From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jan 1 14:09:09 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2018 14:09:09 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Trump for Dershowitz! Dershowitz for Trump! 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: Monday, January 01, 2018 8:05 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Trump for Dershowitz! Dershowitz for Trump! FAB D in BDS. 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-bounces at blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr-bounces at blythe-systems.com] On Behalf Of All the News That Doesn't Fit Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:44 AM To: NYTr Subject: [NYTr] Boyle: Israel: An Aparthei State; Cowardice of Larry Summers Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by Francis Boyle - Jul 30, 2007 The Cowardice of Harvard's Larry Summers I'm not going to go through the subsequent history of the divestment/disinvestment movement, except to say that in the late summer of 2002 the President of Harvard, Larry Summers accused those of us Harvard alumni involved in the Harvard divestment campaign of being anti-Semitic. After he made these charges, WBUR Radio Station in Boston, which is a National Public Radio affiliate, called me up and said: "We would like you to debate Summers for one hour on these charges, live." And I said, "I'd be happy to do so." They then called up Summers and he refused to debate me. Summers did not have the courage, the integrity, or the principles to back up his scurrilous charges. Eventually Harvard fired Summers because of his attempt to impose his Neo-Conservative agenda on Harvard, and in particular his other scurrilous charge that women are dumber then men when it comes to math and science. Well as a Harvard alumnus I say: Good riddance to Larry Summers! (laughter). Debating Dershowitz WBUR then called me back and said, "Well, since Summers won't debate you, would you debate Alan Dershowitz?" And I said, "Sure." So we had a debate for one hour, live on the radio. And there is a link that you can hear this debate if you want to. I still think it's the best debate out there on this whole issue of Israeli apartheid. Again that would be WBUR Radio Station, Boston, 25 September 2002. The problem with the debate, of course, is that Dershowitz knows nothing about international law and human rights. So he immediately started out by saying "well, there's nothing similar to the apartheid regime in South Africa and what Israel is doing to the Palestinians." Well the problem with that is that Dershowitz did not know anything at all about even the existence of the Apartheid Convention. That is our second Handout for tonight. [See Handout 2 reprinted below.] The definition of apartheid is set out in the Apartheid Convention of 1973. And this is taken from my book Defending Civil Resistance Under International Law, Trial Materials on South Africa, published in 1987, that we used successfully to defend anti-apartheid resistors in the United States. If you take a look at the definition of apartheid here found in Article 2, you will see that Israel has inflicted each and every act of apartheid set out in Article 2 on the Palestinians, except an outright ban on marriages between Israelis and Palestinians. But even there they have barred Palestinians living in occupied Palestine who marry Israeli citizens from moving into Israel, and thus defeat the right of family reunification that of course the world supported when Jews were emigrating from the Soviet Union. Israel: An Apartheid State Again you don't have to take my word for it. There's an excellent essay today on Counterpunch.org by the leading Israeli human rights advocate Shulamit Aloni saying basically: "Yes we have an apartheid state in Israel." Indeed, there are roads in the West Bank for Jews only. Palestinians can't ride there and now they're introducing new legislation that Jews cannot even ride Palestinians in their cars. This lead my colleague and friend Professor John Duguard who is the U.N. Special rapporteur for human rights in Palestine to write an essay earlier this fall that you can get on Google, saying that in fact Israeli apartheid against the Palestinians is worse than the apartheid that the Afrikaners inflicted on the Blacks in South Africa. Professor Duguard should know. He was one of a handful of courageous, white, international lawyers living in South Africa at the time who publicly and internationally condemned apartheid against Blacks at risk to his own life. Indeed, when I was litigating anti-apartheid cases on South Africa, we used Professor Duguard's book on Human Rights and the South African Legal Order as the definitive work explaining what apartheid is all about. So Professor Duguard has recently made this statement. Of course President Carter has recently made this statement in his book that Israel is an apartheid state. And certainly if you look at that definition of the Apartheid Convention, right there in front of you, it's clear - there are objective criteria. Indeed if you read my Palestinian book I have a Bibliography at the end with the facts right there based on reputable human rights reports, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, etc. Many of them were also compiled and discussed by my friend Professor Norman Finklestein in his book Beyond Chutzpah, which I'd encourage you to read. 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://blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ . Subscribe: https://blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================= From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jan 1 14:09:09 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2018 14:09:09 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Trump for Dershowitz! Dershowitz for Trump! 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: Monday, January 01, 2018 8:05 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Trump for Dershowitz! Dershowitz for Trump! FAB D in BDS. 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-bounces at blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr-bounces at blythe-systems.com] On Behalf Of All the News That Doesn't Fit Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:44 AM To: NYTr Subject: [NYTr] Boyle: Israel: An Aparthei State; Cowardice of Larry Summers Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by Francis Boyle - Jul 30, 2007 The Cowardice of Harvard's Larry Summers I'm not going to go through the subsequent history of the divestment/disinvestment movement, except to say that in the late summer of 2002 the President of Harvard, Larry Summers accused those of us Harvard alumni involved in the Harvard divestment campaign of being anti-Semitic. After he made these charges, WBUR Radio Station in Boston, which is a National Public Radio affiliate, called me up and said: "We would like you to debate Summers for one hour on these charges, live." And I said, "I'd be happy to do so." They then called up Summers and he refused to debate me. Summers did not have the courage, the integrity, or the principles to back up his scurrilous charges. Eventually Harvard fired Summers because of his attempt to impose his Neo-Conservative agenda on Harvard, and in particular his other scurrilous charge that women are dumber then men when it comes to math and science. Well as a Harvard alumnus I say: Good riddance to Larry Summers! (laughter). Debating Dershowitz WBUR then called me back and said, "Well, since Summers won't debate you, would you debate Alan Dershowitz?" And I said, "Sure." So we had a debate for one hour, live on the radio. And there is a link that you can hear this debate if you want to. I still think it's the best debate out there on this whole issue of Israeli apartheid. Again that would be WBUR Radio Station, Boston, 25 September 2002. The problem with the debate, of course, is that Dershowitz knows nothing about international law and human rights. So he immediately started out by saying "well, there's nothing similar to the apartheid regime in South Africa and what Israel is doing to the Palestinians." Well the problem with that is that Dershowitz did not know anything at all about even the existence of the Apartheid Convention. That is our second Handout for tonight. [See Handout 2 reprinted below.] The definition of apartheid is set out in the Apartheid Convention of 1973. And this is taken from my book Defending Civil Resistance Under International Law, Trial Materials on South Africa, published in 1987, that we used successfully to defend anti-apartheid resistors in the United States. If you take a look at the definition of apartheid here found in Article 2, you will see that Israel has inflicted each and every act of apartheid set out in Article 2 on the Palestinians, except an outright ban on marriages between Israelis and Palestinians. But even there they have barred Palestinians living in occupied Palestine who marry Israeli citizens from moving into Israel, and thus defeat the right of family reunification that of course the world supported when Jews were emigrating from the Soviet Union. Israel: An Apartheid State Again you don't have to take my word for it. There's an excellent essay today on Counterpunch.org by the leading Israeli human rights advocate Shulamit Aloni saying basically: "Yes we have an apartheid state in Israel." Indeed, there are roads in the West Bank for Jews only. Palestinians can't ride there and now they're introducing new legislation that Jews cannot even ride Palestinians in their cars. This lead my colleague and friend Professor John Duguard who is the U.N. Special rapporteur for human rights in Palestine to write an essay earlier this fall that you can get on Google, saying that in fact Israeli apartheid against the Palestinians is worse than the apartheid that the Afrikaners inflicted on the Blacks in South Africa. Professor Duguard should know. He was one of a handful of courageous, white, international lawyers living in South Africa at the time who publicly and internationally condemned apartheid against Blacks at risk to his own life. Indeed, when I was litigating anti-apartheid cases on South Africa, we used Professor Duguard's book on Human Rights and the South African Legal Order as the definitive work explaining what apartheid is all about. So Professor Duguard has recently made this statement. Of course President Carter has recently made this statement in his book that Israel is an apartheid state. And certainly if you look at that definition of the Apartheid Convention, right there in front of you, it's clear - there are objective criteria. Indeed if you read my Palestinian book I have a Bibliography at the end with the facts right there based on reputable human rights reports, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, etc. Many of them were also compiled and discussed by my friend Professor Norman Finklestein in his book Beyond Chutzpah, which I'd encourage you to read. 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://blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ . Subscribe: https://blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================= From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jan 1 14:41:20 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2018 14:41:20 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Trump for Dershowitz! Dershowitz for Trump! 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: Monday, January 01, 2018 8:39 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Trump for Dershowitz! Dershowitz for Trump! ...In this regard, the Harvard Law School Faculty currently has at least five professors who have advocated torture and war crimes:... 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; 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 [mailto:FBOYLE at law.illinois.edu] Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 8:58 AM To: Killeacle Subject: Harvard's Gitmo Kangaroo Law School 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! From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jan 1 14:41:20 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2018 14:41:20 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Trump for Dershowitz! Dershowitz for Trump! 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: Monday, January 01, 2018 8:39 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Trump for Dershowitz! Dershowitz for Trump! ...In this regard, the Harvard Law School Faculty currently has at least five professors who have advocated torture and war crimes:... 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; 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 [mailto:FBOYLE at law.illinois.edu] Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 8:58 AM To: Killeacle Subject: Harvard's Gitmo Kangaroo Law School 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! From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jan 1 14:54:23 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2018 14:54:23 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] From Carl Estabrook Message-ID: An article from Carl Estabrook, recently posted on FB. The Dangerous Myth of the Good War --Nicholson Baker, “Why I'm a Pacifist: The Dangerous Myth of the Good War,” | Harper's Magazine, May 2011 Throughout Hitler’s tenure the question for the rest of the world was how to respond to a man who was (a) violent; (b) highly irrational; (c) vehemently racist; (d) professedly suicidal; and (e) in charge of an expanding empire. One possibility was to build weapons and raise armies, make demands, and threaten sanctions, embargoes, and other punishments. If Hitler failed to comply, we could say, “This has gone too far,” and declare war. Pacifists thought this was precisely the wrong response. “The Government took the one course which I foresaw at the time would strengthen Hitler: they declared war on Germany,” Arthur Ponsonby said in the House of Lords in 1940. The novelist Vera Brittain, who published a biweekly Letter to Peace Lovers in London, agreed. “Nazism thrives, as we see repeatedly, on every policy which provokes resistance, such as bombing, blockade, and threats of ‘retribution,’” she wrote in her masterful 1942 polemic, Humiliation with Honour. The Jews needed immigration visas, not Flying Fortresses. And who was doing their best to get them visas, as well as food, money, and hiding places? Pacifists were. Bertha Bracey helped arrange the Kindertransport, for example, which saved the lives of some 10,000 Jewish children; Runham Brown and Grace Beaton of the War Resisters International organized the release of Jews and other political prisoners from Dachau and Buchenwald; and André Trocmé and Burns Chalmers hid Jewish children among families in the South of France. “We’ve got to fight Hitlerism” sounds good, because Hitler was so self-evidently horrible. But what fighting Hitlerism meant in practice was, largely, the five-year-long Churchillian experiment of undermining German “morale” by dropping magnesium firebombs and 2,000-pound blockbusters on various city centers. The firebombing killed and displaced a great many innocent people—including Jews in hiding—and obliterated entire neighborhoods. It was supposed to cause an anti-Nazi revolution, but it didn’t. “The victims are stunned, exhausted, apathetic, absorbed in the immediate tasks of finding food and shelter,” wrote Brittain in 1944. “But when they recover, who can doubt that there will be, among the majority at any rate, the desire for revenge and a hardening process—even if, for a time, it may be subdued by fear?” If you drop things on people’s heads, they get angry and unite behind their leader. This was, after all, just what had happened during the Blitz in London. The Holocaust was, among many other things, the biggest hostage crisis of all time. Hostage-taking was Hitler’s preferred method from the beginning. In 1923, he led a group of ultranationalists into a beer hall in Munich and, waving a gun, held government officials prisoner. In 1938, after Kristallnacht, he imprisoned thousands of Jews, releasing them only after the Jewish community paid a huge ransom. In occupied France, Holland, Norway, and Yugoslavia, Jews were held hostage and often executed in reprisal for local partisan activity. The American middle class, still dimly recalling the trenches, the mud, the rats, the typhus, and the general obscene futility of World War I, was perhaps slightly closer to pacifism than to Roosevelt’s interventionism—until December 7, 1941. Once Pearl Harbor’s Battleship Row burned and sank, the country cried for the incineration of Tokyo. The shift came in late 1941, occasioned by the event that transformed a pan-European war into a world war: “the entry of the United States into the conflict.” A contemporary wrote: “Although the ‘Final Solution,’ the decision to kill all the Jews under German control, was planned well in advance, its full implementation may have been delayed until the U.S. entered the war. Now the Jews under German control had lost their potential value as hostages.” In any case, on December 12, 1941, Hitler confirmed his intentions in a talk before Goebbels and other party leaders. In his diary, Goebbels later summarized the Führer’s remarks: “The world war is here. The annihilation of the Jews must be the necessary consequence.” Chelmno, the first killing factory, had already commenced operation on December 8, 1941: Jews from the ghetto in the Polish town of Kolo were suffocated with exhaust gasses in sealed trucks. Beginning in March 1942, the Lublin ghetto was liquidated: Jews by the thousands were taken to a second extermination camp, Belzec, and gassed there. More Jews, including orphaned children and old people who had until then been excluded from the camps, were taken from Vienna at the beginning of June. Leonhard Friedrich, a German Quaker arrested in May for helping Jews, later wrote: “In the six months after the United States entered the war, the Gestapo felt under no restraints.” During this same midwar period, the Royal Air Force’s attacks on German civilian life crossed a new threshold of intensity. The militarily insignificant city of Lübeck, on the Baltic Sea, crowded with wood-timbered architectural treasures, was the target of the first truly successful mass firebombing, on the night of March 28, 1942, which burned much of the old city and destroyed a famous, centuries-old painting cycle, Totentanz (“The Dance of Death”). “Blast and bomb, attack and attack until there is nothing left,” said the Sunday Express. “Even if ‘Lübecking’ does not crack the morale of Germany, it is certainly going to raise our spirits,” said the Daily Mail (Vera Brittain, reading through a pile of these clippings, exclaimed: “We are Gadarene swine, inhabited by devils of our own making, rushing down a steep place into the sea.”) Operation Millennium was the RAF’s next large-scale fire raid, at the end of May. Nearly 1,000 bombers flowed toward the city of Cologne, where they dropped about 1,600 tons of bombs—more firebombs than high explosives—in half an hour, destroying tens of thousands of houses and apartments and more than twenty churches. The area around the city’s main cathedral was a roasted ruin. “You have no idea of the thrill and encouragement which the Royal Air Force bombing has given to all of us here,” wrote Roosevelt’s personal aide, Harry Hopkins, to Churchill. He added: “I imagine the Germans know all too well what they have to look forward to.” No doubt the Germans did know—in any case, they promptly blamed the Jews for the bombings. In a radio broadcast, Goebbels said that Germans were now fighting for their very skins. Then again came the overt threat: “In this war the Jews are playing their most criminal game and they will have to pay for it with the extermination of their race throughout Europe and, maybe, even beyond.” Confirmation of the Final Solution didn’t get out widely in the Western press until November 1942, when Rabbi Stephen Wise, after inexplicable delays, called a press conference to reveal the substance of an urgent telegram he had received from Switzerland in August. The Associated Press reported: “Dr. Stephen S. Wise, chairman of the World Jewish Congress, said tonight that he had learned through sources confirmed by the State Department that about half the estimated 4,000,000 Jews in Nazi-occupied Europe have been slain in an ‘extermination campaign.’” The atrocity was so gargantuan, wrote The Nation, that it would have to await the perspective of history to be understood. Again came the question—what to do? “Peace with Hitler for the sake of saving hostages is out of the question,” the editors asserted. “Such a surrender would mean disaster for the world, for the Jews above all. Yet the harder we fight, the nearer the doom of the Nazis approaches, the fiercer will grow their homicidal mania. Let it be admitted in all solemnity that there is no escape from this ghastly dilemma.” The only thing to do was fight on. No, there was a better way, thought Jessie Wallace Hughan, founder of the War Resisters League. Hughan, a soft-faced, wide-smiling woman in her late sixties, was a poet and high school teacher (she had been Abraham Kaufman’s English teacher at Textile High School). She sent a letter to two fellow pacifist leaders, asking them to help her mount a campaign. “It seems that the only way to save thousands and perhaps millions of European Jews from destruction would be for our government to broadcast the promise of a speedy and favorable armistice on condition that the European minorities are not molested any further. I know how improbable it is that our U.S. government would accept this but if it is the only possibility, ought not our pacifist groups to take some action?” Hughan gave talks on the necessity of rescue, she wrote letters to the State Department and the White House, and she and Abraham Kaufman, with the help of volunteers, distributed thousands of pro-armistice flyers. A peace without delay, conditional upon the release of Jews and other political prisoners, might bring the end of Hitler’s reign, she suggested: “There are many anti-Nazis in the Reich, and hope is a stronger revolutionary force than despair.” She wrote a blunt letter on the subject to the New York Times: “We must act now, because dead men cannot be liberated.” The Times didn’t print it. Other pacifists publicly took up this cause. “Peace Now Without Victory Will Save Jews,” wrote Dorothy Day on the front page of her Catholic Worker, and the Jewish Peace Fellowship called for an armistice to prevent Jewish extermination and “make an end to the world-wide slaughter.” Brittain said that Jewish rescue required “the termination or the interruption of the war, and not its increasingly bitter continuation.” Even lapsed or near pacifists—including Eleanor Rathbone in the House of Commons, and the publisher Victor Gollancz—urgently echoed this sentiment: If we failed to make some kind of direct offer to Hitler for the safe passage of Jews, we shared a responsibility for their fate. Gollancz sold a quarter of a million copies of an extraordinary pamphlet called “Let My People Go,” in which he questioned the Churchill government’s promise of postwar retribution. “This ‘policy,’ it must be plainly said, will not save a single Jewish life,” he wrote. “Will the death, after the war, of a Latvian or Lithuanian criminal, or of a Nazi youth who for ten years has been specially and deliberately trained to lose his humanity—will the death of these reduce by one jot or tittle the agony of a Jewish child who perhaps at this very moment at which I write, on Christmas day, three hours after the sweet childish carol, “O come, all ye faithful,” was broadcast before the seven o’clock news, is going to her death in a sealed coach, her lungs poisoned with the unslaked lime with which the floor is strewn, and with the dead standing upright about her, because there is no room for them to fall?” What mattered, Gollancz held, was, and he put it in italics, the saving of life now. The German government had to be approached immediately and asked to allow Jews to emigrate. The Allies had nothing to lose with such a proposal. “If refused, that would strip Hitler of the excuse that he cannot afford to fill useless mouths,” Gollancz wrote. “If accepted, it would not frustrate the economic blockade, because Hitler’s alternative is not feeding but extermination.” Nobody in authority in Britain and the United States paid heed to these promptings. Anthony Eden, Britain’s foreign secretary, who’d been tasked by Churchill with handling queries about refugees, dealt coldly with one of many importunate delegations, saying that any diplomatic effort to obtain the release of the Jews from Hitler was “fantastically impossible.” On a trip to the United States, Eden candidly told Cordell Hull, the secretary of state, that the real difficulty with asking Hitler for the Jews was that “Hitler might well take us up on any such offer, and there simply are not enough ships and means of transportation in the world to handle them.” Churchill agreed. “Even were we to obtain permission to withdraw all Jews,” he wrote in reply to one pleading letter, “transport alone presents a problem which will be difficult of solution.” Not enough shipping and transport? Two years earlier, the British had evacuated nearly 340,000 men from the beaches of Dunkirk in just nine days. The U.S. Air Force had many thousands of new planes. During even a brief armistice, the Allies could have airlifted and transported refugees in very large numbers out of the German sphere. In March 1944, with thousands of Jews still living who were not destined to survive, the War Resisters League published an updated demand that the Allies call a peace conference, stipulating Jewish deliverance. “The fortunes of war have turned, and with them the responsibility for war,” Hughan wrote. “The guilt is upon our heads until we offer our enemies an honorable alternative to bitter-end slaughter. Are we fighting for mere victory or, as enlightened adults, for humanity and civilization?” We were fighting, it seems, for mere victory. It was inconceivable that we could stop, even though an end to the fighting was the solvent that would have dissolved quicker than anything the thick glue of fear that held Hitler and Germany together. By 1944, Hitler’s health was failing. He was evil, but he wasn’t immortal. Whether or not the German opposition, in the sudden stillness of a conditional armistice, would have been able to remove him from power, he would eventually be dead and gone. And some of his millions of victims—if such an armistice had been secured—would have lived. Peace and quiet was what the world needed so desperately then. Time to think, and mourn. Time to sleep without fear. Time to crawl out of the wreckage of wherever you were and look around, and remember what being human was all about. Instead, what did we do? Bomb, burn, blast, and starve, waiting for the unconditional surrender that didn’t come until the Red Army was in Berlin. We came up with a new kind of “sticky flaming goo,” as the New York Times called what would later be known as napalm. Allied airplanes burned the Rouen cathedral, so that the stones crumbled to pieces when touched, destroyed Monte Cassino, and killed 200 schoolchildren during a single raid in Milan. A conservative MP, Reginald Purbrick, who had wanted the Royal Air Force to drop a big bomb into the crater of Mount Vesuvius (“to make a practical test as to whether the disturbances created thereby will give rise to severe earthquakes and eruptions”), began asking the prime minister whether the Royal Air Force might bomb Dresden and other cities in eastern Germany. Churchill eventually obliged him. Remorse works well, but it works only in peacetime. When Vera Brittain argued against the Allied program of urban obliteration in her pamphlet Massacre by Bombing, the Writers’ War Board, a government-funded American propaganda agency, pulled out all the stops in attacking her. MacKinlay Kantor (who later cowrote Curtis LeMay’s memoir, the one that talked about bombing Vietnam “back into the Stone Age”) published a letter in the Times dismissing Brittain’s “anguished ramblings.” The Japanese and Germans well understood the “language of bombs,” Kantor said. “May we continue to speak it until all necessity for such cruel oratory has passed.” Some historians, still believing that bombing has a magical power to communicate, conclude from this dismal stretch of history that the Allied air forces should have bombed the railroad tracks that led to the death camps, or bombed the camps themselves. But bombing would have done absolutely nothing except kill more Jews (and Jews were already dying when Allied fighter planes routinely strafed boxcars in transit.) A cease-fire—“a pause in the fury of hostilities,” as Vera Brittain called it in one of her newsletters—was the one chance the Allies had to save Jewish lives, and the pacifists proposed it repeatedly, using every means available to them. So the Holocaust continued, and the firebombing continued: two parallel, incommensurable, war-born leviathans of pointless malice that fed each other and could each have been stopped long before they were. The mills of God ground the cities of Europe to powder—very slowly—and then the top Nazis chewed their cyanide pills or were executed at Nuremberg. Sixty million people died all over the world so that Hitler, Himmler, and Goering could commit suicide? How utterly ridiculous and tragic. Pacifism at its best, said Arthur Ponsonby, is “intensely practical.” Its primary object is the saving of life. To that overriding end, pacifists opposed the counterproductive barbarity of the Allied bombing campaign, and they offered positive proposals to save the Jews: create safe havens, call an armistice, negotiate a peace that would guarantee the passage of refugees. We should have tried. If the armistice plan failed, then it failed. We could always have resumed the battle. Not trying leaves us culpable. At a Jewish Peace Fellowship meeting in Cincinnati some years after the war, Rabbi Cronbach was asked how any pacifist could justify opposition to World War II. “War was the sustenance of Hitler,” Cronbach answered. “When the Allies began killing Germans, Hitler threatened that, for every German slain, ten Jews would be slain, and that threat was carried out. We in America are not without some responsibility for that Jewish catastrophe.” If we don’t take seriously pacifists like Cronbach, Hughan, Kaufman, Day, and Brittain—these people who thought as earnestly about wars and their consequences as did politicians or generals or think-tankers—we’ll be forever suspended in a kind of immobilizing sticky goo of euphemism and self-deception. We’ll talk about intervention and preemption and no-fly zones, and we’ll steer drones around distant countries on murder sorties. We’ll arm the world with weaponry, and every so often we’ll feel justified in taxiing out a few of our stealth airplanes from their air-conditioned hangars and dropping some expensive bombs. Iran? Pakistan? North Korea? --Nicholson Baker, “Why I'm a Pacifist: The Dangerous Myth of the Good War,” | Harper's Magazine, May 2011 ANTI-WAR ANTI-RACISM EFFORT - on Facebook at -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jan 1 16:20:00 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2018 16:20:00 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] It's system change, and why.......... Message-ID: January 1, 2018 Universalizing Resistance: To Fight Trump, Fight the System In his new book, "Welcome to the Revolution: Universalizing Resistance," Prof. Charlie Derber says progressive movements must work together to confront interconnected hierarchies of power, because smaller issues are intertwined with a larger system; you can't confront one problem without confronting them all Charles Derber is a professor of Sociology at Boston College and the author of over twenty books. His latest titles include Welcome to the Revolution: Universalizing Resistance for Social Justice in Perilous Times and Bully Nation: How the American Establishment Creates a Bullying Society, which was published in paperback this month. ________________________________ transcript [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-12-01/cderber1222trump-240.jpg]GREGORY WILPERT: Welcome to the Real News Network. I'm Gregory Wilpert coming to you from Quito, Ecuador. President Donald Trump just signed his main legislative achievement, a radical tax reform, and thereby gave corporate Americans and the top 1% a huge Christmas gift. It's the most far reaching tax reform in decades and is predicted to further deepen the already massive inequality in the U.S. What can ordinary citizens who disagree with Trump's policies, and more broadly with the directions the U.S. has been taking over the past several decades, do about all of this? Well, one writer who is attempting to answer this question is Professor Charlie Derber. Charlie is Professor of Sociology at Boston College and author of numerous books on political economy, political sociology, environmental sociology, and social change. His most recent book, just published by Routledge, is 'Welcome to the Revolution: Universalizing Resistance for Social Change and Democracy in Perilous Times.' He joins us from Boston, Massachusetts today. Welcome, Charlie. CHARLES DERBER: Hi Greg. Thanks for inviting me. GREGORY WILPERT: Your book is divided into three main parts: an analysis of the system in which we live today, a proposal for how to overcome the system, and third, some concrete proposals on what people can do. Let's go through each one of these step by step. First, you call the system in which we currently live "militarized corporate capitalism." What do you see as being the main features of this system? CHARLES DERBER: Well, I think the most important point is that it is a system. I think the mainstream media and actually much of the liberal left, has lost sight of the idea that so many of the big problems we're dealing with -- whether we're talking about war and militarism, or climate change, or racism, or economic inequality -- have lost sight of the fact that we are dealing with an intertwined system in which all these different hierarchies of power based on class and race and gender and so forth -- and which connect issues like climate and war and capitalism, has this way of connecting the dots -- and recognizing that we have to confront a broader system, which is at the root of all these different problems, has been lost. What is the nature of this system? First of all, it's a system of enormously concentrated economic and political power where we have 1% of the population pretty much dominating politics and the political agenda and much of our social and economic life. I think what I'm trying to ... If anybody has studied any social science, you might know the word "intersectionality," which is just a way of talking about connecting the dots: realizing that climate, war, capitalism, racism, are historically, intertwined systems of power, and to deal with one of them you have to deal with all of them. I'm really talking about the system as a highly concentrated form of power in the political and economic system. GREGORY WILPERT: One of the things that struck me is that you talk about it as being also universalizing, so I just first of all want to ask what does that mean? And secondly, why do you use the concept of universalization instead of perhaps something such as corporate globalization, which was once a pretty common concept that was used both in academia and in the alter-globalization movement. First of all, how is it universalizing, and how is that different perhaps from globalization? CHARLES DERBER: Well, I'm talking about a much broader phenomenon than geographical globalization. I'm talking about a penetration of systemic institutions and values into every sphere of life. Into the environment, into the family, into our inner psyches, into outer space, into every sphere of our society. Religion, education, healthcare, they're all being corporatized. They're all being commodified. They're all being subjected to power and domination in a violent form, including the environment that we depend on. The consequences are frightening because we're dealing with the possibility of destruction of all life. We're losing species. We're losing the prospects of human life over just decades. I mean by "universalizing" to say the system is not only globalizing: It's penetrating the outer and inner sinews of all aspects of our being in a way that's very threatening and unprecedented, historically. GREGORY WILPERT: I think that certainly makes sense, but one thing I'm wondering about is that on the one hand it sounds like there's the process also of homogenization. If the military corporate complex or system is penetrating everything in this way, it sounds like it might be homogenizing us in a sense, and that kind of goes against some other trends that we might think about or talk about that specifically has to do with resistance, which is the trend also towards a fragmentation. That we're losing kind of a sense of solidarity perhaps. How does that fit together? In other words, on the one hand, this universalization, but on the other hand, are we becoming more fragmented? Which is kind of a theme that you also pick up in your book in terms of the identity politics movements and those kinds of things, and the fact that that resistance, so to speak, to the corporate military system tends to be rather in silos or fragmented. How does that go together, on the one hand the universalization and on the other hand this fragmentation? CHARLES DERBER: Well, thank you for that question. It's really important. What I'm arguing is that one of the main problems of the resistance is that at the very moment that the system is universalizing, the contradiction that you point out is very important. The resistance is in many ways fragmented. Ever since the late 1960s, which I think was the last period when progressive left resistance had a more universalizing character to it, where Martin Luther King finally said, "I need to connect the Civil Rights Movement with the anti-Vietnam War movement with the labor movement of the time, and so forth ... Ever since that period, for reasons we can talk about if we have time, the left has fragmented, exactly as you said, largely into a kind of more diffuse and a siloed set of identity communities which don't really talk to each other or coordinate with each other, nor do they see their particular problems as necessarily intertwined with the larger system. So let's take a third-wave feminist like Sheryl Sandberg, the person who's written so much about "leaning in" as the third-wave feminist approach to liberation. Well, leaning in, meaning for women to break the glass ceiling and to get higher up in the corporation, is not exactly what a liberatory feminism from the left, or a progressive point of view, should be doing, because it's basically saying each identity community is on its own, struggling to get a bigger piece of the current capitalist pie. And in that sense, it's actually legitimating the very system that we need, the universalizing system, intersectional system, that we need to be confronting. You've identified in your question, Greg, a major contradiction that I'm trying to confront in the book, which is that the universalizing of the system requires what Martin Luther King at the end of his life recognized, and he was killed after he made this clear, that these various movements had to understand the universalizing and the intersectionality of the system, and they had to reflect that in their own organization. And the reason they don't is complicated, but it's partly because of funding issues. For example, the various left movements tend to be funded by liberal foundations that don't want people to connect these various movements, so they'll fund, say, an anti-racist group in their anti-racist work or prison work, but they won't fund them to simultaneously work on climate or on capitalism itself of course. The other thing is that the ideological conversation and the whole society has really abandoned this systemic conversation. For example, in the Gilded Age in the 1890s of Rockefeller and JPMorgan, and in the '60s and to some degree in the New Deal in the '30s, there was really a talk ... There was systemic conversation. They were talking about "There's something wrong with the whole financial, global capitalist order," and how it was penetrating into all parts of society and affecting all communities. Since the late '60s, that connecting of the dots has been lost, and we have lost a mainstream conversation. How often do you turn on CNN, which is very anti-Trumpist, but never talks about the problems of capitalism ... In fact in large part is critiquing Trump, because he seems to be threatening what is regarded as the democratic rubric, whether it's the FBI and the ... the institutional norms that they view as central to capitalism itself. This is a long answer for simply saying you're right, that the thrust of my book is to argue that if you're dealing with an intersectional, universalizing, deadly system, the only way you can successfully resist it is if you connect the dots and try to build a movement that, first of all, understands the nature of these connected problems that they're dealing with, and are able to coordinate with each other. It doesn't mean that you get rid of identity politics or that people won't be able to work on issues of greatest urgency and passion to them, but that for this movement to really make a difference, particularly in the short time period we have facing us, we need to connect these dots and make clear that these different movements have shared systemic roots, and that if you're gonna solve racism, you're never gonna do that without dealing with the racialized history of capitalism in the United States. The same would be true. You can't stop climate change as long as we have a kind of extractive capitalist system that we have. You certainly cannot stop militarism and war if you don't deal with the nature of our economy, which requires the kind of globalizing militarism that opens up markets and creates cheap labor and so forth. So you're absolutely ... You put your finger on the central contradiction of the movement, and the book is an effort to sort of argue for universalizing the resistance, by which I mean, bringing together these different fragmented, siloed movements. Which, by the way, interviews with activists show something that activists themselves are now quite aware of, that they feel that the movement is jeopardized by failing to see the connections and work together on these interconnected hierarchies of power, so we deal with core of the problem at the heart of all of them. GREGORY WILPERT: Yes, that's actually what I really want to dig into a little bit now, is specifically ... And of course, it's easy to say we should connect the dots and we should come together etc., but how do you do that? First of all, you mentioned already that some interviews that activists are seeing this, but do you see a trend or a movement in that direction that goes beyond, let's say, individual activists, and I'm talking about movements that are coming together. Secondly, what would be the strategy specifically to get people to realize the need for connecting the dots and coming together in an intersectional kind of resistance as you call it? CHARLES DERBER: Well, great question again. A few different quick things. One is, I'm thinking of the 2014 People's Climate March in New York, which was a really good model of kind of a universalizing resistance. That was ... I don't know if you were there, Greg, but there were about 400,000 people marching in New York City against climate change. But there were segments of that march which were walking under the banner of feminism, and others that were marching under the banner of labor, that had been organized by unions and so forth. There were segments marching under anti-war and peace organizations and so forth. I think climate is a great example. If you look at Standing Rock, where indigenous cultures really put together a lot of cultural and economic anti-corporate oil and pipeline industries and so forth, there's something about the climate movement that's naturally more intersectional and universalizing. I see the climate justice movement and the environmental justice movement as an example of a promising development of the kind I'm trying to argue for in the book. Just one personal example, that I live in a suburb of Boston called Dedham, and some Texan big pipeline companies have been trying to go from the middle part of the country and put a new infrastructure of natural gas pipelines through very densely populated Boston and other big, East Coast cities and so forth. My neighbors ... I live in a pretty dense suburb, but there are a lot of people, schools, old-age homes and that sort of thing. These pipelines companies were building these ... These are not small, little gas pipelines. They're huge natural gas pipeline. The gas goes very fast. It's very explosive. It leaks methane and it's very explosive. About a mile and a half from my house, there's a part of the pipeline which is the most vulnerable part of the pipeline to leaks and explosions. It's right by a quarry in the town. My neighbors, scared for their kids and scared for their own property values and all that, and they were not very political people, they went out just to protest the pipelines. Then as they got into it more, they realized that the ultimate decisions about siting the pipeline and deciding whether it could be built or not were resting with FERC, which is the F-E-R-C, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which is a completely oligarchic commission. Not even the president can interfere with the decisions being made by these regulators, who are all people at the top of these big oil and gas and pipeline companies. My neighbors started out in a very siloed, narrow view of just saying, "Get these pipelines the hell out of our front yards," or backyards, or whatever, and then they kinda spontaneously came to understand that to deal with these pipelines and the larger environmental issue, you had to deal with corporate power and the extreme concentration of political and economic power in Washington in agencies like FERC. I think there is a natural tendency for people as they get involved, they're very passionate about a particular cause, and I think that's a reason why people will continue to work on single issues that are really important to them, and I think that's okay. But they will recognize that if they really want to make progress and they want to build the movement and they want to understand the root causes, which is necessary if you're gonna solve the problem, that you can't just work on symptoms. You don't just wanna ... I just had bronchitis. I took antibiotics, but you know, you want to work on the underlying problem. This is certainly true with any major political issue like climate change or war or economic injustice. You have to deal with the underlying problem. So because activists are aware ... I was referring to a 2011 study by two black community activists called Ear to the Ground, where they studied several hundred community activists, and many of them said they were really scared because the movement was doing many good things, but it was burning them out because they felt they weren't reaching enough people, and they weren't digging deep enough into the -- these are really dedicated activists in the community, many people of color -- they felt that they just were not reaching in to enough people and connecting on the issues in a way that resonated to all kinds of people. I think this is a ... I agree with you, it's a very difficult problem to solve, and I don't think my book gives some magic bullet for doing so. But it kind of lays out the entire range of issues that activists are now facing as they try to confront this problem. I think people are more aware of it, and I don't think there's a simple, dogmatic formula. I'm not arguing against identity politics. I'm just saying we need a broader conversation about capitalism as a system which has pretty much been abandoned, as I said, since the late '60s, and try to find ways that we can make these connections. It doesn't mean you completely merge, because there is a danger, as many people will say, that, well, if you merge all these movements into one big movement, then lots of these other issues get subordinated, and you get centralized power. I'm very sensitive to that, so I'm not arguing for people abandoning for their issues or their movements. I'm just arguing for a broader consciousness. This has become now, on the left, a very central set of concerns as people look at how Trump got elected, and they see that overwhelmingly, a lot of white people, and particularly white working people, or middle to lower-income whites, not both workers and small-business people and so forth who were also hurt by the system, are voting Republican and supporting Trump. That's another way in which I think there may be a unifying ... You asked "How can this unify?" I've written about some of the dangers of anti-Trumpism, because it sort of tends to often legitimate the Republican system that preceded Trump and sort of created Trump. At the same time, Trump, because he is a scary guy, he is helping to create a certain kind of unity. After all, the day after he was inaugurated, the Women's March was the biggest day of protest in history as far as we know. Several million people around the world. Since then, we've had, whether it's related to taking away healthcare or whether it's related to leaving the Paris climate agreements or whether it's related to the travel ban and the anti-Muslim, anti-racist stuff, Trump is, despite my critique of some of the anti-Trumpist movement as diverting attention in some ways from the system or even legitimating the system, I do think that Trump is also a unifying force in universalizing the system. GREGORY WILPERT: Right. That's actually something that I wanted to get into a little bit kind of as a last point, because like you say, Trump in a way attracts all the attention on him. I'm wondering how do we get people to look beyond Trump? It is such an easy target in many ways, at least for progressives. Trump is an easy target because he's so outrageous. Then you also have for example all the different comedy late night talk show hosts criticizing Trump every single day, and it's just a huge target. How do you go beyond that to raise the systemic issues? This is certainly of course something you've already kind of addressed, but I'm thinking specifically in the example of Trump. How do we do that? CHARLES DERBER: Well, first recognizing that Trump is playing us, in a way, because the more negative attention he gets from MSNBC and Rachel Maddow and these very creative, mainstream liberal journalists, the more his base ... This is tribalism that he cultivates. It's important to recognize that when you just put his face on TV, which offers a lot of revenue to these TV stations -- even though his base is beginning to erode in certain ways because of the Mueller investigation -- you're doing what he wants you to do, which is to focus on him. I think there's been a lot of misunderstanding that the Republican party, and the corporate donors who really sort of have created the party, have also created Trump. After all, Trump is a billionaire. Maybe not as rich as he says he is, but he's a very wealthy corporate guy, and he comes out of the corporate elite. There's been this sort of mythology that we should focus on Trump as somehow separate from or apart from this Republican and corporate system that we started talking about at the beginning. I think this has been very misleading and dangerous, because then the focus becomes, "Well, if we can simply sort of do away with Trump, then the system will go back to normal," as if normal is where we want to be, but we don't want ... I remember being in an anti-Trump march which said, "Normal is not normal," meaning we want to deal with Trump. He's dangerous. But the people who are now sitting on MSNBC or CNN and using CIA or FBI officials to say this guy's terrible because he's critiquing the CIA or the FBI, well the CIA has been running coups and anti-democratic coups around the world to spread this system, and the FBI tried to undermine the Civil Rights movement and the antiwar movement, and it still infiltrates the left. So we've gotta be very careful that the anti-Trumpist movement keeps its eye on the ball, that it keeps its eye on the real systemic issues that are threatening survival. I'm not saying we shouldn't be dealing with the real dangers that Trump represents, because they're real and they're scary and they're important, but I do think that a lot of the anti-Trump -- particularly on the cable TV shows and the more liberal parts of that anti-Trump movement -- are actually paradoxically serving to legitimate the corporate, universalizing system that created Trump in some ways. You see now the Republican party, which my friend Noam Chomsky calls the most dangerous institution in world history because it's such a climate denier and a militarist kind of thing. It's somehow as if, if we get rid of Trump, then we can just go back to the normalcy of that system that the CIA and the FBI and the military and the capitalist system perpetrate, and that's itself very dangerous. That's another part of my book and my thinking, which is that it's very important to challenge Trump, but we've gotta keep our eye on the ball and recognize we're dealing with this interconnected system, of which Trump really is a very central part. GREGORY WILPERT: Unfortunately, we're going to have to leave it there. There's so much more we could dig into on this very important topic. I was joined by Charlie Derber, Professor of Sociology at Boston College. We were talking about his just-released book, "Welcome to the Revolution: Universalizing Resistance for Social Justice and Democracy in Perilous Times." Thanks Charlie for having joined us today. CHARLES DERBER: Great to talk to you Greg. Thank you so much. GREGORY WILPERT: My pleasure, and then thank you also, our audience, for having joined us and for watching the Real News, and if you like news and analysis that we provide, please don't forget to donate to the Real News Network this holiday season. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 1 20:09:36 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2018 20:09:36 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Correspondence re opioid issue References: <187975253.6407232.1514837376615.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <187975253.6407232.1514837376615@mail.yahoo.com> (from Sal Rodriguez) HiDavid, Iactually wrote this response quite a while ago but then slacked on editing itdown for your convenience. If you're still interested in my take, here it is.   I'llbegin with a response to the Esquire article on the Sackler family, which Ifigure is representative of a lot of the coverage of them. First,I think the fact that they are a wealthy family who engage in a wide set ofphilanthropy including potentially politically disagreeable efforts like"school choice," is irrelevant. Mostof the media I think has consistently failed to dig very deep into what the"opioid crisis" really is - instead resorting to tropes like"the evil corporation profiting from misery," "extremelydangerous drugs are killing people and the government MUST do something aboutit." TheEsquire piece, and most of the links you sent, falls into those two categories. They want to frame the entirety of the "opioid epidemic" as the soleand direct consequence of sinister rich people making these evil pills thatmake everyone addicts and kill them. For left-leaning people, this is attractive: they get to bash Big Pharma, theyget to bash big corporations, they get to blame addiction on capitalism, andthey get to celebrate marijuana. For right-leaning people, they get to expresstheir compassionate conservatism, talk about the importance of religion, talkabout law and order and the need for more border controls to stop the drugsfrom coming in, etc. Butsuch narratives almost entirely rely on superficial analysis and loads ofhysteria. The Esquire article, for example, asserts that Oxycontin is "regarded bymany public-health experts as among the most dangerous products ever sold on amass scale." Itnever gets into any real support for this claim other than going to saythat  since 1996 "more than two hundred thousand people in the UnitedStates have died from overdoses of OxyContin and other prescriptionpainkillers." Asthat sentence reveals, and as Esquire goes on to note, "Not all of thesedeaths are related to OxyContin—dozens of other painkillers, includinggenerics, have flooded the market in the past thirty years." That'sa pretty weak basis for the assertion that OxyContin specifically is"among the most dangerous products every sold on a mass scale." Butsetting that technicality aside,  the overdose numbers are complicated bythe reality that many overdoses are in fact the result of polydrug use,including people who attempt to enhance the effects of opioids with alcohol orbenzodiazepines because their doctor wasn't able or willing to prescribe anadequate number of pills. It'sworth noting that, in 2013, 77 percent of deaths involving prescription opioidswere known to involve a combination of a prescription opioid with another drugor alcohol. The figure is likely higher, given the inconsistent reporting andcollecting of information by medical examiners. https://hams.cc/polydrug.pdf Thisfact is rarely ever mentioned by the mainstream media.   TheEsquire article also attempts to blame heroin overdoses on prescription drugs:"Thousands more have died after starting on a prescription opioid and thenswitching to a drug with a cheaper street price, such as heroin." WhatEsquire leaves out is that a major factor in the "heroin epidemic"was the wide range of federal crackdowns over the past decade - with doctorsand pharmacists targeted, arrested and monitored. The result has been a drop inthe number of opioid prescriptions, but more people moving to heroin and thusbeing exposed to the problems of the black market, including drug tainting withfentanyl and carfentanil. Therecent position paper of the Global Commission on Drug Policy breaks this chainof events down quite well: http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/position-papers/opioi d-crisis-north-america-positio n-paper/ Esquiregoes on to uncritically repeat the corny line by Chris Christie that opioidscreate the equivalent loss of life as “September 11th every threeweeks."  A previously noted, the overwhelming majority of opioiddeaths involve drug mixing, either out of recklessness or lack of educationabout the risks of drug mixing, and by now the big problem isn't prescriptionopioids, but fentanyl-laced heroin, which is a direct consequence of the War onDrugs. Fromthere, the article mostly goes on to complain about how rich the family is, andnothing of great significance is actually said. Anyserious analysis of the current "opioid epidemic" must begin with anunderstanding that: 1) the vast majority of people who are prescribed opioids never develop aproblem with them, 2) the vast majority of people who do misuse opioids weren't prescribed them, 3) there are a lot of people struggling with under-treated pain because ofcrackdowns on opioid prescriptions, 4) most deaths related to opioids involve drug mixing, intended and unintended, 5)crackdowns are the reason so many people have moved to the black market, 6)heroin is only dangerous because it is illegal, 7)addiction is about more than just the drug - it's as much about thecircumstances of a person's life and environment, 8)opioids shouldn't be universally condemned and curbing excesses in prescribingshouldn't prevent doctors from prescribing to those who might need more thanaverage. Ihighly recommend this discussion of the opioid problem and how/why our drugpolicies created it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySJuGhI0lVQ   Hopethis helps. Sal   Hideoriginal message   OnMon, Nov 13, 2017 at 4:13 PM, David Green wrote: HiSal,   Iwrote you back in March regarding your critiques of the "war onopioids" on Counterpunch.   I'mfollowing up with a query regarding your views on the recent coverage of theSackler family (see links below, which I presume you're aware of anyway), aswell as Johann Hari's view expressed on the Real News Network.   Yourperspectives on how to continue to approach the opioid crisis in the generalcontext of neoliberalism would be greatly appreciated.   Best,   DavidGreen ChampaignIL   http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a12775932/sackler- family-oxycontin/   https://www.democracynow.org/2017/10/19/who_profits_from_ the_opioid_crisis   https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/10/30/the- family-that-built-an-empire- of-pain   The Super Wealthy Oxycontin FamilySupports School Privatization With Tactics Similar to Those That Fueled theOpioid Epidemic | naked capitalism   http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content& task=view&id=767&Itemid=74&jumival=20307               | | | | | | | | | | | The Super Wealthy Oxycontin Family Supports School Privatization With Ta... A fortune derived from the relentless marketing of painkillers is now being used to expand charter schools. | | |                           -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Mon Jan 1 21:45:10 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2018 15:45:10 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] No new AWARE ON THE AIR on Tuesday 2 January Message-ID: <7302F7D3-E2E2-4DF2-A043-4189874C066A@gmail.com> The regular recording of AWARE ON THE AIR on Tuesday 2 January is canceled. —CGE From cgestabrook at gmail.com Tue Jan 2 11:36:39 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 05:36:39 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Flyer for AWARE demonstration Message-ID: <4D290010-1FCB-4730-A00D-2DA7522E20BD@gmail.com> [It may be too cold to hold the regular AWARE anti-war demonstration scheduled for Saturday 6 January, but here's a proposed flyer on the state of US war-making. (One page, one side: small print.)] IN THE PAST YEAR, THE U.S. GOVERNMENT MADE WAR AROUND THE WORLD - AS IT HAS FOR YEARS. THAT MUST STOP. The Arrival of Trump. One year ago, expectations for 2017 were running high. Donald Trump was about to take office, and predictions ranged from a new era of US policy pursuing peace and international partnership, to the US becoming a puppet of Russia, and even World War III. Of course, none of these happened, and such forecasts now seem as propagandistic in favor of established US policy as they probably should have at the time. Trump’s evident ignorance of foreign and security issues, combined with his lack of loyal allies within Washington’s political establishment, made him vulnerable to the pressure and influence of the politicians, officials, think tanks, lobbyists, advisors and journalists representing the same special interest groups that had long driven US foreign policy. Within weeks, Trump confirmed senior officials with largely the same hostility for example towards Russia and/or Iran that might have been expected of Hillary Clinton. Seeing him as a threat to the established order, elements within what might be called the Deep State [or ‘the permanent government’] targeted Trump in a relentless campaign to undermine his credibility and threaten his removal from office. Perhaps fearing international isolation if Trump delivered on his campaign promises to restore good relations with Russia and end US support for the war in Syria, the ‘intelligence services’ [CIA, NSA, etc.] appear to have been a key driver of this. But Trump left no doubt as to US priorities by making Saudi Arabia and Israel his first overseas visits – coinciding with a massive Saudi arms deal and planned increase in US military aid to Israel. For the Washington lobbyists and US foreign policy establishment, this was business as usual. Yet it was in respect of Syria a month earlier that Trump learned how he was expected to behave. Syria, Iraq and the Middle East. In response to an alleged chemical attack at Khan Sheikhun in April, Trump without waiting for any investigation launched cruise missiles at Syrian forces. In doing so, he immediately gained the (albeit short lived) approval of the same US politicians and media who for months had remorselessly condemned him. Trump’s missile attack was largely symbolic however, causing little damage to Syria’s military capability and having no impact upon the largely successful prosecution of the war against Islamic State, Al-Qaeda and other rebel groups that over the last year has arguably brought the country now closer to a restoration of peace than at any time since 2011. This was helped not only by the military support of Russia and Iran, by also by their cooperation with Turkey in attempting to forge a realistic peace process, with the long and destructive ‘Assad must go’ mantra of the US and its allies now rendered irrelevant. 2017 was particularly a year of relative tranquility for the people of Syria’s largest city Aleppo, which until its retaking by Syrian forces in December 2016 had for years been largely occupied by US UK backed, Islamist dominated rebels. US politicians and media had for months daily warned that massacres would be perpetrated by the Syrian government “if Aleppo fell,” but these didn’t occur – just as they also hadn’t occurred in other recaptured cities, such as Homs. Meanwhile, throughout 2017 displaced civilians began returning in large numbers to their homes – suggesting that US claims that it had been Assad they’d been fleeing from, rather than war or the rebels the US and UK had backed, were likely wrong. While perhaps forced to do so by the reality of the battlefield, Trump did seem to honor his pledge to stop US funding and arming of Syria’s rebels. With it largely at an end, the massive scale of the arming program was at last publicly revealed, laying to rest the long US media-propagated myth of US policy in Syria having been one of non-intervention. Not only did the arming of Syria’s rebels fuel and prolong a war that has killed some 400,000 people, but also many of the arms supplied by the US and its allies ended up in the hands of the same Islamic State and Al-Qaeda terrorists the US and its allies were purporting to fight. But the US and its allies have long regarded Islamist forces as a useful foreign policy tool, regardless of their disdain of democracy, human rights or other claimed ‘US values.’ Even three years after its air campaign to “degrade” IS began, evidence continued to emerge over the last year to suggest the US and its allies still see IS as much as an asset as an enemy to be destroyed. In December 2016 for example, despite intensive US surveillance, IS forces were able to cross open desert to attack Palmyra, just at the time US backed rebels were under intense military pressure in Aleppo. Similarly, the US reportedly facilitated the escape of IS fighters from Raqqa, and appeared to strike a deal with IS fighters to allow the US’ SDF proxies an unopposed advance in their race to seize Deir ez-Zor oilfields, thereby preventing their retaking by forces loyal to Assad. This illustrates how even now, the uninvited and hence unlawful US presence in Syria continues. As in Syria, 2017 also saw IS largely defeated in Iraq. US-led airstrikes undoubtedly played a role in this – but at great civilian loss of life that barely featured in US UK media, unlike the daily coverage of alleged mass civilian casualties when Syria and Russia were, for example, carrying out operations in Aleppo. Indeed, only now is the extent of US-led killing of civilians in, for example, Raqqa and Mosul starting to receive prominent coverage in US UK media. The same applies to the Saudi air campaign and blockade against Yemen which, using US and UK supplied weapons, continued throughout the year at catastrophic civilian cost, yet which receives only infrequent and mainly uncritical coverage in a US UK media that mostly would rather parrot US and Israeli claims that Iran is the source of the region’s instability. Russia, Russia, Russia. 2017 was the year Russia was blamed by Western politicians and media for everything. Russia was blamed for cyber-attacks, despite little evidence being offered, and despite that in some cases the blame for the attack seemed to shift according to which ‘enemy’ state was most in need of vilification at the time. Throughout 2017, it was also repeatedly reported that Russia is interfering in other countries’ elections and referendums. These claims are often reported as fact yet, despite long running and intensive investigations, the hard evidence to support such allegations remains almost entirely absent – for example in Germany, France, the US and the UK. US Decline? The recent UN votes against Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, and for example the US position on climate change and Iran, show a US arguably more isolated from world opinion, including even its close allies, than at any time in recent history. Yet rather than work to cultivate partnerships to deal with common issues such as Korea or terrorism, the US continues to publicly designate potential allies as enemies, as for example in its recent security strategy document – and to seek confrontation rather than cooperation, as arguably in its decision to send arms to Ukraine. The US remains the world’s most powerful nation. But unless it can be forced to act in the interests of peace, stability, of its own people and the wider world rather than in the narrow interests of the American economic elite - the ‘corporate globalists’ who often appear to be driving its policies - its influence in an increasingly multipolar world will likely decline. If 2017 is any guide, it seems perhaps even less likely now that Trump will prevent this than it did a year ago. [Adapted by cge from ] ANTI-WAR ANTI-RACISM EFFORT - on Facebook at ~ U.S. troops and weapons out of the Mideast ~ Medicare for all ~ universal basic income ~ ### From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jan 2 13:30:09 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 13:30:09 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Flyer for AWARE demonstration In-Reply-To: <4D290010-1FCB-4730-A00D-2DA7522E20BD@gmail.com> References: <4D290010-1FCB-4730-A00D-2DA7522E20BD@gmail.com> Message-ID: I’m sorry Carl, I don’t like to be so critical of your work, given I know you understand and speak on the issues with a depth of understanding above and beyond that of most. However, with the exception of the very first statement, this flyer focuses on “Trump," as if he was “the anti-war candidate.” That may have been the thinking of some, but it was never the thinking of the majority of members of AWARE, nor the majority of the American people. And even if it was, we should be focused on war, not politics of the two/one Party system, since the continuation and escalation of perpetual “war/imperialism” is merely a continuation of US foreign policy, no matter who is in power given our capitalist system. I don’t expect the flyer to represent my opinion in relation to the two Party’s or capitalism, as I believe it should represent all who are opposing war, whatever their political affiliation. This flyer does not represent AWARE. We have many flyers, you have constructed previously, that better reflects the situation with some updating. A mention of US intervention in the election of Honduras, turmoil in Iran, continuing military presence in Syria, Afghanistan, spread of military presence in the Sahel, with the continuing provocations of North Korea, China and Russia. No need to mention Russiagate or Trump. My humble opinion, and I will not comment on this topic any further. > On Jan 2, 2018, at 03:36, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: > > [It may be too cold to hold the regular AWARE anti-war demonstration scheduled for Saturday 6 January, but here's a proposed flyer on the state of US war-making. (One page, one side: small print.)] > > IN THE PAST YEAR, THE U.S. GOVERNMENT MADE WAR > AROUND THE WORLD - AS IT HAS FOR YEARS. THAT MUST STOP. > > The Arrival of Trump. One year ago, expectations for 2017 were running high. Donald Trump was about to take office, and predictions ranged from a new era of US policy pursuing peace and international partnership, to the US becoming a puppet of Russia, and even World War III. Of course, none of these happened, and such forecasts now seem as propagandistic in favor of established US policy as they probably should have at the time. > > Trump’s evident ignorance of foreign and security issues, combined with his lack of loyal allies within Washington’s political establishment, made him vulnerable to the pressure and influence of the politicians, officials, think tanks, lobbyists, advisors and journalists representing the same special interest groups that had long driven US foreign policy. Within weeks, Trump confirmed senior officials with largely the same hostility for example towards Russia and/or Iran that might have been expected of Hillary Clinton. > > Seeing him as a threat to the established order, elements within what might be called the Deep State [or ‘the permanent government’] targeted Trump in a relentless campaign to undermine his credibility and threaten his removal from office. Perhaps fearing international isolation if Trump delivered on his campaign promises to restore good relations with Russia and end US support for the war in Syria, the ‘intelligence services’ [CIA, NSA, etc.] appear to have been a key driver of this. > > But Trump left no doubt as to US priorities by making Saudi Arabia and Israel his first overseas visits – coinciding with a massive Saudi arms deal and planned increase in US military aid to Israel. > > For the Washington lobbyists and US foreign policy establishment, this was business as usual. Yet it was in respect of Syria a month earlier that Trump learned how he was expected to behave. > > Syria, Iraq and the Middle East. In response to an alleged chemical attack at Khan Sheikhun in April, Trump without waiting for any investigation launched cruise missiles at Syrian forces. In doing so, he immediately gained the (albeit short lived) approval of the same US politicians and media who for months had remorselessly condemned him. > > Trump’s missile attack was largely symbolic however, causing little damage to Syria’s military capability and having no impact upon the largely successful prosecution of the war against Islamic State, Al-Qaeda and other rebel groups that over the last year has arguably brought the country now closer to a restoration of peace than at any time since 2011. This was helped not only by the military support of Russia and Iran, by also by their cooperation with Turkey in attempting to forge a realistic peace process, with the long and destructive ‘Assad must go’ mantra of the US and its allies now rendered irrelevant. > > 2017 was particularly a year of relative tranquility for the people of Syria’s largest city Aleppo, which until its retaking by Syrian forces in December 2016 had for years been largely occupied by US UK backed, Islamist dominated rebels. > > US politicians and media had for months daily warned that massacres would be perpetrated by the Syrian government “if Aleppo fell,” but these didn’t occur – just as they also hadn’t occurred in other recaptured cities, such as Homs. Meanwhile, throughout 2017 displaced civilians began returning in large numbers to their homes – suggesting that US claims that it had been Assad they’d been fleeing from, rather than war or the rebels the US and UK had backed, were likely wrong. > > While perhaps forced to do so by the reality of the battlefield, Trump did seem to honor his pledge to stop US funding and arming of Syria’s rebels. With it largely at an end, the massive scale of the arming program was at last publicly revealed, laying to rest the long US media-propagated myth of US policy in Syria having been one of non-intervention. > > Not only did the arming of Syria’s rebels fuel and prolong a war that has killed some 400,000 people, but also many of the arms supplied by the US and its allies ended up in the hands of the same Islamic State and Al-Qaeda terrorists the US and its allies were purporting to fight. But the US and its allies have long regarded Islamist forces as a useful foreign policy tool, regardless of their disdain of democracy, human rights or other claimed ‘US values.’ > > Even three years after its air campaign to “degrade” IS began, evidence continued to emerge over the last year to suggest the US and its allies still see IS as much as an asset as an enemy to be destroyed. In December 2016 for example, despite intensive US surveillance, IS forces were able to cross open desert to attack Palmyra, just at the time US backed rebels were under intense military pressure in Aleppo. > > Similarly, the US reportedly facilitated the escape of IS fighters from Raqqa, and appeared to strike a deal with IS fighters to allow the US’ SDF proxies an unopposed advance in their race to seize Deir ez-Zor oilfields, thereby preventing their retaking by forces loyal to Assad. This illustrates how even now, the uninvited and hence unlawful US presence in Syria continues. > > As in Syria, 2017 also saw IS largely defeated in Iraq. US-led airstrikes undoubtedly played a role in this – but at great civilian loss of life that barely featured in US UK media, unlike the daily coverage of alleged mass civilian casualties when Syria and Russia were, for example, carrying out operations in Aleppo. Indeed, only now is the extent of US-led killing of civilians in, for example, Raqqa and Mosul starting to receive prominent coverage in US UK media. > > The same applies to the Saudi air campaign and blockade against Yemen which, using US and UK supplied weapons, continued throughout the year at catastrophic civilian cost, yet which receives only infrequent and mainly uncritical coverage in a US UK media that mostly would rather parrot US and Israeli claims that Iran is the source of the region’s instability. > > Russia, Russia, Russia. 2017 was the year Russia was blamed by Western politicians and media for everything. Russia was blamed for cyber-attacks, despite little evidence being offered, and despite that in some cases the blame for the attack seemed to shift according to which ‘enemy’ state was most in need of vilification at the time. > > Throughout 2017, it was also repeatedly reported that Russia is interfering in other countries’ elections and referendums. These claims are often reported as fact yet, despite long running and intensive investigations, the hard evidence to support such allegations remains almost entirely absent – for example in Germany, France, the US and the UK. > > US Decline? The recent UN votes against Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, and for example the US position on climate change and Iran, show a US arguably more isolated from world opinion, including even its close allies, than at any time in recent history. > > Yet rather than work to cultivate partnerships to deal with common issues such as Korea or terrorism, the US continues to publicly designate potential allies as enemies, as for example in its recent security strategy document – and to seek confrontation rather than cooperation, as arguably in its decision to send arms to Ukraine. > > The US remains the world’s most powerful nation. But unless it can be forced to act in the interests of peace, stability, of its own people and the wider world rather than in the narrow interests of the American economic elite - the ‘corporate globalists’ who often appear to be driving its policies - its influence in an increasingly multipolar world will likely decline. If 2017 is any guide, it seems perhaps even less likely now that Trump will prevent this than it did a year ago. > > [Adapted by cge from ] > > ANTI-WAR ANTI-RACISM EFFORT - on Facebook at > ~ U.S. troops and weapons out of the Mideast ~ Medicare for all ~ universal basic income ~ > > ### > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cc9e422246b77478f846b08d551d52c9e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636504898374559305&sdata=OlNBA5u0C1bynG8PZHUWwoRAhWKAspQh4lYHbp7c3mY%3D&reserved=0 From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jan 2 14:19:57 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 14:19:57 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Powerful Hollywood Women Unveil Anti-Harassment Plan, Collective Action for all women. Message-ID: Now we’re getting somewhere, collective action, not just for Hollywood stars but for working class women as well. Go Ladies go!!!! * Save Photo [https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/01/02/arts/02WOMEN-FIGHT-BACK-COMBO/02WOMEN-FIGHT-BACK-COMBO-superJumbo.jpg] Some of the women who have established Time’s Up, clockwise from top left: the actresses America Ferrera and Eva Longoria; the lawyer Nina L. Shaw; the actress Reese Witherspoon; the producer Shonda Rhimes; and the lawyer Tina Tchen.CreditClockwise from top left: first two photos, Brinson+Banks for The New York Times; Oriana Koren for The New York Times; Jimmy Morris/European Pressphoto Agency; Brinson+Banks for The New York Times; Alex Wong/Getty Images Driven by outrage and a resolve to correct a power imbalance that seemed intractable just months ago, 300 prominent actresses and female agents, writers, directors, producers and entertainment executives have formed an ambitious, sprawling initiative to fight systemic sexual harassment in Hollywood and in blue-collar workplaces nationwide. The initiative includes: — A legal defense fund, backed by $13 million in donations, to help less privileged women — like janitors, nurses and workers at farms, factories, restaurants and hotels — protect themselves from sexual misconduct and the fallout from reporting it. — Legislation to penalize companies that tolerate persistent harassment, and to discourage the use of nondisclosure agreements to silence victims. — A drive to reach gender parity at studios and talent agencies that has already begun making headway. — And a request that women walking the red carpet at the Golden Globes speak out and raise awareness by wearing black. Continue reading the main story RELATED COVERAGE * Open Letter From Time's Up JAN. 1, 2018 * [https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/12/21/arts/21BAGGER1/21BAGGER1-thumbStandard.jpg] THE CARPETBAGGER Can Anita Hill Fix Hollywood’s Harassment Problem? DEC. 20, 2017 * [https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/11/30/us/30oscars-alpha/30oscars-alpha-thumbStandard.jpg] THE CARPETBAGGER How Can the Oscars Celebrate in Weinstein’s Long Shadow? NOV. 29, 2017 * [https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/12/07/arts/07carpetbagger-jordanpeele2/05carpetbagger-jordanpeele2-thumbStandard.jpg] THE CARPETBAGGER ‘I’d Never Seen My Fears as an African-American Man Onscreen’ DEC. 6, 2017 ADVERTISEMENT Continue reading the main story Called Time’s Up, the movement was announced on Monday with an impassioned pledge of support to working-class women in an open letter signed by hundreds of women in show business, many of them A-listers. The letter also ran as a full-page ad in The New York Times, and in La Opinion, a Spanish-language newspaper. “The struggle for women to break in, to rise up the ranks and to simply be heard and acknowledged in male-dominated workplaces must end; time’s up on this impenetrable monopoly,” the letter says. The group is one answer to the question of how women in Hollywood would respond to cascading allegations that have upended the careers of powerful men in an industry where the prevalence of sexual predation has yielded the minimizing cliché of the “casting couch,” and where silence has been a condition of employment. Time’s Up also helps defuse criticism that the spotlight on the #MeToo movement has been dominated by the accusers of high-profile men, while the travails of working-class women have been overlooked. This was highlighted in November, when an open letter was sent on behalf of 700,000 female farmworkers who said they stood with Hollywood actresses in their fight against abuse. Time’s Up members said the letter bolstered their resolve to train their efforts on both Hollywood and beyond. “It’s very hard for us to speak righteously about the rest of anything if we haven’t cleaned our own house,” said Shonda Rhimes, the executive producer of the television series “Grey’s Anatomy,” “Scandal” and “How to Get Away With Murder,” who has been closely involved with the group. “If this group of women can’t fight for a model for other women who don’t have as much power and privilege, then who can?” Ms. Rhimes continued. Other Time’s Up members include the actresses Ashley Judd, Eva Longoria, America Ferrera, Natalie Portman, Rashida Jones, Emma Stone, Kerry Washington and Reese Witherspoon; the showrunner Jill Soloway; Donna Langley, chairwoman of Universal Pictures; the lawyers Nina L. Shaw and Tina Tchen, who served as Michelle Obama’s chief of staff; and Maria Eitel, an expert in corporate responsibility who is co-chairwoman of the Nike Foundation. “People were moved so viscerally,” said Ms. Eitel, who helps moderate Time’s Up meetings, which began in October. “They didn’t come together because they wanted to whine, or complain, or tell a story or bemoan. They came together because they intended to act. There was almost a ferociousness to it, especially in the first meetings.” The #MeToo Moment A newsletter offering the latest news and insights on the sexual harassment and misconduct scandals roiling society. Sign Up * PRIVACY POLICY * OPT OUT OR CONTACT US ANYTIME Time’s Up is leaderless, run by volunteers and made up of working groups. One group oversaw the creation of a commission, led by Anita Hilland announced in December, that is tasked with creating a blueprint for ending sexual harassment in show business. Another group, 50/50by2020, is pushing entertainment organizations and companies to agree to reach gender parity in their leadership tiers within two years. It already can claim a victory. In early December, after Ms. Rhimes pressed him, Chris Silbermann, a managing director at ICM Partners, pledged that his talent agency would meet that goal. “We just reached this conclusion in our heads that, damn it, everything is possible,” Ms. Rhimes said. “Why shouldn’t it be?” There is also a group ensuring that minorities and gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people are heard. “No one wants to look back and say they stood at the sidelines,” said Lena Waithe, a star of the Netflix series “Master of None” and part of that working group. Another group is devising legislation to tackle abuses and address how nondisclosure agreements silence victims of sexual harassment. “People settling out in advance of their rights is obviously something that can’t continue,” said Ms. Shaw, a prominent lawyer whose clients have included Lupita Nyong’o and Ava DuVernay. Ms. Tchen is spearheading the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund, which is administered by the National Women’s Law Center’s Legal Network for Gender Equity, and will connect female victims of sexual harassment with lawyers. Major donors include Ms. Witherspoon, Ms. Rhimes, Meryl Streep, Steven Spielberg and Kate Capshaw, and the talent agencies ICM Partners, the Creative Artists Agency, William Morris Endeavor and United Talent Agency. Time’s Up has also been urging women to wear black at the Golden Globes on Sunday, to use the red carpet to speak out against gender and racial inequality, and to raise awareness about their initiative and the legal fund. “This is a moment of solidarity, not a fashion moment,” Ms. Longoria said. A vast majority of the women who had been contacted and planned to attend the ceremony pledged to participate, she said. “For years, we’ve sold these awards shows as women, with our gowns and colors and our beautiful faces and our glamour,” Ms. Longoria said. “This time the industry can’t expect us to go up and twirl around. That’s not what this moment is about.” Time’s Up was formed soon after The New York Times reported in early October that the producer Harvey Weinstein had reached multiple settlements with women who had accused him of sexual misconduct. As more women stepped forward, and more men were accused of abuse, a group of female talent agents met at Creative Artists to discuss the problem and explore solutions. The group soon expanded to dozens and, eventually, about 150 participants (it has since doubled as the actresses who joined expanded to New York and London), who meet weekly at the agency and in living rooms across Los Angeles, as well as for daylong workshops. Katie McGrath, who runs the production company Bad Robot with her husband, J. J. Abrams (both are also major donors to the legal fund), said that the women realized from the start that they needed to figure out “what we wanted out of this moment, and what was going to be required in order to shift and pivot from this horror to structural change.” Several of the women said their work with Time’s Up presented a rare opportunity to meet regularly and pool efforts with other powerful women. In an industry overwhelmingly dominated by men, they said, they were usually one of the few actresses on set, or one of the few female writers or producers in a room. “We have been siloed off from each other,” Ms. Witherspoon said. “We’re finally hearing each other, and seeing each other, and now locking arms in solidarity with each other, and in solidarity for every woman who doesn’t feel seen, to be finally heard.” No one can predict whether this burst of energy will lead to lasting changes. Time’s Up members said the meetings had brought disagreements and frustrations as well. “It’s not as satisfying as finding a silver bullet,” Ms. Ferrera said. “We all recognize there’s no such thing.” But, she added, “not taking action is no longer an option.” Ms. Rhimes said working with the group of women reminded her of a feeling she got as a child, when her mother took her around the neighborhood in a wagon to register black women to vote. “We’re a bunch of women used to getting stuff done,” she said. “And we’re getting stuff done.” -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Tue Jan 2 14:44:05 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 08:44:05 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Flyer for AWARE demonstration In-Reply-To: References: <4D290010-1FCB-4730-A00D-2DA7522E20BD@gmail.com> Message-ID: Why don’t you write a one-page flyer that gets those things together? This one was taken from an RT article, but an original one will be better. Do a draft, and I’ll suggest edits. Or edit this one, to include what you want. —CGE > On Jan 2, 2018, at 7:30 AM, Karen Aram wrote: > > I’m sorry Carl, I don’t like to be so critical of your work, given I know you understand and speak on the issues with a depth of understanding above and beyond that of most. > > However, with the exception of the very first statement, this flyer focuses on “Trump," as if he was “the anti-war candidate.” That may have been the thinking of some, but it was never the thinking of the majority of members of AWARE, nor the majority of the American people. And even if it was, we should be focused on war, not politics of the two/one Party system, since the continuation and escalation of perpetual “war/imperialism” is merely a continuation of US foreign policy, no matter who is in power given our capitalist system. > > I don’t expect the flyer to represent my opinion in relation to the two Party’s or capitalism, as I believe it should represent all who are opposing war, whatever their political affiliation. > > This flyer does not represent AWARE. We have many flyers, you have constructed previously, that better reflects the situation with some updating. A mention of US intervention in the election of Honduras, turmoil in Iran, continuing military presence in Syria, Afghanistan, spread of military presence in the Sahel, with the continuing provocations of North Korea, China and Russia. > > No need to mention Russiagate or Trump. > > My humble opinion, and I will not comment on this topic any further. > > >> On Jan 2, 2018, at 03:36, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> [It may be too cold to hold the regular AWARE anti-war demonstration scheduled for Saturday 6 January, but here's a proposed flyer on the state of US war-making. (One page, one side: small print.)] >> >> IN THE PAST YEAR, THE U.S. GOVERNMENT MADE WAR >> AROUND THE WORLD - AS IT HAS FOR YEARS. THAT MUST STOP. >> >> The Arrival of Trump. One year ago, expectations for 2017 were running high. Donald Trump was about to take office, and predictions ranged from a new era of US policy pursuing peace and international partnership, to the US becoming a puppet of Russia, and even World War III. Of course, none of these happened, and such forecasts now seem as propagandistic in favor of established US policy as they probably should have at the time. >> >> Trump’s evident ignorance of foreign and security issues, combined with his lack of loyal allies within Washington’s political establishment, made him vulnerable to the pressure and influence of the politicians, officials, think tanks, lobbyists, advisors and journalists representing the same special interest groups that had long driven US foreign policy. Within weeks, Trump confirmed senior officials with largely the same hostility for example towards Russia and/or Iran that might have been expected of Hillary Clinton. >> >> Seeing him as a threat to the established order, elements within what might be called the Deep State [or ‘the permanent government’] targeted Trump in a relentless campaign to undermine his credibility and threaten his removal from office. Perhaps fearing international isolation if Trump delivered on his campaign promises to restore good relations with Russia and end US support for the war in Syria, the ‘intelligence services’ [CIA, NSA, etc.] appear to have been a key driver of this. >> >> But Trump left no doubt as to US priorities by making Saudi Arabia and Israel his first overseas visits – coinciding with a massive Saudi arms deal and planned increase in US military aid to Israel. >> >> For the Washington lobbyists and US foreign policy establishment, this was business as usual. Yet it was in respect of Syria a month earlier that Trump learned how he was expected to behave. >> >> Syria, Iraq and the Middle East. In response to an alleged chemical attack at Khan Sheikhun in April, Trump without waiting for any investigation launched cruise missiles at Syrian forces. In doing so, he immediately gained the (albeit short lived) approval of the same US politicians and media who for months had remorselessly condemned him. >> >> Trump’s missile attack was largely symbolic however, causing little damage to Syria’s military capability and having no impact upon the largely successful prosecution of the war against Islamic State, Al-Qaeda and other rebel groups that over the last year has arguably brought the country now closer to a restoration of peace than at any time since 2011. This was helped not only by the military support of Russia and Iran, by also by their cooperation with Turkey in attempting to forge a realistic peace process, with the long and destructive ‘Assad must go’ mantra of the US and its allies now rendered irrelevant. >> >> 2017 was particularly a year of relative tranquility for the people of Syria’s largest city Aleppo, which until its retaking by Syrian forces in December 2016 had for years been largely occupied by US UK backed, Islamist dominated rebels. >> >> US politicians and media had for months daily warned that massacres would be perpetrated by the Syrian government “if Aleppo fell,” but these didn’t occur – just as they also hadn’t occurred in other recaptured cities, such as Homs. Meanwhile, throughout 2017 displaced civilians began returning in large numbers to their homes – suggesting that US claims that it had been Assad they’d been fleeing from, rather than war or the rebels the US and UK had backed, were likely wrong. >> >> While perhaps forced to do so by the reality of the battlefield, Trump did seem to honor his pledge to stop US funding and arming of Syria’s rebels. With it largely at an end, the massive scale of the arming program was at last publicly revealed, laying to rest the long US media-propagated myth of US policy in Syria having been one of non-intervention. >> >> Not only did the arming of Syria’s rebels fuel and prolong a war that has killed some 400,000 people, but also many of the arms supplied by the US and its allies ended up in the hands of the same Islamic State and Al-Qaeda terrorists the US and its allies were purporting to fight. But the US and its allies have long regarded Islamist forces as a useful foreign policy tool, regardless of their disdain of democracy, human rights or other claimed ‘US values.’ >> >> Even three years after its air campaign to “degrade” IS began, evidence continued to emerge over the last year to suggest the US and its allies still see IS as much as an asset as an enemy to be destroyed. In December 2016 for example, despite intensive US surveillance, IS forces were able to cross open desert to attack Palmyra, just at the time US backed rebels were under intense military pressure in Aleppo. >> >> Similarly, the US reportedly facilitated the escape of IS fighters from Raqqa, and appeared to strike a deal with IS fighters to allow the US’ SDF proxies an unopposed advance in their race to seize Deir ez-Zor oilfields, thereby preventing their retaking by forces loyal to Assad. This illustrates how even now, the uninvited and hence unlawful US presence in Syria continues. >> >> As in Syria, 2017 also saw IS largely defeated in Iraq. US-led airstrikes undoubtedly played a role in this – but at great civilian loss of life that barely featured in US UK media, unlike the daily coverage of alleged mass civilian casualties when Syria and Russia were, for example, carrying out operations in Aleppo. Indeed, only now is the extent of US-led killing of civilians in, for example, Raqqa and Mosul starting to receive prominent coverage in US UK media. >> >> The same applies to the Saudi air campaign and blockade against Yemen which, using US and UK supplied weapons, continued throughout the year at catastrophic civilian cost, yet which receives only infrequent and mainly uncritical coverage in a US UK media that mostly would rather parrot US and Israeli claims that Iran is the source of the region’s instability. >> >> Russia, Russia, Russia. 2017 was the year Russia was blamed by Western politicians and media for everything. Russia was blamed for cyber-attacks, despite little evidence being offered, and despite that in some cases the blame for the attack seemed to shift according to which ‘enemy’ state was most in need of vilification at the time. >> >> Throughout 2017, it was also repeatedly reported that Russia is interfering in other countries’ elections and referendums. These claims are often reported as fact yet, despite long running and intensive investigations, the hard evidence to support such allegations remains almost entirely absent – for example in Germany, France, the US and the UK. >> >> US Decline? The recent UN votes against Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, and for example the US position on climate change and Iran, show a US arguably more isolated from world opinion, including even its close allies, than at any time in recent history. >> >> Yet rather than work to cultivate partnerships to deal with common issues such as Korea or terrorism, the US continues to publicly designate potential allies as enemies, as for example in its recent security strategy document – and to seek confrontation rather than cooperation, as arguably in its decision to send arms to Ukraine. >> >> The US remains the world’s most powerful nation. But unless it can be forced to act in the interests of peace, stability, of its own people and the wider world rather than in the narrow interests of the American economic elite - the ‘corporate globalists’ who often appear to be driving its policies - its influence in an increasingly multipolar world will likely decline. If 2017 is any guide, it seems perhaps even less likely now that Trump will prevent this than it did a year ago. >> >> [Adapted by cge from ] >> >> ANTI-WAR ANTI-RACISM EFFORT - on Facebook at >> ~ U.S. troops and weapons out of the Mideast ~ Medicare for all ~ universal basic income ~ >> >> ### >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cc9e422246b77478f846b08d551d52c9e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636504898374559305&sdata=OlNBA5u0C1bynG8PZHUWwoRAhWKAspQh4lYHbp7c3mY%3D&reserved=0 > From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jan 2 14:45:55 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 14:45:55 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Flyer for AWARE demonstration In-Reply-To: References: <4D290010-1FCB-4730-A00D-2DA7522E20BD@gmail.com> Message-ID: If and when time allows. > On Jan 2, 2018, at 06:44, C G Estabrook wrote: > > Why don’t you write a one-page flyer that gets those things together? > > This one was taken from an RT article, but an original one will be better. > > Do a draft, and I’ll suggest edits. > > Or edit this one, to include what you want. —CGE > > >> On Jan 2, 2018, at 7:30 AM, Karen Aram wrote: >> >> I’m sorry Carl, I don’t like to be so critical of your work, given I know you understand and speak on the issues with a depth of understanding above and beyond that of most. >> >> However, with the exception of the very first statement, this flyer focuses on “Trump," as if he was “the anti-war candidate.” That may have been the thinking of some, but it was never the thinking of the majority of members of AWARE, nor the majority of the American people. And even if it was, we should be focused on war, not politics of the two/one Party system, since the continuation and escalation of perpetual “war/imperialism” is merely a continuation of US foreign policy, no matter who is in power given our capitalist system. >> >> I don’t expect the flyer to represent my opinion in relation to the two Party’s or capitalism, as I believe it should represent all who are opposing war, whatever their political affiliation. >> >> This flyer does not represent AWARE. We have many flyers, you have constructed previously, that better reflects the situation with some updating. A mention of US intervention in the election of Honduras, turmoil in Iran, continuing military presence in Syria, Afghanistan, spread of military presence in the Sahel, with the continuing provocations of North Korea, China and Russia. >> >> No need to mention Russiagate or Trump. >> >> My humble opinion, and I will not comment on this topic any further. >> >> >>> On Jan 2, 2018, at 03:36, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: >>> >>> [It may be too cold to hold the regular AWARE anti-war demonstration scheduled for Saturday 6 January, but here's a proposed flyer on the state of US war-making. (One page, one side: small print.)] >>> >>> IN THE PAST YEAR, THE U.S. GOVERNMENT MADE WAR >>> AROUND THE WORLD - AS IT HAS FOR YEARS. THAT MUST STOP. >>> >>> The Arrival of Trump. One year ago, expectations for 2017 were running high. Donald Trump was about to take office, and predictions ranged from a new era of US policy pursuing peace and international partnership, to the US becoming a puppet of Russia, and even World War III. Of course, none of these happened, and such forecasts now seem as propagandistic in favor of established US policy as they probably should have at the time. >>> >>> Trump’s evident ignorance of foreign and security issues, combined with his lack of loyal allies within Washington’s political establishment, made him vulnerable to the pressure and influence of the politicians, officials, think tanks, lobbyists, advisors and journalists representing the same special interest groups that had long driven US foreign policy. Within weeks, Trump confirmed senior officials with largely the same hostility for example towards Russia and/or Iran that might have been expected of Hillary Clinton. >>> >>> Seeing him as a threat to the established order, elements within what might be called the Deep State [or ‘the permanent government’] targeted Trump in a relentless campaign to undermine his credibility and threaten his removal from office. Perhaps fearing international isolation if Trump delivered on his campaign promises to restore good relations with Russia and end US support for the war in Syria, the ‘intelligence services’ [CIA, NSA, etc.] appear to have been a key driver of this. >>> >>> But Trump left no doubt as to US priorities by making Saudi Arabia and Israel his first overseas visits – coinciding with a massive Saudi arms deal and planned increase in US military aid to Israel. >>> >>> For the Washington lobbyists and US foreign policy establishment, this was business as usual. Yet it was in respect of Syria a month earlier that Trump learned how he was expected to behave. >>> >>> Syria, Iraq and the Middle East. In response to an alleged chemical attack at Khan Sheikhun in April, Trump without waiting for any investigation launched cruise missiles at Syrian forces. In doing so, he immediately gained the (albeit short lived) approval of the same US politicians and media who for months had remorselessly condemned him. >>> >>> Trump’s missile attack was largely symbolic however, causing little damage to Syria’s military capability and having no impact upon the largely successful prosecution of the war against Islamic State, Al-Qaeda and other rebel groups that over the last year has arguably brought the country now closer to a restoration of peace than at any time since 2011. This was helped not only by the military support of Russia and Iran, by also by their cooperation with Turkey in attempting to forge a realistic peace process, with the long and destructive ‘Assad must go’ mantra of the US and its allies now rendered irrelevant. >>> >>> 2017 was particularly a year of relative tranquility for the people of Syria’s largest city Aleppo, which until its retaking by Syrian forces in December 2016 had for years been largely occupied by US UK backed, Islamist dominated rebels. >>> >>> US politicians and media had for months daily warned that massacres would be perpetrated by the Syrian government “if Aleppo fell,” but these didn’t occur – just as they also hadn’t occurred in other recaptured cities, such as Homs. Meanwhile, throughout 2017 displaced civilians began returning in large numbers to their homes – suggesting that US claims that it had been Assad they’d been fleeing from, rather than war or the rebels the US and UK had backed, were likely wrong. >>> >>> While perhaps forced to do so by the reality of the battlefield, Trump did seem to honor his pledge to stop US funding and arming of Syria’s rebels. With it largely at an end, the massive scale of the arming program was at last publicly revealed, laying to rest the long US media-propagated myth of US policy in Syria having been one of non-intervention. >>> >>> Not only did the arming of Syria’s rebels fuel and prolong a war that has killed some 400,000 people, but also many of the arms supplied by the US and its allies ended up in the hands of the same Islamic State and Al-Qaeda terrorists the US and its allies were purporting to fight. But the US and its allies have long regarded Islamist forces as a useful foreign policy tool, regardless of their disdain of democracy, human rights or other claimed ‘US values.’ >>> >>> Even three years after its air campaign to “degrade” IS began, evidence continued to emerge over the last year to suggest the US and its allies still see IS as much as an asset as an enemy to be destroyed. In December 2016 for example, despite intensive US surveillance, IS forces were able to cross open desert to attack Palmyra, just at the time US backed rebels were under intense military pressure in Aleppo. >>> >>> Similarly, the US reportedly facilitated the escape of IS fighters from Raqqa, and appeared to strike a deal with IS fighters to allow the US’ SDF proxies an unopposed advance in their race to seize Deir ez-Zor oilfields, thereby preventing their retaking by forces loyal to Assad. This illustrates how even now, the uninvited and hence unlawful US presence in Syria continues. >>> >>> As in Syria, 2017 also saw IS largely defeated in Iraq. US-led airstrikes undoubtedly played a role in this – but at great civilian loss of life that barely featured in US UK media, unlike the daily coverage of alleged mass civilian casualties when Syria and Russia were, for example, carrying out operations in Aleppo. Indeed, only now is the extent of US-led killing of civilians in, for example, Raqqa and Mosul starting to receive prominent coverage in US UK media. >>> >>> The same applies to the Saudi air campaign and blockade against Yemen which, using US and UK supplied weapons, continued throughout the year at catastrophic civilian cost, yet which receives only infrequent and mainly uncritical coverage in a US UK media that mostly would rather parrot US and Israeli claims that Iran is the source of the region’s instability. >>> >>> Russia, Russia, Russia. 2017 was the year Russia was blamed by Western politicians and media for everything. Russia was blamed for cyber-attacks, despite little evidence being offered, and despite that in some cases the blame for the attack seemed to shift according to which ‘enemy’ state was most in need of vilification at the time. >>> >>> Throughout 2017, it was also repeatedly reported that Russia is interfering in other countries’ elections and referendums. These claims are often reported as fact yet, despite long running and intensive investigations, the hard evidence to support such allegations remains almost entirely absent – for example in Germany, France, the US and the UK. >>> >>> US Decline? The recent UN votes against Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, and for example the US position on climate change and Iran, show a US arguably more isolated from world opinion, including even its close allies, than at any time in recent history. >>> >>> Yet rather than work to cultivate partnerships to deal with common issues such as Korea or terrorism, the US continues to publicly designate potential allies as enemies, as for example in its recent security strategy document – and to seek confrontation rather than cooperation, as arguably in its decision to send arms to Ukraine. >>> >>> The US remains the world’s most powerful nation. But unless it can be forced to act in the interests of peace, stability, of its own people and the wider world rather than in the narrow interests of the American economic elite - the ‘corporate globalists’ who often appear to be driving its policies - its influence in an increasingly multipolar world will likely decline. If 2017 is any guide, it seems perhaps even less likely now that Trump will prevent this than it did a year ago. >>> >>> [Adapted by cge from ] >>> >>> ANTI-WAR ANTI-RACISM EFFORT - on Facebook at >>> ~ U.S. troops and weapons out of the Mideast ~ Medicare for all ~ universal basic income ~ >>> >>> ### >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cc9e422246b77478f846b08d551d52c9e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636504898374559305&sdata=OlNBA5u0C1bynG8PZHUWwoRAhWKAspQh4lYHbp7c3mY%3D&reserved=0 >> > From cgestabrook at gmail.com Tue Jan 2 14:54:41 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 08:54:41 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Flyer for AWARE demonstration In-Reply-To: References: <4D290010-1FCB-4730-A00D-2DA7522E20BD@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4F179390-051C-43B9-95DA-A39082C1A04D@gmail.com> Look at this. “Stop Trump!” replaces "Stop the war!” for these fiery liberal spirits. The closest they come is “No new [SIC] wars”! But the current ones are fine… By accident or design, they illustrate Johnstone’s remark, "Anti-Trumpism is Anti-Progressiveism in Disguise.” See her article by that title. Resolve To Stop Trump Join the Win 2018 Team Dear Cg— Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) has honored several top Progressives who would be a better President than Donald Trump on our “Trump Trump Tuesday.” We’ve recognized Keith Ellison, Elizabeth Warren, Tulsi Gabbard, Jim McGovern, Bernie Sanders and others who’ve advocated for the popular progressive policies that brought sweeping victories in 2017. Now it’s time to focus on 2018. Today we’re honoring you and your commitment to progress! Bring Back Real Progressivism Pitch In To Help Elect Progressives Here are some but not all of our plans for 2018. We’re counting on you to help us add to and achieve this agenda. Resistance: 1. No cuts to Medicare, Medicaid & Social Security 2. No border walls period—not tied to the Dream Act or anything else 3. No removing or undermining protections and regulations for environmental health and safety 4. No new wars and no threats of using nukes against North Korea, Iran or anyone else 5. No more sneak attacks to gut healthcare, housing, nutrition, education or other human necessities Insistence: 1. Re-elect our progressive champions to Congress 2. Support progressive candidates in the primaries 3. Elect new progressives to Congress 4. Secure more co-sponsors for progressive legislation like Medicare for All, the Off Fossil Fuels Act, Jobs for All, a Clean Dream Act, Free College, etc. 5. Work with our friends in Congress and allied organizations to draft new legislation Movement Building: 1. Strengthen and build PDA chapters leading up to the November 2018 mid-terms 2. Support coalition efforts on core issues, values, and campaigns 3. Continue working to democratize the Democratic Party and to develop strong, progressive leadership at all levels 4. Support independent, progressive media 5. Work to broaden and deepen partnerships for legislative and electoral victories PDA is hard at work recruiting new strong progressive candidates to run for Congress in 2018. We've been successful in the past, helping progressives like Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, as well as Representatives Keith Ellison, Jim McGovern, Barbara Lee, Raul Grijalva, Rick Nolan, Mark Pocan, Tulsi Gabbard, Jamie Raskin, Pramila Jayapal, Ted Lieu, Bonnie Watson Coleman, Nanette Barragan, and others win. PDA needs your help now to make the difference in 2018. Only a newly-empowered progressive leadership in the House and Senate can restrain Trump . We’re seeing real results, but we can’t do it alone. We need 100 new sustainers—supporters who give automatic monthly donations. Signing up for the Win 2018 Sustainer Team at $20.18 per month would help so much, but we appreciate any amount you can spare . Will you pitch in $20.18 (or any other amount ) per month to help us organize for victories this year? Please send checks to: Kimberly Buchan Operations Coordinator Progressive Democrats of America P.O. Box 150064 Grand Rapids, MI 49515-0064 Peace, Donna Smith, PDA Executive Director for Mike H., Mike F., Judy, Janis, Dan, Dr. Bill, Deb, Kimberly, Bryan, and Amos—Your PDA National Team P.S. The midterm elections are less than a year away, and primaries are even sooner. We need you to step up big right now! Please dig deeply and give generously to help PDA make progress.You’ll barely notice the $20.18 (or any other amount ) per month to join the Win in 2018 Team. Whatever you can afford to give, your regular contribution will make all the difference! Invest in progress now! Progressive Democrats of America Grand Rapids, MI 49515, United States www.pdamerica.org Paid for by Progressive Democrats of America Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee This email was sent to cgestabrook at gmail.com . To stop receiving emails, click here . Created with NationBuilder > On Jan 2, 2018, at 8:45 AM, Karen Aram wrote: > > If and when time allows. > >> On Jan 2, 2018, at 06:44, C G Estabrook wrote: >> >> Why don’t you write a one-page flyer that gets those things together? >> >> This one was taken from an RT article, but an original one will be better. >> >> Do a draft, and I’ll suggest edits. >> >> Or edit this one, to include what you want. —CGE >> >> >>> On Jan 2, 2018, at 7:30 AM, Karen Aram wrote: >>> >>> I’m sorry Carl, I don’t like to be so critical of your work, given I know you understand and speak on the issues with a depth of understanding above and beyond that of most. >>> >>> However, with the exception of the very first statement, this flyer focuses on “Trump," as if he was “the anti-war candidate.” That may have been the thinking of some, but it was never the thinking of the majority of members of AWARE, nor the majority of the American people. And even if it was, we should be focused on war, not politics of the two/one Party system, since the continuation and escalation of perpetual “war/imperialism” is merely a continuation of US foreign policy, no matter who is in power given our capitalist system. >>> >>> I don’t expect the flyer to represent my opinion in relation to the two Party’s or capitalism, as I believe it should represent all who are opposing war, whatever their political affiliation. >>> >>> This flyer does not represent AWARE. We have many flyers, you have constructed previously, that better reflects the situation with some updating. A mention of US intervention in the election of Honduras, turmoil in Iran, continuing military presence in Syria, Afghanistan, spread of military presence in the Sahel, with the continuing provocations of North Korea, China and Russia. >>> >>> No need to mention Russiagate or Trump. >>> >>> My humble opinion, and I will not comment on this topic any further. >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 2, 2018, at 03:36, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: >>>> >>>> [It may be too cold to hold the regular AWARE anti-war demonstration scheduled for Saturday 6 January, but here's a proposed flyer on the state of US war-making. (One page, one side: small print.)] >>>> >>>> IN THE PAST YEAR, THE U.S. GOVERNMENT MADE WAR >>>> AROUND THE WORLD - AS IT HAS FOR YEARS. THAT MUST STOP. >>>> >>>> The Arrival of Trump. One year ago, expectations for 2017 were running high. Donald Trump was about to take office, and predictions ranged from a new era of US policy pursuing peace and international partnership, to the US becoming a puppet of Russia, and even World War III. Of course, none of these happened, and such forecasts now seem as propagandistic in favor of established US policy as they probably should have at the time. >>>> >>>> Trump’s evident ignorance of foreign and security issues, combined with his lack of loyal allies within Washington’s political establishment, made him vulnerable to the pressure and influence of the politicians, officials, think tanks, lobbyists, advisors and journalists representing the same special interest groups that had long driven US foreign policy. Within weeks, Trump confirmed senior officials with largely the same hostility for example towards Russia and/or Iran that might have been expected of Hillary Clinton. >>>> >>>> Seeing him as a threat to the established order, elements within what might be called the Deep State [or ‘the permanent government’] targeted Trump in a relentless campaign to undermine his credibility and threaten his removal from office. Perhaps fearing international isolation if Trump delivered on his campaign promises to restore good relations with Russia and end US support for the war in Syria, the ‘intelligence services’ [CIA, NSA, etc.] appear to have been a key driver of this. >>>> >>>> But Trump left no doubt as to US priorities by making Saudi Arabia and Israel his first overseas visits – coinciding with a massive Saudi arms deal and planned increase in US military aid to Israel. >>>> >>>> For the Washington lobbyists and US foreign policy establishment, this was business as usual. Yet it was in respect of Syria a month earlier that Trump learned how he was expected to behave. >>>> >>>> Syria, Iraq and the Middle East. In response to an alleged chemical attack at Khan Sheikhun in April, Trump without waiting for any investigation launched cruise missiles at Syrian forces. In doing so, he immediately gained the (albeit short lived) approval of the same US politicians and media who for months had remorselessly condemned him. >>>> >>>> Trump’s missile attack was largely symbolic however, causing little damage to Syria’s military capability and having no impact upon the largely successful prosecution of the war against Islamic State, Al-Qaeda and other rebel groups that over the last year has arguably brought the country now closer to a restoration of peace than at any time since 2011. This was helped not only by the military support of Russia and Iran, by also by their cooperation with Turkey in attempting to forge a realistic peace process, with the long and destructive ‘Assad must go’ mantra of the US and its allies now rendered irrelevant. >>>> >>>> 2017 was particularly a year of relative tranquility for the people of Syria’s largest city Aleppo, which until its retaking by Syrian forces in December 2016 had for years been largely occupied by US UK backed, Islamist dominated rebels. >>>> >>>> US politicians and media had for months daily warned that massacres would be perpetrated by the Syrian government “if Aleppo fell,” but these didn’t occur – just as they also hadn’t occurred in other recaptured cities, such as Homs. Meanwhile, throughout 2017 displaced civilians began returning in large numbers to their homes – suggesting that US claims that it had been Assad they’d been fleeing from, rather than war or the rebels the US and UK had backed, were likely wrong. >>>> >>>> While perhaps forced to do so by the reality of the battlefield, Trump did seem to honor his pledge to stop US funding and arming of Syria’s rebels. With it largely at an end, the massive scale of the arming program was at last publicly revealed, laying to rest the long US media-propagated myth of US policy in Syria having been one of non-intervention. >>>> >>>> Not only did the arming of Syria’s rebels fuel and prolong a war that has killed some 400,000 people, but also many of the arms supplied by the US and its allies ended up in the hands of the same Islamic State and Al-Qaeda terrorists the US and its allies were purporting to fight. But the US and its allies have long regarded Islamist forces as a useful foreign policy tool, regardless of their disdain of democracy, human rights or other claimed ‘US values.’ >>>> >>>> Even three years after its air campaign to “degrade” IS began, evidence continued to emerge over the last year to suggest the US and its allies still see IS as much as an asset as an enemy to be destroyed. In December 2016 for example, despite intensive US surveillance, IS forces were able to cross open desert to attack Palmyra, just at the time US backed rebels were under intense military pressure in Aleppo. >>>> >>>> Similarly, the US reportedly facilitated the escape of IS fighters from Raqqa, and appeared to strike a deal with IS fighters to allow the US’ SDF proxies an unopposed advance in their race to seize Deir ez-Zor oilfields, thereby preventing their retaking by forces loyal to Assad. This illustrates how even now, the uninvited and hence unlawful US presence in Syria continues. >>>> >>>> As in Syria, 2017 also saw IS largely defeated in Iraq. US-led airstrikes undoubtedly played a role in this – but at great civilian loss of life that barely featured in US UK media, unlike the daily coverage of alleged mass civilian casualties when Syria and Russia were, for example, carrying out operations in Aleppo. Indeed, only now is the extent of US-led killing of civilians in, for example, Raqqa and Mosul starting to receive prominent coverage in US UK media. >>>> >>>> The same applies to the Saudi air campaign and blockade against Yemen which, using US and UK supplied weapons, continued throughout the year at catastrophic civilian cost, yet which receives only infrequent and mainly uncritical coverage in a US UK media that mostly would rather parrot US and Israeli claims that Iran is the source of the region’s instability. >>>> >>>> Russia, Russia, Russia. 2017 was the year Russia was blamed by Western politicians and media for everything. Russia was blamed for cyber-attacks, despite little evidence being offered, and despite that in some cases the blame for the attack seemed to shift according to which ‘enemy’ state was most in need of vilification at the time. >>>> >>>> Throughout 2017, it was also repeatedly reported that Russia is interfering in other countries’ elections and referendums. These claims are often reported as fact yet, despite long running and intensive investigations, the hard evidence to support such allegations remains almost entirely absent – for example in Germany, France, the US and the UK. >>>> >>>> US Decline? The recent UN votes against Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, and for example the US position on climate change and Iran, show a US arguably more isolated from world opinion, including even its close allies, than at any time in recent history. >>>> >>>> Yet rather than work to cultivate partnerships to deal with common issues such as Korea or terrorism, the US continues to publicly designate potential allies as enemies, as for example in its recent security strategy document – and to seek confrontation rather than cooperation, as arguably in its decision to send arms to Ukraine. >>>> >>>> The US remains the world’s most powerful nation. But unless it can be forced to act in the interests of peace, stability, of its own people and the wider world rather than in the narrow interests of the American economic elite - the ‘corporate globalists’ who often appear to be driving its policies - its influence in an increasingly multipolar world will likely decline. If 2017 is any guide, it seems perhaps even less likely now that Trump will prevent this than it did a year ago. >>>> >>>> [Adapted by cge from ] >>>> >>>> ANTI-WAR ANTI-RACISM EFFORT - on Facebook at >>>> ~ U.S. troops and weapons out of the Mideast ~ Medicare for all ~ universal basic income ~ >>>> >>>> ### >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cc9e422246b77478f846b08d551d52c9e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636504898374559305&sdata=OlNBA5u0C1bynG8PZHUWwoRAhWKAspQh4lYHbp7c3mY%3D&reserved=0 >>> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: national_banner.png Type: image/png Size: 15062 bytes Desc: not available URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jan 2 15:09:22 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 15:09:22 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Flyer for AWARE demonstration In-Reply-To: <4D290010-1FCB-4730-A00D-2DA7522E20BD@gmail.com> References: <4D290010-1FCB-4730-A00D-2DA7522E20BD@gmail.com> Message-ID: I have gone through and done a quick edit, for now. Will get back to it later with more. Others may wish to add or subtract from that which either you or I have done. > > IN THE PAST YEAR, THE U.S. GOVERNMENT MADE WAR > AROUND THE WORLD - AS IT HAS FOR YEARS. THAT MUST STOP. > > > The Trump Administration left no doubt as to US priorities by making Saudi Arabia and Israel his first overseas visits – coinciding with a massive Saudi arms deal and planned increase in US military aid to Israel. > > For the Washington lobbyists and US foreign policy establishment, this was business as usual. > > Not only did the arming of Syria’s rebels fuel and prolong a war that has killed some 400,000 people, but also many of the arms supplied by the US and its allies ended up in the hands of the same Islamic State and Al-Qaeda terrorists the US and its allies were purporting to fight. But the US and its allies have long regarded Islamist forces as a useful foreign policy tool, regardless of their disdain of democracy, human rights or other claimed ‘US values.’ > > Similarly, the US reportedly facilitated the escape of IS fighters from Raqqa, and appeared to strike a deal with IS fighters to allow the US’ SDF proxies an unopposed advance in their race to seize Deir ez-Zor oilfields, thereby preventing their retaking by forces loyal to Assad. This illustrates how even now, the uninvited and hence unlawful US presence in Syria continues. > > As in Syria, 2017 also saw IS largely defeated in Iraq. US-led airstrikes undoubtedly played a role in this – but at great civilian loss of life. > > The same applies to The Saudi air campaign and blockade against Yemen which, using US and UK supplied weapons, training and logistics support continues > > US Decline? The recent UN votes against Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, and for example the US position on climate change and Iran, show a US arguably more isolated from world opinion, including even its close allies, than at any time in recent history. > > Yet rather than work to cultivate partnerships to deal with common issues such as Korea or terrorism, the US continues to publicly designate potential allies as enemies, as for example in its recent security strategy document – and to seek confrontation rather than cooperation, as arguably in its decision to send arms to Ukraine. > > The US remains the world’s most powerful nation. But unless it can be forced to act in the interests of peace, stability, of its own people and the wider world rather than in the narrow interests of the American economic elite - the ‘corporate globalists’ who are driving its policies - its influence in an increasingly multipolar world is bringing humanity to the precipice of doom. > > ANTI-WAR ANTI-RACISM EFFORT - on Facebook at > ~ U.S. troops and weapons out of the Mideast ~ > > ### > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cc9e422246b77478f846b08d551d52c9e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636504898374559305&sdata=OlNBA5u0C1bynG8PZHUWwoRAhWKAspQh4lYHbp7c3mY%3D&reserved=0 From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jan 2 15:21:58 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 15:21:58 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Flyer for AWARE demonstration In-Reply-To: References: <4D290010-1FCB-4730-A00D-2DA7522E20BD@gmail.com> Message-ID: We need to add something in relation to the most recent provocations of China, sanctions against Iran and N. Korea, as well as planned war across the nations of the Sahel. I will see what I can come up with later, but if you or anyone else can provide……..sticking to the issue of (war, and what the USG is doing in relation to foreign policy) Other than “Costs of War” I don’t think our domestic concerns belong in the Anti-war “flyer.” We need to keep it simple, for the many who don’t even know we’re at war with currently eight nations. We want people to read the flyer. We can do other flyers with more in-depth information for the Market in the Spring, or for distribution at events. > >> >> IN THE PAST YEAR, THE U.S. GOVERNMENT MADE WAR >> AROUND THE WORLD - AS IT HAS FOR YEARS. THAT MUST STOP. >> >> >> The Trump Administration left no doubt as to US priorities by making Saudi Arabia and Israel his first overseas visits – coinciding with a massive Saudi arms deal and planned increase in US military aid to Israel. >> >> For the Washington lobbyists and US foreign policy establishment, this was business as usual. >> >> Not only did the arming of Syria’s rebels fuel and prolong a war that has killed some 400,000 people, but also many of the arms supplied by the US and its allies ended up in the hands of the same Islamic State and Al-Qaeda terrorists the US and its allies were purporting to fight. But the US and its allies have long regarded Islamist forces as a useful foreign policy tool, regardless of their disdain of democracy, human rights or other claimed ‘US values.’ >> >> Similarly, the US reportedly facilitated the escape of IS fighters from Raqqa, and appeared to strike a deal with IS fighters to allow the US’ SDF proxies an unopposed advance in their race to seize Deir ez-Zor oilfields, thereby preventing their retaking by forces loyal to Assad. This illustrates how even now, the uninvited and hence unlawful US presence in Syria continues. >> >> As in Syria, 2017 also saw IS largely defeated in Iraq. US-led airstrikes undoubtedly played a role in this – but at great civilian loss of life. >> >> The same applies to The Saudi air campaign and blockade against Yemen which, using US and UK supplied weapons, training and logistics support continues >> >> US Decline? The recent UN votes against Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, and for example the US position on climate change and Iran, show a US arguably more isolated from world opinion, including even its close allies, than at any time in recent history. >> >> Yet rather than work to cultivate partnerships to deal with common issues such as Korea or terrorism, the US continues to publicly designate potential allies as enemies, as for example in its recent security strategy document – and to seek confrontation rather than cooperation, as arguably in its decision to send arms to Ukraine. >> >> The US remains the world’s most powerful nation. But unless it can be forced to act in the interests of peace, stability, of its own people and the wider world rather than in the narrow interests of the American economic elite - the ‘corporate globalists’ who are driving its policies - its influence in an increasingly multipolar world is bringing humanity to the precipice of doom. >> >> ANTI-WAR ANTI-RACISM EFFORT - on Facebook at >> ~ U.S. troops and weapons out of the Mideast ~ >> >> ### >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cc9e422246b77478f846b08d551d52c9e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636504898374559305&sdata=OlNBA5u0C1bynG8PZHUWwoRAhWKAspQh4lYHbp7c3mY%3D&reserved=0 > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C18c943eb3aba48442ee608d551f2de4b%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636505025903616203&sdata=7PEHgMFoNCt7fneUpoJclxpNd3qdpd3ZSPzA%2FbSUg%2F4%3D&reserved=0 From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jan 2 18:57:23 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 18:57:23 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Yemen: Remaining Peaceful Was Their Choice, by Kathy Kelly/ Counterpunch Message-ID: JANUARY 1, 2018 Yemen: Remaining Peaceful Was Their Choice by KATHY KELLY FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail[https://uziiw38pmyg1ai60732c4011-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/dropzone/2017/09/atoa-print-icon.png] People living now in Yemen’s third largest city, Ta’iz, have endured unimaginable circumstances for the past three years. Civilians fear to go outside lest they be shot by a sniper or step on a land mine. Both sides of a worsening civil war use Howitzers, Kaytushas, mortars and other missiles to shell the city. Residents say no neighborhood is safer than another, and human rights groups report appalling violations, including torture of captives. Two days ago, a Saudi-led coalition bomber killed 54 people in a crowded market place. Before the civil war developed, the city was regarded as the official cultural capital of Yemen, a place where authors and academics, artists and poets chose to live. Ta’iz was home to a vibrant, creative youth movement during the 2011 Arab Spring uprising. Young men and women organized massive demonstrations to protest the enrichment of entrenched elites as ordinary people struggled to survive. The young people were exposing the roots of one of the worst humanitarian crises in the world today. They were sounding an alarm about the receding water tables which made wells ever harder to dig and were crippling the agricultural economy. They were similarly distressed over unemployment. When starving farmers and shepherds moved to cities, the young people could see how the increased population would overstress already inadequate systems for sewage, sanitation and health care delivery. They protested their government’s cancellation of fuel subsidies and the skyrocketing prices which resulted. They clamored for a refocus on policy away from wealthy elites and toward creation of jobs for high school and university graduates. Despite their misery, they steadfastly opted for unarmed, nonviolent struggle. Dr. Sheila Carapico, an historian who has closely followed Yemen’s modern history, noted the slogans adopted by demonstrators in Ta’iz and in Sana’a, in 2011: ‘Remaining Peaceful Is Our Choice,’ and ‘Peaceful, Peaceful, No to Civil War.’” Carapico adds that some called Ta’iz the epicenter of the popular uprising. “The city’s relatively educated cosmopolitan student body entertained demonstration participants with music, skits, caricatures, graffiti, banners and other artistic embellishments. Throngs were photographed: men and women together; men and women separately, all unarmed.” In December of 2011, 150,000 people walked nearly 200 kilometers from Ta’iz to Sana’a, promoting their call for peaceful change. Among them were tribal people who worked on ranches and farms. They seldom left home without their rifles, but had chosen to set aside their weapons and join the peaceful march. Yet, those who ruled Yemen for over thirty years, in collusion with Saudi Arabia’s neighboring monarchy which fiercely opposed democratic movements anywhere near its borders, negotiated a political arrangement meant to co-opt dissent while resolutely excluding a vast majority of Yemenis from influence on policy. They ignored demands for changes that might be felt by ordinary Yemenis and facilitated instead a leadership swap, replacing the dictatorial President Ali Abdullah Saleh with Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi, his vice-president, as an unelected president of Yemen. The U.S. and neighboring petro-monarchies backed the powerful elites. At a time when Yemenis desperately needed funding to meet the needs of starving millions, they ignored the pleas of peaceful youths calling for demilitarized change, and poured funding into “security spending” – a misleading notion which referred to further military buildup, including the arming of client dictators against their own populations. And then the nonviolent options were over, and civil war began. Now the nightmare of famine and disease those peaceful youths anticipated has become a horrid reality, and their city of Ta’iz is transformed into a battlefield. What could we wish for Ta’iz? Surely, we wouldn’t wish the terror plague of aerial bombardment to cause death, mutilation, destruction and multiple traumas. We wouldn’t wish for shifting battle lines to stretch across the city and the rubble in its blood-marked streets. I think most people in the U.S. wouldn’t wish such horror on any community and wouldn’t want people in Ta’iz to be singled out for further suffering. We could instead build massive campaigns demanding a U.S. call for a permanent cease fire and an end of all weapon sales to any of the warring parties. But, if the U.S. continues to equip the Saudi-led coalition, selling bombs to Saudi Arabia and the UAE and refueling Saudi bombers in midair so they can continue their deadly sorties, people in Taiz and throughout Yemen will continue to suffer. The beleaguered people in Ta’iz will anticipate, every day, the sickening thud, ear-splitting blast or thunderous explosion that could tear apart the body of a loved one, or a neighbor, or a neighbors’ child; or turn their homes to masses of rubble, and alter their lives forever or end their lives before the day is through. Join the debate on Facebook More articles by:KATHY KELLY KATHY KELLY co-coordinates Voices for Creative Nonviolence and has worked closely with the Afghan Youth Peace Volunteers. She is the author of Other Lands Have Dreams published by CounterPunch / AK Press. She can be reached at: Kathy at vcnv.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jan 2 20:48:15 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 20:48:15 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Good film on Netflix with Selena Gomes Message-ID: It was on Netflix: In Dubious Battle (film) - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Dubious_Battle_(film) 1. 2. In Dubious Battle is a 2016 drama film directed by and produced by James Franco, based on John Steinbeck's novel of the same name, with a screenplay by Matt Rager. The film features an ensemble cast, consisting of Franco, Nat Wolff, Josh Hutcherson, Selena Gomez, Vincent D'Onofrio, Analeigh Tipton, Zach Braff, ... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 3 13:05:49 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 13:05:49 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Trump threatens stop to Palestinian aid over Jerusalem row - BBC News 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: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 7:04 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Trump threatens stop to Palestinian aid over Jerusalem row - BBC News http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42549157 The Americans have always beaten up upon, bullied and threatened the Palestinians like this behind closed doors since the start of the so-called "peace process" in 1991. Now the Americans are going public with it. Francis A. Boyle Legal Adviser to the Palestinian Delegation to the Middle East Peace Negotiations (1991-1993) From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 3 13:05:49 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 13:05:49 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Trump threatens stop to Palestinian aid over Jerusalem row - BBC News 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: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 7:04 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Trump threatens stop to Palestinian aid over Jerusalem row - BBC News http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42549157 The Americans have always beaten up upon, bullied and threatened the Palestinians like this behind closed doors since the start of the so-called "peace process" in 1991. Now the Americans are going public with it. Francis A. Boyle Legal Adviser to the Palestinian Delegation to the Middle East Peace Negotiations (1991-1993) From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 3 13:30:51 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 13:30:51 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Trump threatens stop to Palestinian aid over Jerusalem row - BBC News Message-ID: And for your information, the Americans have always blatantly lied to the Palestinians about the legal meaning of the technical legal documents the Americans have drafted in English for the Palestinians to sign. That's the US State Department at work for you! Professor Francis A. Boyle Legal Advisor to the Palestinian Delegation to the Middle East Peace Negotiations (1991-1993) Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) 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, January 03, 2018 7:06 AM To: 'David Green' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' ; 'C G Estabrook' Subject: FW: Trump threatens stop to Palestinian aid over Jerusalem row - BBC News 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, January 03, 2018 7:04 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Trump threatens stop to Palestinian aid over Jerusalem row - BBC News http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42549157 The Americans have always beaten up upon, bullied and threatened the Palestinians like this behind closed doors since the start of the so-called "peace process" in 1991. Now the Americans are going public with it. Francis A. Boyle Legal Adviser to the Palestinian Delegation to the Middle East Peace Negotiations (1991-1993) From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 3 13:30:51 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 13:30:51 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Trump threatens stop to Palestinian aid over Jerusalem row - BBC News Message-ID: And for your information, the Americans have always blatantly lied to the Palestinians about the legal meaning of the technical legal documents the Americans have drafted in English for the Palestinians to sign. That's the US State Department at work for you! Professor Francis A. Boyle Legal Advisor to the Palestinian Delegation to the Middle East Peace Negotiations (1991-1993) Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) 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, January 03, 2018 7:06 AM To: 'David Green' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' ; 'C G Estabrook' Subject: FW: Trump threatens stop to Palestinian aid over Jerusalem row - BBC News 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, January 03, 2018 7:04 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Trump threatens stop to Palestinian aid over Jerusalem row - BBC News http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42549157 The Americans have always beaten up upon, bullied and threatened the Palestinians like this behind closed doors since the start of the so-called "peace process" in 1991. Now the Americans are going public with it. Francis A. Boyle Legal Adviser to the Palestinian Delegation to the Middle East Peace Negotiations (1991-1993) From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jan 3 13:32:34 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 13:32:34 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Iran uprisings Message-ID: * edback * Share » My thoughts on the article below: 1) The similarity of conditions that the US is facing in respect to “austerity policies being imposed by the government. 2) How timely for the US, given our sanctions on Iran, which have contributed to the austerity within their nation. 3) US intervention and suggestions of regime change, the same story we hear over and over again, as we did in respect to Iraq, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, etc.,etc. whereby we want war or a puppet. 4) The absolute hypocrisy of the US, calling for the UN to convene a special security counsel meeting, as if we cared about human rights. Mass protests against austerity and social inequality shake Iranian regime By Keith Jones WSWS.ORG 3 January 2018 Iran has been rocked for the past six days by protests against food-price rises, mass joblessness, ever-widening social inequality, and the Islamic Republic’s brutal austerity program and political repression. The protests began last Thursday in Iran’s second largest city, Mashhad, and the neighboring centers of Neyshabur and Kashmar, then spread to the capital Tehran and more than three-dozen other cities and towns spread across the country. According to government sources, 21 people, including several members of the security forces, have died in clashes between protesters and authorities. There is no national tally of arrests, but a Tehran official has admitted that 450 people have been detained in that city since Saturday and 70 people were reportedly arrested just on Sunday night in Arak, an industrial city some 300 kilometers southwest of the capital. The government has curtailed, when not outright blocking, the social media apps Telegram and Instagram, so as to suppress information about future protests and the scope of the movement. The scale and intensity of the protests have shaken Iran’s bourgeois-clerical regime and are now prompting its rival factions to draw together to suppress the challenge from below. Over the weekend, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani declared Iranians had the right to peacefully protest and claimed his government would soon take steps to address the protesters’ socioeconomic grievances, adding, “We have no bigger challenge than unemployment.” But his ministers and spokesmen for the security agencies are now vowing to stamp out the protest movement, with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) saying it is ready to use an “iron fist.” In justifying state repression, numerous Iranian leaders—from the Islamic Republic’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and IRGC Deputy Commander General Rasoul Sanayee to former “reformist” president and Green ally Mohammad Khatami—have accused Iran’s strategic rivals of inciting and providing logistical support for mob violence. In doing so, many have highlighted the demagogic claims of “support” for the protests made by US President Donald Trump and Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu and the threats of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to “take the war inside Iran.” All three are open advocates of regime change in Tehran and have repeatedly threatened to wage war on Iran. But the current wave of protests has a quite different class character than those that unfolded in 2009 under the banner of the so-called Green Revolution. Egged on by Washington, the New York Times, French President Sarkozy and other European leaders, and drawing their support from the most privileged sections of Iranian society, the Greens sought to overturn the reelection of populist President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, based on unsubstantiated and contrived charges of electoral fraud, and with the aim of installing a regime determined to reach a rapid rapprochement with US imperialism. Based on the best available reports to have filtered through the censorship of the Iranian regime or appeared in the western media, it is apparent that the current wave of protests is, at its core, an incipient rebellion of the working class. To be sure, the protests are socially heterogeneous and there is much political confusion among the participants. Moreover, as would be expected, monarchists and other rightwing elements allied with imperialism are seeking to latch onto and misdirect them. But the protests, although not yet a mass movement, have been comprised principally of workers, poor people and youth. They are being fueled by deep-rooted class anger in a country where 3.2 million or 12.7 percent of the workforce are officially unemployed, the real unemployment rate for youth is in the order of 40 percent, and, according to a recent IRCG report, 50 percent live in poverty. Meanwhile, the World Wealth and Income Database calculates (based on 2013 data) that the top 1 percent of Iranians monopolize 16.3 percent of all the country’s income, just 0.5 of a percentage point less than the entire bottom 50 percent, while the top 10 percent garner 48.5 percent. Mounting working-class opposition The current wave of protests erupted after months of mounting worker unrest and popular demonstrations, including over job cuts, the failure to pay back wages, and the authorities’ indifference to the millions whose savings have been wiped out by the collapse of numerous unregulated financial institutions. Last September, for example, in the aforementioned Arak, workers at two industrial plants that were privatized in the 2000s clashed with police for two days after the security forces intervened to break up their protests against their employers’ failure to pay back wages and medical insurance premiums. According to an Agence France-Presse report, “Minor protests have been bubbling away in the weeks leading up to the current unrest” with “hundreds of oil workers and truck drivers protesting the late payment of wages; tractor makers in Tabriz against their factory’s closure; and Tehran tire workers at bonuses being delayed.” These protests have been treated with indifference by the western media, while Iranian authorities have done their best to black them out. In the days immediately preceding the current wave of protests, an intense and widespread discussion raged on social media about mounting social inequality. The trigger for this outpouring of anger was the tabling of the government’s latest austerity budget. It will boost gasoline prices by as much as 50 percent, while further slashing the small cash payments given Iranians in lieu of the price subsidies for energy, basic foodstuffs and essential services that were phased out between 2010 and 2014. The Green movement was centered almost exclusively in Tehran, in particular its wealthier northern districts. By contrast the current wave of protests has been much broader geographically, including smaller and poorer cities and towns that have constituted the political base of Ahmadinejad and the so-call “hardline” faction of the Islamic Republic’s political elite, which combines Shia orthodoxy with populist appeals to the plebian elements of Iranian society. Even more significantly, while the Greens spoke for that wing of the Iranian bourgeoisie most eager to reach an accommodation with the imperialist powers and mobilized their selfish upper middle-class supporters by denouncing Ahmadinejad for “squandering” money on the poor, the current antigovernment movement is driven by opposition to social inequality. The Greens, who overwhelmingly supported Rouhani’s election in 2013 and his reelection last May, have shunned the current protests, with prominent Green representatives expressing grave concern about the “leaderless” character of the protests. For their part, the demonstrators have reportedly made no specific call for the principal Green leaders, defeated 2009 presidential candidates Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi, to be released from house arrest. Instead they have taken up slogans that challenge the bourgeois clerical regime as a whole. Rouhani’s program of rapprochement with Washington and austerity Iran’s acute social crisis is a product of unrelenting US economic and military-strategic pressure; including biting economic sanctions; the world economic crisis and especially the collapse of world oil prices; the failure of the independent Iranian bourgeois national project; and, last but not least, the brutal austerity measures Rouhani has implemented with the aim of wooing western investment. Pointing to the socially explosive consequences of the brutal US and European economic sanctions on Iran, Rouhani and his political mentor, the late president and longtime advocate of a strategic orientation to the Western imperialist powers Hashemi Rafsanjani, won over the Ayatollah Khomeini and the other key components of the Islamic regime to a change of course in 2014—a fresh attempt to seek an accommodation with Washington and the European Union. As in the case of the Greens four years before, this policy was bound up with a renewed push to eliminate what remained of the social concessions made to the working class in the wake of the 1979 Revolution. During the past four-and-a-half years, the Rouhani regime has pressed forward with privatization and deregulation, while following IMF pro-market and austerity prescriptions, and redrafting the rules governing oil concessions to woo the European and US oil giants. Ultimately, in January 2016 the most punishing US and European sanctions were either removed or suspended in exchange for Tehran dismantling large parts of its civil nuclear program. But insofar as the removal of sanctions has provided a boost to the economy, the benefits have accrued almost entirely to the most privileged sections of the population. Rouhani’s response, as demonstrated by the latest budget, is to double down on austerity for the masses, while increasing the budgets of religious and clergy-led institutions. As is often the case, the opening for the sudden emergence of social opposition was provided by fissures within the ruling elite. The initial antigovernment protests, which were organized under the banner “No to High Prices,” were backed at least tacitly by Rouhani’s religious conservative opponents. This of course is utterly hypocritical. The Principlists and other conservative factions of the ruling elite have supported similar pro-market and pro-big business policies and joined with their “reformist rivals” in prevailing on Ahmadinejad to dismantle, in his final years in office, many of the populist polices that had propelled him to power against Rafsanjani in 2005. A new stage of the class struggle The past week’s protests herald a new stage in the class struggle in Iran and internationally. Across the Middle East, including in Israel, there are signs of mounting working-class opposition. The same is true in Europe and North America, where the ruling elites have dramatically intensified the assault on the working class in the decade since the 2008 global financial crisis. The critical question is the fight to arm the emerging global working class opposition with a socialist internationalist strategy. Iranian workers and youth must fight for the mobilization of the working class as an independent political force in opposition to imperialism and all factions of the national bourgeoisie. Any right-wing forces advocating an orientation to Washington and/or the other imperialist powers within the antigovernment movement must be exposed and politically isolated. It is imperialism that over the past century has suffocated the democratic and social aspirations of the peoples of the Middle East, laid waste to the region through a quarter-century of predatory wars, and today threatens to embroil the people of Iran and the entire region in an even bloodier conflagration. The Iranian bourgeoisie, as demonstrated by more than a century stretching back to the Constitutional Revolution of 1906, is utterly incapable of establishing genuine democracy and freedom from imperialism, because to do so would require a revolutionary mobilization of the masses of such dimensions that it would imperil its own selfish class interests and ambitions. Workers and youth should also spurn those who denigrate the struggle for revolutionary program and leadership on the claim that the upsurge of the masses solves everything. Learn the lesson of history, including of Egypt’s 2011 “Spring” and of the 1979 Iranian Revolution. Thirty-nine years ago, the Shah’s blood-soaked US-backed regime was swept into the dustbin of history by a powerful mass movement spearheaded by the working class. But the working class was politically subordinated by the Stalinist Tudeh Party and various petty bourgeois left forces to the so-called progressive wing of the national bourgeoisie led by Ayatollah Khomeini and the Shia clergy, which having gained control of the state apparatus, quickly used it to savagely suppress all expressions of independent working class organization and restabilize capitalist rule. Today a new upsurge of the working class must settle accounts with the Islamic political establishment, the Iranian bourgeois as a whole and imperialism as part of an international socialist revolution. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jan 3 14:36:58 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 14:36:58 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Real News "Iran" Message-ID: ________________________________ biography Dariush Arjmandi is a member of Rahe Kargar, Organization of Revolutionary Workers of Iran, an exiled group in Germany. ________________________________ transcript [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2018-01-01/darjmandi0102iran-240.jpg]AARON MATÉ: It's The Real News; I'm Aaron Maté. Iran is in the midst of its largest and deadliest protest since 2009. Thousands of people have taken to the streets across the country to voice frustration over a stagnating economy, the ruling clerical regime, and Iran's foreign policy. More than 20 people have been killed and over 530 arrested. Some of the protests have turned violent with attacks on police stations, banks, and mosques. The Iranian government has threatened a major crackdown, but according to Reuters, has largely been restrained so far, holding back the elite forces that have crushed past uprisings. Dariush Arjmandi is an exiled Iranian political activist and a member of the Organization of Revolutionary Workers of Iran, an Iranian Socialist group. Dariush, welcome. Just explain to us how these protests begin and what are the main grievances of those taking to the streets. D. ARJMANDI: Thank you for having me. You see it started, actually, a year ago, at least after the election. And we've had daily demonstration and protest in different cities, workers who are demanding getting paid because they haven't got paid for last six months and nine months and up to a year. Teachers, nurses, young people, unemployed people, especially women who are also organized in teachers' unions and different things. And they have been protesting, people who lost their money and all their savings in different financial scams run by Iranian government and the people in power. So they have been protesting, and they haven't got anywhere, and so as a result, you see the anger showing itself nowadays. AARON MATÉ: And describe the scale of these protests. They've been coming from places that we don't normally hear about when talking about Iranian politics, not just in Tehran, but around the country. D. ARJMANDI: Yeah. It is one of the aspects that's very important, because usually, it's in great cities, in the big cities, in Tehran and Mashhad and other, but this time, it spread itself to the cities that I haven't heard about. And it's more than 70 cities in all Iran are protesting. And that's a great thing because it shows that this is ordinary people, everywhere. AARON MATÉ: And comparing this to the 2009 Green Revolution, is it fair to say that back then, those were huge protests, but a lot of people, a lot of key sectors stayed out of it for the most part, including members of the clergy and trade workers, if that's a fair characterization of 2009, is that any different now? Who are the demographics who are taking part today? D. ARJMANDI: Today is mostly, as I said before, it's mostly the people who've been protesting during the last months. People like teachers, like women who are protesting against all kind of discriminations. Young people, unemployed people, and people who are demanding better pay and better life. And I think it is mostly older people, poor people, working-class, and that's why we see this all over the country. If you compare it to the [inaudible 04:05:00], I think one of the other aspects which is important to point out is that the last time it was the protest against the election and how it was stolen from people. But the people, mostly middle-class people, they were hoping that, especially reformist fraction of the government, would help them somehow. But I think the different this time is that the people gone beyond the different fractions of the regime, and they trying to create the movement for they own future, and they rely on their own power and organizing. AARON MATÉ: All right, Dariush, just to explain that for anyone who's not familiar with the recent history. So when you talk about discontent over the election being stolen from the Iranian people, you're referring to the election of ... The last election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad right? D. ARJMANDI: Yeah. AARON MATÉ: When it was widely perceived that the vote was rigged in his favor, and that is contended as one of the reasons why it's said that the Ayatollahs allowed this time the reformer, Rouhani, to win the recent elections, which was a vote of confidence for a reform agenda and engaging with the West. So if now there is discontent with Rouhani and the message is to him that he's not delivering, what are the main issues with how Rouhani has governed since taking office. Because you know, his reelection was only in June, right? So he hasn't had that much time back in office. D. ARJMANDI: Yeah. No. No. Of course you have to understand the main reason people voted for Rouhani wasn't because they thought he was a great miracle worker or anything like that. It was mostly because people didn't want the other candidate to get elected. And now they see that nothing happened, and of course they're angry and they demand a better life. We've had the budget proposal last week or so, and you could see they're, just like United States, they're increasing the military budget when the things that people care about, like environmental issues, like better wages for workers, and things like that, there is no sign of it in the budget proposal. So of course people, yeah. AARON MATÉ: Right. Okay, so the issue of the military you mentioned goes to the issue of Iran's foreign policy, which although it appeared as if the protest started off about the economy, unemployment, that we've seen recently people chanting in the streets against Iran's foreign policy, specifically saying that we don't want to be involved in Syria supporting Assad, we don't want to be supporting Hezbollah in Lebanon, we don't want to be supporting Hamas. We want money and energy spent on us, on the people. So this goes to Iran's foreign policy in the region, and on this front, I want to play a clip of Israeli Prime Minister, Benyamin Netanyahu, where he came out and made a video voicing support, he said, for the Iranian people. B. NETANYAHU: This regime tries desperately to sow hate between us, but they won't succeed. And when this regime finally falls, and one day it will, Iranians and Israelis will be great friends once again. I wish the Iranian people success in their noble quest for freedom. AARON MATÉ: So that's Israeli Prime Minister, Benyamin Netanyahu, saying that the Iranian government will one day fall. So Dariush, I'm curious for you as an exiled Iranian political activist, how do you navigate this issue, where on the one hand you have people like Netanyahu and Trump and Mohammed Bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, I think you would agree cynically using Iran's internal situation to further their own regime change agenda? And how do you square that off with your own aspirations for Iran and wanting to see a democratic, representative government and change from within? D. ARJMANDI: Yeah. First of all, when Netanyahu talks about Iranian people's rights and things like that, it sounds like a cruel joke, because when you see how he ... What he's doing against Palestinian people, you understand that he doesn't care about people's right. And it's just like when, on the other side, when the Iranian supreme leader defends Palestinian people's right. They may hate each other. They have different agendas and different interests, but I think what they have in common, all of them, both Iranian regime and the United States, Trump, Netanyahu and Bin Salman, that's their hatred for real democracy in the Middle East. Because that is something they all hate, and they would try their best to stop the movement to going in this direction, because creation of a real democracy in Iran would spread like a hell's fire throughout the Middle East. It's not something that they want. That would be a great disaster for all of them. So I think they would try to influence the movement to give each other an excuse, the very excuse the Iranian regime are trying to find and they're seeking, just to say that, "You see? This is Israel and America and Bin Salman, and supporting these people, and these are not Iranian people. These are agents of Dariush and Islamic bias," and things like that. So to suppress the people and the movement even further. So I think it's important to point out this issue, and I think what is important right now is that Iranian people be able to continue their protest through peaceful protest, and for the international community, and by international community I don't mean the government of the Israel or Saudis and others, but the unions, grassroots movements in different countries, to show their support for Iranian people and their demands for better life and for human rights and a democratic country. AARON MATÉ: Finally, briefly as we wrap, how do you see the issue of the sanctions here? In terms of there was huge hope inside Iran, and expectation rightfully that the Iran Nuclear Deal, which Rouhani invested a lot of capital in, would have brought economic benefits and brought relief with money coming into the country. But since the nuclear deal has gone into effect, the U.S. Congress has passed laws that give the President and the Congress the authority to undermine it, and certainly Trump has run away with that. The uncertainty he's created around the Iran Nuclear Deal by recently de-certifying it has deterred major banks from investing inside Iran because of the confusion and the uncertainty about what Trump was going to do. So the money has not come in that would have come in had Trump just respected the deal. So does that ... For defenders of Rouhani to say that this was partly the U.S.'s fault for not living up to its side of the deal, is that a fair case to make? D. ARJMANDI: I think it's important to understand that Iran is a capitalist country. We're living in a world where few people have greater wealth than half of the population of the world. Just like in your country when you had this Trump's budget proposal that gives trillions of dollars to the rich people, I think it would be fair to understand that even in Iran, they would do the same thing and they have been doing the same thing. Plus that in Iran, we have this savage capitalist system, plus one of the worst dictatorship in the human history, so of course any money coming from ... Doesn't matter from where it comes, remember that during the Ahmadinejad, we had the highest oil prices in the history, and they had billions and billions of dollars by selling the oil at high prices. But not one dollar of that money went to the Iranian people. And that's why see the people are angry, because they don't see any improvement in their daily life. And we, as I told you before, we have workers having got any pay for last nine months, and when they protest, they put their leaders in prison just like [inaudible 00:14:17], that you spoke about before. And they have been killing union activists and other people just because they are demanding a better life. So I think it is not the issue actually for Iranian people. What is issue for Iranian people is that they demand to have human rights, to have the right to freedom of speech and freedom of gathering, peaceful gathering and protest, and I hope that the international community would support them in this quest. AARON MATÉ: And fair enough. I guess my only point there is that it's long been a strategy of powerful actors on the world stage to squeeze countries that they oppose in a bid to turn societies against themselves. And certainly, Iran's problems are internal. You cannot blame everything on Western powers. But I can't help but wonder just what would have ... Would the situation be any different if the sanctions relief had actually come, and if Iran was not just reliant on oil, but was allowed to have the investments in its country that other countries have? D. ARJMANDI: To see any real difference in ordinary people's life and their daily life, I think we would need to have a different kind of political system and a different kind of government, and that's why Iranian people demand it. As I said before, we had a lot of money during Ahmadinejad, but not one dollar of that went to the people, and was used to make people's life better. So I don't think that is any issue. The issue is that Iranian people have the right to have independent movement without external and internal involvement to make a better life for themselves, and to demand secular government and secular system and a democratic system to make their own future and make their life a little better or not. AARON MATÉ: We'll leave it there. Dariush Arjmandi, exiled Iranian political activist, member of Organization of Revolutionary Workers of Iran, an Iranian socialist group. Thank you. D. ARJMANDI: Thank you for having me. AARON MATÉ: And thank you for joining us on The Real News. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 3 14:44:50 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 14:44:50 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Trump threatens stop to Palestinian aid over Jerusalem row - BBC News Message-ID: Trump is the way American Foreign Policy has always been conducted by the United States government behind closed doors. Trump is just taking it public now. The cat is out of the bag. The Emperor wears no clothes. Fab 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, January 03, 2018 7:06 AM To: 'David Green' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' ; 'C G Estabrook' Subject: FW: Trump threatens stop to Palestinian aid over Jerusalem row - BBC News 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, January 03, 2018 7:04 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Trump threatens stop to Palestinian aid over Jerusalem row - BBC News http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42549157 The Americans have always beaten up upon, bullied and threatened the Palestinians like this behind closed doors since the start of the so-called "peace process" in 1991. Now the Americans are going public with it. Francis A. Boyle Legal Adviser to the Palestinian Delegation to the Middle East Peace Negotiations (1991-1993) From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 3 14:44:50 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 14:44:50 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Trump threatens stop to Palestinian aid over Jerusalem row - BBC News Message-ID: Trump is the way American Foreign Policy has always been conducted by the United States government behind closed doors. Trump is just taking it public now. The cat is out of the bag. The Emperor wears no clothes. Fab 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, January 03, 2018 7:06 AM To: 'David Green' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' ; 'C G Estabrook' Subject: FW: Trump threatens stop to Palestinian aid over Jerusalem row - BBC News 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, January 03, 2018 7:04 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Trump threatens stop to Palestinian aid over Jerusalem row - BBC News http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42549157 The Americans have always beaten up upon, bullied and threatened the Palestinians like this behind closed doors since the start of the so-called "peace process" in 1991. Now the Americans are going public with it. Francis A. Boyle Legal Adviser to the Palestinian Delegation to the Middle East Peace Negotiations (1991-1993) From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jan 3 14:55:12 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 14:55:12 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] More on Iran, this from RT. Message-ID: Following days of violent unrest gripping Iran, tens of thousands of people flocked to streets in the country’s major cities in a massive show of support for the government and the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei. Massive pro-government rallies kicked off on Wednesday in different towns and cities, including Ahvaz, Kermanshah, Bushehr, Abadan, Gorgan and Qom, local media reported. Chants of “Leader, we are ready!” and “We offer the blood in our veins to our Leader” were heard as images provided by state media showed thousands-strong crowds waving Iranian flags and a holding placards that read “Death to seditionists.” Demonstrators then shouted anti-American and anti-Israeli slogans which Iranian media said“welcomed the turmoil and voiced support for the riots.” The pro-government rallies come as Iran’s Interior Ministry said on Tuesday that the situation in most parts of the country has returned to normal, and that it estimates the unrest will soon come to an end. Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Tuesday said violent protests gripping the country were sparked by “enemies of Iran” using “money, weapons, politics and security apparatus.” Khamenei’s words were echoed by other top Iranian officials, including President Hassan Rouhani who suggested on Monday that Saudi involvement had played a role in sparking the protests. “They [the Saudis] have blatantly said that we will create problems in Tehran,” he said. He also vowed that his government will redouble efforts to improve the country’s economic situation, while decreasing unemployment, air pollution and inflation, FARS news agency reported. Earlier, Rouhani admitted people have right to voice protest over rising food prices and economic hardships, but not in a way that endangers public safety. Read more [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Iran's President Hassan Rouhani © Reuters]Netanyahu predicts Iran regime change, denies Israel’s involvement in protests Amid anti-government protests that snowball across the country, some world leaders encouraged the rioting. In his first series of tweets in 2018, US President Donald Trump maintained the Iranians, having “little food, big inflation and no human rights,”are acting “against the brutal and corrupt Iranian regime.” In a previous tweet, Trump claimed Iran “is failing at every level despite the terrible [2015 nuclear] deal made with them by the Obama Administration.” He added: “The great Iranian people have been repressed for many years. They are hungry for food and for freedom.” In response, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Bahram Ghasemi urged Trump to stop “wasting his time on posting useless and insulting tweets about other nations” and called the American president to tackle gun violence, poverty and hunger in his own country. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also spewed vitriol against Iran, saying in a video message: “When this regime [the Iranian government] finally falls, and one day it will, Iranians and Israelis will be great friends once again.” In the 90-second-long video Netanyahu praised the protesters who have rallied since Thursday, saying that they “seek freedom and justice.” He then dismissed the accusation that Israel was involved into stirring Iranian protests, calling this “false” and “laughable.” -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 3 18:02:12 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 18:02:12 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years In-Reply-To: References: <2fd2252c-e9c9-48c3-8f50-d535bbc68146@xtinp2mta4204.xt.local> 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: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 12:01 PM To: Thanks Robert Siegel Cc: ThanksRobert at npr.org. Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Yeah, thanks to you and your NPR colleagues for doing damage control for Israel against the Palestinians for the last 40 years. National Propaganda radio indeed. 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) From: Robert Siegel [mailto:email at et.npr.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 11:05 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Robert Siegel Retires From NPR On January 5th [NPR] [https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2017/04/25/voss-robertsiegel30_flat_wide-c72860fc1e463e4585205a62b0ac3026f36f9399-s600-c85.jpg] A little over 40 years ago, the small FM radio station that paid me to do an evening newscast was sold. My employment and career prospects went from dim to bleak. As a lifelong New Yorker, I was reduced to desperate measures and, with a 1-year-old daughter and my wife's unflinching support, I moved to Washington, a city which in the 1970s still imported its bagels from Philadelphia. My plan was to work my way back to a real city (meaning New York) and probably to a medium with a future (meaning television). Mentally, I gave the NPR experiment a couple of years. Instead, I was progressively sucked in — by the remarkably smart, creative people here; by the unique opportunity to go work out of the BBC in London as NPR's first foreign staffer; by a rewarding if arduous sentence of four years running NPR News; and finally by ascent to radio heaven, hosting All Things Considered in 1987. Thank you for listening, and for the support to our stations that makes NPR thrive — and that kept me in the best job I ever dreamed of. — Robert Siegel ________________________________ For 30 years, Robert Siegel has been the voice of All Things Considered. He steps down from the host chair on Friday. Listen to Robert Reflect on His Career Pass along your favorite memories or well wishes to Robert by emailing ThanksRobert at npr.org. You received this message because you're subscribed to our Best of NPR emails. | | Privacy Policy | NPR 1111 N. CAPITOL ST. NE WASHINGTON DC 20002 [NPR] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 3 18:02:12 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 18:02:12 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years In-Reply-To: References: <2fd2252c-e9c9-48c3-8f50-d535bbc68146@xtinp2mta4204.xt.local> 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: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 12:01 PM To: Thanks Robert Siegel Cc: ThanksRobert at npr.org. Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Yeah, thanks to you and your NPR colleagues for doing damage control for Israel against the Palestinians for the last 40 years. National Propaganda radio indeed. 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) From: Robert Siegel [mailto:email at et.npr.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 11:05 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Robert Siegel Retires From NPR On January 5th [NPR] [https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2017/04/25/voss-robertsiegel30_flat_wide-c72860fc1e463e4585205a62b0ac3026f36f9399-s600-c85.jpg] A little over 40 years ago, the small FM radio station that paid me to do an evening newscast was sold. My employment and career prospects went from dim to bleak. As a lifelong New Yorker, I was reduced to desperate measures and, with a 1-year-old daughter and my wife's unflinching support, I moved to Washington, a city which in the 1970s still imported its bagels from Philadelphia. My plan was to work my way back to a real city (meaning New York) and probably to a medium with a future (meaning television). Mentally, I gave the NPR experiment a couple of years. Instead, I was progressively sucked in — by the remarkably smart, creative people here; by the unique opportunity to go work out of the BBC in London as NPR's first foreign staffer; by a rewarding if arduous sentence of four years running NPR News; and finally by ascent to radio heaven, hosting All Things Considered in 1987. Thank you for listening, and for the support to our stations that makes NPR thrive — and that kept me in the best job I ever dreamed of. — Robert Siegel ________________________________ For 30 years, Robert Siegel has been the voice of All Things Considered. He steps down from the host chair on Friday. Listen to Robert Reflect on His Career Pass along your favorite memories or well wishes to Robert by emailing ThanksRobert at npr.org. You received this message because you're subscribed to our Best of NPR emails. | | Privacy Policy | NPR 1111 N. CAPITOL ST. NE WASHINGTON DC 20002 [NPR] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 3 18:25:17 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 18:25:17 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years References: <2fd2252c-e9c9-48c3-8f50-d535bbc68146@xtinp2mta4204.xt.local> 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: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 12:21 PM To: 'Thanks Robert Siegel' Cc: 'ThanksRobert at npr.org.' Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years My all-time favorite NPR anti-Palestinian atrocity was Linda “Israel Must Retaliate” Gradstein. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 03, 2018 12:01 PM To: 'Thanks Robert Siegel' > Cc: 'ThanksRobert at npr.org.' > Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Yeah, thanks to you and your NPR colleagues for doing damage control for Israel against the Palestinians for the last 40 years. National Propaganda radio indeed. 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) From: Robert Siegel [mailto:email at et.npr.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 11:05 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Robert Siegel Retires From NPR On January 5th [NPR] [https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2017/04/25/voss-robertsiegel30_flat_wide-c72860fc1e463e4585205a62b0ac3026f36f9399-s600-c85.jpg] A little over 40 years ago, the small FM radio station that paid me to do an evening newscast was sold. My employment and career prospects went from dim to bleak. As a lifelong New Yorker, I was reduced to desperate measures and, with a 1-year-old daughter and my wife's unflinching support, I moved to Washington, a city which in the 1970s still imported its bagels from Philadelphia. My plan was to work my way back to a real city (meaning New York) and probably to a medium with a future (meaning television). Mentally, I gave the NPR experiment a couple of years. Instead, I was progressively sucked in — by the remarkably smart, creative people here; by the unique opportunity to go work out of the BBC in London as NPR's first foreign staffer; by a rewarding if arduous sentence of four years running NPR News; and finally by ascent to radio heaven, hosting All Things Considered in 1987. Thank you for listening, and for the support to our stations that makes NPR thrive — and that kept me in the best job I ever dreamed of. — Robert Siegel ________________________________ For 30 years, Robert Siegel has been the voice of All Things Considered. He steps down from the host chair on Friday. Listen to Robert Reflect on His Career Pass along your favorite memories or well wishes to Robert by emailing ThanksRobert at npr.org. You received this message because you're subscribed to our Best of NPR emails. | | Privacy Policy | NPR 1111 N. CAPITOL ST. NE WASHINGTON DC 20002 [NPR] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 3 18:25:17 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 18:25:17 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years References: <2fd2252c-e9c9-48c3-8f50-d535bbc68146@xtinp2mta4204.xt.local> 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: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 12:21 PM To: 'Thanks Robert Siegel' Cc: 'ThanksRobert at npr.org.' Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years My all-time favorite NPR anti-Palestinian atrocity was Linda “Israel Must Retaliate” Gradstein. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 03, 2018 12:01 PM To: 'Thanks Robert Siegel' > Cc: 'ThanksRobert at npr.org.' > Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Yeah, thanks to you and your NPR colleagues for doing damage control for Israel against the Palestinians for the last 40 years. National Propaganda radio indeed. 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) From: Robert Siegel [mailto:email at et.npr.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 11:05 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Robert Siegel Retires From NPR On January 5th [NPR] [https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2017/04/25/voss-robertsiegel30_flat_wide-c72860fc1e463e4585205a62b0ac3026f36f9399-s600-c85.jpg] A little over 40 years ago, the small FM radio station that paid me to do an evening newscast was sold. My employment and career prospects went from dim to bleak. As a lifelong New Yorker, I was reduced to desperate measures and, with a 1-year-old daughter and my wife's unflinching support, I moved to Washington, a city which in the 1970s still imported its bagels from Philadelphia. My plan was to work my way back to a real city (meaning New York) and probably to a medium with a future (meaning television). Mentally, I gave the NPR experiment a couple of years. Instead, I was progressively sucked in — by the remarkably smart, creative people here; by the unique opportunity to go work out of the BBC in London as NPR's first foreign staffer; by a rewarding if arduous sentence of four years running NPR News; and finally by ascent to radio heaven, hosting All Things Considered in 1987. Thank you for listening, and for the support to our stations that makes NPR thrive — and that kept me in the best job I ever dreamed of. — Robert Siegel ________________________________ For 30 years, Robert Siegel has been the voice of All Things Considered. He steps down from the host chair on Friday. Listen to Robert Reflect on His Career Pass along your favorite memories or well wishes to Robert by emailing ThanksRobert at npr.org. You received this message because you're subscribed to our Best of NPR emails. | | Privacy Policy | NPR 1111 N. CAPITOL ST. NE WASHINGTON DC 20002 [NPR] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jan 3 23:08:28 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 23:08:28 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Live Streaming the Conference on U.S. Foreing Military Bases References: Message-ID: Subject: Live Streaming the Conference on U.S. Foreing Military Bases Reply-To: No Bases List > View this email in your browser [https://gallery.mailchimp.com/ccd625b69dbee766fcef0d707/images/1ea0aebc-8077-4ebf-a6fa-a3cc335edd60.jpg] Watch the Conference Live You will be able to watch the Conference on U.S. Foreign Military Bases via Live Streaming on our Web Site: NoForeignBases.org/live-streaming/ PLEASE SHARE THE LINK WITH ALL YOUR FRIENDS Want to change how you receive these emails? You can unsubscribe from this list. This email was sent to karenaram at hotmail.com why did I get this? unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences Gabbard Petition · P.O. Box 8693 · Haledon, Nj 07538 · USA [Email Marketing Powered by MailChimp] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bjornsona at ameritech.net Thu Jan 4 01:18:39 2018 From: bjornsona at ameritech.net (bjornsona at ameritech.net) Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2018 19:18:39 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Message-ID: I am so sorry. The news I hear feels like a requiem for any two-state solution in Gaza and the West Bank to me, admittedly an outsider looking on from far away.  I hope I am wrong. I feel so many of us were fooled and then fearful of speaking up.  Sent from my LG Phoenix 2, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone ------ Original message------From: Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discussDate: Wed, Jan 3, 2018 12:26 PMTo: 'David Green';Miller, Joseph Thomas;'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com';'peace-discuss at anti-war.net';'C. G. ESTABROOK';'a-fields at uiuc.edu';'Joe Lauria';'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net';'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net';Szoke, Ron;'Arlene Hickory';'Karen Aram';'abass10 at gmail.com';'mickalideh at gmail.com';'Lina Thorne';'chicago at worldcantwait.net';'Jay';'David Johnson';'Mildred O'brien';'C G Estabrook';Cc: Subject:[Peace-discuss] FW: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years     Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 03, 2018 12:21 PM To: 'Thanks Robert Siegel' > Cc: 'ThanksRobert at npr.org.' > Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years   My all-time favorite NPR anti-Palestinian  atrocity was Linda “Israel Must Retaliate” Gradstein. Fab.   Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 03, 2018 12:01 PM To: 'Thanks Robert Siegel' Cc: 'ThanksRobert at npr.org.' Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years   Yeah, thanks to you and your NPR colleagues for doing damage control for Israel against the Palestinians for the last 40 years. National Propaganda radio indeed. 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)   From: Robert Siegel [mailto:email at et.npr.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 11:05 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Subject: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years   Robert Siegel Retires From NPR On January 5th   A little over 40 years ago, the small FM radio station that paid me to do an evening newscast was sold. My employment and career prospects went from dim to bleak. As a lifelong New Yorker, I was reduced to desperate measures and, with a 1-year-old daughter and my wife's unflinching support, I moved to Washington, a city which in the 1970s still imported its bagels from Philadelphia. My plan was to work my way back to a real city (meaning New York) and probably to a medium with a future (meaning television). Mentally, I gave the NPR experiment a couple of years. Instead, I was progressively sucked in — by the remarkably smart, creative people here; by the unique opportunity to go work out of the BBC in London as NPR's first foreign staffer; by a rewarding if arduous sentence of four years running NPR News; and finally by ascent to radio heaven, hosting All Things Considered in 1987. Thank you for listening, and for the support to our stations that makes NPR thrive — and that kept me in the best job I ever dreamed of. — Robert Siegel     For 30 years, Robert Siegel has been the voice of All Things Considered. He steps down from the host chair on Friday.     Listen to Robert Reflect on His Career   Pass along your favorite memories or well wishes to Robert by emailing ThanksRobert at npr.org.  You received this message because you're subscribed to our Best of NPR emails. |   |  Privacy Policy | NPR 1111 N. CAPITOL ST. NE WASHINGTON DC 20002   -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bjornsona at ameritech.net Thu Jan 4 01:18:39 2018 From: bjornsona at ameritech.net (bjornsona at ameritech.net) Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2018 19:18:39 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Message-ID: I am so sorry. The news I hear feels like a requiem for any two-state solution in Gaza and the West Bank to me, admittedly an outsider looking on from far away.  I hope I am wrong. I feel so many of us were fooled and then fearful of speaking up.  Sent from my LG Phoenix 2, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone ------ Original message------From: Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discussDate: Wed, Jan 3, 2018 12:26 PMTo: 'David Green';Miller, Joseph Thomas;'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com';'peace-discuss at anti-war.net';'C. G. ESTABROOK';'a-fields at uiuc.edu';'Joe Lauria';'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net';'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net';Szoke, Ron;'Arlene Hickory';'Karen Aram';'abass10 at gmail.com';'mickalideh at gmail.com';'Lina Thorne';'chicago at worldcantwait.net';'Jay';'David Johnson';'Mildred O'brien';'C G Estabrook';Cc: Subject:[Peace-discuss] FW: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years     Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 03, 2018 12:21 PM To: 'Thanks Robert Siegel' > Cc: 'ThanksRobert at npr.org.' > Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years   My all-time favorite NPR anti-Palestinian  atrocity was Linda “Israel Must Retaliate” Gradstein. Fab.   Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 03, 2018 12:01 PM To: 'Thanks Robert Siegel' Cc: 'ThanksRobert at npr.org.' Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years   Yeah, thanks to you and your NPR colleagues for doing damage control for Israel against the Palestinians for the last 40 years. National Propaganda radio indeed. 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)   From: Robert Siegel [mailto:email at et.npr.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 11:05 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Subject: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years   Robert Siegel Retires From NPR On January 5th   A little over 40 years ago, the small FM radio station that paid me to do an evening newscast was sold. My employment and career prospects went from dim to bleak. As a lifelong New Yorker, I was reduced to desperate measures and, with a 1-year-old daughter and my wife's unflinching support, I moved to Washington, a city which in the 1970s still imported its bagels from Philadelphia. My plan was to work my way back to a real city (meaning New York) and probably to a medium with a future (meaning television). Mentally, I gave the NPR experiment a couple of years. Instead, I was progressively sucked in — by the remarkably smart, creative people here; by the unique opportunity to go work out of the BBC in London as NPR's first foreign staffer; by a rewarding if arduous sentence of four years running NPR News; and finally by ascent to radio heaven, hosting All Things Considered in 1987. Thank you for listening, and for the support to our stations that makes NPR thrive — and that kept me in the best job I ever dreamed of. — Robert Siegel     For 30 years, Robert Siegel has been the voice of All Things Considered. He steps down from the host chair on Friday.     Listen to Robert Reflect on His Career   Pass along your favorite memories or well wishes to Robert by emailing ThanksRobert at npr.org.  You received this message because you're subscribed to our Best of NPR emails. |   |  Privacy Policy | NPR 1111 N. CAPITOL ST. NE WASHINGTON DC 20002   -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jan 4 14:18:52 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 14:18:52 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years References: <2fd2252c-e9c9-48c3-8f50-d535bbc68146@xtinp2mta4204.xt.local> Message-ID: Over the years, I have been told by 3 different people independently of each other that when they tried to get me onto the University of Illinois’ own WILL—The National Public Radio Affiliate for Central Illinois—that WILL told each of them independently of each other that the Champaign-Urbana Jewish Community threatened WILL that if I were put on there for any reason, they would collectively withhold their contributions. Professor Francis A. Boyle University of Illinois College 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) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 12:25 PM To: 'David Green' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' ; 'C G Estabrook' Subject: FW: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 03, 2018 12:21 PM To: 'Thanks Robert Siegel' > Cc: 'ThanksRobert at npr.org.' > Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years My all-time favorite NPR anti-Palestinian atrocity was Linda “Israel Must Retaliate” Gradstein. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 03, 2018 12:01 PM To: 'Thanks Robert Siegel' > Cc: 'ThanksRobert at npr.org.' > Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Yeah, thanks to you and your NPR colleagues for doing damage control for Israel against the Palestinians for the last 40 years. National Propaganda radio indeed. 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) From: Robert Siegel [mailto:email at et.npr.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 11:05 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Robert Siegel Retires From NPR On January 5th [NPR] [https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2017/04/25/voss-robertsiegel30_flat_wide-c72860fc1e463e4585205a62b0ac3026f36f9399-s600-c85.jpg] A little over 40 years ago, the small FM radio station that paid me to do an evening newscast was sold. My employment and career prospects went from dim to bleak. As a lifelong New Yorker, I was reduced to desperate measures and, with a 1-year-old daughter and my wife's unflinching support, I moved to Washington, a city which in the 1970s still imported its bagels from Philadelphia. My plan was to work my way back to a real city (meaning New York) and probably to a medium with a future (meaning television). Mentally, I gave the NPR experiment a couple of years. Instead, I was progressively sucked in — by the remarkably smart, creative people here; by the unique opportunity to go work out of the BBC in London as NPR's first foreign staffer; by a rewarding if arduous sentence of four years running NPR News; and finally by ascent to radio heaven, hosting All Things Considered in 1987. Thank you for listening, and for the support to our stations that makes NPR thrive — and that kept me in the best job I ever dreamed of. — Robert Siegel ________________________________ For 30 years, Robert Siegel has been the voice of All Things Considered. He steps down from the host chair on Friday. Listen to Robert Reflect on His Career Pass along your favorite memories or well wishes to Robert by emailing ThanksRobert at npr.org. You received this message because you're subscribed to our Best of NPR emails. | | Privacy Policy | NPR 1111 N. CAPITOL ST. NE WASHINGTON DC 20002 [NPR] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jan 4 14:18:52 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 14:18:52 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years References: <2fd2252c-e9c9-48c3-8f50-d535bbc68146@xtinp2mta4204.xt.local> Message-ID: Over the years, I have been told by 3 different people independently of each other that when they tried to get me onto the University of Illinois’ own WILL—The National Public Radio Affiliate for Central Illinois—that WILL told each of them independently of each other that the Champaign-Urbana Jewish Community threatened WILL that if I were put on there for any reason, they would collectively withhold their contributions. Professor Francis A. Boyle University of Illinois College 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) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 12:25 PM To: 'David Green' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' ; 'C G Estabrook' Subject: FW: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 03, 2018 12:21 PM To: 'Thanks Robert Siegel' > Cc: 'ThanksRobert at npr.org.' > Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years My all-time favorite NPR anti-Palestinian atrocity was Linda “Israel Must Retaliate” Gradstein. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 03, 2018 12:01 PM To: 'Thanks Robert Siegel' > Cc: 'ThanksRobert at npr.org.' > Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Yeah, thanks to you and your NPR colleagues for doing damage control for Israel against the Palestinians for the last 40 years. National Propaganda radio indeed. 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) From: Robert Siegel [mailto:email at et.npr.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 11:05 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Robert Siegel Retires From NPR On January 5th [NPR] [https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2017/04/25/voss-robertsiegel30_flat_wide-c72860fc1e463e4585205a62b0ac3026f36f9399-s600-c85.jpg] A little over 40 years ago, the small FM radio station that paid me to do an evening newscast was sold. My employment and career prospects went from dim to bleak. As a lifelong New Yorker, I was reduced to desperate measures and, with a 1-year-old daughter and my wife's unflinching support, I moved to Washington, a city which in the 1970s still imported its bagels from Philadelphia. My plan was to work my way back to a real city (meaning New York) and probably to a medium with a future (meaning television). Mentally, I gave the NPR experiment a couple of years. Instead, I was progressively sucked in — by the remarkably smart, creative people here; by the unique opportunity to go work out of the BBC in London as NPR's first foreign staffer; by a rewarding if arduous sentence of four years running NPR News; and finally by ascent to radio heaven, hosting All Things Considered in 1987. Thank you for listening, and for the support to our stations that makes NPR thrive — and that kept me in the best job I ever dreamed of. — Robert Siegel ________________________________ For 30 years, Robert Siegel has been the voice of All Things Considered. He steps down from the host chair on Friday. Listen to Robert Reflect on His Career Pass along your favorite memories or well wishes to Robert by emailing ThanksRobert at npr.org. You received this message because you're subscribed to our Best of NPR emails. | | Privacy Policy | NPR 1111 N. CAPITOL ST. NE WASHINGTON DC 20002 [NPR] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jan 4 14:44:44 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 14:44:44 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Working class opposition. erupting in Iran.... Message-ID: I support the assertions made in this article, but any USG intervention, which has likely already taken place covertly, with weapons, CIA supported Jihadists, that includes sanctions, as was done in Syria and Libya, we must all back off and focus our criticism on "USG warmongering" which includes our allies the Saudi's and Israel. Any change within Iran, must come from the Iranian people without outside interference or intervention. Working class opposition erupts in Iran: A harbinger for the world in 2018 by Keith Jones 4 January 2018 The long-suppressed and brutally exploited Iranian working class has burst onto the scene shaking Iran’s bourgeois-clerical regime. Since Dec. 28, tens of thousands have defied the Islamic Republic’s repressive apparatus and taken to the streets in cities and towns across the county. They have done so to voice their anger over food price rises, mass unemployment, gaping social inequality, years of sweeping social spending cuts and a pseudo-democratic political system that is rigged on behalf of the ruling elite and utterly impervious to the needs of working people. The scope and intensity of this movement and its rapid embrace of slogans challenging the government and the entire autocratic political system have stunned Iranian authorities and western observers alike. Yet, it was preceded by months of worker protests against job cuts and plant closures and unpaid wages and benefits. In the days immediately prior to the eruption of the antigovernment protests, discussion of the ever-deepening divide between Iran’s top 1 and 10 percent and the vast majority who live in poverty and economic insecurity raged on social media. The trigger for this explosion of popular discontent was the government’s latest austerity budget. It will further slash income support for ordinary Iranians, raise gas prices by as much as 50 percent, and curtail development spending, while increasing the already huge sums under the control of the Shia clergy. Yesterday, after days of an ever-widening mobilization of security forces, mass arrests, and bloody clashes that left at least 21 dead, General Mohammad Ali Jafari, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, declared the unrest over: “Today we can announce the end of the sedition.” The rulers of the Islamic Republic are trying to justify their brutal crackdown with spurious claims that the protests are being manipulated by Washington and its principal regional allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia, as part of their incendiary drive for regime change in Tehran. The claim that the current protests are akin to those mounted by the Green Movement in 2009 is a base slander meant to justify a bigger crime. The Green challenge to the results of the 2009 Iranian presidential election was a long-prepared political operation that followed the script of similar US-orchestrated “color revolutions” in the Ukraine, Georgia, Lebanon and elsewhere. It was aimed at bringing to power those elements of the Iranian elite most eager to reach a quick rapprochement with US and European imperialism. It drew its popular support almost exclusively from the most privileged layers of the upper middle class, who were mobilized on the basis of neoliberal denunciations of the populist President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for “squandering” money on the poor. The current challenge to the Iranian regime is of an entirely different character. It is rooted in the working class, including in smaller industrial cities and district towns; draws its greatest support from young people who face an unemployment rate of 40 percent or more; and is driven by opposition to social inequality and capitalist austerity. Whatever the immediate fate of the current wave of protests, a new stage in the class struggle has opened in Iran that will unfold over the coming weeks and months. What is certain is that the working class, having thrust itself onto center stage, will not be quickly or easily silenced. The working-class unrest in Iran has already upset the calculations not just of the Iranian elite, but of governments around the world. Trump, whose anti-Muslim travel ban targets Iranians, has hypocritically and fatuously claimed his “support” for the protests, with the hope that he can use them to demonize Tehran and thereby provide grist for US war preparations against Iran. The European powers have been more circumspect, and not only because the protests cut across their plans to cash in on the Iranian government’s offers of oil concessions and cheap labor. They fear the destabilizing impact of mounting class struggle in Iran on the entire Middle East. To understand the significance of the resurgence of the Iranian working class for Middle East and world politics, it is necessary to examine it in historical context. The 1979 Iranian Revolution, which overthrew the tyrannical US-sponsored regime of the Shah four decades ago, was a massive, working class-led, anti-imperialist social explosion. It was a growing wave of political strikes that broke the back of the Shah’s regime, and in the months that followed, workers seized factories, placing them under the control of workers’ councils. But a social revolution expropriating the Iranian bourgeoisie and establishing a workers’ republic in alliance with the rural toilers was blocked by the nominally socialist organizations, above all the Stalinist Tudeh Party. The Tudeh party had deep roots in the working class, which had a long history of secularism and revolutionary socialism. But for decades it orientated to the impotent liberal wing of the national bourgeoisie and then in 1979 swung round to giving uncritical support to the Ayatollah Khomeini, on the grounds that he was the political leader of the “progressive” wing of the bourgeoisie and leading a “national democratic” (i.e. capitalist) revolution. This aged Shia cleric had long been a politically marginal figure. But he was able to gain a mass following among the urban and rural poor by exploiting the political vacuum created by the Stalinists, and by drawing on the longstanding connections between the Shia clergy and the bazaar, the bastion of the traditional wing of the Iranian bourgeoisie. With the working class politically neutralized by the Stalinists, Khomeini was able to reorganize the state machine following the Shah’s overthrow while manipulating and diverting the mass movement, then restabilize bourgeois rule through savage repression of the political left, including the Tudeh party, and the destruction of all independent workers’ organizations. These developments fed into and were part of a broader process in which, due to the betrayals of the Stalinists, Islamist forces were able to politically profit from the mounting crisis of the postcolonial bourgeois nationalist regimes and movements, including the Palestine Liberation Organization, and their inability to realize their bourgeois-democratic programs. Before his death in 1989, Khomeini oversaw a further lurch to the right of the Islamic Republic, with a turn to the IMF and overtures to the “Great Satan,” US imperialism. This had been prepared the previous year in a further ferocious assault on the left, in which thousands of political prisoners were killed. Over the course of the past three decades, Iran’s government has been led by different factions of the political elite, including so-called “reformists” and Shia populists like Ahmadinejad. All have further rolled back the social concessions made to working people in the wake of the 1979 revolution and savagely suppressed the working class. The Western press has long sought to vilify Iranian politics and social life. But at its core, the experience of the working class in Iran mirrors that of workers around the world, who for decades have faced an unrelenting assault on their social rights and politically have been utterly disenfranchised. In response to the 2008 crisis, the universal response of the bourgeoisie has been to drastically intensify this class war. Precarious employment, crumbling public services, unprecedented social inequality, exclusion from political life and the threat of imperialist war—this is the lot of workers the world over. But the period in which the class struggle could be suppressed is coming to an end. In country after country around the world, the parties, organizations and political mechanisms, including the establishment left parties and pro-capitalist unions, through which the bourgeoisie has managed its affairs and above all suppressed the class struggle are breaking down. The events in Iran will resonate across the Middle East, where the working class has passed through decades of bitter experiences, not only with the secular bourgeois nationalist movements, but also with various forms of Islamist politics, including the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party in Turkey. And while the ignoramus Trump tweets about injustice in Iran, how different will American workers deem their circumstances from those of Iranian workers? Last month as the Iranian government was presenting a budget that slashes social spending while funneling additional money to the mullahs, the US Congress rewarded the rich and super-rich with trillions in additional tax cuts. These tax cuts are now to be paid for through a massive assault on Social Security, health care and other core social rights. The events in Iran must be recognized as a harbinger of a vast eruption of working-class struggle around the world. The task of revolutionary socialists is to turn into this movement and to fight to arm the international working class with an understanding of the logic of its needs, aspirations and struggle. Capitalism is incompatible with the needs of society. Working people, the class that produces the world’s wealth, must unite their struggles across state borders and continents to establish workers’ political power, so as to undertake the socialist reorganization of society and put an end to want and imperialist war. Keith Jones WSWS.ORG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jan 4 15:01:25 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 15:01:25 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years In-Reply-To: References: <2fd2252c-e9c9-48c3-8f50-d535bbc68146@xtinp2mta4204.xt.local> Message-ID: And look what they did to Steven Salaita, his wife, and their baby. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 04, 2018 8:19 AM To: 'David Green' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' ; 'C G Estabrook' Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Over the years, I have been told by 3 different people independently of each other that when they tried to get me onto the University of Illinois’ own WILL—The National Public Radio Affiliate for Central Illinois—that WILL told each of them independently of each other that the Champaign-Urbana Jewish Community threatened WILL that if I were put on there for any reason, they would collectively withhold their contributions. Professor Francis A. Boyle University of Illinois College 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) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 12:25 PM To: 'David Green' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; 'Joe Lauria' >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'Karen Aram' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; 'David Johnson' >; 'Mildred O'brien' >; 'C G Estabrook' > Subject: FW: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 03, 2018 12:21 PM To: 'Thanks Robert Siegel' > Cc: 'ThanksRobert at npr.org.' > Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years My all-time favorite NPR anti-Palestinian atrocity was Linda “Israel Must Retaliate” Gradstein. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 03, 2018 12:01 PM To: 'Thanks Robert Siegel' > Cc: 'ThanksRobert at npr.org.' > Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Yeah, thanks to you and your NPR colleagues for doing damage control for Israel against the Palestinians for the last 40 years. National Propaganda radio indeed. 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) From: Robert Siegel [mailto:email at et.npr.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 11:05 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Robert Siegel Retires From NPR On January 5th [NPR] [https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2017/04/25/voss-robertsiegel30_flat_wide-c72860fc1e463e4585205a62b0ac3026f36f9399-s600-c85.jpg] A little over 40 years ago, the small FM radio station that paid me to do an evening newscast was sold. My employment and career prospects went from dim to bleak. As a lifelong New Yorker, I was reduced to desperate measures and, with a 1-year-old daughter and my wife's unflinching support, I moved to Washington, a city which in the 1970s still imported its bagels from Philadelphia. My plan was to work my way back to a real city (meaning New York) and probably to a medium with a future (meaning television). Mentally, I gave the NPR experiment a couple of years. Instead, I was progressively sucked in — by the remarkably smart, creative people here; by the unique opportunity to go work out of the BBC in London as NPR's first foreign staffer; by a rewarding if arduous sentence of four years running NPR News; and finally by ascent to radio heaven, hosting All Things Considered in 1987. Thank you for listening, and for the support to our stations that makes NPR thrive — and that kept me in the best job I ever dreamed of. — Robert Siegel ________________________________ For 30 years, Robert Siegel has been the voice of All Things Considered. He steps down from the host chair on Friday. Listen to Robert Reflect on His Career Pass along your favorite memories or well wishes to Robert by emailing ThanksRobert at npr.org. You received this message because you're subscribed to our Best of NPR emails. | | Privacy Policy | NPR 1111 N. CAPITOL ST. NE WASHINGTON DC 20002 [NPR] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jan 4 15:01:25 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 15:01:25 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years In-Reply-To: References: <2fd2252c-e9c9-48c3-8f50-d535bbc68146@xtinp2mta4204.xt.local> Message-ID: And look what they did to Steven Salaita, his wife, and their baby. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 04, 2018 8:19 AM To: 'David Green' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' ; 'C G Estabrook' Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Over the years, I have been told by 3 different people independently of each other that when they tried to get me onto the University of Illinois’ own WILL—The National Public Radio Affiliate for Central Illinois—that WILL told each of them independently of each other that the Champaign-Urbana Jewish Community threatened WILL that if I were put on there for any reason, they would collectively withhold their contributions. Professor Francis A. Boyle University of Illinois College 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) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 12:25 PM To: 'David Green' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; 'Joe Lauria' >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'Karen Aram' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; 'David Johnson' >; 'Mildred O'brien' >; 'C G Estabrook' > Subject: FW: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 03, 2018 12:21 PM To: 'Thanks Robert Siegel' > Cc: 'ThanksRobert at npr.org.' > Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years My all-time favorite NPR anti-Palestinian atrocity was Linda “Israel Must Retaliate” Gradstein. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 03, 2018 12:01 PM To: 'Thanks Robert Siegel' > Cc: 'ThanksRobert at npr.org.' > Subject: RE: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Yeah, thanks to you and your NPR colleagues for doing damage control for Israel against the Palestinians for the last 40 years. National Propaganda radio indeed. 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) From: Robert Siegel [mailto:email at et.npr.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 11:05 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Thank You For 40 Wonderful Years Robert Siegel Retires From NPR On January 5th [NPR] [https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2017/04/25/voss-robertsiegel30_flat_wide-c72860fc1e463e4585205a62b0ac3026f36f9399-s600-c85.jpg] A little over 40 years ago, the small FM radio station that paid me to do an evening newscast was sold. My employment and career prospects went from dim to bleak. As a lifelong New Yorker, I was reduced to desperate measures and, with a 1-year-old daughter and my wife's unflinching support, I moved to Washington, a city which in the 1970s still imported its bagels from Philadelphia. My plan was to work my way back to a real city (meaning New York) and probably to a medium with a future (meaning television). Mentally, I gave the NPR experiment a couple of years. Instead, I was progressively sucked in — by the remarkably smart, creative people here; by the unique opportunity to go work out of the BBC in London as NPR's first foreign staffer; by a rewarding if arduous sentence of four years running NPR News; and finally by ascent to radio heaven, hosting All Things Considered in 1987. Thank you for listening, and for the support to our stations that makes NPR thrive — and that kept me in the best job I ever dreamed of. — Robert Siegel ________________________________ For 30 years, Robert Siegel has been the voice of All Things Considered. He steps down from the host chair on Friday. Listen to Robert Reflect on His Career Pass along your favorite memories or well wishes to Robert by emailing ThanksRobert at npr.org. You received this message because you're subscribed to our Best of NPR emails. | | Privacy Policy | NPR 1111 N. CAPITOL ST. NE WASHINGTON DC 20002 [NPR] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 4 15:03:06 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 15:03:06 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Saturday demo References: <569090100.335865.1515078186531.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <569090100.335865.1515078186531@mail.yahoo.com> The forecast is even worse than previously, down to a high of 8. Obviously not a good day to stand outside. DG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jan 4 15:22:55 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 15:22:55 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Role of Women in Stopping Nuclear War Program, more info. Message-ID: [State Representative Carol Ammons's photo.] FEB10 The Role Of Women In Stopping Nuclear War Public · Hosted by State Representative Carol Ammons Going Invite Friends Share * clock Saturday, February 10 at 2 PM - 4 PM CST * pin With the threat of nuclear warning growing, now more than ever it is critical we bring to the table the voices of those directly impacted by war and organize ourselves to advocate for peaceful solutions. Join Representative Carol Ammons and a panel of experts discussing topics ranging from historical overview of United States involvement in global conflict, current international relations between the United States and key countries, experiences of military personnel who have served on the ground during wartime, and hear the experiences of those who have been forced to relocate because of war. The panel is the kickoff event to starting the Illinois Chapter of Women's Action for New Directions (WAND). WAND empowers women to be agents of change to reduce violence and militarism, support nuclear disarmament, and redirect excessive Pentagon spending to unmet human and environmental needs. *All are welcome to attend the panel and join the Illinois Chapter of WAND. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jan 4 20:15:09 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 20:15:09 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Message from Senator Richard J. Durbin References: Message-ID: In relation to our letters to our Representatives, reflecting Net Neutrality. Richard Durbin has responded in the affirmative: “On December 15, I announced that I will cosponsor a Congressional Review Act resolution Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts is planning to introduce that would undo the FCC’s harmful action of repealing net neutrality rules. " Begin forwarded message: From: "Senator Richard J. Durbin" > Subject: Message from Senator Richard J. Durbin Date: January 4, 2018 at 10:34:24 PST To: karenaram at hotmail.com January 4, 2018 Dear Ms. Aram: Thank you for contacting me to share your views about net neutrality. I appreciate hearing from you. In February 2015, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted to adopt new net neutrality rules that would preserve the internet as an open platform for consumer choice and competition. These rules prohibited Internet Service Providers (ISPs) from blocking or slowing down customers' access to websites and banned ISPs from charging content providers for faster delivery of certain information to users. The FCC adopted these rules by taking a regulatory step to reclassify broadband service under Title II of the Telecommunications Act. Reclassification of broadband under Title II provided the agency with much broader authority to establish strong net neutrality rules and allowed broadband services to be treated as a public utility. Opponents argue the reclassification was an overreach of the agency's authority and will increase taxes on consumers. On May 18, 2017, the FCC voted to adopt the proposed rule, Restoring Internet Freedom (Docket 17-108). The rule rolled back many of the central tenants of net neutrality. The rule also repealed regulations allowing the FCC to investigate suspected anti-competitive business practices of ISPs. On December 12, 2017, I joined 38 of my Senate Democratic colleagues in a letter calling on FCC Chairman Pai to abandon his plan to repeal the agency's net neutrality rules. However, on December 14, 2017, despite millions of public comments opposing the action and over the objections of tech companies like Netflix, Reddit, and Etsy, the FCC voted along party lines to repeal the net neutrality rules. The rollback of net neutrality threatens access to a free and open internet. This action amounts to the FCC letting ISPs pick winners and losers, charge people more for service, and even block certain parts of the internet. On December 15, I announced that I will cosponsor a Congressional Review Act resolution Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts is planning to introduce that would undo the FCC's harmful action of repealing net neutrality rules. A transparent and fairly managed flow of information is essential to a true democracy and benefits a growing economy. I will keep your thoughts in mind should the Senate consider legislation that would impact net neutrality rules. Thank you again for contacting me. Please feel free to keep in touch. Sincerely, [https://outreach.senate.gov/iqextranet/Customers/SenDurbin/Sen_Signature.PNG] Richard J. Durbin United States Senator RJD/mw -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jan 4 23:20:11 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 23:20:11 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] A poem by Prof. Francis Boyle Message-ID: Dean Iceman Befriended when came Gave my hand Took it Gave my support Took it Vouched for him Promptly stabbed in backs Longtime Clients and Friends Twice Muslims/Arabs/Africans of Color Latinx of Color Picture Clear Iceman v. Irish American Green Diaper Baby Typical law dean Smiling all the time Glad-handing all the time Jiving all the time Betraying offered Friendship Insulting my intelligence So it goes In ruthless unprincipled world Of “Legal Education” Oxymoron to be sure Only morons could believe U.S. Imperial Legal Education Association of American Imperial Law Schools American Society of Imperial Law American Journal of Imperial Law Harvard Imperial Law School Yale Imperial Law School UChicago Imperial Law School Columbia Imperial Law School Berkeley Imperial Law School NYU Imperial Law School Virginia Imperial Law School Northwestern Imperial Law School Georgetown Imperial Law School Illinois Imperial Law School Etc., Etc., Etc. ad nauseum White/Judeo/Christian Law Profs Against Peoples of Color Home and abroad Especially Muslims Their Untermensch They Ubermensch Like Nazis against Jews 70 years after World War 2 The Nazis have won Against Latinx too -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jan 4 23:27:01 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 23:27:01 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Right of African Americans to Self-Determination by Francis A. Boyle Message-ID: The Right of African Americans to Self-Determination* By Francis A. Boyle Before the IHRAAM Conference on Civil Rights, Human Rights, & Self-Determination East-West University, Chicago Illinois April 20, 2012 *Check against oral delivery. ©2012 by Francis A. Boyle. All rights reserved. In order to commemorate the 500th anniversary of Columbus's invasion of the Americas, in early 1992 I was asked by the Organizers of the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nations in the U.S.A. to serve as Special Prosecutor of the United States of America for committing international crimes against Indigenous Peoples, People of Color, and Oppressed Nationalities, including and especially African Americans. For the purposes of these proceedings, the Organizers asked me to call African Americans the New Afrikan People. The Tribunal was initiated by the American Indian Movement (AIM) with the support of representatives of the Puerto Rican People, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and “progressive White North Americans.” Of course, I do not consider myself to be a "White North American." I was born Irish. During the past 840 years of resisting one of the most brutal and cruel colonial occupations in the history of humankind, we Irish know what the denial of self-determination, genocide, and gross violations of our most fundamental human rights are all about in our beloved Ireland and abroad, which atrocities still continue as of today. In my capacity as Special Prosecutor of the United States Federal Government, I drew up an Indictment under international law that was served upon the Attorney General of the United States and the United States Attorney in San Francisco prior to the convening of the Tribunal in that city just before "Columbus Day" on October 2-4, 1992 with a demand that they appear to defend the United States government from the charges. I take it they saw no point in trying to defend the indefensible because no one showed up to defend the United States government, though they did publicly acknowledge receipt of our service of process. I will not go through all 37 charges of my Indictment here. But the proceedings of this pathbreaking International Tribunal have been recorded in a formal Verdict by the Tribunal; in a Video of the Tribunal; and in a Book on the Tribunal--all under the title U.S.A. On Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nations in the United States. Six months after the conclusion of these San Francisco Tribunal proceedings, I was the Lawyer and Ambassador for the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina arguing its case for genocide against Yugoslavia before the International Court of Justice in The Hague, the World Court of the United Nations System. There I would singlehandedly win two World Court Orders overwhelmingly in favor of Bosnia against Yugoslavia to cease and desist from committing all acts of genocide against the Bosnians on 8 April 1993 and 13 September 1993. I treated the San Francisco Tribunal proceedings with as much care, attention, dignity, respect, and professionalism as I did the World Court proceedings for Bosnia. And the results were the same: massive, overwhelming, crushing victories for my clients in both the World Court and the San Francisco Tribunal! For the purpose of this Conference, I want to briefly discuss the nine charges that I filed against the United States government for committing international crimes against African Americans. I believe that these nine charges succinctly state the fundamental principles of international law and human rights concerning African Americans. Obviously, these nine charges of my Indictment cannot answer all the questions African Americans might have with respect to their rights under international law and human rights law. But I do submit that these nine charges provide a solid foundation for providing guidance to African Americans as to their basic rights under international law that can be used in the future in order to navigate problems and issues as they arise to confront them today. The Distinguished Judges composing this International Tribunal consisted of seven independent Experts on human rights drawn from all over the world. In their Verdict, Preliminary Findings, and Order of 4 October 1992, the Indigenous Peoples' Tribunal did not accept all of the 37 charges that I filed in my Indictment against the United States government for perpetrating international crimes against Indigenous Peoples, People of Color, and Oppressed Nations. But in their own words, the exact findings of this Tribunal on African Americans were as follows: New Afrikans 7. With respect to the charges brought by the New Afrikan People, the Defendant, the Federal Government of the United States of America is,by unanimous vote, guilty as charged in: 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 perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 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 United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 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. (my emphasis added) 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. [Let me repeat that: By unanimous vote, Ibid.] 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. ADDITIONAL FINDINGS 11. In light of the foregoing findings, this Tribunal also, by unanimous vote, finds the Defendant guilty as charged in paragraph 37, which, as amended, reads: In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes a 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, and the Federal Government of the United States of America is similar to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. [This powerful Finding speaks for itself and requires no explanation by me.] …. 13. With respect to the following charges brought by the New African People: a. four members of the Tribunal find the Defendant guilty as charged in paragraph 11, which, as amended, reads: 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. Three members of the Tribunal reserve the right to consider the documentary evidence further before making a final determination. [In all honesty, I do not know what more evidence these three members of the Tribunal wanted to see before they were willing to order that the United States government must pay reparations for slavery to African Americans -- with all due respect to these three Judges. To the best of my knowledge, this was the first time ever that any Lawyer had argued in favor of reparations for slavery for African Americans before an International Tribunal. A 4 in favor to 0 against to 3 abstentions Verdict was not a bad outcome for the first time through, though it was disappointing to me personally—it should have been unanimous. I and others lawyers will have to learn from this experience in order to do a better job the next time around on this critical issue of obtaining Reparations for Slavery to African Americans. But in retrospect, however, I should have argued to the San Francisco Trubunal that African Americans today suffer from intergenerational post-traumatic stress disorder (P.T.S.D.) in order to drive home to the Judges the direct and immediate deleterious and debilitating effects that Slavery still now afflicts upon African Americans personally and as a People with a right of self-determination. ] b. Three members of the Tribunal find the Defendant guilty as charged in paragraph 18, which reads: 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. Four members of the Tribunal reserve the right to consider the documentary evidence further before making a final determination. Obviously, I lost this Land “Reparations” argument by 3 in favor to 0 against to 4 abstaining. The Organizers of the San Francisco Tribunal had requested me to argue for this Land “Reparations” form of relief for African Americans, and I did that to the best of my ability. I suspect it appeared to be too “radical” a proposition for a majority of Judges on the Tribunal to endorse. But I take some consolation from the fact that at least three Judges agreed with me and none dissented. The Tribunal concluded its Verdict with the following Order to the United States government: "Now therefore, it is ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Defendant cease and desist from the commission of the crimes it has been found guilty of herein." Pursuant thereto, I then filed a copy of this San Francisco Verdict with its Cease and Desist Order upon the Attorney General of the United States of America in Washington, D.C. In return, I later received a 5 February 1993 Letter from the U.S. Department of Justice that acknowledged the receipt of the San Francisco Tribunal Verdict and its Cease and Desist Order against the United States government. This U.S. D.O.J Letter then advised me: “If you, or the Tribunal, have any evidence of the violation of federal criminal law, we ask that you provide that information to your local office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.” As I saw it at the time, and still see it as of today, historically this would be analogous to the Nazi Ministry of “Justice” advising a German lawyer representing the Jews to file his Complaint of criminal law violations by the Nazi government against the Jews with the Gestapo. The F.B.I is and has always been the American Gestapo -- especially for all Peoples of Color living within its imperial domain, and in particular against African Americans.[1] I also make that statement on the basis of first-hand personal experience. In the summer of 2004 the F.B.I. and the C.I.A/F.B.I Joint Terrorist Task Force in Springfield, Illinois put me on all of the U.S. government’s so-called “terrorist watch lists” because I refused to become an informant for them against my Arab and Muslim Clients, which would have violated their Constitutional Rights and my Ethical Obligation as an attorney. That is what the U.S. government’s “war on terrorism” is really all about: It is a War by the White Racist Judeo-Christian Financial Power Elite of America against Arabs and Muslims--many of whom are African Americans--both in this country and abroad. The Crusades all over again! As Special Prosecutor for the San Francisco Tribunal, it came as no surprise to me that the Judges unanimously endorsed most of my charges against the United States government with respect to African Americans. This is because the principles of international law with respect to African Americans are incontestable, and thus so glaringly obvious for the entire world to see. I most respectfully submit that African Americans should use the Tribunal's Verdict, Preliminary Findings, and Order in order to support, promote, and defend their basic rights under international law, including and especially African Americans’ right to self-determination as found unanimously by the San Francisco Tribunal in 1992. In this regard, the Verdict, Preliminary Findings, and Order of this San Francisco Tribunal qualify as a "judicial decision" within the meaning of Article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. Pursuant thereto, this Verdict, Preliminary Findings, and Order constitute "subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law" for international law and practice. Furthermore, the Statute of the International Court of Justice is an "integral part" of the United Nations Charter under Article 92 thereof. Hence the San Francisco Tribunal's Verdict, Preliminary Findings, and Order can be relied upon by the International Court of Justice itself, by the International Criminal Court, by some other International Tribunal, or by any other Court in the world today, as well as by any People or State of the World Community -- including and especially by African Americans. TheVerdict of the San Francisco Tribunal still serves 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, including and especially against African Americans. Obviously, in my brief presentation here today, I do not have the time to go through each and every one of these nine charges; to discuss all of the factual evidence that supported these nine charges; or to provide you with an analysis of the international legal bases for each one of these nine charges. For that type of information, I refer you to the Video and the Book on the San Francisco Tribunal as well as to its Verdict, Preliminary Findings, and Order itself. But in the discussions that follow tonight and tomorrow, I will be happy to respond to any questions you might have. Thank you. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (voice) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 5 03:36:11 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 03:36:11 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Lay review of "American Made" from IMDB References: <1181899166.762707.1515123371379.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1181899166.762707.1515123371379@mail.yahoo.com> An apparently popular Tom Cruise vehicle: Fails to Get Off the Ground popcorninhell30 September 2017 At this point is there a person on earth who doesn't already know the CIA was up to some shady s**t in Central America? Those who might still be in the dark about this stuff please do yourself a favor and read "Castles Made of Sand" by Andre Gerolymatos or "A Great Place to Have a War" by Joshua Kulantzick. If you want something a little more specific to this film's subject matter there's "Smuggler's End" by Del Hahn. You can also watch: Bananas (1971), The In-Laws (1979), El Salvador: Another Vietnam (1981), Alsino and the Condor (1982), Under Fire (1983), Latino (1985), Salvador (1986), Romero (1989), Walker (1987), Down Came a Blackbird (1995),Blow (2001), Voces Inocentes (2004), Guatemala: The Secret Files (2008), Harvest of Empire (2012), Princesas Rojas (2013), Escobar: Paradise Lost (2014),the TV show Narcos (2015-present), Room of Bones (2015), Finding Oscar (2016), The Infiltrator (2016) and if that's not enough, the hearings on the Iran-Contra Investigation on Youtube. All of these options and more would give you a more cogent, compelling and satisfying experience than sitting through American Made; a light, mediocre and curiously smug, bug-eyed view of important historical events. In it a TWA pilot turned CIA stooge makes a little side cash smuggling drugs, guns and people to and from Central America. While doing so, the movie frames the larger collusions and convolutions not as the result of a deeply flawed man sticking his thumbs in various proverbial pies but as an awkward jumble of "and then…" filmmaking in spite of him. Barry (Cruise) fits neatly into the recent crop of true-life protagonists too stupid to realize they're in over their head. He smiles crookedly, trying to hide his intentions under aviator glasses – mostly to the amusement of his CIA handler played by Domhnall Gleeson. He's clearly playing with a bad hand and everyone including the infamous Medellin drug cartel knows it, but damned if they're not entertained by Barry's good 'ol boy braggadocio. He's like a composite of the dudes from War Dogs (2016) only with the serendipity (and obliviousness) of Forrest Gump (1994). What exactly makes a man like this tick? The movie doesn't really seem that interested in answering that question. Instead it seems more concerned with giving us a history lesson based on Barry's limited first-person perspective and various camera collage techniques that make American Made look like an episode of Arrested Development (2003-Present). This is of course told without wit, irony or the requisite anger needed. One can't help but think that if director Doug Liman brought the same level of ire to this movie that he did in the under-watched Fair Game (2010), American Made would have been a bit more palatable to… someone. As it stands however, American Made is for no one. It's a frustratingly mediocre waste of marquee space that's too dense to be entertaining and too cavalier to be worth a good discussion of Cold War foreign policy. It lacks characterization and perspective, leaving only Tom Cruise's boundless charisma to push it past the runway with any alacrity. As much as I'd like to say Cruise pulls it off, American Made as a whole should have stayed grounded for a little while longer. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kmedina67 at gmail.com Fri Jan 5 03:58:10 2018 From: kmedina67 at gmail.com (kmedina67) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2018 21:58:10 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Saturday demo In-Reply-To: <569090100.335865.1515078186531@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5a4ef7d6.03b0240a.b63ba.235d@mx.google.com> Yes, thanks David. I have been outside walking a fair amount this week, and I think standing still in that wind tunnel for two hours in this bitter cold just might be life threatening to our most faithful precious anti war activists. I would be willing to draw a chalk outline on the sidewalk with the words, "stop the wars" and call it a day. Ten minutes tops. Then some warm coffee and conversation.  Karen Medina -------- Original message --------From: David Green via Peace Date: 1/4/18 09:03 (GMT-06:00) To: Peace-discuss List , Peace List Subject: [Peace] Saturday demo The forecast is even worse than previously, down to a high of 8. Obviously not a good day to stand outside. DG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From deb.pdamerica at gmail.com Fri Jan 5 09:52:10 2018 From: deb.pdamerica at gmail.com (Debra Schrishuhn) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 03:52:10 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Message from Senator Richard J. Durbin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <50B0F62E-3FE5-44F6-A220-B67347AAEA25@gmail.com> Duckworth is also on board. She co-sponsored Sen Markey's resolution. Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 4, 2018, at 2:15 PM, Karen Aram wrote: > > In relation to our letters to our Representatives, reflecting Net Neutrality. Richard Durbin has responded in the affirmative: >> >> >> >> “On December 15, I announced that I will cosponsor a Congressional Review Act resolution Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts is planning to introduce that would undo the FCC’s harmful action of repealing net neutrality rules. " >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> From: "Senator Richard J. Durbin" >> Subject: Message from Senator Richard J. Durbin >> Date: January 4, 2018 at 10:34:24 PST >> To: karenaram at hotmail.com >> >> January 4, 2018 >> >> Dear Ms. Aram: >> >> >> Thank you for contacting me to share your views about net neutrality. I appreciate hearing from you. >> >> In February 2015, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted to adopt new net neutrality rules that would preserve the internet as an open platform for consumer choice and competition. These rules prohibited Internet Service Providers (ISPs) from blocking or slowing down customers' access to websites and banned ISPs from charging content providers for faster delivery of certain information to users. >> >> The FCC adopted these rules by taking a regulatory step to reclassify broadband service under Title II of the Telecommunications Act. Reclassification of broadband under Title II provided the agency with much broader authority to establish strong net neutrality rules and allowed broadband services to be treated as a public utility. Opponents argue the reclassification was an overreach of the agency's authority and will increase taxes on consumers. >> >> On May 18, 2017, the FCC voted to adopt the proposed rule, Restoring Internet Freedom (Docket 17-108). The rule rolled back many of the central tenants of net neutrality. The rule also repealed regulations allowing the FCC to investigate suspected anti-competitive business practices of ISPs. >> >> On December 12, 2017, I joined 38 of my Senate Democratic colleagues in a letter calling on FCC Chairman Pai to abandon his plan to repeal the agency's net neutrality rules. However, on December 14, 2017, despite millions of public comments opposing the action and over the objections of tech companies like Netflix, Reddit, and Etsy, the FCC voted along party lines to repeal the net neutrality rules. >> >> The rollback of net neutrality threatens access to a free and open internet. This action amounts to the FCC letting ISPs pick winners and losers, charge people more for service, and even block certain parts of the internet. >> >> On December 15, I announced that I will cosponsor a Congressional Review Act resolution Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts is planning to introduce that would undo the FCC's harmful action of repealing net neutrality rules. >> >> A transparent and fairly managed flow of information is essential to a true democracy and benefits a growing economy. I will keep your thoughts in mind should the Senate consider legislation that would impact net neutrality rules. >> >> Thank you again for contacting me. Please feel free to keep in touch. >> >> >> >> >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Richard J. Durbin >> United States Senator >> >> RJD/mw >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Fri Jan 5 13:17:43 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 13:17:43 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Message from Senator Richard J. Durbin In-Reply-To: <50B0F62E-3FE5-44F6-A220-B67347AAEA25@gmail.com> References: <50B0F62E-3FE5-44F6-A220-B67347AAEA25@gmail.com> Message-ID: Our two Democrats will fight for Net Neutrality, our Republican, Davis, is opposed, hardly a shock. Another reason why this guy has to go…… On Jan 5, 2018, at 01:52, Debra Schrishuhn > wrote: Duckworth is also on board. She co-sponsored Sen Markey's resolution. Sent from my iPhone On Jan 4, 2018, at 2:15 PM, Karen Aram > wrote: In relation to our letters to our Representatives, reflecting Net Neutrality. Richard Durbin has responded in the affirmative: “On December 15, I announced that I will cosponsor a Congressional Review Act resolution Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts is planning to introduce that would undo the FCC’s harmful action of repealing net neutrality rules. " Begin forwarded message: From: "Senator Richard J. Durbin" > Subject: Message from Senator Richard J. Durbin Date: January 4, 2018 at 10:34:24 PST To: karenaram at hotmail.com January 4, 2018 Dear Ms. Aram: Thank you for contacting me to share your views about net neutrality. I appreciate hearing from you. In February 2015, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted to adopt new net neutrality rules that would preserve the internet as an open platform for consumer choice and competition. These rules prohibited Internet Service Providers (ISPs) from blocking or slowing down customers' access to websites and banned ISPs from charging content providers for faster delivery of certain information to users. The FCC adopted these rules by taking a regulatory step to reclassify broadband service under Title II of the Telecommunications Act. Reclassification of broadband under Title II provided the agency with much broader authority to establish strong net neutrality rules and allowed broadband services to be treated as a public utility. Opponents argue the reclassification was an overreach of the agency's authority and will increase taxes on consumers. On May 18, 2017, the FCC voted to adopt the proposed rule, Restoring Internet Freedom (Docket 17-108). The rule rolled back many of the central tenants of net neutrality. The rule also repealed regulations allowing the FCC to investigate suspected anti-competitive business practices of ISPs. On December 12, 2017, I joined 38 of my Senate Democratic colleagues in a letter calling on FCC Chairman Pai to abandon his plan to repeal the agency's net neutrality rules. However, on December 14, 2017, despite millions of public comments opposing the action and over the objections of tech companies like Netflix, Reddit, and Etsy, the FCC voted along party lines to repeal the net neutrality rules. The rollback of net neutrality threatens access to a free and open internet. This action amounts to the FCC letting ISPs pick winners and losers, charge people more for service, and even block certain parts of the internet. On December 15, I announced that I will cosponsor a Congressional Review Act resolution Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts is planning to introduce that would undo the FCC's harmful action of repealing net neutrality rules. A transparent and fairly managed flow of information is essential to a true democracy and benefits a growing economy. I will keep your thoughts in mind should the Senate consider legislation that would impact net neutrality rules. Thank you again for contacting me. Please feel free to keep in touch. Sincerely, [https://outreach.senate.gov/iqextranet/Customers/SenDurbin/Sen_Signature.PNG] Richard J. Durbin United States Senator RJD/mw -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jan 5 15:20:33 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 15:20:33 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: 1968: Dr. Benjamin Spock's indictment for urging young men to resist the Vietnam draft - The Washington Post 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: Friday, January 05, 2018 9:19 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: 1968: Dr. Benjamin Spock's indictment for urging young men to resist the Vietnam draft - The Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/retropolis/wp/2018/01/05/he-was-americas-most-famous-pediatrician-then-dr-spock-attacked-the-vietnam-draft/?utm_term=.ac3c1bf090b7 Ben Spock, M.D. Managua, Nicaragua, 1985 With Ramsey Clark and Len Weinglass (RIP) To help Nicaraguans Against Reagan's contra terrorists After day of hard work return to hotel Sitting on veranda sipping soft drinks Ben Spock and his Wife Bringing Humanitarian relief supplies At own expense Sit down to talk Most dramatic meeting Ramsey persecuted Ben Draft Resistance Conspiracy We all knew The Empire put on trial America's Baby Doctor For saving his Baby Boomers >From Abattoir of Vietnam Conversation pleasant but tense Ben vindicated by History Against Ramsey and LBJ and Hershey We all knew Ben gracious too After Spocks depart Ramsey turns to Len and me Anguishly It was the worst decision I ever made In my entire life Prosecuting that man! We all make our mistakes Ramsey and me Learn from them hopefully Here's to Ben Spock, M.D. Right from very get-go Doctor for my Woodstock Generation My hero! Long may he live In annals of history! RIP From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jan 5 15:20:33 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 15:20:33 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: 1968: Dr. Benjamin Spock's indictment for urging young men to resist the Vietnam draft - The Washington Post 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: Friday, January 05, 2018 9:19 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: 1968: Dr. Benjamin Spock's indictment for urging young men to resist the Vietnam draft - The Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/retropolis/wp/2018/01/05/he-was-americas-most-famous-pediatrician-then-dr-spock-attacked-the-vietnam-draft/?utm_term=.ac3c1bf090b7 Ben Spock, M.D. Managua, Nicaragua, 1985 With Ramsey Clark and Len Weinglass (RIP) To help Nicaraguans Against Reagan's contra terrorists After day of hard work return to hotel Sitting on veranda sipping soft drinks Ben Spock and his Wife Bringing Humanitarian relief supplies At own expense Sit down to talk Most dramatic meeting Ramsey persecuted Ben Draft Resistance Conspiracy We all knew The Empire put on trial America's Baby Doctor For saving his Baby Boomers >From Abattoir of Vietnam Conversation pleasant but tense Ben vindicated by History Against Ramsey and LBJ and Hershey We all knew Ben gracious too After Spocks depart Ramsey turns to Len and me Anguishly It was the worst decision I ever made In my entire life Prosecuting that man! We all make our mistakes Ramsey and me Learn from them hopefully Here's to Ben Spock, M.D. Right from very get-go Doctor for my Woodstock Generation My hero! Long may he live In annals of history! RIP From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 5 15:35:00 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 15:35:00 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Jerusalem, the Capital of Apartheid References: <1749153128.989192.1515166500431.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1749153128.989192.1515166500431@mail.yahoo.com> Jerusalem, the Capital of Apartheid by Ran HaCohen Posted on December 11, 2017      By acknowledging Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, President Trump has demonstrated a genuinely deep historical insight. Even if Israel itself had claimed any other city as its capital – be it Tel-Aviv, where Israel’s declaration of independence took place in 1948; or Hebron, where once Abraham bought a graveyard, and where nowadays a few hundred Jewish settlers terrorize hundreds of thousands of Palestinians; or even Vilnius, once known as “Lithuania’s Jerusalem” for its prosperous Jewish community (Israelis now parrot that “every people has a right to choose its own capital”, so why not?) – the leader of the free world would have been correct in pointing at Jerusalem as the true and genuine capital of the Israeli Apartheid. Since the fall of the South African Apartheid in 1994, no capital – in fact, no other city on the globe – has been divided into 60% first-class full citizens and 40% second-class “residents”. Precisely this, however, is the essence of “united” Jerusalem. When Israel occupied and annexed the eastern parts of the city in 1967, it regretfully found out that they were inhabited – by Palestinians, more than 300.000 of them by now. These Palestinians were not granted the Israeli citizenship, but merely turned into tolerated inhabitants, as if they had somehow infiltrated into their own city. As non-citizens they can participate in municipal elections, but have no voting rights to the Knesset, under whose jurisdiction the whole of Jerusalem falls. If they stay out of Jerusalem for too long (guess who decides how long), they lose even their residence status and be thrown out of the city altogether, as happened to thousands of them. In 1980 Israel legally – or, as the entire international community finds, illegally – declared the entire united Jerusalem to be its capital. Consequently, about a dozen foreign embassies left Jerusalem and moved to Tel Aviv. Yes, Mr. Trump: your future embassy will not be the first one! You’re a loser on that. Many embassies preceded you, but they all left as soon as the Apartheid in the city was turned into a law. One might think that Israel would then turn its “eternal capital” into a symbol of welfare and prosperity, a model of nondiscriminatory coexistence. The very opposite is true. In East Jerusalem, two-thirds of the population live under the poverty level (compared to just one-fifth in West Jerusalem). This poverty is intended. To push Palestinians out, Israel grants them no construction permits; cutting it from its West Bank hinterland has turned East Jerusalem into a South African township: impoverished, strangulated, polluted and overpopulated. The infrastructures – electricity, water, sewage, education, health, roads, pavements, you name it – are either nonexistent, or intentionally lagging ages behind those in the Jewish neighborhood, both those in West Jerusalem and the Jewish settlements within East Jerusalem itself, continuously placed there in order to break the Palestinian community altogether and push their original inhabitants out of the city. Since the previous decade, the Apartheid Wall (newspeak’s “separation fence”) runs through East Jerusalem, annexing the better parts of it while practically leaving other parts outside the city. The Palestinian National Authority is not allowed to operate in these neighborhoods, because “Jerusalem is all ours”; the Jerusalem municipality is not willing to give them any services either. These surrounded ghettos, home to tens of thousands, have become a safe haven for criminal gangs, where even the garbage has to be burned on the street since no authority bothers to collect it. Entering Jerusalem proper for whatever reason – work, visit, hospital – is performed through heavily armed checkpoints, and depends on the good will of the Israelis, or rather the lack of it. Private property, this holy capitalistic right, is a privilege reserved exclusively to the Jews, as Jerusalem demonstrates in a rotten nutshell. Aided by law and police, Israeli settlers regularly throw Palestinians in East Jerusalem out of their homes and take them, claiming the properties belonged to Jews in the distant past. Jewish property is eternal, no matter how many hands and sovereignties it changed. Obviously, there are also numerous properties that belonged to Palestinians in that very same distant past; however, under Israeli law these properties cannot be claimed by their original owners, who allegedly “abandoned” them when fleeing (or being deported) from them in the 1948 war. Jewish property left on the Palestinian side is never considered “abandoned”, and its previous owners, or their heirs, or some settlers’ gang, can successfully claim them and throw out their Palestinian residents. As we have said, Palestinian Jerusalemites have no voting rights to the Knesset. They can vote to the city’s municipality, though; but almost all of them have so far refrained from exercising this right, since voting is considered as consenting to the Israeli occupation. But the farsighted architects of Apartheid are not content. What if all of a sudden 40% of the capital’s population do start voting?! A new law is in the making to solve this issue; after all, even South Africa was once all for democracy – provided non-Whites were excluded. The bill proposes to split Arab neighborhoods in East Jerusalem and make them independent of the city. This way, Jerusalem can no longer be held responsible for serving them (which it does not do anyway), and, on top of that, their inhabitants will be excluded even from electing the mayor of Jerusalem. Annexing to Jerusalem some distant Jewish suburbs, including illegal West-Bank settlements, is suggested as a further boost to the Jewish majority. Just imagine your own city split and expanded at will, based on such racist considerations of whom-do-we-want-not-to-vote. The only problem with this proposal is that it might sound like the beginning of the end of the (big lie of) “united Jerusalem”, and, more specifically, that these townships would be given to a Palestinian State, once the Messiah comes. Don’t worry: the proposed law clearly rules out giving up Israeli sovereignty over these suggested “new municipalities” without the support of a two-third Knesset majority – a condition which is practically impossible to satisfy – and a bill setting even higher demands is already underway. Just like in South Africa, democracy – even when reserved to Whites/Jews – must give way to Apartheid policies. Jewish tradition distinguishes between Upper and Lower Jerusalem. Upper Jerusalem is the ideal City of God. Never has Lower Jerusalem been more remote from this ideal. Today’s Jerusalem is the most blatant incarnation of the Israeli Apartheid, with 40% of its residents held as non-citizens in their own city, discriminated by law, pushed into poverty, harassed and terrorized by the Israeli police and settlers: a huge South African township, marked for eviction and takeover by Israeli Jews. Realities in the West Bank are basically much the same, but Jerusalem is the quintessence of this injustice. President Trump will go into history as the leader who gave his blessing to this moral crime, earning himself a distinguished place in the hall of shame. Dr. Ran HaCohen was born in the Netherlands in 1964 and grew up in Israel. He has a B.A. in computer science, an M.A. in comparative literature, and a Ph.D. in Jewish studies. He is a university teacher in Israel. He also works as a literary translator (from German, English, and Dutch). HaCohen’s work has been published widely in Israel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jan 5 15:39:08 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 15:39:08 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] 1968: Dr. Benjamin Spock's indictment for urging young men to resist the Vietnam draft - The Washington Post Message-ID: 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, robbing, 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 murdered 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) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, January 05, 2018 9:21 AM To: 'David Green' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' ; 'C G Estabrook' Subject: FW: 1968: Dr. Benjamin Spock's indictment for urging young men to resist the Vietnam draft - The Washington Post 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: Friday, January 05, 2018 9:19 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: 1968: Dr. Benjamin Spock's indictment for urging young men to resist the Vietnam draft - The Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/retropolis/wp/2018/01/05/he-was-americas-most-famous-pediatrician-then-dr-spock-attacked-the-vietnam-draft/?utm_term=.ac3c1bf090b7 Ben Spock, M.D. Managua, Nicaragua, 1985 With Ramsey Clark and Len Weinglass (RIP) To help Nicaraguans Against Reagan's contra terrorists After day of hard work return to hotel Sitting on veranda sipping soft drinks Ben Spock and his Wife Bringing Humanitarian relief supplies At own expense Sit down to talk Most dramatic meeting Ramsey persecuted Ben Draft Resistance Conspiracy We all knew The Empire put on trial America's Baby Doctor For saving his Baby Boomers >From Abattoir of Vietnam Conversation pleasant but tense Ben vindicated by History Against Ramsey and LBJ and Hershey We all knew Ben gracious too After Spocks depart Ramsey turns to Len and me Anguishly It was the worst decision I ever made In my entire life Prosecuting that man! We all make our mistakes Ramsey and me Learn from them hopefully Here's to Ben Spock, M.D. Right from very get-go Doctor for my Woodstock Generation My hero! Long may he live In annals of history! RIP From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jan 5 15:39:08 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 15:39:08 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] 1968: Dr. Benjamin Spock's indictment for urging young men to resist the Vietnam draft - The Washington Post Message-ID: 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, robbing, 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 murdered 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) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, January 05, 2018 9:21 AM To: 'David Green' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' ; 'C G Estabrook' Subject: FW: 1968: Dr. Benjamin Spock's indictment for urging young men to resist the Vietnam draft - The Washington Post 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: Friday, January 05, 2018 9:19 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: 1968: Dr. Benjamin Spock's indictment for urging young men to resist the Vietnam draft - The Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/retropolis/wp/2018/01/05/he-was-americas-most-famous-pediatrician-then-dr-spock-attacked-the-vietnam-draft/?utm_term=.ac3c1bf090b7 Ben Spock, M.D. Managua, Nicaragua, 1985 With Ramsey Clark and Len Weinglass (RIP) To help Nicaraguans Against Reagan's contra terrorists After day of hard work return to hotel Sitting on veranda sipping soft drinks Ben Spock and his Wife Bringing Humanitarian relief supplies At own expense Sit down to talk Most dramatic meeting Ramsey persecuted Ben Draft Resistance Conspiracy We all knew The Empire put on trial America's Baby Doctor For saving his Baby Boomers >From Abattoir of Vietnam Conversation pleasant but tense Ben vindicated by History Against Ramsey and LBJ and Hershey We all knew Ben gracious too After Spocks depart Ramsey turns to Len and me Anguishly It was the worst decision I ever made In my entire life Prosecuting that man! We all make our mistakes Ramsey and me Learn from them hopefully Here's to Ben Spock, M.D. Right from very get-go Doctor for my Woodstock Generation My hero! Long may he live In annals of history! RIP From deb.pdamerica at gmail.com Fri Jan 5 15:46:59 2018 From: deb.pdamerica at gmail.com (Debra Schrishuhn) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 09:46:59 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Message from Senator Richard J. Durbin In-Reply-To: References: <50B0F62E-3FE5-44F6-A220-B67347AAEA25@gmail.com> Message-ID: <51C43EC0-D57E-43A2-BA5D-05F1EE4E3EF6@gmail.com> Davis even refused to denounce the President's inflammatory tweet on potential nuclear war with N Korea. Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 5, 2018, at 7:17 AM, Karen Aram wrote: > > Our two Democrats will fight for Net Neutrality, our Republican, Davis, is opposed, hardly a shock. > > Another reason why this guy has to go…… > > >> On Jan 5, 2018, at 01:52, Debra Schrishuhn wrote: >> >> Duckworth is also on board. She co-sponsored Sen Markey's resolution. >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Jan 4, 2018, at 2:15 PM, Karen Aram wrote: >> >>> In relation to our letters to our Representatives, reflecting Net Neutrality. Richard Durbin has responded in the affirmative: >>>> >>>> >>>> “On December 15, I announced that I will cosponsor a Congressional Review Act resolution Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts is planning to introduce that would undo the FCC’s harmful action of repealing net neutrality rules. " >>>> >>>> Begin forwarded message: >>>> >>>> From: "Senator Richard J. Durbin" >>>> Subject: Message from Senator Richard J. Durbin >>>> Date: January 4, 2018 at 10:34:24 PST >>>> To: karenaram at hotmail.com >>>> >>>> January 4, 2018 >>>> >>>> Dear Ms. Aram: >>>> >>>> >>>> Thank you for contacting me to share your views about net neutrality. I appreciate hearing from you. >>>> >>>> In February 2015, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted to adopt new net neutrality rules that would preserve the internet as an open platform for consumer choice and competition. These rules prohibited Internet Service Providers (ISPs) from blocking or slowing down customers' access to websites and banned ISPs from charging content providers for faster delivery of certain information to users. >>>> >>>> The FCC adopted these rules by taking a regulatory step to reclassify broadband service under Title II of the Telecommunications Act. Reclassification of broadband under Title II provided the agency with much broader authority to establish strong net neutrality rules and allowed broadband services to be treated as a public utility. Opponents argue the reclassification was an overreach of the agency's authority and will increase taxes on consumers. >>>> >>>> On May 18, 2017, the FCC voted to adopt the proposed rule, Restoring Internet Freedom (Docket 17-108). The rule rolled back many of the central tenants of net neutrality. The rule also repealed regulations allowing the FCC to investigate suspected anti-competitive business practices of ISPs. >>>> >>>> On December 12, 2017, I joined 38 of my Senate Democratic colleagues in a letter calling on FCC Chairman Pai to abandon his plan to repeal the agency's net neutrality rules. However, on December 14, 2017, despite millions of public comments opposing the action and over the objections of tech companies like Netflix, Reddit, and Etsy, the FCC voted along party lines to repeal the net neutrality rules. >>>> >>>> The rollback of net neutrality threatens access to a free and open internet. This action amounts to the FCC letting ISPs pick winners and losers, charge people more for service, and even block certain parts of the internet. >>>> >>>> On December 15, I announced that I will cosponsor a Congressional Review Act resolution Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts is planning to introduce that would undo the FCC's harmful action of repealing net neutrality rules. >>>> >>>> A transparent and fairly managed flow of information is essential to a true democracy and benefits a growing economy. I will keep your thoughts in mind should the Senate consider legislation that would impact net neutrality rules. >>>> >>>> Thank you again for contacting me. Please feel free to keep in touch. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Sincerely, >>>> >>>> Richard J. Durbin >>>> United States Senator >>>> >>>> RJD/mw >>>> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From r-szoke at illinois.edu Fri Jan 5 18:39:56 2018 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 18:39:56 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Duck and Cover? Message-ID: The CDC wants to gently prepare people for (an unlikely) nuclear war Check out this story on CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/05/health/cdc-nuclear-preparedness-trnd/index.html From moboct1 at aim.com Fri Jan 5 19:12:04 2018 From: moboct1 at aim.com (Mildred O'brien) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 14:12:04 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Lay review of "American Made" from IMDB--Now you got me started on Barry Seals... In-Reply-To: <160c7b74ddb-1726-86ee1@webjas-vac050.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <160c7bcc225-171d-2739b@webjas-vaa197.srv.aolmail.net> -----Original Message----- From: Mildred O'brien To: davegreen84 ; karenaram ; davidjohnson1451 Sent: Fri, Jan 5, 2018 1:06 pm Subject: Lay review of "American Made" from IMDB--Now that you got me started on Barry Seals... While laid up recovering from the cold I had since Dec 16 I've been re-reading The Secret Life of Bill Clinton (1999), a well researched (unauthorized, it goes without saying) biography by the English investigative reporter, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard.  (Some dismiss him for once reporting for a Murdock UK paper).  He devoted a chapter to Barry Seal, Air Contra and Mena Airport (a 40-some year old topic apparently CIA is trying to whitewash by the contemporary movie), facts which I'm sure Hollywood doesn't touch.  Seal lost his job as a TWA pilot in 1972 [my brother who was a TWA pilot at that time may have known him] when caught trying to smuggle plastic explosives in a DC-3 into Cuba (probably intended for a Fidel assassination attempt), and afterwards found more gainful employment in Colombia:        "(Mena) goes beyond anything that was revealed by the various noisy investigations into the Iran-Contra affair.  What makes it so fascinating today is evidence that the CIA's base of operations was in Arkansas, and that Governor Bill Clinton was actively involved.  The idea that an outwardly liberal and progressive Democrat [sic] like Bill Clinton was secretly assisting Oliver North's crusade against the Revolucion Sandinista is so shocking that the American press has dismissed it out of hand.  But it is precisely because Mena turns the world upside down that it matters so much,  If true, it validates an inchoate suspicion felt by many Americans that things are not what they seem.  It suggests that the political rhetoric of the two parties in Washington is mere window dressing, while the real decisions are made in secret collusion without democratic accountabilty (emphasis mine). To examine Mena is to examine the institutional condition of the United States.  As for the president, it exposes him as a remarkable counterfeit, willing to betray his liberal principles [sic] for self-advancement.      "It was the political Left that first became exercised about Mena.  They were alerted when a Fairchild C-123 military transport was shot down in Nicaragua on October 5, 1986 [Hasenfus].  The plane had been used earlier by cocaine smuggler Berriman Adler Seal, who based his fleet of aircraft at Mena.  Arkansas Congressman Bill Alexander, the Democratic Deputy Whip in the House, made it his lonely crusade in the late 1980s to find out whether drug smuggling had somehow become intertwined with rogue operations by the CIA at Mena.  The left-wing press, The Nation and the Village Voice, doggedly pursued the story, led by an Irish radical named Alexander Cockburn.  He passed the baton to Roger Morris, author of the Clinton biography Partners in Power, and Sally Denton.  They wrote a long expose called the "Crimes of Mena" for the "Outlook" section of the Washington Post in 1994, only to see it spiked at the last moment [a later story by Evans-Prichard was published on the front page of the Washington Times].      "Until now [1999] no one has provided documentary evidence that Barry Seal's Mena-based air fleet was part of the 'Air Contra' supply operation or that Seal was actually running guns to Nicaragua under the cover of drug smuggling.  With due acknowledgment to my colleagues on the Left, I beg to offer the elusive proof." Little would it be known that the subject would turn up as the romantic Tom Cruise tale of the murder of a washed-up pilot and a washed-up (let's hope) President.   That's only one topic of the book.  It goes into other curious Clinton coincidences as the Oklahoma City bombing of the Murrah Building,Vince Foster's and other murders.  (Unfortunately, it leaves off in 1999; I'm sure the author would find more fascinating Clinton material in the years since).  I used to think Oklahoma politics was dirty until reading this expose of Arkansas politicians. Midge O'Brien -----Original Message----- From: David Green To: Mildred O'brien Sent: Fri, Jan 5, 2018 8:58 am Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lay review of "American Made" from IMDB You're welcome, and Happy New Year! On ‎Friday‎, ‎January‎ ‎5‎, ‎2018‎ ‎08‎:‎05‎:‎16‎ ‎AM‎ ‎CST, Mildred O'brien wrote: Hi, David: OR--they could read Penny Lernoux's "Cry of the People" (1982) and Fear and Hope: Political Democracy in Central America (1984) or "In Banks We Trust" (1984).  OR Evans-Pritchard's "The Secret Life of Bill Clinton" (1999) on Barry Seal's Mena, Arkansas operation, which financed Bill's political ambitions.  WHO would bother paying to watch a stupid Hollywood-Tom Cruise flick anyway???  I learned about US war on Central American in 1981 when my sister-in-law's cousin was murdered by the coup in the mountains of Guatemala at Lake Atitlan.  He was a missionary priest from Oklahoma who worked 13 years with Tzuthil Indians.  His mistake: improving their quality of life--and--questioning soldiers about so many of his "disappeared" parishioners.  He was made a candidate ("beatified") for sainthood last year by Pope Francis.  His parents, poor farmers from Okarche, OK drove to Washington to ask President Reagan (who they voted for and trusted--their first mistake) to investigate his murder.  Reagan wouldn't see them, but they talked to Secy. Alexander Haig who told them "he must have been doing something he shouldn't have."  Yeah, like exist... Good way to start the New Year with your letter to the N-G.  Thanks.   Midge -----Original Message----- From: David Green via Peace-discuss To: Peace-discuss List Sent: Thu, Jan 4, 2018 9:36 pm Subject: [Peace-discuss] Lay review of "American Made" from IMDB An apparently popular Tom Cruise vehicle: Fails to Get Off the Ground popcorninhell30 September 2017 At this point is there a person on earth who doesn't already know the CIA was up to some shady s**t in Central America? Those who might still be in the dark about this stuff please do yourself a favor and read "Castles Made of Sand" by Andre Gerolymatos or "A Great Place to Have a War" by Joshua Kulantzick. If you want something a little more specific to this film's subject matter there's "Smuggler's End" by Del Hahn. You can also watch: Bananas (1971), The In-Laws (1979), El Salvador: Another Vietnam (1981), Alsino and the Condor (1982), Under Fire (1983), Latino (1985), Salvador (1986), Romero (1989), Walker (1987), Down Came a Blackbird (1995),Blow (2001), Voces Inocentes (2004), Guatemala: The Secret Files (2008), Harvest of Empire (2012), Princesas Rojas (2013), Escobar: Paradise Lost (2014),the TV show Narcos (2015-present), Room of Bones (2015), Finding Oscar (2016), The Infiltrator (2016) and if that's not enough, the hearings on the Iran-Contra Investigation on Youtube. All of these options and more would give you a more cogent, compelling and satisfying experience than sitting through American Made; a light, mediocre and curiously smug, bug-eyed view of important historical events. In it a TWA pilot turned CIA stooge makes a little side cash smuggling drugs, guns and people to and from Central America. While doing so, the movie frames the larger collusions and convolutions not as the result of a deeply flawed man sticking his thumbs in various proverbial pies but as an awkward jumble of "and then…" filmmaking in spite of him. Barry (Cruise) fits neatly into the recent crop of true-life protagonists too stupid to realize they're in over their head. He smiles crookedly, trying to hide his intentions under aviator glasses – mostly to the amusement of his CIA handler played by Domhnall Gleeson. He's clearly playing with a bad hand and everyone including the infamous Medellin drug cartel knows it, but damned if they're not entertained by Barry's good 'ol boy braggadocio. He's like a composite of the dudes from War Dogs (2016) only with the serendipity (and obliviousness) of Forrest Gump (1994). What exactly makes a man like this tick? The movie doesn't really seem that interested in answering that question. Instead it seems more concerned with giving us a history lesson based on Barry's limited first-person perspective and various camera collage techniques that make American Made look like an episode of Arrested Development (2003-Present). This is of course told without wit, irony or the requisite anger needed. One can't help but think that if director Doug Liman brought the same level of ire to this movie that he did in the under-watched Fair Game (2010), American Made would have been a bit more palatable to… someone. As it stands however, American Made is for no one. It's a frustratingly mediocre waste of marquee space that's too dense to be entertaining and too cavalier to be worth a good discussion of Cold War foreign policy. It lacks characterization and perspective, leaving only Tom Cruise's boundless charisma to push it past the runway with any alacrity. As much as I'd like to say Cruise pulls it off, American Made as a whole should have stayed grounded for a little while longer. _______________________________________________ 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 Jan 5 19:51:53 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 19:51:53 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Interview on The Real News with Trita Parsi and Dr. Sadeghi Message-ID: Trita Parsi was born in Iran and grew up in Sweden. He earned a Master's Degree in International Relations at Uppsala University, a second Master's Degree in Economics at Stockholm School of Economics and a PhD in International Relations from Johns Hopkins University SAIS. He has served as an adviser to Congressman Bob Ney (R-OH18) on Middle East issues and is a co-founder and current President of the National Iranian American Council (www.niacouncil.org). Dr. Parsi is the author of A Single Roll of the Dice: Obama�s Diplomacy with Iran, Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Iran, Israel and the United States, and most recently, Losing an Enemy: Obama, Iran, and the Triumph of Diplomacy. He has followed Middle East politics for more than a decade, both through work in the field, and through extensive experience on Capitol Hill and the United Nations. Dr. Eskandar Sadeghi is a historian of modern Iran. Dr. Sadeghi is a British Academy Postdoctoral Fellow in the Faculty of Oriental Studies at the University of Oxford. He is also the Series Editor of Radical Histories of the Middle East. ________________________________ transcript [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2018-01-01/panel0103iran-240.jpg]AARON MATÉ: It's The Real News. I'm Aaron Mate. Pro-government rallies are being held in Iran today after nearly a week of nationwide protests against the country's leaders. Tens of thousands have turned out for demonstrations supporting the Iranian government in at least 10 cities. This follows days of clashes that have left at least 22 people dead. The initial protests began with conservatives but quickly spread to other citizens disgruntled with a struggling economy and rising inequality. There are reports those protests are now dying down just as government supporters are turning out. The government has arrested more than 530 people and restricted access to social media in a bid to crack down on the protests. I'm joined now by two guests: Dr. Eskandar Sadeghi, a research fellow in modern Iranian history at the University of Oxford, and Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian-American Council, author of the book, 'Losing an Enemy: Obama, Iran, and the Triumph of Diplomacy.' Welcome to you both. Trita, I'll start with you. What do you think is important for people to know about these protests? Am I correct to say that they started off with the conservatives and then morphed into something different? TRITA PARSI: Yes, this was actually started by conservatives in the city of Mashhad. They were hoping to be able to put pressure and embarrass the more moderate President Rouhani, but it kind of got out of control because this message of economic grievance is something that a very large segment of the population agreed with. There are very legitimate grievances when it comes to the economic situation as well as the social and the political situation. They quickly lost control over it, and instead of just targeting the Rouhani government, it turned into a protest that is targeting the entire regime including the conservative establishment. It is, however, at least thus far, much smaller than what we saw in 2009 which I mean there were more than a million or two million people on the streets of Tehran at the time. This one tends to be not only much smaller but also including or driven by a different segment of society that has not been at the center of Iran's political development for the last two decades. It is a poorer segment of the society. It's a segment of society that doesn't seem to have had the same buy-in into that idea that you can change a system from within and, as a result, are a little bit more susceptible to shifting over towards seeking a complete overthrow of the regime. AARON MATÉ: So have the people who took part in the 2009 Green Revolution taking part in this round of protests? Because their main grievance last time, if I have this right, is that they felt as if the elections were rigged against their preferred candidate. TRITA PARSI: I've spoken to people who did help organize some of those protests in 2009, and they were completely taken by surprise by this. They are not driving this. They're not even a part of it. They're keeping a bit of a calculated distance from these protests as well. It's very clear that it is not an outgrowth of a continuation of the Green Movement. This is simply something else. AARON MATÉ: Eskandar, if you could pick it up on the topic of those grievances that Trita Parsi mentioned, what are the main economic grievances driving the protesters that have come out over the past week? E. SADEGHI: Well there are several. Obviously as Trita pointed out, it's obviously quite difficult to sort of unpack them especially because obviously they initially were expressed in the form of economic grievances and then steadily transformed into something else and obviously swept the country in its entirety. Some of the points that did come up obviously: the price of eggs, the price of basic foodstuffs more generally, the price of fuel and energy prices which obviously hit the poor disproportionately, more severely. These are sort of the primary ones, but some people have sort of speculated that when President Rouhani sort of presented his budget just very recently as he sort of was maneuvering as it were to, how can I say, leverage his influence with the people against sort of conservative factions, what he did express he sort of spoke to various different, how can I say, sort of expenditures which had been allocated to conservative religious sort of institutions within the state which have traditionally been seen as less transparent, less accountable. What this actually did is actually maybe sort of provoked the anger of many people who sort of expected to see this money actually allocated to betterment of their lives. And in tandem with the fact that he was also cutting subsidies for some of the poorest strata of Iranian society. These sorts of things turned out to be sort of a perfect storm which were initiated by conservative forces in Mashhad and then were taken up. It did sort of emerge out of faction or jockeying between the Rouhani administration and those conservative factions which were obviously trying to some extent to weaken him. A lot of the speculation has been that a big reason why there wasn't a clampdown or one of the reasons why the conservatives have been especially sympathetic to the initial protests which expressed economic grievance was because they wanted to see Rouhani weakened. AARON MATÉ: Trita, what about the issue of military spending? One critique of that Rouhani budget that I've heard is that there was an excessive amount allocated to military spending spurring people to make those chants that we heard against Iranian foreign policy in terms of its support for Assad or Hezbollah in Lebanon. TRITA PARSI: Yeah. In this specific budget proposal, the spending of the IRGC, their budget and other things in the military arm were actually increased whereas so much else was being cut down which is something that clearly angered a tremendous amount of people. You do have a situation in Iran in which, in general terms, people tend to be very skeptical of the foreign posture, the regional posture of the government when it comes to resource allocation, the amount of resources that it allocates for these policies. We have seen moments in which the policies actually have received a significant amount of support. Zogby has done consistent polls on this issue, and we saw, for instance, that in 2014 when ISIS emerged there was a lot of support for Iran's foreign policy. Then later on again this year, it was and it seems to be a function of the fact that the Trump administration pursued a much more aggressive policy, combined with the fact that ISIS actually struck Iran in the first time with a successful terrorist attack in Tehran that left 17 people killed. You saw then, as a result, support for the regional posture increase again, but under normal circumstances, it tends to be quite low. As a result, it is something that people point to as a reason to object to the policies of the government because it's simply allocating it in the wrong way. AARON MATÉ: Well Trita, speaking of normal circumstances, let me ask you. Do you think we'd be seeing these protests and this level of economic stagnation had Trump and the U.S. government lived up to the Iran Nuclear Deal, not taken steps that have deterred investment inside Iran? TRITA PARSI: I think it is a very big component of it because, at the end of the day, people had the expectation that things were going to really move in a much more positive direction as a result of the nuclear deal. On paper, there's a lot of things with the Iranian economy that seems to be moving in the right direction. I mean the growth is going to be roughly 4% this year according to the IMF, but that is almost exclusively driven by the fact that the Iranians can sell oil again. Oil sales don't create jobs. What you need to do in order to actually create more social justice in Iran is to actually have a far greater amount of job creation because of the large number of young people that are entering the labor market on a yearly basis. To create jobs, you need investments. You just don't need oil sales. To get investments, you need to make sure that the banks feel comfortable that nuclear deal is durable and that it is not constantly being attacked either from Iran or Trump or someone else. That sense of durability has not existed primarily because the Trump administration has made it very clear that they're looking forward to killing this deal. That has been a major factor as to why investments have not come into Iran. There's many other factors as well. There's also of course the Iranian government's own corruption, mismanagement, etc., but had these investments come in, there's a significant likelihood that the economic situation would have looked different and that we wouldn't have had a scenario in which the expectation gap had become as significant as it is right now in which, on the one hand, people expected things to move forward and become much more positive, and on the other hand now with this budget, there's austerity measures that is cutting their standard of living significantly. AARON MATÉ: Eskandar Sadeghi, how do you approach this issue? How do you apportion the blame here? On the one hand, the impact of the sanctions over many years and the fact that Trump has created a climate where the benefits of the Iran Nuclear Deal are not being received because investors, banks as Trita described, are scared to put their money there for fear of the potential consequences. And on the other hand, you have Rouhani's policies, the austerity measures that Trita mentioned, and an overall neoliberal orientation or at least that's the critique of it. E. SADEGHI: Yeah. Just to echo Trita, I think he's very sort of correct in pointing out sort of, one, the combination of austerity measures which Rouhani obviously inherited an economic situation from the Ahmadinejad administration where inflation was running over 40 percent, unemployment was extremely high. What he was actually trying to do was obviously ... He basically partook in this austerity or monetary policy in basically trying to push down inflation because that, in turn, would have an impact on prices which, in turn, would very much effect the lot of the core. But what that actually has done, as Trita actually said ... It hasn't actually created the jobs. That's exactly because the Trump administration has put so much pressure, has been so antagonistic. I mean I've spoken to plenty of individuals who were previously thinking in the last months of the Obama administration were very optimistic and hoping to do business in Iran and obviously very quickly changed their minds. Obviously I think this is part and parcel of what the Trump administration very much wants to do. Trump was very clear and repeatedly stated that he wants to destroy this deal. The best way he can probably do that is obviously to really destroy the center in Iran. If you recall even before the most recent election, individuals like Elliott Abrams and [inaudible 00:11:31] are very much calling for Ebrahim Raisi -- Raisi, the competitor to Rouhani -- to be elected, and actually said this would be to the benefit of the political agenda. So I definitely think there's a sort of invested or shared interest, as it were, between the Trump administration and various sort of neoconservatives in Washington but also conservatives within Iran who want to see a weakened center and sort of a moderate or centrist government. AARON MATÉ: Right. Speaking of neocons, let's talk about that and how hawks, anti-Iran hawks here in the West have utilized the Iran protests for their own agenda and the willingness of Western media to play along. Just today in the New York Times, the op-ed page ran a piece by Reuel Marc Gerecht, who is a senior fellow at something called the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies in Washington, D.C. who, by his own count ... He says "I've written about 25000 words about bombing Iran. Even my mom thinks I've gone too far." That's a quote from him. Trita, you actually confronted another anti-Iran neocon yesterday on national TV on MSNBC, Bill Kristol. Let's show that clip. Billy Kristol: Let's be more respectful of the Iranian people's desire for freedom. TRITA PARSI: With all due respect, you've been arguing to bomb Iran for so long so I don't know if you're really respecting the Iranian people. You've been advocating killing Iranians so I don't think you or the Trump administration have the credibility to now say that you care for the Iranian people. Billy Kristol: I don't- MSNBC Anchor: Hold on. Let's get something clear. Billy Kristol: It's not about me. It's not about me. MSNBC Anchor: Hold on. Billy Kristol: It's not about me. It's about the Iranian people. Do you stand with the Iranian people? Do you stand with the Iranian people against the regime? TRITA PARSI: Of course I do. That's exactly why- Billy Kristol: Okay. Good. Fine. We're in agreement. We're in agreement. [crosstalk 00:13:15]. We're in agreement then- TRITA PARSI: ... move towards a more democratic situation without killing them. MSNBC Anchor: Trita- Billy Kristol: I couldn't agree more. MSNBC Anchor: ... Bill Kristol is not advocating to kill anyone. Let's make that very clear. TRITA PARSI: No, on the contrary, there's been all of this argument for taking military action against Iran instead of actually having this nuclear deal that has been working. AARON MATÉ: That's Trita Parsi telling Bill Kristol that he's been advocating killing Iranians, and then Trita also correcting the MSNBC anchor when she tries to say quite the contrary. It was interesting, Trita. At the end of that clip, Bill Kristol had that opportunity to respond. He just shook his head and deferred. But your thoughts on that exchange? It went viral afterwards. TRITA PARSI: Look, I find it bizarre that they have the audacity to pretend that they care for the people of Iran just because they're willing to jump on a protest right now. For years, they have been advocating bombing Iran. For years, they've been advocating sanctioning Iran and even explicitly saying in some cases that we want to take food out of the mouth of the Iranian people. When you treat the people in that way, I don't think you can give them the benefit of the doubt for them to suddenly switch around and pretend as if the care for the people. They lack any credibility to speak now as if their recommendations actually are to be able to benefit the Iranian people. They're just trying to take advantage of this current situation in order to advance the agenda that they've always had which is to start some form of a confrontation with Iran in order to change the balance of power in Iran to be more favorable towards Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the United States. This has been a critical agenda item of theirs for years, and they're seeing an opportunity to push that. We should not let them fool people to think that they care for the Iranian people. They're just using the Iranian people and their suffering as an instrument right now. AARON MATÉ: Eskandar Sadeghi, we'll wrap with you. The key questions, the key issues for you going forward now especially as it appears ... Although this might not be the case, it appears today that the protests are dying down. Your thoughts on the question of: Is genuine change possible within a reformist agenda as embodied by the President Hassan Rouhani? E. SADEGHI: I think anyone who has studied Iran who has invested time looking at its history even since the Rafsanjani period, but if we particularly look at 1997 and the election of Mohammad Khatami and what he did achieve even though it did have various limitations and it was a very difficult sort of struggle and there was a backlash, we have to look at some of the achievements of the period. One of the key ones is the ability of his administration to institutionalize local city and village elections. This sort of gave ... Hundreds of thousands of people actually participated in these elections, and they had a massive, massive impact on sort of transforming Iranian self-conception or conception of themselves as citizens who had agency who could define and determine their political destiny. That's one particularly important one. The role of the press. Anyone who's familiar and reads Farsi and follows the news can see how vibrant the Iranian press has been in the past. Today, you can palpably see since 2013 how much more critical, how much more emboldened sort of reformists are in the Iranian context. I think we need to really acknowledge the achievements. It's true as Trita said that the expectations, the high, people do want to see faster pace of reform, but we have to really see what has been achieved. Even just most recently with the Rouhani administration, one can see sort of countless ... These protests are unusual. There's no doubt about it, the whole breadth of the country and the nature of them and the class which is actually participating in them, but we have seen repeated strikes, repeated sort of demands from teachers, from various different workers asking for their rights. This is the best way, I think, going forward by respecting, sort of allowing moderates in Iran, allowing the reformists in Iran to open that space whereby Iranian civil society can burgeon and grow and continue to thrive and continue to try and hold its government to account. It's not going to happen by external interference. it's not going to happen by Trump's irate and ill-informed tweets. It's not going to happen obviously as a result of sanctions and warmongering and threats. The only criticism I do have with respect to Rouhani and obviously the reformists is that they really do need to rethink their political economic outlook especially because, since 1997, they've very much been obsessed with decreasing the size of the state privatization, lowering inflation, and whatnot. They really do need to think of an alternative model which, again, really does take heed of the working class and sort of lower strata Iranian society's basic needs and demands and demands of social justice. Especially since 2009, they've been preoccupied obviously with ... Sorry. Since 1997, with representing the middle class of Iran and focusing on sort of essentially liberal freedoms: the right to free speech, the right to form associations, and these sorts of things which are absolutely essential for any kind of democratic society. But in the process, they have to some extent forgotten these basic socioeconomic issues of socioeconomic justice which are absolutely indispensable. The hope going forward is that they really do take this onboard and, rather than a kind of haughty response to these protests and sort of dismissing them as the work of the rabble and whatnot, that, no, these are actually genuine grievances which is being acknowledged. But still, I think they need to go further and offer really concrete proposals of how they intend to go forward in the coming weeks and months. Simply so, the situation, this instability can't be taken advantage of by the likes of the Trump administration and by external actors which ... They are very glad. You can just see sort of the glee which many of these individuals or these neocons or the Netanyahu government and whatnot ... The glee with which they are overlooking kind of this instability, but nevertheless, we have to sort of stay hopeful. We have to hope that Rouhani can come out of this and actually does have the wherewithal with which he can rethink and really give his economic agenda and give some concrete proposals to the Iranian people which they do deserve. AARON MATÉ: Well since Eskandar mentioned Trump, I have to ask Trita Parsi one more question which is that Trump faces a new deadline this month on whether or not to wave Iran sanctions under the nuclear deal. The importance of that decision, both for the nuclear deal and for how it might bear on Iran's internal dynamics right now when it comes to this movement for increasing democracy? TRITA PARSI: [inaudible 00:20:23] thing, but essentially when it comes to the nuclear deal, there's some very critical deadlines next week in which the United States is obligated to renew wavers on the sanctions as long as the Iranians are living up to their end of the bargain. The reports by the IADA confirm that the Iranians are in compliance. There's a very high likelihood that Trump will use the current protest as a pretext to do what he had planned to do anyways which was to not renew these waivers and, by that, put the United States out of compliance with the deal potentially triggering a process that could see the deal collapse as a result of that. In the midst of all of this, there's something likely going to happen that will create a massive international crisis. AARON MATÉ: We'll leave it there. Dr. Eskandar Sadeghi, research fellow in modern Iranian history at the University of Oxford, and Trita Parsi, President of the National Iranian-American Council, author of 'Losing an Enemy: Obama, Iran, and the Triumph of Diplomacy.' Thanks to you both. TRITA PARSI: Thank you. E. SADEGHI: Thank you. AARON MATÉ: Thank you for joining us on The Real News. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Fri Jan 5 22:49:47 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 22:49:47 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Poem for the Working Class References: Message-ID: 96. John Hancock Center 1967 Dad Got summer job Chicago Public Beaches Lifeguard Visions of girls, sun, sand Dancing through my head 17 Son, don’t take that job! Have something lined up for you! Sounded ominous Sure was! Most heavy duty construction work John Hancock Center Bottom of The Hole In trenches with mud and water and dirt and slime Installing 4 and 5 inch electrical conduit From ComEd Main feed Backbreaking labor 8 hours a day Covered in mud and dirt and slime and sweat From hair on my head to bottom of my steel tipped boots Having pulled himself up by bootstraps Wanted me to know what it was like for Men Working by sweat of their brows to support their families Not look down my nose at them Show respect Sure did! Later AFL-CIO Union Officer 3 years Helping them out as lawyer Two months into this purgatory Sought reprieve Dad Started out with Gang of 25 Journeymen electricians All quit or been fired but me Son, if you quit or you’re fired Don’t come home! He meant it Soldiered on till end of August Time to return to high school Illegal for me to work that job under 18 Dad the Lawyer cum Marine pulled strings To stick my face into that Hole Wanted to build character Sure built a Character! End of last day Went over to his law firm Covered in mud and dirt and slime and sweat From hair on my head to bottom of my steel tipped boots What are you doing here? Just finished summer job You are taking me out to dinner! He laughed Ok! Let me get my hat Walked across LaSalle Street to Henrici’s Famous Upscale Downtown Chicago Restaurant Good evening Mr. Boyle, said Maître D Good evening Joseph, said he Joe scanned me up and down Looking down his nose at me Violating dress code obviously Dad chuckled This is my Brother! Right this way gentlemen Could not believe it! Called me His Brother to another Working Man Highest Compliment in his book Worth three months of backbreaking work In the mud and the dirt and the slime and the sweat Covered from hair on my head to bottom of my steel tipped boots Not easy growing up as oldest child and namesake Of Marine Corps Combat Veteran Invading Saipan, Tinian, and Okinawa Hard as his steel bayonet Killing large numbers of Japanese soldiers Hand to hand combat No regret As he saw it They had it coming for Pearl Harbor And killing so many of his Buddies His Comrades-in-Arms On the Beaches and in the Jungles of the Pacific Elite Marine Corps Killer Proud of it! Till the day he died Not as tough as my Dad Thank Heavens for that! But he raised me tough enough To fight! For the poor, the oppressed, the downtrodden of the world Against the rich, the powerful, and the famous Against States Against Governments Against Empires My Poems Against The Empire! 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 galliher at illinois.edu Sat Jan 6 01:04:44 2018 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 19:04:44 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Interview on The Real News with Trita Parsi and Dr. Sadeghi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4F1AD4C5-93B2-43BE-A3D5-768A7BD433DB@illinois.edu> Discussed on NEWS FROM NEPTUNE today. {Iranian demonstrations:Rouhani::populism that elected Trump:Obama} The Iranian anti-government demonstrations, based as they are on the economic immiseration of the Iranian populace (encouraged by US sanctions & economic warfare against Iran), are to the reformist neoliberal Rouhani government, as the populist movement that produced Trump, is to the neoliberal Obama administration. —CGE > On Jan 5, 2018, at 1:51 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > > Trita Parsi was born in Iran and grew up in Sweden. He earned a Master's Degree in International Relations at Uppsala University, a second Master's Degree in Economics at Stockholm School of Economics and a PhD in International Relations from Johns Hopkins University SAIS. He has served as an adviser to Congressman Bob Ney (R-OH18) on Middle East issues and is a co-founder and current President of the National Iranian American Council (www.niacouncil.org). Dr. Parsi is the author of A Single Roll of the Dice: Obama�s Diplomacy with Iran, Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Iran, Israel and the United States, and most recently, Losing an Enemy: Obama, Iran, and the Triumph of Diplomacy. He has followed Middle East politics for more than a decade, both through work in the field, and through extensive experience on Capitol Hill and the United Nations. > > Dr. Eskandar Sadeghi is a historian of modern Iran. Dr. Sadeghi is a British Academy Postdoctoral Fellow in the Faculty of Oriental Studies at the University of Oxford. He is also the Series Editor of Radical Histories of the Middle East. > > transcript > AARON MATÉ: It's The Real News. I'm Aaron Mate. Pro-government rallies are being held in Iran today after nearly a week of nationwide protests against the country's leaders. Tens of thousands have turned out for demonstrations supporting the Iranian government in at least 10 cities. This follows days of clashes that have left at least 22 people dead. The initial protests began with conservatives but quickly spread to other citizens disgruntled with a struggling economy and rising inequality. There are reports those protests are now dying down just as government supporters are turning out. The government has arrested more than 530 people and restricted access to social media in a bid to crack down on the protests. > > I'm joined now by two guests: Dr. Eskandar Sadeghi, a research fellow in modern Iranian history at the University of Oxford, and Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian-American Council, author of the book, 'Losing an Enemy: Obama, Iran, and the Triumph of Diplomacy.' Welcome to you both. Trita, I'll start with you. What do you think is important for people to know about these protests? Am I correct to say that they started off with the conservatives and then morphed into something different? > > TRITA PARSI: Yes, this was actually started by conservatives in the city of Mashhad. They were hoping to be able to put pressure and embarrass the more moderate President Rouhani, but it kind of got out of control because this message of economic grievance is something that a very large segment of the population agreed with. There are very legitimate grievances when it comes to the economic situation as well as the social and the political situation. They quickly lost control over it, and instead of just targeting the Rouhani government, it turned into a protest that is targeting the entire regime including the conservative establishment. > > It is, however, at least thus far, much smaller than what we saw in 2009 which I mean there were more than a million or two million people on the streets of Tehran at the time. This one tends to be not only much smaller but also including or driven by a different segment of society that has not been at the center of Iran's political development for the last two decades. It is a poorer segment of the society. It's a segment of society that doesn't seem to have had the same buy-in into that idea that you can change a system from within and, as a result, are a little bit more susceptible to shifting over towards seeking a complete overthrow of the regime. > > AARON MATÉ: So have the people who took part in the 2009 Green Revolution taking part in this round of protests? Because their main grievance last time, if I have this right, is that they felt as if the elections were rigged against their preferred candidate. > > TRITA PARSI: I've spoken to people who did help organize some of those protests in 2009, and they were completely taken by surprise by this. They are not driving this. They're not even a part of it. They're keeping a bit of a calculated distance from these protests as well. It's very clear that it is not an outgrowth of a continuation of the Green Movement. This is simply something else. > > AARON MATÉ: Eskandar, if you could pick it up on the topic of those grievances that Trita Parsi mentioned, what are the main economic grievances driving the protesters that have come out over the past week? > > E. SADEGHI: Well there are several. Obviously as Trita pointed out, it's obviously quite difficult to sort of unpack them especially because obviously they initially were expressed in the form of economic grievances and then steadily transformed into something else and obviously swept the country in its entirety. Some of the points that did come up obviously: the price of eggs, the price of basic foodstuffs more generally, the price of fuel and energy prices which obviously hit the poor disproportionately, more severely. > > These are sort of the primary ones, but some people have sort of speculated that when President Rouhani sort of presented his budget just very recently as he sort of was maneuvering as it were to, how can I say, leverage his influence with the people against sort of conservative factions, what he did express he sort of spoke to various different, how can I say, sort of expenditures which had been allocated to conservative religious sort of institutions within the state which have traditionally been seen as less transparent, less accountable. What this actually did is actually maybe sort of provoked the anger of many people who sort of expected to see this money actually allocated to betterment of their lives. And in tandem with the fact that he was also cutting subsidies for some of the poorest strata of Iranian society. > > These sorts of things turned out to be sort of a perfect storm which were initiated by conservative forces in Mashhad and then were taken up. It did sort of emerge out of faction or jockeying between the Rouhani administration and those conservative factions which were obviously trying to some extent to weaken him. A lot of the speculation has been that a big reason why there wasn't a clampdown or one of the reasons why the conservatives have been especially sympathetic to the initial protests which expressed economic grievance was because they wanted to see Rouhani weakened. > > AARON MATÉ: Trita, what about the issue of military spending? One critique of that Rouhani budget that I've heard is that there was an excessive amount allocated to military spending spurring people to make those chants that we heard against Iranian foreign policy in terms of its support for Assad or Hezbollah in Lebanon. > > TRITA PARSI: Yeah. In this specific budget proposal, the spending of the IRGC, their budget and other things in the military arm were actually increased whereas so much else was being cut down which is something that clearly angered a tremendous amount of people. You do have a situation in Iran in which, in general terms, people tend to be very skeptical of the foreign posture, the regional posture of the government when it comes to resource allocation, the amount of resources that it allocates for these policies. > > We have seen moments in which the policies actually have received a significant amount of support. Zogby has done consistent polls on this issue, and we saw, for instance, that in 2014 when ISIS emerged there was a lot of support for Iran's foreign policy. Then later on again this year, it was and it seems to be a function of the fact that the Trump administration pursued a much more aggressive policy, combined with the fact that ISIS actually struck Iran in the first time with a successful terrorist attack in Tehran that left 17 people killed. You saw then, as a result, support for the regional posture increase again, but under normal circumstances, it tends to be quite low. As a result, it is something that people point to as a reason to object to the policies of the government because it's simply allocating it in the wrong way. > > AARON MATÉ: Well Trita, speaking of normal circumstances, let me ask you. Do you think we'd be seeing these protests and this level of economic stagnation had Trump and the U.S. government lived up to the Iran Nuclear Deal, not taken steps that have deterred investment inside Iran? > > TRITA PARSI: I think it is a very big component of it because, at the end of the day, people had the expectation that things were going to really move in a much more positive direction as a result of the nuclear deal. On paper, there's a lot of things with the Iranian economy that seems to be moving in the right direction. I mean the growth is going to be roughly 4% this year according to the IMF, but that is almost exclusively driven by the fact that the Iranians can sell oil again. > > Oil sales don't create jobs. What you need to do in order to actually create more social justice in Iran is to actually have a far greater amount of job creation because of the large number of young people that are entering the labor market on a yearly basis. To create jobs, you need investments. You just don't need oil sales. To get investments, you need to make sure that the banks feel comfortable that nuclear deal is durable and that it is not constantly being attacked either from Iran or Trump or someone else. > > That sense of durability has not existed primarily because the Trump administration has made it very clear that they're looking forward to killing this deal. That has been a major factor as to why investments have not come into Iran. There's many other factors as well. There's also of course the Iranian government's own corruption, mismanagement, etc., but had these investments come in, there's a significant likelihood that the economic situation would have looked different and that we wouldn't have had a scenario in which the expectation gap had become as significant as it is right now in which, on the one hand, people expected things to move forward and become much more positive, and on the other hand now with this budget, there's austerity measures that is cutting their standard of living significantly. > > AARON MATÉ: Eskandar Sadeghi, how do you approach this issue? How do you apportion the blame here? On the one hand, the impact of the sanctions over many years and the fact that Trump has created a climate where the benefits of the Iran Nuclear Deal are not being received because investors, banks as Trita described, are scared to put their money there for fear of the potential consequences. And on the other hand, you have Rouhani's policies, the austerity measures that Trita mentioned, and an overall neoliberal orientation or at least that's the critique of it. > > E. SADEGHI: Yeah. Just to echo Trita, I think he's very sort of correct in pointing out sort of, one, the combination of austerity measures which Rouhani obviously inherited an economic situation from the Ahmadinejad administration where inflation was running over 40 percent, unemployment was extremely high. What he was actually trying to do was obviously ... He basically partook in this austerity or monetary policy in basically trying to push down inflation because that, in turn, would have an impact on prices which, in turn, would very much effect the lot of the core. > > But what that actually has done, as Trita actually said ... It hasn't actually created the jobs. That's exactly because the Trump administration has put so much pressure, has been so antagonistic. I mean I've spoken to plenty of individuals who were previously thinking in the last months of the Obama administration were very optimistic and hoping to do business in Iran and obviously very quickly changed their minds. Obviously I think this is part and parcel of what the Trump administration very much wants to do. Trump was very clear and repeatedly stated that he wants to destroy this deal. > > The best way he can probably do that is obviously to really destroy the center in Iran. If you recall even before the most recent election, individuals like Elliott Abrams and [inaudible 00:11:31] are very much calling for Ebrahim Raisi -- Raisi, the competitor to Rouhani -- to be elected, and actually said this would be to the benefit of the political agenda. So I definitely think there's a sort of invested or shared interest, as it were, between the Trump administration and various sort of neoconservatives in Washington but also conservatives within Iran who want to see a weakened center and sort of a moderate or centrist government. > > AARON MATÉ: Right. Speaking of neocons, let's talk about that and how hawks, anti-Iran hawks here in the West have utilized the Iran protests for their own agenda and the willingness of Western media to play along. Just today in the New York Times, the op-ed page ran a piece by Reuel Marc Gerecht, who is a senior fellow at something called the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies in Washington, D.C. who, by his own count ... He says "I've written about 25000 words about bombing Iran. Even my mom thinks I've gone too far." That's a quote from him. > > Trita, you actually confronted another anti-Iran neocon yesterday on national TV on MSNBC, Bill Kristol. Let's show that clip. > > Billy Kristol: Let's be more respectful of the Iranian people's desire for freedom. > > TRITA PARSI: With all due respect, you've been arguing to bomb Iran for so long so I don't know if you're really respecting the Iranian people. You've been advocating killing Iranians so I don't think you or the Trump administration have the credibility to now say that you care for the Iranian people. > > Billy Kristol: I don't- > > MSNBC Anchor: Hold on. Let's get something clear. > > Billy Kristol: It's not about me. It's not about me. > > MSNBC Anchor: Hold on. > > Billy Kristol: It's not about me. It's about the Iranian people. Do you stand with the Iranian people? Do you stand with the Iranian people against the regime? > > TRITA PARSI: Of course I do. That's exactly why- > > Billy Kristol: Okay. Good. Fine. We're in agreement. We're in agreement. [crosstalk 00:13:15]. We're in agreement then- > > TRITA PARSI: ... move towards a more democratic situation without killing them. > > MSNBC Anchor: Trita- > > Billy Kristol: I couldn't agree more. > > MSNBC Anchor: ... Bill Kristol is not advocating to kill anyone. Let's make that very clear. > > TRITA PARSI: No, on the contrary, there's been all of this argument for taking military action against Iran instead of actually having this nuclear deal that has been working. > > AARON MATÉ: That's Trita Parsi telling Bill Kristol that he's been advocating killing Iranians, and then Trita also correcting the MSNBC anchor when she tries to say quite the contrary. It was interesting, Trita. At the end of that clip, Bill Kristol had that opportunity to respond. He just shook his head and deferred. But your thoughts on that exchange? It went viral afterwards. > > TRITA PARSI: Look, I find it bizarre that they have the audacity to pretend that they care for the people of Iran just because they're willing to jump on a protest right now. For years, they have been advocating bombing Iran. For years, they've been advocating sanctioning Iran and even explicitly saying in some cases that we want to take food out of the mouth of the Iranian people. When you treat the people in that way, I don't think you can give them the benefit of the doubt for them to suddenly switch around and pretend as if the care for the people. They lack any credibility to speak now as if their recommendations actually are to be able to benefit the Iranian people. > > They're just trying to take advantage of this current situation in order to advance the agenda that they've always had which is to start some form of a confrontation with Iran in order to change the balance of power in Iran to be more favorable towards Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the United States. This has been a critical agenda item of theirs for years, and they're seeing an opportunity to push that. We should not let them fool people to think that they care for the Iranian people. They're just using the Iranian people and their suffering as an instrument right now. > > AARON MATÉ: Eskandar Sadeghi, we'll wrap with you. The key questions, the key issues for you going forward now especially as it appears ... Although this might not be the case, it appears today that the protests are dying down. Your thoughts on the question of: Is genuine change possible within a reformist agenda as embodied by the President Hassan Rouhani? > > E. SADEGHI: I think anyone who has studied Iran who has invested time looking at its history even since the Rafsanjani period, but if we particularly look at 1997 and the election of Mohammad Khatami and what he did achieve even though it did have various limitations and it was a very difficult sort of struggle and there was a backlash, we have to look at some of the achievements of the period. > > One of the key ones is the ability of his administration to institutionalize local city and village elections. This sort of gave ... Hundreds of thousands of people actually participated in these elections, and they had a massive, massive impact on sort of transforming Iranian self-conception or conception of themselves as citizens who had agency who could define and determine their political destiny. That's one particularly important one. > > The role of the press. Anyone who's familiar and reads Farsi and follows the news can see how vibrant the Iranian press has been in the past. Today, you can palpably see since 2013 how much more critical, how much more emboldened sort of reformists are in the Iranian context. I think we need to really acknowledge the achievements. It's true as Trita said that the expectations, the high, people do want to see faster pace of reform, but we have to really see what has been achieved. Even just most recently with the Rouhani administration, one can see sort of countless ... > > These protests are unusual. There's no doubt about it, the whole breadth of the country and the nature of them and the class which is actually participating in them, but we have seen repeated strikes, repeated sort of demands from teachers, from various different workers asking for their rights. This is the best way, I think, going forward by respecting, sort of allowing moderates in Iran, allowing the reformists in Iran to open that space whereby Iranian civil society can burgeon and grow and continue to thrive and continue to try and hold its government to account. > > It's not going to happen by external interference. it's not going to happen by Trump's irate and ill-informed tweets. It's not going to happen obviously as a result of sanctions and warmongering and threats. The only criticism I do have with respect to Rouhani and obviously the reformists is that they really do need to rethink their political economic outlook especially because, since 1997, they've very much been obsessed with decreasing the size of the state privatization, lowering inflation, and whatnot. They really do need to think of an alternative model which, again, really does take heed of the working class and sort of lower strata Iranian society's basic needs and demands and demands of social justice. > > Especially since 2009, they've been preoccupied obviously with ... Sorry. Since 1997, with representing the middle class of Iran and focusing on sort of essentially liberal freedoms: the right to free speech, the right to form associations, and these sorts of things which are absolutely essential for any kind of democratic society. But in the process, they have to some extent forgotten these basic socioeconomic issues of socioeconomic justice which are absolutely indispensable. > > The hope going forward is that they really do take this onboard and, rather than a kind of haughty response to these protests and sort of dismissing them as the work of the rabble and whatnot, that, no, these are actually genuine grievances which is being acknowledged. But still, I think they need to go further and offer really concrete proposals of how they intend to go forward in the coming weeks and months. > > Simply so, the situation, this instability can't be taken advantage of by the likes of the Trump administration and by external actors which ... They are very glad. You can just see sort of the glee which many of these individuals or these neocons or the Netanyahu government and whatnot ... The glee with which they are overlooking kind of this instability, but nevertheless, we have to sort of stay hopeful. We have to hope that Rouhani can come out of this and actually does have the wherewithal with which he can rethink and really give his economic agenda and give some concrete proposals to the Iranian people which they do deserve. > > AARON MATÉ: Well since Eskandar mentioned Trump, I have to ask Trita Parsi one more question which is that Trump faces a new deadline this month on whether or not to wave Iran sanctions under the nuclear deal. The importance of that decision, both for the nuclear deal and for how it might bear on Iran's internal dynamics right now when it comes to this movement for increasing democracy? > > TRITA PARSI: [inaudible 00:20:23] thing, but essentially when it comes to the nuclear deal, there's some very critical deadlines next week in which the United States is obligated to renew wavers on the sanctions as long as the Iranians are living up to their end of the bargain. The reports by the IADA confirm that the Iranians are in compliance. There's a very high likelihood that Trump will use the current protest as a pretext to do what he had planned to do anyways which was to not renew these waivers and, by that, put the United States out of compliance with the deal potentially triggering a process that could see the deal collapse as a result of that. In the midst of all of this, there's something likely going to happen that will create a massive international crisis. > > AARON MATÉ: We'll leave it there. Dr. Eskandar Sadeghi, research fellow in modern Iranian history at the University of Oxford, and Trita Parsi, President of the National Iranian-American Council, author of 'Losing an Enemy: Obama, Iran, and the Triumph of Diplomacy.' Thanks to you both. > > TRITA PARSI: Thank you. > > E. SADEGHI: Thank you. > > AARON MATÉ: Thank you for joining us on The Real News. > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From karenaram at hotmail.com Sat Jan 6 01:17:08 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 01:17:08 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Interview on The Real News with Trita Parsi and Dr. Sadeghi In-Reply-To: <4F1AD4C5-93B2-43BE-A3D5-768A7BD433DB@illinois.edu> References: <4F1AD4C5-93B2-43BE-A3D5-768A7BD433DB@illinois.edu> Message-ID: Great, I look forward to watching it. > On Jan 5, 2018, at 17:04, Carl G. Estabrook wrote: > > Discussed on NEWS FROM NEPTUNE today. > > {Iranian demonstrations:Rouhani::populism that elected Trump:Obama} > > The Iranian anti-government demonstrations, based as they are on the economic immiseration of the Iranian populace (encouraged by US sanctions & economic warfare against Iran), are to the reformist neoliberal Rouhani government, as the populist movement that produced Trump, is to the neoliberal Obama administration. > > —CGE > > >> On Jan 5, 2018, at 1:51 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> >> Trita Parsi was born in Iran and grew up in Sweden. He earned a Master's Degree in International Relations at Uppsala University, a second Master's Degree in Economics at Stockholm School of Economics and a PhD in International Relations from Johns Hopkins University SAIS. He has served as an adviser to Congressman Bob Ney (R-OH18) on Middle East issues and is a co-founder and current President of the National Iranian American Council (https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=www.niacouncil.org&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cab06104229f9474e110308d554a1a44b%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636507975570946085&sdata=uWueu6JO7UkCjmwQ78%2FpOcmb7Lq2J9Nosu0w22TEDgI%3D&reserved=0). Dr. Parsi is the author of A Single Roll of the Dice: Obama�s Diplomacy with Iran, Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Iran, Israel and the United States, and most recently, Losing an Enemy: Obama, Iran, and the Triumph of Diplomacy. He has followed Middle East politics for more than a decade, both through work in the field, and through extensive experience on Capitol Hill and the United Nations. >> >> Dr. Eskandar Sadeghi is a historian of modern Iran. Dr. Sadeghi is a British Academy Postdoctoral Fellow in the Faculty of Oriental Studies at the University of Oxford. He is also the Series Editor of Radical Histories of the Middle East. >> >> transcript >> AARON MATÉ: It's The Real News. I'm Aaron Mate. Pro-government rallies are being held in Iran today after nearly a week of nationwide protests against the country's leaders. Tens of thousands have turned out for demonstrations supporting the Iranian government in at least 10 cities. This follows days of clashes that have left at least 22 people dead. The initial protests began with conservatives but quickly spread to other citizens disgruntled with a struggling economy and rising inequality. There are reports those protests are now dying down just as government supporters are turning out. The government has arrested more than 530 people and restricted access to social media in a bid to crack down on the protests. >> >> I'm joined now by two guests: Dr. Eskandar Sadeghi, a research fellow in modern Iranian history at the University of Oxford, and Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian-American Council, author of the book, 'Losing an Enemy: Obama, Iran, and the Triumph of Diplomacy.' Welcome to you both. Trita, I'll start with you. What do you think is important for people to know about these protests? Am I correct to say that they started off with the conservatives and then morphed into something different? >> >> TRITA PARSI: Yes, this was actually started by conservatives in the city of Mashhad. They were hoping to be able to put pressure and embarrass the more moderate President Rouhani, but it kind of got out of control because this message of economic grievance is something that a very large segment of the population agreed with. There are very legitimate grievances when it comes to the economic situation as well as the social and the political situation. They quickly lost control over it, and instead of just targeting the Rouhani government, it turned into a protest that is targeting the entire regime including the conservative establishment. >> >> It is, however, at least thus far, much smaller than what we saw in 2009 which I mean there were more than a million or two million people on the streets of Tehran at the time. This one tends to be not only much smaller but also including or driven by a different segment of society that has not been at the center of Iran's political development for the last two decades. It is a poorer segment of the society. It's a segment of society that doesn't seem to have had the same buy-in into that idea that you can change a system from within and, as a result, are a little bit more susceptible to shifting over towards seeking a complete overthrow of the regime. >> >> AARON MATÉ: So have the people who took part in the 2009 Green Revolution taking part in this round of protests? Because their main grievance last time, if I have this right, is that they felt as if the elections were rigged against their preferred candidate. >> >> TRITA PARSI: I've spoken to people who did help organize some of those protests in 2009, and they were completely taken by surprise by this. They are not driving this. They're not even a part of it. They're keeping a bit of a calculated distance from these protests as well. It's very clear that it is not an outgrowth of a continuation of the Green Movement. This is simply something else. >> >> AARON MATÉ: Eskandar, if you could pick it up on the topic of those grievances that Trita Parsi mentioned, what are the main economic grievances driving the protesters that have come out over the past week? >> >> E. SADEGHI: Well there are several. Obviously as Trita pointed out, it's obviously quite difficult to sort of unpack them especially because obviously they initially were expressed in the form of economic grievances and then steadily transformed into something else and obviously swept the country in its entirety. Some of the points that did come up obviously: the price of eggs, the price of basic foodstuffs more generally, the price of fuel and energy prices which obviously hit the poor disproportionately, more severely. >> >> These are sort of the primary ones, but some people have sort of speculated that when President Rouhani sort of presented his budget just very recently as he sort of was maneuvering as it were to, how can I say, leverage his influence with the people against sort of conservative factions, what he did express he sort of spoke to various different, how can I say, sort of expenditures which had been allocated to conservative religious sort of institutions within the state which have traditionally been seen as less transparent, less accountable. What this actually did is actually maybe sort of provoked the anger of many people who sort of expected to see this money actually allocated to betterment of their lives. And in tandem with the fact that he was also cutting subsidies for some of the poorest strata of Iranian society. >> >> These sorts of things turned out to be sort of a perfect storm which were initiated by conservative forces in Mashhad and then were taken up. It did sort of emerge out of faction or jockeying between the Rouhani administration and those conservative factions which were obviously trying to some extent to weaken him. A lot of the speculation has been that a big reason why there wasn't a clampdown or one of the reasons why the conservatives have been especially sympathetic to the initial protests which expressed economic grievance was because they wanted to see Rouhani weakened. >> >> AARON MATÉ: Trita, what about the issue of military spending? One critique of that Rouhani budget that I've heard is that there was an excessive amount allocated to military spending spurring people to make those chants that we heard against Iranian foreign policy in terms of its support for Assad or Hezbollah in Lebanon. >> >> TRITA PARSI: Yeah. In this specific budget proposal, the spending of the IRGC, their budget and other things in the military arm were actually increased whereas so much else was being cut down which is something that clearly angered a tremendous amount of people. You do have a situation in Iran in which, in general terms, people tend to be very skeptical of the foreign posture, the regional posture of the government when it comes to resource allocation, the amount of resources that it allocates for these policies. >> >> We have seen moments in which the policies actually have received a significant amount of support. Zogby has done consistent polls on this issue, and we saw, for instance, that in 2014 when ISIS emerged there was a lot of support for Iran's foreign policy. Then later on again this year, it was and it seems to be a function of the fact that the Trump administration pursued a much more aggressive policy, combined with the fact that ISIS actually struck Iran in the first time with a successful terrorist attack in Tehran that left 17 people killed. You saw then, as a result, support for the regional posture increase again, but under normal circumstances, it tends to be quite low. As a result, it is something that people point to as a reason to object to the policies of the government because it's simply allocating it in the wrong way. >> >> AARON MATÉ: Well Trita, speaking of normal circumstances, let me ask you. Do you think we'd be seeing these protests and this level of economic stagnation had Trump and the U.S. government lived up to the Iran Nuclear Deal, not taken steps that have deterred investment inside Iran? >> >> TRITA PARSI: I think it is a very big component of it because, at the end of the day, people had the expectation that things were going to really move in a much more positive direction as a result of the nuclear deal. On paper, there's a lot of things with the Iranian economy that seems to be moving in the right direction. I mean the growth is going to be roughly 4% this year according to the IMF, but that is almost exclusively driven by the fact that the Iranians can sell oil again. >> >> Oil sales don't create jobs. What you need to do in order to actually create more social justice in Iran is to actually have a far greater amount of job creation because of the large number of young people that are entering the labor market on a yearly basis. To create jobs, you need investments. You just don't need oil sales. To get investments, you need to make sure that the banks feel comfortable that nuclear deal is durable and that it is not constantly being attacked either from Iran or Trump or someone else. >> >> That sense of durability has not existed primarily because the Trump administration has made it very clear that they're looking forward to killing this deal. That has been a major factor as to why investments have not come into Iran. There's many other factors as well. There's also of course the Iranian government's own corruption, mismanagement, etc., but had these investments come in, there's a significant likelihood that the economic situation would have looked different and that we wouldn't have had a scenario in which the expectation gap had become as significant as it is right now in which, on the one hand, people expected things to move forward and become much more positive, and on the other hand now with this budget, there's austerity measures that is cutting their standard of living significantly. >> >> AARON MATÉ: Eskandar Sadeghi, how do you approach this issue? How do you apportion the blame here? On the one hand, the impact of the sanctions over many years and the fact that Trump has created a climate where the benefits of the Iran Nuclear Deal are not being received because investors, banks as Trita described, are scared to put their money there for fear of the potential consequences. And on the other hand, you have Rouhani's policies, the austerity measures that Trita mentioned, and an overall neoliberal orientation or at least that's the critique of it. >> >> E. SADEGHI: Yeah. Just to echo Trita, I think he's very sort of correct in pointing out sort of, one, the combination of austerity measures which Rouhani obviously inherited an economic situation from the Ahmadinejad administration where inflation was running over 40 percent, unemployment was extremely high. What he was actually trying to do was obviously ... He basically partook in this austerity or monetary policy in basically trying to push down inflation because that, in turn, would have an impact on prices which, in turn, would very much effect the lot of the core. >> >> But what that actually has done, as Trita actually said ... It hasn't actually created the jobs. That's exactly because the Trump administration has put so much pressure, has been so antagonistic. I mean I've spoken to plenty of individuals who were previously thinking in the last months of the Obama administration were very optimistic and hoping to do business in Iran and obviously very quickly changed their minds. Obviously I think this is part and parcel of what the Trump administration very much wants to do. Trump was very clear and repeatedly stated that he wants to destroy this deal. >> >> The best way he can probably do that is obviously to really destroy the center in Iran. If you recall even before the most recent election, individuals like Elliott Abrams and [inaudible 00:11:31] are very much calling for Ebrahim Raisi -- Raisi, the competitor to Rouhani -- to be elected, and actually said this would be to the benefit of the political agenda. So I definitely think there's a sort of invested or shared interest, as it were, between the Trump administration and various sort of neoconservatives in Washington but also conservatives within Iran who want to see a weakened center and sort of a moderate or centrist government. >> >> AARON MATÉ: Right. Speaking of neocons, let's talk about that and how hawks, anti-Iran hawks here in the West have utilized the Iran protests for their own agenda and the willingness of Western media to play along. Just today in the New York Times, the op-ed page ran a piece by Reuel Marc Gerecht, who is a senior fellow at something called the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies in Washington, D.C. who, by his own count ... He says "I've written about 25000 words about bombing Iran. Even my mom thinks I've gone too far." That's a quote from him. >> >> Trita, you actually confronted another anti-Iran neocon yesterday on national TV on MSNBC, Bill Kristol. Let's show that clip. >> >> Billy Kristol: Let's be more respectful of the Iranian people's desire for freedom. >> >> TRITA PARSI: With all due respect, you've been arguing to bomb Iran for so long so I don't know if you're really respecting the Iranian people. You've been advocating killing Iranians so I don't think you or the Trump administration have the credibility to now say that you care for the Iranian people. >> >> Billy Kristol: I don't- >> >> MSNBC Anchor: Hold on. Let's get something clear. >> >> Billy Kristol: It's not about me. It's not about me. >> >> MSNBC Anchor: Hold on. >> >> Billy Kristol: It's not about me. It's about the Iranian people. Do you stand with the Iranian people? Do you stand with the Iranian people against the regime? >> >> TRITA PARSI: Of course I do. That's exactly why- >> >> Billy Kristol: Okay. Good. Fine. We're in agreement. We're in agreement. [crosstalk 00:13:15]. We're in agreement then- >> >> TRITA PARSI: ... move towards a more democratic situation without killing them. >> >> MSNBC Anchor: Trita- >> >> Billy Kristol: I couldn't agree more. >> >> MSNBC Anchor: ... Bill Kristol is not advocating to kill anyone. Let's make that very clear. >> >> TRITA PARSI: No, on the contrary, there's been all of this argument for taking military action against Iran instead of actually having this nuclear deal that has been working. >> >> AARON MATÉ: That's Trita Parsi telling Bill Kristol that he's been advocating killing Iranians, and then Trita also correcting the MSNBC anchor when she tries to say quite the contrary. It was interesting, Trita. At the end of that clip, Bill Kristol had that opportunity to respond. He just shook his head and deferred. But your thoughts on that exchange? It went viral afterwards. >> >> TRITA PARSI: Look, I find it bizarre that they have the audacity to pretend that they care for the people of Iran just because they're willing to jump on a protest right now. For years, they have been advocating bombing Iran. For years, they've been advocating sanctioning Iran and even explicitly saying in some cases that we want to take food out of the mouth of the Iranian people. When you treat the people in that way, I don't think you can give them the benefit of the doubt for them to suddenly switch around and pretend as if the care for the people. They lack any credibility to speak now as if their recommendations actually are to be able to benefit the Iranian people. >> >> They're just trying to take advantage of this current situation in order to advance the agenda that they've always had which is to start some form of a confrontation with Iran in order to change the balance of power in Iran to be more favorable towards Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the United States. This has been a critical agenda item of theirs for years, and they're seeing an opportunity to push that. We should not let them fool people to think that they care for the Iranian people. They're just using the Iranian people and their suffering as an instrument right now. >> >> AARON MATÉ: Eskandar Sadeghi, we'll wrap with you. The key questions, the key issues for you going forward now especially as it appears ... Although this might not be the case, it appears today that the protests are dying down. Your thoughts on the question of: Is genuine change possible within a reformist agenda as embodied by the President Hassan Rouhani? >> >> E. SADEGHI: I think anyone who has studied Iran who has invested time looking at its history even since the Rafsanjani period, but if we particularly look at 1997 and the election of Mohammad Khatami and what he did achieve even though it did have various limitations and it was a very difficult sort of struggle and there was a backlash, we have to look at some of the achievements of the period. >> >> One of the key ones is the ability of his administration to institutionalize local city and village elections. This sort of gave ... Hundreds of thousands of people actually participated in these elections, and they had a massive, massive impact on sort of transforming Iranian self-conception or conception of themselves as citizens who had agency who could define and determine their political destiny. That's one particularly important one. >> >> The role of the press. Anyone who's familiar and reads Farsi and follows the news can see how vibrant the Iranian press has been in the past. Today, you can palpably see since 2013 how much more critical, how much more emboldened sort of reformists are in the Iranian context. I think we need to really acknowledge the achievements. It's true as Trita said that the expectations, the high, people do want to see faster pace of reform, but we have to really see what has been achieved. Even just most recently with the Rouhani administration, one can see sort of countless ... >> >> These protests are unusual. There's no doubt about it, the whole breadth of the country and the nature of them and the class which is actually participating in them, but we have seen repeated strikes, repeated sort of demands from teachers, from various different workers asking for their rights. This is the best way, I think, going forward by respecting, sort of allowing moderates in Iran, allowing the reformists in Iran to open that space whereby Iranian civil society can burgeon and grow and continue to thrive and continue to try and hold its government to account. >> >> It's not going to happen by external interference. it's not going to happen by Trump's irate and ill-informed tweets. It's not going to happen obviously as a result of sanctions and warmongering and threats. The only criticism I do have with respect to Rouhani and obviously the reformists is that they really do need to rethink their political economic outlook especially because, since 1997, they've very much been obsessed with decreasing the size of the state privatization, lowering inflation, and whatnot. They really do need to think of an alternative model which, again, really does take heed of the working class and sort of lower strata Iranian society's basic needs and demands and demands of social justice. >> >> Especially since 2009, they've been preoccupied obviously with ... Sorry. Since 1997, with representing the middle class of Iran and focusing on sort of essentially liberal freedoms: the right to free speech, the right to form associations, and these sorts of things which are absolutely essential for any kind of democratic society. But in the process, they have to some extent forgotten these basic socioeconomic issues of socioeconomic justice which are absolutely indispensable. >> >> The hope going forward is that they really do take this onboard and, rather than a kind of haughty response to these protests and sort of dismissing them as the work of the rabble and whatnot, that, no, these are actually genuine grievances which is being acknowledged. But still, I think they need to go further and offer really concrete proposals of how they intend to go forward in the coming weeks and months. >> >> Simply so, the situation, this instability can't be taken advantage of by the likes of the Trump administration and by external actors which ... They are very glad. You can just see sort of the glee which many of these individuals or these neocons or the Netanyahu government and whatnot ... The glee with which they are overlooking kind of this instability, but nevertheless, we have to sort of stay hopeful. We have to hope that Rouhani can come out of this and actually does have the wherewithal with which he can rethink and really give his economic agenda and give some concrete proposals to the Iranian people which they do deserve. >> >> AARON MATÉ: Well since Eskandar mentioned Trump, I have to ask Trita Parsi one more question which is that Trump faces a new deadline this month on whether or not to wave Iran sanctions under the nuclear deal. The importance of that decision, both for the nuclear deal and for how it might bear on Iran's internal dynamics right now when it comes to this movement for increasing democracy? >> >> TRITA PARSI: [inaudible 00:20:23] thing, but essentially when it comes to the nuclear deal, there's some very critical deadlines next week in which the United States is obligated to renew wavers on the sanctions as long as the Iranians are living up to their end of the bargain. The reports by the IADA confirm that the Iranians are in compliance. There's a very high likelihood that Trump will use the current protest as a pretext to do what he had planned to do anyways which was to not renew these waivers and, by that, put the United States out of compliance with the deal potentially triggering a process that could see the deal collapse as a result of that. In the midst of all of this, there's something likely going to happen that will create a massive international crisis. >> >> AARON MATÉ: We'll leave it there. Dr. Eskandar Sadeghi, research fellow in modern Iranian history at the University of Oxford, and Trita Parsi, President of the National Iranian-American Council, author of 'Losing an Enemy: Obama, Iran, and the Triumph of Diplomacy.' Thanks to you both. >> >> TRITA PARSI: Thank you. >> >> E. SADEGHI: Thank you. >> >> AARON MATÉ: Thank you for joining us on The Real News. >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cab06104229f9474e110308d554a1a44b%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636507975570946085&sdata=3unFpM3My8KzkXWuJMAv2J%2BmVOUAyTDjVXhmtARiPrk%3D&reserved=0 > From brussel at illinois.edu Sat Jan 6 03:34:30 2018 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 03:34:30 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Working class opposition. erupting in Iran.... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <362CE1A6-395F-44C2-86BC-FFCE88C94266@illinois.edu> See https://popularresistance.org/special-report-are-long-term-us-regime-change-efforts-behind-iran-protests/ It indicates U.S. money/organizations which over time have sought to undermine the Iranian regime, as with others. It also casts some doubt about NIAC and its spokespersons. —mkb On Jan 4, 2018, at 8:44 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss > wrote: I support the assertions made in this article, but any USG intervention, which has likely already taken place covertly, with weapons, CIA supported Jihadists, that includes sanctions, as was done in Syria and Libya, we must all back off and focus our criticism on "USG warmongering" which includes our allies the Saudi's and Israel. Any change within Iran, must come from the Iranian people without outside interference or intervention. Working class opposition erupts in Iran: A harbinger for the world in 2018 by Keith Jones 4 January 2018 The long-suppressed and brutally exploited Iranian working class has burst onto the scene shaking Iran’s bourgeois-clerical regime. Since Dec. 28, tens of thousands have defied the Islamic Republic’s repressive apparatus and taken to the streets in cities and towns across the county. They have done so to voice their anger over food price rises, mass unemployment, gaping social inequality, years of sweeping social spending cuts and a pseudo-democratic political system that is rigged on behalf of the ruling elite and utterly impervious to the needs of working people. The scope and intensity of this movement and its rapid embrace of slogans challenging the government and the entire autocratic political system have stunned Iranian authorities and western observers alike. Yet, it was preceded by months of worker protests against job cuts and plant closures and unpaid wages and benefits. In the days immediately prior to the eruption of the antigovernment protests, discussion of the ever-deepening divide between Iran’s top 1 and 10 percent and the vast majority who live in poverty and economic insecurity raged on social media. The trigger for this explosion of popular discontent was the government’s latest austerity budget. It will further slash income support for ordinary Iranians, raise gas prices by as much as 50 percent, and curtail development spending, while increasing the already huge sums under the control of the Shia clergy. Yesterday, after days of an ever-widening mobilization of security forces, mass arrests, and bloody clashes that left at least 21 dead, General Mohammad Ali Jafari, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, declared the unrest over: “Today we can announce the end of the sedition.” The rulers of the Islamic Republic are trying to justify their brutal crackdown with spurious claims that the protests are being manipulated by Washington and its principal regional allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia, as part of their incendiary drive for regime change in Tehran. The claim that the current protests are akin to those mounted by the Green Movement in 2009 is a base slander meant to justify a bigger crime. The Green challenge to the results of the 2009 Iranian presidential election was a long-prepared political operation that followed the script of similar US-orchestrated “color revolutions” in the Ukraine, Georgia, Lebanon and elsewhere. It was aimed at bringing to power those elements of the Iranian elite most eager to reach a quick rapprochement with US and European imperialism. It drew its popular support almost exclusively from the most privileged layers of the upper middle class, who were mobilized on the basis of neoliberal denunciations of the populist President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for “squandering” money on the poor. The current challenge to the Iranian regime is of an entirely different character. It is rooted in the working class, including in smaller industrial cities and district towns; draws its greatest support from young people who face an unemployment rate of 40 percent or more; and is driven by opposition to social inequality and capitalist austerity. Whatever the immediate fate of the current wave of protests, a new stage in the class struggle has opened in Iran that will unfold over the coming weeks and months. What is certain is that the working class, having thrust itself onto center stage, will not be quickly or easily silenced. The working-class unrest in Iran has already upset the calculations not just of the Iranian elite, but of governments around the world. Trump, whose anti-Muslim travel ban targets Iranians, has hypocritically and fatuously claimed his “support” for the protests, with the hope that he can use them to demonize Tehran and thereby provide grist for US war preparations against Iran. The European powers have been more circumspect, and not only because the protests cut across their plans to cash in on the Iranian government’s offers of oil concessions and cheap labor. They fear the destabilizing impact of mounting class struggle in Iran on the entire Middle East. To understand the significance of the resurgence of the Iranian working class for Middle East and world politics, it is necessary to examine it in historical context. The 1979 Iranian Revolution, which overthrew the tyrannical US-sponsored regime of the Shah four decades ago, was a massive, working class-led, anti-imperialist social explosion. It was a growing wave of political strikes that broke the back of the Shah’s regime, and in the months that followed, workers seized factories, placing them under the control of workers’ councils. But a social revolution expropriating the Iranian bourgeoisie and establishing a workers’ republic in alliance with the rural toilers was blocked by the nominally socialist organizations, above all the Stalinist Tudeh Party. The Tudeh party had deep roots in the working class, which had a long history of secularism and revolutionary socialism. But for decades it orientated to the impotent liberal wing of the national bourgeoisie and then in 1979 swung round to giving uncritical support to the Ayatollah Khomeini, on the grounds that he was the political leader of the “progressive” wing of the bourgeoisie and leading a “national democratic” (i.e. capitalist) revolution. This aged Shia cleric had long been a politically marginal figure. But he was able to gain a mass following among the urban and rural poor by exploiting the political vacuum created by the Stalinists, and by drawing on the longstanding connections between the Shia clergy and the bazaar, the bastion of the traditional wing of the Iranian bourgeoisie. With the working class politically neutralized by the Stalinists, Khomeini was able to reorganize the state machine following the Shah’s overthrow while manipulating and diverting the mass movement, then restabilize bourgeois rule through savage repression of the political left, including the Tudeh party, and the destruction of all independent workers’ organizations. These developments fed into and were part of a broader process in which, due to the betrayals of the Stalinists, Islamist forces were able to politically profit from the mounting crisis of the postcolonial bourgeois nationalist regimes and movements, including the Palestine Liberation Organization, and their inability to realize their bourgeois-democratic programs. Before his death in 1989, Khomeini oversaw a further lurch to the right of the Islamic Republic, with a turn to the IMF and overtures to the “Great Satan,” US imperialism. This had been prepared the previous year in a further ferocious assault on the left, in which thousands of political prisoners were killed. Over the course of the past three decades, Iran’s government has been led by different factions of the political elite, including so-called “reformists” and Shia populists like Ahmadinejad. All have further rolled back the social concessions made to working people in the wake of the 1979 revolution and savagely suppressed the working class. The Western press has long sought to vilify Iranian politics and social life. But at its core, the experience of the working class in Iran mirrors that of workers around the world, who for decades have faced an unrelenting assault on their social rights and politically have been utterly disenfranchised. In response to the 2008 crisis, the universal response of the bourgeoisie has been to drastically intensify this class war. Precarious employment, crumbling public services, unprecedented social inequality, exclusion from political life and the threat of imperialist war—this is the lot of workers the world over. But the period in which the class struggle could be suppressed is coming to an end. In country after country around the world, the parties, organizations and political mechanisms, including the establishment left parties and pro-capitalist unions, through which the bourgeoisie has managed its affairs and above all suppressed the class struggle are breaking down. The events in Iran will resonate across the Middle East, where the working class has passed through decades of bitter experiences, not only with the secular bourgeois nationalist movements, but also with various forms of Islamist politics, including the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party in Turkey. And while the ignoramus Trump tweets about injustice in Iran, how different will American workers deem their circumstances from those of Iranian workers? Last month as the Iranian government was presenting a budget that slashes social spending while funneling additional money to the mullahs, the US Congress rewarded the rich and super-rich with trillions in additional tax cuts. These tax cuts are now to be paid for through a massive assault on Social Security, health care and other core social rights. The events in Iran must be recognized as a harbinger of a vast eruption of working-class struggle around the world. The task of revolutionary socialists is to turn into this movement and to fight to arm the international working class with an understanding of the logic of its needs, aspirations and struggle. Capitalism is incompatible with the needs of society. Working people, the class that produces the world’s wealth, must unite their struggles across state borders and continents to establish workers’ political power, so as to undertake the socialist reorganization of society and put an end to want and imperialist war. Keith Jones WSWS.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 galliher at illinois.edu Sat Jan 6 04:01:17 2018 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 22:01:17 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Working class opposition. erupting in Iran.... In-Reply-To: <362CE1A6-395F-44C2-86BC-FFCE88C94266@illinois.edu> References: <362CE1A6-395F-44C2-86BC-FFCE88C94266@illinois.edu> Message-ID: Discussed on NEWS FROM NEPTUNE today (and soon archived and available at Urbana Public TV). {Iranian demonstrations:Rouhani::populism that elected Trump:Obama} The Iranian anti-government demonstrations, based as they are on the economic immiseration of the Iranian populace (encouraged by US sanctions & economic warfare against Iran), are to the reformist neoliberal Rouhani government, as the populist movement that produced Trump, is to the neoliberal Obama administration (mutatis mutandis, of course). —CGE > On Jan 5, 2018, at 9:34 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss wrote: > > See https://popularresistance.org/special-report-are-long-term-us-regime-change-efforts-behind-iran-protests/ > > It indicates U.S. money/organizations which over time have sought to undermine the Iranian regime, as with others. It also casts some doubt about NIAC and its spokespersons. > > —mkb > > >> On Jan 4, 2018, at 8:44 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> I support the assertions made in this article, but any USG intervention, which has likely already taken place covertly, with weapons, CIA supported Jihadists, that includes sanctions, as was done in Syria and Libya, we must all back off and focus our criticism on "USG warmongering" which includes our allies the Saudi's and Israel. Any change within Iran, must come from the Iranian people without outside interference or intervention. >> >> Working class opposition erupts in Iran: A harbinger for the world in 2018 >> by Keith Jones >> >> >> 4 January 2018 >> The long-suppressed and brutally exploited Iranian working class has burst onto the scene shaking Iran’s bourgeois-clerical regime. >> Since Dec. 28, tens of thousands have defied the Islamic Republic’s repressive apparatus and taken to the streets in cities and towns across the county. They have done so to voice their anger over food price rises, mass unemployment, gaping social inequality, years of sweeping social spending cuts and a pseudo-democratic political system that is rigged on behalf of the ruling elite and utterly impervious to the needs of working people. >> The scope and intensity of this movement and its rapid embrace of slogans challenging the government and the entire autocratic political system have stunned Iranian authorities and western observers alike. Yet, it was preceded by months of worker protests against job cuts and plant closures and unpaid wages and benefits. >> In the days immediately prior to the eruption of the antigovernment protests, discussion of the ever-deepening divide between Iran’s top 1 and 10 percent and the vast majority who live in poverty and economic insecurity raged on social media. The trigger for this explosion of popular discontent was the government’s latest austerity budget. It will further slash income support for ordinary Iranians, raise gas prices by as much as 50 percent, and curtail development spending, while increasing the already huge sums under the control of the Shia clergy. >> Yesterday, after days of an ever-widening mobilization of security forces, mass arrests, and bloody clashes that left at least 21 dead, General Mohammad Ali Jafari, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, declared the unrest over: “Today we can announce the end of the sedition.” >> The rulers of the Islamic Republic are trying to justify their brutal crackdown with spurious claims that the protests are being manipulated by Washington and its principal regional allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia, as part of their incendiary drive for regime change in Tehran. >> The claim that the current protests are akin to those mounted by the Green Movement in 2009 is a base slander meant to justify a bigger crime. The Green challenge to the results of the 2009 Iranian presidential election was a long-prepared political operation that followed the script of similar US-orchestrated “color revolutions” in the Ukraine, Georgia, Lebanon and elsewhere. It was aimed at bringing to power those elements of the Iranian elite most eager to reach a quick rapprochement with US and European imperialism. It drew its popular support almost exclusively from the most privileged layers of the upper middle class, who were mobilized on the basis of neoliberal denunciations of the populist President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for “squandering” money on the poor. >> The current challenge to the Iranian regime is of an entirely different character. It is rooted in the working class, including in smaller industrial cities and district towns; draws its greatest support from young people who face an unemployment rate of 40 percent or more; and is driven by opposition to social inequality and capitalist austerity. >> Whatever the immediate fate of the current wave of protests, a new stage in the class struggle has opened in Iran that will unfold over the coming weeks and months. What is certain is that the working class, having thrust itself onto center stage, will not be quickly or easily silenced. >> The working-class unrest in Iran has already upset the calculations not just of the Iranian elite, but of governments around the world. Trump, whose anti-Muslim travel ban targets Iranians, has hypocritically and fatuously claimed his “support” for the protests, with the hope that he can use them to demonize Tehran and thereby provide grist for US war preparations against Iran. The European powers have been more circumspect, and not only because the protests cut across their plans to cash in on the Iranian government’s offers of oil concessions and cheap labor. They fear the destabilizing impact of mounting class struggle in Iran on the entire Middle East. >> To understand the significance of the resurgence of the Iranian working class for Middle East and world politics, it is necessary to examine it in historical context. >> The 1979 Iranian Revolution, which overthrew the tyrannical US-sponsored regime of the Shah four decades ago, was a massive, working class-led, anti-imperialist social explosion. It was a growing wave of political strikes that broke the back of the Shah’s regime, and in the months that followed, workers seized factories, placing them under the control of workers’ councils. >> But a social revolution expropriating the Iranian bourgeoisie and establishing a workers’ republic in alliance with the rural toilers was blocked by the nominally socialist organizations, above all the Stalinist Tudeh Party. The Tudeh party had deep roots in the working class, which had a long history of secularism and revolutionary socialism. But for decades it orientated to the impotent liberal wing of the national bourgeoisie and then in 1979 swung round to giving uncritical support to the Ayatollah Khomeini, on the grounds that he was the political leader of the “progressive” wing of the bourgeoisie and leading a “national democratic” (i.e. capitalist) revolution. >> This aged Shia cleric had long been a politically marginal figure. But he was able to gain a mass following among the urban and rural poor by exploiting the political vacuum created by the Stalinists, and by drawing on the longstanding connections between the Shia clergy and the bazaar, the bastion of the traditional wing of the Iranian bourgeoisie. >> With the working class politically neutralized by the Stalinists, Khomeini was able to reorganize the state machine following the Shah’s overthrow while manipulating and diverting the mass movement, then restabilize bourgeois rule through savage repression of the political left, including the Tudeh party, and the destruction of all independent workers’ organizations. >> These developments fed into and were part of a broader process in which, due to the betrayals of the Stalinists, Islamist forces were able to politically profit from the mounting crisis of the postcolonial bourgeois nationalist regimes and movements, including the Palestine Liberation Organization, and their inability to realize their bourgeois-democratic programs. >> Before his death in 1989, Khomeini oversaw a further lurch to the right of the Islamic Republic, with a turn to the IMF and overtures to the “Great Satan,” US imperialism. This had been prepared the previous year in a further ferocious assault on the left, in which thousands of political prisoners were killed. >> Over the course of the past three decades, Iran’s government has been led by different factions of the political elite, including so-called “reformists” and Shia populists like Ahmadinejad. All have further rolled back the social concessions made to working people in the wake of the 1979 revolution and savagely suppressed the working class. >> The Western press has long sought to vilify Iranian politics and social life. But at its core, the experience of the working class in Iran mirrors that of workers around the world, who for decades have faced an unrelenting assault on their social rights and politically have been utterly disenfranchised. >> In response to the 2008 crisis, the universal response of the bourgeoisie has been to drastically intensify this class war. Precarious employment, crumbling public services, unprecedented social inequality, exclusion from political life and the threat of imperialist war—this is the lot of workers the world over. >> But the period in which the class struggle could be suppressed is coming to an end. >> In country after country around the world, the parties, organizations and political mechanisms, including the establishment left parties and pro-capitalist unions, through which the bourgeoisie has managed its affairs and above all suppressed the class struggle are breaking down. >> The events in Iran will resonate across the Middle East, where the working class has passed through decades of bitter experiences, not only with the secular bourgeois nationalist movements, but also with various forms of Islamist politics, including the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party in Turkey. >> And while the ignoramus Trump tweets about injustice in Iran, how different will American workers deem their circumstances from those of Iranian workers? Last month as the Iranian government was presenting a budget that slashes social spending while funneling additional money to the mullahs, the US Congress rewarded the rich and super-rich with trillions in additional tax cuts. These tax cuts are now to be paid for through a massive assault on Social Security, health care and other core social rights. >> The events in Iran must be recognized as a harbinger of a vast eruption of working-class struggle around the world. >> The task of revolutionary socialists is to turn into this movement and to fight to arm the international working class with an understanding of the logic of its needs, aspirations and struggle. Capitalism is incompatible with the needs of society. Working people, the class that produces the world’s wealth, must unite their struggles across state borders and continents to establish workers’ political power, so as to undertake the socialist reorganization of society and put an end to want and imperialist war. >> Keith Jones WSWS.ORG >> From galliher at illinois.edu Sat Jan 6 04:29:09 2018 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 22:29:09 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Working class opposition. erupting in Iran.... In-Reply-To: References: <362CE1A6-395F-44C2-86BC-FFCE88C94266@illinois.edu> Message-ID: In "Twenty-First Century Populism: The Spectre of Western European Democracy" (2008), Daniele Albertazzi and Duncan McDonnell define populism as an ideology that "pits a virtuous and homogeneous people against a set of elites and dangerous ‘others’ who are together depicted as depriving (or attempting to deprive) the sovereign people of their rights, values, prosperity, identity, and voice.” Recent examples include the Iranian demonstrators, the Trump campaign, the Sanders campaign, Brexit, the Le Pen and Mélenchon campaigns, and the AfD… > On Jan 5, 2018, at 10:01 PM, Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Discussed on NEWS FROM NEPTUNE today (and soon archived and available at Urbana Public TV). > > {Iranian demonstrations:Rouhani::populism that elected Trump:Obama} > > The Iranian anti-government demonstrations, based as they are on the economic immiseration of the Iranian populace (encouraged by US sanctions & economic warfare against Iran), are to the reformist neoliberal Rouhani government, as the populist movement that produced Trump, is to the neoliberal Obama administration (mutatis mutandis, of course). > > —CGE > > >> On Jan 5, 2018, at 9:34 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> See https://popularresistance.org/special-report-are-long-term-us-regime-change-efforts-behind-iran-protests/ >> >> It indicates U.S. money/organizations which over time have sought to undermine the Iranian regime, as with others. It also casts some doubt about NIAC and its spokespersons. >> >> —mkb >> >> >>> On Jan 4, 2018, at 8:44 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >>> >>> I support the assertions made in this article, but any USG intervention, which has likely already taken place covertly, with weapons, CIA supported Jihadists, that includes sanctions, as was done in Syria and Libya, we must all back off and focus our criticism on "USG warmongering" which includes our allies the Saudi's and Israel. Any change within Iran, must come from the Iranian people without outside interference or intervention. >>> >>> Working class opposition erupts in Iran: A harbinger for the world in 2018 >>> by Keith Jones >>> >>> >>> 4 January 2018 >>> The long-suppressed and brutally exploited Iranian working class has burst onto the scene shaking Iran’s bourgeois-clerical regime. >>> Since Dec. 28, tens of thousands have defied the Islamic Republic’s repressive apparatus and taken to the streets in cities and towns across the county. They have done so to voice their anger over food price rises, mass unemployment, gaping social inequality, years of sweeping social spending cuts and a pseudo-democratic political system that is rigged on behalf of the ruling elite and utterly impervious to the needs of working people. >>> The scope and intensity of this movement and its rapid embrace of slogans challenging the government and the entire autocratic political system have stunned Iranian authorities and western observers alike. Yet, it was preceded by months of worker protests against job cuts and plant closures and unpaid wages and benefits. >>> In the days immediately prior to the eruption of the antigovernment protests, discussion of the ever-deepening divide between Iran’s top 1 and 10 percent and the vast majority who live in poverty and economic insecurity raged on social media. The trigger for this explosion of popular discontent was the government’s latest austerity budget. It will further slash income support for ordinary Iranians, raise gas prices by as much as 50 percent, and curtail development spending, while increasing the already huge sums under the control of the Shia clergy. >>> Yesterday, after days of an ever-widening mobilization of security forces, mass arrests, and bloody clashes that left at least 21 dead, General Mohammad Ali Jafari, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, declared the unrest over: “Today we can announce the end of the sedition.” >>> The rulers of the Islamic Republic are trying to justify their brutal crackdown with spurious claims that the protests are being manipulated by Washington and its principal regional allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia, as part of their incendiary drive for regime change in Tehran. >>> The claim that the current protests are akin to those mounted by the Green Movement in 2009 is a base slander meant to justify a bigger crime. The Green challenge to the results of the 2009 Iranian presidential election was a long-prepared political operation that followed the script of similar US-orchestrated “color revolutions” in the Ukraine, Georgia, Lebanon and elsewhere. It was aimed at bringing to power those elements of the Iranian elite most eager to reach a quick rapprochement with US and European imperialism. It drew its popular support almost exclusively from the most privileged layers of the upper middle class, who were mobilized on the basis of neoliberal denunciations of the populist President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for “squandering” money on the poor. >>> The current challenge to the Iranian regime is of an entirely different character. It is rooted in the working class, including in smaller industrial cities and district towns; draws its greatest support from young people who face an unemployment rate of 40 percent or more; and is driven by opposition to social inequality and capitalist austerity. >>> Whatever the immediate fate of the current wave of protests, a new stage in the class struggle has opened in Iran that will unfold over the coming weeks and months. What is certain is that the working class, having thrust itself onto center stage, will not be quickly or easily silenced. >>> The working-class unrest in Iran has already upset the calculations not just of the Iranian elite, but of governments around the world. Trump, whose anti-Muslim travel ban targets Iranians, has hypocritically and fatuously claimed his “support” for the protests, with the hope that he can use them to demonize Tehran and thereby provide grist for US war preparations against Iran. The European powers have been more circumspect, and not only because the protests cut across their plans to cash in on the Iranian government’s offers of oil concessions and cheap labor. They fear the destabilizing impact of mounting class struggle in Iran on the entire Middle East. >>> To understand the significance of the resurgence of the Iranian working class for Middle East and world politics, it is necessary to examine it in historical context. >>> The 1979 Iranian Revolution, which overthrew the tyrannical US-sponsored regime of the Shah four decades ago, was a massive, working class-led, anti-imperialist social explosion. It was a growing wave of political strikes that broke the back of the Shah’s regime, and in the months that followed, workers seized factories, placing them under the control of workers’ councils. >>> But a social revolution expropriating the Iranian bourgeoisie and establishing a workers’ republic in alliance with the rural toilers was blocked by the nominally socialist organizations, above all the Stalinist Tudeh Party. The Tudeh party had deep roots in the working class, which had a long history of secularism and revolutionary socialism. But for decades it orientated to the impotent liberal wing of the national bourgeoisie and then in 1979 swung round to giving uncritical support to the Ayatollah Khomeini, on the grounds that he was the political leader of the “progressive” wing of the bourgeoisie and leading a “national democratic” (i.e. capitalist) revolution. >>> This aged Shia cleric had long been a politically marginal figure. But he was able to gain a mass following among the urban and rural poor by exploiting the political vacuum created by the Stalinists, and by drawing on the longstanding connections between the Shia clergy and the bazaar, the bastion of the traditional wing of the Iranian bourgeoisie. >>> With the working class politically neutralized by the Stalinists, Khomeini was able to reorganize the state machine following the Shah’s overthrow while manipulating and diverting the mass movement, then restabilize bourgeois rule through savage repression of the political left, including the Tudeh party, and the destruction of all independent workers’ organizations. >>> These developments fed into and were part of a broader process in which, due to the betrayals of the Stalinists, Islamist forces were able to politically profit from the mounting crisis of the postcolonial bourgeois nationalist regimes and movements, including the Palestine Liberation Organization, and their inability to realize their bourgeois-democratic programs. >>> Before his death in 1989, Khomeini oversaw a further lurch to the right of the Islamic Republic, with a turn to the IMF and overtures to the “Great Satan,” US imperialism. This had been prepared the previous year in a further ferocious assault on the left, in which thousands of political prisoners were killed. >>> Over the course of the past three decades, Iran’s government has been led by different factions of the political elite, including so-called “reformists” and Shia populists like Ahmadinejad. All have further rolled back the social concessions made to working people in the wake of the 1979 revolution and savagely suppressed the working class. >>> The Western press has long sought to vilify Iranian politics and social life. But at its core, the experience of the working class in Iran mirrors that of workers around the world, who for decades have faced an unrelenting assault on their social rights and politically have been utterly disenfranchised. >>> In response to the 2008 crisis, the universal response of the bourgeoisie has been to drastically intensify this class war. Precarious employment, crumbling public services, unprecedented social inequality, exclusion from political life and the threat of imperialist war—this is the lot of workers the world over. >>> But the period in which the class struggle could be suppressed is coming to an end. >>> In country after country around the world, the parties, organizations and political mechanisms, including the establishment left parties and pro-capitalist unions, through which the bourgeoisie has managed its affairs and above all suppressed the class struggle are breaking down. >>> The events in Iran will resonate across the Middle East, where the working class has passed through decades of bitter experiences, not only with the secular bourgeois nationalist movements, but also with various forms of Islamist politics, including the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party in Turkey. >>> And while the ignoramus Trump tweets about injustice in Iran, how different will American workers deem their circumstances from those of Iranian workers? Last month as the Iranian government was presenting a budget that slashes social spending while funneling additional money to the mullahs, the US Congress rewarded the rich and super-rich with trillions in additional tax cuts. These tax cuts are now to be paid for through a massive assault on Social Security, health care and other core social rights. >>> The events in Iran must be recognized as a harbinger of a vast eruption of working-class struggle around the world. >>> The task of revolutionary socialists is to turn into this movement and to fight to arm the international working class with an understanding of the logic of its needs, aspirations and struggle. Capitalism is incompatible with the needs of society. Working people, the class that produces the world’s wealth, must unite their struggles across state borders and continents to establish workers’ political power, so as to undertake the socialist reorganization of society and put an end to want and imperialist war. >>> Keith Jones WSWS.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 cgestabrook at gmail.com Sat Jan 6 09:54:43 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 03:54:43 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Trump's not another Hitler: he's another Obama Message-ID: Not a lot of people remember this, but George W Bush actually campaigned in 2000 against the interventionist foreign policy that the United States had been increasingly espousing. Far from advocating the full-scale regime change ground invasions that his administration is now infamous for, Bush frequently used the word “humble” when discussing the type of foreign policy he favored, condemning nation-building, an over-extended military, and the notion that America should be the world’s police force. Eight years later, after hundreds of thousands of human lives had been snuffed out in Iraq and Afghanistan and an entire region horrifically destabilized, Obama campaigned against Bush’s interventionist foreign policy, edging out Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries partly because she had supported the Iraq invasion while he had condemned it. The Democrats, decrying the warmongering tendencies of the Republicans, elected a President of the United States who would see Bush’s Afghanistan and Iraq and raise him Libya, Syria, Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia, along with a tenfold increase in drone strikes . Libya collapsed into a failed state where a slave trade now runs rampant , and half a million people died in the Syrian war that Obama and US allies exponentially escalated . Eight years later, a reality TV star and WWE Hall-of-Famer was elected President of the United States by the other half of the crowd who was sick to death of those warmongering Democrats. Trump campaigned on a non-interventionist foreign policy , saying America should fight terrorists but not enter into regime change wars with other governments. He thrashed his primary opponents as the only one willing to unequivocally condemn Bush and his actions, then won the general election partly by attacking the interventionist foreign policy of his predecessor and his opponent, and criticizing Hillary Clinton’s hawkish no-fly zone agenda in Syria. Now he’s approved the selling of arms to Ukraine to use against Russia, a dangerously hawkish move that even Obama refused to make for fear of increasing tensions with Moscow. His administration has escalated troop presence in Afghanistan and made it abundantly clear that the Pentagon has no intention of leaving Syria anytime soon despite the absence of any reasonable justification for US presence there. The CIA had ratcheted up operations in Iran six months into Trump’s presidency, shortly before the administration began running the exact same script against that country that the Obama administration ran on Libya, Syria and Ukraine. Maybe US presidents are limited to eight years because that’s how long it takes the public to forget everything. In the lead-up to the November elections those of us on the left who backed third parties were promised over and over and over again by Democratic party loyalists that if Hillary Clinton failed to secure the election there’d be goose-stepping stormtroopers patrolling the streets and murdering non-whites with impunity, concentration camps for Muslims and white supremacist extermination programs. Comparisons to Hitler went on nonstop, and anyone who failed to fall in line with the mainstream liberal narrative can attest that they were accused of aiding actual, literal Nazism on a regular basis. A year into Trump’s presidency, and not only did the apocalyptic predictions of national genocide fail to come true, he’s not even deporting as many immigrants as Obama . He is, however, out-bombing him . We were promised another Hitler. Instead, we got another Obama, who was himself another Bush. The march into corporatist Orwellian police state at home and globalist oligarchic hegemony abroad continues unhindered for the United States of America. And of course that march would have continued had Hillary won as well, it just would have looked a bit different. Fewer environmental deregulations, likely catastrophic escalations against the Syrian government and possibly Russia, the exact same approaches to Iran, just as much hawkishness toward North Korea but minus the tweets about button sizes, no attempts at dismantling Obama’s corporatist healthcare plan. Not much more than that. Nobody wants to hear this. The Democrats still want to believe that the sitting president is simultaneously a Nazi, a Kremlin secret agent, an idiot, and a lunatic, and Trump supporters want to believe that he’s a populist savior fighting to liberate the nation from the claws of the deep state. Because of their partisan blinders they will both find reasons to believe they’ve got a savior or a traitor in the White House despite the fact that their country’s actual policy and behavior remains more or less the same. I still sometimes get Democrats telling me that Trump is about to flip into Hitler 2.0 any minute now and start throwing non-whites into extermination camps. Whenever I point out that they were wrong about their “your choices are Hillary or Hitler” alarmism I get a bunch of them telling me “give him time”. Well he’s had time. They were wrong. They didn’t get a Nazi, they got another shitty neocon. And since the Dems have been paced into alignment with the neocons there’s no one left to oppose their agendas, which is why we’re seeing so little pushback on Trump’s Iran saber rattling. I get Trump supporters telling me that he’s fighting the deep state, but the only way you can believe that at this point is to redefine “deep state” to mean “Democrats and their supporters”, which would actually just be more partisan bickering, which is all we’re actually seeing at this point. The only people you see pushing the collusion narrative and working for impeachment at this point are Democrats and Never-Trumpers; now that Trump has proven himself a good, compliant little boy the intelligence community has been putting its energy into the anti-detente propaganda effort to manufacture support for its new cold war escalations instead. The MAGA crowd tells me their guy has de-escalated the Syrian situation in an attempt to paint him as less pro-war than his predecessor, but that’s not even true either. Until US troops actually leave Syria, all this administration has done is kill a bunch of people (many of them civilians ), occupy parts of a sovereign nation, and refuse to leave. Why are those troops still there when Syria and its allies are perfectly capable of handling any remaining traces of ISIS as they have been? No good reason, that’s for sure. This is not the fault of the American people. The American people consistently vote against interventionist wars (as evidenced by the fact that winning presidential candidates have to campaign against them), and while they may be guilted by the tribe into flag-waving once the troops are there, they consistently say no to every request for consent for more empire-building wars. In my recent article about how the CNN/CIA narrative is running the same script for Iran as they did for Libya and Syria, most of the pushback I received was from good people who wanted to make sure I knew that they didn’t consent to military intervention, they were simply offering their support for the people of Iran. Which is about as naive and sweet as a kid wanting to help the nice old man find his puppy. I understand you wanting to help find the puppy America, but for God’s sake please don’t get in that man’s van. So the will of the American people has been heard loud and clear. They do not consent to more regime change wars and more military interventions. They do not want that. Through the trickery of the mainstream media though, they are paced by fear-mongering and guilting into a reluctant, bargaining, “Well okay then…” consent which is quickly turned over into flag-waving enthusiasm because you have to support your troops, don’tchaknow? And I get that! Everyone knows a serviceman or woman; you don’t want to make them feel sad or like their life is being wasted. That’s such a tragedy! Who wants to make that conscious? Let’s be clear, too: the troops are often from some of the finest of working and middle-class families across the States, families whose strong sense of morality about right and wrong led their young sons and daughters to make the courageous decision to enter the armed forces. These young men and women were born with the most exemplary of desires. They want to make the world a better place and they are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice to do so. People love these families and they love their children. These young people really are our best new humans. They are so committed to the highest interest that they would put aside their self-interest to do so. Do you know how rare that quality is in a human? And these young people are being taken from us young, whether that be by death or by destroying their beautiful minds as they are warped by the war machine into thinking that evil is good. Taken and used to pump up the egos of a selfish few. In a healthy culture, the highest interest would dictate the desires of these young men and women. Unfortunately, the “highest interest” which should be assessed by the will of the people, is not being heard. It is not being enacted. The will of the people has repeatedly said that it does not want to send these young people off to kill another country’s young people to shore up the share portfolios of a few cancerous beings. The will of the people consistently says no to that, but it has been corralled by a small group of bloodthirsty vampires, parasites who will happily lay any amount of young bodies to waste to win their tiny dick battles until they are finally satisfied with the amount of zeroes on their bank statements. Spoiler alert: they never will be. Americans talk about “seeing through the partisan bullshit” of US politics like it’s some kind of magical superpower, but it’s not. Both parties act in slightly different ways toward the exact same ends, working together like the jab-cross combination of a boxer to advance the same warmongering, corporatist oligarchic agendas, and there’s no reason to believe any of them about anything. America has two corporatist war parties who serve a plutocratic class of elites; one of them wears a cowboy hat, the other has pink hair. That’s it. That’s all you need to see to free yourself from the illusion. Please stop attacking one another for the evils that have been inflicted on you by this small group of sociopaths, America. Stop buying into the two-party good cop/bad cop schtick that the elites use to turn urban Americans against rural Americans and turn your anger toward your real enemies. —Caitlin Johnstone ____________ https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/trump-isnt-another-hitler-he-s-another-obama-51ea7db498b4 ### -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sat Jan 6 13:41:11 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 13:41:11 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Working class opposition. erupting in Iran.... In-Reply-To: References: <362CE1A6-395F-44C2-86BC-FFCE88C94266@illinois.edu> Message-ID: I find the statement : "pits a virtuous and homogeneous people against a set of elites and dangerous ‘others’ who are together depicted as depriving (or attempting to deprive) the sovereign people “ disingenuous at best, because it lumps all movements against a Government by its people, as one and the same, with extreme sarcasm. The people generally and in the case of Iran, have legitimate complaints. Like Syria, US involvement will mitigate those who are legitimate in their opposition to the government. The opposition in Syria was minimal, but legitimate, what happened to them once the Jihadists were brought in by the US, probably dead. That is not to say Iran, is the same as Syria, only in respect to US interference. The role of the American people is to stand up against our governments interventions in sovereign nations, using US taxpayers money, weapons, sanctions, jihadists, etc., in support of coups and all else we use to install puppet regimes. There are similarities to the situations in every nation, and fear that Iran will become another Syria or Libya, or Ukraine, or……..is legitimate and must be prevented by the American people saying “NO, MORE.” Even if as Kevin Zeese points out “Iran is not Syria, and will become stronger in the long run.” Trump is calling for war, intervention etc., but we know its not just “him,” removal of Trump will solve nothing, because Hillary and all the Democrats are supporting the demonstrators or “people of Iran.” However, Trump is President and responsible for his actions just as Obama was responsible for his when expanding the Bush wars from two to eight. of their rights, values, prosperity, identity, and voice.”On Jan 5, 2018, at 20:29, Carl G. Estabrook > wrote: In "Twenty-First Century Populism: The Spectre of Western European Democracy" (2008), Daniele Albertazzi and Duncan McDonnell define populism as an ideology that "pits a virtuous and homogeneous people against a set of elites and dangerous ‘others’ who are together depicted as depriving (or attempting to deprive) the sovereign people of their rights, values, prosperity, identity, and voice.” Recent examples include the Iranian demonstrators, the Trump campaign, the Sanders campaign, Brexit, the Le Pen and Mélenchon campaigns, and the AfD… On Jan 5, 2018, at 10:01 PM, Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: Discussed on NEWS FROM NEPTUNE today (and soon archived and available at Urbana Public TV). {Iranian demonstrations:Rouhani::populism that elected Trump:Obama} The Iranian anti-government demonstrations, based as they are on the economic immiseration of the Iranian populace (encouraged by US sanctions & economic warfare against Iran), are to the reformist neoliberal Rouhani government, as the populist movement that produced Trump, is to the neoliberal Obama administration (mutatis mutandis, of course). —CGE On Jan 5, 2018, at 9:34 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss > wrote: See https://popularresistance.org/special-report-are-long-term-us-regime-change-efforts-behind-iran-protests/ It indicates U.S. money/organizations which over time have sought to undermine the Iranian regime, as with others. It also casts some doubt about NIAC and its spokespersons. —mkb On Jan 4, 2018, at 8:44 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss > wrote: I support the assertions made in this article, but any USG intervention, which has likely already taken place covertly, with weapons, CIA supported Jihadists, that includes sanctions, as was done in Syria and Libya, we must all back off and focus our criticism on "USG warmongering" which includes our allies the Saudi's and Israel. Any change within Iran, must come from the Iranian people without outside interference or intervention. Working class opposition erupts in Iran: A harbinger for the world in 2018 by Keith Jones 4 January 2018 The long-suppressed and brutally exploited Iranian working class has burst onto the scene shaking Iran’s bourgeois-clerical regime. Since Dec. 28, tens of thousands have defied the Islamic Republic’s repressive apparatus and taken to the streets in cities and towns across the county. They have done so to voice their anger over food price rises, mass unemployment, gaping social inequality, years of sweeping social spending cuts and a pseudo-democratic political system that is rigged on behalf of the ruling elite and utterly impervious to the needs of working people. The scope and intensity of this movement and its rapid embrace of slogans challenging the government and the entire autocratic political system have stunned Iranian authorities and western observers alike. Yet, it was preceded by months of worker protests against job cuts and plant closures and unpaid wages and benefits. In the days immediately prior to the eruption of the antigovernment protests, discussion of the ever-deepening divide between Iran’s top 1 and 10 percent and the vast majority who live in poverty and economic insecurity raged on social media. The trigger for this explosion of popular discontent was the government’s latest austerity budget. It will further slash income support for ordinary Iranians, raise gas prices by as much as 50 percent, and curtail development spending, while increasing the already huge sums under the control of the Shia clergy. Yesterday, after days of an ever-widening mobilization of security forces, mass arrests, and bloody clashes that left at least 21 dead, General Mohammad Ali Jafari, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, declared the unrest over: “Today we can announce the end of the sedition.” The rulers of the Islamic Republic are trying to justify their brutal crackdown with spurious claims that the protests are being manipulated by Washington and its principal regional allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia, as part of their incendiary drive for regime change in Tehran. The claim that the current protests are akin to those mounted by the Green Movement in 2009 is a base slander meant to justify a bigger crime. The Green challenge to the results of the 2009 Iranian presidential election was a long-prepared political operation that followed the script of similar US-orchestrated “color revolutions” in the Ukraine, Georgia, Lebanon and elsewhere. It was aimed at bringing to power those elements of the Iranian elite most eager to reach a quick rapprochement with US and European imperialism. It drew its popular support almost exclusively from the most privileged layers of the upper middle class, who were mobilized on the basis of neoliberal denunciations of the populist President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for “squandering” money on the poor. The current challenge to the Iranian regime is of an entirely different character. It is rooted in the working class, including in smaller industrial cities and district towns; draws its greatest support from young people who face an unemployment rate of 40 percent or more; and is driven by opposition to social inequality and capitalist austerity. Whatever the immediate fate of the current wave of protests, a new stage in the class struggle has opened in Iran that will unfold over the coming weeks and months. What is certain is that the working class, having thrust itself onto center stage, will not be quickly or easily silenced. The working-class unrest in Iran has already upset the calculations not just of the Iranian elite, but of governments around the world. Trump, whose anti-Muslim travel ban targets Iranians, has hypocritically and fatuously claimed his “support” for the protests, with the hope that he can use them to demonize Tehran and thereby provide grist for US war preparations against Iran. The European powers have been more circumspect, and not only because the protests cut across their plans to cash in on the Iranian government’s offers of oil concessions and cheap labor. They fear the destabilizing impact of mounting class struggle in Iran on the entire Middle East. To understand the significance of the resurgence of the Iranian working class for Middle East and world politics, it is necessary to examine it in historical context. The 1979 Iranian Revolution, which overthrew the tyrannical US-sponsored regime of the Shah four decades ago, was a massive, working class-led, anti-imperialist social explosion. It was a growing wave of political strikes that broke the back of the Shah’s regime, and in the months that followed, workers seized factories, placing them under the control of workers’ councils. But a social revolution expropriating the Iranian bourgeoisie and establishing a workers’ republic in alliance with the rural toilers was blocked by the nominally socialist organizations, above all the Stalinist Tudeh Party. The Tudeh party had deep roots in the working class, which had a long history of secularism and revolutionary socialism. But for decades it orientated to the impotent liberal wing of the national bourgeoisie and then in 1979 swung round to giving uncritical support to the Ayatollah Khomeini, on the grounds that he was the political leader of the “progressive” wing of the bourgeoisie and leading a “national democratic” (i.e. capitalist) revolution. This aged Shia cleric had long been a politically marginal figure. But he was able to gain a mass following among the urban and rural poor by exploiting the political vacuum created by the Stalinists, and by drawing on the longstanding connections between the Shia clergy and the bazaar, the bastion of the traditional wing of the Iranian bourgeoisie. With the working class politically neutralized by the Stalinists, Khomeini was able to reorganize the state machine following the Shah’s overthrow while manipulating and diverting the mass movement, then restabilize bourgeois rule through savage repression of the political left, including the Tudeh party, and the destruction of all independent workers’ organizations. These developments fed into and were part of a broader process in which, due to the betrayals of the Stalinists, Islamist forces were able to politically profit from the mounting crisis of the postcolonial bourgeois nationalist regimes and movements, including the Palestine Liberation Organization, and their inability to realize their bourgeois-democratic programs. Before his death in 1989, Khomeini oversaw a further lurch to the right of the Islamic Republic, with a turn to the IMF and overtures to the “Great Satan,” US imperialism. This had been prepared the previous year in a further ferocious assault on the left, in which thousands of political prisoners were killed. Over the course of the past three decades, Iran’s government has been led by different factions of the political elite, including so-called “reformists” and Shia populists like Ahmadinejad. All have further rolled back the social concessions made to working people in the wake of the 1979 revolution and savagely suppressed the working class. The Western press has long sought to vilify Iranian politics and social life. But at its core, the experience of the working class in Iran mirrors that of workers around the world, who for decades have faced an unrelenting assault on their social rights and politically have been utterly disenfranchised. In response to the 2008 crisis, the universal response of the bourgeoisie has been to drastically intensify this class war. Precarious employment, crumbling public services, unprecedented social inequality, exclusion from political life and the threat of imperialist war—this is the lot of workers the world over. But the period in which the class struggle could be suppressed is coming to an end. In country after country around the world, the parties, organizations and political mechanisms, including the establishment left parties and pro-capitalist unions, through which the bourgeoisie has managed its affairs and above all suppressed the class struggle are breaking down. The events in Iran will resonate across the Middle East, where the working class has passed through decades of bitter experiences, not only with the secular bourgeois nationalist movements, but also with various forms of Islamist politics, including the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party in Turkey. And while the ignoramus Trump tweets about injustice in Iran, how different will American workers deem their circumstances from those of Iranian workers? Last month as the Iranian government was presenting a budget that slashes social spending while funneling additional money to the mullahs, the US Congress rewarded the rich and super-rich with trillions in additional tax cuts. These tax cuts are now to be paid for through a massive assault on Social Security, health care and other core social rights. The events in Iran must be recognized as a harbinger of a vast eruption of working-class struggle around the world. The task of revolutionary socialists is to turn into this movement and to fight to arm the international working class with an understanding of the logic of its needs, aspirations and struggle. Capitalism is incompatible with the needs of society. Working people, the class that produces the world’s wealth, must unite their struggles across state borders and continents to establish workers’ political power, so as to undertake the socialist reorganization of society and put an end to want and imperialist war. Keith Jones WSWS.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 karenaram at hotmail.com Sat Jan 6 14:51:49 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 14:51:49 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Trump's not another Hitler: he's another Obama In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Brilliant article, one of those “I wish I could say it the way she does.” However, two points left out, minor if one looks at the big picture, but important to those now struggling due to the “new tax increase, favoring only the elites” implemented by the neocons, as well as the “austerity, and lack of jobs forcing many young people to join the military." Desperation has more to do with families sending off their young to fight in wars for Oligarchs, than “pride." Add to this deregulation of Net Neutrality, taking place under the Trump administration, being supported by our local Republican, opposed by our two local Democrats. I’m not dismissing the censorship imposed by Obama, especially, incarceration of “whistleblowers” but with the appointees by Trump heading up our institutions, it’s looking very much like fascism in the fast lane, as we destroy our institutions, and social services. Social services and programs as Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security maybe neoliberal, but without which, many people will sicken and die. All that being said, yes, Caitlyn is right, it’s the “system, good cop vs. bad cop” that the people need to rise up against, and overturn, not just go after the Administration, or depend on elections, which we know are rigged. On Jan 6, 2018, at 01:54, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: Not a lot of people remember this, but George W Bush actually campaigned in 2000 against the interventionist foreign policy that the United States had been increasingly espousing. Far from advocating the full-scale regime change ground invasions that his administration is now infamous for, Bush frequently used the word “humble” when discussing the type of foreign policy he favored, condemning nation-building, an over-extended military, and the notion that America should be the world’s police force. Eight years later, after hundreds of thousands of human lives had been snuffed out in Iraq and Afghanistan and an entire region horrifically destabilized, Obama campaigned against Bush’s interventionist foreign policy, edging out Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries partly because she had supported the Iraq invasion while he had condemned it. The Democrats, decrying the warmongering tendencies of the Republicans, elected a President of the United States who would see Bush’s Afghanistan and Iraq and raise him Libya, Syria, Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia, along with a tenfold increase in drone strikes. Libya collapsed into a failed state where a slave trade now runs rampant, and half a million people died in the Syrian war that Obama and US allies exponentially escalated. Eight years later, a reality TV star and WWE Hall-of-Famer was elected President of the United States by the other half of the crowd who was sick to death of those warmongering Democrats. Trump campaigned on a non-interventionist foreign policy, saying America should fight terrorists but not enter into regime change wars with other governments. He thrashed his primary opponents as the only one willing to unequivocally condemn Bush and his actions, then won the general election partly by attacking the interventionist foreign policy of his predecessor and his opponent, and criticizing Hillary Clinton’s hawkish no-fly zone agenda in Syria. Now he’s approved the selling of arms to Ukraine to use against Russia, a dangerously hawkish move that even Obama refused to make for fear of increasing tensions with Moscow. His administration has escalated troop presence in Afghanistan and made it abundantly clear that the Pentagon has no intention of leaving Syria anytime soon despite the absence of any reasonable justification for US presence there. The CIA had ratcheted up operations in Iran six months into Trump’s presidency, shortly before the administration began running the exact same script against that country that the Obama administration ran on Libya, Syria and Ukraine. Maybe US presidents are limited to eight years because that’s how long it takes the public to forget everything. In the lead-up to the November elections those of us on the left who backed third parties were promised over and over and over again by Democratic party loyalists that if Hillary Clinton failed to secure the election there’d be goose-stepping stormtroopers patrolling the streets and murdering non-whites with impunity, concentration camps for Muslims and white supremacist extermination programs. Comparisons to Hitler went on nonstop, and anyone who failed to fall in line with the mainstream liberal narrative can attest that they were accused of aiding actual, literal Nazism on a regular basis. A year into Trump’s presidency, and not only did the apocalyptic predictions of national genocide fail to come true, he’s not even deporting as many immigrants as Obama. He is, however, out-bombing him. We were promised another Hitler. Instead, we got another Obama, who was himself another Bush. The march into corporatist Orwellian police state at home and globalist oligarchic hegemony abroad continues unhindered for the United States of America. And of course that march would have continued had Hillary won as well, it just would have looked a bit different. Fewer environmental deregulations, likely catastrophic escalations against the Syrian government and possibly Russia, the exact same approaches to Iran, just as much hawkishness toward North Korea but minus the tweets about button sizes, no attempts at dismantling Obama’s corporatist healthcare plan. Not much more than that. Nobody wants to hear this. The Democrats still want to believe that the sitting president is simultaneously a Nazi, a Kremlin secret agent, an idiot, and a lunatic, and Trump supporters want to believe that he’s a populist savior fighting to liberate the nation from the claws of the deep state. Because of their partisan blinders they will both find reasons to believe they’ve got a savior or a traitor in the White House despite the fact that their country’s actual policy and behavior remains more or less the same. I still sometimes get Democrats telling me that Trump is about to flip into Hitler 2.0 any minute now and start throwing non-whites into extermination camps. Whenever I point out that they were wrong about their “your choices are Hillary or Hitler” alarmism I get a bunch of them telling me “give him time”. Well he’s had time. They were wrong. They didn’t get a Nazi, they got another shitty neocon. And since the Dems have been paced into alignment with the neocons there’s no one left to oppose their agendas, which is why we’re seeing so little pushback on Trump’s Iran saber rattling. I get Trump supporters telling me that he’s fighting the deep state, but the only way you can believe that at this point is to redefine “deep state” to mean “Democrats and their supporters”, which would actually just be more partisan bickering, which is all we’re actually seeing at this point. The only people you see pushing the collusion narrative and working for impeachment at this point are Democrats and Never-Trumpers; now that Trump has proven himself a good, compliant little boy the intelligence community has been putting its energy into the anti-detente propaganda effort to manufacture support for its new cold war escalations instead. The MAGA crowd tells me their guy has de-escalated the Syrian situation in an attempt to paint him as less pro-war than his predecessor, but that’s not even true either. Until US troops actually leave Syria, all this administration has done is kill a bunch of people (many of them civilians), occupy parts of a sovereign nation, and refuse to leave. Why are those troops still there when Syria and its allies are perfectly capable of handling any remaining traces of ISIS as they have been? No good reason, that’s for sure. This is not the fault of the American people. The American people consistently vote against interventionist wars (as evidenced by the fact that winning presidential candidates have to campaign against them), and while they may be guilted by the tribe into flag-waving once the troops are there, they consistently say no to every request for consent for more empire-building wars. In my recent article about how the CNN/CIA narrative is running the same script for Iran as they did for Libya and Syria, most of the pushback I received was from good people who wanted to make sure I knew that they didn’t consent to military intervention, they were simply offering their support for the people of Iran. Which is about as naive and sweet as a kid wanting to help the nice old man find his puppy. I understand you wanting to help find the puppy America, but for God’s sake please don’t get in that man’s van. So the will of the American people has been heard loud and clear. They do not consent to more regime change wars and more military interventions. They do not want that. Through the trickery of the mainstream media though, they are paced by fear-mongering and guilting into a reluctant, bargaining, “Well okay then…” consent which is quickly turned over into flag-waving enthusiasm because you have to support your troops, don’tchaknow? And I get that! Everyone knows a serviceman or woman; you don’t want to make them feel sad or like their life is being wasted. That’s such a tragedy! Who wants to make that conscious? Let’s be clear, too: the troops are often from some of the finest of working and middle-class families across the States, families whose strong sense of morality about right and wrong led their young sons and daughters to make the courageous decision to enter the armed forces. These young men and women were born with the most exemplary of desires. They want to make the world a better place and they are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice to do so. People love these families and they love their children. These young people really are our best new humans. They are so committed to the highest interest that they would put aside their self-interest to do so. Do you know how rare that quality is in a human? And these young people are being taken from us young, whether that be by death or by destroying their beautiful minds as they are warped by the war machine into thinking that evil is good. Taken and used to pump up the egos of a selfish few. In a healthy culture, the highest interest would dictate the desires of these young men and women. Unfortunately, the “highest interest” which should be assessed by the will of the people, is not being heard. It is not being enacted. The will of the people has repeatedly said that it does not want to send these young people off to kill another country’s young people to shore up the share portfolios of a few cancerous beings. The will of the people consistently says no to that, but it has been corralled by a small group of bloodthirsty vampires, parasites who will happily lay any amount of young bodies to waste to win their tiny dick battles until they are finally satisfied with the amount of zeroes on their bank statements. Spoiler alert: they never will be. Americans talk about “seeing through the partisan bullshit” of US politics like it’s some kind of magical superpower, but it’s not. Both parties act in slightly different ways toward the exact same ends, working together like the jab-cross combination of a boxer to advance the same warmongering, corporatist oligarchic agendas, and there’s no reason to believe any of them about anything. America has two corporatist war parties who serve a plutocratic class of elites; one of them wears a cowboy hat, the other has pink hair. That’s it. That’s all you need to see to free yourself from the illusion. Please stop attacking one another for the evils that have been inflicted on you by this small group of sociopaths, America. Stop buying into the two-party good cop/bad cop schtick that the elites use to turn urban Americans against rural Americans and turn your anger toward your real enemies. —Caitlin Johnstone ____________ https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/trump-isnt-another-hitler-he-s-another-obama-51ea7db498b4 ### _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C93057d8044ca4f2a573508d554eb9bb5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636508293264569681&sdata=Z8qheclX5CcXEmcflx6VSd9Qbvh2cJpUsr33IjBY51s%3D&reserved=0 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Sat Jan 6 15:20:31 2018 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 09:20:31 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Trump's not another Hitler: he's another Obama In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <006a01d38701$e4b74750$ae25d5f0$@comcast.net> I agree 100 % Karen with your assessment of Caitlin Johnstone’s article ( she is good as usual ) as well as your two minor points you disagree with her about. And I have one very minor point of disagreement with you Karen. That is calling Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security “ neoliberal “. Obamacare / ACA IS very much neoliberal however because it is based on the tax payer subsidization of corporate insurance companies ( the very essence of our healthcare crisis ) and penalizes ( fines ) the lower middle Working class and the working poor because they are unable to afford the inferior overpriced health insurance on the ACA exchanges. And I might add that the Medicare Advantage program is also neoliberal in that the government inefficiently pays MORE to private corporate insurance companies to administer Medicare / Medicaid benefits to recipients than it would cost for the government to do it directly themselves – sneaky slow and systematic back door privatization. David J. From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2018 8:52 AM To: C G Estabrook Cc: peace; peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Trump's not another Hitler: he's another Obama Brilliant article, one of those “I wish I could say it the way she does.” However, two points left out, minor if one looks at the big picture, but important to those now struggling due to the “new tax increase, favoring only the elites” implemented by the neocons, as well as the “austerity, and lack of jobs forcing many young people to join the military." Desperation has more to do with families sending off their young to fight in wars for Oligarchs, than “pride." Add to this deregulation of Net Neutrality, taking place under the Trump administration, being supported by our local Republican, opposed by our two local Democrats. I’m not dismissing the censorship imposed by Obama, especially, incarceration of “whistleblowers” but with the appointees by Trump heading up our institutions, it’s looking very much like fascism in the fast lane, as we destroy our institutions, and social services. Social services and programs as Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security maybe neoliberal, but without which, many people will sicken and die. All that being said, yes, Caitlyn is right, it’s the “system, good cop vs. bad cop” that the people need to rise up against, and overturn, not just go after the Administration, or depend on elections, which we know are rigged. On Jan 6, 2018, at 01:54, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: Not a lot of people remember this, but George W Bush actually campaigned in 2000 against the interventionist foreign policy that the United States had been increasingly espousing. Far from advocating the full-scale regime change ground invasions that his administration is now infamous for, Bush frequently used the word “humble” when discussing the type of foreign policy he favored, condemning nation-building, an over-extended military, and the notion that America should be the world’s police force. Eight years later, after hundreds of thousands of human lives had been snuffed out in Iraq and Afghanistan and an entire region horrifically destabilized, Obama campaigned against Bush’s interventionist foreign policy, edging out Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries partly because she had supported the Iraq invasion while he had condemned it. The Democrats, decrying the warmongering tendencies of the Republicans, elected a President of the United States who would see Bush’s Afghanistan and Iraq and raise him Libya, Syria, Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia, along with a tenfold increase in drone strikes . Libya collapsed into a failed state where a slave trade now runs rampant , and half a million people died in the Syrian war that Obama and US allies exponentially escalated . Eight years later, a reality TV star and WWE Hall-of-Famer was elected President of the United States by the other half of the crowd who was sick to death of those warmongering Democrats. Trump campaigned on a non-interventionist foreign policy , saying America should fight terrorists but not enter into regime change wars with other governments. He thrashed his primary opponents as the only one willing to unequivocally condemn Bush and his actions, then won the general election partly by attacking the interventionist foreign policy of his predecessor and his opponent, and criticizing Hillary Clinton’s hawkish no-fly zone agenda in Syria. Now he’s approved the selling of arms to Ukraine to use against Russia, a dangerously hawkish move that even Obama refused to make for fear of increasing tensions with Moscow. His administration has escalated troop presence in Afghanistan and made it abundantly clear that the Pentagon has no intention of leaving Syria anytime soon despite the absence of any reasonable justification for US presence there. The CIA had ratcheted up operations in Iran six months into Trump’s presidency, shortly before the administration began running the exact same script against that country that the Obama administration ran on Libya, Syria and Ukraine. Maybe US presidents are limited to eight years because that’s how long it takes the public to forget everything. In the lead-up to the November elections those of us on the left who backed third parties were promised over and over and over again by Democratic party loyalists that if Hillary Clinton failed to secure the election there’d be goose-stepping stormtroopers patrolling the streets and murdering non-whites with impunity, concentration camps for Muslims and white supremacist extermination programs. Comparisons to Hitler went on nonstop, and anyone who failed to fall in line with the mainstream liberal narrative can attest that they were accused of aiding actual, literal Nazism on a regular basis. A year into Trump’s presidency, and not only did the apocalyptic predictions of national genocide fail to come true, he’s not even deporting as many immigrants as Obama . He is, however, out-bombing him . We were promised another Hitler. Instead, we got another Obama, who was himself another Bush. The march into corporatist Orwellian police state at home and globalist oligarchic hegemony abroad continues unhindered for the United States of America. And of course that march would have continued had Hillary won as well, it just would have looked a bit different. Fewer environmental deregulations, likely catastrophic escalations against the Syrian government and possibly Russia, the exact same approaches to Iran, just as much hawkishness toward North Korea but minus the tweets about button sizes, no attempts at dismantling Obama’s corporatist healthcare plan. Not much more than that. Nobody wants to hear this. The Democrats still want to believe that the sitting president is simultaneously a Nazi, a Kremlin secret agent, an idiot, and a lunatic, and Trump supporters want to believe that he’s a populist savior fighting to liberate the nation from the claws of the deep state. Because of their partisan blinders they will both find reasons to believe they’ve got a savior or a traitor in the White House despite the fact that their country’s actual policy and behavior remains more or less the same. I still sometimes get Democrats telling me that Trump is about to flip into Hitler 2.0 any minute now and start throwing non-whites into extermination camps. Whenever I point out that they were wrong about their “your choices are Hillary or Hitler” alarmism I get a bunch of them telling me “give him time”. Well he’s had time. They were wrong. They didn’t get a Nazi, they got another shitty neocon. And since the Dems have been paced into alignment with the neocons there’s no one left to oppose their agendas, which is why we’re seeing so little pushback on Trump’s Iran saber rattling. I get Trump supporters telling me that he’s fighting the deep state, but the only way you can believe that at this point is to redefine “deep state” to mean “Democrats and their supporters”, which would actually just be more partisan bickering, which is all we’re actually seeing at this point. The only people you see pushing the collusion narrative and working for impeachment at this point are Democrats and Never-Trumpers; now that Trump has proven himself a good, compliant little boy the intelligence community has been putting its energy into the anti-detente propaganda effort to manufacture support for its new cold war escalations instead. The MAGA crowd tells me their guy has de-escalated the Syrian situation in an attempt to paint him as less pro-war than his predecessor, but that’s not even true either. Until US troops actually leave Syria, all this administration has done is kill a bunch of people (many of them civilians ), occupy parts of a sovereign nation, and refuse to leave. Why are those troops still there when Syria and its allies are perfectly capable of handling any remaining traces of ISIS as they have been? No good reason, that’s for sure. This is not the fault of the American people. The American people consistently vote against interventionist wars (as evidenced by the fact that winning presidential candidates have to campaign against them), and while they may be guilted by the tribe into flag-waving once the troops are there, they consistently say no to every request for consent for more empire-building wars. In my recent article about how the CNN/CIA narrative is running the same script for Iran as they did for Libya and Syria, most of the pushback I received was from good people who wanted to make sure I knew that they didn’t consent to military intervention, they were simply offering their support for the people of Iran. Which is about as naive and sweet as a kid wanting to help the nice old man find his puppy. I understand you wanting to help find the puppy America, but for God’s sake please don’t get in that man’s van. So the will of the American people has been heard loud and clear. They do not consent to more regime change wars and more military interventions. They do not want that. Through the trickery of the mainstream media though, they are paced by fear-mongering and guilting into a reluctant, bargaining, “Well okay then…” consent which is quickly turned over into flag-waving enthusiasm because you have to support your troops, don’tchaknow? And I get that! Everyone knows a serviceman or woman; you don’t want to make them feel sad or like their life is being wasted. That’s such a tragedy! Who wants to make that conscious? Let’s be clear, too: the troops are often from some of the finest of working and middle-class families across the States, families whose strong sense of morality about right and wrong led their young sons and daughters to make the courageous decision to enter the armed forces. These young men and women were born with the most exemplary of desires. They want to make the world a better place and they are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice to do so. People love these families and they love their children. These young people really are our best new humans. They are so committed to the highest interest that they would put aside their self-interest to do so. Do you know how rare that quality is in a human? And these young people are being taken from us young, whether that be by death or by destroying their beautiful minds as they are warped by the war machine into thinking that evil is good. Taken and used to pump up the egos of a selfish few. In a healthy culture, the highest interest would dictate the desires of these young men and women. Unfortunately, the “highest interest” which should be assessed by the will of the people, is not being heard. It is not being enacted. The will of the people has repeatedly said that it does not want to send these young people off to kill another country’s young people to shore up the share portfolios of a few cancerous beings. The will of the people consistently says no to that, but it has been corralled by a small group of bloodthirsty vampires, parasites who will happily lay any amount of young bodies to waste to win their tiny dick battles until they are finally satisfied with the amount of zeroes on their bank statements. Spoiler alert: they never will be. Americans talk about “seeing through the partisan bullshit” of US politics like it’s some kind of magical superpower, but it’s not. Both parties act in slightly different ways toward the exact same ends, working together like the jab-cross combination of a boxer to advance the same warmongering, corporatist oligarchic agendas, and there’s no reason to believe any of them about anything. America has two corporatist war parties who serve a plutocratic class of elites; one of them wears a cowboy hat, the other has pink hair. That’s it. That’s all you need to see to free yourself from the illusion. Please stop attacking one another for the evils that have been inflicted on you by this small group of sociopaths, America. Stop buying into the two-party good cop/bad cop schtick that the elites use to turn urban Americans against rural Americans and turn your anger toward your real enemies. —Caitlin Johnstone ____________ https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/trump-isnt-another-hitler-he-s-another-obama-51ea7db498b4 ### _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss &data=02%7C01%7C%7C93057d8044ca4f2a573508d554eb9bb5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636508293264569681&sdata=Z8qheclX5CcXEmcflx6VSd9Qbvh2cJpUsr33IjBY51s%3D&reserved=0 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sat Jan 6 16:34:45 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 16:34:45 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Oregon Court: Banning Fossil Fuel Facilities is Constitutional Message-ID: January 5, 2018 Oregon Court: Banning Fossil Fuel Facilities is Constitutional An Oregon appeals court ruled that restricting fossil fuel infrastructure is constitutional, overruling a lower appeals court decision. It’s an important victory in the fight against climate change, and for local self-determination, says Nicholas Caleb of the Center for Sustainable Economy. See below: ________________________________ Full Episode Climate Change [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2018-01-01/mjones0105drilling-thumb.jpg] Trump Administration Proposes Opening 90% Of US Waters To Offshore Drilling [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2018-01-01/ncaleb0104fossilfuel-thumb.jpg] Oregon Court: Banning Fossil Fuel Facilities is Constitutional [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-05-01/sbanerjee0531arctic-thumb.jpg] Arctic Climate Warming Twice as Fast As Anywhere Else [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-12-01/schakraborty1222indiasmog-thumb.jpg] India's Capital of Delhi Has the World's Worst Air Pollution - Why? [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-09-01/kochdoc0914-thumb.jpg] TRNN SPECIAL: Trump, The Koch Brothers and Their War on Climate Science [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-12-01/narrative1222worstfire-thumb.jpg] California Wildfire Becomes Largest Ever Recorded [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-12-01/aroesch1214fossilfuels-thumb.jpg] World Bank and World's Third Largest Insurer Divest from Most Oil and Gas [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-12-01/jschlegelmilch1212climate-thumb.jpg] Cities vs. Climate Change: Can Infrastructures Handle Extreme Weather? [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-12-01/thollo1205tesla-thumb.jpg] Coal, Lies and Renewable Energy, Australian Style [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-12-01/kmaitlandcarter1207caliburning-thumb.jpg] State of Emergency Declared in Southern California [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-12-01/print1201Pruit-thumb.jpg] EPA's Pruitt Pushed Through Directive Favoring Polluters, Lawsuit Says [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-11-01/mmagana1130epa-thumb.jpg] As U.S. Child Asthma Rates Soar, EPA Fights for Big Coal's Agenda [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-11-01/lperera1129epahearing-thumb.jpg] Coal Mining Families Say 'No' to Repealing Clean Power Plan [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-11-01/rhorton1127climate-thumb.jpg] Dangerous Climate Change is Here and Worse to Come, Major Report Warns [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-11-01/bpollin1116ny-thumb.jpg] Report: Investing in Clean Energy Would Boost NY's Economy [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-11-01/panel0130keystone-thumb.jpg] TRNN Replay: The Story Behind Keystone XL Pipeline Amendments [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-11-01/dbleakney1115cop23-thumb.jpg] Is Canada a 'Rogue Nation' on Climate Change? [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-11-01/sedwards1114carbon-thumb.jpg] Is Carbon Trading Just a License to Pollute? [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-11-01/shorn1113dapl-thumb.jpg] Congress and Oil Industry Collude to Charge Anti-Pipeline Activists With Terrorism [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-11-01/shorn1113bonn-thumb.jpg] Activists Disrupt White House's Pro-Coal Panel at Bonn Climate Summit [http://therealnews.com/permalinkedgraphics/video_page_banner.png] ________________________________ audio [Share to Facebook] [Share to Twitter] [http://therealnews.com/permalinkedgraphics/webml_share.png] [http://therealnews.com/t2/images/donate_btn.png] I support the real news because they deal with real issues, not meaningless articles and sound bites - Gary Log in and tell us why you support TRNN ________________________________ biography Nick Caleb ​is Staff Attorney at the Center for Sustainable Economy, providing legal counsel for the Climate Justice Program. Nick graduated with an LL.M. from Tilberg University in The Netherlands after receiving a J.D. from the University of Oregon School of Law. Nick is active locally in Portland, Oregon policy-making​, with a particular focus on ​environmental justice, sustainable cities and issues around the commons. Formerly with "Neighbors for Clean Air" and "Our Children's Trust," Nick helped launch the Youth Climate Action Now (YouCAN) campaign. This campaign is a continuation of an effort that began with energetic youth in Eugene who organized to persuade the Eugene City Council to pass the country's first binding climate recovery ordinance, committing city planning and policy to a science-based, community-wide greenhouse gas reduction goal of 350 parts per million of CO2, the level deemed "safe" by climate scientists. ________________________________ transcript [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2018-01-01/ncaleb0104fossilfuel-240.jpg]G. WILPERT: Welcome to The Real News Network. I'm Gregory Wilpert coming to you from Quito, Ecuador. On Thursday, the Oregon Court of Appeals allowed the city of Portland, Oregon to move forward with a local law that bans all new fossil fuel infrastructure such as new port facilities for shipping coal and holding tanks for oil and natural gas. The law had been blocked by a Land Use Board of Appeals that declared the law to be unconstitutional. Advocates now say that the Oregon Appeals Court's decision to allow the law banning fossil fuels infrastructure to be implemented will allow other local governments to pursue similar policies that combat climate change. Joining me to talk about this important decision is Nicholas Caleb. Nicholas joins us from Klamath Falls, Oregon. He is a staff attorney with The Center for a Sustainable Economy, which was a party to this lawsuit. Thanks for joining us today, Nicholas. NICHOLAS CALEB: Thanks for having me. G. WILPERT: First, tell us a little bit about what this Portland law is all about. Tell us more about what it intended to do and what its significance is. NICHOLAS CALEB: In Portland and many port cities around the country, there are dangers of fossil fuel infrastructure from explosions, and spills, and air pollution, and you name it. The city of Portland decided that it wanted to be very proactive and stop adding to this risk. We had seen proposals for new propane export terminals in Portland that were rejected by activists. Instead of fighting these battles one by one, the city actually wanted to take a stand and say, "We're just not gonna do this type of development anymore. It's not good for Portland, and it's not good for the climate." Over a period of about two years, the city passed resolutions and entered into a land use planning process that resulted in an ordinance called the Fossil Fuel Terminal Zoning Amendments. The Fossil Fuel Terminal Zoning Amendments did very much what you said in the introduction. They stopped the construction of large-scale fossil fuel infrastructure for storage and transport, which is a de facto ban on fossil fuel infrastructure. Immediately, big business interests at the Portland Business Alliance, which is basically the local chamber of commerce in Portland, and the oil industry at the Western States Petroleum Association sued us in land use court, and we lost that case originally. G. WILPERT: Just tell us a little bit about why did you lose it. I mean what was the argument that it was unconstitutional? I mean sounds like I'm talking about a zoning issue that seems to be within the purview of city governments. NICHOLAS CALEB: Yes, which is why we appealed it, of course. The argument was that because this was stopping an industry from adding new facilities, that it was discriminating against interstate commerce, basically, that a lot of the facilities that would have been sited would be energy for export because, in the Northwest, we're not a fossil-fuel-producing region, but we are seeing a lot of so-called pass-through fossil fuels that are going to Southeast Asian markets. When you tally the amount of projects that were proposed to go through Oregon, Washington over the last five or six years, it would have been sort of apocalyptic levels of carbon pollution going through or region. Portland was the first community to try to battle this from the position of a municipal ordinance. We developed the ordinance to be resilient to legal challenge, and so when we lost that original case, we were very disappointed but also confident going into appeal. G. WILPERT: Now the Oregon Appeals Court has overturned the Land Use Board's decision. What were the arguments on the side of the ... I mean your arguments and also the ones of the side of the court when it ruled in your favor? NICHOLAS CALEB: Our argument was that local governments have very high power to protect the health and safety of their residents, and the fossil fuel industry and fossil fuel infrastructure poses health hazards in the form of spills, and explosions, and air quality like I mentioned before. But also, in the Northwest, we're often at enhanced danger because we have liquefaction zones where most of our fossil fuel infrastructure sits. In this big earthquake that we all expect to happen in the next 50 years, it'll be 9.0 or above, all of our critical energy infrastructure is sitting in liquefaction zones, and it'll be a disaster. It magnifies the disasters by many, many times. That was the basis for the ordinance, that we have the power to protect the health and safety of the residents of the community. In addition, we think that this is strong climate action at the same time. The court agreed that both of those were legitimate concerns that the city of Portland had. G. WILPERT: What's going to happen now? I mean could the plaintiffs still appeal this decision to a higher court? If so, does this mean that Portland can't enforce the law until their appeal is complete? NICHOLAS CALEB: Well, we expect that the other side will definitely appeal. We don't know for sure, but that's my expectation. It doesn't seem like they have any reason not to. If they did, it would go to the Oregon Supreme Court next. Then if they or us appealed from that, it would go to the United States Supreme Court, so this could be hung up in court for a while. In the meantime, though, we believe that the city of Portland can actually reinstitute its ordinance. In addition to the constitutional questions, there were a few local land use provisions that the Land Use Board of Appeals found that the city of Portland ran afoul of. Those are not critical that we would have to start the whole entire process over, but we might have to hold some supplementary processes, and do some fact finding, and hold a couple of public hearings in order to build the record up and legitimize the process. Basically, we think that there's a path toward getting our fossil fuel ban up and running again in a very short amount of time. G. WILPERT: What do you consider to be the larger consequences of the law and of the Appeals Court's decision? I mean what does it mean for communities elsewhere? Are other communities actually watching this case for that reason? NICHOLAS CALEB: Yeah. We at The Center for a Sustainable Economy have been talking with communities all over the country who are facing dangerous infrastructure projects being proposed in their communities and are also concerned about the impacts of climate change. With the national government basically dismantling all environmental and climate laws, it's been up to states and local governments to try to innovate ways of slowing down the fossil fuel economy so that we can transition to a renewable-energy-based economy. There are all sorts of communities that are trying lawsuits and other sorts of regulations to slow down the growth of the fossil fuel economy. We think that this is the most direct means of doing so, just preventing new infrastructure from being built, because we have to say no to the expansion of the fossil fuel industry before we can start turning the corner the other way. This is a signal to those communities that have been looking at Portland and saying, "Wow, that's interesting. It's elegant. We'd like to do it, but we're scared of being sued." Now they have a court that's actually ruled on this and said, "Look, this isn't running afoul of the Constitution, so as long as you're putting together smart, progressive, well-vetted policy that follows local land use policy and code, you should be fine as far as the Constitution goes." G. WILPERT: Okay. Well, we'll definitely continue to follow this story as it develops and see what happens with the appeals process. I was speaking to Nicholas Caleb, a staff attorney at The Center for a Sustainable Economy. Thanks again for having joined us today, Nicholas. NICHOLAS CALEB: Thanks for having me. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stuartnlevy at gmail.com Sat Jan 6 16:58:36 2018 From: stuartnlevy at gmail.com (stuartnlevy) Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2018 10:58:36 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] No AWARE demonstration today... Message-ID: <5a51003e.9234810a.ed422.f657@mx.google.com> It sounds as though we are cancelling today's AWARE demonstration.  It is just too cold.  Confirming this from David's and Karen's messages yesterday.  -- Stuart -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sat Jan 6 17:05:18 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 17:05:18 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Trump's not another Hitler: he's another Obama In-Reply-To: <006a01d38701$e4b74750$ae25d5f0$@comcast.net> References: <006a01d38701$e4b74750$ae25d5f0$@comcast.net> Message-ID: David I didn’t mean my points to be in disagreement with Caitlyn, as much as they were meant to support. You maybe right in that Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid aren’t “Neoliberal per se”, but the fact that they were implemented during the New Deal to save “Capitalism” and it did, as well as putting “Socialism” on the back shelf, and then during the fifties underground. Leads me to see it as Neoliberalism. Also, given the fact that its “intent” as well as the “benefits” have been whittled away by the capitalist powers that be, lend me to believe they are neoliberal. The intent of SS when implemented was to provide everyone over the age of 65 with a means of support, whether they paid into it or not. Today, not only are they increasing the age to receive benefits, those benefits are barely survival levels, and don’t apply to the many farmers, self employed and poor who didn’t pay into it. Unless we do away with our capitalist Oligarchs we are only going to get these programs, as handouts, though we have earned them. A true socialist society, would not allow these programs, so necessary for “life,” to be reduced as they have been over the years. It’s the change in the power structure of capitalism, that needs to take place, as long as these programs are controlled by a system of capitalism with the goal of profiting the elites, these programs will remain barely subsistence if at all, and therefore neoliberal in character. On Jan 6, 2018, at 07:20, David Johnson > wrote: I agree 100 % Karen with your assessment of Caitlin Johnstone’s article ( she is good as usual ) as well as your two minor points you disagree with her about. And I have one very minor point of disagreement with you Karen. That is calling Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security “ neoliberal “. Obamacare / ACA IS very much neoliberal however because it is based on the tax payer subsidization of corporate insurance companies ( the very essence of our healthcare crisis ) and penalizes ( fines ) the lower middle Working class and the working poor because they are unable to afford the inferior overpriced health insurance on the ACA exchanges. And I might add that the Medicare Advantage program is also neoliberal in that the government inefficiently pays MORE to private corporate insurance companies to administer Medicare / Medicaid benefits to recipients than it would cost for the government to do it directly themselves – sneaky slow and systematic back door privatization. David J. From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2018 8:52 AM To: C G Estabrook Cc: peace; peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Trump's not another Hitler: he's another Obama Brilliant article, one of those “I wish I could say it the way she does.” However, two points left out, minor if one looks at the big picture, but important to those now struggling due to the “new tax increase, favoring only the elites” implemented by the neocons, as well as the “austerity, and lack of jobs forcing many young people to join the military." Desperation has more to do with families sending off their young to fight in wars for Oligarchs, than “pride." Add to this deregulation of Net Neutrality, taking place under the Trump administration, being supported by our local Republican, opposed by our two local Democrats. I’m not dismissing the censorship imposed by Obama, especially, incarceration of “whistleblowers” but with the appointees by Trump heading up our institutions, it’s looking very much like fascism in the fast lane, as we destroy our institutions, and social services. Social services and programs as Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security maybe neoliberal, but without which, many people will sicken and die. All that being said, yes, Caitlyn is right, it’s the “system, good cop vs. bad cop” that the people need to rise up against, and overturn, not just go after the Administration, or depend on elections, which we know are rigged. On Jan 6, 2018, at 01:54, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: Not a lot of people remember this, but George W Bush actually campaigned in 2000 against the interventionist foreign policy that the United States had been increasingly espousing. Far from advocating the full-scale regime change ground invasions that his administration is now infamous for, Bush frequently used the word “humble” when discussing the type of foreign policy he favored, condemning nation-building, an over-extended military, and the notion that America should be the world’s police force. Eight years later, after hundreds of thousands of human lives had been snuffed out in Iraq and Afghanistan and an entire region horrifically destabilized, Obama campaigned against Bush’s interventionist foreign policy, edging out Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries partly because she had supported the Iraq invasion while he had condemned it. The Democrats, decrying the warmongering tendencies of the Republicans, elected a President of the United States who would see Bush’s Afghanistan and Iraq and raise him Libya, Syria, Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia, along with a tenfold increase in drone strikes. Libya collapsed into a failed state where a slave trade now runs rampant, and half a million people died in the Syrian war that Obama and US allies exponentially escalated. Eight years later, a reality TV star and WWE Hall-of-Famer was elected President of the United States by the other half of the crowd who was sick to death of those warmongering Democrats. Trump campaigned on a non-interventionist foreign policy, saying America should fight terrorists but not enter into regime change wars with other governments. He thrashed his primary opponents as the only one willing to unequivocally condemn Bush and his actions, then won the general election partly by attacking the interventionist foreign policy of his predecessor and his opponent, and criticizing Hillary Clinton’s hawkish no-fly zone agenda in Syria. Now he’s approved the selling of arms to Ukraine to use against Russia, a dangerously hawkish move that even Obama refused to make for fear of increasing tensions with Moscow. His administration has escalated troop presence in Afghanistan and made it abundantly clear that the Pentagon has no intention of leaving Syria anytime soon despite the absence of any reasonable justification for US presence there. The CIA had ratcheted up operations in Iran six months into Trump’s presidency, shortly before the administration began running the exact same script against that countrythat the Obama administration ran on Libya, Syria and Ukraine. Maybe US presidents are limited to eight years because that’s how long it takes the public to forget everything. In the lead-up to the November elections those of us on the left who backed third parties were promised over and over and over again by Democratic party loyalists that if Hillary Clinton failed to secure the election there’d be goose-stepping stormtroopers patrolling the streets and murdering non-whites with impunity, concentration camps for Muslims and white supremacist extermination programs. Comparisons to Hitler went on nonstop, and anyone who failed to fall in line with the mainstream liberal narrative can attest that they were accused of aiding actual, literal Nazism on a regular basis. A year into Trump’s presidency, and not only did the apocalyptic predictions of national genocide fail to come true, he’s not even deporting as many immigrants as Obama. He is, however, out-bombing him. We were promised another Hitler. Instead, we got another Obama, who was himself another Bush. The march into corporatist Orwellian police state at home and globalist oligarchic hegemony abroad continues unhindered for the United States of America. And of course that march would have continued had Hillary won as well, it just would have looked a bit different. Fewer environmental deregulations, likely catastrophic escalations against the Syrian government and possibly Russia, the exact same approaches to Iran, just as much hawkishness toward North Korea but minus the tweets about button sizes, no attempts at dismantling Obama’s corporatist healthcare plan. Not much more than that. Nobody wants to hear this. The Democrats still want to believe that the sitting president is simultaneously a Nazi, a Kremlin secret agent, an idiot, and a lunatic, and Trump supporters want to believe that he’s a populist savior fighting to liberate the nation from the claws of the deep state. Because of their partisan blinders they will both find reasons to believe they’ve got a savior or a traitor in the White House despite the fact that their country’s actual policy and behavior remains more or less the same. I still sometimes get Democrats telling me that Trump is about to flip into Hitler 2.0 any minute now and start throwing non-whites into extermination camps. Whenever I point out that they were wrong about their “your choices are Hillary or Hitler” alarmism I get a bunch of them telling me “give him time”. Well he’s had time. They were wrong. They didn’t get a Nazi, they got another shitty neocon. And since the Dems have been paced into alignment with the neocons there’s no one left to oppose their agendas, which is why we’re seeing so little pushback on Trump’s Iran saber rattling. I get Trump supporters telling me that he’s fighting the deep state, but the only way you can believe that at this point is to redefine “deep state” to mean “Democrats and their supporters”, which would actually just be more partisan bickering, which is all we’re actually seeing at this point. The only people you see pushing the collusion narrative and working for impeachment at this point are Democrats and Never-Trumpers; now that Trump has proven himself a good, compliant little boy the intelligence community has been putting its energy into the anti-detente propaganda effort to manufacture support for its new cold war escalations instead. The MAGA crowd tells me their guy has de-escalated the Syrian situation in an attempt to paint him as less pro-war than his predecessor, but that’s not even true either. Until US troops actually leave Syria, all this administration has done is kill a bunch of people (many of them civilians), occupy parts of a sovereign nation, and refuse to leave. Why are those troops still there when Syria and its allies are perfectly capable of handling any remaining traces of ISIS as they have been? No good reason, that’s for sure. This is not the fault of the American people. The American people consistently vote against interventionist wars (as evidenced by the fact that winning presidential candidates have to campaign against them), and while they may be guilted by the tribe into flag-waving once the troops are there, they consistently say no to every request for consent for more empire-building wars. In my recent article about how the CNN/CIA narrative is running the same script for Iran as they did for Libya and Syria, most of the pushback I received was from good people who wanted to make sure I knew that they didn’t consent to military intervention, they were simply offering their support for the people of Iran. Which is about as naive and sweet as a kid wanting to help the nice old man find his puppy. I understand you wanting to help find the puppy America, but for God’s sake please don’t get in that man’s van. So the will of the American people has been heard loud and clear. They do not consent to more regime change wars and more military interventions. They do not want that. Through the trickery of the mainstream media though, they are paced by fear-mongering and guilting into a reluctant, bargaining, “Well okay then…” consent which is quickly turned over into flag-waving enthusiasm because you have to support your troops, don’tchaknow? And I get that! Everyone knows a serviceman or woman; you don’t want to make them feel sad or like their life is being wasted. That’s such a tragedy! Who wants to make that conscious? Let’s be clear, too: the troops are often from some of the finest of working and middle-class families across the States, families whose strong sense of morality about right and wrong led their young sons and daughters to make the courageous decision to enter the armed forces. These young men and women were born with the most exemplary of desires. They want to make the world a better place and they are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice to do so. People love these families and they love their children. These young people really are our best new humans. They are so committed to the highest interest that they would put aside their self-interest to do so. Do you know how rare that quality is in a human? And these young people are being taken from us young, whether that be by death or by destroying their beautiful minds as they are warped by the war machine into thinking that evil is good. Taken and used to pump up the egos of a selfish few. In a healthy culture, the highest interest would dictate the desires of these young men and women. Unfortunately, the “highest interest” which should be assessed by the will of the people, is not being heard. It is not being enacted. The will of the people has repeatedly said that it does notwant to send these young people off to kill another country’s young people to shore up the share portfolios of a few cancerous beings. The will of the people consistently says no to that, but it has been corralled by a small group of bloodthirsty vampires, parasites who will happily lay any amount of young bodies to waste to win their tiny dick battles until they are finally satisfied with the amount of zeroes on their bank statements. Spoiler alert: they never will be. Americans talk about “seeing through the partisan bullshit” of US politics like it’s some kind of magical superpower, but it’s not. Both parties act in slightly different ways toward the exact same ends, working together like the jab-cross combination of a boxer to advance the same warmongering, corporatist oligarchic agendas, and there’s no reason to believe any of them about anything. America has two corporatist war parties who serve a plutocratic class of elites; one of them wears a cowboy hat, the other has pink hair. That’s it. That’s all you need to see to free yourself from the illusion. Please stop attacking one another for the evils that have been inflicted on you by this small group of sociopaths, America. Stop buying into the two-party good cop/bad cop schtick that the elites use to turn urban Americans against rural Americans and turn your anger toward your real enemies. —Caitlin Johnstone ____________ https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/trump-isnt-another-hitler-he-s-another-obama-51ea7db498b4 ### _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C93057d8044ca4f2a573508d554eb9bb5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636508293264569681&sdata=Z8qheclX5CcXEmcflx6VSd9Qbvh2cJpUsr33IjBY51s%3D&reserved=0 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From moboct1 at aim.com Sat Jan 6 19:03:15 2018 From: moboct1 at aim.com (Mildred O'brien) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 14:03:15 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Lay review of "American Made" from IMDB--Now you got me started on Barry Seals... In-Reply-To: <160cbde9bc9-171d-2abcc@webjas-vaa121.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <160ccdb0c2a-1720-6288f@webjas-vad210.srv.aolmail.net> -----Original Message----- From: Mildred O'brien To: davegreen84 ; karenaram ; davidjohnson1451 Sent: Fri, Jan 5, 2018 1:06 pm Subject: Lay review of "American Made" from IMDB--Now you got me started on Barry Seals... While laid up recovering from the cold I had since the Trump Tax protest Dec 16, I've been re-reading The Secret Life of Bill Clinton (1999), a well researched (unauthorized, it goes without saying) biography by the English investigative reporter, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, who was Wash. DC bureau chief of the Sunday Telegraph.  In  the book's chapter Barry Seal, Air Contra and Mena Airport (a 40-some year old topic apparently CIA is trying to whitewash by the contemporary movie), are facts which I'm sure Hollywood doesn't touch.  Seal lost his job as a TWA pilot in 1972 when caught trying to smuggle plastic explosives in a DC-3 into Cuba (probably intended for a Fidel assassination attempt), and afterwards found more gainful employment in Colombia (my brother, a pilot for TWA at that time may have known him):      "(Mena) goes beyond anything that was revealed by the various noisy investigations into the Iran-Contra affair.  What makes it so fascinating today is evidence that the CIA's base of operations was in Arkansas, and that Governor Bill Clinton was actively involved.  The idea that an outwardly liberal and progressive Democrat [sic] like Bill Clinton was secretly assisting Oliver North's crusade against the Revolucion Sandinista is so shocking that the American press has dismissed it out of hand.  But it is precisely because Mena turns the world upside down that it matters so much,  If true, it validates an inchoate suspicion felt by many Americans that things are not what they seem.  It suggests that the political rhetoric of the two parties in Washington is mere window dressing, while the real decisions are made in secret collusion without democratic accountabilty [emphasis mine]. To examine Mena is to examine the institutional condition of the United States.  As for the president, it exposes him as a remarkable counterfeit, willing to betray his liberal principles [sic] for self-advancement.      "It was the political Left that first became exercised about Mena.  They were alerted when a Fairchild C-123 military transport was shot down in Nicaragua on October 5, 1986 [the Hasenfus affair].  The plane had been used earlier by cocaine smuggler Berriman Adler Seal, who based his fleet of aircraft at Mena.  Arkansas Congressman Bill Alexander, the Democratic Deputy Whip in the House, made it his lonely crusade in the late 1980s to find out whether drug smuggling had somehow become intertwined with rogue operations by the CIA at Mena.  The left-wing press, The Nation and the Village Voice, doggedly pursued the story, led by an Irish radical named Alexander Cockburn.  He passed the baton to Roger Morris, author of the Clinton biography Partners in Power, and Sally Denton.  They wrote a long expose called the "Crimes of Mena" for the "Outlook" section of the Washington Post in 1994, only to see it spiked at the last moment [a later story by Evans-Prichard was published on the front page of the Washington Times].      "Until now [1999] no one has provided documentary evidence that Barry Seal's Mena-based air fleet was part of the 'Air Contra' supply operation or that Seal was actually running guns to Nicaragua under the cover of drug smuggling.  With due acknowledgment to my colleagues on the Left, I beg to offer the elusive proof." Who would have thought that the subject would turn up as the romantic Tom Cruise flick about a washed-up drug-running pilot and a washed-up President.   That's only one topic of the book.  It goes into other curious Clinton coincidences as the Oklahoma City bombing of the Murrah Building,Vince Foster's and other murders.  The book was published in 1999; I'm sure the author would have found even more interesting stories about the Clintons since he left D.C.  I used to think Oklahoma politics was dirty until reading this expose of Arkansas shenanigans.  (Gene Lyons must have drunk Hillary's Kool Aid, or he spent too much time in the Arkansas countryside). Midge O'Brien -----Original Message----- From: David Green To: Mildred O'brien Sent: Fri, Jan 5, 2018 8:58 am Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lay review of "American Made" from IMDB You're welcome, and Happy New Year! On ‎Friday‎, ‎January‎ ‎5‎, ‎2018‎ ‎08‎:‎05‎:‎16‎ ‎AM‎ ‎CST, Mildred O'brien wrote: Hi, David: OR--they could read Penny Lernoux's "Cry of the People" (1982) and Fear and Hope: Political Democracy in Central America (1984) or "In Banks We Trust" (1984).  OR Evans-Pritchard's "The Secret Life of Bill Clinton" (1999) on Barry Seal's Mena, Arkansas operation, which financed Bill's political ambitions.  WHO would bother paying to watch a stupid Hollywood-Tom Cruise flick anyway???  I learned about US war on Central American in 1981 when my sister-in-law's cousin was murdered by the coup in the mountains of Guatemala at Lake Atitlan.  He was a missionary priest from Oklahoma who worked 13 years with Tzuthil Indians.  His mistake: improving their quality of life--and--questioning soldiers about so many of his "disappeared" parishioners.  He was made a candidate ("beatified") for sainthood last year by Pope Francis.  His parents, poor farmers from Okarche, OK drove to Washington to ask President Reagan (who they voted for and trusted--their first mistake) to investigate his murder.  Reagan wouldn't see them, but they talked to Secy. Alexander Haig who told them "he must have been doing something he shouldn't have."  Yeah, like exist... Good way to start the New Year with your letter to the N-G.  Thanks.   Midge -----Original Message----- From: David Green via Peace-discuss To: Peace-discuss List Sent: Thu, Jan 4, 2018 9:36 pm Subject: [Peace-discuss] Lay review of "American Made" from IMDB An apparently popular Tom Cruise vehicle: Fails to Get Off the Ground popcorninhell30 September 2017 At this point is there a person on earth who doesn't already know the CIA was up to some shady s**t in Central America? Those who might still be in the dark about this stuff please do yourself a favor and read "Castles Made of Sand" by Andre Gerolymatos or "A Great Place to Have a War" by Joshua Kulantzick. If you want something a little more specific to this film's subject matter there's "Smuggler's End" by Del Hahn. You can also watch: Bananas (1971), The In-Laws (1979), El Salvador: Another Vietnam (1981), Alsino and the Condor (1982), Under Fire (1983), Latino (1985), Salvador (1986), Romero (1989), Walker (1987), Down Came a Blackbird (1995),Blow (2001), Voces Inocentes (2004), Guatemala: The Secret Files (2008), Harvest of Empire (2012), Princesas Rojas (2013), Escobar: Paradise Lost (2014),the TV show Narcos (2015-present), Room of Bones (2015), Finding Oscar (2016), The Infiltrator (2016) and if that's not enough, the hearings on the Iran-Contra Investigation on Youtube. All of these options and more would give you a more cogent, compelling and satisfying experience than sitting through American Made; a light, mediocre and curiously smug, bug-eyed view of important historical events. In it a TWA pilot turned CIA stooge makes a little side cash smuggling drugs, guns and people to and from Central America. While doing so, the movie frames the larger collusions and convolutions not as the result of a deeply flawed man sticking his thumbs in various proverbial pies but as an awkward jumble of "and then…" filmmaking in spite of him. Barry (Cruise) fits neatly into the recent crop of true-life protagonists too stupid to realize they're in over their head. He smiles crookedly, trying to hide his intentions under aviator glasses – mostly to the amusement of his CIA handler played by Domhnall Gleeson. He's clearly playing with a bad hand and everyone including the infamous Medellin drug cartel knows it, but damned if they're not entertained by Barry's good 'ol boy braggadocio. He's like a composite of the dudes from War Dogs (2016) only with the serendipity (and obliviousness) of Forrest Gump (1994). What exactly makes a man like this tick? The movie doesn't really seem that interested in answering that question. Instead it seems more concerned with giving us a history lesson based on Barry's limited first-person perspective and various camera collage techniques that make American Made look like an episode of Arrested Development (2003-Present). This is of course told without wit, irony or the requisite anger needed. One can't help but think that if director Doug Liman brought the same level of ire to this movie that he did in the under-watched Fair Game (2010), American Made would have been a bit more palatable to… someone. As it stands however, American Made is for no one. It's a frustratingly mediocre waste of marquee space that's too dense to be entertaining and too cavalier to be worth a good discussion of Cold War foreign policy. It lacks characterization and perspective, leaving only Tom Cruise's boundless charisma to push it past the runway with any alacrity. As much as I'd like to say Cruise pulls it off, American Made as a whole should have stayed grounded for a little while longer. _______________________________________________ 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 Sat Jan 6 20:32:47 2018 From: bjornsona at ameritech.net (bjornsona at ameritech.net) Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2018 14:32:47 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace-discus] Message-ID: <3ansvpn9964cufnl38ulovo1.1515269336192@email.lge.com> I submit  we are in a post-neocon/post-neoliberal age, call it what you will.  The once demarcated Democrats and Republicans seem to be exposing each other's secrets as quickly and nastily as lobsters in a stinky restaurant tank tearing each other apart. The restaurant owners didn't care enough to band their claws. While some Americans are watching the show, more are deciding to have dinner in a different restaurant. My guess is they are all moving down the street to the small strip mall, where some of them are eating at the Caribbean jerk joint, some at the vegan place owned by the lesbian couple, some atthe southern BBQ. The thing is, their cars are all in the same parking lot and they will eventually wind up in the same place. Sent from my LG Phoenix 2, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphoneI sub------ Original message------From: Karen Aram via Peace-discuss Date: Sat, Jan 6, 2018 11:05 AMTo: David Johnson;Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net;Subject:Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Trump's not another Hitler: he's another Obama David I didn’t mean my points to be in disagreement with Caitlyn, as much as they were meant to support.  You maybe right in that Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid aren’t “Neoliberal per se”, but the fact that they were implemented during the New Deal to save “Capitalism” and it did, as well as putting “Socialism” on the back shelf, and then during the fifties underground. Leads me to see it as Neoliberalism.  Also, given the fact that its “intent” as well as the “benefits” have been whittled away by the capitalist powers that be, lend me to believe they are neoliberal. The intent of SS when implemented was to provide everyone over the age of 65 with a means of support, whether they paid into it or not. Today, not only are they increasing the age to receive benefits, those benefits are barely survival levels, and don’t apply to the many farmers, self employed and poor who didn’t pay into it.  Unless we do away with our capitalist Oligarchs we are only going to get these programs, as handouts, though we have earned them. A true socialist society, would not allow these programs, so necessary for “life,” to be reduced as they have been over the years.  It’s the change in the power structure of capitalism, that needs to take place, as long as these programs are controlled by a system of capitalism with the goal of profiting the elites, these programs will remain barely subsistence if at all, and therefore neoliberal in character. On Jan 6, 2018, at 07:20, David Johnson wrote: I agree 100 % Karen with your assessment of Caitlin Johnstone’s article ( she is good as usual ) as well as your two minor points you disagree with her about.   And I have one very minor point of disagreement with you Karen. That is calling Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security “ neoliberal “. Obamacare / ACA IS very much neoliberal however because it is based on the tax payer subsidization of corporate insurance companies ( the very essence of our healthcare crisis ) and penalizes ( fines ) the lower middle Working class and the working poor because they are unable to afford the inferior overpriced health insurance on the ACA exchanges. And I might add that the Medicare Advantage program is also neoliberal in that the government  inefficiently pays MORE to private corporate insurance companies to administer Medicare / Medicaid benefits to recipients than it would cost for the government to do it directly themselves – sneaky slow and systematic back door privatization.   David J.     From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2018 8:52 AM To: C G Estabrook Cc: peace; peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Trump's not another Hitler: he's another Obama   Brilliant article, one of those “I wish I could say it the way she does.”     However, two points left out, minor if one looks at the big picture, but important to those now struggling due to the “new tax increase, favoring only the elites” implemented by the neocons, as well as the “austerity, and lack of jobs forcing many young people to join the military." Desperation has more to do with families sending off their young to fight in wars for Oligarchs, than “pride."  Add to this deregulation of Net Neutrality, taking place under the Trump administration, being supported by our local Republican, opposed by our two local Democrats. I’m not dismissing the censorship imposed by Obama, especially, incarceration of  “whistleblowers” but with the appointees by Trump heading up our institutions, it’s looking very much like fascism in the fast lane, as we destroy our institutions, and social services.    Social services and programs as Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security maybe neoliberal, but without which, many people will sicken and die.   All that being said, yes, Caitlyn is right, it’s the “system, good cop vs. bad cop” that the people need to rise up against, and overturn, not just go after the Administration, or depend on elections, which we know are rigged.      On Jan 6, 2018, at 01:54, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote:   Not a lot of people remember this, but George W Bush actually campaigned in 2000 against the interventionist foreign policy that the United States had been increasingly espousing. Far from advocating the full-scale regime change ground invasions that his administration is now infamous for, Bush frequently used the word “humble” when discussing the type of foreign policy he favored, condemning nation-building, an over-extended military, and the notion that America should be the world’s police force. Eight years later, after hundreds of thousands of human lives had been snuffed out in Iraq and Afghanistan and an entire region horrifically destabilized, Obama campaigned against Bush’s interventionist foreign policy, edging out Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries partly because she had supported the Iraq invasion while he had condemned it. The Democrats, decrying the warmongering tendencies of the Republicans, elected a President of the United States who would see Bush’s Afghanistan and Iraq and raise him Libya, Syria, Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia, along with a tenfold increase in drone strikes. Libya collapsed into a failed state where a slave trade now runs rampant, and half a million people died in the Syrian war that Obama and US allies exponentially escalated. Eight years later, a reality TV star and WWE Hall-of-Famer was elected President of the United States by the other half of the crowd who was sick to death of those warmongering Democrats. Trump campaigned on a non-interventionist foreign policy, saying America should fight terrorists but not enter into regime change wars with other governments. He thrashed his primary opponents as the only one willing to unequivocally condemn Bush and his actions, then won the general election partly by attacking the interventionist foreign policy of his predecessor and his opponent, and criticizing Hillary Clinton’s hawkish no-fly zone agenda in Syria. Now he’s approved the selling of arms to Ukraine to use against Russia, a dangerously hawkish move that even Obama refused to make for fear of increasing tensions with Moscow. His administration has escalated troop presence in Afghanistan and made it abundantly clear that the Pentagon has no intention of leaving Syria anytime soon despite the absence of any reasonable justification for US presence there. The CIA had ratcheted up operations in Iran six months into Trump’s presidency, shortly before the administration began running the exact same script against that countrythat the Obama administration ran on Libya, Syria and Ukraine. Maybe US presidents are limited to eight years because that’s how long it takes the public to forget everything. In the lead-up to the November elections those of us on the left who backed third parties were promised over and over and over again by Democratic party loyalists that if Hillary Clinton failed to secure the election there’d be goose-stepping stormtroopers patrolling the streets and murdering non-whites with impunity, concentration camps for Muslims and white supremacist extermination programs. Comparisons to Hitler went on nonstop, and anyone who failed to fall in line with the mainstream liberal narrative can attest that they were accused of aiding actual, literal Nazism on a regular basis. A year into Trump’s presidency, and not only did the apocalyptic predictions of national genocide fail to come true, he’s not even deporting as many immigrants as Obama. He is, however, out-bombing him. We were promised another Hitler. Instead, we got another Obama, who was himself another Bush. The march into corporatist Orwellian police state at home and globalist oligarchic hegemony abroad continues unhindered for the United States of America. And of course that march would have continued had Hillary won as well, it just would have looked a bit different. Fewer environmental deregulations, likely catastrophic escalations against the Syrian government and possibly Russia, the exact same approaches to Iran, just as much hawkishness toward North Korea but minus the tweets about button sizes, no attempts at dismantling Obama’s corporatist healthcare plan. Not much more than that. Nobody wants to hear this. The Democrats still want to believe that the sitting president is simultaneously a Nazi, a Kremlin secret agent, an idiot, and a lunatic, and Trump supporters want to believe that he’s a populist savior fighting to liberate the nation from the claws of the deep state. Because of their partisan blinders they will both find reasons to believe they’ve got a savior or a traitor in the White House despite the fact that their country’s actual policy and behavior remains more or less the same. I still sometimes get Democrats telling me that Trump is about to flip into Hitler 2.0 any minute now and start throwing non-whites into extermination camps. Whenever I point out that they were wrong about their “your choices are Hillary or Hitler” alarmism I get a bunch of them telling me “give him time”. Well he’s had time. They were wrong. They didn’t get a Nazi, they got another shitty neocon. And since the Dems have been paced into alignment with the neocons there’s no one left to oppose their agendas, which is why we’re seeing so little pushback on Trump’s Iran saber rattling. I get Trump supporters telling me that he’s fighting the deep state, but the only way you can believe that at this point is to redefine “deep state” to mean “Democrats and their supporters”, which would actually just be more partisan bickering, which is all we’re actually seeing at this point. The only people you see pushing the collusion narrative and working for impeachment at this point are Democrats and Never-Trumpers; now that Trump has proven himself a good, compliant little boy the intelligence community has been putting its energy into the anti-detente propaganda effort to manufacture support for its new cold war escalations instead. The MAGA crowd tells me their guy has de-escalated the Syrian situation in an attempt to paint him as less pro-war than his predecessor, but that’s not even true either. Until US troops actually leave Syria, all this administration has done is kill a bunch of people (many of them civilians), occupy parts of a sovereign nation, and refuse to leave. Why are those troops still there when Syria and its allies are perfectly capable of handling any remaining traces of ISIS as they have been? No good reason, that’s for sure. This is not the fault of the American people. The American people consistently vote against interventionist wars (as evidenced by the fact that winning presidential candidates have to campaign against them), and while they may be guilted by the tribe into flag-waving once the troops are there, they consistently say no to every request for consent for more empire-building wars. In my recent article about how the CNN/CIA narrative is running the same script for Iran as they did for Libya and Syria, most of the pushback I received was from good people who wanted to make sure I knew that they didn’t consent to military intervention, they were simply offering their support for the people of Iran. Which is about as naive and sweet as a kid wanting to help the nice old man find his puppy. I understand you wanting to help find the puppy America, but for God’s sake please don’t get in that man’s van. So the will of the American people has been heard loud and clear. They do not consent to more regime change wars and more military interventions. They do not want that. Through the trickery of the mainstream media though, they are paced by fear-mongering and guilting into a reluctant, bargaining, “Well okay then…” consent which is quickly turned over into flag-waving enthusiasm because you have to support your troops, don’tchaknow? And I get that! Everyone knows a serviceman or woman; you don’t want to make them feel sad or like their life is being wasted. That’s such a tragedy! Who wants to make that conscious? Let’s be clear, too: the troops are often from some of the finest of working and middle-class families across the States, families whose strong sense of morality about right and wrong led their young sons and daughters to make the courageous decision to enter the armed forces. These young men and women were born with the most exemplary of desires. They want to make the world a better place and they are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice to do so. People love these families and they love their children. These young people really are our best new humans. They are so committed to the highest interest that they would put aside their self-interest to do so. Do you know how rare that quality is in a human? And these young people are being taken from us young, whether that be by death or by destroying their beautiful minds as they are warped by the war machine into thinking that evil is good. Taken and used to pump up the egos of a selfish few. In a healthy culture, the highest interest would dictate the desires of these young men and women. Unfortunately, the “highest interest” which should be assessed by the will of the people, is not being heard. It is not being enacted. The will of the people has repeatedly said that it does notwant to send these young people off to kill another country’s young people to shore up the share portfolios of a few cancerous beings. The will of the people consistently says no to that, but it has been corralled by a small group of bloodthirsty vampires, parasites who will happily lay any amount of young bodies to waste to win their tiny dick battles until they are finally satisfied with the amount of zeroes on their bank statements. Spoiler alert: they never will be. Americans talk about “seeing through the partisan bullshit” of US politics like it’s some kind of magical superpower, but it’s not. Both parties act in slightly different ways toward the exact same ends, working together like the jab-cross combination of a boxer to advance the same warmongering, corporatist oligarchic agendas, and there’s no reason to believe any of them about anything. America has two corporatist war parties who serve a plutocratic class of elites; one of them wears a cowboy hat, the other has pink hair. That’s it. That’s all you need to see to free yourself from the illusion. Please stop attacking one another for the evils that have been inflicted on you by this small group of sociopaths, America. Stop buying into the two-party good cop/bad cop schtick that the elites use to turn urban Americans against rural Americans and turn your anger toward your real enemies. —Caitlin Johnstone ____________ https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/trump-isnt-another-hitler-he-s-another-obama-51ea7db498b4   ### _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C93057d8044ca4f2a573508d554eb9bb5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636508293264569681&sdata=Z8qheclX5CcXEmcflx6VSd9Qbvh2cJpUsr33IjBY51s%3D&reserved=0 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jan 6 20:56:53 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 20:56:53 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: The One State Solution--Promoting the Collapse of Zionism 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, January 06, 2018 2:53 PM To: eFreePalestine at yahoogroups.com Subject: NYT: The One State Solution--Promoting the Collapse of Zionism For the past three decades, Francis A. Boyle has provided the leadership of the Palestinian people with advice, counsel, and representation at all stages of the Middle East Peace Process. Here, he elaborates what the Palestinians must now do to realize their international legal right of return, in keeping with his startling perception of Israel as itself nothing more than a Jewish Bantustan bound for failure. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Clarity Press, Inc. [mailto:clarity at islandnet.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2011 3:15 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: BOOK: The Palestinian Right of Return / Boyle PROMOTING THE COLLAPSE OF ZIONISM: A STRATEGY FOR PALESTINE [http://www.claritypress.com/sitebuilder/images/palestinian-right-of-return-211x329.jpg] THE PALESTINIAN RIGHT OF RETURN UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW by FRANCIS A. BOYLE ISBN: 0932863-93-0 / 978-0-932863-93-5 $14.95 / 123 pp. / 2011 SYNOPSIS The just resolution of the Palestinian right of return is at the very heart of the Middle East peace process. Nonetheless, the Obama administration intends to impose a comprehensive peace settlement upon the Palestinians that will force them to give up their well-recognized right of return under United Nations General Assembly Resolution 194(III)) of 1948; accept a Bantustan of disjointed and surrounded chunks of territory on the West Bank in Gaza; and even expressly recognize Israel as "the Jewish State," as newly demanded by Benjamin Netanyahu. All this will fail for the reasons so powerfully stated in this book. For the past three decades, Francis A. Boyle has provided the leadership of the Palestinian people with advice, counsel, and representation at all stages of the Middle East Peace Process. Here, he elaborates what the Palestinians must now do to realize their international legal right of return, in keeping with his startling perception of Israel as itself nothing more than a Jewish Bantustan bound for failure. While an enormous amount of scholarly literature has been generated affirming the Palestinian right of return under international law, none is as authentic, powerful, personal, or convincing as the eloquent pleas of Dr. Hanan Ashrawi and Dr. Haidar Abdul Shaff, included here. This book goes to the heart of the solution. AUTHOR FRANCIS A. BOYLE is a leading American expert in international law. He was responsible for drafting the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, the American implementing legislation for the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention. He served on the Board of Directors of Amnesty International (1988-1992), and represented Bosnia-Herzegovina at the World Court. He served as legal adviser to the Palestinian Delegation to the Middle East peace negotiations from 1991 to 1993. In 2007, he delivered the Bertrand Russell Peace Lectures. Professor Boyle teaches international law at the University of Illinois, Champaign and is author of, inter alia, The Future of International Law and American Foreign Policy, Foundations of World Order, The Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence, Palestine, Palestinians and International Law, Destroying World Order, Biowarfare and Terrorism, Tackling America's Toughest Problems, and The Tamil Genocide by Sri Lanka. He holds a Doctor of Law Magna Cum Laude as well as a Ph.D. in Political Science, both from Harvard University. View the Table of Contents View other Clarity Press titles on the Middle East Available now from Clarity Acquire this book from amazon.com CLARITY PRESS, INC http://www.claritypress.com You are presently listed as a subscriber for press releases from Clarity Press, Inc. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jan 6 20:56:53 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 20:56:53 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: The One State Solution--Promoting the Collapse of Zionism 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, January 06, 2018 2:53 PM To: eFreePalestine at yahoogroups.com Subject: NYT: The One State Solution--Promoting the Collapse of Zionism For the past three decades, Francis A. Boyle has provided the leadership of the Palestinian people with advice, counsel, and representation at all stages of the Middle East Peace Process. Here, he elaborates what the Palestinians must now do to realize their international legal right of return, in keeping with his startling perception of Israel as itself nothing more than a Jewish Bantustan bound for failure. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Clarity Press, Inc. [mailto:clarity at islandnet.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2011 3:15 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: BOOK: The Palestinian Right of Return / Boyle PROMOTING THE COLLAPSE OF ZIONISM: A STRATEGY FOR PALESTINE [http://www.claritypress.com/sitebuilder/images/palestinian-right-of-return-211x329.jpg] THE PALESTINIAN RIGHT OF RETURN UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW by FRANCIS A. BOYLE ISBN: 0932863-93-0 / 978-0-932863-93-5 $14.95 / 123 pp. / 2011 SYNOPSIS The just resolution of the Palestinian right of return is at the very heart of the Middle East peace process. Nonetheless, the Obama administration intends to impose a comprehensive peace settlement upon the Palestinians that will force them to give up their well-recognized right of return under United Nations General Assembly Resolution 194(III)) of 1948; accept a Bantustan of disjointed and surrounded chunks of territory on the West Bank in Gaza; and even expressly recognize Israel as "the Jewish State," as newly demanded by Benjamin Netanyahu. All this will fail for the reasons so powerfully stated in this book. For the past three decades, Francis A. Boyle has provided the leadership of the Palestinian people with advice, counsel, and representation at all stages of the Middle East Peace Process. Here, he elaborates what the Palestinians must now do to realize their international legal right of return, in keeping with his startling perception of Israel as itself nothing more than a Jewish Bantustan bound for failure. While an enormous amount of scholarly literature has been generated affirming the Palestinian right of return under international law, none is as authentic, powerful, personal, or convincing as the eloquent pleas of Dr. Hanan Ashrawi and Dr. Haidar Abdul Shaff, included here. This book goes to the heart of the solution. AUTHOR FRANCIS A. BOYLE is a leading American expert in international law. He was responsible for drafting the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, the American implementing legislation for the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention. He served on the Board of Directors of Amnesty International (1988-1992), and represented Bosnia-Herzegovina at the World Court. He served as legal adviser to the Palestinian Delegation to the Middle East peace negotiations from 1991 to 1993. In 2007, he delivered the Bertrand Russell Peace Lectures. Professor Boyle teaches international law at the University of Illinois, Champaign and is author of, inter alia, The Future of International Law and American Foreign Policy, Foundations of World Order, The Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence, Palestine, Palestinians and International Law, Destroying World Order, Biowarfare and Terrorism, Tackling America's Toughest Problems, and The Tamil Genocide by Sri Lanka. He holds a Doctor of Law Magna Cum Laude as well as a Ph.D. in Political Science, both from Harvard University. View the Table of Contents View other Clarity Press titles on the Middle East Available now from Clarity Acquire this book from amazon.com CLARITY PRESS, INC http://www.claritypress.com You are presently listed as a subscriber for press releases from Clarity Press, Inc. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sat Jan 6 21:06:50 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 21:06:50 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News from Neptune yesterday Message-ID: Excellent discussion by Carl and David in relation to Iran, based upon Trita Parsi’s interview with the Real News. https://youtu.be/RLFBQA_dvV8 From galliher at illinois.edu Sat Jan 6 23:45:37 2018 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 17:45:37 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Working class opposition. erupting in Iran.... In-Reply-To: References: <362CE1A6-395F-44C2-86BC-FFCE88C94266@illinois.edu> Message-ID: <3471B644-1C95-47F2-874C-66493BA85A75@illinois.edu> That’s a description of the self-understanding of populist movements. Like our own self-understanding, it may be more or less correct, honest or cynical, accurate or deluded. > On Jan 6, 2018, at 7:41 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > I find the statement : > > "pits a virtuous and homogeneous people against a set of elites and dangerous ‘others’ > who are together depicted as depriving (or attempting to deprive) the sovereign people “ > > disingenuous at best, because it lumps all movements against a Government by its people, as one and the same, with extreme sarcasm. The people generally and in the case of Iran, have legitimate complaints. Like Syria, US involvement will mitigate those who are legitimate in their opposition to the government. The opposition in Syria was minimal, but legitimate, what happened to them once the Jihadists were brought in by the US, probably dead. > > That is not to say Iran, is the same as Syria, only in respect to US interference. > > The role of the American people is to stand up against our governments interventions in sovereign nations, using US taxpayers money, weapons, sanctions, jihadists, etc., in support of coups and all else we use to install puppet regimes. > > There are similarities to the situations in every nation, and fear that Iran will become another Syria or Libya, or Ukraine, or……..is legitimate and must be prevented by the American people saying “NO, MORE.” Even if as Kevin Zeese points out “Iran is not Syria, and will become stronger in the long run.” > > Trump is calling for war, intervention etc., but we know its not just “him,” removal of Trump will solve nothing, because Hillary and all the Democrats are supporting the demonstrators or “people of Iran.” However, Trump is President and responsible for his actions just as Obama was responsible for his when expanding the Bush wars from two to eight. > > > > > > > > > > > >> of their rights, values, prosperity, identity, and voice.”On Jan 5, 2018, at 20:29, Carl G. Estabrook > wrote: >> >> In "Twenty-First Century Populism: The Spectre of Western European Democracy" (2008), Daniele Albertazzi and Duncan McDonnell define populism as an ideology that >> >> "pits a virtuous and homogeneous people against a set of elites and dangerous ‘others’ >> who are together depicted as depriving (or attempting to deprive) the sovereign people >> of their rights, values, prosperity, identity, and voice.” >> >> Recent examples include the Iranian demonstrators, the Trump campaign, the Sanders campaign, Brexit, the Le Pen and Mélenchon campaigns, and the AfD… >> >> >>> On Jan 5, 2018, at 10:01 PM, Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: >>> >>> Discussed on NEWS FROM NEPTUNE today (and soon archived and available at Urbana Public TV). >>> >>> {Iranian demonstrations:Rouhani::populism that elected Trump:Obama} >>> >>> The Iranian anti-government demonstrations, based as they are on the economic immiseration of the Iranian populace (encouraged by US sanctions & economic warfare against Iran), are to the reformist neoliberal Rouhani government, as the populist movement that produced Trump, is to the neoliberal Obama administration (mutatis mutandis, of course). >>> >>> —CGE >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 5, 2018, at 9:34 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss > wrote: >>>> >>>> See https://popularresistance.org/special-report-are-long-term-us-regime-change-efforts-behind-iran-protests/ >>>> >>>> It indicates U.S. money/organizations which over time have sought to undermine the Iranian regime, as with others. It also casts some doubt about NIAC and its spokespersons. >>>> >>>> —mkb >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jan 4, 2018, at 8:44 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss > wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I support the assertions made in this article, but any USG intervention, which has likely already taken place covertly, with weapons, CIA supported Jihadists, that includes sanctions, as was done in Syria and Libya, we must all back off and focus our criticism on "USG warmongering" which includes our allies the Saudi's and Israel. Any change within Iran, must come from the Iranian people without outside interference or intervention. >>>>> >>>>> Working class opposition erupts in Iran: A harbinger for the world in 2018 >>>>> by Keith Jones >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 4 January 2018 >>>>> The long-suppressed and brutally exploited Iranian working class has burst onto the scene shaking Iran’s bourgeois-clerical regime. >>>>> Since Dec. 28, tens of thousands have defied the Islamic Republic’s repressive apparatus and taken to the streets in cities and towns across the county. They have done so to voice their anger over food price rises, mass unemployment, gaping social inequality, years of sweeping social spending cuts and a pseudo-democratic political system that is rigged on behalf of the ruling elite and utterly impervious to the needs of working people. >>>>> The scope and intensity of this movement and its rapid embrace of slogans challenging the government and the entire autocratic political system have stunned Iranian authorities and western observers alike. Yet, it was preceded by months of worker protests against job cuts and plant closures and unpaid wages and benefits. >>>>> In the days immediately prior to the eruption of the antigovernment protests, discussion of the ever-deepening divide between Iran’s top 1 and 10 percent and the vast majority who live in poverty and economic insecurity raged on social media. The trigger for this explosion of popular discontent was the government’s latest austerity budget. It will further slash income support for ordinary Iranians, raise gas prices by as much as 50 percent, and curtail development spending, while increasing the already huge sums under the control of the Shia clergy. >>>>> Yesterday, after days of an ever-widening mobilization of security forces, mass arrests, and bloody clashes that left at least 21 dead, General Mohammad Ali Jafari, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, declared the unrest over: “Today we can announce the end of the sedition.” >>>>> The rulers of the Islamic Republic are trying to justify their brutal crackdown with spurious claims that the protests are being manipulated by Washington and its principal regional allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia, as part of their incendiary drive for regime change in Tehran. >>>>> The claim that the current protests are akin to those mounted by the Green Movement in 2009 is a base slander meant to justify a bigger crime. The Green challenge to the results of the 2009 Iranian presidential election was a long-prepared political operation that followed the script of similar US-orchestrated “color revolutions” in the Ukraine, Georgia, Lebanon and elsewhere. It was aimed at bringing to power those elements of the Iranian elite most eager to reach a quick rapprochement with US and European imperialism. It drew its popular support almost exclusively from the most privileged layers of the upper middle class, who were mobilized on the basis of neoliberal denunciations of the populist President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for “squandering” money on the poor. >>>>> The current challenge to the Iranian regime is of an entirely different character. It is rooted in the working class, including in smaller industrial cities and district towns; draws its greatest support from young people who face an unemployment rate of 40 percent or more; and is driven by opposition to social inequality and capitalist austerity. >>>>> Whatever the immediate fate of the current wave of protests, a new stage in the class struggle has opened in Iran that will unfold over the coming weeks and months. What is certain is that the working class, having thrust itself onto center stage, will not be quickly or easily silenced. >>>>> The working-class unrest in Iran has already upset the calculations not just of the Iranian elite, but of governments around the world. Trump, whose anti-Muslim travel ban targets Iranians, has hypocritically and fatuously claimed his “support” for the protests, with the hope that he can use them to demonize Tehran and thereby provide grist for US war preparations against Iran. The European powers have been more circumspect, and not only because the protests cut across their plans to cash in on the Iranian government’s offers of oil concessions and cheap labor. They fear the destabilizing impact of mounting class struggle in Iran on the entire Middle East. >>>>> To understand the significance of the resurgence of the Iranian working class for Middle East and world politics, it is necessary to examine it in historical context. >>>>> The 1979 Iranian Revolution, which overthrew the tyrannical US-sponsored regime of the Shah four decades ago, was a massive, working class-led, anti-imperialist social explosion. It was a growing wave of political strikes that broke the back of the Shah’s regime, and in the months that followed, workers seized factories, placing them under the control of workers’ councils. >>>>> But a social revolution expropriating the Iranian bourgeoisie and establishing a workers’ republic in alliance with the rural toilers was blocked by the nominally socialist organizations, above all the Stalinist Tudeh Party. The Tudeh party had deep roots in the working class, which had a long history of secularism and revolutionary socialism. But for decades it orientated to the impotent liberal wing of the national bourgeoisie and then in 1979 swung round to giving uncritical support to the Ayatollah Khomeini, on the grounds that he was the political leader of the “progressive” wing of the bourgeoisie and leading a “national democratic” (i.e. capitalist) revolution. >>>>> This aged Shia cleric had long been a politically marginal figure. But he was able to gain a mass following among the urban and rural poor by exploiting the political vacuum created by the Stalinists, and by drawing on the longstanding connections between the Shia clergy and the bazaar, the bastion of the traditional wing of the Iranian bourgeoisie. >>>>> With the working class politically neutralized by the Stalinists, Khomeini was able to reorganize the state machine following the Shah’s overthrow while manipulating and diverting the mass movement, then restabilize bourgeois rule through savage repression of the political left, including the Tudeh party, and the destruction of all independent workers’ organizations. >>>>> These developments fed into and were part of a broader process in which, due to the betrayals of the Stalinists, Islamist forces were able to politically profit from the mounting crisis of the postcolonial bourgeois nationalist regimes and movements, including the Palestine Liberation Organization, and their inability to realize their bourgeois-democratic programs. >>>>> Before his death in 1989, Khomeini oversaw a further lurch to the right of the Islamic Republic, with a turn to the IMF and overtures to the “Great Satan,” US imperialism. This had been prepared the previous year in a further ferocious assault on the left, in which thousands of political prisoners were killed. >>>>> Over the course of the past three decades, Iran’s government has been led by different factions of the political elite, including so-called “reformists” and Shia populists like Ahmadinejad. All have further rolled back the social concessions made to working people in the wake of the 1979 revolution and savagely suppressed the working class. >>>>> The Western press has long sought to vilify Iranian politics and social life. But at its core, the experience of the working class in Iran mirrors that of workers around the world, who for decades have faced an unrelenting assault on their social rights and politically have been utterly disenfranchised. >>>>> In response to the 2008 crisis, the universal response of the bourgeoisie has been to drastically intensify this class war. Precarious employment, crumbling public services, unprecedented social inequality, exclusion from political life and the threat of imperialist war—this is the lot of workers the world over. >>>>> But the period in which the class struggle could be suppressed is coming to an end. >>>>> In country after country around the world, the parties, organizations and political mechanisms, including the establishment left parties and pro-capitalist unions, through which the bourgeoisie has managed its affairs and above all suppressed the class struggle are breaking down. >>>>> The events in Iran will resonate across the Middle East, where the working class has passed through decades of bitter experiences, not only with the secular bourgeois nationalist movements, but also with various forms of Islamist politics, including the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party in Turkey. >>>>> And while the ignoramus Trump tweets about injustice in Iran, how different will American workers deem their circumstances from those of Iranian workers? Last month as the Iranian government was presenting a budget that slashes social spending while funneling additional money to the mullahs, the US Congress rewarded the rich and super-rich with trillions in additional tax cuts. These tax cuts are now to be paid for through a massive assault on Social Security, health care and other core social rights. >>>>> The events in Iran must be recognized as a harbinger of a vast eruption of working-class struggle around the world. >>>>> The task of revolutionary socialists is to turn into this movement and to fight to arm the international working class with an understanding of the logic of its needs, aspirations and struggle. Capitalism is incompatible with the needs of society. Working people, the class that produces the world’s wealth, must unite their struggles across state borders and continents to establish workers’ political power, so as to undertake the socialist reorganization of society and put an end to want and imperialist war. >>>>> Keith Jones WSWS.ORG >>>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 Sun Jan 7 00:50:01 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2018 00:50:01 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Working class opposition. erupting in Iran.... In-Reply-To: <3471B644-1C95-47F2-874C-66493BA85A75@illinois.edu> References: <362CE1A6-395F-44C2-86BC-FFCE88C94266@illinois.edu> <3471B644-1C95-47F2-874C-66493BA85A75@illinois.edu> Message-ID: I don’t understand the application of the word, “populism” to a working class demonstration against a government. On Jan 6, 2018, at 15:45, Carl G. Estabrook > wrote: That’s a description of the self-understanding of populist movements. Like our own self-understanding, it may be more or less correct, honest or cynical, accurate or deluded. On Jan 6, 2018, at 7:41 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss > wrote: I find the statement : "pits a virtuous and homogeneous people against a set of elites and dangerous ‘others’ who are together depicted as depriving (or attempting to deprive) the sovereign people “ disingenuous at best, because it lumps all movements against a Government by its people, as one and the same, with extreme sarcasm. The people generally and in the case of Iran, have legitimate complaints. Like Syria, US involvement will mitigate those who are legitimate in their opposition to the government. The opposition in Syria was minimal, but legitimate, what happened to them once the Jihadists were brought in by the US, probably dead. That is not to say Iran, is the same as Syria, only in respect to US interference. The role of the American people is to stand up against our governments interventions in sovereign nations, using US taxpayers money, weapons, sanctions, jihadists, etc., in support of coups and all else we use to install puppet regimes. There are similarities to the situations in every nation, and fear that Iran will become another Syria or Libya, or Ukraine, or……..is legitimate and must be prevented by the American people saying “NO, MORE.” Even if as Kevin Zeese points out “Iran is not Syria, and will become stronger in the long run.” Trump is calling for war, intervention etc., but we know its not just “him,” removal of Trump will solve nothing, because Hillary and all the Democrats are supporting the demonstrators or “people of Iran.” However, Trump is President and responsible for his actions just as Obama was responsible for his when expanding the Bush wars from two to eight. of their rights, values, prosperity, identity, and voice.”On Jan 5, 2018, at 20:29, Carl G. Estabrook > wrote: In "Twenty-First Century Populism: The Spectre of Western European Democracy" (2008), Daniele Albertazzi and Duncan McDonnell define populism as an ideology that "pits a virtuous and homogeneous people against a set of elites and dangerous ‘others’ who are together depicted as depriving (or attempting to deprive) the sovereign people of their rights, values, prosperity, identity, and voice.” Recent examples include the Iranian demonstrators, the Trump campaign, the Sanders campaign, Brexit, the Le Pen and Mélenchon campaigns, and the AfD… On Jan 5, 2018, at 10:01 PM, Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: Discussed on NEWS FROM NEPTUNE today (and soon archived and available at Urbana Public TV). {Iranian demonstrations:Rouhani::populism that elected Trump:Obama} The Iranian anti-government demonstrations, based as they are on the economic immiseration of the Iranian populace (encouraged by US sanctions & economic warfare against Iran), are to the reformist neoliberal Rouhani government, as the populist movement that produced Trump, is to the neoliberal Obama administration (mutatis mutandis, of course). —CGE On Jan 5, 2018, at 9:34 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss > wrote: See https://popularresistance.org/special-report-are-long-term-us-regime-change-efforts-behind-iran-protests/ It indicates U.S. money/organizations which over time have sought to undermine the Iranian regime, as with others. It also casts some doubt about NIAC and its spokespersons. —mkb On Jan 4, 2018, at 8:44 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss > wrote: I support the assertions made in this article, but any USG intervention, which has likely already taken place covertly, with weapons, CIA supported Jihadists, that includes sanctions, as was done in Syria and Libya, we must all back off and focus our criticism on "USG warmongering" which includes our allies the Saudi's and Israel. Any change within Iran, must come from the Iranian people without outside interference or intervention. Working class opposition erupts in Iran: A harbinger for the world in 2018 by Keith Jones 4 January 2018 The long-suppressed and brutally exploited Iranian working class has burst onto the scene shaking Iran’s bourgeois-clerical regime. Since Dec. 28, tens of thousands have defied the Islamic Republic’s repressive apparatus and taken to the streets in cities and towns across the county. They have done so to voice their anger over food price rises, mass unemployment, gaping social inequality, years of sweeping social spending cuts and a pseudo-democratic political system that is rigged on behalf of the ruling elite and utterly impervious to the needs of working people. The scope and intensity of this movement and its rapid embrace of slogans challenging the government and the entire autocratic political system have stunned Iranian authorities and western observers alike. Yet, it was preceded by months of worker protests against job cuts and plant closures and unpaid wages and benefits. In the days immediately prior to the eruption of the antigovernment protests, discussion of the ever-deepening divide between Iran’s top 1 and 10 percent and the vast majority who live in poverty and economic insecurity raged on social media. The trigger for this explosion of popular discontent was the government’s latest austerity budget. It will further slash income support for ordinary Iranians, raise gas prices by as much as 50 percent, and curtail development spending, while increasing the already huge sums under the control of the Shia clergy. Yesterday, after days of an ever-widening mobilization of security forces, mass arrests, and bloody clashes that left at least 21 dead, General Mohammad Ali Jafari, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, declared the unrest over: “Today we can announce the end of the sedition.” The rulers of the Islamic Republic are trying to justify their brutal crackdown with spurious claims that the protests are being manipulated by Washington and its principal regional allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia, as part of their incendiary drive for regime change in Tehran. The claim that the current protests are akin to those mounted by the Green Movement in 2009 is a base slander meant to justify a bigger crime. The Green challenge to the results of the 2009 Iranian presidential election was a long-prepared political operation that followed the script of similar US-orchestrated “color revolutions” in the Ukraine, Georgia, Lebanon and elsewhere. It was aimed at bringing to power those elements of the Iranian elite most eager to reach a quick rapprochement with US and European imperialism. It drew its popular support almost exclusively from the most privileged layers of the upper middle class, who were mobilized on the basis of neoliberal denunciations of the populist President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for “squandering” money on the poor. The current challenge to the Iranian regime is of an entirely different character. It is rooted in the working class, including in smaller industrial cities and district towns; draws its greatest support from young people who face an unemployment rate of 40 percent or more; and is driven by opposition to social inequality and capitalist austerity. Whatever the immediate fate of the current wave of protests, a new stage in the class struggle has opened in Iran that will unfold over the coming weeks and months. What is certain is that the working class, having thrust itself onto center stage, will not be quickly or easily silenced. The working-class unrest in Iran has already upset the calculations not just of the Iranian elite, but of governments around the world. Trump, whose anti-Muslim travel ban targets Iranians, has hypocritically and fatuously claimed his “support” for the protests, with the hope that he can use them to demonize Tehran and thereby provide grist for US war preparations against Iran. The European powers have been more circumspect, and not only because the protests cut across their plans to cash in on the Iranian government’s offers of oil concessions and cheap labor. They fear the destabilizing impact of mounting class struggle in Iran on the entire Middle East. To understand the significance of the resurgence of the Iranian working class for Middle East and world politics, it is necessary to examine it in historical context. The 1979 Iranian Revolution, which overthrew the tyrannical US-sponsored regime of the Shah four decades ago, was a massive, working class-led, anti-imperialist social explosion. It was a growing wave of political strikes that broke the back of the Shah’s regime, and in the months that followed, workers seized factories, placing them under the control of workers’ councils. But a social revolution expropriating the Iranian bourgeoisie and establishing a workers’ republic in alliance with the rural toilers was blocked by the nominally socialist organizations, above all the Stalinist Tudeh Party. The Tudeh party had deep roots in the working class, which had a long history of secularism and revolutionary socialism. But for decades it orientated to the impotent liberal wing of the national bourgeoisie and then in 1979 swung round to giving uncritical support to the Ayatollah Khomeini, on the grounds that he was the political leader of the “progressive” wing of the bourgeoisie and leading a “national democratic” (i.e. capitalist) revolution. This aged Shia cleric had long been a politically marginal figure. But he was able to gain a mass following among the urban and rural poor by exploiting the political vacuum created by the Stalinists, and by drawing on the longstanding connections between the Shia clergy and the bazaar, the bastion of the traditional wing of the Iranian bourgeoisie. With the working class politically neutralized by the Stalinists, Khomeini was able to reorganize the state machine following the Shah’s overthrow while manipulating and diverting the mass movement, then restabilize bourgeois rule through savage repression of the political left, including the Tudeh party, and the destruction of all independent workers’ organizations. These developments fed into and were part of a broader process in which, due to the betrayals of the Stalinists, Islamist forces were able to politically profit from the mounting crisis of the postcolonial bourgeois nationalist regimes and movements, including the Palestine Liberation Organization, and their inability to realize their bourgeois-democratic programs. Before his death in 1989, Khomeini oversaw a further lurch to the right of the Islamic Republic, with a turn to the IMF and overtures to the “Great Satan,” US imperialism. This had been prepared the previous year in a further ferocious assault on the left, in which thousands of political prisoners were killed. Over the course of the past three decades, Iran’s government has been led by different factions of the political elite, including so-called “reformists” and Shia populists like Ahmadinejad. All have further rolled back the social concessions made to working people in the wake of the 1979 revolution and savagely suppressed the working class. The Western press has long sought to vilify Iranian politics and social life. But at its core, the experience of the working class in Iran mirrors that of workers around the world, who for decades have faced an unrelenting assault on their social rights and politically have been utterly disenfranchised. In response to the 2008 crisis, the universal response of the bourgeoisie has been to drastically intensify this class war. Precarious employment, crumbling public services, unprecedented social inequality, exclusion from political life and the threat of imperialist war—this is the lot of workers the world over. But the period in which the class struggle could be suppressed is coming to an end. In country after country around the world, the parties, organizations and political mechanisms, including the establishment left parties and pro-capitalist unions, through which the bourgeoisie has managed its affairs and above all suppressed the class struggle are breaking down. The events in Iran will resonate across the Middle East, where the working class has passed through decades of bitter experiences, not only with the secular bourgeois nationalist movements, but also with various forms of Islamist politics, including the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party in Turkey. And while the ignoramus Trump tweets about injustice in Iran, how different will American workers deem their circumstances from those of Iranian workers? Last month as the Iranian government was presenting a budget that slashes social spending while funneling additional money to the mullahs, the US Congress rewarded the rich and super-rich with trillions in additional tax cuts. These tax cuts are now to be paid for through a massive assault on Social Security, health care and other core social rights. The events in Iran must be recognized as a harbinger of a vast eruption of working-class struggle around the world. The task of revolutionary socialists is to turn into this movement and to fight to arm the international working class with an understanding of the logic of its needs, aspirations and struggle. Capitalism is incompatible with the needs of society. Working people, the class that produces the world’s wealth, must unite their struggles across state borders and continents to establish workers’ political power, so as to undertake the socialist reorganization of society and put an end to want and imperialist war. Keith Jones WSWS.ORG _______________________________________________ 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 Sun Jan 7 01:05:08 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2018 01:05:08 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Erik Prince Message-ID: We discussed this on AWARE about a year ago. The New Eastern Outlook’s Wm. Engdahl has an article in relation to the situation currently. Maybe the Chinese were operating on the premise of “keeping your enemies closer.” I see this as extremely dangerous, not just for the Chinese. Blackwater founder and CIA-funded mercenary Erik Prince managed to convince the Chinese government to finance and hire his Hong Kong Frontier Services Group to do security training and operations along the two major corridors of the new Silk Road: Northwest China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region and Southwest China’s Yunnan Province, where Kunming is the strategic hub of the entire Myanmar oil and gas pipelines and including a deep sea port on Maday Island in Kyaukphyu, Rakhine State, heart of recent political unrest involving the Myanmar security forces and Rohingya Muslims. Then the same Erik Prince quietly lobbies US President Trump and CIA Director Pompeo to hire, “off the books,” his private network of former CIA and US special forces mercenaries to carry out covert operations in Iran, North Korea, Afghanistan and other places strategic to the BRI development. A major security fiasco involving a major China state company and a Hong Kong-based corporate security company is emerging. It could potentially open up the massive Eurasian project of China, its Belt, Road Initiative (BRI), to major covert sabotage directed out of Langley Virginia CIA headquarters and carried out by a “Trojan Horse” the Chinese have hired to train their personnel to protect the high-speed Eurasian rail and deep water ports infrastructure from sabotage and terror attacks. The Hong Kong company is owned by Erik Prince, notorious founder of Blackwater Security. At the same time Prince is being paid by the Chinese to protect their BRI, he is reportedly plotting with Trump and CIA chief Mike Pompeo to form a “private CIA, completely off the books” that would do black operations in many of the Eurasian countries linked to the BRI. This is shaping up as a major security fiasco for China’s BRI if left uncorrected. Private CIA In early December a new element of Erik Prince’s dubious role as a “private” security consultant came to light. Media reports indicated that Prince is quietly proposing to President Trump personally and to Trump CIA head Mike Pompeo, to create a top secret global private CIA, “off-the-books” that would carry out dirty tricks, assassinations and other black operations independent of the official CIA. According to the reports, Prince is proposing the project together with his longtime associate, CIA veteran John R. Maguire, who also has worked as a consultant to Prince’s Hong Kong Frontier Services Group, about which more below. They would reportedly create the “off-the-books” parallel CIA together with convicted Iran-Contra operative, Col. Oliver North, and would get US government funding to create a private mercenary force in both Pakistan, Afghanistan and send covert “private” destabilization agents into Iran and even North Korea among other proposed operations. If we combine this Prince plan with his recent proposal for a privatized Afghan “exit strategy” we begin to see an ominous picture that will ensure chaos and anarchy in a key country of the future China Belt, Road Initiative, the so-called New Economic Silk Road. The Prince private Afghan war plan The same Erik Prince has recently presented a plan for a private Prince-created mercenary force to go into Afghanistan, a country his Blackwater was hired after 2002 by the CIA to operate in. On December 7, Prince unveiled what he termed his plan for an Afghan “exit strategy” after 17 years and more than $714 billion dollars of US taxpayer money. Prince proposes his private company be mandated to grab invaluable mining resources in Afghanistan’s Helmland Province and use the resources to pay for a continued US military role in the country. Prince proposes plundering huge reserves of lithium, uranium, phosphorus, and other rare earth elements worth $1 trillion in Helmand Province alone. According to a report in the US Military Times, Prince has submitted a business proposal offering a “turn-key composite air wing” to help the Afghan air force fight against the Taliban and other militant groups. Prince’s private security company would reportedly provide and operate a fleet of fixed-wing planes, attack helicopters and drones capable of providing close-air support to maneuvering ground forces. Notable is the fact that Helmland Province is also home to the world’s largest opium cultivation, a crop whose volume exploded after the 2001 US invasion. Ahmed Wali Karzai, the warlord brother of the former US-selected President reportedly received regular payment from the CIA while he oversaw the control of Helmland opium and heroin. Erik Prince would use his Hong Kong private security company, Frontier Services Group, the China-focused private military corporation Prince controls, according to these reports, to “provide logistics support to the extractive firms with secure transportation and camp support.” Now it begins to get really serious, as a potential security fiasco for China’s development of the BRI looms. The well-connected Prince Erik Prince became notorious as head of one of the more savage US private mercenary armies during the US occupation of Iraq in the 1990s. Blackwater became notorious in Iraq for the Nisour Square massacre in September 2007, when Blackwater mercenaries working for the US Government opened fire in a crowded square in Baghdad, killing 17 Iraqi civilians including children and seriously wounding 20 more. Three guards were convicted of 14 manslaughter charges, and another of murder, in a US court. After that, in 2010 he sold the company and regrouped eventually under the name Academi. Academi was also reportedly involved in the 2013-14 CIA-backed coup d’etat in Ukraine that toppled the elected Yanukovich government, involved in training private paramilitary forces tied to Ukraine neo-nazi groups. In 2010 Prince’s company, despite scandals, received another $100 million to do work for the CIA. In 2009 it was revealed that Erik Prince was part of a CIA task force commissioned to kill terrorists. He even was hired to provide security to the Langley, Virginia CIA headquarters. Interesting to note as well are Erik Prince’s ties to the Donald Trump Administration. His sister, billionaire Betsy DeVos, wife of the heir of the AmWay fortune, is Trump Administration Secretary of Education. According to one former US senior official, Prince had advised the Trump transition team before January 20 on matters related to intelligence and defense, “including weighing in on candidates for the Defense and State departments.” Erik Prince is close friend of vice President Mike Pence, who as Vice President cast a rare tie-breaking vote in the Senate that allowed Prince’s sister, Betsy DeVos, to become Education Secretary. Prince is also close with billionaire hedge fund operator Robert Mercer, a key financier of Trump’s election. These close connections Prince is reportedly using to promote his private CIA that would report only to Pompeo and Trump, outside the traditional intelligence chain-of-command. Prince and the China Silk Road Security A Chinese government newspaper revealed in early 2017 that Prince’s Hong Kong-based Frontier Services Group (FSG) will build two operational bases in Northwest China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region and Southwest China’s Yunnan Province. Xinjiang and Yunnan provinces are at the heart or geographical pivot of China’s vast, developing One Bridge, One Road high-speed rail, port and energy pipeline infrastructure undertaking. Erik Prince is chairman and principal operating executive of Frontier Services Group. In an interview with the London Financial Times, Prince described his work with China stating, “We’re not serving Chinese foreign policy goals, we’re helping increase trade.” FSG is a logistics company, we are not a security company. None of our people have been or will be armed. But security management is certainly part of the logistics process.” FSG’s largest investor is CITIC, an investment fund owned and controlled by the People’s Republic of China. CITIC owns 20% of Frontier Services Group. In an interview in the Chinese state Global Times paper, Prince announced his FSG has been hired to build two of what the company calls “operational bases.” Prince stated in the interview with Global Times, “The Northwest corridor includes the countries of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Afghanistan and the Southwest corridor includes Myanmar, Thailand, Laos and Cambodia,” adding that, “the planned new facility in China’s Yunnan Province will allow FSG to be able to better serve companies in the Southwest corridor. Subsequently, FSG will be opening a training facility in Xinjiang to serve businesses in the Northwest corridor.” The FSG base in Northwest China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, will be in the heart of the sensitive region long a target of CIA-instigated Uyghur terrorism. Xinjiang is home to the CIA-fostered East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM) of Al Qaeda, active among Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang. Xinjiang itself is the cross-roads of most major international oil and gas pipelines into China from Kazakhstan, Russia and elsewhere. The second “operational base” will be in Southwest China’s Yunnan Province, where Kunming is the strategic hub of the entire Myanmar oil and gas pipelines and deep-water port to the Indian Ocean as well as the crossroads of the vast One Road, One Road high-speed rail. Prince and Chia’s Potential Fiasco If we step back a moment and put all the pieces on the table we see the outlines of a looming security fiasco if not worse for the ambitious and game-changing Eurasian Belt, Road Initiative. Blackwater founder and notorious CIA-funded mercenary Erik Prince has managed to convince the Chinese government to finance and hire his Hong Kong Frontier Services Group to do security training and operations along the two major arteries or corridors of the new Silk Road: Northwest China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region and Southwest China’s Yunnan Province, where Kunming is the strategic hub of the entire Myanmar oil and gas pipelines and including a deep sea port on Maday Island in Kyaukphyu, Rakhine State, heart of recent, suspiciously-timed political unrest involving the Myanmar security forces and Rohingya Muslims. Then the same Erik Prince quietly lobbies US President Trump and CIA Director Pompeo to hire, “off the books,” his private network of former CIA and US special forces mercenaries to carry out covert operations in Iran, North Korea, Afghanistan and other places strategic to the BRI development. Moreover, Prince lobbies the Afghan and US governments to let his private mercenary air force carry out “anti-terrorist” bombings and other military operations in Afghanistan to be paid by the vast unexploited rare earth and other minerals in Afghanistan’s Helmland Province, home to the world’s largest opium cultivation, using Prince’s Hong Kong Frontier Services Group allegedly to police the operation of mineral exploitation. All this suggests that China and its CITIC are being quietly set up for a colossal security fiasco along major nodes of their Belt, Road Initiative project. F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.” -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sun Jan 7 01:13:17 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2018 01:13:17 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Erik Prince/ Title I forgot to include References: Message-ID: [New Eastern Outlook] * ENG * RUS RSS Add to favorites * About * Contact Us * Home * Columns * Locations * Contributors * Search 04.01.2018 Author: F. William Engdahl Major Beijing BRI Security Fiasco Emerging We discussed this on AWARE about a year ago. The New Eastern Outlook’s Wm. Engdahl has an article in relation to the situation currently. Maybe the Chinese were operating on the premise of “keeping your enemies closer.” I see this as extremely dangerous, not just for the Chinese. Blackwater founder and CIA-funded mercenary Erik Prince managed to convince the Chinese government to finance and hire his Hong Kong Frontier Services Group to do security training and operations along the two major corridors of the new Silk Road: Northwest China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region and Southwest China’s Yunnan Province, where Kunming is the strategic hub of the entire Myanmar oil and gas pipelines and including a deep sea port on Maday Island in Kyaukphyu, Rakhine State, heart of recent political unrest involving the Myanmar security forces and Rohingya Muslims. Then the same Erik Prince quietly lobbies US President Trump and CIA Director Pompeo to hire, “off the books,” his private network of former CIA and US special forces mercenaries to carry out covert operations in Iran, North Korea, Afghanistan and other places strategic to the BRI development. A major security fiasco involving a major China state company and a Hong Kong-based corporate security company is emerging. It could potentially open up the massive Eurasian project of China, its Belt, Road Initiative (BRI), to major covert sabotage directed out of Langley Virginia CIA headquarters and carried out by a “Trojan Horse” the Chinese have hired to train their personnel to protect the high-speed Eurasian rail and deep water ports infrastructure from sabotage and terror attacks. The Hong Kong company is owned by Erik Prince, notorious founder of Blackwater Security. At the same time Prince is being paid by the Chinese to protect their BRI, he is reportedly plotting with Trump and CIA chief Mike Pompeo to form a “private CIA, completely off the books” that would do black operations in many of the Eurasian countries linked to the BRI. This is shaping up as a major security fiasco for China’s BRI if left uncorrected. Private CIA In early December a new element of Erik Prince’s dubious role as a “private” security consultant came to light. Media reports indicated that Prince is quietly proposing to President Trump personally and to Trump CIA head Mike Pompeo, to create a top secret global private CIA, “off-the-books” that would carry out dirty tricks, assassinations and other black operations independent of the official CIA. According to the reports, Prince is proposing the project together with his longtime associate, CIA veteran John R. Maguire, who also has worked as a consultant to Prince’s Hong Kong Frontier Services Group, about which more below. They would reportedly create the “off-the-books” parallel CIA together with convicted Iran-Contra operative, Col. Oliver North, and would get US government funding to create a private mercenary force in both Pakistan, Afghanistan and send covert “private” destabilization agents into Iran and even North Korea among other proposed operations. If we combine this Prince plan with his recent proposal for a privatized Afghan “exit strategy” we begin to see an ominous picture that will ensure chaos and anarchy in a key country of the future China Belt, Road Initiative, the so-called New Economic Silk Road. The Prince private Afghan war plan The same Erik Prince has recently presented a plan for a private Prince-created mercenary force to go into Afghanistan, a country his Blackwater was hired after 2002 by the CIA to operate in. On December 7, Prince unveiled what he termed his plan for an Afghan “exit strategy” after 17 years and more than $714 billion dollars of US taxpayer money. Prince proposes his private company be mandated to grab invaluable mining resources in Afghanistan’s Helmland Province and use the resources to pay for a continued US military role in the country. Prince proposes plundering huge reserves of lithium, uranium, phosphorus, and other rare earth elements worth $1 trillion in Helmand Province alone. According to a report in the US Military Times, Prince has submitted a business proposal offering a “turn-key composite air wing” to help the Afghan air force fight against the Taliban and other militant groups. Prince’s private security company would reportedly provide and operate a fleet of fixed-wing planes, attack helicopters and drones capable of providing close-air support to maneuvering ground forces. Notable is the fact that Helmland Province is also home to the world’s largest opium cultivation, a crop whose volume exploded after the 2001 US invasion. Ahmed Wali Karzai, the warlord brother of the former US-selected President reportedly received regular payment from the CIA while he oversaw the control of Helmland opium and heroin. Erik Prince would use his Hong Kong private security company, Frontier Services Group, the China-focused private military corporation Prince controls, according to these reports, to “provide logistics support to the extractive firms with secure transportation and camp support.” Now it begins to get really serious, as a potential security fiasco for China’s development of the BRI looms. The well-connected Prince Erik Prince became notorious as head of one of the more savage US private mercenary armies during the US occupation of Iraq in the 1990s. Blackwater became notorious in Iraq for the Nisour Square massacre in September 2007, when Blackwater mercenaries working for the US Government opened fire in a crowded square in Baghdad, killing 17 Iraqi civilians including children and seriously wounding 20 more. Three guards were convicted of 14 manslaughter charges, and another of murder, in a US court. After that, in 2010 he sold the company and regrouped eventually under the name Academi. Academi was also reportedly involved in the 2013-14 CIA-backed coup d’etat in Ukraine that toppled the elected Yanukovich government, involved in training private paramilitary forces tied to Ukraine neo-nazi groups. In 2010 Prince’s company, despite scandals, received another $100 million to do work for the CIA. In 2009 it was revealed that Erik Prince was part of a CIA task force commissioned to kill terrorists. He even was hired to provide security to the Langley, Virginia CIA headquarters. Interesting to note as well are Erik Prince’s ties to the Donald Trump Administration. His sister, billionaire Betsy DeVos, wife of the heir of the AmWay fortune, is Trump Administration Secretary of Education. According to one former US senior official, Prince had advised the Trump transition team before January 20 on matters related to intelligence and defense, “including weighing in on candidates for the Defense and State departments.” Erik Prince is close friend of vice President Mike Pence, who as Vice President cast a rare tie-breaking vote in the Senate that allowed Prince’s sister, Betsy DeVos, to become Education Secretary. Prince is also close with billionaire hedge fund operator Robert Mercer, a key financier of Trump’s election. These close connections Prince is reportedly using to promote his private CIA that would report only to Pompeo and Trump, outside the traditional intelligence chain-of-command. Prince and the China Silk Road Security A Chinese government newspaper revealed in early 2017 that Prince’s Hong Kong-based Frontier Services Group (FSG) will build two operational bases in Northwest China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region and Southwest China’s Yunnan Province. Xinjiang and Yunnan provinces are at the heart or geographical pivot of China’s vast, developing One Bridge, One Road high-speed rail, port and energy pipeline infrastructure undertaking. Erik Prince is chairman and principal operating executive of Frontier Services Group. In an interview with the London Financial Times, Prince described his work with China stating, “We’re not serving Chinese foreign policy goals, we’re helping increase trade.” FSG is a logistics company, we are not a security company. None of our people have been or will be armed. But security management is certainly part of the logistics process.” FSG’s largest investor is CITIC, an investment fund owned and controlled by the People’s Republic of China. CITIC owns 20% of Frontier Services Group. In an interview in the Chinese state Global Times paper, Prince announced his FSG has been hired to build two of what the company calls “operational bases.” Prince stated in the interview with Global Times, “The Northwest corridor includes the countries of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Afghanistan and the Southwest corridor includes Myanmar, Thailand, Laos and Cambodia,” adding that, “the planned new facility in China’s Yunnan Province will allow FSG to be able to better serve companies in the Southwest corridor. Subsequently, FSG will be opening a training facility in Xinjiang to serve businesses in the Northwest corridor.” The FSG base in Northwest China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, will be in the heart of the sensitive region long a target of CIA-instigated Uyghur terrorism. Xinjiang is home to the CIA-fostered East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM) of Al Qaeda, active among Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang. Xinjiang itself is the cross-roads of most major international oil and gas pipelines into China from Kazakhstan, Russia and elsewhere. The second “operational base” will be in Southwest China’s Yunnan Province, where Kunming is the strategic hub of the entire Myanmar oil and gas pipelines and deep-water port to the Indian Ocean as well as the crossroads of the vast One Road, One Road high-speed rail. Prince and Chia’s Potential Fiasco If we step back a moment and put all the pieces on the table we see the outlines of a looming security fiasco if not worse for the ambitious and game-changing Eurasian Belt, Road Initiative. Blackwater founder and notorious CIA-funded mercenary Erik Prince has managed to convince the Chinese government to finance and hire his Hong Kong Frontier Services Group to do security training and operations along the two major arteries or corridors of the new Silk Road: Northwest China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region and Southwest China’s Yunnan Province, where Kunming is the strategic hub of the entire Myanmar oil and gas pipelines and including a deep sea port on Maday Island in Kyaukphyu, Rakhine State, heart of recent, suspiciously-timed political unrest involving the Myanmar security forces and Rohingya Muslims. Then the same Erik Prince quietly lobbies US President Trump and CIA Director Pompeo to hire, “off the books,” his private network of former CIA and US special forces mercenaries to carry out covert operations in Iran, North Korea, Afghanistan and other places strategic to the BRI development. Moreover, Prince lobbies the Afghan and US governments to let his private mercenary air force carry out “anti-terrorist” bombings and other military operations in Afghanistan to be paid by the vast unexploited rare earth and other minerals in Afghanistan’s Helmland Province, home to the world’s largest opium cultivation, using Prince’s Hong Kong Frontier Services Group allegedly to police the operation of mineral exploitation. All this suggests that China and its CITIC are being quietly set up for a colossal security fiasco along major nodes of their Belt, Road Initiative project. F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.” _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C139e1932a7eb4f53983308d5556ac339%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636508839382413277&sdata=jwIrWnQJmeZpVBrwtdOb1sBLHqXfgkZs5hhUuq%2FknvU%3D&reserved=0 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From galliher at illinois.edu Sun Jan 7 02:10:43 2018 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 20:10:43 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Working class opposition. erupting in Iran.... In-Reply-To: References: <362CE1A6-395F-44C2-86BC-FFCE88C94266@illinois.edu> <3471B644-1C95-47F2-874C-66493BA85A75@illinois.edu> Message-ID: > 'The People's Party, also known as the Populist Party or the Populists, was an agrarian-populist political party in the United States. For a few years, 1892–96, it played a major role as a left-wing force in American politics. It was merged into the Democratic Party in 1896; a small independent remnant survived until 1908. It drew support from angry farmers in the West and South and operated on the left-wing of American politics. It was highly critical of capitalism, especially banks and railroads, and allied itself with the labor movement.[1][2][3] 'Established in 1891, as a result of the Populist movement, the People's Party reached its peak in the 1892 presidential election, when its ticket, composed of James B. Weaver and James G. Field, won 8.5% of the popular vote and carried five states (Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Nevada and North Dakota), and the 1894 House of Representatives elections, when it took over 10% of the vote. Built on a coalition of poor, white cotton farmers in the South (especially North Carolina, Alabama and Texas) and hard-pressed wheat farmers in the Plains states (especially Kansas and Nebraska), the Populists represented a radical crusading form of agrarianism and hostility to elites, cities, banks, railroads, and gold. 'The party sometimes allied with labor unions in the North and Republicans in the South. In the 1896 presidential elections the Populists endorsed the Democratic presidential nominee, William Jennings Bryan, adding their own vice presidential nominee. By joining with the Democrats, the People's Party lost its independent identity and rapidly withered away. 'The terms "populism" and "populist" have been used in the 20th and 21st centuries to describe anti-elitist appeals against established interests or mainstream parties, referring to both the political left and right.' > On Jan 6, 2018, at 6:50 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > I don’t understand the application of the word, “populism” to a working class demonstration against a government. > >> On Jan 6, 2018, at 15:45, Carl G. Estabrook > wrote: >> >> That’s a description of the self-understanding of populist movements. >> >> Like our own self-understanding, it may be more or less correct, honest or cynical, accurate or deluded. >> >> >>> On Jan 6, 2018, at 7:41 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss > wrote: >>> >>> I find the statement : >>> >>> "pits a virtuous and homogeneous people against a set of elites and dangerous ‘others’ >>> who are together depicted as depriving (or attempting to deprive) the sovereign people “ >>> >>> disingenuous at best, because it lumps all movements against a Government by its people, as one and the same, with extreme sarcasm. The people generally and in the case of Iran, have legitimate complaints. Like Syria, US involvement will mitigate those who are legitimate in their opposition to the government. The opposition in Syria was minimal, but legitimate, what happened to them once the Jihadists were brought in by the US, probably dead. >>> >>> That is not to say Iran, is the same as Syria, only in respect to US interference. >>> >>> The role of the American people is to stand up against our governments interventions in sovereign nations, using US taxpayers money, weapons, sanctions, jihadists, etc., in support of coups and all else we use to install puppet regimes. >>> >>> There are similarities to the situations in every nation, and fear that Iran will become another Syria or Libya, or Ukraine, or……..is legitimate and must be prevented by the American people saying “NO, MORE.” Even if as Kevin Zeese points out “Iran is not Syria, and will become stronger in the long run.” >>> >>> Trump is calling for war, intervention etc., but we know its not just “him,” removal of Trump will solve nothing, because Hillary and all the Democrats are supporting the demonstrators or “people of Iran.” However, Trump is President and responsible for his actions just as Obama was responsible for his when expanding the Bush wars from two to eight. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> of their rights, values, prosperity, identity, and voice.”On Jan 5, 2018, at 20:29, Carl G. Estabrook > wrote: >>>> >>>> In "Twenty-First Century Populism: The Spectre of Western European Democracy" (2008), Daniele Albertazzi and Duncan McDonnell define populism as an ideology that >>>> >>>> "pits a virtuous and homogeneous people against a set of elites and dangerous ‘others’ >>>> who are together depicted as depriving (or attempting to deprive) the sovereign people >>>> of their rights, values, prosperity, identity, and voice.” >>>> >>>> Recent examples include the Iranian demonstrators, the Trump campaign, the Sanders campaign, Brexit, the Le Pen and Mélenchon campaigns, and the AfD… >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jan 5, 2018, at 10:01 PM, Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Discussed on NEWS FROM NEPTUNE today (and soon archived and available at Urbana Public TV). >>>>> >>>>> {Iranian demonstrations:Rouhani::populism that elected Trump:Obama} >>>>> >>>>> The Iranian anti-government demonstrations, based as they are on the economic immiseration of the Iranian populace (encouraged by US sanctions & economic warfare against Iran), are to the reformist neoliberal Rouhani government, as the populist movement that produced Trump, is to the neoliberal Obama administration (mutatis mutandis, of course). >>>>> >>>>> —CGE >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Jan 5, 2018, at 9:34 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss > wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> See https://popularresistance.org/special-report-are-long-term-us-regime-change-efforts-behind-iran-protests/ >>>>>> >>>>>> It indicates U.S. money/organizations which over time have sought to undermine the Iranian regime, as with others. It also casts some doubt about NIAC and its spokespersons. >>>>>> >>>>>> —mkb >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jan 4, 2018, at 8:44 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss > wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I support the assertions made in this article, but any USG intervention, which has likely already taken place covertly, with weapons, CIA supported Jihadists, that includes sanctions, as was done in Syria and Libya, we must all back off and focus our criticism on "USG warmongering" which includes our allies the Saudi's and Israel. Any change within Iran, must come from the Iranian people without outside interference or intervention. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Working class opposition erupts in Iran: A harbinger for the world in 2018 >>>>>>> by Keith Jones >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 4 January 2018 >>>>>>> The long-suppressed and brutally exploited Iranian working class has burst onto the scene shaking Iran’s bourgeois-clerical regime. >>>>>>> Since Dec. 28, tens of thousands have defied the Islamic Republic’s repressive apparatus and taken to the streets in cities and towns across the county. They have done so to voice their anger over food price rises, mass unemployment, gaping social inequality, years of sweeping social spending cuts and a pseudo-democratic political system that is rigged on behalf of the ruling elite and utterly impervious to the needs of working people. >>>>>>> The scope and intensity of this movement and its rapid embrace of slogans challenging the government and the entire autocratic political system have stunned Iranian authorities and western observers alike. Yet, it was preceded by months of worker protests against job cuts and plant closures and unpaid wages and benefits. >>>>>>> In the days immediately prior to the eruption of the antigovernment protests, discussion of the ever-deepening divide between Iran’s top 1 and 10 percent and the vast majority who live in poverty and economic insecurity raged on social media. The trigger for this explosion of popular discontent was the government’s latest austerity budget. It will further slash income support for ordinary Iranians, raise gas prices by as much as 50 percent, and curtail development spending, while increasing the already huge sums under the control of the Shia clergy. >>>>>>> Yesterday, after days of an ever-widening mobilization of security forces, mass arrests, and bloody clashes that left at least 21 dead, General Mohammad Ali Jafari, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, declared the unrest over: “Today we can announce the end of the sedition.” >>>>>>> The rulers of the Islamic Republic are trying to justify their brutal crackdown with spurious claims that the protests are being manipulated by Washington and its principal regional allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia, as part of their incendiary drive for regime change in Tehran. >>>>>>> The claim that the current protests are akin to those mounted by the Green Movement in 2009 is a base slander meant to justify a bigger crime. The Green challenge to the results of the 2009 Iranian presidential election was a long-prepared political operation that followed the script of similar US-orchestrated “color revolutions” in the Ukraine, Georgia, Lebanon and elsewhere. It was aimed at bringing to power those elements of the Iranian elite most eager to reach a quick rapprochement with US and European imperialism. It drew its popular support almost exclusively from the most privileged layers of the upper middle class, who were mobilized on the basis of neoliberal denunciations of the populist President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for “squandering” money on the poor. >>>>>>> The current challenge to the Iranian regime is of an entirely different character. It is rooted in the working class, including in smaller industrial cities and district towns; draws its greatest support from young people who face an unemployment rate of 40 percent or more; and is driven by opposition to social inequality and capitalist austerity. >>>>>>> Whatever the immediate fate of the current wave of protests, a new stage in the class struggle has opened in Iran that will unfold over the coming weeks and months. What is certain is that the working class, having thrust itself onto center stage, will not be quickly or easily silenced. >>>>>>> The working-class unrest in Iran has already upset the calculations not just of the Iranian elite, but of governments around the world. Trump, whose anti-Muslim travel ban targets Iranians, has hypocritically and fatuously claimed his “support” for the protests, with the hope that he can use them to demonize Tehran and thereby provide grist for US war preparations against Iran. The European powers have been more circumspect, and not only because the protests cut across their plans to cash in on the Iranian government’s offers of oil concessions and cheap labor. They fear the destabilizing impact of mounting class struggle in Iran on the entire Middle East. >>>>>>> To understand the significance of the resurgence of the Iranian working class for Middle East and world politics, it is necessary to examine it in historical context. >>>>>>> The 1979 Iranian Revolution, which overthrew the tyrannical US-sponsored regime of the Shah four decades ago, was a massive, working class-led, anti-imperialist social explosion. It was a growing wave of political strikes that broke the back of the Shah’s regime, and in the months that followed, workers seized factories, placing them under the control of workers’ councils. >>>>>>> But a social revolution expropriating the Iranian bourgeoisie and establishing a workers’ republic in alliance with the rural toilers was blocked by the nominally socialist organizations, above all the Stalinist Tudeh Party. The Tudeh party had deep roots in the working class, which had a long history of secularism and revolutionary socialism. But for decades it orientated to the impotent liberal wing of the national bourgeoisie and then in 1979 swung round to giving uncritical support to the Ayatollah Khomeini, on the grounds that he was the political leader of the “progressive” wing of the bourgeoisie and leading a “national democratic” (i.e. capitalist) revolution. >>>>>>> This aged Shia cleric had long been a politically marginal figure. But he was able to gain a mass following among the urban and rural poor by exploiting the political vacuum created by the Stalinists, and by drawing on the longstanding connections between the Shia clergy and the bazaar, the bastion of the traditional wing of the Iranian bourgeoisie. >>>>>>> With the working class politically neutralized by the Stalinists, Khomeini was able to reorganize the state machine following the Shah’s overthrow while manipulating and diverting the mass movement, then restabilize bourgeois rule through savage repression of the political left, including the Tudeh party, and the destruction of all independent workers’ organizations. >>>>>>> These developments fed into and were part of a broader process in which, due to the betrayals of the Stalinists, Islamist forces were able to politically profit from the mounting crisis of the postcolonial bourgeois nationalist regimes and movements, including the Palestine Liberation Organization, and their inability to realize their bourgeois-democratic programs. >>>>>>> Before his death in 1989, Khomeini oversaw a further lurch to the right of the Islamic Republic, with a turn to the IMF and overtures to the “Great Satan,” US imperialism. This had been prepared the previous year in a further ferocious assault on the left, in which thousands of political prisoners were killed. >>>>>>> Over the course of the past three decades, Iran’s government has been led by different factions of the political elite, including so-called “reformists” and Shia populists like Ahmadinejad. All have further rolled back the social concessions made to working people in the wake of the 1979 revolution and savagely suppressed the working class. >>>>>>> The Western press has long sought to vilify Iranian politics and social life. But at its core, the experience of the working class in Iran mirrors that of workers around the world, who for decades have faced an unrelenting assault on their social rights and politically have been utterly disenfranchised. >>>>>>> In response to the 2008 crisis, the universal response of the bourgeoisie has been to drastically intensify this class war. Precarious employment, crumbling public services, unprecedented social inequality, exclusion from political life and the threat of imperialist war—this is the lot of workers the world over. >>>>>>> But the period in which the class struggle could be suppressed is coming to an end. >>>>>>> In country after country around the world, the parties, organizations and political mechanisms, including the establishment left parties and pro-capitalist unions, through which the bourgeoisie has managed its affairs and above all suppressed the class struggle are breaking down. >>>>>>> The events in Iran will resonate across the Middle East, where the working class has passed through decades of bitter experiences, not only with the secular bourgeois nationalist movements, but also with various forms of Islamist politics, including the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party in Turkey. >>>>>>> And while the ignoramus Trump tweets about injustice in Iran, how different will American workers deem their circumstances from those of Iranian workers? Last month as the Iranian government was presenting a budget that slashes social spending while funneling additional money to the mullahs, the US Congress rewarded the rich and super-rich with trillions in additional tax cuts. These tax cuts are now to be paid for through a massive assault on Social Security, health care and other core social rights. >>>>>>> The events in Iran must be recognized as a harbinger of a vast eruption of working-class struggle around the world. >>>>>>> The task of revolutionary socialists is to turn into this movement and to fight to arm the international working class with an understanding of the logic of its needs, aspirations and struggle. Capitalism is incompatible with the needs of society. Working people, the class that produces the world’s wealth, must unite their struggles across state borders and continents to establish workers’ political power, so as to undertake the socialist reorganization of society and put an end to want and imperialist war. >>>>>>> Keith Jones WSWS.ORG >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 Sun Jan 7 04:26:24 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2018 04:26:24 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Populism References: <1194236787.1593591.1515299184625.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1194236787.1593591.1515299184625@mail.yahoo.com> https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/12/russian-revolution-bolsheviks-lenin-party This article traces the history of  late 19th century populism and later historical interpretations of populism in this country, and then traces how a pejorative meaning of the word has evolved among European elites in the context of "right wing" movements. DG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 7 04:31:49 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2018 04:31:49 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Populism - correct link References: <1427513003.1605660.1515299509214.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1427513003.1605660.1515299509214@mail.yahoo.com> https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/01/populism-douglas-hofstadter-donald-trump-democracy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brussel at illinois.edu Sun Jan 7 19:34:49 2018 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2018 19:34:49 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A_=5Bufpj-activist=5D_Mazda_Majidi?= =?utf-8?q?=3A_What_to_make_of_Iran=E2=80=99s_demonstrations?= References: <252474672.1841686.1515286524334@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: One of the most complete an objective reviews about what is known and what has been happening in Iran. —mkb d https://www.liberationnews.org/what-to-make-of-irans-demonstrations/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=shared_article&utm_campaign=Liberation%20News -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From galliher at illinois.edu Sun Jan 7 20:16:18 2018 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2018 14:16:18 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?=5Bufpj-activist=5D_Mazda_Majidi=3A_Wha?= =?utf-8?q?t_to_make_of_Iran=E2=80=99s_demonstrations?= In-Reply-To: References: <252474672.1841686.1515286524334@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3D1119F1-A1FC-4900-94DD-BF20F4D70340@illinois.edu> That seems right. The anti-government protests in Iran look like what is called ‘populism’ elsewhere. Those are the local equivalent of Trump voters in the streets… The US has been torturing Iran for more than 60 years, and that’s even more important now that Iran draws increasingly close to Russia (and China). The bedrock of US fp for more than century has been to prevent the economic integration of Eurasia, under whatever auspices. That was the goal of the ‘carrot’ of the Iranian nuclear deal. Opposition to the deal in the US is a difference over tactics, not strategy, which remains what it’s always been. —CGE > On Jan 7, 2018, at 1:34 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss wrote: > > One of the most complete an objective reviews about what is known and what has been happening in Iran. > > —mkb > d > >> >> >> https://www.liberationnews.org/what-to-make-of-irans-demonstrations/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=shared_article&utm_campaign=Liberation%20News >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Sun Jan 7 23:54:02 2018 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2018 23:54:02 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A_=5Bufpj-activist=5D_Mazda_Majidi?= =?utf-8?q?=3A_What_to_make_of_Iran=E2=80=99s_demonstrations?= In-Reply-To: References: <252474672.1841686.1515286524334@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <2ABB60EF-407A-4669-987E-4E64847AA579@illinois.edu> I don’t believe in ”objectivity,” but do see some merit in trying to be judicious & reach an equilibrium between conflicting considerations by some sort of dialectical process. Looks like this article does that fairly well. Thanks, Mort. ~~ Ron Szoke [cid:DC43E6DD-6581-434F-8C02-0F76ACB8EA6B at hsd1.il.comcast.net] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Well-informed.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 32266 bytes Desc: Well-informed.jpg URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 8 00:57:25 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 00:57:25 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A_=5Bufpj-activist=5D_Mazda_Majidi?= =?utf-8?q?=3A_What_to_make_of_Iran=E2=80=99s_demonstrations?= In-Reply-To: <2ABB60EF-407A-4669-987E-4E64847AA579@illinois.edu> References: <252474672.1841686.1515286524334@mail.yahoo.com> <2ABB60EF-407A-4669-987E-4E64847AA579@illinois.edu> Message-ID: <980416203.1853252.1515373045869@mail.yahoo.com> Thanks Mort; for those who would like to listen to this analysis, the author is interviewed on the podcast "Moderate Rebels" hosted by Max Blumenthal and Ben Norton. https://soundcloud.com/moderaterebelsradio On ‎Sunday‎, ‎January‎ ‎7‎, ‎2018‎ ‎05‎:‎54‎:‎31‎ ‎PM‎ ‎CST, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss wrote: I don’t believe in ”objectivity,” but do see some merit in trying to be judicious & reach an equilibrium between conflicting considerations by some sort of dialectical process. Looks like this article does that fairly well.  Thanks, Mort. ~~ Ron Szoke _______________________________________________ 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: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Well-informed.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 32266 bytes Desc: not available URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 8 00:57:25 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 00:57:25 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A_=5Bufpj-activist=5D_Mazda_Majidi?= =?utf-8?q?=3A_What_to_make_of_Iran=E2=80=99s_demonstrations?= In-Reply-To: <2ABB60EF-407A-4669-987E-4E64847AA579@illinois.edu> References: <252474672.1841686.1515286524334@mail.yahoo.com> <2ABB60EF-407A-4669-987E-4E64847AA579@illinois.edu> Message-ID: <980416203.1853252.1515373045869@mail.yahoo.com> Thanks Mort; for those who would like to listen to this analysis, the author is interviewed on the podcast "Moderate Rebels" hosted by Max Blumenthal and Ben Norton. https://soundcloud.com/moderaterebelsradio On ‎Sunday‎, ‎January‎ ‎7‎, ‎2018‎ ‎05‎:‎54‎:‎31‎ ‎PM‎ ‎CST, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss wrote: I don’t believe in ”objectivity,” but do see some merit in trying to be judicious & reach an equilibrium between conflicting considerations by some sort of dialectical process. Looks like this article does that fairly well.  Thanks, Mort. ~~ Ron Szoke _______________________________________________ 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: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Well-informed.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 32266 bytes Desc: not available URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Mon Jan 8 03:11:12 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2018 21:11:12 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] A good account from an unlikely source References: <58946d83-51f8-1819-8154-095eec8b7c8d@panix.com> Message-ID: https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/fire-and-fury-is-a-book-all-too-worthy-of-the-president From cgestabrook at gmail.com Mon Jan 8 03:37:04 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2018 21:37:04 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A_=5Bufpj-activist=5D_Mazda_Majidi?= =?utf-8?q?=3A_What_to_make_of_Iran=E2=80=99s_demonstrations?= In-Reply-To: <2ABB60EF-407A-4669-987E-4E64847AA579@illinois.edu> References: <252474672.1841686.1515286524334@mail.yahoo.com> <2ABB60EF-407A-4669-987E-4E64847AA579@illinois.edu> Message-ID: Ron— Your view is that it's objectively true that there’s no such thing as objectivity…? Doesn’t that involve you in at least the teensiest contradiction? Regards, Carl > On Jan 7, 2018, at 5:54 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss wrote: > > I don’t believe in ”objectivity,” but do see some merit in trying to be judicious & reach an equilibrium between conflicting considerations by some sort of dialectical process. Looks like this article does that fairly well. Thanks, Mort. > > ~~ Ron Szoke > > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jan 8 14:50:23 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 14:50:23 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: D in BDS on Israel Blackballs BDS Organizations 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, January 08, 2018 8:48 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: D in BDS on Israel Blackballs BDS Organizations DB: And it is important to note those who fought that war against apartheid in South Africa are among the strongest supporters of the Palestinians. And they now say, and I pushed them on this, because I want to know if we’re talking hyperbole here, and they now say that the Palestinian situation is way worse, particularly in Gaza. Way worse than they ever had it in terms of the Bantustans that you were just referring to. FB: That’s correct. And indeed, my friend, Professor John Dugard, who had been Special Rapporteur on Palestine is from South Africa. And he was one of a handful of white, international law professors over there with the courage, integrity and principles to oppose apartheid in South Africa, at risk to his life. And Dugard has said the same thing. If you want to look at… do a google on his name DUGARD. And Dugard has said, and as you point out, other ANC leaders have said, that what the Palestinians are up against is far worse than what we were up against in the struggle against apartheid. You were involved, I was involved, many of us fought apartheid in South Africa. And we’re fighting apartheid over there [Palestine] today as well. The legal principles are pretty much the same. DB: The legal principles are the same, but the uh… sort of the history and the details, or the situation, are quite a bit different. Israel and its lobby controls U.S. policy so they’re… all those anti-apartheiders have been fairly silent, wouldn’t you say? FB: Well, we have the BDS campaign… DB: Well, yes… no, no, this is the silver lining but I mean all those politicians, and all those civil rights activists, and all those folks… and you know I can go down the list, do not see… if you even bring that up, either the subject disappears or you’re considered an idiot, or a conspiracy theorist, over the top, whatever. When you make that parallel structure. I haven’t heard it on NPR, have you? FB: You mean National Propaganda Radio, Dennis? But, look, I set up the Israeli divestment/disinvestment campaign, in November of 2000, because of my involvement in the divestment/disinvestment campaign here against apartheid South Africa, that was called for by a black lawyer who was ahead of me at Harvard Law School, Randal Robinson. And looking into the situation, I concluded that the legal principles are the same. And, when I did this, I remember the president of Harvard, Larry Summers, condemned me, because I was involved in the Harvard divestment/disinvestment campaign, and accused me of being anti-semitic. And WBUR, which is the NPR affiliate out there in Boston asked me to debate Summers and I said I would. And Summers did not have the courage, integrity or principles to debate me. As you know, eventually Harvard fired him because he publicly stated women are dumber than men when it comes to math and science. So, fine. So I debated Alan Dershowitz on this, as far back as 2002. And, we had a debate and I won that debate. I clobbered Dershowitz. And in 2005 then-Palestinian civil society leaders contacted me and said “We really want to set up a BDS campaign, modeled on what the world did against apartheid South Africa. Boycott, divestment and sanctions, would you go in with us?” I said, “Sure.” So, I sort of surrendered the initiative to them. But we’ve made an enormous amount of progress in these years. And, yes, the forces against us are substantial, and I guess more substantial than in apartheid South Africa. Although thereto, as you note, the United States government fully supported apartheid South Africa, except during President Jimmy Carter. But all the rest of them supported it, up through and including Reagan, and the collapse of apartheid. So, when I set this thing up in 2000 I knew the forces against us would be formidable. But the only progressive … change we’ve ever seen in this country, Dennis, in my lifetime, going back to the struggle for civil rights for black people, which I also supported, has come from the people, and grassroots movement. It has never come from Washington, D.C. And it certainly hasn’t come from the judiciary. It hasn’t come from Congress. It hasn’t come from the executive branch. So, I think we’ve done a pretty good job in the BDS campaign, not just in this country, but worldwide. And it’s going to take more time. Israel is fighting it tooth and nail, as you know. They even set up a separate ministry over there, to counteract BDS. [Sheldon] Adelson is putting millions of dollars into the campaign. But I think everyone who looks at it realizes they are losing, because we have truth and justice on our side. So we’re just going to have to keep plucking away, Dennis. People want to have peace with justice there for both Palestinians and Jews. It can be done. But we have a lot more work to do. DB: Beautiful. Alright, well, Professor Boyle, as always we appreciate the good information, and the discussion about an issue that is really at the core, whether there’s going to be peace in this world. 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: Wednesday, December 27, 2017 12:48 PM Author: "Francis Boyle" - BingNews Subject: Reverberations from Trump’s Jerusalem Move I spoke about the significance of the vote with Professor Francis Boyle, a scholar and long-time pro-Palestinian activist, who has been deeply engaged in the Mideast peace process and various negotiations over the last 30 years. Boyle is a professor of ... View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jan 8 14:50:23 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 14:50:23 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: D in BDS on Israel Blackballs BDS Organizations 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, January 08, 2018 8:48 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: D in BDS on Israel Blackballs BDS Organizations DB: And it is important to note those who fought that war against apartheid in South Africa are among the strongest supporters of the Palestinians. And they now say, and I pushed them on this, because I want to know if we’re talking hyperbole here, and they now say that the Palestinian situation is way worse, particularly in Gaza. Way worse than they ever had it in terms of the Bantustans that you were just referring to. FB: That’s correct. And indeed, my friend, Professor John Dugard, who had been Special Rapporteur on Palestine is from South Africa. And he was one of a handful of white, international law professors over there with the courage, integrity and principles to oppose apartheid in South Africa, at risk to his life. And Dugard has said the same thing. If you want to look at… do a google on his name DUGARD. And Dugard has said, and as you point out, other ANC leaders have said, that what the Palestinians are up against is far worse than what we were up against in the struggle against apartheid. You were involved, I was involved, many of us fought apartheid in South Africa. And we’re fighting apartheid over there [Palestine] today as well. The legal principles are pretty much the same. DB: The legal principles are the same, but the uh… sort of the history and the details, or the situation, are quite a bit different. Israel and its lobby controls U.S. policy so they’re… all those anti-apartheiders have been fairly silent, wouldn’t you say? FB: Well, we have the BDS campaign… DB: Well, yes… no, no, this is the silver lining but I mean all those politicians, and all those civil rights activists, and all those folks… and you know I can go down the list, do not see… if you even bring that up, either the subject disappears or you’re considered an idiot, or a conspiracy theorist, over the top, whatever. When you make that parallel structure. I haven’t heard it on NPR, have you? FB: You mean National Propaganda Radio, Dennis? But, look, I set up the Israeli divestment/disinvestment campaign, in November of 2000, because of my involvement in the divestment/disinvestment campaign here against apartheid South Africa, that was called for by a black lawyer who was ahead of me at Harvard Law School, Randal Robinson. And looking into the situation, I concluded that the legal principles are the same. And, when I did this, I remember the president of Harvard, Larry Summers, condemned me, because I was involved in the Harvard divestment/disinvestment campaign, and accused me of being anti-semitic. And WBUR, which is the NPR affiliate out there in Boston asked me to debate Summers and I said I would. And Summers did not have the courage, integrity or principles to debate me. As you know, eventually Harvard fired him because he publicly stated women are dumber than men when it comes to math and science. So, fine. So I debated Alan Dershowitz on this, as far back as 2002. And, we had a debate and I won that debate. I clobbered Dershowitz. And in 2005 then-Palestinian civil society leaders contacted me and said “We really want to set up a BDS campaign, modeled on what the world did against apartheid South Africa. Boycott, divestment and sanctions, would you go in with us?” I said, “Sure.” So, I sort of surrendered the initiative to them. But we’ve made an enormous amount of progress in these years. And, yes, the forces against us are substantial, and I guess more substantial than in apartheid South Africa. Although thereto, as you note, the United States government fully supported apartheid South Africa, except during President Jimmy Carter. But all the rest of them supported it, up through and including Reagan, and the collapse of apartheid. So, when I set this thing up in 2000 I knew the forces against us would be formidable. But the only progressive … change we’ve ever seen in this country, Dennis, in my lifetime, going back to the struggle for civil rights for black people, which I also supported, has come from the people, and grassroots movement. It has never come from Washington, D.C. And it certainly hasn’t come from the judiciary. It hasn’t come from Congress. It hasn’t come from the executive branch. So, I think we’ve done a pretty good job in the BDS campaign, not just in this country, but worldwide. And it’s going to take more time. Israel is fighting it tooth and nail, as you know. They even set up a separate ministry over there, to counteract BDS. [Sheldon] Adelson is putting millions of dollars into the campaign. But I think everyone who looks at it realizes they are losing, because we have truth and justice on our side. So we’re just going to have to keep plucking away, Dennis. People want to have peace with justice there for both Palestinians and Jews. It can be done. But we have a lot more work to do. DB: Beautiful. Alright, well, Professor Boyle, as always we appreciate the good information, and the discussion about an issue that is really at the core, whether there’s going to be peace in this world. 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: Wednesday, December 27, 2017 12:48 PM Author: "Francis Boyle" - BingNews Subject: Reverberations from Trump’s Jerusalem Move I spoke about the significance of the vote with Professor Francis Boyle, a scholar and long-time pro-Palestinian activist, who has been deeply engaged in the Mideast peace process and various negotiations over the last 30 years. Boyle is a professor of ... View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Mon Jan 8 17:56:16 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 11:56:16 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Why Biss is perhaps the best candidate for governor References: <3c1966c649eb4036e30983bffe6190c0@bounce.bluestatedigital.com> Message-ID: <159FF042-B1CC-473D-9ABB-65D208E5E161@gmail.com> > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Nico Probst > Subject: Tax LaSalle Street > Date: January 5, 2018 at 7:30:03 PM CST > To: "C. G. Estabrook" > Reply-To: info at danielbiss.com > > > > > We’ve been told our state is broke and that we can’t afford to fund the programs working families need. > > Don’t believe it. > > The truth is that we live in one of the wealthiest states in the nation. Fourteen of the richest people in the world live right here in Illinois. > > We can afford to invest in Illinois, and we can absolutely pay for it. > > One way to do it is by putting a small tax on financial transactions in Chicago, known as the LaSalle Street tax. Daniel’s proposal is estimated to increase revenue by $10-$12 billion every year. Watch this video to learn more: > > When you or I go to the store to buy an item, we are charged a sales tax on it. But when wealthy investors go to the stock exchanges on LaSalle Street, they aren’t charged a dime. > > Bruce Rauner, JB Pritzker, and Chris Kennedy will say that taxing financial transactions will drive investors away, but we already know other places that tax financial transactions are doing just fine. > > The LaSalle Street tax is fair and the extra revenue could be used to help fund our community schools, ensure health care for all, pay for free college tuition, and bring our state out of debt -- all while creating good-paying jobs. > > This is just one of a few ways we can tackle our budget problems, but I need your help. > > If you believe in taxing LaSalle Street and investing in Illinois’ working people, please add your name to show you’re with Daniel. > Thanks for taking action, > > Nico > > Nico Probst > Deputy Campaign Manager > Biss for Illinois > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jan 8 18:49:25 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 18:49:25 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Why Biss is perhaps the best candidate for governor In-Reply-To: <159FF042-B1CC-473D-9ABB-65D208E5E161@gmail.com> References: <3c1966c649eb4036e30983bffe6190c0@bounce.bluestatedigital.com> <159FF042-B1CC-473D-9ABB-65D208E5E161@gmail.com> Message-ID: Is Biss a Green? This was one of Rich Whitney’s suggestions. We know candidates say a lot of things, so its important who the Party is, in reference to whether they will act upon it after being elected. On Jan 8, 2018, at 09:56, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: Begin forwarded message: From: Nico Probst > Subject: Tax LaSalle Street Date: January 5, 2018 at 7:30:03 PM CST To: "C. G. Estabrook" > Reply-To: info at danielbiss.com [https://s.bsd.net/biss/main/page/-/daniel_litesa_LogoAssets_BissWallace_2colorvertical%20%281%29.png] We’ve been told our state is broke and that we can’t afford to fund the programs working families need. Don’t believe it. The truth is that we live in one of the wealthiest states in the nation. Fourteen of the richest people in the world live right here in Illinois. We can afford to invest in Illinois, and we can absolutely pay for it. One way to do it is by putting a small tax on financial transactions in Chicago, known as the LaSalle Street tax. Daniel’s proposal is estimated to increase revenue by $10-$12 billion every year. Watch this video to learn more: [Watch the LaSalle Street tax video now!] When you or I go to the store to buy an item, we are charged a sales tax on it. But when wealthy investors go to the stock exchanges on LaSalle Street, they aren’t charged a dime. Bruce Rauner, JB Pritzker, and Chris Kennedy will say that taxing financial transactions will drive investors away, but we already know other places that tax financial transactions are doing just fine. The LaSalle Street tax is fair and the extra revenue could be used to help fund our community schools, ensure health care for all, pay for free college tuition, and bring our state out of debt -- all while creating good-paying jobs. This is just one of a few ways we can tackle our budget problems, but I need your help. If you believe in taxing LaSalle Street and investing in Illinois’ working people, please add your name to show you’re with Daniel. Thanks for taking action, Nico Nico Probst Deputy Campaign Manager Biss for Illinois _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C12e284668cc548784d2008d556c130d2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636510310096551236&sdata=kJw9BT5nR3%2BhbjpPfxWK29ZUj7XTyoPToJXUqzkPUFg%3D&reserved=0 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jan 8 18:55:39 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 18:55:39 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: [Peace] Why Biss is perhaps the best candidate for governor References: Message-ID: He is a Democrat and we can meet him when he is here. Please see: Daniel Biss, will be in CU on the 12th - come by the Esquire and have lunch with us! Open format, anytime between 12-1:30 is great. No agendas, no program, just you, me, him and some conversation (and of course - peanuts!). Is Biss a Green? This was one of Rich Whitney’s suggestions. We know candidates say a lot of things, so its important who the Party is, in reference to whether they will act upon it after being elected. On Jan 8, 2018, at 09:56, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: Begin forwarded message: From: Nico Probst > Subject: Tax LaSalle Street Date: January 5, 2018 at 7:30:03 PM CST To: "C. G. Estabrook" > Reply-To: info at danielbiss.com [https://s.bsd.net/biss/main/page/-/daniel_litesa_LogoAssets_BissWallace_2colorvertical%20%281%29.png] We’ve been told our state is broke and that we can’t afford to fund the programs working families need. Don’t believe it. The truth is that we live in one of the wealthiest states in the nation. Fourteen of the richest people in the world live right here in Illinois. We can afford to invest in Illinois, and we can absolutely pay for it. One way to do it is by putting a small tax on financial transactions in Chicago, known as the LaSalle Street tax. Daniel’s proposal is estimated to increase revenue by $10-$12 billion every year. Watch this video to learn more: [Watch the LaSalle Street tax video now!] When you or I go to the store to buy an item, we are charged a sales tax on it. But when wealthy investors go to the stock exchanges on LaSalle Street, they aren’t charged a dime. Bruce Rauner, JB Pritzker, and Chris Kennedy will say that taxing financial transactions will drive investors away, but we already know other places that tax financial transactions are doing just fine. The LaSalle Street tax is fair and the extra revenue could be used to help fund our community schools, ensure health care for all, pay for free college tuition, and bring our state out of debt -- all while creating good-paying jobs. This is just one of a few ways we can tackle our budget problems, but I need your help. If you believe in taxing LaSalle Street and investing in Illinois’ working people, please add your name to show you’re with Daniel. Thanks for taking action, Nico Nico Probst Deputy Campaign Manager Biss for Illinois _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C12e284668cc548784d2008d556c130d2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636510310096551236&sdata=kJw9BT5nR3%2BhbjpPfxWK29ZUj7XTyoPToJXUqzkPUFg%3D&reserved=0 _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace&data=02%7C01%7C%7C58c9ecac44f1419a4bf008d556c89c45%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636510341966454330&sdata=ZCRkc%2BNSwDpu0LxsBeEduzHtpIvO4CPgp96Ek9E%2F0h4%3D&reserved=0 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Mon Jan 8 19:02:55 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 13:02:55 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Oprah Winfrey, proposed presidential candidate Message-ID: <7205B7D3-1771-4499-8052-34708C1A4A5E@gmail.com> A carnival barker for neoliberalism [See Gail Thain Parker, "Mind Cure in New England: From the Civil War to World War I” (1973)] "[There are] strong parallels in the mind-cure movement of the Gilded Age and Oprah’s evolving enterprise in the New Gilded Age, the era of neoliberalism ... Oprah’s enterprise reinforces the neoliberal focus on the self: Oprah’s enterprise is an ensemble of ideological practices that help legitimize a world of growing inequality and shrinking possibilities by promoting and embodying a configuration of self compatible with that world. "Nothing captures this ensemble of ideological practices better than O Magazine, whose aim is to 'help women see every experience and challenge as an opportunity to grow and discover their best self. To convince women that the real goal is becoming more of who they really are. To embrace their life.' "O Magazine implicitly, and sometimes explicitly, identifies a range of problems in neoliberal capitalism and suggests ways for readers to adapt themselves to mitigate or overcome these problems. "Does your 60 hour-a-week desk job make your back hurt and leave you emotionally exhausted and stressed? Of course it does. Studies show that 'death by office job' is real: people who sit at a desk all day are more likely to be obese, depressed, or just dead for no discernible reason. But you can dull these effects and improve your wellness with these O-approved strategies: Become more of an 'out-of-the-box thinker' because creative people are healthier. Bring photos, posters, and 'kitschy figurines' to decorate your workspace: 'You’ll feel less emotionally exhausted and reduce burnout.' Write down three positive things that happened during your workday every night before leaving the office to 'reduce stress and physical pain from work.' "Oprah is appealing precisely because her stories hide the role of political, economic, and social structures "In December 2013, O devoted a whole issue to anxiety and worry. The issue 'conquers a lifetime’s worth of anxieties and apprehensions.' an apt subject given rising levels of anxiety across the age spectrum. "In the issue, bibliotherapists Ella Berthoud and Susan Elderkin present a list of books for the anxious, prescribing them instead of a 'trip to the pharmacy.' Feeling claustrophobic because you’re too poor to move out of your parents’ house? Read 'Little House on the Prairie.' Feeling stressed because your current project at work is ending and you don’t have another lined up? Read 'The Man Who Planted Trees.' Worried that you won’t be able to pay the rent because you just lost your job? Read 'The Wind-Up Bird Chronicles.' 'Instead of feeling depressed, follow the lead hero Toru Okada, who, while jobless, embarks on a fantastic liberating journey that changes the way he thinks.' 'Oprah recognizes the pervasiveness of anxiety and alienation in our society. But instead of examining the economic or political basis of these feelings, she advises us to turn our gaze inward and reconfigure ourselves to become more adaptable to the vagaries and stresses of the neoliberal moment. 'Oprah is appealing precisely because her stories hide the role of political, economic, and social structures. In doing so, they make the American Dream seem attainable. If we just fix ourselves, we can achieve our goals. For some people, the American dream is attainable, but to understand the chances for everyone, we need to look dispassionately at the factors that shape success. 'The current incarnation of the American Dream narrative holds that if you acquire enough cultural capital (skills and education) and social capital (connections, access to networks), you will be able to translate that capital into both economic capital (cash) and happiness. Cultural capital and social capital are seen as there for the taking (particularly with advances in internet technology), so the only additional necessary ingredients are pluck, passion, and persistence— all attributes that allegedly come from inside us. 'The American dream is premised on the assumption that if you work hard, economic opportunity will present itself, and financial stability will follow, but the role of cultural and social capital in paving the road to wealth and fulfilment, or blocking it, may be just as important as economic capital. Some people are able to translate their skills, knowledge, and connections into economic opportunity and financial stability, and some are not—either because their skills, knowledge, and connections don’t seem to work as well, or they can’t acquire them in the first place because they’re too poor. 'Today, the centrality of social and cultural capital is obscured (sometimes deliberately), as demonstrated in the implicit and explicit message of Oprah and her ideological colleagues. In their stories, and many others like them, cultural and social capital are easy to acquire. They tell us to get an education. Too poor? Take an online course. Go to Khan Academy. They tell us to meet people, build up our network. Don’t have any connected family members? Join LinkedIn. 'It’s simple. Anyone can become anything. There’s no distinction between the quality and productivity of different people’s social and cultural capital. We’re all building our skills. We’re all networking. 'This is a fiction. If all or most forms of social and cultural capital were equally valuable and accessible, we should see the effects of this in increased upward mobility and wealth created anew by new people in each generation rather than passed down and expanded from one generation to the next. The data do not demonstrate this upward mobility. 'The US, in a sample of 13 wealthy countries, ranks highest in inequality and lowest in intergenerational earnings mobility. Wealth isn’t earned fresh in each new generation by plucky go-getters. It is passed down, preserved, and expanded through generous tax laws and the assiduous transmission of social and cultural capital. 'The way Oprah tells us to get through it all and realize our dreams is always to adapt ourselves to the changing world, not to change the world we live in. We demand little or nothing from the system, from the collective apparatus of powerful people and institutions. We only make demands of ourselves. 'We are the perfect, depoliticized, complacent neoliberal subjects. 'And yet we’re not. The popularity of strategies for alleviating alienation rests on our deep, collective desire for meaning and creativity. Literary critic and political theorist Fredric Jameson would say that the Oprah stories, and others like them, are able to “manage our desires” only because they appeal to deep fantasies about how we want to live our lives. This, after all, is what the American dream narrative is about – not necessarily a description of life lived, but a vision of how life should be lived. 'When the stories that manage our desires break their promises over and over, the stories themselves become fuel for change and open a space for new, radical stories. These new stories must feature collective demands that provide a critical perspective on the real limits to success in our society and foster a vision of life that does fulfill the desire for self-actualization.' [This is an extract from "New Prophets of Capital" by Nicole Aschoff, published by Verso Books.] See also "Oprah Winfrey, Warmonger?" https://www.counterpunch.org/2002/11/.../oprah-winfrey-warmonger/ "Oprah and Elie Wiesel” https://www.counterpunch.org/2006/02/01/oprah-and-elie-wiesel/ "The Shopkeeper's Tale” https://www.counterpunch.org/2013/08/19/the-shopkeepers-tale/ From cgestabrook at gmail.com Mon Jan 8 19:27:30 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 13:27:30 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Why Biss is perhaps the best candidate for governor In-Reply-To: References: <3c1966c649eb4036e30983bffe6190c0@bounce.bluestatedigital.com> <159FF042-B1CC-473D-9ABB-65D208E5E161@gmail.com> Message-ID: <0C6F5045-BE6F-4FBD-B715-BFA3C2C92E04@gmail.com> He’s a Democrat who dumped his lt-gov candidate from the ticket for supporting BDS. Apparently he’s as weak on apartheid as our local legislators, Democrat state senator Scott Bennett and Democratic state representative Carol Ammons, who refused to vote against Senate Bill 1761, supporting Israeli apartheid. (They would not have refused to vote against South African apartheid, and the Israeli form is worse, in the occupied territories.) Pour encourager les autres*, I plan to vote against all incumbents, regardless of party. They haven’t done well. —CGE __________________________________________________________ * British Admiral John Byng's execution is referred to in Voltaire's novel ‘Candide' with the line "Dans ce pays-ci, il est bon de tuer de temps en temps un amiral pour encourager les autres" – "In this country, it is wise to kill an admiral from time to time to encourage the others." > On Jan 8, 2018, at 12:49 PM, Karen Aram via Peace wrote: > > Is Biss a Green? This was one of Rich Whitney’s suggestions. > > We know candidates say a lot of things, so its important who the Party is, in reference to whether they will act upon it after being elected. > >> On Jan 8, 2018, at 09:56, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: >> >> >> >>> Begin forwarded message: >>> >>> From: Nico Probst > >>> Subject: Tax LaSalle Street >>> Date: January 5, 2018 at 7:30:03 PM CST >>> To: "C. G. Estabrook" > >>> Reply-To: info at danielbiss.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> We’ve been told our state is broke and that we can’t afford to fund the programs working families need. >>> >>> Don’t believe it. >>> >>> The truth is that we live in one of the wealthiest states in the nation. Fourteen of the richest people in the world live right here in Illinois. >>> >>> We can afford to invest in Illinois, and we can absolutely pay for it. >>> >>> One way to do it is by putting a small tax on financial transactions in Chicago, known as the LaSalle Street tax. Daniel’s proposal is estimated to increase revenue by $10-$12 billion every year. Watch this video to learn more: >>> >>> When you or I go to the store to buy an item, we are charged a sales tax on it. But when wealthy investors go to the stock exchanges on LaSalle Street, they aren’t charged a dime. >>> >>> Bruce Rauner, JB Pritzker, and Chris Kennedy will say that taxing financial transactions will drive investors away, but we already know other places that tax financial transactions are doing just fine. >>> >>> The LaSalle Street tax is fair and the extra revenue could be used to help fund our community schools, ensure health care for all, pay for free college tuition, and bring our state out of debt -- all while creating good-paying jobs. >>> >>> This is just one of a few ways we can tackle our budget problems, but I need your help. >>> >>> If you believe in taxing LaSalle Street and investing in Illinois’ working people, please add your name to show you’re with Daniel. >>> Thanks for taking action, >>> >>> Nico >>> >>> Nico Probst >>> Deputy Campaign Manager >>> Biss for Illinois >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C12e284668cc548784d2008d556c130d2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636510310096551236&sdata=kJw9BT5nR3%2BhbjpPfxWK29ZUj7XTyoPToJXUqzkPUFg%3D&reserved=0 > > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jan 8 19:33:37 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 19:33:37 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Why Biss is perhaps the best candidate for governor In-Reply-To: <0C6F5045-BE6F-4FBD-B715-BFA3C2C92E04@gmail.com> References: <3c1966c649eb4036e30983bffe6190c0@bounce.bluestatedigital.com> <159FF042-B1CC-473D-9ABB-65D208E5E161@gmail.com> <0C6F5045-BE6F-4FBD-B715-BFA3C2C92E04@gmail.com> Message-ID: Then you were being facetious when you suggested voting for him, because he supports the Lasalle Street Tax? On Jan 8, 2018, at 11:27, C G Estabrook > wrote: He’s a Democrat who dumped his lt-gov candidate from the ticket for supporting BDS. Apparently he’s as weak on apartheid as our local legislators, Democrat state senator Scott Bennett and Democratic state representative Carol Ammons, who refused to vote against Senate Bill 1761, supporting Israeli apartheid. (They would not have refused to vote against South African apartheid, and the Israeli form is worse, in the occupied territories.) Pour encourager les autres*, I plan to vote against all incumbents, regardless of party. They haven’t done well. —CGE __________________________________________________________ * British Admiral John Byng's execution is referred to in Voltaire's novel ‘Candide' with the line "Dans ce pays-ci, il est bon de tuer de temps en temps un amiral pour encourager les autres" – "In this country, it is wise to kill an admiral from time to time to encourage the others." On Jan 8, 2018, at 12:49 PM, Karen Aram via Peace > wrote: Is Biss a Green? This was one of Rich Whitney’s suggestions. We know candidates say a lot of things, so its important who the Party is, in reference to whether they will act upon it after being elected. On Jan 8, 2018, at 09:56, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: Begin forwarded message: From: Nico Probst > Subject: Tax LaSalle Street Date: January 5, 2018 at 7:30:03 PM CST To: "C. G. Estabrook" > Reply-To: info at danielbiss.com [https://s.bsd.net/biss/main/page/-/daniel_litesa_LogoAssets_BissWallace_2colorvertical%20%281%29.png] We’ve been told our state is broke and that we can’t afford to fund the programs working families need. Don’t believe it. The truth is that we live in one of the wealthiest states in the nation. Fourteen of the richest people in the world live right here in Illinois. We can afford to invest in Illinois, and we can absolutely pay for it. One way to do it is by putting a small tax on financial transactions in Chicago, known as the LaSalle Street tax. Daniel’s proposal is estimated to increase revenue by $10-$12 billion every year. Watch this video to learn more: [Watch the LaSalle Street tax video now!] When you or I go to the store to buy an item, we are charged a sales tax on it. But when wealthy investors go to the stock exchanges on LaSalle Street, they aren’t charged a dime. Bruce Rauner, JB Pritzker, and Chris Kennedy will say that taxing financial transactions will drive investors away, but we already know other places that tax financial transactions are doing just fine. The LaSalle Street tax is fair and the extra revenue could be used to help fund our community schools, ensure health care for all, pay for free college tuition, and bring our state out of debt -- all while creating good-paying jobs. This is just one of a few ways we can tackle our budget problems, but I need your help. If you believe in taxing LaSalle Street and investing in Illinois’ working people, please add your name to show you’re with Daniel. Thanks for taking action, Nico Nico Probst Deputy Campaign Manager Biss for Illinois _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C12e284668cc548784d2008d556c130d2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636510310096551236&sdata=kJw9BT5nR3%2BhbjpPfxWK29ZUj7XTyoPToJXUqzkPUFg%3D&reserved=0 _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Mon Jan 8 19:57:21 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 13:57:21 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Why Biss is perhaps the best candidate for governor In-Reply-To: References: <3c1966c649eb4036e30983bffe6190c0@bounce.bluestatedigital.com> <159FF042-B1CC-473D-9ABB-65D208E5E161@gmail.com> <0C6F5045-BE6F-4FBD-B715-BFA3C2C92E04@gmail.com> Message-ID: <744ABAB4-AA05-488B-9F89-C24263902BBB@gmail.com> No, I was suggesting a vote for him if he’s willing to do what the Democrats in the ‘budget crisis’ weren’t willing to do - tax the rich. Biss is probably the best of a poor (in one sense) lot of Democrat gubernatorial candidates. And of course he’s not an incumbent. > On Jan 8, 2018, at 1:33 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Then you were being facetious when you suggested voting for him, because he supports the Lasalle Street Tax? > >> On Jan 8, 2018, at 11:27, C G Estabrook > wrote: >> >> He’s a Democrat who dumped his lt-gov candidate from the ticket for supporting BDS. >> >> Apparently he’s as weak on apartheid as our local legislators, Democrat state senator Scott Bennett and Democratic state representative Carol Ammons, who refused to vote against Senate Bill 1761, supporting Israeli apartheid. (They would not have refused to vote against South African apartheid, and the Israeli form is worse, in the occupied territories.) >> >> Pour encourager les autres*, I plan to vote against all incumbents, regardless of party. They haven’t done well. >> >> —CGE >> >> __________________________________________________________ >> * British Admiral John Byng's execution is referred to in Voltaire's novel ‘Candide' with the line "Dans ce pays-ci, il est bon de tuer de temps en temps un amiral pour encourager les autres" – "In this country, it is wise to kill an admiral from time to time to encourage the others." >> >> >> >>> On Jan 8, 2018, at 12:49 PM, Karen Aram via Peace > wrote: >>> >>> Is Biss a Green? This was one of Rich Whitney’s suggestions. >>> >>> We know candidates say a lot of things, so its important who the Party is, in reference to whether they will act upon it after being elected. >>> >>>> On Jan 8, 2018, at 09:56, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Begin forwarded message: >>>>> >>>>> From: Nico Probst > >>>>> Subject: Tax LaSalle Street >>>>> Date: January 5, 2018 at 7:30:03 PM CST >>>>> To: "C. G. Estabrook" > >>>>> Reply-To: info at danielbiss.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> We’ve been told our state is broke and that we can’t afford to fund the programs working families need. >>>>> >>>>> Don’t believe it. >>>>> >>>>> The truth is that we live in one of the wealthiest states in the nation. Fourteen of the richest people in the world live right here in Illinois. >>>>> >>>>> We can afford to invest in Illinois, and we can absolutely pay for it. >>>>> >>>>> One way to do it is by putting a small tax on financial transactions in Chicago, known as the LaSalle Street tax. Daniel’s proposal is estimated to increase revenue by $10-$12 billion every year. Watch this video to learn more: >>>>> >>>>> When you or I go to the store to buy an item, we are charged a sales tax on it. But when wealthy investors go to the stock exchanges on LaSalle Street, they aren’t charged a dime. >>>>> >>>>> Bruce Rauner, JB Pritzker, and Chris Kennedy will say that taxing financial transactions will drive investors away, but we already know other places that tax financial transactions are doing just fine. >>>>> >>>>> The LaSalle Street tax is fair and the extra revenue could be used to help fund our community schools, ensure health care for all, pay for free college tuition, and bring our state out of debt -- all while creating good-paying jobs. >>>>> >>>>> This is just one of a few ways we can tackle our budget problems, but I need your help. >>>>> >>>>> If you believe in taxing LaSalle Street and investing in Illinois’ working people, please add your name to show you’re with Daniel. >>>>> Thanks for taking action, >>>>> >>>>> Nico >>>>> >>>>> Nico Probst >>>>> Deputy Campaign Manager >>>>> Biss for Illinois >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>>> https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C12e284668cc548784d2008d556c130d2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636510310096551236&sdata=kJw9BT5nR3%2BhbjpPfxWK29ZUj7XTyoPToJXUqzkPUFg%3D&reserved=0 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 Mon Jan 8 22:09:18 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 16:09:18 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: [Aware] Aware, Are you looking for lasting love? ? References: Message-ID: Are we? Or would we just settle for non-aggression? > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Joey Fletcher via Aware > Subject: [Aware] Aware, Are you looking for lasting love? ? > Date: January 8, 2018 at 3:42:43 PM CST > To: > Reply-To: > >   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Aware mailing list > Aware at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/aware -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jan 8 22:53:51 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 22:53:51 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: CDC to Brief Public on Responding to Nuclear Attack: Duck and Cover! 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, January 8, 2018 4:52 PM To: 'globenet at yahoogroups.com' Subject: CDC to Brief Public on Responding to Nuclear Attack: Duck and Cover! Déjà vu all over again. Fab. [Boylebookemail.JPG] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 20855 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jan 8 22:53:51 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 22:53:51 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: CDC to Brief Public on Responding to Nuclear Attack: Duck and Cover! 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, January 8, 2018 4:52 PM To: 'globenet at yahoogroups.com' Subject: CDC to Brief Public on Responding to Nuclear Attack: Duck and Cover! Déjà vu all over again. Fab. [Boylebookemail.JPG] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 20855 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Mon Jan 8 23:22:36 2018 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 17:22:36 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Protests in Iran Took Many By Surprise - But Not Iranian Labor Activists Message-ID: <00fd01d388d7$91d70390$b5850ab0$@comcast.net> Unlike the 2009 Green Movement, which was largely a product of the educated, urban Tehrani middle class, the recent protests in Iran appear to reflect the anger of the country's working-class masses. As Iranians grapple with high inflation, unemployment, and economic corruption, the burden of these problems has fallen most heavily on young people who lack the political connections to survive, let alone raise their standard of living. Iran's Working Class Behind the Protests. We share this excellent report on the Iranian protests. It was originally published at The Intercept Protests in Iran Took Many By Surprise - But Not Iranian Labor Activists https://cdn01.theintercept.com/wp-uploads/sites/1/2014/02/Murtaza-Hussain-Hi -Res-Original_350.jpg Murtaza Hussain January 6 2018, 4:30 a.m. Over the past week, tens of thousands of people in dozens of cities across Iran have braved bullets and tear gas in a public outpouring of dissent against the country's ruling establishment. Videos of demonstrations shared on social media have shown protesters smashing government-owned banks, tearing down posters of government officials, and at times calling for the end of clerical rule in the country. At least 22 people are reported to have been killed since the unrest began December 28, with human rights groups saying hundreds more were detained by security forces. The outbreak and nature of the unrest have taken many analysts of Iranian politics by surprise. Rather than emerging from liberal Tehran, these protests appear to have originated in working-class conservative cities and towns that the Islamic Republic likes to depict as its core constituency. One group of people, however, has long expected such an outbreak of discontent from the economically disadvantaged people in these areas: Iranian labor activists. "Working people in Iran have been dreaming of a better life for four decades, but today ordinary people often have to work two or three jobs simply to survive," says Mehdi Kouhestaninejad, a longtime Iranian trade unionist now living in Canada, who is active in the international solidarity movement for workers' rights in Iran. "Many people inside and outside Iran may be shocked by what is going on, but trade unionists have been warning for the past 10 years that there will be an uprising against the ruling class and their kleptocracy." Unlike the 2009 Green Movement, which was largely a product of the educated, urban Tehrani middle class, the recent protests in Iran appear to reflect the anger of the country's working-class masses. As Iranians grapple with high inflation, unemployment, and economic corruption, the burden of these problems has fallen most heavily on young people who lack the political connections to survive, let alone raise their standard of living. The latest protests also erupted from an unclear place in terms of Iran's political spectrum: While the Green Movement was rallying around reformist politics and its leadership in Mir Hossein Mousavi, the latest protests have seen chants cursing just about every actor and political affiliation in Iran. There were frequent changes of "death to Rouhani" - referring to Iran's reform-minded centrist president, Hassan Rouhani, whom young Tehranis have repeatedly poured into the streets to support. Photo taken on Dec. 30, 2017, shows unrest on the streets of central Tehran. Two people were killed overnight in the western province of Lorestan amid anti-government protests erupting across Iran. (Kyodo)==Kyodo Unrest on the streets of central Tehran on Dec. 30, 2017, amid anti-government protests erupting across Iran. Photo: Kyodo News/AP In response to the protests, five Iranian labor organizations released a statement calling for "an end to poverty and misery" in the country and urging the government to enact economic reforms. But while labor groups have supported the protests, it is unclear to what extent they have been involved in actually directing them. The ability of independent civil society groups to publicly organize in Iran is greatly constrained by the government. One of the few videos that has been released clearly articulating economic grievances against the government appears to have been an astroturf operation organized by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a way of turning the unrest against their rivals in the Rouhani government. Historically, however, workers' movements in Iran have been an important center of power in the country. During the 1979 Iranian Revolution, labor organizers helped play a decisive role in the fall of the Pahlavi monarchy, particularly oil workers, whose decision to go on strike in the late days of the revolution brought the country's economy to a halt and helped seal the fate of Mohammad Reza Shah. Following the revolution, the new clerical rulers of the Islamic Republic quickly moved to marginalize labor groups. Today, the formation of independent trade unions is effectively banned in Iran, while labor rights activists are routinely detained and imprisoned by security forces. Workers today are allowed to organize government-approved Islamic Labor Councils, but the bodies are widely viewed as being coopted by the state and unable to effect genuine change. The absence of genuine labor movements and the bargaining power that they provide has helped foster an increasingly unequal society. Although the Iranian economy is widely believed to have turned a corner following the lifting of international sanctions related to the country's nuclear program, the resulting benefits have been unevenly distributed. For young, working-class people dealing with rampant inflation, unemployment, and income inequality, there is a growing sense of hopelessness about the future. The increasing militarization of Iranian society and takeover of components of the economy by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps - an institution close to Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and other influential clerical bodies - have also created what the exiled labor activist Kouhestaninejad describes as a "mafia-like" atmosphere, in which the ability of working-class people to assert their rights has been tightly constrained. "There is no transparency. We are dealing with a government in which no one knows who is who and every part of the economy is seemingly under the influence of the IRGC, which is running it like a mafia," Kouhestaninejad says. "Meanwhile, there are millions of youths who cannot find a job, or when they find a job it is precarious and they have no job security. Oftentimes to work, they must sign a 'white contract,' which means that their employer can assign them any terms they want, with no negotiation." While the recent protests have garnered considerable international attention, labor activists and workers in Iran have been engaged in long-running battles over unpaid wages and benefits that predate the latest unrest. In December, hundreds of workers at the Haft Tapeh sugar cane plantation in Shush, a city in southwestern Iran, launched a round of strikes and protests over unpaid wages that, by then, were more than four months late. While working-class demonstrators often lack the media savvy, language skills, and international connections available to Tehran-centric political opposition movements, workers at Haft Tapeh managed to get international attention for their fight through their affiliation with the International Union of Food and Allied Workers, a global trade union federation also known as IUF. IUF representatives say that the recent unrest across the country was long expected and represents the culmination of grievances on the part of ordinary people in the country. "There is no need to speculate on the causes of the regular strikes and demonstrations like those at Haft Tapeh, and no need to search for foreign enemies stirring the pot. The current round of mass demonstrations is an authentic expression of frustration and anger," says Peter Rossman, a spokesperson for the IUF based in Geneva. "Workers at Haft Tapeh have been compelled to hold strikes and demonstration since 2008 to feed their families. The ferocious repression against workers seeking to form unions explains why the frustration can only express itself in this form." "The ferocious repression against workers seeking to form unions explains why the frustration can only express itself in this form." The recent demonstrations represent the biggest public challenge to the Islamic Republic's rule since the Green Movement. But it's unclear what the future trajectory of these protests in Iran will be. Unlike the Green Movement, those who have taken to the streets in recent days have not won the backing of prominent members of the ruling establishment, nor have any identifiable leaders emerged. According to the Iranian Interior Ministry, 90 percent of those detained across the country in recent days are under 25 years old - members of a generation that grew up under international sanctions and has little memory of the relative openness of the Islamic Republic under reformist President Mohammad Khatami. The apparent dissatisfaction of these working-class demonstrators stands as a significant challenge to the regime's authority, given its proclaimed status as a defender of Iran's conservative masses. "Regardless [of] what happens going forward, the protests have proven two things: Areas of [the] country that the regime depicted as their base - small-town, conservative communities - are in fact very angry and very anti-regime," says Hadi Ghaemi, executive director of the Center for Human Rights in Iran. "There is a lot of anger among young people who are children of the working class and went to university, but still find themselves unable to rise in Iranian society." In recent days, officials from the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps have announced plans to take control of the security situation in the country. As waves of demonstrations and arrests continue, the future of the protest movement may depend on whether a broader coalition forms that is capable of withstanding the coercive apparatus of the state. To some degree, the economically based nature of the protests could potentially militate in the government's favor by dividing the urban political opposition from the working-class conservative regions currently taking part in the unrest. "None of the Green Movement supporters - who are mostly from the educated middle class - have come out in support of the protests, because they see more of a future in Rouhani's policies than any other alternative, even if they are unhappy with the regime," says Ghaemi. "The protests have a clear class dimension. They are coming from a segment of young people who feel they have nothing left to lose." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1304 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 54035 bytes Desc: not available URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jan 9 02:38:20 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 02:38:20 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Review of the film "American Made" Message-ID: I hate to be disagreeable, but the film, is a satire, nothing romantic about it. It’s anything but propaganda, no it’s not a documentary but for those who don’t know anything about what took place there and then. It’s also a film that will sell big in overseas. It’s comical, and will appeal to the many people who don’t read books, or pay much attention to politics, or weren’t around back then. It shows clearly that the White House, DEA, CIA and Governor Clinton in Arkansas all were involved in the drug smuggling of cocaine to the US from Columbia, and guns from Columbia to the Contra’s in Nicaragua. As well as other things, like CIA payoffs to Noriega. It all led to the Iran Contra Affair, because Ollie North and others reporting to the Reagan Administration were involved. As to why Barry Seal did what he did, questions the reviewer? The money, the money, and the challenge. Inaccuracies in the film consist of his relationship to his wife Lucy as they were divorced before his death, he had, had two other wives by then. According to Del Hahn, his biographer: Barry never met the Columbian Cartel personally. I think critics feel they must be critical, and some need to be a bit less elitist. > The movie shows that Cruise was > smuggling cigars via TWA when he was > recruited. > Also, Clinton is tied in during a good scene with > the AG of Arkansas. > The movie was not romantic. > It was satire and a mockumentary is the Iran > Contra affair. From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 9 02:52:02 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 02:52:02 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Review of the film "American Made" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <845844561.2401431.1515466322691@mail.yahoo.com> That's a fair enough assessment, Karen. What prompted me to look for the original comment that I posted was being bombarded with promotions for the film whenever I watched something on YouTube. My perhaps hasty assumption from the trailer was that Americans would view the character in the form of Tom Cruise as a kind of loveable rascal, without understanding the context of what he was involved in; or that he's presented as a sort of romantic outlaw. But of course just the idea that this is presented as entertainment is disturbing to me, although I don't expect it to be disturbing to the broader culture. DG On ‎Monday‎, ‎January‎ ‎8‎, ‎2018‎ ‎08‎:‎38‎:‎45‎ ‎PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: I hate to be disagreeable, but the film, is a satire, nothing romantic about it. It’s anything but propaganda, no it’s not a documentary but for those who don’t know anything about what took place there and then. It’s also a film that will sell big in overseas. It’s comical, and will appeal to the many people who don’t read books, or pay much attention to politics, or weren’t around back then. It shows clearly that the White House, DEA, CIA and Governor Clinton in Arkansas all were involved in the drug smuggling of cocaine to the US from Columbia, and guns from Columbia to the Contra’s in Nicaragua. As well as other things, like CIA payoffs to Noriega. It all led to the Iran Contra Affair, because Ollie North and others reporting to the Reagan Administration were involved. As to why Barry Seal did what he did, questions the reviewer? The money, the money, and the challenge.  Inaccuracies in the film consist of his relationship to his wife Lucy as they were divorced before his death, he had, had two other wives by then.  According to Del Hahn, his biographer: Barry never met the Columbian Cartel personally. I think critics feel they must be critical, and some need to be a bit less elitist. > The movie shows that Cruise was > smuggling cigars via TWA when he was > recruited. > Also, Clinton is tied in during a good scene with > the AG of Arkansas. > The movie was not romantic. > It was satire and a mockumentary is the Iran > Contra affair. _______________________________________________ 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 Jan 9 13:17:12 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 13:17:12 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Review of the film "American Made" In-Reply-To: <845844561.2401431.1515466322691@mail.yahoo.com> References: <845844561.2401431.1515466322691@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: David I understand, and had I seen a trailer, or ads, I would likely feel the same. An example of what you find disturbing is they have a scene of Barry in the White House meeting GW Bush, visiting his Dad, and yes he too is shown as a “likable rascal." Which is disturbing, but recognize this is one of the reasons he was elected by those seeing him in this light. More disturbing is “13 Hours,” another “based on a book,” and supposedly a true story about Benghazi, the death of Ambassador Stephens etc. This is a film I found irritating as it clearly was a US/CIA/or Special Ops, JSOC propaganda film. According to reviews it exposed the lie that Obama and Hillary used a VDO as the reason the people were so aroused to anger at the US. Unfortunately, that doesn’t mitigate the other lies throughout the film about Gadaffi, Libya, and why and what the US was doing there. At the very beginning in small type letters across the screen they claimed the CIA, was attempting to find the stockpile of weapons to prevent their proliferation to Jihadists, a lie given the CIA promoted the proliferation of weapons to Jihadists. This film, not a satire, received a couple Academy Awards for some things, and is now on Amazon. To defend my poor taste in film, I watched both as a result of a recommendation, for my opinion, and find it difficult to concentrate having them run while I’m doing reading online. On Jan 8, 2018, at 18:52, David Green > wrote: That's a fair enough assessment, Karen. What prompted me to look for the original comment that I posted was being bombarded with promotions for the film whenever I watched something on YouTube. My perhaps hasty assumption from the trailer was that Americans would view the character in the form of Tom Cruise as a kind of loveable rascal, without understanding the context of what he was involved in; or that he's presented as a sort of romantic outlaw. But of course just the idea that this is presented as entertainment is disturbing to me, although I don't expect it to be disturbing to the broader culture. DG On ‎Monday‎, ‎January‎ ‎8‎, ‎2018‎ ‎08‎:‎38‎:‎45‎ ‎PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss > wrote: I hate to be disagreeable, but the film, is a satire, nothing romantic about it. It’s anything but propaganda, no it’s not a documentary but for those who don’t know anything about what took place there and then. It’s also a film that will sell big in overseas. It’s comical, and will appeal to the many people who don’t read books, or pay much attention to politics, or weren’t around back then. It shows clearly that the White House, DEA, CIA and Governor Clinton in Arkansas all were involved in the drug smuggling of cocaine to the US from Columbia, and guns from Columbia to the Contra’s in Nicaragua. As well as other things, like CIA payoffs to Noriega. It all led to the Iran Contra Affair, because Ollie North and others reporting to the Reagan Administration were involved. As to why Barry Seal did what he did, questions the reviewer? The money, the money, and the challenge. Inaccuracies in the film consist of his relationship to his wife Lucy as they were divorced before his death, he had, had two other wives by then. According to Del Hahn, his biographer: Barry never met the Columbian Cartel personally. I think critics feel they must be critical, and some need to be a bit less elitist. > The movie shows that Cruise was > smuggling cigars via TWA when he was > recruited. > Also, Clinton is tied in during a good scene with > the AG of Arkansas. > The movie was not romantic. > It was satire and a mockumentary is the Iran > Contra affair. _______________________________________________ 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 Jan 9 14:44:27 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 14:44:27 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] A Crime against humanity Message-ID: A crime against humanity US to deport 262,000 Salvadoran immigrants 9 January 2018 The US Department of Homeland Security announced Monday that it is terminating Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for more than a quarter-million immigrants from El Salvador. The immigrants, a large majority of them poorer workers, have 18 months, until September 9, 2019, to leave the US or be arrested and deported. Including the roughly 190,000 children of the 262,000 Salvadoran TPS recipients, the total population immediately affected is larger than the population of a city the size of Toledo, Ohio or New Orleans, Louisiana. Rounding up the TPS recipients for deportation will require Gestapo-type operations in the Washington DC metropolitan area, where 50,000 Salvadoran TPS recipients live; Los Angeles, where 40,000 live; and Houston and New York City, where a combined 50,000 reside. The Salvadorans are the largest single group covered by the TPS program, under which the DHS secretary may allow people fleeing natural disasters or civil wars to stay in the United States for more extended periods of time than under traditional refugee status. The Salvadoran TPS recipients constitute a significant section of the working class in the US, where most have put down deep roots. The average Salvadoran covered by TPS has been living in the US for 21 years. Those now facing deportation are primarily of middle age and have lived here for most of their adult lives. By one estimate, removing these workers will slash the US gross domestic product by nearly $110 billion over the next 10 years. Some 190,000 were admitted before 1994 and all 262,000 entered the country before 2001, when several major earthquakes devastated El Salvador. Tens of thousands escaped the civil war that ravaged the country from 1980 to 1992, during which US-backed death squads razed villages and massacred the population, including the estimated 1,200 peasants murdered in the village of El Mozote 37 years ago last month in what is known as El Salvador’s My Lai. The move is a death sentence for hundreds or even thousands of those who will be sent back to a country with one of the highest murder rates in the world, dominated by criminal drug gangs that operate with impunity, protected by a corrupt military that rakes in money from both narcotics trafficking and US military aid. According to a 2015 report in the Guardian, dozens of deported Salvadorans were murdered after being deported by Obama in 2014-2015 alone. The decision to terminate TPS for Salvadorans signals the Trump administration’s determination to put an end to the program entirely. Previously, DHS Acting Secretary Elaine Duke terminated TPS for 2,500 immigrants from Nicaragua, giving them until January 5, 2019 to leave the United States, and for 57,000 immigrants from Haiti, whose TPS status is set to expire July 22, 2019. But equal responsibility for the move lies with the Democratic Party, which paved the way for Trump’s mass deportation program during the Obama administration. President Obama deported 2.7 million immigrants, including hundreds of thousands when the Democratic Party controlled Congress in the first years of his administration. This makes the phony statements of support for immigrants by leading Democrats all the more cynical. Barack Obama jailed tens of thousands of Salvadoran children and their mothers who crossed into the US during a flare-up of Central American violence in 2014. As for Trump’s request and for $15 billion more in funding for border “security,” the Democratic Party has long embraced the militarization of the border and has made clear it will back the allocation of additional billions to increase what is already a small army of border police and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. The Democrats’ opposition to Trump’s demand for $18 billion to build a physical wall along the US-Mexico border is a political maneuver to divert attention from their basic agreement on stepping up the war against undocumented workers. When the precursor to Trump’s wall was first proposed in the 2006 Secure Fence Act, signed into law by President George W. Bush, top Senate Democrats backed it, including then-senators Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Joseph Biden, as well as Charles Schumer, now the Senate Democratic leader. As a result of this and other bipartisan border militarization measures, up to 27,000 immigrants have died crossing the desert in the last 20 years. In 2013, the Democrats agreed to spend $40 billion on border security, doubling the number of Border Patrol agents to 40,000 and expanding the use of high-tech surveillance equipment, including sensors and drones. The Democrats also agreed to eliminate the visa lottery, exclude siblings of US citizens from family reunification visas, and expand visa offerings based on education levels and work expertise, along the lines demanded by US corporations seeking highly skilled labor. The bill was voted down by the Republicans. Today, they are proposing to go above and beyond their previous anti-immigrant pledges. The move to deport TPS recipients comes as the Democratic Party and Trump are engaged in Kabuki theater negotiations over the fate of 800,000 young people brought to the US as children who are enrolled in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program enacted during the Obama administration. Trump rescinded the DACA order, effective March 5, at which point mass roundups of former DACA recipients could begin, using the information they supplied to the government as part of their applications for DACA. The White House is also demanding cuts in legal immigration as part of a “compromise” on DACA, including the elimination of the visa lottery program and so-called “chain migration,” which allows US citizens and legal residents to sponsor family relations for entry. Last week, Senator Schumer made clear in advance of talks on DACA that he supported further measures to militarize the US-Mexican border. Senator Bernie Sanders reiterated his support for stepped-up attacks on undocumented workers in an appearance Sunday on the ABC program “This Week.” Sanders declared that while he opposed Trump’s border wall, “I don’t think there’s anybody who disagrees that we need strong border security. If the president wants to work with us to make sure we have strong border security, let’s do that.” Sanders, in line with the trade union bureaucracy, echoes Trump’s economic nationalism and pseudo-populist attempts to pit American workers against their class brothers and sisters in other countries. The vast majority of Americans disagree with the anti-immigrant nationalism of Trump, with nine in 10 believing the government should give citizenship to immigrants who have lived in the US for a number of years. Mass protests broke out at airports across the country in January and February 2017 after Trump announced his initial travel ban. Since then, the Democratic Party has worked systematically to divert and suppress popular opposition to Trump’s anti-immigrant, pro-corporate and pro-war program. It has instead promoted reactionary, anti-democratic campaigns. These include the so-called “Me Too” movement, which rejects basic democratic principles such as the presumption of innocence and due process in order to promote the feminism of privileged layers of the middle class; the anti-Russia campaign, which seeks to shift American foreign policy to an even more aggressive military posture against Russia; and the campaign against “fake news,” which is being used to justify censorship of the Internet and social media. In December, the Supreme Court allowed a revised version of Trump’s travel ban to take effect shortly after House Democrats voted two-to-one against a move by a Democratic congressman to introduce articles of impeachment citing Trump’s mass deportation program. Socialists reject the entire reactionary framework of the so-called “debate” over immigration “reform.” The Socialist Equality Party (SEP) rejects the position of Democrats and Republicans alike that undocumented workers are guilty of a crime and must be made to “pay” in one fashion or another for their supposed misdeeds. The SEP upholds the right of workers from every corner of the globe to live and work in whatever country they choose with full citizenship rights, including the right to return to their home countries without the threat of being barred from re-entry to the US and being separated from their families. The total number of people who work in the same factories, construction sites and other industries alongside the 262,000 Salvadoran TPS recipients number in the millions or tens of millions. The attack on them is an attack on the entire working class. Only the power of the working class—united across race and nationality—can block the drive to destroy the lives of hundreds of thousands of Salvadoran workers living in the US. Patrick Martin WSWS.ORG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brussel at illinois.edu Tue Jan 9 16:15:34 2018 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 16:15:34 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: [ufpj-activist] [national] Behind the Iranian protests References: Message-ID: I believe I alerted this list to what is said here, to be skeptical and critical about what comes from NIAC. —mkb Begin forwarded message: From: David McReynolds > Subject: Re: [ufpj-activist] [national] Behind the Iranian protests Date: January 8, 2018 at 11:44:34 AM CST To: Michael Munk >, ufpj-activist > On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 6:33 PM, > wrote: Kevin Zeese and Margaret Flowers write in Popular Resistance "[Mostafa Afzalzadehe, an independent Iranian journalist and film maker warned] to be careful who people in the US listen to as spokespersons for the Iranian people. He specifically mentioning the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), the largest Iranian-American group. He claimed that NIAC was started by funding from Congress and some of its members had ties to government or regime change organizations. When we said we did not know that NIAC had received US government funding and that Trita Parsi, the executive director of NIAC, is a widely respected Iranian commentator (indeed, he recently appeared on Democracy Now and Real News Network), he said, “You should research it for yourself. I’m just alerting you.” We researched NIAC and found on NIAC’s website that they received money from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). NED is a private organization primarily funded by an annual allocation from US government and Wall Street interests and has been involved in US regime change operations in the Middle East and around the world. In their More Myths and Facts section NIAC acknowledges receiving funding from NED but claims that was different from the Bush administration’s democracy program, the Democracy Fund, designed for regime change. NIAC also says it does not receive funding from the US or Iranian governments on its site. NIAC research director, Reza Marashi, mentioned by Mostafa, worked at the State Department’s Office of Iranian Affairs for four years prior to joining NIAC. And, field organizer Dornaz Memarzia, worked at Freedom House before joining NIAC, an organization also involved in US regime change operations, tied to the CIA and State Department. Trita Parsa has written award winning books on Iran and foreign policy and received his Ph.D. at the Johns Hopkins School for Advanced Economic Studies under Francis Fukuyama, the well known neocon and advocate for “free market” capitalism ..." Read it all at https://popularresistance.org/special-report-are-long-term-us-regime-change-efforts-behind-iran-protests/ www.michaelmunk.com _______________________________________________ ufpj-activist mailing list Guidelines: %(http://www.unitedforpeace.org/listserv-community-guidelines) Post: ufpj-activist at lists.mayfirst.org List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/ufpj-activist To Unsubscribe Send email to: ufpj-activist-unsubscribe at lists.mayfirst.org Or visit: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/ufpj-activist/brussel%40illinois.edu You are subscribed as: brussel at illinois.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jan 9 19:04:12 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 19:04:12 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Killer Koh v. 200,000 Salvadorans Message-ID: The roots of El Salvador’s high murder rate, for example -- it is one of the most dangerous countries in the world -- lie in U.S. support for its right-wing government and the grossly unjust political-economic order it defended during the 1980s. During that decade, Washington helped fuel the country’s civil war by providing hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, and various forms of assistance to its brutal military. Killer Koh worked for Reagan from 1983-1985—exterminating about 75,000 Salvadorans, 35,000 Nicaraguans and 250,000 Guatemalans, most of them Mayan Indians, outright genocide. Hence we founded the Original Sanctuary Movement in order to protect them. See my book Defending Civil Resistance Under International Law (Transnational Publishers Inc. 1987) Fab Ed Norton 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) From: Institute for Public Accuracy via ActionNetwork.org [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2018 9:07 AM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: 200,000 Salvadorans 200,000 Salvadorans JOSEPH NEVINS, jonevins at vassar.edu, @jonevins1 Nevins is professor of geography at Vassar College. His books include Dying to Live: A Story of U.S. Immigration in an Age of Global Apartheid (City Lights Books). He said today: "The Trump Administration’s decision to end Temporary Protected Status for approximately 200,000 Salvadorans residing in the United States is abhorrent. In addition to being part and parcel of its war on immigrants (particularly low-income ones), it is a denial of U.S. responsibility for much of what drives Salvadorans to flee their homeland and makes life there unviable. The roots of El Salvador’s high murder rate, for example -- it is one of the most dangerous countries in the world -- lie in U.S. support for its right-wing government and the grossly unjust political-economic order it defended during the 1980s. During that decade, Washington helped fuel the country’s civil war by providing hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, and various forms of assistance to its brutal military. "In the 1990s, the United States, allying itself with the country’s conservative elites, helped to impose a neoliberal 'free trade' agreement on El Salvador, an accord that has helped to fuel out-migration due to its dislocating impacts. Finally, there is the matter of climate change, with the United States as the world’s biggest historical contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. Along with Honduras and Guatemala, El Salvador is one of the detrimentally impacted countries in the world by a warming and increasingly unstable climate. From growing incidents of 'natural' disasters to an outbreak of coffee rust, which has devastated the region’s coffee sector, climate change-related environmental degradation has also helped to push Salvadorans to migrate. For such reason and more, the U.S. government has an ethical obligation to allow Salvadorans to migrate and reside in the United States." For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 January 9, 2018 Institute for Public Accuracy 980 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org [Action Network] Sent via Action Network, a free online toolset anyone can use to organize. Click here to sign up and get started building an email list and creating online actions today. Action Network is an open platform that empowers individuals and groups to organize for progressive causes. We encourage responsible activism, and do not support using the platform to take unlawful or other improper action. We do not control or endorse the conduct of users and make no representations of any kind about them. . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jan 9 19:04:12 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 19:04:12 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Killer Koh v. 200,000 Salvadorans Message-ID: The roots of El Salvador’s high murder rate, for example -- it is one of the most dangerous countries in the world -- lie in U.S. support for its right-wing government and the grossly unjust political-economic order it defended during the 1980s. During that decade, Washington helped fuel the country’s civil war by providing hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, and various forms of assistance to its brutal military. Killer Koh worked for Reagan from 1983-1985—exterminating about 75,000 Salvadorans, 35,000 Nicaraguans and 250,000 Guatemalans, most of them Mayan Indians, outright genocide. Hence we founded the Original Sanctuary Movement in order to protect them. See my book Defending Civil Resistance Under International Law (Transnational Publishers Inc. 1987) Fab Ed Norton 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) From: Institute for Public Accuracy via ActionNetwork.org [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2018 9:07 AM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: 200,000 Salvadorans 200,000 Salvadorans JOSEPH NEVINS, jonevins at vassar.edu, @jonevins1 Nevins is professor of geography at Vassar College. His books include Dying to Live: A Story of U.S. Immigration in an Age of Global Apartheid (City Lights Books). He said today: "The Trump Administration’s decision to end Temporary Protected Status for approximately 200,000 Salvadorans residing in the United States is abhorrent. In addition to being part and parcel of its war on immigrants (particularly low-income ones), it is a denial of U.S. responsibility for much of what drives Salvadorans to flee their homeland and makes life there unviable. The roots of El Salvador’s high murder rate, for example -- it is one of the most dangerous countries in the world -- lie in U.S. support for its right-wing government and the grossly unjust political-economic order it defended during the 1980s. During that decade, Washington helped fuel the country’s civil war by providing hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, and various forms of assistance to its brutal military. "In the 1990s, the United States, allying itself with the country’s conservative elites, helped to impose a neoliberal 'free trade' agreement on El Salvador, an accord that has helped to fuel out-migration due to its dislocating impacts. Finally, there is the matter of climate change, with the United States as the world’s biggest historical contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. Along with Honduras and Guatemala, El Salvador is one of the detrimentally impacted countries in the world by a warming and increasingly unstable climate. From growing incidents of 'natural' disasters to an outbreak of coffee rust, which has devastated the region’s coffee sector, climate change-related environmental degradation has also helped to push Salvadorans to migrate. For such reason and more, the U.S. government has an ethical obligation to allow Salvadorans to migrate and reside in the United States." For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 January 9, 2018 Institute for Public Accuracy 980 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org [Action Network] Sent via Action Network, a free online toolset anyone can use to organize. Click here to sign up and get started building an email list and creating online actions today. Action Network is an open platform that empowers individuals and groups to organize for progressive causes. We encourage responsible activism, and do not support using the platform to take unlawful or other improper action. We do not control or endorse the conduct of users and make no representations of any kind about them. . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jan 9 19:17:42 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 19:17:42 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Far Right Governments in Poland and Hungary Confront the EU Message-ID: * Home * Special Programs * Member Benefits * About Us * Contact Us * Jobs * Log In * Subscribe to our Newsletter HOT TOPICS ▶ Undoing The New Deal Target: Iran The Real Baltimore Reality Asserts Itself United Kingdom ________________________________ January 9, 2018 Far-Right Governments in Poland and Hungary Confront the EU The European Union is trying to sanction Poland for undermining its judicial branch. However, the real issue seems to be Poland's refusal to accept refugees, as required by the EU. Poland is now allying itself with Hungary, another right-wing government, in order to avoid sanctionsbiography Carol Schaeffer is a journalist covering nationalism across the globe with a focus on central and eastern Europe. ________________________________ transcript [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2018-01-01/cshaeffer018polandhungry-240.jpg]GREGORY WILPERT: Welcome to The Real News Network. I'm Gregory Wilpert coming to you from Quito, Ecuador. The European Union has begun a process to activate Article 7 against Poland, the most extreme sanction that the European Union can impose against one of its own member states other than kicking them out entirely. If the article is implemented, it will revoke the right of Poland to vote in the European commission. Officially, the reason for the proposed sanction is Poland's reform of the Judicial Branch, which restricts the ability of the Polish Supreme Court to intervene in legislation. However, behind this reform is the far right world view of the Polish government. Meanwhile, Hungary pledged its support for the Polish government, and the two governments have formed a united front against the rest of the EU, which they condemn as being too liberal. The right wing alliance is based on both country's adamant position against accepting more refugees. Polish Prime Minister, Mateusz Morawiecki visited Hungary last week and had this to say. MATEUSZ MORAWIECKI: [Translator]: In terms of migration and quotas that were to be imposed on member countries, we strongly reject such an approach as it infringes on sovereign decisions of member states. We are of the opinion that the EU commission does not have the right to implement such solutions. GREGORY WILPERT: Joining me to discuss the situation between the EU, and Poland and Hungary is Carol Schaeffer. Carol is a freelance journalist covering central and eastern Europe and writes about right wing nationalist movements for The Atlantic and other venues. Thanks for joining us today, Carol. CAROL SCHAEFFER: Thank you for having me. GREGORY WILPERT: So first of all, explain to us briefly what the judicial reform in Poland is about and why does the EU consider it to be undemocratic? CAROL SCHAEFFER: So, the judicial reforms and the rejection of an EU-imposed migrant quota are technically separate issues, but both constitute a shift to the right in eastern Europe and a battle over European values. The European Court of Justice has taken issue with the ruling Law and Justice party in Poland's judicial reforms, namely because it would allow the government vast power over the independent supreme courts, and the courts in general. And it's been rejected by the EU Commission as undemocratic because it is a centralization of power and eliminates the checks and balances critical to democratic government. And the asylum seeker quotas is a means of the European Union to distribute asylum seekers into participating EU member states. And it sees Poland and Hungary, as well as the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Romania as well, and they're lack of participation as undemocratic because these countries wish to continue to receive EU funds without participating in this shared endeavor. GREGORY WILPERT: So, like you say, it seems that the question of the reform and procedure which is at heart of the judicial reform is a secondary issue. And the actual one over which the EU on the one side and Poland, Hungary on the other, diverge has to do with other things which has to do with migration issue. So, what is the actual refugee situation in eastern Europe? And particularly in Poland and Hungary at the moment? CAROL SCHAEFFER: Well, the refugee situation or the migrant situation, however you want to call it, it's complex. For example, in Poland, Poland is often using Ukrainian migrants as a foil against the idea of accepting refugees from the Middle East, the global south and east. So, since Ukraine began its war in 2014, there has been, for example, an increase in migrants from Ukraine coming into Poland often the Law and Justice party will site numbers like a million Ukrainians are now living in Poland. The actual situation, although that number is technically correct, the number actually comes from the number of visas that were issued to Ukrainian citizens and does not actually reflect the various reasons and lengths of stay that these people stay. However, that's not to say that there are not large numbers of Ukrainian refugees in Poland, nor that their situation is not dire. For example, nine percent of Ukrainian immigrants in Poland have no secondary or higher education but as many as 70.7% perform physical labor. But the cultural and linguistic similarity, in some senses shared history has long made Poland an attractive destination for Ukrainians. And studies have shown that although there was an increase in Ukrainians coming to Poland since Euromaidan, the influx of refugees since the beginning of the war has been vastly overstated. And this is mostly a foil for the Law and Justice party to reject other migrants on essentially racist bounds. And the same goes for Hungary as well. Hungary likewise has made statements that it does not reject asylum seekers out of hand, just ones from the global south and east. For example, Orbán has said in a speech, I think last year, last February, that it would gladly house refugees from, and this is refugees, from western Europe. GREGORY WILPERT: That's an interesting idea. The united front of Poland and Hungary is challenging the EU's consensus voting system as well because each of the two countries can veto any proposal that's aimed at the other. Is there nothing else that the EU can do? And does this mean that other right wing governments in Europe, such as Austria, can now violate EU agreements unilaterally without consequences because they're developing this united front? CAROL SCHAEFFER: I think that this question is best posed to an EU constitutional law expert, which I'm not. I'm a writer and I would ask someone like that. But my sense is that the answer is not entirely straightforward. Although it is true that unilateral agreement must be made to inflict certain punitive measures against a member nation, it does seem unlikely that this is the first time such an alliance has been made in EU history. So furthermore, Romania, Slovakia and the Czech Republic have also denounced the quotas. So, the legality surrounding such vetoes may not be so cut and dry. And like you say, other right wing governments may also be able to reject EU rules on these grounds. So, I'm not quite sure on the legality of it but I think it's more complex than just a straightforward answer. I don't think it's so cut and dry. I do think it is most likely that this will produce a stalemate and then further solutions will be proposed. Meanwhile, thousands of asylum seekers will continue to suffer indefinitely. GREGORY WILPERT: And right wing nationalism, though, is usually about national pride and exceptionalism. Is the friendship, would you say, between Prime Minister Morawiecki and Prime Minister Orbán of Hungary just a convenient alliance to break the EU consensus process? Or does it represent a new kind of international front of the extreme right? CAROL SCHAEFFER: I would argue that it's the latter, that it's an international nationalism. To my knowledge, again this is not the first attempt at such a coalition. However, I do have, I do believe that it is an international nationalism. I also would like to say though, that I think the limitations of some of these alliances should be kept in mind. For example, Poland and Hungary differ greatly on their attitudes towards Russia and their involvement in NATO. But more presciently, I do think that we will continue to see alliances between far right parties in Europe and perhaps beyond and they will continue to be united by more than what they disagree on, namely frankly a racist platform against the global south and east. GREGORY WILPERT: Actually, could you just say a little bit about that, this platform? I mean, apparently the prime minister, president of Hungary, Orbán, he has said something like that he's in favor of an illiberal democracy. What else can you say about the actual positions that they've taken? CAROL SCHAEFFER: Well, Orbán in particular, has turned to Russia, China as models for exactly this illiberal democracy. I think what that means is, for Orbán's sake that means establishing a greater authoritarian rule within Hungary. And Poland is beginning to align not with Russia because of its more complicated past and relationship with Russia in the earlier part of the 20th century, but I could see an alliance with Hungary against a liberal European Union, which the rhetoric in Poland has already been about, the rhetoric in Poland has already made references to the European commission, the European Union as just as oppressive as the Soviet Union. And this is a big dog whistle to far right parties. A lot of it is part of an anti-communization platform, which has been going on for the latter part of, well basically since the late '90s up until now. Yeah. GREGORY WILPERT: Okay, well, we'll just leave it there for now, but continue to follow the situation. I'm speaking to Carol Schaeffer, who covers central and eastern Europe for The Atlantic, among other publications. Thanks again for having joined us today, Carol. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jan 10 12:32:50 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 12:32:50 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Resisting Internet Censorship: Online discussion with Chris Hedges and David North References: <380cabff931cd452085b8d4a5.2cb7388bc9.20180110041552.0f4fb4c5cc.48cba8c5@mail196.wdc02.mcdlv.net> Message-ID: For anyone interested, please see below: This year marks the 200th anniversary of the birth of Karl Marx, the originator of the materialist conception of history, the author of Das Kapital and, with Friedrich Engels, the founder of the modern revolutionary socialist movement. View this email in your browser [https://gallery.mailchimp.com/380cabff931cd452085b8d4a5/images/56c0471b-a650-4887-b620-7bd723295460.png] [https://gallery.mailchimp.com/380cabff931cd452085b8d4a5/images/dfd544de-c5e6-4945-9801-e15a0be02c02.jpg]Organizing Resistance to Internet Censorship: An online discussion with Chris Hedges and David North On January 16, 2018, the World Socialist Web Site will video livestream a discussion on Internet censorship, featuring Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Chris Hedges and WSWS International Editorial Board Chairperson David North. WSWS reporter Andre Damon will moderate the discussion. The webinar will explore the political context of the efforts to censor the Internet and abolish net neutrality, examine the pretexts used to justify the suppression of free speech (i.e., “fake news”), and discuss political strategies to defend democratic rights. Hedges and North will also field questions from on-line listeners. Register Today! The webinar will be streamed live by the WSWS on YouTube and Facebook on Tuesday, January 16 at 7:00 pm EST (midnight in London, 1:00am in Berlin, 3:00am in Moscow and 11:00 am January 17 in Sydney. Full Time Zone Conversions). Chris Hedges is the host of RT’s On Contact and a Pulitzer prize-winning journalist who presently writes a weekly column for Truthdig. He is also the author of the bestsellers American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America, Empire of Illusion: The End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle and War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning. Hedges has taught at Columbia University, New York University, Princeton University and the University of Toronto. David North has played a leading role in the international socialist movement for forty-five years, and is presently the chairperson of the International Editorial Board of the World Socialist Web Site and national chairperson of the Socialist Equality Party (US). His published works include A Quarter-Century of War: The US Drive for Global Hegemony; The Russian Revolution and the Unfinished Twentieth Century; The Frankfurt School, Postmodernism and the Politics of the Pseudo-Left: A Marxist Critique; and In Defense of Leon Trotsky. Andre Damon has written extensively on Google’s censorship of left wing, anti-war, and progressive web sites. Help promote the event by sharing this video on social media [https://gallery.mailchimp.com/380cabff931cd452085b8d4a5/images/ebe48164-9d44-4369-99cf-374d3153bf19.jpg] Government and corporations escalate Internet censorship and attacks on free speech By Andre Damon The year 2018 has opened with an international campaign to censor the Internet. Throughout the world, technology giants are responding to the political demands of governments by cracking down on freedom of speech, which is inscribed in the US Bill of Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights, and countless international agreements. Bloomberg, the financial news service, published a blog post titled “Welcome to 2018, the Year of Censored Social Media,” which began with the observation, “This year, don’t count on the social networks to provide its core service: an uncensored platform for every imaginable view. The censorship has already begun, and it’ll only get heavier. Read more » Register Today! [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/color-facebook-48.png] Share [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/color-twitter-48.png] Tweet [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/color-forwardtofriend-48.png] Forward Socialist Equality Party | socialequality.com Articles: Copyright © 2017 wsws.org, All rights reserved. unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 10 20:03:47 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 20:03:47 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Killer Koh v. 200,000 Salvadorans In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In what became known as “The Sanctuary Trials,” the defendants called upon their rights protected under both the U.S. constitution and international law. They employed First Amendment free exercise claims, arguing they were simply living out their faith by providing refuge to their fellow brethren in need; this was the call of the Gospel and an exercise of their religion. As Sister Nicgorski stated on the day of her arraignment, “If I am guilty of anything, I am guilty of the gospel.” Defendants referenced passages in the Old and New Testaments, such as Leviticus 19:34 ("The stranger who sojourns with you shall be to you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself) and the story of Exodus (“What answer is there for the envoys of the nation? This: that the Lord has fixed Zion in her place, and the afflicted among God's people shall take refuge there” [Isaiah 14:32]). The defense also called upon international law to defend their actions. They argued that the U.S. administration's policy towards Central Americans violated the 1980 Refugee Act, a U.S. law enacted under Carter that reflected international norms set down in the 1951 U.N. Convention and 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. I was the Designated Expert on these cases along with Professor Richard Falk. Meanwhile, from 1983 to 1985 Killer Koh had been working with Reagan et al to exterminate the Peoples of Central America. Fab Ed Norton Professor of Law Carl Schmitt Law School UIUC. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 9, 2018 1:04 PM To: 'David Green' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' ; 'C G Estabrook' Subject: Killer Koh v. 200,000 Salvadorans The roots of El Salvador’s high murder rate, for example -- it is one of the most dangerous countries in the world -- lie in U.S. support for its right-wing government and the grossly unjust political-economic order it defended during the 1980s. During that decade, Washington helped fuel the country’s civil war by providing hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, and various forms of assistance to its brutal military. Killer Koh worked for Reagan from 1983-1985—exterminating about 75,000 Salvadorans, 35,000 Nicaraguans and 250,000 Guatemalans, most of them Mayan Indians, outright genocide. Hence we founded the Original Sanctuary Movement in order to protect them. See my book Defending Civil Resistance Under International Law (Transnational Publishers Inc. 1987) Fab Ed Norton 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) From: Institute for Public Accuracy via ActionNetwork.org [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2018 9:07 AM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: 200,000 Salvadorans 200,000 Salvadorans JOSEPH NEVINS, jonevins at vassar.edu, @jonevins1 Nevins is professor of geography at Vassar College. His books include Dying to Live: A Story of U.S. Immigration in an Age of Global Apartheid (City Lights Books). He said today: "The Trump Administration’s decision to end Temporary Protected Status for approximately 200,000 Salvadorans residing in the United States is abhorrent. In addition to being part and parcel of its war on immigrants (particularly low-income ones), it is a denial of U.S. responsibility for much of what drives Salvadorans to flee their homeland and makes life there unviable. The roots of El Salvador’s high murder rate, for example -- it is one of the most dangerous countries in the world -- lie in U.S. support for its right-wing government and the grossly unjust political-economic order it defended during the 1980s. During that decade, Washington helped fuel the country’s civil war by providing hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, and various forms of assistance to its brutal military. "In the 1990s, the United States, allying itself with the country’s conservative elites, helped to impose a neoliberal 'free trade' agreement on El Salvador, an accord that has helped to fuel out-migration due to its dislocating impacts. Finally, there is the matter of climate change, with the United States as the world’s biggest historical contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. Along with Honduras and Guatemala, El Salvador is one of the detrimentally impacted countries in the world by a warming and increasingly unstable climate. From growing incidents of 'natural' disasters to an outbreak of coffee rust, which has devastated the region’s coffee sector, climate change-related environmental degradation has also helped to push Salvadorans to migrate. For such reason and more, the U.S. government has an ethical obligation to allow Salvadorans to migrate and reside in the United States." For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 January 9, 2018 Institute for Public Accuracy 980 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org [Action Network] Sent via Action Network, a free online toolset anyone can use to organize. Click here to sign up and get started building an email list and creating online actions today. Action Network is an open platform that empowers individuals and groups to organize for progressive causes. We encourage responsible activism, and do not support using the platform to take unlawful or other improper action. We do not control or endorse the conduct of users and make no representations of any kind about them. . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 10 20:03:47 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 20:03:47 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Killer Koh v. 200,000 Salvadorans In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In what became known as “The Sanctuary Trials,” the defendants called upon their rights protected under both the U.S. constitution and international law. They employed First Amendment free exercise claims, arguing they were simply living out their faith by providing refuge to their fellow brethren in need; this was the call of the Gospel and an exercise of their religion. As Sister Nicgorski stated on the day of her arraignment, “If I am guilty of anything, I am guilty of the gospel.” Defendants referenced passages in the Old and New Testaments, such as Leviticus 19:34 ("The stranger who sojourns with you shall be to you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself) and the story of Exodus (“What answer is there for the envoys of the nation? This: that the Lord has fixed Zion in her place, and the afflicted among God's people shall take refuge there” [Isaiah 14:32]). The defense also called upon international law to defend their actions. They argued that the U.S. administration's policy towards Central Americans violated the 1980 Refugee Act, a U.S. law enacted under Carter that reflected international norms set down in the 1951 U.N. Convention and 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. I was the Designated Expert on these cases along with Professor Richard Falk. Meanwhile, from 1983 to 1985 Killer Koh had been working with Reagan et al to exterminate the Peoples of Central America. Fab Ed Norton Professor of Law Carl Schmitt Law School UIUC. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 9, 2018 1:04 PM To: 'David Green' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' ; 'C G Estabrook' Subject: Killer Koh v. 200,000 Salvadorans The roots of El Salvador’s high murder rate, for example -- it is one of the most dangerous countries in the world -- lie in U.S. support for its right-wing government and the grossly unjust political-economic order it defended during the 1980s. During that decade, Washington helped fuel the country’s civil war by providing hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, and various forms of assistance to its brutal military. Killer Koh worked for Reagan from 1983-1985—exterminating about 75,000 Salvadorans, 35,000 Nicaraguans and 250,000 Guatemalans, most of them Mayan Indians, outright genocide. Hence we founded the Original Sanctuary Movement in order to protect them. See my book Defending Civil Resistance Under International Law (Transnational Publishers Inc. 1987) Fab Ed Norton 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) From: Institute for Public Accuracy via ActionNetwork.org [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2018 9:07 AM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: 200,000 Salvadorans 200,000 Salvadorans JOSEPH NEVINS, jonevins at vassar.edu, @jonevins1 Nevins is professor of geography at Vassar College. His books include Dying to Live: A Story of U.S. Immigration in an Age of Global Apartheid (City Lights Books). He said today: "The Trump Administration’s decision to end Temporary Protected Status for approximately 200,000 Salvadorans residing in the United States is abhorrent. In addition to being part and parcel of its war on immigrants (particularly low-income ones), it is a denial of U.S. responsibility for much of what drives Salvadorans to flee their homeland and makes life there unviable. The roots of El Salvador’s high murder rate, for example -- it is one of the most dangerous countries in the world -- lie in U.S. support for its right-wing government and the grossly unjust political-economic order it defended during the 1980s. During that decade, Washington helped fuel the country’s civil war by providing hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, and various forms of assistance to its brutal military. "In the 1990s, the United States, allying itself with the country’s conservative elites, helped to impose a neoliberal 'free trade' agreement on El Salvador, an accord that has helped to fuel out-migration due to its dislocating impacts. Finally, there is the matter of climate change, with the United States as the world’s biggest historical contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. Along with Honduras and Guatemala, El Salvador is one of the detrimentally impacted countries in the world by a warming and increasingly unstable climate. From growing incidents of 'natural' disasters to an outbreak of coffee rust, which has devastated the region’s coffee sector, climate change-related environmental degradation has also helped to push Salvadorans to migrate. For such reason and more, the U.S. government has an ethical obligation to allow Salvadorans to migrate and reside in the United States." For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 January 9, 2018 Institute for Public Accuracy 980 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org [Action Network] Sent via Action Network, a free online toolset anyone can use to organize. Click here to sign up and get started building an email list and creating online actions today. Action Network is an open platform that empowers individuals and groups to organize for progressive causes. We encourage responsible activism, and do not support using the platform to take unlawful or other improper action. We do not control or endorse the conduct of users and make no representations of any kind about them. . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kmedina67 at gmail.com Wed Jan 10 20:14:22 2018 From: kmedina67 at gmail.com (kmedina67) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 14:14:22 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are any of these events worth attending? In-Reply-To: <1284348345.1324552.1515611328390@tardis-app3.cites.illinois.edu> Message-ID: <5a567424.8c4a240a.9a06a.f6a5@mx.google.com> Dear peace discuss, in particular David green and Carl Estabrook, What do you think about the list of events I  the email forwarded below? Do you think are are worth attending? Pace e bene,Karen Medina -------- Original message --------From: jewishculture at illinois.edu Date: 1/10/18 13:08 (GMT-06:00)Subject: UIUC Jewish Studies Weekly Email table#wrapper { max-width:800px !important; box-shadow:none; } table th, table td { padding:0 !important; } .col-2 table td { padding: 10px !important; } #outlook a { padding:0; } .ExternalClass { width:100%; } .ExternalClass, .ExternalClass p, .ExternalClass span, .ExternalClass font, .ExternalClass td, .ExternalClass div { line-height:100% !important; } .content-td a, .content-div a { color: #666699; text-decoration: none; } .content-td a:hover, .content-div a:hover { color: #; text-decoration: underline; } #footer a { color: #075FB7; text-decoration: none; } #footer a:hover { color: #; text-decoration: underline; } #footer img { border:0; } span.preheader{display:none !important;} #main td { padding:0px; } #main td .edu-uiuc-webservices-calendar-title { padding-top:2px; padding-bottom:1px; padding-right:10px; }  Click here to see this online    @media screen and (max-width:525px) { iframe width: 100% !important; } }   Welcome Back!   Announcements...  #content_9 a { color:#075fb7; } #content_9 p { line-height: 20px; margin-top:6px; } .content-td a, .content-div a { text-decoration: underline !important; } We are delighted to announce that Dov Weiss’s book, Pious Irreverence, is the Nahum M. Sarna Memorial Award winner of the National Jewish Book award in the category of scholarship. This is a major achievement! Please join us in congratulating Professor Weiss!  Here is the link to the winners:  https://www.jewishbookcouncil.org/awards/2017-national-jewish-book-award-winners-and-finalists     #content_11 a { color:#075fb7; } #content_11 p { line-height: 20px; margin-top:6px; } .content-td a, .content-div a { text-decoration: underline !important; }   Click here for the extension for the call for papers for the 2018 Women's and Gender History Symposium at the University of Illinois hosted by the UIUC History Graduate Student Association, which will take place on March 2nd, 2018 in Champaign-Urbana. This is an interdisciplinary conference and we welcome papers from all programs and methodologies.    Responses and inquiries can be sent to this email: gendersymp at gmail.com  #content_13 a { color:#075fb7; } #content_13 p { line-height: 20px; margin-top:6px; } .content-td a, .content-div a { text-decoration: underline !important; } See our Spring 2018 Events list. More events to come! Check out our Jewish Studies Spring 2018 Courses   Jewish Studies and HGMS Events  #content_18 a { color:#075fb7; } #content_18 p { line-height: 20px; margin-top:6px; } .content-td a, .content-div a { text-decoration: underline !important; } HGMS Faculty Workshop with Khatchig Mouradian, Columbia University Date Jan 25, 2018 Time 12:00 pm Location English Building, Room 109 (608 S. Wright St., Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies Khatchig Mouradian will be giving a talk entitled:  'The Very Limit of our Endurance': Unarmed Resistance in Ottoman Syria during WWI   Khatchig Mouradian lecture - "Internment and Destruction: Concentration Camps During the Armenian Genocide, 1915-1917" Date Jan 25, 2018 Time 5:00 pm - 6:30 pm Location English Building, Room 304 (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies Khatchig Mouradian is a Professor at Columbia University.     HGMS Faculty Workshop with Anke Pinkert - "Public Memory Underground: Photographs of the 1953 Worker’s Uprising in East Germany" Date Feb 12, 2018 Time 12:00 pm - 1:30 pm Location English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies HGMS Faculty Workshop with Anke Pinkert Anke Pinkert is an Associate Professor and Director of Graduate Studies in Germanic Languages and Literatures at UIUC.        A concert with Anthony Russell - "Convergence: Spirituals from the Shtetl. Davening from the Delta." Date Feb 20, 2018 Time 7:30 pm Location Knight Auditorium, Spurlock Museum, (600 S. Gregory, Urbana) Sponsor CAS/MillerComm, Program in Jewish Culture and Society Anthony Mordechai Tzvi Russell is a Yiddish singer and composer. Please click on the link (his name) to find out more info. There's much more to him!   Book talk for Michael Shapiro's "Wrestling with Shylock: Jewish Responses to the Merchant of Venice" Date Mar 5, 2018 Time 5:00 pm Location Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society Michael Shapiro is one of the founders of the Program in Jewish Culture and Society and is an emeritus professor of English and the Center for Global Studies at UIUC.     HGMS Grad Student Conference Date Mar 9, 2018 Time 9:00 am - 3:00 pm Location Levis Faculty Center, Room 422 (919 W. Illinois St, Urbana, 4th floor) Sponsor Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies, Program in Jewish Culture and Society       Julia Cohen Workshop - "The Past as a Foreign Country: Sephardi Jews and the Spanish Past" Date Apr 9, 2018 Time 12:00 pm Location English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) Sponsor Oscar and Rose A. Einhorn fund, Program in Jewish Culture and Society Julia Cohen is an Associate Professor of Modern Jewish History and an Associate Professor of History at Vanderbilt University. She is the author of Becoming Ottomans: Sephardi Jews and Imperial Citizenship in the Modern Era (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014) which received many awards.         Julia Cohen Lecture - "Jews for Jihad? Jewish Citizens in an Islamic Empire" Date Apr 9, 2018 Time 5:00 pm Location Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) Sponsor Oscar and Rose A. Einhorn fund, Program in Jewish Culture and Society Julia Cohen is an Associate Professor of Modern Jewish History and an Associate Professor of History at Vanderbilt University. She is the author of Becoming Ottomans: Sephardi Jews and Imperial Citizenship in the Modern Era (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014) which received many awards.     Mark Steinberg Workshop - "In the Shadow of Benya Krik? Jews, the Street, and Socialism in 1920s Odessa" Date Apr 16, 2018 Time 12:00 pm Location English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society Mark Steinberg is a Professor in the History Department at UIUC and is also the Director of Graduate Studies.      Book launch for Sayed Kashua's "Track Changes" Date Apr 23, 2018 Time 5:00 pm Location Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society Sayed Kashua will be talking about his new book, Track Changes.               University of Illinois Champaign-Urbana The Program in Jewish Culture and Society 608 S. Wright St. English 109 Urbana, IL 61801 http://www.jewishculture.illinois.edu             Subscribe   Unsubscribe      -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brussel at illinois.edu Wed Jan 10 20:33:47 2018 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 20:33:47 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are any of these events worth attending? In-Reply-To: <5a567424.8c4a240a.9a06a.f6a5@mx.google.com> References: <5a567424.8c4a240a.9a06a.f6a5@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <7161D2A0-2477-4FB6-AB18-EAF0B18B071B@illinois.edu> Too much glorification of Jewish victimhood, and not enough of what the Jewish state and its supporters represent, in particular to Palestinians, but not only to them. Clearly, individuals can decide if they are interested. … —mkb On Jan 10, 2018, at 2:14 PM, kmedina67 via Peace-discuss > wrote: Dear peace discuss, in particular David green and Carl Estabrook, What do you think about the list of events I the email forwarded below? Do you think are are worth attending? Pace e bene, Karen Medina -------- Original message -------- From: jewishculture at illinois.edu Date: 1/10/18 13:08 (GMT-06:00) Subject: UIUC Jewish Studies Weekly Email Click here to see this online [https://illinois.edu/skinDesigner/files/25471/wizard_header.jpg?iIndex=1206T111404] Welcome Back! Announcements... We are delighted to announce that Dov Weiss’s book, Pious Irreverence, is the Nahum M. Sarna Memorial Award winner of the National Jewish Book award in the category of scholarship. This is a major achievement! Please join us in congratulating Professor Weiss! Here is the link to the winners: https://www.jewishbookcouncil.org/awards/2017-national-jewish-book-award-winners-and-finalists Click here for the extension for the call for papers for the 2018 Women's and Gender History Symposium at the University of Illinois hosted by the UIUC History Graduate Student Association, which will take place on March 2nd, 2018 in Champaign-Urbana. This is an interdisciplinary conference and we welcome papers from all programs and methodologies. Responses and inquiries can be sent to this email: gendersymp at gmail.com See our Spring 2018 Events list. More events to come! Check out our Jewish Studies Spring 2018 Courses Jewish Studies and HGMS Events HGMS Faculty Workshop with Khatchig Mouradian, Columbia University Date Jan 25, 2018 Time 12:00 pm Location English Building, Room 109 (608 S. Wright St., Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies Khatchig Mouradian will be giving a talk entitled: 'The Very Limit of our Endurance': Unarmed Resistance in Ottoman Syria during WWI Khatchig Mouradian lecture - "Internment and Destruction: Concentration Camps During the Armenian Genocide, 1915-1917" Date Jan 25, 2018 Time 5:00 pm - 6:30 pm Location English Building, Room 304 (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies Khatchig Mouradian is a Professor at Columbia University. HGMS Faculty Workshop with Anke Pinkert - "Public Memory Underground: Photographs of the 1953 Worker’s Uprising in East Germany" Date Feb 12, 2018 Time 12:00 pm - 1:30 pm Location English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies HGMS Faculty Workshop with Anke Pinkert Anke Pinkert is an Associate Professor and Director of Graduate Studies in Germanic Languages and Literatures at UIUC. A concert with Anthony Russell - "Convergence: Spirituals from the Shtetl. Davening from the Delta." Date Feb 20, 2018 Time 7:30 pm Location Knight Auditorium, Spurlock Museum, (600 S. Gregory, Urbana) Sponsor CAS/MillerComm, Program in Jewish Culture and Society Anthony Mordechai Tzvi Russell is a Yiddish singer and composer. Please click on the link (his name) to find out more info. There's much more to him! Book talk for Michael Shapiro's "Wrestling with Shylock: Jewish Responses to the Merchant of Venice" Date Mar 5, 2018 Time 5:00 pm Location Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society Michael Shapiro is one of the founders of the Program in Jewish Culture and Society and is an emeritus professor of English and the Center for Global Studies at UIUC. HGMS Grad Student Conference Date Mar 9, 2018 Time 9:00 am - 3:00 pm Location Levis Faculty Center, Room 422 (919 W. Illinois St, Urbana, 4th floor) Sponsor Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies, Program in Jewish Culture and Society Julia Cohen Workshop - "The Past as a Foreign Country: Sephardi Jews and the Spanish Past" Date Apr 9, 2018 Time 12:00 pm Location English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) Sponsor Oscar and Rose A. Einhorn fund, Program in Jewish Culture and Society Julia Cohen is an Associate Professor of Modern Jewish History and an Associate Professor of History at Vanderbilt University. She is the author of Becoming Ottomans: Sephardi Jews and Imperial Citizenship in the Modern Era (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014) which received many awards. Julia Cohen Lecture - "Jews for Jihad? Jewish Citizens in an Islamic Empire" Date Apr 9, 2018 Time 5:00 pm Location Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) Sponsor Oscar and Rose A. Einhorn fund, Program in Jewish Culture and Society Julia Cohen is an Associate Professor of Modern Jewish History and an Associate Professor of History at Vanderbilt University. She is the author of Becoming Ottomans: Sephardi Jews and Imperial Citizenship in the Modern Era (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014) which received many awards. Mark Steinberg Workshop - "In the Shadow of Benya Krik? Jews, the Street, and Socialism in 1920s Odessa" Date Apr 16, 2018 Time 12:00 pm Location English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society Mark Steinberg is a Professor in the History Department at UIUC and is also the Director of Graduate Studies. Book launch for Sayed Kashua's "Track Changes" Date Apr 23, 2018 Time 5:00 pm Location Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society Sayed Kashua will be talking about his new book, Track Changes. University of Illinois Champaign-Urbana The Program in Jewish Culture and Society 608 S. Wright St. English 109 Urbana, IL 61801 http://www.jewishculture.illinois.edu [Block I] Subscribe Unsubscribe [https://illinois.edu/emailer/opened.gif?emailId=156281&emailAddress=kmedina67 at gmail.com]_______________________________________________ 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 Wed Jan 10 20:47:22 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 20:47:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are any of these events worth attending? In-Reply-To: <7161D2A0-2477-4FB6-AB18-EAF0B18B071B@illinois.edu> References: <5a567424.8c4a240a.9a06a.f6a5@mx.google.com> <7161D2A0-2477-4FB6-AB18-EAF0B18B071B@illinois.edu> Message-ID: <1754702769.539453.1515617243011@mail.yahoo.com> I agree basically with Mort (no surprise); Mark Steinberg is a friend and a good historian and my maternal grandmother was from Odessa, so I'd probably choose that if I had to choose. DG On ‎Wednesday‎, ‎January‎ ‎10‎, ‎2018‎ ‎02‎:‎35‎:‎39‎ ‎PM‎ ‎CST, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss wrote: Too much glorification of Jewish victimhood, and not enough of what the Jewish state and its supporters represent, in particular to Palestinians, but not only to them. Clearly, individuals can decide if they are interested. … —mkb On Jan 10, 2018, at 2:14 PM, kmedina67 via Peace-discuss wrote: Dear peace discuss, in particular David green and Carl Estabrook, What do you think about the list of events I  the email forwarded below? Do you think are are worth attending? Pace e bene,Karen Medina -------- Original message --------From: jewishculture at illinois.eduDate: 1/10/18 13:08 (GMT-06:00)Subject: UIUC Jewish Studies Weekly Email | | |   | | Click here to see this online | |   | | | | |   | |   | | |   | |   | | Welcome Back! | |   | |   | |   | | Announcements... | |   | | | We are delighted to announce that Dov Weiss’s book, Pious Irreverence, is the Nahum M. Sarna Memorial Award winner of the National Jewish Book award in the category of scholarship. This is a major achievement! Please join us in congratulating Professor Weiss!  Here is the link to the winners:  https://www.jewishbookcouncil.org/awards/2017-national-jewish-book-award-winners-and-finalists   | | |   | | |  Click here for the extension for the call for papers for the 2018 Women's and Gender History Symposium at the University of Illinois hosted by the UIUC History Graduate Student Association, which will take place on March 2nd, 2018 in Champaign-Urbana. This is an interdisciplinary conference and we welcome papers from all programs and methodologies.  Responses and inquiries can be sent to this email: gendersymp at gmail.com | | |   | | | See our Spring 2018 Events list. More events to come! Check out our Jewish Studies Spring 2018 Courses  | | |   | |   | | Jewish Studies and HGMS Events | |   | | | | HGMS Faculty Workshop with Khatchig Mouradian, Columbia University | Date | Jan 25, 2018 | | Time | 12:00 pm | | Location | English Building, Room 109 (608 S. Wright St., Urbana) | | Sponsor | Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies | Khatchig Mouradian will be giving a talk entitled:  'The Very Limit of our Endurance': Unarmed Resistance in Ottoman Syria during WWI |   | | | Khatchig Mouradian lecture - "Internment and Destruction: Concentration Camps During the Armenian Genocide, 1915-1917" | Date | Jan 25, 2018 | | Time | 5:00 pm - 6:30 pm | | Location | English Building, Room 304 (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) | | Sponsor | Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies | Khatchig Mouradian is a Professor at Columbia University.   |   | | | HGMS Faculty Workshop with Anke Pinkert - "Public Memory Underground: Photographs of the 1953 Worker’s Uprising in East Germany" | Date | Feb 12, 2018 | | Time | 12:00 pm - 1:30 pm | | Location | English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) | | Sponsor | Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies | HGMS Faculty Workshop with Anke Pinkert Anke Pinkert is an Associate Professor and Director of Graduate Studies in Germanic Languages and Literatures at UIUC.     |   | | | A concert with Anthony Russell - "Convergence: Spirituals from the Shtetl. Davening from the Delta." | Date | Feb 20, 2018 | | Time | 7:30 pm | | Location | Knight Auditorium, Spurlock Museum, (600 S. Gregory, Urbana) | | Sponsor | CAS/MillerComm, Program in Jewish Culture and Society | Anthony Mordechai Tzvi Russell is a Yiddish singer and composer. Please click on the link (his name) to find out more info. There's much more to him! |   | | | Book talk for Michael Shapiro's "Wrestling with Shylock: Jewish Responses to the Merchant of Venice" | Date | Mar 5, 2018 | | Time | 5:00 pm | | Location | Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) | | Sponsor | Program in Jewish Culture and Society | Michael Shapiro is one of the founders of the Program in Jewish Culture and Society and is an emeritus professor of English and the Center for Global Studies at UIUC.   |   | | | HGMS Grad Student Conference | Date | Mar 9, 2018 | | Time | 9:00 am - 3:00 pm | | Location | Levis Faculty Center, Room 422 (919 W. Illinois St, Urbana, 4th floor) | | Sponsor | Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies, Program in Jewish Culture and Society |     |   | | | Julia Cohen Workshop - "The Past as a Foreign Country: Sephardi Jews and the Spanish Past" | Date | Apr 9, 2018 | | Time | 12:00 pm | | Location | English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) | | Sponsor | Oscar and Rose A. Einhorn fund, Program in Jewish Culture and Society | Julia Cohen is an Associate Professor of Modern Jewish History and an Associate Professor of History at Vanderbilt University. She is the author of Becoming Ottomans: Sephardi Jews and Imperial Citizenship in the Modern Era (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014) which received many awards.      |   | | | Julia Cohen Lecture - "Jews for Jihad? Jewish Citizens in an Islamic Empire" | Date | Apr 9, 2018 | | Time | 5:00 pm | | Location | Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) | | Sponsor | Oscar and Rose A. Einhorn fund, Program in Jewish Culture and Society | Julia Cohen is an Associate Professor of Modern Jewish History and an Associate Professor of History at Vanderbilt University. She is the author of Becoming Ottomans: Sephardi Jews and Imperial Citizenship in the Modern Era (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014) which received many awards.   |   | | | Mark Steinberg Workshop - "In the Shadow of Benya Krik? Jews, the Street, and Socialism in 1920s Odessa" | Date | Apr 16, 2018 | | Time | 12:00 pm | | Location | English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) | | Sponsor | Program in Jewish Culture and Society | Mark Steinberg is a Professor in the History Department at UIUC and is also the Director of Graduate Studies.    |   | | | Book launch for Sayed Kashua's "Track Changes" | Date | Apr 23, 2018 | | Time | 5:00 pm | | Location | Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) | | Sponsor | Program in Jewish Culture and Society | Sayed Kashua will be talking about his new book, Track Changes.    |   | | |   | | | |   | | |   | |   | | |   | |   | University of Illinois Champaign-Urbana The Program in Jewish Culture and Society 608 S. Wright St. English 109 Urbana, IL 61801 http://www.jewishculture.illinois.edu        Subscribe   Unsubscribe |   | |   | | |   | |   | _______________________________________________ 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 Wed Jan 10 20:47:22 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 20:47:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are any of these events worth attending? In-Reply-To: <7161D2A0-2477-4FB6-AB18-EAF0B18B071B@illinois.edu> References: <5a567424.8c4a240a.9a06a.f6a5@mx.google.com> <7161D2A0-2477-4FB6-AB18-EAF0B18B071B@illinois.edu> Message-ID: <1754702769.539453.1515617243011@mail.yahoo.com> I agree basically with Mort (no surprise); Mark Steinberg is a friend and a good historian and my maternal grandmother was from Odessa, so I'd probably choose that if I had to choose. DG On ‎Wednesday‎, ‎January‎ ‎10‎, ‎2018‎ ‎02‎:‎35‎:‎39‎ ‎PM‎ ‎CST, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss wrote: Too much glorification of Jewish victimhood, and not enough of what the Jewish state and its supporters represent, in particular to Palestinians, but not only to them. Clearly, individuals can decide if they are interested. … —mkb On Jan 10, 2018, at 2:14 PM, kmedina67 via Peace-discuss wrote: Dear peace discuss, in particular David green and Carl Estabrook, What do you think about the list of events I  the email forwarded below? Do you think are are worth attending? Pace e bene,Karen Medina -------- Original message --------From: jewishculture at illinois.eduDate: 1/10/18 13:08 (GMT-06:00)Subject: UIUC Jewish Studies Weekly Email | | |   | | Click here to see this online | |   | | | | |   | |   | | |   | |   | | Welcome Back! | |   | |   | |   | | Announcements... | |   | | | We are delighted to announce that Dov Weiss’s book, Pious Irreverence, is the Nahum M. Sarna Memorial Award winner of the National Jewish Book award in the category of scholarship. This is a major achievement! Please join us in congratulating Professor Weiss!  Here is the link to the winners:  https://www.jewishbookcouncil.org/awards/2017-national-jewish-book-award-winners-and-finalists   | | |   | | |  Click here for the extension for the call for papers for the 2018 Women's and Gender History Symposium at the University of Illinois hosted by the UIUC History Graduate Student Association, which will take place on March 2nd, 2018 in Champaign-Urbana. This is an interdisciplinary conference and we welcome papers from all programs and methodologies.  Responses and inquiries can be sent to this email: gendersymp at gmail.com | | |   | | | See our Spring 2018 Events list. More events to come! Check out our Jewish Studies Spring 2018 Courses  | | |   | |   | | Jewish Studies and HGMS Events | |   | | | | HGMS Faculty Workshop with Khatchig Mouradian, Columbia University | Date | Jan 25, 2018 | | Time | 12:00 pm | | Location | English Building, Room 109 (608 S. Wright St., Urbana) | | Sponsor | Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies | Khatchig Mouradian will be giving a talk entitled:  'The Very Limit of our Endurance': Unarmed Resistance in Ottoman Syria during WWI |   | | | Khatchig Mouradian lecture - "Internment and Destruction: Concentration Camps During the Armenian Genocide, 1915-1917" | Date | Jan 25, 2018 | | Time | 5:00 pm - 6:30 pm | | Location | English Building, Room 304 (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) | | Sponsor | Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies | Khatchig Mouradian is a Professor at Columbia University.   |   | | | HGMS Faculty Workshop with Anke Pinkert - "Public Memory Underground: Photographs of the 1953 Worker’s Uprising in East Germany" | Date | Feb 12, 2018 | | Time | 12:00 pm - 1:30 pm | | Location | English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) | | Sponsor | Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies | HGMS Faculty Workshop with Anke Pinkert Anke Pinkert is an Associate Professor and Director of Graduate Studies in Germanic Languages and Literatures at UIUC.     |   | | | A concert with Anthony Russell - "Convergence: Spirituals from the Shtetl. Davening from the Delta." | Date | Feb 20, 2018 | | Time | 7:30 pm | | Location | Knight Auditorium, Spurlock Museum, (600 S. Gregory, Urbana) | | Sponsor | CAS/MillerComm, Program in Jewish Culture and Society | Anthony Mordechai Tzvi Russell is a Yiddish singer and composer. Please click on the link (his name) to find out more info. There's much more to him! |   | | | Book talk for Michael Shapiro's "Wrestling with Shylock: Jewish Responses to the Merchant of Venice" | Date | Mar 5, 2018 | | Time | 5:00 pm | | Location | Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) | | Sponsor | Program in Jewish Culture and Society | Michael Shapiro is one of the founders of the Program in Jewish Culture and Society and is an emeritus professor of English and the Center for Global Studies at UIUC.   |   | | | HGMS Grad Student Conference | Date | Mar 9, 2018 | | Time | 9:00 am - 3:00 pm | | Location | Levis Faculty Center, Room 422 (919 W. Illinois St, Urbana, 4th floor) | | Sponsor | Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies, Program in Jewish Culture and Society |     |   | | | Julia Cohen Workshop - "The Past as a Foreign Country: Sephardi Jews and the Spanish Past" | Date | Apr 9, 2018 | | Time | 12:00 pm | | Location | English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) | | Sponsor | Oscar and Rose A. Einhorn fund, Program in Jewish Culture and Society | Julia Cohen is an Associate Professor of Modern Jewish History and an Associate Professor of History at Vanderbilt University. She is the author of Becoming Ottomans: Sephardi Jews and Imperial Citizenship in the Modern Era (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014) which received many awards.      |   | | | Julia Cohen Lecture - "Jews for Jihad? Jewish Citizens in an Islamic Empire" | Date | Apr 9, 2018 | | Time | 5:00 pm | | Location | Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) | | Sponsor | Oscar and Rose A. Einhorn fund, Program in Jewish Culture and Society | Julia Cohen is an Associate Professor of Modern Jewish History and an Associate Professor of History at Vanderbilt University. She is the author of Becoming Ottomans: Sephardi Jews and Imperial Citizenship in the Modern Era (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014) which received many awards.   |   | | | Mark Steinberg Workshop - "In the Shadow of Benya Krik? Jews, the Street, and Socialism in 1920s Odessa" | Date | Apr 16, 2018 | | Time | 12:00 pm | | Location | English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) | | Sponsor | Program in Jewish Culture and Society | Mark Steinberg is a Professor in the History Department at UIUC and is also the Director of Graduate Studies.    |   | | | Book launch for Sayed Kashua's "Track Changes" | Date | Apr 23, 2018 | | Time | 5:00 pm | | Location | Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) | | Sponsor | Program in Jewish Culture and Society | Sayed Kashua will be talking about his new book, Track Changes.    |   | | |   | | | |   | | |   | |   | | |   | |   | University of Illinois Champaign-Urbana The Program in Jewish Culture and Society 608 S. Wright St. English 109 Urbana, IL 61801 http://www.jewishculture.illinois.edu        Subscribe   Unsubscribe |   | |   | | |   | |   | _______________________________________________ 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 Wed Jan 10 20:49:59 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 14:49:59 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are any of these events worth attending? In-Reply-To: <7161D2A0-2477-4FB6-AB18-EAF0B18B071B@illinois.edu> References: <5a567424.8c4a240a.9a06a.f6a5@mx.google.com> <7161D2A0-2477-4FB6-AB18-EAF0B18B071B@illinois.edu> Message-ID: <79CC859D-17BF-4BF0-9979-BB0F8485BE17@gmail.com> Mort is right, but Michael Shapiro’s talk looks interesting. > On Jan 10, 2018, at 2:33 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Too much glorification of Jewish victimhood, and not enough of what the Jewish state and its supporters represent, in particular to Palestinians, but not only to them. > Clearly, individuals can decide if they are interested. … > > —mkb > > >> On Jan 10, 2018, at 2:14 PM, kmedina67 via Peace-discuss > wrote: >> >> Dear peace discuss, in particular David green and Carl Estabrook, >> >> What do you think about the list of events I the email forwarded below? Do you think are are worth attending? >> >> >> >> Pace e bene, >> Karen Medina >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: jewishculture at illinois.edu >> Date: 1/10/18 13:08 (GMT-06:00) >> Subject: UIUC Jewish Studies Weekly Email >> >> >> Click here to see this online >> >> >> >> >> >> <> >> Welcome Back! >> >> >> <> >> Announcements... >> <> >> We are delighted to announce that Dov Weiss’s book, Pious Irreverence, is the Nahum M. Sarna Memorial Award winner of the National Jewish Book award in the category of scholarship. This is a major achievement! Please join us in congratulating Professor Weiss! Here is the link to the winners: >> >> https://www.jewishbookcouncil.org/awards/2017-national-jewish-book-award-winners-and-finalists >> >> <> >> >> Click here for the extension for the call for papers for the 2018 Women's and Gender History Symposium at the University of Illinois hosted by the UIUC History Graduate Student Association, which will take place on March 2nd, 2018 in Champaign-Urbana. This is an interdisciplinary conference and we welcome papers from all programs and methodologies. >> >> Responses and inquiries can be sent to this email: gendersymp at gmail.com >> <> >> See our Spring 2018 Events list . More events to come! >> >> Check out our Jewish Studies Spring 2018 Courses >> >> >> <> >> Jewish Studies and HGMS Events >> <> >> HGMS Faculty Workshop with Khatchig Mouradian, Columbia University >> Date Jan 25, 2018 >> Time 12:00 pm >> Location English Building, Room 109 (608 S. Wright St., Urbana) >> Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies >> Khatchig Mouradian will be giving a talk entitled: >> >> 'The Very Limit of our Endurance': Unarmed Resistance in Ottoman Syria during WWI >> >> >> Khatchig Mouradian lecture - "Internment and Destruction: Concentration Camps During the Armenian Genocide, 1915-1917" >> Date Jan 25, 2018 >> Time 5:00 pm - 6:30 pm >> Location English Building, Room 304 (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) >> Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies >> Khatchig Mouradian is a Professor at Columbia University. >> >> >> >> HGMS Faculty Workshop with Anke Pinkert - "Public Memory Underground: Photographs of the 1953 Worker’s Uprising in East Germany" >> Date Feb 12, 2018 >> Time 12:00 pm - 1:30 pm >> Location English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) >> Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies >> HGMS Faculty Workshop with Anke Pinkert >> >> Anke Pinkert is an Associate Professor and Director of Graduate Studies in Germanic Languages and Literatures at UIUC. >> >> >> >> >> A concert with Anthony Russell - "Convergence: Spirituals from the Shtetl. Davening from the Delta." >> Date Feb 20, 2018 >> Time 7:30 pm >> Location Knight Auditorium, Spurlock Museum, (600 S. Gregory, Urbana) >> Sponsor CAS/MillerComm, Program in Jewish Culture and Society >> Anthony Mordechai Tzvi Russell is a Yiddish singer and composer. Please click on the link (his name) to find out more info. There's much more to him! >> >> >> Book talk for Michael Shapiro's "Wrestling with Shylock: Jewish Responses to the Merchant of Venice" >> Date Mar 5, 2018 >> Time 5:00 pm >> Location Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) >> Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society >> Michael Shapiro is one of the founders of the Program in Jewish Culture and Society and is an emeritus professor of English and the Center for Global Studies at UIUC. >> >> >> >> HGMS Grad Student Conference >> Date Mar 9, 2018 >> Time 9:00 am - 3:00 pm >> Location Levis Faculty Center, Room 422 (919 W. Illinois St, Urbana, 4th floor) >> Sponsor Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies, Program in Jewish Culture and Society >> >> >> >> Julia Cohen Workshop - "The Past as a Foreign Country: Sephardi Jews and the Spanish Past" >> Date Apr 9, 2018 >> Time 12:00 pm >> Location English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) >> Sponsor Oscar and Rose A. Einhorn fund, Program in Jewish Culture and Society >> Julia Cohen is an Associate Professor of Modern Jewish History and an Associate Professor of History at Vanderbilt University. She is the author of Becoming Ottomans: Sephardi Jews and Imperial Citizenship in the Modern Era (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014) which received many awards. >> >> >> >> >> >> Julia Cohen Lecture - "Jews for Jihad? Jewish Citizens in an Islamic Empire" >> Date Apr 9, 2018 >> Time 5:00 pm >> Location Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) >> Sponsor Oscar and Rose A. Einhorn fund, Program in Jewish Culture and Society >> Julia Cohen is an Associate Professor of Modern Jewish History and an Associate Professor of History at Vanderbilt University. She is the author of Becoming Ottomans: Sephardi Jews and Imperial Citizenship in the Modern Era (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014) which received many awards. >> >> >> >> Mark Steinberg Workshop - "In the Shadow of Benya Krik? Jews, the Street, and Socialism in 1920s Odessa" >> Date Apr 16, 2018 >> Time 12:00 pm >> Location English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) >> Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society >> Mark Steinberg is a Professor in the History Department at UIUC and is also the Director of Graduate Studies. >> >> >> >> Book launch for Sayed Kashua's "Track Changes" >> Date Apr 23, 2018 >> Time 5:00 pm >> Location Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) >> Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society >> Sayed Kashua will be talking about his new book, Track Changes. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> University of Illinois Champaign-Urbana >> >> The Program in Jewish Culture and Society >> >> 608 S. Wright St. >> >> English 109 >> >> Urbana, IL 61801 >> >> http://www.jewishculture.illinois.edu >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Subscribe Unsubscribe >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 Wed Jan 10 20:51:36 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 20:51:36 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are any of these events worth attending? In-Reply-To: <7161D2A0-2477-4FB6-AB18-EAF0B18B071B@illinois.edu> References: <5a567424.8c4a240a.9a06a.f6a5@mx.google.com> <7161D2A0-2477-4FB6-AB18-EAF0B18B071B@illinois.edu> Message-ID: I’m interested in Mark Sternberg’s workshop: “In the Shadow of Benya Krik” Jews, the Street, and Socialism in 1920’s Odessa,” having heard Prof. Sternberg speak on the “People’s History Hour” in reference to the Russian Revolution. I would also be interested in Michael Shapiro’s book review of “The Merchant of Venice” having read the book when about fourteen. I was appalled at the racism, as well as the play some years ago, a British production done in Bangkok, which watered it down a bit. While I have a problem with racism, I don’t like censoring history. So I am interested in this program. On Jan 10, 2018, at 12:33, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss > wrote: Too much glorification of Jewish victimhood, and not enough of what the Jewish state and its supporters represent, in particular to Palestinians, but not only to them. Clearly, individuals can decide if they are interested. … —mkb On Jan 10, 2018, at 2:14 PM, kmedina67 via Peace-discuss > wrote: Dear peace discuss, in particular David green and Carl Estabrook, What do you think about the list of events I the email forwarded below? Do you think are are worth attending? Pace e bene, Karen Medina -------- Original message -------- From: jewishculture at illinois.edu Date: 1/10/18 13:08 (GMT-06:00) Subject: UIUC Jewish Studies Weekly Email Click here to see this online [https://illinois.edu/skinDesigner/files/25471/wizard_header.jpg?iIndex=1206T111404] Welcome Back! Announcements... We are delighted to announce that Dov Weiss’s book, Pious Irreverence, is the Nahum M. Sarna Memorial Award winner of the National Jewish Book award in the category of scholarship. This is a major achievement! Please join us in congratulating Professor Weiss! Here is the link to the winners: https://www.jewishbookcouncil.org/awards/2017-national-jewish-book-award-winners-and-finalists Click here for the extension for the call for papers for the 2018 Women's and Gender History Symposium at the University of Illinois hosted by the UIUC History Graduate Student Association, which will take place on March 2nd, 2018 in Champaign-Urbana. This is an interdisciplinary conference and we welcome papers from all programs and methodologies. Responses and inquiries can be sent to this email: gendersymp at gmail.com See our Spring 2018 Events list. More events to come! Check out our Jewish Studies Spring 2018 Courses Jewish Studies and HGMS Events HGMS Faculty Workshop with Khatchig Mouradian, Columbia University Date Jan 25, 2018 Time 12:00 pm Location English Building, Room 109 (608 S. Wright St., Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies Khatchig Mouradian will be giving a talk entitled: 'The Very Limit of our Endurance': Unarmed Resistance in Ottoman Syria during WWI Khatchig Mouradian lecture - "Internment and Destruction: Concentration Camps During the Armenian Genocide, 1915-1917" Date Jan 25, 2018 Time 5:00 pm - 6:30 pm Location English Building, Room 304 (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies Khatchig Mouradian is a Professor at Columbia University. HGMS Faculty Workshop with Anke Pinkert - "Public Memory Underground: Photographs of the 1953 Worker’s Uprising in East Germany" Date Feb 12, 2018 Time 12:00 pm - 1:30 pm Location English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies HGMS Faculty Workshop with Anke Pinkert Anke Pinkert is an Associate Professor and Director of Graduate Studies in Germanic Languages and Literatures at UIUC. A concert with Anthony Russell - "Convergence: Spirituals from the Shtetl. Davening from the Delta." Date Feb 20, 2018 Time 7:30 pm Location Knight Auditorium, Spurlock Museum, (600 S. Gregory, Urbana) Sponsor CAS/MillerComm, Program in Jewish Culture and Society Anthony Mordechai Tzvi Russell is a Yiddish singer and composer. Please click on the link (his name) to find out more info. There's much more to him! Book talk for Michael Shapiro's "Wrestling with Shylock: Jewish Responses to the Merchant of Venice" Date Mar 5, 2018 Time 5:00 pm Location Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society Michael Shapiro is one of the founders of the Program in Jewish Culture and Society and is an emeritus professor of English and the Center for Global Studies at UIUC. HGMS Grad Student Conference Date Mar 9, 2018 Time 9:00 am - 3:00 pm Location Levis Faculty Center, Room 422 (919 W. Illinois St, Urbana, 4th floor) Sponsor Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies, Program in Jewish Culture and Society Julia Cohen Workshop - "The Past as a Foreign Country: Sephardi Jews and the Spanish Past" Date Apr 9, 2018 Time 12:00 pm Location English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) Sponsor Oscar and Rose A. Einhorn fund, Program in Jewish Culture and Society Julia Cohen is an Associate Professor of Modern Jewish History and an Associate Professor of History at Vanderbilt University. She is the author of Becoming Ottomans: Sephardi Jews and Imperial Citizenship in the Modern Era (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014) which received many awards. Julia Cohen Lecture - "Jews for Jihad? Jewish Citizens in an Islamic Empire" Date Apr 9, 2018 Time 5:00 pm Location Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) Sponsor Oscar and Rose A. Einhorn fund, Program in Jewish Culture and Society Julia Cohen is an Associate Professor of Modern Jewish History and an Associate Professor of History at Vanderbilt University. She is the author of Becoming Ottomans: Sephardi Jews and Imperial Citizenship in the Modern Era (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014) which received many awards. Mark Steinberg Workshop - "In the Shadow of Benya Krik? Jews, the Street, and Socialism in 1920s Odessa" Date Apr 16, 2018 Time 12:00 pm Location English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society Mark Steinberg is a Professor in the History Department at UIUC and is also the Director of Graduate Studies. Book launch for Sayed Kashua's "Track Changes" Date Apr 23, 2018 Time 5:00 pm Location Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society Sayed Kashua will be talking about his new book, Track Changes. University of Illinois Champaign-Urbana The Program in Jewish Culture and Society 608 S. Wright St. English 109 Urbana, IL 61801 http://www.jewishculture.illinois.edu [Block I] Subscribe Unsubscribe [https://illinois.edu/emailer/opened.gif?emailId=156281&emailAddress=kmedina67 at gmail.com]_______________________________________________ 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://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7ba63c016352416f13f708d55869b51f%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636512133381454794&sdata=whSzeLVVQu2d9ITPWF28kPYAq%2BJcVkgrp2FThVXhawk%3D&reserved=0 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jan 10 20:54:40 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 20:54:40 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are any of these events worth attending? In-Reply-To: References: <5a567424.8c4a240a.9a06a.f6a5@mx.google.com> <7161D2A0-2477-4FB6-AB18-EAF0B18B071B@illinois.edu> Message-ID: David G. and Carl Its nice to know we three agree. On Jan 10, 2018, at 12:51, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss > wrote: I’m interested in Mark Sternberg’s workshop: “In the Shadow of Benya Krik” Jews, the Street, and Socialism in 1920’s Odessa,” having heard Prof. Sternberg speak on the “People’s History Hour” in reference to the Russian Revolution. I would also be interested in Michael Shapiro’s book review of “The Merchant of Venice” having read the book when about fourteen. I was appalled at the racism, as well as the play some years ago, a British production done in Bangkok, which watered it down a bit. While I have a problem with racism, I don’t like censoring history. So I am interested in this program. On Jan 10, 2018, at 12:33, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss > wrote: Too much glorification of Jewish victimhood, and not enough of what the Jewish state and its supporters represent, in particular to Palestinians, but not only to them. Clearly, individuals can decide if they are interested. … —mkb On Jan 10, 2018, at 2:14 PM, kmedina67 via Peace-discuss > wrote: Dear peace discuss, in particular David green and Carl Estabrook, What do you think about the list of events I the email forwarded below? Do you think are are worth attending? Pace e bene, Karen Medina -------- Original message -------- From: jewishculture at illinois.edu Date: 1/10/18 13:08 (GMT-06:00) Subject: UIUC Jewish Studies Weekly Email Click here to see this online [https://illinois.edu/skinDesigner/files/25471/wizard_header.jpg?iIndex=1206T111404] Welcome Back! Announcements... We are delighted to announce that Dov Weiss’s book, Pious Irreverence, is the Nahum M. Sarna Memorial Award winner of the National Jewish Book award in the category of scholarship. This is a major achievement! Please join us in congratulating Professor Weiss! Here is the link to the winners: https://www.jewishbookcouncil.org/awards/2017-national-jewish-book-award-winners-and-finalists Click here for the extension for the call for papers for the 2018 Women's and Gender History Symposium at the University of Illinois hosted by the UIUC History Graduate Student Association, which will take place on March 2nd, 2018 in Champaign-Urbana. This is an interdisciplinary conference and we welcome papers from all programs and methodologies. Responses and inquiries can be sent to this email: gendersymp at gmail.com See our Spring 2018 Events list. More events to come! Check out our Jewish Studies Spring 2018 Courses Jewish Studies and HGMS Events HGMS Faculty Workshop with Khatchig Mouradian, Columbia University Date Jan 25, 2018 Time 12:00 pm Location English Building, Room 109 (608 S. Wright St., Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies Khatchig Mouradian will be giving a talk entitled: 'The Very Limit of our Endurance': Unarmed Resistance in Ottoman Syria during WWI Khatchig Mouradian lecture - "Internment and Destruction: Concentration Camps During the Armenian Genocide, 1915-1917" Date Jan 25, 2018 Time 5:00 pm - 6:30 pm Location English Building, Room 304 (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies Khatchig Mouradian is a Professor at Columbia University. HGMS Faculty Workshop with Anke Pinkert - "Public Memory Underground: Photographs of the 1953 Worker’s Uprising in East Germany" Date Feb 12, 2018 Time 12:00 pm - 1:30 pm Location English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society, Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies HGMS Faculty Workshop with Anke Pinkert Anke Pinkert is an Associate Professor and Director of Graduate Studies in Germanic Languages and Literatures at UIUC. A concert with Anthony Russell - "Convergence: Spirituals from the Shtetl. Davening from the Delta." Date Feb 20, 2018 Time 7:30 pm Location Knight Auditorium, Spurlock Museum, (600 S. Gregory, Urbana) Sponsor CAS/MillerComm, Program in Jewish Culture and Society Anthony Mordechai Tzvi Russell is a Yiddish singer and composer. Please click on the link (his name) to find out more info. There's much more to him! Book talk for Michael Shapiro's "Wrestling with Shylock: Jewish Responses to the Merchant of Venice" Date Mar 5, 2018 Time 5:00 pm Location Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society Michael Shapiro is one of the founders of the Program in Jewish Culture and Society and is an emeritus professor of English and the Center for Global Studies at UIUC. HGMS Grad Student Conference Date Mar 9, 2018 Time 9:00 am - 3:00 pm Location Levis Faculty Center, Room 422 (919 W. Illinois St, Urbana, 4th floor) Sponsor Holocaust, Genocide, and Memory Studies, Program in Jewish Culture and Society Julia Cohen Workshop - "The Past as a Foreign Country: Sephardi Jews and the Spanish Past" Date Apr 9, 2018 Time 12:00 pm Location English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) Sponsor Oscar and Rose A. Einhorn fund, Program in Jewish Culture and Society Julia Cohen is an Associate Professor of Modern Jewish History and an Associate Professor of History at Vanderbilt University. She is the author of Becoming Ottomans: Sephardi Jews and Imperial Citizenship in the Modern Era (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014) which received many awards. Julia Cohen Lecture - "Jews for Jihad? Jewish Citizens in an Islamic Empire" Date Apr 9, 2018 Time 5:00 pm Location Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) Sponsor Oscar and Rose A. Einhorn fund, Program in Jewish Culture and Society Julia Cohen is an Associate Professor of Modern Jewish History and an Associate Professor of History at Vanderbilt University. She is the author of Becoming Ottomans: Sephardi Jews and Imperial Citizenship in the Modern Era (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014) which received many awards. Mark Steinberg Workshop - "In the Shadow of Benya Krik? Jews, the Street, and Socialism in 1920s Odessa" Date Apr 16, 2018 Time 12:00 pm Location English 109, Seminar room (608 S. Wright St, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society Mark Steinberg is a Professor in the History Department at UIUC and is also the Director of Graduate Studies. Book launch for Sayed Kashua's "Track Changes" Date Apr 23, 2018 Time 5:00 pm Location Lucy Ellis Lounge, Foreign Languages Building 1080 (707 S. Mathews, Urbana) Sponsor Program in Jewish Culture and Society Sayed Kashua will be talking about his new book, Track Changes. University of Illinois Champaign-Urbana The Program in Jewish Culture and Society 608 S. Wright St. English 109 Urbana, IL 61801 http://www.jewishculture.illinois.edu [Block I] Subscribe Unsubscribe [https://illinois.edu/emailer/opened.gif?emailId=156281&emailAddress=kmedina67 at gmail.com]_______________________________________________ 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://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7ba63c016352416f13f708d55869b51f%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636512133381454794&sdata=whSzeLVVQu2d9ITPWF28kPYAq%2BJcVkgrp2FThVXhawk%3D&reserved=0 _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C4fe738ec3d8d4c0a71b508d5586c00e7%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636512143246314667&sdata=rLexvg2PNDLn4NG%2FmWwvqHasOeGHThmplTknpp3EUiA%3D&reserved=0 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 10 22:47:19 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 22:47:19 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Killer Koh v. 200,000 Salvadorans In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Translated From today’s Newspeak Times OpEd: “…Most of the Salvadorans who originally qualified for protected status fled a brutal civil {Sic! Reagan instigated} war in their country between 1980 and 1992—a war the United States fanned by its military support for the Salvadoran government {Sic: military dictatorship that exterminated 75,000 human beings}.” Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 10, 2018 2:04 PM To: 'David Green' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' ; 'C G Estabrook' Subject: RE: Killer Koh v. 200,000 Salvadorans In what became known as “The Sanctuary Trials,” the defendants called upon their rights protected under both the U.S. constitution and international law. They employed First Amendment free exercise claims, arguing they were simply living out their faith by providing refuge to their fellow brethren in need; this was the call of the Gospel and an exercise of their religion. As Sister Nicgorski stated on the day of her arraignment, “If I am guilty of anything, I am guilty of the gospel.” Defendants referenced passages in the Old and New Testaments, such as Leviticus 19:34 ("The stranger who sojourns with you shall be to you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself) and the story of Exodus (“What answer is there for the envoys of the nation? This: that the Lord has fixed Zion in her place, and the afflicted among God's people shall take refuge there” [Isaiah 14:32]). The defense also called upon international law to defend their actions. They argued that the U.S. administration's policy towards Central Americans violated the 1980 Refugee Act, a U.S. law enacted under Carter that reflected international norms set down in the 1951 U.N. Convention and 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. I was the Designated Expert on these cases along with Professor Richard Falk. Meanwhile, from 1983 to 1985 Killer Koh had been working with Reagan et al to exterminate the Peoples of Central America. Fab Ed Norton Professor of Law Carl Schmitt Law School UIUC. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 9, 2018 1:04 PM To: 'David Green' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; 'Joe Lauria' >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'Karen Aram' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; 'David Johnson' >; 'Mildred O'brien' >; 'C G Estabrook' > Subject: Killer Koh v. 200,000 Salvadorans The roots of El Salvador’s high murder rate, for example -- it is one of the most dangerous countries in the world -- lie in U.S. support for its right-wing government and the grossly unjust political-economic order it defended during the 1980s. During that decade, Washington helped fuel the country’s civil war by providing hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, and various forms of assistance to its brutal military. Killer Koh worked for Reagan from 1983-1985—exterminating about 75,000 Salvadorans, 35,000 Nicaraguans and 250,000 Guatemalans, most of them Mayan Indians, outright genocide. Hence we founded the Original Sanctuary Movement in order to protect them. See my book Defending Civil Resistance Under International Law (Transnational Publishers Inc. 1987) Fab Ed Norton 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) From: Institute for Public Accuracy via ActionNetwork.org [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2018 9:07 AM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: 200,000 Salvadorans 200,000 Salvadorans JOSEPH NEVINS, jonevins at vassar.edu, @jonevins1 Nevins is professor of geography at Vassar College. His books include Dying to Live: A Story of U.S. Immigration in an Age of Global Apartheid (City Lights Books). He said today: "The Trump Administration’s decision to end Temporary Protected Status for approximately 200,000 Salvadorans residing in the United States is abhorrent. In addition to being part and parcel of its war on immigrants (particularly low-income ones), it is a denial of U.S. responsibility for much of what drives Salvadorans to flee their homeland and makes life there unviable. The roots of El Salvador’s high murder rate, for example -- it is one of the most dangerous countries in the world -- lie in U.S. support for its right-wing government and the grossly unjust political-economic order it defended during the 1980s. During that decade, Washington helped fuel the country’s civil war by providing hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, and various forms of assistance to its brutal military. "In the 1990s, the United States, allying itself with the country’s conservative elites, helped to impose a neoliberal 'free trade' agreement on El Salvador, an accord that has helped to fuel out-migration due to its dislocating impacts. Finally, there is the matter of climate change, with the United States as the world’s biggest historical contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. Along with Honduras and Guatemala, El Salvador is one of the detrimentally impacted countries in the world by a warming and increasingly unstable climate. From growing incidents of 'natural' disasters to an outbreak of coffee rust, which has devastated the region’s coffee sector, climate change-related environmental degradation has also helped to push Salvadorans to migrate. For such reason and more, the U.S. government has an ethical obligation to allow Salvadorans to migrate and reside in the United States." For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 January 9, 2018 Institute for Public Accuracy 980 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org [Action Network] Sent via Action Network, a free online toolset anyone can use to organize. Click here to sign up and get started building an email list and creating online actions today. Action Network is an open platform that empowers individuals and groups to organize for progressive causes. We encourage responsible activism, and do not support using the platform to take unlawful or other improper action. We do not control or endorse the conduct of users and make no representations of any kind about them. . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 10 22:47:19 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 22:47:19 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Killer Koh v. 200,000 Salvadorans In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Translated From today’s Newspeak Times OpEd: “…Most of the Salvadorans who originally qualified for protected status fled a brutal civil {Sic! Reagan instigated} war in their country between 1980 and 1992—a war the United States fanned by its military support for the Salvadoran government {Sic: military dictatorship that exterminated 75,000 human beings}.” Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 10, 2018 2:04 PM To: 'David Green' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' ; 'C G Estabrook' Subject: RE: Killer Koh v. 200,000 Salvadorans In what became known as “The Sanctuary Trials,” the defendants called upon their rights protected under both the U.S. constitution and international law. They employed First Amendment free exercise claims, arguing they were simply living out their faith by providing refuge to their fellow brethren in need; this was the call of the Gospel and an exercise of their religion. As Sister Nicgorski stated on the day of her arraignment, “If I am guilty of anything, I am guilty of the gospel.” Defendants referenced passages in the Old and New Testaments, such as Leviticus 19:34 ("The stranger who sojourns with you shall be to you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself) and the story of Exodus (“What answer is there for the envoys of the nation? This: that the Lord has fixed Zion in her place, and the afflicted among God's people shall take refuge there” [Isaiah 14:32]). The defense also called upon international law to defend their actions. They argued that the U.S. administration's policy towards Central Americans violated the 1980 Refugee Act, a U.S. law enacted under Carter that reflected international norms set down in the 1951 U.N. Convention and 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. I was the Designated Expert on these cases along with Professor Richard Falk. Meanwhile, from 1983 to 1985 Killer Koh had been working with Reagan et al to exterminate the Peoples of Central America. Fab Ed Norton Professor of Law Carl Schmitt Law School UIUC. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 9, 2018 1:04 PM To: 'David Green' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; 'Joe Lauria' >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'Karen Aram' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; 'David Johnson' >; 'Mildred O'brien' >; 'C G Estabrook' > Subject: Killer Koh v. 200,000 Salvadorans The roots of El Salvador’s high murder rate, for example -- it is one of the most dangerous countries in the world -- lie in U.S. support for its right-wing government and the grossly unjust political-economic order it defended during the 1980s. During that decade, Washington helped fuel the country’s civil war by providing hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, and various forms of assistance to its brutal military. Killer Koh worked for Reagan from 1983-1985—exterminating about 75,000 Salvadorans, 35,000 Nicaraguans and 250,000 Guatemalans, most of them Mayan Indians, outright genocide. Hence we founded the Original Sanctuary Movement in order to protect them. See my book Defending Civil Resistance Under International Law (Transnational Publishers Inc. 1987) Fab Ed Norton 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) From: Institute for Public Accuracy via ActionNetwork.org [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2018 9:07 AM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: 200,000 Salvadorans 200,000 Salvadorans JOSEPH NEVINS, jonevins at vassar.edu, @jonevins1 Nevins is professor of geography at Vassar College. His books include Dying to Live: A Story of U.S. Immigration in an Age of Global Apartheid (City Lights Books). He said today: "The Trump Administration’s decision to end Temporary Protected Status for approximately 200,000 Salvadorans residing in the United States is abhorrent. In addition to being part and parcel of its war on immigrants (particularly low-income ones), it is a denial of U.S. responsibility for much of what drives Salvadorans to flee their homeland and makes life there unviable. The roots of El Salvador’s high murder rate, for example -- it is one of the most dangerous countries in the world -- lie in U.S. support for its right-wing government and the grossly unjust political-economic order it defended during the 1980s. During that decade, Washington helped fuel the country’s civil war by providing hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, and various forms of assistance to its brutal military. "In the 1990s, the United States, allying itself with the country’s conservative elites, helped to impose a neoliberal 'free trade' agreement on El Salvador, an accord that has helped to fuel out-migration due to its dislocating impacts. Finally, there is the matter of climate change, with the United States as the world’s biggest historical contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. Along with Honduras and Guatemala, El Salvador is one of the detrimentally impacted countries in the world by a warming and increasingly unstable climate. From growing incidents of 'natural' disasters to an outbreak of coffee rust, which has devastated the region’s coffee sector, climate change-related environmental degradation has also helped to push Salvadorans to migrate. For such reason and more, the U.S. government has an ethical obligation to allow Salvadorans to migrate and reside in the United States." For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 January 9, 2018 Institute for Public Accuracy 980 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org [Action Network] Sent via Action Network, a free online toolset anyone can use to organize. Click here to sign up and get started building an email list and creating online actions today. Action Network is an open platform that empowers individuals and groups to organize for progressive causes. We encourage responsible activism, and do not support using the platform to take unlawful or other improper action. We do not control or endorse the conduct of users and make no representations of any kind about them. . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jan 11 00:50:26 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 00:50:26 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Film Message-ID: While on the topic of historical films, I recommend “Marshall,” it deals with the early career of Thurgood Marshall. I can’t comment on its accuracy, or the acting, though it clearly belongs to star Chadwick Boseman. It’s not often I find a film inspiring. It makes one remember the struggles that many fought with such dignity and courage. From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jan 11 01:28:00 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 01:28:00 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp's article on Truthout Message-ID: “Trump Lied 1,950 Times - Washington Post Also Lied While Correcting Him" [https://smhttp-ssl-62992.nexcesscdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/The-Washington-Post-masthead-1024-850x567.jpg]The offices of The Washington Post in Washington, D.C. (Charles Dharapak / AP) The Washington Post put out an in-depth analysis of President Trump’s 1,950 lies and misleading claims over his first year in office. It’s an impressive feat since the Post had to fact-check everything and allow Trump’s third-grade-level speeches to enter its fact-checkers’ earholes, a punishment I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemies. [https://smhttp-ssl-62992.nexcesscdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Washington-Post1-1024-1024x384.jpg] The writers at the Washington Post are correct that lies spray out of Trump’s face with the force of an untethered fire hose. They’re also correct that almost every statement by Trump is either false or misleading. However, the irony is that almost every statement the Washington Post prints in correcting Trump’s lies is in itself a lie or misleading statement. So, to be clear, I’m not saying Trump is not lying. I’m saying that the way in which our mainstream media correct him is also meant to deceive us. ADVERTISEMENT The Washington Post starts with December and counts backward through the year. Here are my corrections to its corrections to Trump’s lies. (This is only a few weeks’ worth, but you’ll probably get my gist and need to purge yourself in a bathroom immediately.) The quote on the left is from Trump. The writing to the right is the Post’s correction. [https://smhttp-ssl-62992.nexcesscdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Washington-Post2-1024-1024x242.jpg] Trump statement: “If the Dems (Crooked Hillary) got elected, your stocks would be down 50% from values on Election Day. Now they have a great future – and just beginning!” Washington Post correction: “Trump of course has no idea how stocks would have performed if Clinton had won the election. The stock market rise in Trump’s first year was a continuation of a bull market that started under President Obama—and was mirrored by worldwide securities markets. The U.S. rise in 2017 was not unique. When looking at the Standard & Poor’s 500 stock index, it’s clear U.S. stocks haven’t rallied as as robustly as their foreign equivalents.” [https://smhttp-ssl-62992.nexcesscdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Washington-Post6-1024-1024x201.jpg] Trump statement: “The stock market is at an all-time high and continues to go up, up, up.” Washington Post correction: “This is a flip-flop for Trump. Before he was elected, he dismissed the stock-market performance under Obama as ‘artificial’ and ‘a bubble.’ Moreover, the U.S. rise in 2017 was not unique. When looking at the Standard & Poor’s 500 stock index, it’s clear U.S. stocks haven’t rallied as as robustly as their foreign equivalents.” What the Post won’t tell you is that the stock market does great when workers are effectively exploited. When the average American worker doesn’t have the power or leverage to demand better pay or safer working conditions, corporations are thrilled, the stock market grows and the fabled coke-fueled Wall Street parties go off without a hitch. The market has also continued to grow with increasing inequality. Furthermore, over 90 percent of the income gains since the 2008 collapse have gone to the top 1 percent, and 80 percent of stock value overall is held by the top 10 percent of the population. Plus, the market does not take into account externalities such as impacts on the environment. Even as the environment collapses around us, the stock market thrives. So while Trump is lying to us about what the stock market would’ve done under President Hillary, The Washington Post is lying to us about the nature of the stock market (as is Trump). The Post acts as if Wall Street’s growth is somehow good for average Americans. I’s not. Trump, Hillary and the Post are all part of an elite class enjoying the spoils of a fully exploited working class. Judging the health of our society by looking at stock prices is like judging the health of a dying man by looking at the leeches on his skin. “Wow, those leeches are very happy. This man is in peak condition!” [https://smhttp-ssl-62992.nexcesscdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Washington-Post3-1024-1024x226.jpg] Trump statement: “I use Social Media not because I like to, but because it is the only way to fight a VERY dishonest and unfair ‘press,’ now often referred to as Fake News Media. Phony and non-existent ‘sources’ are being used more often than ever. Many stories & reports a pure fiction!” Washington Post correction: “Trump tends to deem negative articles as ‘fake news’ even if they are accurate. Mainstream news organizations can certainly make mistakes, or rely on sources who are inaccurate, but they do not use nonexistent sources or print ‘pure fiction.’ ” This almost needs no response because most people know how ridiculous it is. Of course, Trump lies endlessly. He hardly knows how to speak an honest sentence. (After all, he’s a barely literate man who called himself “a genius” just a couple of days ago.) But the idea that The Washington Post, long known to put out propaganda for the CIA and other government agencies, is somehow free of intentionally misleading the American public is laughable on a level that would put the new Dave Chappelle special to shame. One need look no further than its hilarious “Prop or Not” article (which was quickly debunked) to see how far down bullshit lane it’s willing to travel. But more importantly, what the Post won’t tell us here is what it won’t tell us all the rest of the time. (And that last sentence is not a typo.) The corporate media—even when it’s getting the story correct—is endlessly avoiding certain topics or points. Just last week, former New York Times reporter James Risen revealed how he was stopped by his editors from reporting on the Bush-era illegal surveillance of American citizens. That occurred a decade before the Edward Snowden revelations and could’ve changed the outcome of presidential elections as well as the course of our government’s continued assault on our civil liberties. (No biggie.) Our media avoids everything from climate change (which it’s known about for decades but hardly covers even as it covers extreme weather events) to the current U.S.-backed destruction of Yemen to the fact that only 1 percent of terror plots stopped by the FBI are real—and most of those 99 percent were helped along by the FBI. (To add anecdotal evidence to my point, my friend Abby Martin and I have both forced The New York Times to issue corrections in the past year on statements about us that a simple Google search could have proven wrong.) [https://smhttp-ssl-62992.nexcesscdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Washington-Post4-1024-1024x178.jpg] Trump statement: “Since the election we have created more than 2 million jobs.” Washington Post correction: Trump is counting jobs from Election Day, even though he did not take office until almost three months later. At the time, about 1.7 million jobs had been created during his presidency.” [https://smhttp-ssl-62992.nexcesscdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Washington-Post5-1024-1024x156.jpg] Trump statement: “Unemployment is at a 17-year low.” Washington Post correction: “This is flip flop for Trump. While campaigning Trump dismissed the unemployment rate as made up, suggesting unemployment was closer to 30 or 40 percent. Since becoming president Trump has embraced the figure.” Shouldn’t it matter in the “correction” that most of the jobs created are part-time and low-paid? About 25 percent of those with part-time jobs currently live in poverty in our country. This is not Trump’s fault but an ongoing trend in America’s late-stage capitalist economy that is exploiting nearly everyone more and more. Trump’s economic team is filled with people from Goldman Sachs and Citibank, just as Obama’s was. (Many people don’t even know that Citigroup chose almost all of Obama’s cabinet.) Wall Street has captured our government and therefore does whatever is good for the top 1 percent who rule Wall Street. On top of that, technology will soon replace most jobs, and we need to adjust to a nearly jobless society. Studies show roughly 50 percent of jobs in the U.S. could be replaced by artificial intelligence in the next 20 years. And, in fact, the percentage might be much higher than that, seeing as technology advances exponentially—whereas we humans seem to be devolving tenaciously. So acting as if poorly paid part-time job creation is the only way to judge success as a president is ignorant or manipulative on a level usually reserved for the cast of “Survivor.” Even our “most successful” corporations hardly pay their employees—Amazon was just added to the list of major corporations with a significant number of employees on food stamps. The Washington Post wants the struggling American worker to remain unaware of what’s coming and of the power we could all have if we knew what to demand from a government that is hypothetically supposed to work for us. [https://smhttp-ssl-62992.nexcesscdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Washington-Post7-1024-1024x269.jpg] Trump statement: “Congress has authorized funding at near-record levels so that we can rebuild our full military might after years of dangerous cuts and depletion of our military.” Washington Post correction: “Trump, perhaps because he is reading his weekly address from a script, is more careful than usual. He does not claim a record level of spending and he notes that it is ‘authorized, as Congress must still appropriate funds. Still, Trump claims the military has been depleted due to years of budget cuts, but the decreased military budget reflects the close of two wars: the war in Iraq and the war in Afghanistan. Despite the decreased budget, the total budget is still larger than it was in 2000, before either war began.” Here, the Post is bragging about military spending while failing to mention that our military spending is out of control on all levels. We spend more on our military than the next eight countries combined. At the same time we refuse to fund universal health care, infrastructure projects, paid maternity leave and education. Last week in Baltimore, children sat in freezing classrooms because the schools didn’t have money for heating. While even the Post covered the Baltimore story, it won’t ever connect such an issue to our utterly psychotic military spending. Part of how our corporate media manufactures consent for our illogical and highly immoral system is by leaving everything out of context, intentionally avoiding connecting the dots. The United Nations estimated it would take $30 billion a year to end world hunger and then in 2015 increased that number to $267 billion. Even if the correct figure is $267 billion, that’s still less than half of the over $600 billion we spend on “defense.” If we wanted it to be defense, why don’t we pay to end world hunger, at which point we would be the safest country in the world because no one wants to bomb the country that ended world hunger. Or we can continue to listen to the Post haggle with Donald Trump as to whether or not he’s built up our “depleted” military. Oh yeah, I almost forgot. The Post acts as if the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are over even though about 40,000 people were killed in Iraq in 2017, and we still have at least 11,000 troops in Afghanistan. But how does one declare a war is “over” when it was never really a war to begin with—but rather an ongoing assault of a population, designed to maintain endless instability in a region and allow the U.S. to hold our global empire? The Post misses tiny insignificant facts like that. [https://smhttp-ssl-62992.nexcesscdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Washington-Post9-1024-1024x429.jpg] Trump statement: “I’m the one that saved coal. I’m the one that created jobs. You know West Virginia is doing fantastically now.” Washington Post correction: West Virginia’s GDP increased 3 percent in the first quarter of 2017. The recent bump is due in part to the increased price of metallurgic coal, which is used to make steel, and a price increase in natural gas exports. West Virginia produces roughly 5 percent of the natural gas in the U.S. and as the price of natural gas rises, the demand for coal increases, spurring growth in the state. Trump can’t take credit for the change in prices, which fluctuate with market forces. As for ‘saving coal,’ there has barely been any job growth in the coal industry since Trump became president. According to the Bureau of Labor statistics, only 900 jobs have been created in the coal industry since Trump became president—an increase of less than 3 percent.” The Post corrects Trump’s assertion that coal jobs have returned to West Virginia. However, it doesn’t mention that coal is the dirtiest of all fuels and therefore is helping to send our planet down a death spiral of greenhouse gases. Something tells me most of its readers might like to know there won’t be a world for their grandkids to grow up in. We should all be wildly celebrating the move away from coal in an orgiastic manner. The Post’s correction is the equivalent of the president bragging that he brought hit man jobs back to West Virginia and then the Post saying: “In fact, hit man jobs have not returned as promised, and very few people have been professionally murdered in West Virginia in the past year.” The Post should have said: “In fact, coal jobs have not returned, and that is a good thing if we value the air in our lungs and the life in our bodies.” [https://smhttp-ssl-62992.nexcesscdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Washington-Post10-1024-1024x263.jpg] Trump statement: “Now that the individual mandate is officially killed, people have no idea how big a deal that was. It’s the most unpopular part of Obamacare. But now, Obamacare is essentially. … You know, you saw this. … It’s basically dead over a period of time.” Washington Post correction: “While the individual mandate was an important incentive for Americans to seek health insurance, it was only one part of a far-reaching law that remains intact. The repeal does not take effect until 2019, and enrollment in Obamacare has remained strong. The Congressional Budget Office says the marketplaces are expected to remain stable for years.” What The Washington Post won’t mention is that the U.S. is the only developed country without universal health care. And Obamacare was written by the health insurance industry (initially introduced by the GOP in the 1990s). This is an industry that by definition profits most when people are least taken care of. This doesn’t mean it isn’t great that more people have coverage than before Obamacare, but rather it’s pathetic that one of the richest countries in the world doesn’t cover everyone to begin with. That context might help in any correction on this issue. [https://smhttp-ssl-62992.nexcesscdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Washington-Post11-1024-1024x213.jpg] Trump statement: “We see the drugs pouring into the country, we need the wall.” Washington Post correction: “The wall will have virtually no effect on drugs coming into the country. According to reports by the DEA, the majority of drugs are smuggled through legal ports of entry or smuggled through underground tunnels. Whoa, whoa, whoa. If the Post really wants to correct Trump, it would mention that the catastrophic drug war is a war on our own people and was designed from the beginning to arrest black people and activists. Furthermore, in Portugal, where drugs have been decriminalized and are treated as a health problem instead of a crime problem, illicit drug use has decreased and so have overdoses. No so-called “correction” of Trump’s ridiculous statement that a wall will stop drug use is even remotely complete without talking about the context of the drug war. And here’s the thing—The Washington Post knows this. It knows everything I just stated. It’s even covered some of it in the past. And yet, in general, most of the time, it leaves out this context so that our nation continues arresting thousands upon thousands of people (of color) a year for small-time drug use. It seems the Post wants to have its coke and eat it, too. Overall, The Washington Post has filled its “corrections” with decontextualized manipulations of its own. (And I’ve covered only about two weeks out of 52.) The Post is lying to us as much as Trump is. Until we can see these issues for what they really are, we will never be able to change anything. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jan 11 01:39:25 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 01:39:25 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] CHINA TO FULLY FUND AFGHAN AIRBASE. Message-ID: * HOME * WORLD * BUSINESS * OPINION * TECH * VIRAL * RADIO * MULTIMEDIA * CARTOONS * BLOGS LISTEN LIVE * * * * * * * SEARCH [Chinese Premier Li Keqiang (R) talks with Afghan Chief Executive Officer Abdullah Abdullah at a signing ceremony at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, China, May 16, 2016] Dragon of the Mountains: China to Fully Fund Afghan Military Base © REUTERS/ Kim Kyung-Hoon ASIA & PACIFIC 03:46 11.01.2018Get short URL 0 10 The mountains are about to get a lot less lonely. China has announced that they will be footing the bill for the construction and equipping of a new base in northern Afghanistan - although they’ll leave the manning of the base to the Afghans themselves. Gen. Dawlat Waziri, a spokesman for the Afghan Defense Ministry, told the Fergana News Agency (FNA) that China is funding the base somewhere in the northeastern province of Badakhshan, which contains the 47-mile long mountainous border between the two countries. Waziri added that Beijing would handle all material and technical expenses: weapons and uniforms, military equipment, infrastructure and everything else. The exact location of the base has yet to be determined, but FNA added that it would be the beginning of what was intended to be significant security and counterterror cooperation between Afghanistan and China in the former nation's northern regions. [A Pakistan security personnel stands guard near the the Beijing-funded megaport of Gwadar, in southwestern Pakistan] © AFP 2017/ STR China to Build Second Foreign Naval Base, This Time in Pakistan The decision to build the base was made during a meeting between Chinese Defense Minister Chang Wanquan and his Afghan counterpart, Tariq Shah Bahrami, in December. Xu Qiliang, the vice chairman of China's Central Military Commission, who also attended the meeting, told China Military Online that Beijing would build the base sometime in 2018 to "strengthen pragmatic cooperation in areas of military exchange and anti-terrorism and safeguard the security of the two countries and the region, making contributions to the development of China-Afghanistan strategic partnership of cooperation". China isn't just doing it out of the kindness of their hearts, though. Badakhshan has increasingly become the home for Uighur militants who have used the Wakhjir Pass, the only crossing between the two countries, to move between Badakhshan and China's restive province of Xinjiang. [An aerial view of Djibouti] © AFP 2017/ JACQUES DEMARTHON Chinese Military Holds Live-Fire Drills at its First Overseas Base "China worries that Chinese Uighurs among the terrorists' ranks can cross into Chinese territory through Afghanistan and become a headache for the Chinese authorities," an anonymous Afghan security official told FNA. The Uighur minority of Xinjiang have a contentious relationship with the Han Chinese-controlled Beijing, and the two groups live almost entirely separately despite Xinjiang being home to large populations of both. Uighurs cannot serve in the government while holding Islamic views, and generally live in poverty even by regional standards. This has galvanized Uighur Islamic terrorist groups and subsequent Chinese government reprisals. Tensions exploded in mid-2009 when rioting Uighurs attacked Han Chinese in the regional capital of Urumqi, causing security forces to reply. Around 200 people were killed in a single day of rioting. [Type 901] CHINA DEFENSE OBSERVER China to Build Pier at Djibouti Base to Support East Africa Naval Missions Crossing between Afghanistan and China is extremely difficult because the Wakhjir Pass is closed to the public, has no road through it and is rendered impassable from ice and snow for about five months out of the year. However, militant and drug smuggling groups still manage to maintain routes through the pass. China has been aggressively pushing for stronger ties with its impoverished and war-torn neighbor, mediating disputes between Afghanistan and Pakistan and offering to involve Kabul in the $60 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor they plan to build with Islamabad. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Thu Jan 11 12:02:28 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 06:02:28 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] A sermon to go with your soda-water this morning Message-ID: (Mine’s San Pellegrino.) https://journal-neo.org/2018/01/09/usa-a-different-strategy-for-a-different-ambition/ —CGE -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jan 11 15:10:01 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:10:01 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Sunday, January 14th a must listen Message-ID: [Image may contain: 4 people, people smiling] Black Alliance for Peace 13 hrs Watch BAP members discuss U.S. militarism on the African continent at the Coalition Against U.S. Foreign Military Bases conference. Find the livestream on our Facebook page at 11:45 a.m., Sunday, Jan. 14, or view it at blackallianceforpeace.com/bases Stop by the conference if you're in or around Baltimore, Maryland: noforeignbases.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jan 11 16:05:18 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 16:05:18 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Reagan/KillerKoh Against 200, 000 Salvadoran Refugees & 14 year old boy Message-ID: And let us never forget that Killer Koh signed off on the drone murders of US Citizens Mr. Alwaki and His 16 year old son. Fab. “…particularly to the 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.” Chomsky {now 10,000+ people} Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 11, 2018 9:58 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Subject: Vienna_Convention_Article18 (1).pdf Vienna_Convention_Article18 (1).pdf file:///C:/Users/fboyle/Downloads/Vienna_Convention_Article18%20(1).pdf Sent from Mail for Windows 10 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jan 11 16:05:18 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 16:05:18 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Reagan/KillerKoh Against 200, 000 Salvadoran Refugees & 14 year old boy Message-ID: And let us never forget that Killer Koh signed off on the drone murders of US Citizens Mr. Alwaki and His 16 year old son. Fab. “…particularly to the 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.” Chomsky {now 10,000+ people} Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 11, 2018 9:58 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Subject: Vienna_Convention_Article18 (1).pdf Vienna_Convention_Article18 (1).pdf file:///C:/Users/fboyle/Downloads/Vienna_Convention_Article18%20(1).pdf Sent from Mail for Windows 10 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jan 11 21:57:22 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 21:57:22 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Reagan/KillerKoh Against 200, 000 Salvadoran Refugees & 14 year old boy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Situational awareness: President Trump has rejected a bipartisan plan to increase border security and let DACA recipients stay in the country, Sen. Dick Durbin told CNN this afternoon. P.S. — WaPo's Josh Dawsey reports Trump saying in the Oval Office when asked to restore protections for immigrants from El Salvador, Haiti and countries in Africa: “Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come 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: Thursday, January 11, 2018 10:05 AM To: 'David Green' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' ; 'C G Estabrook' Subject: Reagan/KillerKoh Against 200,000 Salvadoran Refugees & 14 year old boy And let us never forget that Killer Koh signed off on the drone murders of US Citizens Mr. Alwaki and His 16 year old son. Fab. “…particularly to the 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.” Chomsky {now 10,000+ people} Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 11, 2018 9:58 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vienna_Convention_Article18 (1).pdf Vienna_Convention_Article18 (1).pdf file:///C:/Users/fboyle/Downloads/Vienna_Convention_Article18%20(1).pdf Sent from Mail for Windows 10 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jan 11 21:57:22 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 21:57:22 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Reagan/KillerKoh Against 200, 000 Salvadoran Refugees & 14 year old boy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Situational awareness: President Trump has rejected a bipartisan plan to increase border security and let DACA recipients stay in the country, Sen. Dick Durbin told CNN this afternoon. P.S. — WaPo's Josh Dawsey reports Trump saying in the Oval Office when asked to restore protections for immigrants from El Salvador, Haiti and countries in Africa: “Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come 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: Thursday, January 11, 2018 10:05 AM To: 'David Green' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' ; 'C G Estabrook' Subject: Reagan/KillerKoh Against 200,000 Salvadoran Refugees & 14 year old boy And let us never forget that Killer Koh signed off on the drone murders of US Citizens Mr. Alwaki and His 16 year old son. Fab. “…particularly to the 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.” Chomsky {now 10,000+ people} Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 11, 2018 9:58 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vienna_Convention_Article18 (1).pdf Vienna_Convention_Article18 (1).pdf file:///C:/Users/fboyle/Downloads/Vienna_Convention_Article18%20(1).pdf Sent from Mail for Windows 10 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jan 11 22:08:30 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 22:08:30 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Reagan/KillerKoh Against 200, 000 Salvadoran Refugees & 14 year old boy References: Message-ID: … immigrants from El Salvador, Haiti and countries in Africa: “Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?” Trump Three decades ago, I went out to San Francisco to argue that their Original Sanctuary Resolution should include refugees from the Criminal Apartheid Regime in South Africa against a White Racist Law Professor from Southern Methodist U Law School in Dallas Texas who had no problems with South African Apartheid against Blacks at Hastings Law School, UCal, San Francisco free of charge. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 11, 2018 3:57 PM To: 'David Green' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' ; 'C G Estabrook' Subject: RE: Reagan/KillerKoh Against 200,000 Salvadoran Refugees & 14 year old boy Situational awareness: President Trump has rejected a bipartisan plan to increase border security and let DACA recipients stay in the country, Sen. Dick Durbin told CNN this afternoon. P.S. — WaPo's Josh Dawsey reports Trump saying in the Oval Office when asked to restore protections for immigrants from El Salvador, Haiti and countries in Africa: “Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come 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: Thursday, January 11, 2018 10:05 AM To: 'David Green' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; 'Joe Lauria' >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'Karen Aram' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; 'David Johnson' >; 'Mildred O'brien' >; 'C G Estabrook' > Subject: Reagan/KillerKoh Against 200,000 Salvadoran Refugees & 14 year old boy And let us never forget that Killer Koh signed off on the drone murders of US Citizens Mr. Alwaki and His 16 year old son. Fab. “…particularly to the 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.” Chomsky {now 10,000+ people} Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 11, 2018 9:58 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vienna_Convention_Article18 (1).pdf Vienna_Convention_Article18 (1).pdf file:///C:/Users/fboyle/Downloads/Vienna_Convention_Article18%20(1).pdf Sent from Mail for Windows 10 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jan 11 22:08:30 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 22:08:30 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Reagan/KillerKoh Against 200, 000 Salvadoran Refugees & 14 year old boy References: Message-ID: … immigrants from El Salvador, Haiti and countries in Africa: “Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?” Trump Three decades ago, I went out to San Francisco to argue that their Original Sanctuary Resolution should include refugees from the Criminal Apartheid Regime in South Africa against a White Racist Law Professor from Southern Methodist U Law School in Dallas Texas who had no problems with South African Apartheid against Blacks at Hastings Law School, UCal, San Francisco free of charge. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 11, 2018 3:57 PM To: 'David Green' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' ; 'C G Estabrook' Subject: RE: Reagan/KillerKoh Against 200,000 Salvadoran Refugees & 14 year old boy Situational awareness: President Trump has rejected a bipartisan plan to increase border security and let DACA recipients stay in the country, Sen. Dick Durbin told CNN this afternoon. P.S. — WaPo's Josh Dawsey reports Trump saying in the Oval Office when asked to restore protections for immigrants from El Salvador, Haiti and countries in Africa: “Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come 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: Thursday, January 11, 2018 10:05 AM To: 'David Green' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; 'Joe Lauria' >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'Karen Aram' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; 'David Johnson' >; 'Mildred O'brien' >; 'C G Estabrook' > Subject: Reagan/KillerKoh Against 200,000 Salvadoran Refugees & 14 year old boy And let us never forget that Killer Koh signed off on the drone murders of US Citizens Mr. Alwaki and His 16 year old son. Fab. “…particularly to the 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.” Chomsky {now 10,000+ people} Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 11, 2018 9:58 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vienna_Convention_Article18 (1).pdf Vienna_Convention_Article18 (1).pdf file:///C:/Users/fboyle/Downloads/Vienna_Convention_Article18%20(1).pdf Sent from Mail for Windows 10 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jan 11 22:59:38 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 22:59:38 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Oriental Review References: <001a1137340e4abe270562877c90@google.com> Message-ID: Oriental Review ________________________________ US, Israel step up hybrid war in Syria Posted: 11 Jan 2018 07:27 AM PST The US military objective is to gain access to the Mediterranean coast for the Kurdistan enclave it is creating in Syria without which the enclave will be landlocked and dependent critically on supply routes via Turkey or Iraq. The post US, Israel step up hybrid war in Syria appeared first on OrientalReview.org. You are subscribed to email updates from OrientalReview.org. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. Email delivery powered by Google Google, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Fri Jan 12 00:39:31 2018 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 18:39:31 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] This is where the new cold war between the U.S. and Russia began Message-ID: <00dc01d38b3d$cfde61c0$6f9b2540$@comcast.net> This is where the new cold war between the U.S. and Russia began. This article by journalist Robert Perry ( who exposed much of the Iran Contra scandal ) Describes the American vulture capitalist turned UK citizen ( in order to avoid paying U.S. taxes ) Bill Browder, began the process when he ( Browder ) was facing arrest warrants for fraud and tax evasion from the Russian government and fled the country and then began a phony story about how he ( Browder ) was not a crook but instead a " crusader " against Russian government corruption. Through Browder's immense wealth and lobbying ( bribing ) U.S. lawmakers he was able to get the U.S. and then Canada to enact the Magnitsky act ( economic sanctions against Russia ) .The producer of the documentary who is a critic of Putin originally began the film to tell Browder's story and in the process of research determined that Browder's story was all lies. The film has been essentially banned in the U.S. and Canada and is difficult to even find on the internet. How Russia-gate Met the Magnitsky Myth July 13, 2017 Exclusive: A documentary debunking the Magnitsky myth, which was an opening salvo in the New Cold War, was largely blocked from viewing in the West but has now become a factor in Russia-gate, reports Robert Parry. By Robert Parry Near the center of the current furor over Donald Trump Jr.'s meeting with a Russian lawyer in June 2016 is a documentary that almost no one in the West has been allowed to see, a film that flips the script on the story of the late Sergei Magnitsky and his employer, hedge-fund operator William Browder. The Russian lawyer, Natalie Veselnitskaya, who met with Trump Jr. and other advisers to Donald Trump Sr.'s campaign, represented a company that had run afoul of a U.S. investigation into money-laundering allegedly connected to the Magnitsky case and his death in a Russian prison in 2009. His death sparked a campaign spearheaded by Browder, who used his wealth and clout to lobby the U.S. Congress in 2012 to enact the Magnitsky Act to punish alleged human rights abusers in Russia. The law became what might be called the first shot in the New Cold War. According to Browder's narrative, companies ostensibly under his control had been hijacked by corrupt Russian officials in furtherance of a $230 million tax-fraud scheme; he then dispatched his "lawyer" Magnitsky to investigate and - after supposedly uncovering evidence of the fraud - Magnitsky blew the whistle only to be arrested by the same corrupt officials who then had him locked up in prison where he died of heart failure from physical abuse. Despite Russian denials - and the "dog ate my homework" quality of Browder's self-serving narrative - the dramatic tale became a cause celebre in the West. The story eventually attracted the attention of Russian filmmaker Andrei Nekrasov, a known critic of President Vladimir Putin. Nekrasov decided to produce a docu-drama that would present Browder's narrative to a wider public. Nekrasov even said he hoped that he might recruit Browder as the narrator of the tale. However, the project took an unexpected turn when Nekrasov's research kept turning up contradictions to Browder's storyline, which began to look more and more like a corporate cover story. Nekrasov discovered that a woman working in Browder's company was the actual whistleblower and that Magnitsky - rather than a crusading lawyer - was an accountant who was implicated in the scheme. So, the planned docudrama suddenly was transformed into a documentary with a dramatic reversal as Nekrasov struggles with what he knows will be a dangerous decision to confront Browder with what appear to be deceptions. In the film, you see Browder go from a friendly collaborator into an angry adversary who tries to bully Nekrasov into backing down. Blocked Premiere Ultimately, Nekrasov completes his extraordinary film - entitled "The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes" - and it was set for a premiere at the European Parliament in Brussels in April 2016. However, at the last moment - faced with Browder's legal threats - the parliamentarians pulled the plug. Nekrasov encountered similar resistance in the United States, a situation that, in part, brought Natalie Veselnitskaya into this controversy. https://consortiumnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/mdswofj6-860x400-300x1 40.jpg Film director Andrei Nekrasov, who produced "The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes." As a lawyer defending Prevezon, a real-estate company registered in Cyprus, on a money-laundering charge, she was dealing with U.S. prosecutors in New York City and, in that role, became an advocate for lifting the U.S. sanctions, The Washington Post reported. That was when she turned to promoter Rob Goldstone to set up a meeting at Trump Tower with Donald Trump Jr. To secure the sit-down on June 9, 2016, Goldstone dangled the prospect that Veselnitskaya had some derogatory financial information from the Russian government about Russians supporting the Democratic National Committee. Trump Jr. jumped at the possibility and brought senior Trump campaign advisers, Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner, along. By all accounts, Veselnitskaya had little or nothing to offer about the DNC and turned the conversation instead to the Magnitsky Act and Putin's retaliatory measure to the sanctions, canceling a program in which American parents adopted Russian children. One source told me that Veselnitskaya also wanted to enhance her stature in Russia with the boast that she had taken a meeting at Trump Tower with Trump's son. But another goal of Veselnitskaya's U.S. trip was to participate in an effort to give Americans a chance to see Nekrasov's blacklisted documentary. She traveled to Washington in the days after her Trump Tower meeting and attended a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing, according to The Washington Post. There were hopes to show the documentary to members of Congress but the offer was rebuffed. Instead a room was rented at the Newseum near Capitol Hill. Browder's lawyers. who had successfully intimidated the European Parliament, also tried to strong arm the Newseum, but its officials responded that they were only renting out a room and that they had allowed other controversial presentations in the past. Their stand wasn't exactly a profile in courage. "We're not going to allow them not to show the film," said Scott Williams, the chief operating officer of the Newseum. "We often have people renting for events that other people would love not to have happen." In an article about the controversy in June 2016, The New York Times added that "A screening at the Newseum is especially controversial because it could attract lawmakers or their aides." Heaven forbid! One-Time Showing So, Nekrasov's documentary got a one-time showing with Veselnitskaya reportedly in attendance and with a follow-up discussion moderated by journalist Seymour Hersh. However, except for that audience, the public of the United States and Europe has been essentially shielded from the documentary's discoveries, all the better for the Magnitsky myth to retain its power as a seminal propaganda moment of the New Cold War. https://consortiumnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/a854ac3c8d4c9e816cb556 90ca3da446-800x-300x273.jpg Financier William Browder (right) with Magnitsky's widow and son, along with European parliamentarians. After the Newseum presentation, a Washington Post editorial branded Nekrasov's documentary Russian "agit-prop" and sought to discredit Nekrasov without addressing his many documented examples of Browder's misrepresenting both big and small facts in the case. Instead, the Post accused Nekrasov of using "facts highly selectively" and insinuated that he was merely a pawn in the Kremlin's "campaign to discredit Mr. Browder and the Magnitsky Act." The Post also misrepresented the structure of the film by noting that it mixed fictional scenes with real-life interviews and action, a point that was technically true but willfully misleading because the fictional scenes were from Nekrasov's original idea for a docu-drama that he shows as part of explaining his evolution from a believer in Browder's self-exculpatory story to a skeptic. But the Post's deception is something that almost no American would realize because almost no one got to see the film. The Post concluded smugly: "The film won't grab a wide audience, but it offers yet another example of the Kremlin's increasingly sophisticated efforts to spread its illiberal values and mind-set abroad. In the European Parliament and on French and German television networks, showings were put off recently after questions were raised about the accuracy of the film, including by Magnitsky's family. "We don't worry that Mr. Nekrasov's film was screened here, in an open society. But it is important that such slick spin be fully exposed for its twisted story and sly deceptions." The Post's gleeful editorial had the feel of something you might read in a totalitarian society where the public only hears about dissent when the Official Organs of the State denounce some almost unknown person for saying something that almost no one heard. New Paradigm The Post's satisfaction that Nekrasov's documentary would not draw a large audience represents what is becoming a new paradigm in U.S. mainstream journalism, the idea that it is the media's duty to protect the American people from seeing divergent narratives on sensitive geopolitical issues. https://consortiumnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/twp26p1-300x188.jpg The Washington Post building in downtown Washington, D.C. (Photo credit: Washington Post) Over the past year, we have seen a growing hysteria about "Russian propaganda" and "fake news" with The New York Times and other major news outlets eagerly awaiting algorithms that can be unleashed on the Internet to eradicate information that groups like Google's First Draft Coalition deem "false." First Draft consists of the Times, the Post, other mainstream outlets, and establishment-approved online news sites, such as Bellingcat with links to the pro-NATO think tank, Atlantic Council. First Draft's job will be to serve as a kind of Ministry of Truth and thus shield the public from information that is deemed propaganda or untrue. In the meantime, there is the ad hoc approach that was applied to Nekrasov's documentary. Having missed the Newseum showing, I was only able to view the film because I was given a special password to an online version. >From searches that I did on Wednesday, Nekrasov's film was not available on Amazon although a pro-Magnitsky documentary was. I did find a streaming service that appeared to have the film available. But the Post's editors were right in their expectation that "The film won't grab a wide audience." Instead, it has become a good example of how political and legal pressure can effectively black out what we used to call "the other side of the story." The film now, however, has unexpectedly become a factor in the larger drama of Russia-gate and the drive to remove Donald Trump Sr. from the White House. Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America's Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 9579 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 20149 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 12822 bytes Desc: not available URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Fri Jan 12 01:51:42 2018 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 19:51:42 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Assange Granted Ecuador Citizenship to Secure 'Human Rights' Message-ID: <010601d38b47$e5982a50$b0c87ef0$@comcast.net> Assange Granted Ecuador Citizenship to Secure 'Human Rights' * WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is seen on the balcony of the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, Britain, May 19, 2017. WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is seen on the balcony of the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, Britain, May 19, 2017. | Photo: Reuters Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro (R) speaks during a meeting with ministers in Caracas, Venezuela January 5, 2017 Western Journalists Threaten Venezuela by Joe Emersberger Espinosa said that the government continues to work with the U.K. to "explore alternatives and options to resolve the case." After the surprising news was released two days ago, the Ecuadorean government confirmed in a press conference this morning that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been given citizenship in the Andean nation. In a press conference held today Ecuador's foreign minister, Maria Fernanda Espinosa reaffirmed that Julian Assange was granted Ecuadorean citizenship Dec. 21, 2017. Assange, who has been sheltered in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London since June 19, 2012 when he was granted political asylum, began the application in September. She stressed several times that Ecuador is following all national and international laws and is "dedicated to protecting the human rights" of Assange in this "delicate case." Despite the confirmed citizenship status, Espinosa said that the government continues to work with the U.K. to "explore alternatives and options to resolve the case." The foreign ministers said that her government tried to obtain diplomatic status for the Wikileaks founder within the United Kingdom on Dec. 20, but that the British government immediately denied the asylum seeker such status. Earlier this week Ecuador's foreign ministry released a statement that read: "Julian Assange received international protection from the Ecuadorean government in August 2012. "The current government inherited this issue and it's looking for solution alternatives, with full respect of national and international law, as well as human rights... in coordination with the United Kingdom, with which we have the best friendship and cooperation relations." Assange is committed to not "intervening in issues non-related with his asylum condition," as requested by Ecuadorian government, the statement continued. The Foreign Office in the UK has confirmed that Assange continues to face arrest for breaching bail conditions if he leaves the embassy premises. He fears that if arrested by UK authorities they he will be extradited to the United States whose government is looking to prosecute Assange for publishing thousands of U.S. classified military and diplomatic documents via his Wikileaks page. Rumors about Assange's condition were sparked Jan. 1 when he tweeted a 60-character code and a link to the song "Paper Planes" by British singer MIA. The Ecuadorean government has since insisted that "nothing has happened." In a picture posted Wednesday on his personal Twitter account, Assange appears wearing a jersey from Ecuador's national football team. The Australian activist now appears in Ecuador's Civil Registry database and holds an identity document: 'Julian Paul Assange' is registered in the Internal Revenue Service with document number 1729926483. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 68683 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 2295 bytes Desc: not available URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Fri Jan 12 01:55:05 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 19:55:05 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] This is where the new cold war between the U.S. and Russia began In-Reply-To: <00dc01d38b3d$cfde61c0$6f9b2540$@comcast.net> References: <00dc01d38b3d$cfde61c0$6f9b2540$@comcast.net> Message-ID: Timely and important. Unfortunately Robert Parry had a stroke on December 24 and says he’s forced to reduce his activity: he has nevertheless produced the following important statement on the US political establishment and corrupt journalism: . For an awful local example of what Parry’s talking about, see today’s News-Gazette, page 3, above the fold: an AP story brimming with lies and misinformation that I would not have thought possible just a few months ago. David Green and I will be discussing this dangerous nonsense and the circumstances that produced it on News from Neptune tomorrow, Jan. 12. The program is cablecast on Urbana Public TV and archived there; also on YouTube. There will be a link on the Facebook page for News from Neptune. —CGE > On Jan 11, 2018, at 6:39 PM, David Johnson via Peace-discuss wrote: > > This is where the new cold war between the U.S. and Russia began. This article by journalist Robert Parry ( who exposed much of the Iran Contra scandal ) Describes the American vulture capitalist turned UK citizen ( in order to avoid paying U.S. taxes ) Bill Browder, began the process when he ( Browder ) was facing arrest warrants for fraud and tax evasion from the Russian government and fled the country and then began a phony story about how he ( Browder ) was not a crook but instead a " crusader " against Russian government corruption. Through Browder's immense wealth and lobbying ( bribing ) U.S. lawmakers he was able to get the U.S. and then Canada to enact the Magnitsky act ( economic sanctions against Russia ) .The producer of the documentary who is a critic of Putin originally began the film to tell Browder's story and in the process of research determined that Browder's story was all lies. The film has been essentially banned in the U.S. and Canada and is difficult to even find on the internet. > How Russia-gate Met the Magnitsky Myth > July 13, 2017 > Exclusive: A documentary debunking the Magnitsky myth, which was an opening salvo in the New Cold War, was largely blocked from viewing in the West but has now become a factor in Russia-gate, reports Robert Parry. > By Robert Parry > Near the center of the current furor over Donald Trump Jr.’s meeting with a Russian lawyer in June 2016 is a documentary that almost no one in the West has been allowed to see, a film that flips the script on the story of the late Sergei Magnitsky and his employer, hedge-fund operator William Browder. > The Russian lawyer, Natalie Veselnitskaya, who met with Trump Jr. and other advisers to Donald Trump Sr.’s campaign, represented a company that had run afoul of a U.S. investigation into money-laundering allegedly connected to the Magnitsky case and his death in a Russian prison in 2009. His death sparked a campaign spearheaded by Browder, who used his wealth and clout to lobby the U.S. Congress in 2012 to enact the Magnitsky Act to punish alleged human rights abusers in Russia. The law became what might be called the first shot in the New Cold War. > According to Browder’s narrative, companies ostensibly under his control had been hijacked by corrupt Russian officials in furtherance of a $230 million tax-fraud scheme; he then dispatched his “lawyer” Magnitsky to investigate and – after supposedly uncovering evidence of the fraud – Magnitsky blew the whistle only to be arrested by the same corrupt officials who then had him locked up in prison where he died of heart failure from physical abuse. > Despite Russian denials – and the “dog ate my homework” quality of Browder’s self-serving narrative – the dramatic tale became a cause celebre in the West. The story eventually attracted the attention of Russian filmmaker Andrei Nekrasov, a known critic of President Vladimir Putin. Nekrasov decided to produce a docu-drama that would present Browder’s narrative to a wider public. Nekrasov even said he hoped that he might recruit Browder as the narrator of the tale. > However, the project took an unexpected turn when Nekrasov’s research kept turning up contradictions to Browder’s storyline, which began to look more and more like a corporate cover story. Nekrasov discovered that a woman working in Browder’s company was the actual whistleblower and that Magnitsky – rather than a crusading lawyer – was an accountant who was implicated in the scheme. > So, the planned docudrama suddenly was transformed into a documentary with a dramatic reversal as Nekrasov struggles with what he knows will be a dangerous decision to confront Browder with what appear to be deceptions. In the film, you see Browder go from a friendly collaborator into an angry adversary who tries to bully Nekrasov into backing down. > Blocked Premiere > Ultimately, Nekrasov completes his extraordinary film – entitled “The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes” – and it was set for a premiere at the European Parliament in Brussels in April 2016. However, at the last moment – faced with Browder’s legal threats – the parliamentarians pulled the plug. Nekrasov encountered similar resistance in the United States, a situation that, in part, brought Natalie Veselnitskaya into this controversy. > > Film director Andrei Nekrasov, who produced “The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes.” > As a lawyer defending Prevezon, a real-estate company registered in Cyprus, on a money-laundering charge, she was dealing with U.S. prosecutors in New York City and, in that role, became an advocate for lifting the U.S. sanctions, The Washington Post reported. > That was when she turned to promoter Rob Goldstone to set up a meeting at Trump Tower with Donald Trump Jr. To secure the sit-down on June 9, 2016, Goldstone dangled the prospect that Veselnitskaya had some derogatory financial information from the Russian government about Russians supporting the Democratic National Committee. Trump Jr. jumped at the possibility and brought senior Trump campaign advisers, Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner, along. > By all accounts, Veselnitskaya had little or nothing to offer about the DNC and turned the conversation instead to the Magnitsky Act and Putin’s retaliatory measure to the sanctions, canceling a program in which American parents adopted Russian children. One source told me that Veselnitskaya also wanted to enhance her stature in Russia with the boast that she had taken a meeting at Trump Tower with Trump’s son. > But another goal of Veselnitskaya’s U.S. trip was to participate in an effort to give Americans a chance to see Nekrasov’s blacklisted documentary. She traveled to Washington in the days after her Trump Tower meeting and attended a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing, according to The Washington Post. > There were hopes to show the documentary to members of Congress but the offer was rebuffed. Instead a room was rented at the Newseum near Capitol Hill. Browder’s lawyers. who had successfully intimidated the European Parliament, also tried to strong arm the Newseum, but its officials responded that they were only renting out a room and that they had allowed other controversial presentations in the past. > Their stand wasn’t exactly a profile in courage. “We’re not going to allow them not to show the film,” said Scott Williams, the chief operating officer of the Newseum. “We often have people renting for events that other people would love not to have happen.” > In an article about the controversy in June 2016, The New York Times added that “A screening at the Newseum is especially controversial because it could attract lawmakers or their aides.” Heaven forbid! > One-Time Showing > So, Nekrasov’s documentary got a one-time showing with Veselnitskaya reportedly in attendance and with a follow-up discussion moderated by journalist Seymour Hersh. However, except for that audience, the public of the United States and Europe has been essentially shielded from the documentary’s discoveries, all the better for the Magnitsky myth to retain its power as a seminal propaganda moment of the New Cold War. > > Financier William Browder (right) with Magnitsky’s widow and son, along with European parliamentarians. > After the Newseum presentation, a Washington Post editorial branded Nekrasov’s documentary Russian “agit-prop” and sought to discredit Nekrasov without addressing his many documented examples of Browder’s misrepresenting both big and small facts in the case. Instead, the Post accused Nekrasov of using “facts highly selectively” and insinuated that he was merely a pawn in the Kremlin’s “campaign to discredit Mr. Browder and the Magnitsky Act.” > The Post also misrepresented the structure of the film by noting that it mixed fictional scenes with real-life interviews and action, a point that was technically true but willfully misleading because the fictional scenes were from Nekrasov’s original idea for a docu-drama that he shows as part of explaining his evolution from a believer in Browder’s self-exculpatory story to a skeptic. But the Post’s deception is something that almost no American would realize because almost no one got to see the film. > The Post concluded smugly: “The film won’t grab a wide audience, but it offers yet another example of the Kremlin’s increasingly sophisticated efforts to spread its illiberal values and mind-set abroad. In the European Parliament and on French and German television networks, showings were put off recently after questions were raised about the accuracy of the film, including by Magnitsky’s family. > “We don’t worry that Mr. Nekrasov’s film was screened here, in an open society. But it is important that such slick spin be fully exposed for its twisted story and sly deceptions.” > The Post’s gleeful editorial had the feel of something you might read in a totalitarian society where the public only hears about dissent when the Official Organs of the State denounce some almost unknown person for saying something that almost no one heard. > New Paradigm > The Post’s satisfaction that Nekrasov’s documentary would not draw a large audience represents what is becoming a new paradigm in U.S. mainstream journalism, the idea that it is the media’s duty to protect the American people from seeing divergent narratives on sensitive geopolitical issues. > > The Washington Post building in downtown Washington, D.C. (Photo credit: Washington Post) > Over the past year, we have seen a growing hysteria about “Russian propaganda” and “fake news” with The New York Times and other major news outlets eagerly awaiting algorithms that can be unleashed on the Internet to eradicate information that groups like Google’s First Draft Coalition deem “false.” > First Draft consists of the Times, the Post, other mainstream outlets, and establishment-approved online news sites, such as Bellingcat with links to the pro-NATO think tank, Atlantic Council. First Draft’s job will be to serve as a kind of Ministry of Truth and thus shield the public from information that is deemed propaganda or untrue. > In the meantime, there is the ad hoc approach that was applied to Nekrasov’s documentary. Having missed the Newseum showing, I was only able to view the film because I was given a special password to an online version. > From searches that I did on Wednesday, Nekrasov’s film was not available on Amazon although a pro-Magnitsky documentary was. I did find a streaming service that appeared to have the film available. > But the Post’s editors were right in their expectation that “The film won’t grab a wide audience.” Instead, it has become a good example of how political and legal pressure can effectively black out what we used to call “the other side of the story.” The film now, however, has unexpectedly become a factor in the larger drama of Russia-gate and the drive to remove Donald Trump Sr. from the White House. > Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com). > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From karenaram at hotmail.com Fri Jan 12 15:22:30 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 15:22:30 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Activist detained and 18 arrested at Manhattan immigrant rights protest Message-ID: Activist detained and 18 arrested at Manhattan immigrant rights protest By Isaac Finn 12 January 2018 Following the detention of prominent immigrant rights activist Ravi Ragbir by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, 18 peaceful protesters were arrested by police at a demonstration in lower Manhattan yesterday morning. Ragbir, who is the executive director of the of the interfaith immigrants’ rights group New Sanctuary Coalition of NYC, legally immigrated from Trinidad and Tobago more than 25 years ago. After serving five years in prison for a wire fraud conviction, a judge ordered his deportation in 2006, but Ragbir received a stay of removal in 2011 and his case is reevaluated annually. [http://www.wsws.org/asset/2c79537d-37b3-4e34-9e12-1cacef9c265C/image.jpg?rendition=image480]The arrest of Ravi Ragbir According to Common Dreams, he had a “stay of removal,” which would prevent him from being deported, that was supposed to be in effect until next week. However, he was detained by ICE during one of his regularly scheduled check-ins. His detention coincided with a “Solidarity Vigil Against Deportation” that was called by a variety of religious, legal and immigrants’ rights organizations—including the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU), Faith in New York, Immigrant Defense Project and Northern Manhattan Coalition for Immigrant Rights. The vigil, which included over 200 protesters, gathered in Foley Square in Manhattan across the street from 26 Federal Plaza, where immigrants must check in with ICE officers. After it was announced that Ragbir had been detained, many protesters moved into the nearby street and attempted to block an ambulance in which he was being transported. A spokesperson from the Immigrant Defense Project later confirmed that Ragbir was placed in an ambulance because he had fainted while being detained by ICE. Videos that have surfaced on social media also show a heavy police presence, with NYPD officers forcibly pushing demonstrators out of the way of the ambulance and grabbing others to arrest them with zip-tie handcuffs. The 18 arrested protesters were then forced to sit on the road as the police attempted to disperse the demonstration. Democratic City Council members Ydanis Rodriguez and Jumaane Williams were among those arrested. [http://www.wsws.org/asset/203a9e91-0681-47fe-8fc1-d3cf2c85161C/image.jpg?rendition=image480] The decision to detain Ragbir, who has been called a “fixture in the immigrants’ rights movement,” and immediately clamp down on a protest in support of him reflects the attempts to intimidate large numbers of workers and youth who are opposed to the attack on immigrants. These supporters of immigrant rights are also hostile to the ongoing negotiations between Democrats and the Trump administration over the potential elimination of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival (DACA) policy, which defers the deportation of individuals who came to America as minors. Ragbir’s detention comes only a few days after Jean Montrevil, a founding member of the New Sanctuary Coalition, was also taken into custody by ICE. A WSWS reporting team spoke with demonstrators at the vigil for Ragbir: Mahfuzur Rahman, a student at City College of New York, said, “We know with Ravi, their entire accusation is based on a conviction from 20 years ago, which he served and since then he’s been an excellent citizen—he’s a better citizen than me! So why should his rights and all he’s done for his community be stripped away just because of this lunatic in the [White] House? And seeing how he’s even married to a US citizen, so he is a citizen, but they want to strip him of every single thing that the naturalization process allowed him. So, it makes no sense to send him back to Trinidad, and I’m here today with my fellow people just to do what is necessary. “I support most immigrant organizations here in NYC, and again, an attack on one of us is an attack on all of us. He was just going for a check-in, that’s the only thing.” Brittany Ramos DeBarros, a veteran, said, “I think this goes against the ethics and values that our nation is supposed to stand for, and as a person who cares about the moral integrity of our country, I think that it’s important that we stand up, especially given the long history of federal agents targeting leaders of resistance and liberation movements to dismantle the momentum of those movements. “I don’t think it’s a mistake that Ravi is such an engaged leader at a time when supporting immigrants’ rights is so unpopular with a certain few. So, I want them to know that even though they have the power of federal sanction sometimes, that we won’t take that lying down and that we know what this is really about.” [http://www.wsws.org/asset/5e628d6b-8c8f-4221-b69f-d51afc396a0N/image.jpg?rendition=image480]Julia Julia, another protester, noted, “Honestly, [Ragbir’s arrest] appears to be because of collaboration between the NYPD and ICE. He has been instrumental in advocating for rights of immigrants, especially undocumented immigrants, and perhaps it’s supposed to send a message to those of us who are in the movement, sort of a scare tactic and an attempt to damage the movement. “The NYPD is definitely not required to collaborate with ICE, and [New York City Mayor Bill] de Blasio has said previously that he would prevent it, as part of being a so-called Sanctuary City. “When undocumented people are arrested by the NYPD, their information is vulnerable to being shared with a federal database that ICE can access. That isn’t to say that that’s what happened here, but just to say that we know there are some ways in which the NYPD enables ICE to continue raids and targeting undocumented folks. I know that they’re not legally required to share the information with ICE, and that they’re not legally required to abet ICE raids, but I know that’s what’s happening here.” [http://www.wsws.org/en/media/photos/legacy/frontpage/201801webinar490.jpg] Fight Google's censorship! Google is blocking the World Socialist Web Sitefrom search results. To fight this blacklisting: Share this article with friends and coworkers * Facebook * Twitter * E-Mail * Reddit Commenting Discussion Rules » -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brussel at illinois.edu Fri Jan 12 21:30:42 2018 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 21:30:42 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: NIAC Calls for Release of Demonstrators References: Message-ID: NIAC comes clean… Begin forwarded message: From: National Iranian American Council > Subject: NIAC Calls for Release of Demonstrators Date: January 11, 2018 at 7:43:16 PM CST To: mkb4 at me.com Reply-To: National Iranian American Council > [https://gallery.mailchimp.com/ec0d04df4f6d2288f04feee31/images/0d73a631-0fa4-4016-b35d-3027823a76c5.png] FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Trita Parsi Phone: 202-386-2303 Email: tparsi at niacouncil.org NIAC Calls for Release of Demonstrators Washington, D.C. – National Iranian American Council issued the following statement: "We reiterate our call on the Iranian government to honor its human rights obligations, including by releasing all prisoners of conscience. The government has detained thousands of Iranians in the midst of the demonstrations and at least 2 have died while in detention. This is in addition to at least 21 who died during the initial protests that began on December 28. Many Iranians continue to demonstrate outside of Evin and other prisons were protesters have been held. The Iranian government needs to answer calls for their release, allow an independent investigation of the detainees' deaths, and prosecute anyone involved in the deaths of detainees and of Iranians expressing their right to free expression and peaceful assembly. "We continue to support targeted sanctions against human rights violators in the Iranian government and urge that these measures be carried out multilaterally and in a manner that does not punish ordinary people. We also continue to urge American officials and companies to take necessary steps to ensure that online communications tools are fully available for Iranians and that sanctions are not unintentionally aiding Iran’s government in censoring Internet communications. "It is up to Iranians living in Iran to decide their country’s destiny. As outside observers, we will continue our efforts to defend their rights and that the international community presses the Iranian government to respect its human rights obligations. We stand in solidarity with all Iranians who seek a government that respects the human rights and dignity of Iranians everywhere and democratically represents its people." ### [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/outline-color-facebook-48.png] Share [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/outline-color-twitter-48.png] Tweet [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/outline-color-forwardtofriend-48.png] Forward Help secure our rights and peace through a strong Iranian-American voice. Contribute today. Follow Us: [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/outline-gray-facebook-48.png] [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/outline-gray-twitter-48.png] [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/outline-gray-instagram-48.png] [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/outline-gray-link-48.png] Want fewer emails? Update your subscription | Unsubscribe NIAC 1629 K St NW, Ste 503 Washington, DC 20006 Add us to your address book You are subscribed to NIAC updates. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kmedina67 at gmail.com Sat Jan 13 04:27:00 2018 From: kmedina67 at gmail.com (kmedina67) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 22:27:00 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Arrests at Rep. Hoyer's office - pending Yemen War legislation In-Reply-To: <0d6pflorvij4edfmj28f62ke.1515817259280@email.android.com> Message-ID: <5a598a98.43b6240a.cf639.274e@mx.google.com> 7 arrested, protesting Hoyer's office about Yemen. My heroes. Pace e bene,Karen Medina -------- Original message --------From: Voices for Creative Nonviolence Date: 1/12/18 18:24 (GMT-06:00)Subject: Arrests at Rep. Hoyer's office - pending Yemen War legislation Seven activists incl. K. Kelly were arrested 1/11 sitting in at Rep Steny Hoyer's office seeking his pledge to bring a House vote on the Yemen War. Seven activists, including Voices' Kathy Kelly, were arrested yesterday Jan 11th for refusing to leave Rep. Steny Hoyer's Washington DC office unless the Congressman (and House Minority Whip) committed to bring a vote on legislation to end the U.S.-Saudi war against Yemen.  Under intense bombardment and naval blockade, Yemen is poised to become the new century's worst case of epidemic and famine; in the worst global famine year in the history of the UN. The activists, convened by the National Campaign for Nonviolent Resistance, voiced three main demands: that Rep. Hoyer speak out against Saudi war crimes, that he condemn any further U.S. arms sales to the Saudi-led coalition bombarding and blockading Yemen, and that he help bring to a vote (and ensure much-needed debate on) House Resolution 81 invoking war powers to end U.S. involvement in the Yemen war.  (They also urged Rep. Hoyer to vigorously, publicly, reject President Trump’s cruel dehumanization of the world's most desperate places as “shithole countries").   Arrested in the action were Kathy, Janice Sevre-Duszynska, Phil Runkel, Malachy Kilbride, Joy First, Alice Sutter, and Richard Ochs. Voices' Brian Terrell had been arrested in a previous action coordinated by Witness Against Torture in Washington that day. Below please find our friend Justin Alexander's analysis of comparable Senate legislation capable of bringing the issue far more squarely before the American public, and, in his analysis, of ending the war: Senate War Powers resolution on ending unauthorised US support for the war in Yemen - A bipartisan Senate resolution on Yemen will be introduced in mid-January and has a good chance of passing. Situation in Yemen The Yemeni civil war, between Houthi rebels and the Saudi-backed government, is nearing its third anniversary. It is considered the world’s worst humanitarian crisis by the UN: 11m people (39% of population) in “acute need”. 8m are at risk of famine. 2m are internally displaced. The cholera epidemic has surpassed a million cases, the worst recorded globally in modern times. Other diseases are emerging, such as diphtheria, given the collapse of the health system and infrastructure. The Houthi rebels continue to control the highlands, where the majority of the population live, and the frontlines have only shifted slightly in the last six months. One area of advance by government forces is the west coast, moving towards Hodeida port, the source of most food imports into rebel territory. Disruption of the port would severely harm humanitarian aid (which was temporarily halted in Nov-Dec when Saudi Arabia intensified its blockade in response to Houthi missile firings). There is no clear end-game in sight and the Houthis could conceivably hold out for years, even if Hodeida fell. Even if the government were to eventually defeat the Houthis, fresh conflicts are likely given deep divisions within the anti-Houthi camp (such as South Yemen separatists), President Hadi’s unpopularity and the potential for jihadist groups (Al Qaeda, Islamic State) to fill vacuums, as they had done repeatedly. The longer the war continues, the harder it will be to stabalise and rebuild the country. A negotiated end to the war, based on a consensual federal structure, together with sustained regional/international aid offers the best hope for regional stability and humanitarian improvements. Recent developments Despite commitments by Saudi Arabia to the US to improve targeting and reduce civilian casualties, there is little evidence of this happening. UN records show hundreds of civilian casualties a month from Saudi airstrikes, including 54 civilians killed in a market on 26 December. The war in Yemen was further complicated in December when the former president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, tried to shift sides from the Houthis to the Saudis, but was swiftly killed. This has created another vector of internal conflict (between Houthis and some Saleh loyalists). It has also reinforced the (misleading) Saudi narrative that the rebels are an Iranian-proxy which, together with Houthi missile firings at Riyadh, has further reduced prospects for peace negotiations. Bipartisan resolution There is growing frustration with the war in Yemen in both parties and chambers. 4 Republicans supported the June 2017 resolution to block arms sales to Saudi Arabia. 3 Republicans cosponsored House Con. Res 81 (although the House leadership blocked its progress). The National Defence Authorisation Act (14-Nov-17) included provisions requiring reports to Congress on efforts to reduce harm to civilians in Yemen and on the administration’s strategy in Yemen. President Trump Tweeted on Dec 6th that Saudi Arabia should “completely allow food, fuel, water and medicine to reach the Yemeni people… immediately”. There are indications that even more Republicans will support (and fewer Democrats oppose) a more limited resolution on War Powers, rather than on arms sales. Some conservative groups (such as FreedomWorks and Campaign for Liberty), are supportive of the resolution. Potential impact If US refuelling was removed, Saudi Arabia’s airstrike capacity would be severely reduced. This would reduce the direct civilian casualties (and US culpability in them) and could help shift the focus towards peace negotiations. Implementation of the War Powers Act would increase the accountability of the executive to Congress, something which could help reduce the risk of reckless US involvement in conflicts in the future.     Share Tweet Forward to Friend This email was sent to kmedina67 at gmail.com why did I get this?    unsubscribe from this list    update subscription preferences Voices for Creative Nonviolence · 1249 W Argyle St · Chicago, IL 60640 · USA @media only screen and (max-width: 480px){ table#canspamBar td{font-size:14px !important;} table#canspamBar td a{display:block !important; margin-top:10px !important;} } -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sat Jan 13 13:44:05 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 13:44:05 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FACE BOOK ANNOUNCES MAJOR PLAN TO CENSOR NEWS ACCOUNT Message-ID: Facebook announces major plan to censor news content 13 January 2018 Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced Friday that the world’s largest social network is initiating major changes aimed at deprioritizing news and political content on individual users’ news feeds in favor of “personal moments.” The change is the most significant effort to date to censor online information. Facebook is currently a major source of news for hundreds of millions of people throughout the world. The number of global Facebook users has increased from 100 million in 2008 to more than 2 billion. According to a Pew Research poll last November, 45 percent of Americans use Facebook for news content, more than any other social media platform. It has become a significant mechanism for the organization of protests and the spread of information outside of the control of the major media conglomerates. It is this that Facebook, working closely with the major capitalist states, wants to end. In his post announcing the decision, Zuckerberg said that the company is “making a major change to how we build Facebook … from focusing on helping you find relevant content to helping you have more meaningful social interactions.” The manifesto is filled with the type of Orwellian language characteristic of an authoritarian regime. The changes are motivated, Zuckerberg explains, by “a responsibility to make sure our services aren’t just fun to use, but also good for people’s well-being.” By demoting news content and emphasizing posts from friends and family, Facebook will ensure that its users “feel more connected and less lonely,” and the overall effect will be “good for our well-being.” In other words, Facebook knows what is good for you, and it is not news and information about the state of the world. Such “public content” will be increasingly removed from Facebook news feeds, while those news posts that are shown “will be held to the same standard—it should encourage meaningful interactions between people.” In the dictatorship envisioned by Orwell in his book 1984, Big Brother and his apologists in the media use “Newspeak” to paper over the perpetual state of war and dictatorship by turning things into their opposite: war is peace. In Zuckerberg’s “funspeak,” the suppression of peoples’ ability to transmit information is described as an effort to “bring us closer together with the people that matter to us.” Censorship in the guise of a Hallmark greeting card. Zuckerberg states, moreover, that Facebook “started making changes in this direction last year,” that is, that censorship has already begun. The World Socialist Web Site has observed that over the past six months, content posted on Facebook, particularly videos, have a significantly lower reach than in the past, while readers have reported having their own posts of WSWS articles flagged as “spam.” The political motivation for the decision—a 180-degree shift from the company’s content strategy—is underscored by the fact that it will likely have a significant negative impact on Facebook’s bottom line. In his post, Zuckerberg acknowledged that he expects “the time people spend on Facebook and some measures of engagement will go down.” This, combined with an anticipated drop in advertising revenue from content publishers, caused Facebook stock to fall 9 percent on Friday. But more important issues are at stake. Facebook’s action exemplifies the embrace by the major technology companies of corporate-state censorship. From companies whose stated aim is to propagate, share and disseminate information, they have become instruments of suppression and control. One year ago, Zuckerberg would have taken his statement, included in his post yesterday, that “video and other public content have exploded on Facebook in the past couple of years” as a point of pride. Now, he treats it as dangerous. This shift is the outcome of a campaign led by the Democratic Party and US intelligence agencies. In coordination with media outlets including the New York Times and Washington Post, they have developed a neo-McCarthyite argument that Russian influence in US politics, primarily through the mechanism of social media, has corrupted “American democracy” and is “sowing divisions” within the country—an argument taken up by Germany, France and other states. In a series of hearings at the end of last year, US lawmakers made clear that they expected Facebook, Twitter and Google to implement a sweeping crackdown on political speech. Just this past week, Democrats in the US Senate released a major report on alleged Russian intervention in US and European politics that concludes that “social media platforms are a key conduit of disinformation campaigns that undermine democracies.” The real concern of the ruling class is not Russian “meddling,” but the growth of social and political opposition, in the United States and internationally. As the Trump administration pursues its reactionary, militarist and antidemocratic agenda—including the abolition of net neutrality—the Democrats are terrified that unending war and unsustainable levels of social inequality will produce a social explosion. Five months ago, the World Socialist Web Site warned that Google was seeking to censor leftwing, antiwar, and progressive web sites as part of a broad turn toward censorship by the major technology companies. The assault on democratic rights and free speech has far progressed in just half a year. The ruling class is taking rapid actions in anticipation of a major war and the explosion of social unrest this year. Under these conditions the online webinar, “Organizing resistance to Internet censorship,” featuring WSWS Chairperson David North and journalist Chris Hedges, is extraordinarily timely. The live videostream will be broadcast on Tuesday, January 16, from 7:00 to 8:30 pm Eastern Standard Time. We call on all our readers to register today at endcensorship.org and make plans to participate in this critical international event. Andre Damon [http://www.wsws.org/en/media/photos/legacy/frontpage/201801webinar490.jpg] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sat Jan 13 15:03:23 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 15:03:23 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Arrests at Rep. Hoyer's office - pending Yemen War legislation In-Reply-To: <5a598a98.43b6240a.cf639.274e@mx.google.com> References: <5a598a98.43b6240a.cf639.274e@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Mine heroes too Karen. How come we never get arrested? Probably because Rodney is never there to be bothered by pesky protestors. On Jan 12, 2018, at 20:27, kmedina67 via Peace-discuss > wrote: 7 arrested, protesting Hoyer's office about Yemen. My heroes. Pace e bene, Karen Medina -------- Original message -------- From: Voices for Creative Nonviolence > Date: 1/12/18 18:24 (GMT-06:00) Subject: Arrests at Rep. Hoyer's office - pending Yemen War legislation [https://gallery.mailchimp.com/ad474c00c83953a2b8e225340/images/4c01e163-8f70-41bd-a693-1b550c3e103b.png] [https://gallery.mailchimp.com/ad474c00c83953a2b8e225340/images/e8cfa1bb-1fab-4095-b722-7f3da30bf79e.png] Seven activists, including Voices' Kathy Kelly, were arrested yesterday Jan 11th for refusing to leave Rep. Steny Hoyer's Washington DC office unless the Congressman (and House Minority Whip) committed to bring a vote on legislation to end the U.S.-Saudi war against Yemen. Under intense bombardment and naval blockade, Yemen is poised to become the new century's worst case of epidemic and famine; in the worst global famine year in the history of the UN. The activists, convened by the National Campaign for Nonviolent Resistance, voiced three main demands: that Rep. Hoyer speak out against Saudi war crimes, that he condemn any further U.S. arms sales to the Saudi-led coalition bombarding and blockading Yemen, and that he help bring to a vote (and ensure much-needed debate on) House Resolution 81 invoking war powers to end U.S. involvement in the Yemen war. (They also urged Rep. Hoyer to vigorously, publicly, reject President Trump’s cruel dehumanization of the world's most desperate places as “shithole countries"). Arrested in the action were Kathy, Janice Sevre-Duszynska, Phil Runkel, Malachy Kilbride, Joy First, Alice Sutter, and Richard Ochs. Voices' Brian Terrell had been arrested in a previous action coordinated by Witness Against Torture in Washington that day. Below please find our friend Justin Alexander's analysis of comparable Senate legislation capable of bringing the issue far more squarely before the American public, and, in his analysis, of ending the war: Senate War Powers resolution on ending unauthorised US support for the war in Yemen - A bipartisan Senate resolution on Yemen will be introduced in mid-January and has a good chance of passing. Situation in Yemen * The Yemeni civil war, between Houthi rebels and the Saudi-backed government, is nearing its third anniversary. * It is considered the world’s worst humanitarian crisis by the UN: * 11m people (39% of population) in “acute need”. 8m are at risk of famine. 2m are internally displaced. * The cholera epidemic has surpassed a million cases, the worst recorded globally in modern times. Other diseases are emerging, such as diphtheria, given the collapse of the health system and infrastructure. * The Houthi rebels continue to control the highlands, where the majority of the population live, and the frontlines have only shifted slightly in the last six months. * One area of advance by government forces is the west coast, moving towards Hodeida port, the source of most food imports into rebel territory. Disruption of the port would severely harm humanitarian aid (which was temporarily halted in Nov-Dec when Saudi Arabia intensified its blockade in response to Houthi missile firings). * There is no clear end-game in sight and the Houthis could conceivably hold out for years, even if Hodeida fell. * Even if the government were to eventually defeat the Houthis, fresh conflicts are likely given deep divisions within the anti-Houthi camp (such as South Yemen separatists), President Hadi’s unpopularity and the potential for jihadist groups (Al Qaeda, Islamic State) to fill vacuums, as they had done repeatedly. * The longer the war continues, the harder it will be to stabalise and rebuild the country. A negotiated end to the war, based on a consensual federal structure, together with sustained regional/international aid offers the best hope for regional stability and humanitarian improvements. Recent developments * Despite commitments by Saudi Arabia to the US to improve targeting and reduce civilian casualties, there is little evidence of this happening. UN records show hundreds of civilian casualties a month from Saudi airstrikes, including 54 civilians killed in a market on 26 December. * The war in Yemen was further complicated in December when the former president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, tried to shift sides from the Houthis to the Saudis, but was swiftly killed. This has created another vector of internal conflict (between Houthis and some Saleh loyalists). * It has also reinforced the (misleading) Saudi narrative that the rebels are an Iranian-proxy which, together with Houthi missile firings at Riyadh, has further reduced prospects for peace negotiations. Bipartisan resolution * There is growing frustration with the war in Yemen in both parties and chambers. * 4 Republicans supported the June 2017 resolution to block arms sales to Saudi Arabia. * 3 Republicans cosponsored House Con. Res 81 (although the House leadership blocked its progress). * The National Defence Authorisation Act (14-Nov-17) included provisions requiring reports to Congress on efforts to reduce harm to civilians in Yemen and on the administration’s strategy in Yemen. * President Trump Tweeted on Dec 6th that Saudi Arabia should “completely allow food, fuel, water and medicine to reach the Yemeni people… immediately”. * There are indications that even more Republicans will support (and fewer Democrats oppose) a more limited resolution on War Powers, rather than on arms sales. Some conservative groups (such as FreedomWorks and Campaign for Liberty), are supportive of the resolution. Potential impact * If US refuelling was removed, Saudi Arabia’s airstrike capacity would be severely reduced. This would reduce the direct civilian casualties (and US culpability in them) and could help shift the focus towards peace negotiations. * Implementation of the War Powers Act would increase the accountability of the executive to Congress, something which could help reduce the risk of reckless US involvement in conflicts in the future. [https://gallery.mailchimp.com/ad474c00c83953a2b8e225340/images/a5d31915-89ff-4125-943d-f35fb1a8d340.png] [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/outline-dark-facebook-48.png] Share [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/outline-dark-twitter-48.png] Tweet [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/outline-dark-forwardtofriend-48.png] Forward to Friend This email was sent to kmedina67 at gmail.com why did I get this? unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences Voices for Creative Nonviolence · 1249 W Argyle St · Chicago, IL 60640 · USA _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C20610b4839304442da8a08d55a3df6a3%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636514144532401846&sdata=cOtjE%2BEJ9%2Bp2G0%2FtMahg5cDXdJ8WFl8ADWUuhDnpAdM%3D&reserved=0 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From r-szoke at illinois.edu Sat Jan 13 18:49:25 2018 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 18:49:25 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are you stupid, crazy or evil? Or all 3? References: Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: From: "Szoke, Ron" > Subject: Pinker Date: January 13, 2018 To bigots & fanatics, the “real issue” is always the same: Your personal moral character. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Social Media Is Making Us Dumber. Here’s Exhibit A. - The New York Times.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 70053 bytes Desc: Social Media Is Making Us Dumber. Here’s Exhibit A. - The New York Times.pdf URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sat Jan 13 18:52:01 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 12:52:01 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Identity politics rides again Message-ID: <6DD4D310-FCB6-49FB-8C6D-59C3FEDB2B9C@gmail.com> 'Trump just doesn't get it. It's OK to bomb these countries, run death squads, subvert their govts, wreck their economies. But you don't call them 'shit holes' because that's racist.' [David Traynier] And the political establishment wants you to concentrate on Trump's racism rather than his continuation of Obama's policy of bombing these countries, running death squads, subverting their governments, and wrecking their economies - because of course that's their policy. (And they're afraid he might not carry it out.) —CGE From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jan 13 19:00:43 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 19:00:43 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Are you stupid, crazy or evil? Or all 3? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Yeah well Stevie Pinker Fully supported Harvard’s NeoConning President Larry Summers to the bitter end, even after Larry said that women are dumber than men in math and science. Stevie is no progressive. Fab. Francis 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2018 12:49 PM To: peace-discuss Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are you stupid, crazy or evil? Or all 3? Begin forwarded message: From: "Szoke, Ron" > Subject: Pinker Date: January 13, 2018 To bigots & fanatics, the “real issue” is always the same: Your personal moral character. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sat Jan 13 19:08:40 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 13:08:40 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are you stupid, crazy or evil? Or all 3? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ron— Does that mean that the ‘#Resistance’ - concentrating as it is on Trump’s personal moral character (which disqualifies him as president) - contains bigots and fanatics? Is it stupid, crazy, or evil? Or all 3? —CGE > On Jan 13, 2018, at 12:49 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss wrote: > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: "Szoke, Ron" > > Subject: Pinker > Date: January 13, 2018 > > > > To bigots & fanatics, the “real issue” is always the same: Your personal moral character. > _______________________________________________ > 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 Sat Jan 13 20:56:42 2018 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 14:56:42 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are you stupid, crazy or evil? Or all 3? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <99216A34-A1F9-4EFC-94CF-91CDDC8B511D@illinois.edu> "Chomsky versus Pinker on Human Nature and Politics” James McGilvray Introduction: Differences and justifications The political writings of Steven Pinker and Noam Chomsky differ in style, audience, and content. Pinker is a stylist; he wrote a book (2014) advis- ing others how to write. Chomsky’s fact- and irony-rich works demand the reader’s critical participation; they do not try to persuade or charm. Pinker’s work is welcomed by the establishment; Chomsky’s criticism is ignored or rejected. Pinker’s writing expresses few qualms about the social hierarchies, differences in power, capacity to dominate and acquire, and unequal rewards of capitalist economic systems—systems that by their natures and in prac- tice induce considerable disparities in income, power, and wealth. Chomsky is an egalitarian who holds that everyone should have an equal say in eco- nomic and political matters that affect them, even suggesting that an ideal system would accord equal reward to all (1981). Pinker declares Chomsky’s egalitarian views naïve. In The Blank State (2004: 302), he says Chomsky’s socioeconomic ideal (anarchosyndicalism) is a romantic notion ‘innocent of modern evolutionary theory with its demonstration of ubiquitous conflicts of genetic interest’. By contrast, the evolutionary psychology Pinker defends (2005) paints a Hobbesian ‘darker view of human nature’. Its hallmarks of competition, distrust, and the pur- suit of glory (Pinker, 2002) appear to justify the unequal socioeconomic systems that Chomsky criticizes. Evolutionary psychology can justify only if it offers an objective and uni- versal science of human nature, and it can be universal and objective only if it is a natural science. Chomsky holds that it is not: evolutionary psychol- ogy does not qualify as a natural science. It is not that there are no natural sciences of the mind, and in principle of human nature. Chomsky’s science of language is a natural science (Chomsky and McGilvray, 2012: hereafter, C&M). And Chomsky holds that a natural science of human nature might be able to justify anarchosyndicalism (Chomsky, 1970, 1987), although in a very indirect way. I explain how below. Apparently, what seem to be remote academic disagreements over what counts as a natural science of mind are relevant to the justification of economic and political institutions. So I begin by sketching the differences in Pinker’s and Chomsky’s views of how to construct natural sciences of mental systems. Pinker and Chomsky on the sciences of mind Pinker and Chomsky agree that what makes Homo sapiens distinct (what constitutes our distinct nature) can be traced to our minds and what they provide us in terms of cognitive capacities. They agree too that whatever makes us unique must result from biological evolution. If science is to get a grip on what makes us unique, it must do so by acknowledging that what a biblical tradition calls ‘special creation’ is a product of biologically based evolutionary change. In other crucial ways, however, they disagree. Pinker and other evolutionary psychologists assume that what they call ‘natural selection’ operates over long time spans, typically involving mul- tiple ‘selected’ mutations resulting in complex mind/brain systems that solve practical (action-related) problems. Organisms (or their genes) sup- posedly benefit from some mutations because ‘selected’ mutations enhance the capacity to survive and produce progeny in specific environments. The process of mutation and selection yields internal systems with complex ‘designs’: innate computational systems that allow the organism to deal with the relevant problems. Current humans have many internal problem- solving systems, some of which remain beneficial in the relevant sense, some not—not because of change in social or natural environments. To find these systems, the evolutionary psychologist focuses on the atti- tudes, choices, capacities, preferences, and behaviours of contemporary humans, seeking both those that benefit and those that are problematic. They make guesses about which systems were ‘selected’ in some specified environment(s) by guessing what would solve problems posed by that envi- ronment, or (now) not. They typically (e.g. Cosmides and Tooby, 2005) conceive of the mind/brain as a computer that ‘runs’ a cluster of more-or- less devoted computational programs, each configured to solve a specific kind of environmentally posed problem or problems. Like many other evolu- tionary psychologists, Pinker (2005) adopts a version of what Fodor (1998a; 1998b) calls a ‘computational theory of mind’. To determine internal pro- grams, they do backward engineering: they try to figure out what design a system/program must have to solve problems well in a specified environ- ment. This strategy is reflected in Pinker and Bloom’s (1990): for them, the language system evolved through improvements in the capacity to communicate linguistically… > On Jan 13, 2018, at 1:00 PM, Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Yeah well Stevie Pinker Fully supported Harvard’s NeoConning President Larry Summers to the bitter end, even after Larry said that women are dumber than men in math and science. Stevie is no progressive. Fab. > > Francis 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2018 12:49 PM > To: peace-discuss > Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are you stupid, crazy or evil? Or all 3? > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: "Szoke, Ron" > Subject: Pinker > Date: January 13, 2018 > > > > To bigots & fanatics, the “real issue” is always the same: Your personal moral character. > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sat Jan 13 21:35:11 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 15:35:11 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] 'Nuclear [sic] deal' Message-ID: <3411FC61-7E62-4FB4-AFDC-2DFE3D94817B@gmail.com> https://www.rt.com/news/415822-iran-nuclear-deal-survive-trump/ 'Iran nuclear deal survived year one of Trump’s presidency, can go the distance' – former adviser — RT World News The Iran nuclear deal will survive the Trump presidency because it is in the national interest of the US, says a former adviser to Iran’s nuclear negotiation team. Kaveh Afrasiabi says it is a win-win. On Friday, the Trump administration opted to extend sanctions relief for Iran for another 120 days, a decision that will, for now, prevent the landmark 2015 nuclear deal from falling through. Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif hit back at Donald Trump for trying to scupper the nuclear deal, saying that “Iran strongly announces that it will make no measure beyond its JCPOA commitments and will make no changes in the nuclear deal either now or in the future.” RT discussed the issue with Kaveh Afrasiabi, a former adviser to Iran’s nuclear negotiation team and author of “Iran Nuclear Accord and the Remaking of the Middle East”. RT: Why has Trump extended the sanctions relief for Iran if he is so opposed to the deal? Kaveh Afrasiabi: First of all, a small, yet significant sigh of relief that President Trump ultimately listened to the sound advice of his top advisers as well as the various European leaders by sticking with the deal and not scuttling it as he has repeatedly vowed to do so. So the deal has now survived year one of Trump’s presidency, and my hunch is that it will continue to do so in year two and the remainder of Trump’s presidency, for a good reason – because it is in the national interest of the US, it is a win-win. And it puts to rest international anxieties about Iran’s potential proliferation. And we’ve heard from the various European leaders just a couple of days ago that this is a working deal and IAEA through 9 reports has confirmed that Iran has fully fulfilled its obligations. So, there is really no rationale or justification for Trump to go against the deal and scrap it and really land a big stamp on the US’ credibility on the international scene. Most political observers complain that they don’t understand what Trump is going to do. I don’t agree with him simply because he doesn’t act upon political analysis or approach. The only way to give rationale for what he does – he has a businessman’s mentality, he runs the foreign policy of the US according to that businessman’s mentality…It is a zero sum game…That is what he does: he keeps saying that this is my last time, but actually I wouldn’t expect for a second that he can pull out from this multilateral deal because all his partners oppose this. - Dr. Maged Botros, professor of political sciences Helwan University RT: Trump’s statement sounds like an ultimatum. He says “either fix the deal, or the US will withdraw.” Is this a viable strategy? Kaveh Afrasiabi: I really don’t think so. I characterized the announcement as one step forward, one step backward. He keeps the deal intact yet on shaky grounds. We heard similar ultimatums back in October and nothing happened… This is the president that makes ad-hoc decisions and you have to go one day at a time and don’t [bet] on his ultimatum today because this deal serves US national interests as confirmed by Defense Secretary Mattis, Rex Tillerson and others. I really doubt that this ultimatum will work because you cannot mix in non-nuclear and conventional issues such as Iran’s ballistic missile issue with the nuclear issue because then what kind of standards will you use? Saudi Arabia has ballistic missiles; Israel has ballistic missiles. And this will widen the net of negotiations to such a vacuous stage where negotiations on these issues will become impossible. RT: Do you think, despite his criticism of the deal, he will have the backbone to walk away from it if it’s not revised to Washington's liking? If the EU stuck by it, but the US walked away from the agreement – what would that mean? Would it fall through? KA: We will be back to square one of the Iranian nuclear crisis with the Iranians explicitly warning that they will resume their full scale nuclear activities, including enrichment activities. And what the Trump administration wants to do is to make permanent some temporary provisions of this deal which restrict Iran’s nuclear rights under the non-proliferation treaty. And of course, no politician in Iran will consent to that. It would be national suicide, political suicide. It is really unrealistic and unwise expectation by the Trump administration that it can turn those temporary provisions into something permanent. And it also has a very bad misreading of the nuclear accord, because the accord imposes some restrictions that are long-term, such as restrictive monitoring of Iran’s facilities under the additional protocol which will continue forever and Iran will legislate it, if the deal keeps going, if it is not scuttled. ### -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jan 13 21:44:47 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 21:44:47 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are you stupid, crazy or evil? Or all 3? In-Reply-To: <99216A34-A1F9-4EFC-94CF-91CDDC8B511D@illinois.edu> References: <99216A34-A1F9-4EFC-94CF-91CDDC8B511D@illinois.edu> Message-ID: Stevie is just a Closet NeoCon. His "evolutionary psychology" is just warmed over Sociobaloneyism. Fab. 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: Carl G. Estabrook [mailto:galliher at illinois.edu] Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2018 2:57 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: peace-discuss Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Are you stupid, crazy or evil? Or all 3? "Chomsky versus Pinker on Human Nature and Politics” James McGilvray Introduction: Differences and justifications The political writings of Steven Pinker and Noam Chomsky differ in style, audience, and content. Pinker is a stylist; he wrote a book (2014) advis- ing others how to write. Chomsky’s fact- and irony-rich works demand the reader’s critical participation; they do not try to persuade or charm. Pinker’s work is welcomed by the establishment; Chomsky’s criticism is ignored or rejected. Pinker’s writing expresses few qualms about the social hierarchies, differences in power, capacity to dominate and acquire, and unequal rewards of capitalist economic systems—systems that by their natures and in prac- tice induce considerable disparities in income, power, and wealth. Chomsky is an egalitarian who holds that everyone should have an equal say in eco- nomic and political matters that affect them, even suggesting that an ideal system would accord equal reward to all (1981). Pinker declares Chomsky’s egalitarian views naïve. In The Blank State (2004: 302), he says Chomsky’s socioeconomic ideal (anarchosyndicalism) is a romantic notion ‘innocent of modern evolutionary theory with its demonstration of ubiquitous conflicts of genetic interest’. By contrast, the evolutionary psychology Pinker defends (2005) paints a Hobbesian ‘darker view of human nature’. Its hallmarks of competition, distrust, and the pur- suit of glory (Pinker, 2002) appear to justify the unequal socioeconomic systems that Chomsky criticizes. Evolutionary psychology can justify only if it offers an objective and uni- versal science of human nature, and it can be universal and objective only if it is a natural science. Chomsky holds that it is not: evolutionary psychol- ogy does not qualify as a natural science. It is not that there are no natural sciences of the mind, and in principle of human nature. Chomsky’s science of language is a natural science (Chomsky and McGilvray, 2012: hereafter, C&M). And Chomsky holds that a natural science of human nature might be able to justify anarchosyndicalism (Chomsky, 1970, 1987), although in a very indirect way. I explain how below. Apparently, what seem to be remote academic disagreements over what counts as a natural science of mind are relevant to the justification of economic and political institutions. So I begin by sketching the differences in Pinker’s and Chomsky’s views of how to construct natural sciences of mental systems. Pinker and Chomsky on the sciences of mind Pinker and Chomsky agree that what makes Homo sapiens distinct (what constitutes our distinct nature) can be traced to our minds and what they provide us in terms of cognitive capacities. They agree too that whatever makes us unique must result from biological evolution. If science is to get a grip on what makes us unique, it must do so by acknowledging that what a biblical tradition calls ‘special creation’ is a product of biologically based evolutionary change. In other crucial ways, however, they disagree. Pinker and other evolutionary psychologists assume that what they call ‘natural selection’ operates over long time spans, typically involving mul- tiple ‘selected’ mutations resulting in complex mind/brain systems that solve practical (action-related) problems. Organisms (or their genes) sup- posedly benefit from some mutations because ‘selected’ mutations enhance the capacity to survive and produce progeny in specific environments. The process of mutation and selection yields internal systems with complex ‘designs’: innate computational systems that allow the organism to deal with the relevant problems. Current humans have many internal problem- solving systems, some of which remain beneficial in the relevant sense, some not—not because of change in social or natural environments. To find these systems, the evolutionary psychologist focuses on the atti- tudes, choices, capacities, preferences, and behaviours of contemporary humans, seeking both those that benefit and those that are problematic. They make guesses about which systems were ‘selected’ in some specified environment(s) by guessing what would solve problems posed by that envi- ronment, or (now) not. They typically (e.g. Cosmides and Tooby, 2005) conceive of the mind/brain as a computer that ‘runs’ a cluster of more-or- less devoted computational programs, each configured to solve a specific kind of environmentally posed problem or problems. Like many other evolu- tionary psychologists, Pinker (2005) adopts a version of what Fodor (1998a; 1998b) calls a ‘computational theory of mind’. To determine internal pro- grams, they do backward engineering: they try to figure out what design a system/program must have to solve problems well in a specified environ- ment. This strategy is reflected in Pinker and Bloom’s (1990): for them, the language system evolved through improvements in the capacity to communicate linguistically… > On Jan 13, 2018, at 1:00 PM, Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Yeah well Stevie Pinker Fully supported Harvard’s NeoConning President Larry Summers to the bitter end, even after Larry said that women are dumber than men in math and science. Stevie is no progressive. Fab. > > Francis 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] > On Behalf Of Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2018 12:49 PM > To: peace-discuss > Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are you stupid, crazy or evil? Or all 3? > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: "Szoke, Ron" > Subject: Pinker > Date: January 13, 2018 > > > > To bigots & fanatics, the “real issue” is always the same: Your personal moral character. > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jan 13 22:00:43 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 22:00:43 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are you stupid, crazy or evil? Or all 3? In-Reply-To: References: <99216A34-A1F9-4EFC-94CF-91CDDC8B511D@illinois.edu> Message-ID: The Harvard Psychos Department is a total fraud with Stevie the Closet Neo-Con Sociobaloneyist, Dick Hernnstein the die-hard bigot and racist against African Americans and Bud Skinner who used to demand that his female grad students sleep with him in order to get their PHDs--The Old Goat. Everyone at Harvard knew it and did nothing about it. Harvard's Droit de Seigneur. And speaking of pseudo-shrink frauds, the former chair of the UI Psychos Department Manny Donchin and his Top Henchman had a contract with the CIA to develop a better lie detector test for them using our students as their guinea pigs. Fab. 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2018 3:45 PM To: Estabrook, Carl G Cc: peace-discuss Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Are you stupid, crazy or evil? Or all 3? Stevie is just a Closet NeoCon. His "evolutionary psychology" is just warmed over Sociobaloneyism. Fab. 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: Carl G. Estabrook [mailto:galliher at illinois.edu] Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2018 2:57 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: peace-discuss Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Are you stupid, crazy or evil? Or all 3? "Chomsky versus Pinker on Human Nature and Politics” James McGilvray Introduction: Differences and justifications The political writings of Steven Pinker and Noam Chomsky differ in style, audience, and content. Pinker is a stylist; he wrote a book (2014) advis- ing others how to write. Chomsky’s fact- and irony-rich works demand the reader’s critical participation; they do not try to persuade or charm. Pinker’s work is welcomed by the establishment; Chomsky’s criticism is ignored or rejected. Pinker’s writing expresses few qualms about the social hierarchies, differences in power, capacity to dominate and acquire, and unequal rewards of capitalist economic systems—systems that by their natures and in prac- tice induce considerable disparities in income, power, and wealth. Chomsky is an egalitarian who holds that everyone should have an equal say in eco- nomic and political matters that affect them, even suggesting that an ideal system would accord equal reward to all (1981). Pinker declares Chomsky’s egalitarian views naïve. In The Blank State (2004: 302), he says Chomsky’s socioeconomic ideal (anarchosyndicalism) is a romantic notion ‘innocent of modern evolutionary theory with its demonstration of ubiquitous conflicts of genetic interest’. By contrast, the evolutionary psychology Pinker defends (2005) paints a Hobbesian ‘darker view of human nature’. Its hallmarks of competition, distrust, and the pur- suit of glory (Pinker, 2002) appear to justify the unequal socioeconomic systems that Chomsky criticizes. Evolutionary psychology can justify only if it offers an objective and uni- versal science of human nature, and it can be universal and objective only if it is a natural science. Chomsky holds that it is not: evolutionary psychol- ogy does not qualify as a natural science. It is not that there are no natural sciences of the mind, and in principle of human nature. Chomsky’s science of language is a natural science (Chomsky and McGilvray, 2012: hereafter, C&M). And Chomsky holds that a natural science of human nature might be able to justify anarchosyndicalism (Chomsky, 1970, 1987), although in a very indirect way. I explain how below. Apparently, what seem to be remote academic disagreements over what counts as a natural science of mind are relevant to the justification of economic and political institutions. So I begin by sketching the differences in Pinker’s and Chomsky’s views of how to construct natural sciences of mental systems. Pinker and Chomsky on the sciences of mind Pinker and Chomsky agree that what makes Homo sapiens distinct (what constitutes our distinct nature) can be traced to our minds and what they provide us in terms of cognitive capacities. They agree too that whatever makes us unique must result from biological evolution. If science is to get a grip on what makes us unique, it must do so by acknowledging that what a biblical tradition calls ‘special creation’ is a product of biologically based evolutionary change. In other crucial ways, however, they disagree. Pinker and other evolutionary psychologists assume that what they call ‘natural selection’ operates over long time spans, typically involving mul- tiple ‘selected’ mutations resulting in complex mind/brain systems that solve practical (action-related) problems. Organisms (or their genes) sup- posedly benefit from some mutations because ‘selected’ mutations enhance the capacity to survive and produce progeny in specific environments. The process of mutation and selection yields internal systems with complex ‘designs’: innate computational systems that allow the organism to deal with the relevant problems. Current humans have many internal problem- solving systems, some of which remain beneficial in the relevant sense, some not—not because of change in social or natural environments. To find these systems, the evolutionary psychologist focuses on the atti- tudes, choices, capacities, preferences, and behaviours of contemporary humans, seeking both those that benefit and those that are problematic. They make guesses about which systems were ‘selected’ in some specified environment(s) by guessing what would solve problems posed by that envi- ronment, or (now) not. They typically (e.g. Cosmides and Tooby, 2005) conceive of the mind/brain as a computer that ‘runs’ a cluster of more-or- less devoted computational programs, each configured to solve a specific kind of environmentally posed problem or problems. Like many other evolu- tionary psychologists, Pinker (2005) adopts a version of what Fodor (1998a; 1998b) calls a ‘computational theory of mind’. To determine internal pro- grams, they do backward engineering: they try to figure out what design a system/program must have to solve problems well in a specified environ- ment. This strategy is reflected in Pinker and Bloom’s (1990): for them, the language system evolved through improvements in the capacity to communicate linguistically… > On Jan 13, 2018, at 1:00 PM, Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Yeah well Stevie Pinker Fully supported Harvard’s NeoConning President Larry Summers to the bitter end, even after Larry said that women are dumber than men in math and science. Stevie is no progressive. Fab. > > Francis 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] > On Behalf Of Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2018 12:49 PM > To: peace-discuss > Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are you stupid, crazy or evil? Or all 3? > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: "Szoke, Ron" > Subject: Pinker > Date: January 13, 2018 > > > > To bigots & fanatics, the “real issue” is always the same: Your personal moral character. > _______________________________________________ > 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 Sat Jan 13 22:28:27 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 22:28:27 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Help keep the momentum going for January 16 Hedges/North meeting References: <434lRvxEoNKF3KPeYcYf7dopzM5pDQZeUGHd0vQY@www4.wsws.org> Message-ID: Live video webinar with Chris Hedges and David North: Organizing resistance to Internet censorship [https://www.wsws.org/img/title.png] Dear WSWS readers, Support is growing for the World Socialist Web Site's upcoming livestream event, "Organizing Resistance to Internet Censorship" featuring David North and Chris Hedges, to be held Tuesday, January 16 at 7 PM EST. Register today! [https://www.wsws.org/asset/b2218ba4-097f-4840-83a2-90e3b90e3691?rendition=image320] Award-winning Australian journalist and filmmaker John Pilger threw his support behind the meeting, writing: "As a journalist and filmmaker who has long navigated the mainstream, I offer my support to this important discussion between Chris Hedges and David North." Pilger called the WSWS, Wikileaks, Counterpunch, and other left-wing news sources "crucial," and said "the filtering and limiting of Google searches of these sites is rank censorship ... The matter is urgent; voices must be raised! I urge my colleagues to break their silence." Attendees from six continents and dozens of countries have signed-up for this world event even as Google, Facebook, and other platforms continue to censor articles from the WSWS. Keep our momentum going! Read and share today's perspective by Andre Damon, "Facebook announces major plan to censor news content " Share this new video to social media and build awareness of the January 16 event! [https://www.wsws.org/en/media/photos/legacy/frontpage/201801webinar340.jpg?v=2] Thank you, World Socialist Web Site [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/color-facebook-48.png] Share [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/color-twitter-48.png] Tweet [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/color-forwardtofriend-48.png] Forward Articles: Copyright (C) 2018 wsws.org, All rights reserved. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- To be unsubscribed from the World Socialist Web Site mailing list, simply click on the link below: Unsubscribe karenaram at hotmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sun Jan 14 04:49:27 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 22:49:27 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fro the astute editor of Current Affairs Message-ID: currentaffairs.org Trump Exceptionalism Will Kill Every Last One Of Your Brain Cells by Nathan J. Robinson 14-17 minutes Before concluding that Trump’s actions are unprecedented, better check whether that’s actually true… “I can’t believe in the history of the White House any president has ever spoken the words that I heard our president speak yesterday.” That was Senator Dick Durbin’s reaction to Donald Trump’s instantly infamous “shithole countries” remark. But what I can’t believe is that a United States Senator (and grown man) could think Donald Trump was the first foul-mouthed racist to inhabit the Oval Office. We have LBJ on tape saying the n-word, after all, and there was almost no ethnic group that Richard Nixon didn’t make a bigoted comment about at one point or another. (His White House tapes contain remarks about “Jews, blacks, Italian-Americans and Irish-Americans.”) We can dismiss Durbin’s remark as a bit of rhetoric, of course. He didn’t mean it literally, but was expressing the degree to which Trump’s disgusting prejudices depart from the expected standard of “presidential” conduct. (Even if the actual standard of presidential conduct has often been roughly on this level.) But many Democrats do actually believe, implicitly or explicitly, in a form of “Trump Exceptionalism,” which holds that Donald Trump is an entirely aberrant departure from previous presidents, whose conduct is of an unprecedented level of awfulness. In narrating Trump’s presidency as totally different from what came before, though, they often end up exaggerating the extent to which Trump’s actions are actually unprecedented (or “unpresidented”). That’s a concerning tendency because it lead to the forgetting of history, but also because it ends up exonerating prior presidents for inexcusable acts. Exhibit A here is the rehabilitation of George W. Bush , who is responsible for an inconceivable amount of death and carnage, but who is increasingly seen as dignified and statesmanlike when compared to Donald Trump. Bush himself encourages that view by occasionally issuing denunciations of Trump’s less defensible outbursts. The more Trump is depicted as an aberrant departure from a sound and principled norm, the better Bush seems . The irony here is that so far, measured on Number Of Illegal Wars That Killed Half A Million Innocent People , Bush is far worse than Trump. And though Trump’s immigration policies are uniquely cruel, much of the rest of Trump’s agenda is simply orthodox Republican politics. Massive tax cuts for corporations, gutting consumer protection, eliminating ObamaCare: I struggle to think of any of Trump’s policies that put him outside the mainstream of the Republican Party. In saying this, I’m not downplaying how bad Trump is, but emphasizing how bad the rest of the American right is. My major worry, which many other leftists have given voice to, is that because so much rage is focused on Trump specifically, who is seen as personally unique and unlike everyone else, a far-right politician who did not exhibit some of these peculiar Trump-specific traits would be far more easily “normalized” and accepted as legitimate. If Tom Cotton, a truly frightening man whose immigration positions seem functionally identical to Trump’s , were to run for president in a few years, I’m not sure we’d see the same level of liberal fury, because Cotton wouldn’t be so stupid as to actually use the word “shithole” to describe the countries he’d give the same treatment to as Trump. And while Trump may have called Haiti and Africa “shitholes,” at least he hasn’t, say, denied an ongoing genocide (as Bill Clinton did with Rwanda ) or pushed to lower the minimum wage in Haiti (as Obama’s State Department did in 2009 ). The United States has always treated the Haitian people as expendable shithole-dwellers, as Paul Farmer documented in his important and underrated book The Uses of Haiti . (By the way, here is what Haiti is actually like .) To see a particularly extreme example of Trump Exceptionalism, consider the framework put forth by Harvard professors Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt in their new book How Democracies Die . In a column about their work, Nicholas Kristof explained their criteria for what constitutes a “dangerous authoritarian leader: 1. The leader shows only a weak commitment to democratic rules. 2. He or she denies the legitimacy of opponents. 3. He or she tolerates violence. 4. He or she shows some willingness to curb civil liberties or the media…. “With the exception of Richard Nixon, no major-party presidential candidate met even one of these four criteria over the last century,” they say, which sounds reassuring. Unfortunately, they have one update: “Donald Trump met them all.” Note that they say that, except Nixon, zero U.S. presidents of the last century meet even one of the stated criteria. None of them have “tolerated violence,” which apparently doesn’t includeembracing mass murdering dictators like Indonesia’s Suharto , or wiping out an entire city of people with an atomic bomb , or dropping 250 million cluster bombs on Laos , or burning down virtually every town in North Korea , or training Latin American death squad leaders , or supporting violent coups by brutal military juntas , or torturing people to death . Presumably, we are talking about violence within our borders, which likewise doesn’t include turning police into soldiers and locking vast numbers of people in cages . Likewise, none of them have in any way showed a willingness to curb civil liberties, meaning that the construction of a massive ubiquitous state surveillance apparatus has no implications for civil liberties. Likewise, unilaterally expanding the power of the executive branch has no implications for one’s “commitment to democratic rules,” and nor does offering rich people exemptions from the criminal justice system . Levitsky and Ziblatt, in their book, seem most concerned with #2, the denying of “legitimacy” to the other side, and the erosion of the “norms” underpinning democracy. Democracy, for them, does not necessarily mean that government should actually do what the public wants it to do (since it doesn’t and never has ). Rather, it means “recognizing that our political rivals are decent, patriotic, law-abiding citizens—that they love our country and respect the Constitution just as we do. It means that even if we believe our opponents’ ideas to be foolish or wrong‐headed, we do not view them as an existential threat.” Civility and respect, then, rather than actual public participation in policy-making, are what matters, and someone who doesn’t respect their political opponents is anti-democratic. If you don’t think George W. Bush is “decent” and “law-abiding,” then—and I don’t, because I think he’s a morally bankrupt war criminal—you are no better than Trump. I dwell on Levitsky and Ziblatt because their book actually offers a highly illuminating insight into how this kind of Harvard liberalism conceives of politics. Although they are mainly concerned with proving that Donald Trump is a monstrous departure from the norm, it quickly becomes clear that their standard for what constitutes “authoritarianism” would encompass a broad range of anti-establishment candidates, including Bernie Sanders: What kinds of candidates tend to test positive on a litmus test for authoritarianism? Very often, populist outsiders claiming to represent the voice of “the people,” wage war on what they depict as a corrupt and conspiratorial elite. Populists tend to deny the legitimacy of established parties, attacking them as undemocratic and even unpatriotic.. They tell voters that the existing system is not really a democracy but instead has been hijacked, corrupted, or rigged by the elite. And they promise to bury that elite and return power to “the people.” And when one of these candidates comes alone, one that attacks “established parties” as “undemocratic,” telling voters that the existing system is “corrupt,” Levitsky and Ziblatt make it clear that political parties need to act as “gatekeepers” to ensure that the candidates do not win: Potential demagogues exist in all democracies, and occasionally, one or more of them strike a public chord. But in some democracies, political leaders heed the warning signs and take steps to ensure that authoritarians remain on the fringes, far from the centers of power. When faced with the rise of extremists or demagogues, they make a concerted effort to isolate and defeat them. Although mass responses to extremist appeals matter, what matters more is whether political elites, and especially parties, serve as filters. Put simply, political parties are democracy’s gatekeepers. They then explain what political parties ought to do to fulfill this “gatekeeping” function. Let me quote it at length, because it’s fascinating: Keeping authoritarian politicians out of power is more easily said than done. Democracies, after all, are not supposed to ban parties or prohibit candidates from standing for election, and we do not advocate such measures. The responsibility for filtering out authoritarians lies, rather, with political parties and party leaders: democracy’s gatekeepers.Successful gatekeeping requires that mainstream parties isolate and defeat extremist forces, a behavior political scientist Nancy Bermeo calls “distancing.” Prodemocratic parties may engage in distancing in several ways. First, they can keep would-be authoritarians off party ballots at election time. This requires that they resist the temptation to nominate these extremists for higher office even when they can deliver votes… Parties can root out extremists in the grass roots of their own ranks… [W]henever extremists emerge as serious electoral contenders, mainstream parties must forge a united front to defeat them. To quote Linz, they must be willing to “join with opponents ideologically distant but committed to the survival of the democratic political order.” In normal circumstances, this is almost unimaginable. Picture Senator Edward Kennedy and other liberal Democrats campaigning for Ronald Reagan, or the British Labour Party and their trade union allies endorsing Margaret Thatcher. Each party’s followers would be infuriated at this seeming betrayal of principles. But in extraordinary times, courageous party leadership means putting democracy and country before party and articulating to voters what is at stake. Here, then, we have two Harvard professors arguing that when a candidate comes along alleging that party elites are rigging the system against voters, party elites need to respond by… rigging the system against voters. Note that it doesn’t matter whether the candidates are correct to say that the party is undemocratic and corrupt. As soon as they have made the charge, they become a “populist authoritarian” who must be stopped at all costs so that the “democratic political order” can survive. The euphemisms here are downright Orwellian, although to be honest Oceania was a little more subtle in its propaganda against Eurasia and Eastasia. We can see here a ready-built justification for the “superdelegate” system, as well as the DNC’s collusion with the Clinton campaign against Bernie Sanders. If you accept Levitsky and Ziblatt’s logic, democracy itself compels party elites to make sure that populist candidates are “isolated and defeated,” and “kept off party ballots at election time.” That may still be true even if those candidates stand a better chance of winning than the party elite’s preferred nominee (“Even when they can deliver votes”), meaning that an electable populist is worse than a disliked establishment candidate. The logic here is simple: once you believe that “democracy” requires “respect for the other’s decency” any criticism of the system that is too strong (e.g. “I think my opponent is corrupt and morally noxious”) cannot be tolerated, because it rejects democracy. So, in the interests of democracy, one must use undemocratic means to suppress the criticism. (Levitsky and Ziblatt also have, of course, a lot of stuff about how the Founders believed strongly in checks on democracy. This is true: James Madison believed that a central task of government was to “protect the minority of the opulent against the majority,” and “philosopher king”-type rhetoric about how democracy should only be entrusted to the “responsible” and “intelligent” has been a constant in American liberal thinking.) In fact, we can even see that for a certain type of liberal, if a “populist” won the Democratic nomination, the correct course of action would be to support the Republican. As Levitsky and Ziblatt say, even if the party membership would be upset at a seeming betrayal of principles, anything is justified to keep the “authoritarians” out of power. This somewhat confirms my theory that if Bernie Sanders had been nominated by the Democrats, many of the Democratic elite would have rather jumped ship to the Republican Party than support him. (Only the threat of Trump might have kept them from doing so, though I still suspect a number of them would have been begging Michael Bloomberg to run.) We saw exactly this in England, where the Blair wing of the Labour Party seemed like it would rather destroy the Labour Party and preserve Conservative power than allow Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership to continue. That might seem like madness, but How Democracies Die shows that it’s the perfectly rational consequence of this ideology. (Indeed, Barack Obama apparently preferred Theresa May’s conservatives over Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour in the last election.) It’s very important, then, to carefully scrutinize perspectives that single out Donald Trump as a unique threat to something called “democracy.” I do thin k Donald Trump is a more dangerous individual than nearly any prior president. But it’s not because he calls the system “corrupt” and is a racist who uses swear words, it’s because he might press the nuclear button in some irrational fit of pique. (Then again, JFK nearly did exactly that …) I am under no illusion, though, that Trump is the first president to pander to white supremacists or treat Haitians like crap . Beware anyone who says that Trump is threatening to erode our democracy, because they’re assuming we already have one. If you appreciate our work, please consider making a donation or purchasing a subscription . Current Affairs is not for profit and carries no outside advertising. We are an independent media institution funded entirely by subscribers and small donors, and we depend on you in order to continue to produce high-quality work. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sun Jan 14 13:41:22 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2018 13:41:22 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Announcement of Rally References: Message-ID: RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Session Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jan 14 13:48:25 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2018 13:48:25 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! 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, January 14, 2018 7:45 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Session Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jan 14 13:48:25 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2018 13:48:25 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! 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, January 14, 2018 7:45 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Session Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sun Jan 14 15:29:49 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2018 15:29:49 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] LIVE STREAMING SHORTLY OF CONFERENCE ON MILITARY BASES Message-ID: https://youtu.be/Evz1DPTfq_g From karenaram at hotmail.com Sun Jan 14 16:32:31 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2018 16:32:31 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Good article, and true.... Message-ID: http://nationalinterest.org/feature/heres-whats-store-us-russia-relations-24040 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sun Jan 14 16:57:48 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2018 10:57:48 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] From the astute editor of Current Affairs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <04F998C2-7FBA-4F7D-A073-E3E1A1A8DC2E@gmail.com> As an undergraduate I took the popular course taught by Stanley Hoffmann (1928-2015), who was member of my House (where J. K. Galbraith conducted an even more valuable luncheon seminar) - along with serious political thinkers like the late Perry Bullard, Marshall Ganz, and Loring Jetton. They were all propaedeutic to the political criticism of US government crimes in the late 1960s, at what Noam Chomsky called in my hearing, “the academy for the passive and obedient in Harvard Square." By 1969 about 70% of the public had come to regard the Vietnam war as “fundamentally wrong and immoral,” not “a mistake,” largely as a result of the impact of student protest on general consciousness. I was also fortunate enough to be as a grad student a ‘teaching fellow’ (as we said then) for Stuart Hughes . Hoffman, Galbraith, and Hughes were importantly and admirably at odds with Harvard’s political culture. —CGE > On Jan 14, 2018, at 6:57 AM, Boyle, Francis A wrote: > > I believe those two Harvard Professors miseducate in the Government Department where I got my PHD. They are all NeoCons there. Two Pots calling the Kettle Black. Fab. > …The very next day, I sent in my acceptance to the Harvard Law School, and enrolled there in September of 1971. Immediately upon my arrival at Harvard, I applied for and was soon accepted to the Ph.D. Program in Political Science at Harvard's Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Government. This was the same doctoral program that had produced Kissinger, Brzezinski, Huntington and numerous other realpolitikers…. > > As I was to discover during those succeeding years, Morgenthau was definitely right: Stanley Hoffmann was and still is the brightest person in the field of international relations today. And yet, even more importantly, he is also the most principled, ethical, and humanitarian scholar who inhabits the basically Hobbesian world of self-styled international relations (IR) experts in the United States of America today. Where the life of IR specialists is oftentimes solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short, Francis 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2018 10:49 PM > To: peace-discuss > Cc: peace > Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fro the astute editor of Current Affairs > > currentaffairs.org > Trump Exceptionalism Will Kill Every Last One Of Your Brain Cells > > by Nathan J. Robinson > 14-17 minutes > Before concluding that Trump’s actions are unprecedented, better check whether that’s actually true… > “I can’t believe in the history of the White House any president has ever spoken the words that I heard our president speak yesterday.” That was Senator Dick Durbin’s reaction to Donald Trump’s instantly infamous “shithole countries” remark. But what I can’t believe is that a United States Senator (and grown man) could think Donald Trump was the first foul-mouthed racist to inhabit the Oval Office. We have LBJ on tape saying the n-word, after all, and there was almost no ethnic group that Richard Nixon didn’t make a bigoted comment about at one point or another. (His White House tapes contain remarks about “Jews, blacks, Italian-Americans and Irish-Americans.”) > We can dismiss Durbin’s remark as a bit of rhetoric, of course. He didn’t mean it literally, but was expressing the degree to which Trump’s disgusting prejudices depart from the expected standard of “presidential” conduct. (Even if the actual standard of presidential conduct has often been roughly on this level.) But many Democrats do actually believe, implicitly or explicitly, in a form of “Trump Exceptionalism,” which holds that Donald Trump is an entirely aberrant departure from previous presidents, whose conduct is of an unprecedented level of awfulness. > In narrating Trump’s presidency as totally different from what came before, though, they often end up exaggerating the extent to which Trump’s actions are actually unprecedented (or “unpresidented”). That’s a concerning tendency because it lead to the forgetting of history, but also because it ends up exonerating prior presidents for inexcusable acts. Exhibit A here is the rehabilitation of George W. Bush, who is responsible for an inconceivable amount of death and carnage, but who is increasingly seen as dignified and statesmanlike when compared to Donald Trump. Bush himself encourages that view by occasionally issuing denunciations of Trump’s less defensible outbursts. The more Trump is depicted as an aberrant departure from a sound and principled norm, the better Bush seems. The irony here is that so far, measured on Number Of Illegal Wars That Killed Half A Million Innocent People, Bush is far worse than Trump. And though Trump’s immigration policies are uniquely cruel, much of the rest of Trump’s agenda is simply orthodox Republican politics. Massive tax cuts for corporations, gutting consumer protection, eliminating ObamaCare: I struggle to think of any of Trump’s policies that put him outside the mainstream of the Republican Party. > In saying this, I’m not downplaying how bad Trump is, but emphasizing how bad the rest of the American right is. My major worry, which many other leftists have given voice to, is that because so much rage is focused on Trump specifically, who is seen as personally unique and unlike everyone else, a far-right politician who did not exhibit some of these peculiar Trump-specific traits would be far more easily “normalized” and accepted as legitimate. If Tom Cotton, a truly frightening man whose immigration positions seem functionally identical to Trump’s, were to run for president in a few years, I’m not sure we’d see the same level of liberal fury, because Cotton wouldn’t be so stupid as to actually use the word “shithole” to describe the countries he’d give the same treatment to as Trump. And while Trump may have called Haiti and Africa “shitholes,” at least he hasn’t, say, denied an ongoing genocide (as Bill Clinton did with Rwanda) or pushed to lower the minimum wage in Haiti (as Obama’s State Department did in 2009). The United States has always treated the Haitian people as expendable shithole-dwellers, as Paul Farmer documented in his important and underrated book The Uses of Haiti. (By the way, here is what Haiti is actually like.) > To see a particularly extreme example of Trump Exceptionalism, consider the framework put forth by Harvard professors Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt in their new book How Democracies Die. In a column about their work, Nicholas Kristof explained their criteria for what constitutes a “dangerous authoritarian leader: > 1. The leader shows only a weak commitment to democratic rules. 2. He or she denies the legitimacy of opponents. 3. He or she tolerates violence. 4. He or she shows some willingness to curb civil liberties or the media…. “With the exception of Richard Nixon, no major-party presidential candidate met even one of these four criteria over the last century,” they say, which sounds reassuring. Unfortunately, they have one update: “Donald Trump met them all.” > Note that they say that, except Nixon, zero U.S. presidents of the last century meet even one of the stated criteria. None of them have “tolerated violence,” which apparently doesn’t include embracing mass murdering dictators like Indonesia’s Suharto, or wiping out an entire city of people with an atomic bomb, or dropping 250 million cluster bombs on Laos, or burning down virtually every town in North Korea, or training Latin American death squad leaders, or supporting violent coups by brutal military juntas, or torturing people to death. Presumably, we are talking about violence within our borders, which likewise doesn’t include turning police into soldiers and locking vast numbers of people in cages. Likewise, none of them have in any way showed a willingness to curb civil liberties, meaning that the construction of a massive ubiquitous state surveillance apparatus has no implications for civil liberties. Likewise, unilaterally expanding the power of the executive branch has no implications for one’s “commitment to democratic rules,” and nor does offering rich people exemptions from the criminal justice system. > Levitsky and Ziblatt, in their book, seem most concerned with #2, the denying of “legitimacy” to the other side, and the erosion of the “norms” underpinning democracy. Democracy, for them, does not necessarily mean that government should actually do what the public wants it to do (since it doesn’t and never has). Rather, it means “recognizing that our political rivals are decent, patriotic, law-abiding citizens—that they love our country and respect the Constitution just as we do. It means that even if we believe our opponents’ ideas to be foolish or wrong‐headed, we do not view them as an existential threat.” Civility and respect, then, rather than actual public participation in policy-making, are what matters, and someone who doesn’t respect their political opponents is anti-democratic. If you don’t think George W. Bush is “decent” and “law-abiding,” then—and I don’t, because I think he’s a morally bankrupt war criminal—you are no better than Trump. > > I dwell on Levitsky and Ziblatt because their book actually offers a highly illuminating insight into how this kind of Harvard liberalism conceives of politics. Although they are mainly concerned with proving that Donald Trump is a monstrous departure from the norm, it quickly becomes clear that their standard for what constitutes “authoritarianism” would encompass a broad range of anti-establishment candidates, including Bernie Sanders: > What kinds of candidates tend to test positive on a litmus test for authoritarianism? Very often, populist outsiders claiming to represent the voice of “the people,” wage war on what they depict as a corrupt and conspiratorial elite. Populists tend to deny the legitimacy of established parties, attacking them as undemocratic and even unpatriotic.. They tell voters that the existing system is not really a democracy but instead has been hijacked, corrupted, or rigged by the elite. And they promise to bury that elite and return power to “the people.” > And when one of these candidates comes alone, one that attacks “established parties” as “undemocratic,” telling voters that the existing system is “corrupt,” Levitsky and Ziblatt make it clear that political parties need to act as “gatekeepers” to ensure that the candidates do not win: > Potential demagogues exist in all democracies, and occasionally, one or more of them strike a public chord. But in some democracies, political leaders heed the warning signs and take steps to ensure that authoritarians remain on the fringes, far from the centers of power. When faced with the rise of extremists or demagogues, they make a concerted effort to isolate and defeat them. Although mass responses to extremist appeals matter, what matters more is whether political elites, and especially parties, serve as filters. Put simply, political parties are democracy’s gatekeepers. > They then explain what political parties ought to do to fulfill this “gatekeeping” function. Let me quote it at length, because it’s fascinating: > Keeping authoritarian politicians out of power is more easily said than done. Democracies, after all, are not supposed to ban parties or prohibit candidates from standing for election, and we do not advocate such measures. The responsibility for filtering out authoritarians lies, rather, with political parties and party leaders: democracy’s gatekeepers.Successful gatekeeping requires that mainstream parties isolate and defeat extremist forces, a behavior political scientist Nancy Bermeo calls “distancing.” Prodemocratic parties may engage in distancing in several ways. First, they can keep would-be authoritarians off party ballots at election time. This requires that they resist the temptation to nominate these extremists for higher office even when they can deliver votes… Parties can root out extremists in the grass roots of their own ranks… [W]henever extremists emerge as serious electoral contenders, mainstream parties must forge a united front to defeat them. To quote Linz, they must be willing to “join with opponents ideologically distant but committed to the survival of the democratic political order.” In normal circumstances, this is almost unimaginable. Picture Senator Edward Kennedy and other liberal Democrats campaigning for Ronald Reagan, or the British Labour Party and their trade union allies endorsing Margaret Thatcher. Each party’s followers would be infuriated at this seeming betrayal of principles. But in extraordinary times, courageous party leadership means putting democracy and country before party and articulating to voters what is at stake. > Here, then, we have two Harvard professors arguing that when a candidate comes along alleging that party elites are rigging the system against voters, party elites need to respond by… rigging the system against voters. Note that it doesn’t matter whether the candidates are correct to say that the party is undemocratic and corrupt. As soon as they have made the charge, they become a “populist authoritarian” who must be stopped at all costs so that the “democratic political order” can survive. The euphemisms here are downright Orwellian, although to be honest Oceania was a little more subtle in its propaganda against Eurasia and Eastasia. > We can see here a ready-built justification for the “superdelegate” system, as well as the DNC’s collusion with the Clinton campaign against Bernie Sanders. If you accept Levitsky and Ziblatt’s logic, democracy itself compels party elites to make sure that populist candidates are “isolated and defeated,” and “kept off party ballots at election time.” That may still be true even if those candidates stand a better chance of winning than the party elite’s preferred nominee (“Even when they can deliver votes”), meaning that an electable populist is worse than a disliked establishment candidate. The logic here is simple: once you believe that “democracy” requires “respect for the other’s decency” any criticism of the system that is too strong (e.g. “I think my opponent is corrupt and morally noxious”) cannot be tolerated, because it rejects democracy. So, in the interests of democracy, one must use undemocratic means to suppress the criticism. (Levitsky and Ziblatt also have, of course, a lot of stuff about how the Founders believed strongly in checks on democracy. This is true: James Madison believed that a central task of government was to “protect the minority of the opulent against the majority,” and “philosopher king”-type rhetoric about how democracy should only be entrusted to the “responsible” and “intelligent” has been a constant in American liberal thinking.) > In fact, we can even see that for a certain type of liberal, if a “populist” won the Democratic nomination, the correct course of action would be to support the Republican. As Levitsky and Ziblatt say, even if the party membership would be upset at a seeming betrayal of principles, anything is justified to keep the “authoritarians” out of power. This somewhat confirms my theory that if Bernie Sanders had been nominated by the Democrats, many of the Democratic elite would have rather jumped ship to the Republican Party than support him. (Only the threat of Trump might have kept them from doing so, though I still suspect a number of them would have been begging Michael Bloomberg to run.) We saw exactly this in England, where the Blair wing of the Labour Party seemed like it would rather destroy the Labour Party and preserve Conservative power than allow Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership to continue. That might seem like madness, but How Democracies Die shows that it’s the perfectly rational consequence of this ideology. (Indeed, Barack Obama apparently preferred Theresa May’s conservatives over Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour in the last election.) > It’s very important, then, to carefully scrutinize perspectives that single out Donald Trump as a unique threat to something called “democracy.” I do think Donald Trump is a more dangerous individual than nearly any prior president. But it’s not because he calls the system “corrupt” and is a racist who uses swear words, it’s because he might press the nuclear button in some irrational fit of pique. (Then again, JFK nearly did exactly that…) I am under no illusion, though, that Trump is the first president to pander to white supremacists or treat Haitians like crap. Beware anyone who says that Trump is threatening to erode our democracy, because they’re assuming we already have one. > If you appreciate our work, please consider making a donation or purchasing a subscription. Current Affairs is not for profit and carries no outside advertising. We are an independent media institution funded entirely by subscribers and small donors, and we depend on you in order to continue to produce high-quality work. > > From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jan 15 01:47:24 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 01:47:24 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Graduate student workers should be allowed to organize References: Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: From: Economic Policy Institute > Subject: Graduate student workers should be allowed to organize Date: January 14, 2018 at 05:06:51 PST [https://gallery.mailchimp.com/ec2361f981a14ee1d45cccaa9/images/01e57658-61dd-452f-93fe-8f537c2c2f75.png] EPI News—Our most important stories this week [https://gallery.mailchimp.com/ec2361f981a14ee1d45cccaa9/_compresseds/41d4ccdc-f1a4-40f8-9f08-f0aaf3cfd7e9.jpg] Graduate student workers should be allowed to organize Graduate students and research assistants at many private colleges and universities are organizing for higher wages. A new EPI report reviews the context for graduate student organizing and argues that they should be able to unionize. Colleges and universities are increasingly relying on graduate teaching assistants and contingent faculty, who play an integral role in producing research and providing quality education. And yet the pay graduate teaching and research assistants receive rarely rises to the level of a living wage. Read the report » Share this report: Graduate student workers should be allowed to organize [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/outline-light-facebook-48.png] Share [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/outline-light-twitter-48.png] Tweet 10 worst ways President Trump and Congress have betrayed working Americans In time for the one-year anniversary of President Donald Trump’s inauguration, EPI released a new feature recapping 10 actions by Trump and Congress that hurt workers the most during Trump’s first year. President Trump and Congress further rigged the economy in favor of the wealthy by rolling back important worker protections, advancing nominees to key administration posts who have a history of exploiting working people, and taking other actions that undermine pay growth and erode working conditions for the nation’s workers. EPI’s Policy Watch tracker will continue to spotlight actions by the Trump administration, Congress, and federal agencies to weaken workers’ rights. Transparency in work visa programs is needed to fight human trafficking On Thursday, January 11, EPI’s Daniel Costa joined members of Congress from both sides of the aisle as they announced a measure to combat human trafficking by increasing the transparency of workers’ activities and whereabouts. If enacted, the Visa Transparency Anti-Trafficking Act of 2018 would create a standardized reporting system across all guestworker visa categories and require that this information be made public. Costa, who is the director of immigration law and policy research at EPI, has published estimates of the numbers of temporary migrant workers employed by visa classification. But those estimates are based on limited data because no official government estimates exist by visa class. Without the greater transparency called for by the bill, millions of workers could remain hidden and vulnerable to abuse from employers. From the EPI blog * Maryland grants access to paid sick days to 700,000 workers and their families By Elise Gould, Jessica Schieder * Fighting for public sector union rights 50 years after MLK’s assassination By Marni von Wilpert * Our analysis of January 1 state minimum wage changes understated the total increase in wages for workers throughout the country By David Cooper, Janelle Jones * The search for the next president of the New York Federal Reserve is a big deal By Josh Bivens * Renegotiating NAFTA is an opportunity to get trade policy right By Owen E. Herrnstadt * The economy has made great strides since the recession, but weakness remains By Elise Gould EPI in the news [https://gallery.mailchimp.com/ec2361f981a14ee1d45cccaa9/images/0fa1ace2-872c-416e-9f27-7dbf45c92496.png] The Atlantic quoted EPI’s Valerie Wilson about a crucial fact that President Trump glossed over when he sent a tweet taking credit for the record low black unemployment rate. While the economic policies of the past decade helped lower the black unemployment rate, the 6.8 percent unemployment rate of black Americans is still much higher than the 4.1 percent unemployment rate of white Americans. “If we had an overall unemployment rate of 6.8 percent, nobody would be cheering about that,” said Wilson, director of EPI’s Program on Race, Ethnicity, and the Economy. | The Black and Hispanic Unemployment Rates Don't Deserve Applause » [https://gallery.mailchimp.com/ec2361f981a14ee1d45cccaa9/images/2166ed4c-6d8c-4af6-84a8-14af8513b7df.png] Splinter interviewed EPI President Thea Lee about inequality and declining working class power. While Lee decried the “brilliant exploitation of that inequality to create racial and other divisions within the working class,” she expressed hope that progressives could “put forward a powerful set of pro-worker policies” and “show what a non-racist, non-xenophobic, non-sexist, non-divisive real populism looks like.” | The "Vicious But Brilliant Exploitation" That Drives Right Wing Economics » [https://gallery.mailchimp.com/ec2361f981a14ee1d45cccaa9/images/00378d8c-db3b-4b1d-bad7-74318e35d9a1.png] The Washington Post asked EPI Director of Research Josh Bivens to explain the relationship between workers’ wages and stock market performance. “Stock market gains and near-stagnant pay for most workers have the same root cause: the policy-induced shift of economic leverage and bargaining power away from typical workers and towards corporate managers and owners of capital,” said Bivens. | How Stocks Are Leaving Wages in the Dust » [https://gallery.mailchimp.com/ec2361f981a14ee1d45cccaa9/images/c578595c-54aa-45f9-8e60-b47e399ec70c.png] EPI Senior Economist Elise Gould spoke to NPR’s Planet Money about one of her favorite economic indicators in the federal government’s monthly jobs report—the share of people age 25 to 54 who have a job. The share is now 79.1 percent. This suggests that even after years of economic recovery, there are still a lot of workers waiting in the wings, which has held down wage growth, Gould explained. | Hidden Gems of the Jobs Report » [https://gallery.mailchimp.com/ec2361f981a14ee1d45cccaa9/images/d9e0c554-01de-4f26-a498-829e5683f6bf.png] SalonTV interviewed EPI Economic Analyst Janelle Jones on the good news for workers in the 18 states that saw increases in the state minimum wage in January 2018. “Every cent added to their hourly wage is really going to make a difference for how they can support themselves and their families,” Jones said. | A Salary Bump for Some Workers » Share this newsletter: EPI News—Graduate student workers should be allowed to organize [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/outline-light-facebook-48.png] Share [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/outline-light-twitter-48.png] Tweet [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/outline-light-forwardtofriend-48.png] Forward Donate to EPI [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/color-facebook-48.png] Facebook [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/color-twitter-48.png] Twitter [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/color-link-48.png] epi.org View this email in your browser | Unsubscribe from this list -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jan 15 02:44:07 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 02:44:07 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons In-Reply-To: <2ab5175e797cf44579dae2f21.24d5dd889d.20180112175657.b0855b2db1.eae4627c@mail95.sea21.rsgsv.net> References: <2ab5175e797cf44579dae2f21.24d5dd889d.20180112175657.b0855b2db1.eae4627c@mail95.sea21.rsgsv.net> Message-ID: On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp > wrote: Hey Karen- I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. Keep Fighting, Lee Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From r-szoke at illinois.edu Mon Jan 15 04:02:04 2018 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 04:02:04 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Military Quietly Prepares for a Last Resort: War With North Korea Message-ID: <4616D03F-9AD5-4943-A25B-3F8723E9634B@illinois.edu> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/us/politics/military-exercises-north-korea-pentagon.html?action=click&contentCollection=Sunday%20Review&module=Trending&version=Full®ion=Marginalia&pgtype=article Military Quietly Prepares for a Last Resort: War With North Korea By HELENE COOPER, ERIC SCHMITT, THOMAS GIBBONS-NEFF and JOHN ISMAYJAN. 14, 2018 Paratroopers from the 82nd Airborne during a night jump exercise at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev., in December. By MAJ. BROUGH L. MCDONALD on January 14, 2018. Photo by B. McDonald. WASHINGTON — Across the military, officers and troops are quietly preparing for a war they hope will not come. At Fort Bragg in North Carolina last month, a mix of 48 Apache gunships and Chinook cargo helicopters took off in an exercise that practiced moving troops and equipment under live artillery fire to assault targets. Two days later, in the skies above Nevada, 119 soldiers from the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division parachuted out of C-17 military cargo planes under cover of darkness in an exercise that simulated a foreign invasion. Next month, at Army posts across the United States, more than 1,000 reserve soldiers will practice how to set up so-called mobilization centers that move military forces overseas in a hurry. And beginning next month with the Winter Olympics in the South Korean town of Pyeongchang, the Pentagon plans to send more Special Operations troops to the Korean Peninsula, an initial step toward what some officials said ultimately could be the formation of a Korea-based task force similar to the types that are fighting in Iraq and Syria. Others said the plan was strictly related to counterterrorism efforts. In the world of the American military, where contingency planning is a mantra drummed into the psyche of every officer, the moves are ostensibly part of standard Defense Department training and troop rotations. But the scope and timing of the exercises suggest a renewed focus on getting the country’s military prepared for what could be on the horizon with North Korea. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and General Joseph F. Dunford Jr., the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, both argue forcefully for using diplomacy to address Pyongyang’s nuclear ambitions. A war with North Korea, Mr. Mattis said in August, would be “catastrophic.” Still, about two dozen current and former Pentagon officials and senior commanders said in interviews that the exercises largely reflected the military’s response to orders from Mr. Mattis and service chiefs to be ready for any possible military action on the Korean Peninsula. President Trump’s own words have left senior military leaders and rank-and-file troops convinced that they need to accelerate their contingency planning. [https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/01/13/us/00dc-military1/00dc-military1-superJumbo.jpg] During the 82nd Airborne exercise in Nevada last month, Army soldiers practiced moving paratroopers on helicopters and flew artillery, fuel and ammunition deep behind what was designated as enemy lines. U.S. Army In perhaps the most incendiary exchange, in a September speech at the United Nations, Mr. Trump vowed to “totally destroy North Korea” if it threatened the United States, and derided the rogue nation’s leader, Kim Jong-un, as “Rocket Man.” In response, Mr. Kim said he would deploy the “highest level of hard-line countermeasure in history” against the United States, and described Mr. Trump as a “mentally deranged U.S. dotard.” Mr. Trump’s rhetoric has since cooled, following a fresh attempt at détente between Pyongyang and Seoul. In an interview last week with The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Trump was quoted as saying, “I probably have a very good relationship with Kim Jong-un,” despite their mutual public insults. But the president said on Sunday that The Journal had misquoted him, and that he had actually said “I’d probably have” a good relationship if he wanted one. A false alarm in Hawaii on Saturday that set off about 40 minutes of panic after a state emergency response employee mistakenly sent out a text alert warning of an incoming ballistic missile attack underscored Americans’ anxiety about North Korea. A Conventional Mission After 16 years of fighting insurgents in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria, American commanding generals worry that the military is better prepared for going after stateless groups of militants than it is for its own conventional mission of facing down heavily fortified land powers that have their own formidable militaries and air defenses. The exercise at Fort Bragg was part of one of the largest air assault exercises in recent years. The practice run at Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada used double the number of cargo planes for paratroopers as was used in past exercises. The Army Reserve exercise planned for next month will breathe new life into mobilization centers that have been largely dormant as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have wound down. And while the military has deployed Special Operations reaction forces to previous large global events, like the 2014 World Cup in Brazil, those units usually numbered around 100 — far fewer than some officials said could be sent for the Olympics in South Korea. Others discounted that possibility. At a wide-ranging meeting at his headquarters on Jan. 2, Gen. Tony Thomas, the head of the Special Operations Command in Tampa, Fla., warned the 200 civilians and service members in the audience that more Special Forces personnel might have to shift to the Korea theater from the Middle East in May or June, if tensions escalate on the peninsula. The general’s spokesman, Capt. Jason Salata, confirmed the account provided to The New York Times by someone in the audience, but said General Thomas made it clear that no decisions had been made. The Army chief of staff, Gen. Mark A. Milley, in several recent meetings at the Pentagon, has brought up two historic American military disasters as a warning of where a lack of preparedness can lead. Military officials said General Milley has cited the ill-fated Battle of the Kasserine Pass during World War II, when unprepared American troops were outfoxed and then pummeled by the forces of Field Marshal Erwin Rommel of Germany. General Milley has also recently mentioned Task Force Smith, the poorly equipped, understrength unit that was mauled by North Korean troops in 1950 during the Korean War. In meeting after meeting, the officials said, General Milley has likened the two American defeats to what he warns could happen if the military does not get ready for a possible war with North Korea. He has urged senior Army leaders to get units into shape, and fretted about a loss of what he has called muscle memory: how to fight a large land war, including one in which an established adversary is able to bring sophisticated air defenses, tanks, infantry, naval power and even cyberweapons into battle. Speaking in October at the annual meeting of the Association of the United States Army, General Milley called Pyongyang the biggest threat to American national security, and said that Army officers who lead operational units must prepare to meet that threat. “Do not wait on orders and printed new regulations and new manuals,” General Milley told the audience. “Put simply, I want you to get ready for what might come, and do not do any tasks that do not directly contribute to increasing combat readiness in your unit.” His concerns have drifted down to the Army’s rank and file. And troops at bases and posts around the world routinely wonder aloud if they will soon be deployed to the Korean Peninsula. But unlike the run-up to the Iraq war, when the Pentagon had already begun huge troop movements in 2002 to prepare for the invasion that began in 2003, military officials insist that this is not a case of a war train that has left the station. [https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/01/13/us/00dc-military2/00dc-military2-superJumbo.jpg] Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has voiced deep concerns about the consequences of a war against North Korea. Erin Schaff for The New York Times “This could be as simple as these guys reading the newspaper,” said Derek Chollet, an assistant secretary of defense during the Obama administration, referring to the rush by military officials to get ready. “You’re not seeing any massive military movements” that would indicate that a decision has been made to go to war, he added. There have been no travel warnings advising Americans to stay away from South Korea or Japan, and no advisories warning American businesses to be cautious. It is unlikely that the Pentagon would launch military action on the Korean Peninsula without first warning Americans and others there, military officials said — unless the Trump administration believes that the United States could conduct a one-time airstrike on North Korea that would not bring any retaliation from Pyongyang to nearby Seoul. Some officials in the White House have argued that such a targeted, limited strike could be launched with minimal, if any, blowback against South Korea — a premise that Mr. Mattis views with skepticism, according to people familiar with his thinking. But for Mr. Mattis, the planning serves to placate Mr. Trump. Effectively, analysts said, it alerts the president to how seriously the Pentagon views the threat and protects Mr. Mattis from suggestions that he is out of step with Mr. Trump. “The military’s job is to be fully ready for whatever contingencies might be on the horizon,” said Michèle A. Flournoy, a top Pentagon official in the Obama administration and co-founder of WestExec Advisors, a strategic consultancy in Washington. “Even if no decision on North Korea has been made and no order has been given,” Ms. Flournoy said, “the need to be ready for the contingency that is top of mind for the president and his national security team would motivate commanders to use planned exercise opportunities to enhance their preparation, just in case.” Operation Panther Blade In the case of the 82nd Airborne exercise in Nevada last month, for instance, Army soldiers practiced moving paratroopers on helicopters and flew artillery, fuel and ammunition deep behind what was designated as enemy lines. The maneuvers were aimed at forcing an enemy to fight on different fronts early in combat. Officials said maneuvers practiced in the exercise, called Panther Blade, could be used anywhere, not just on the Korean Peninsula. “Operation Panther Blade is about building global readiness,” said Lt. Col. Joe Buccino, a public affairs officer with the 82nd Airborne. “An air assault and deep attack of this scale is very complex and requires dynamic synchronization of assets over time and space.” Another exercise, called Bronze Ram, is being coordinated by the shadowy Joint Special Operations Command, officials said, and mimics other training scenarios that mirror current events. This year’s exercise, one of many that concentrate on threats from across the world, will focus extensively on underground operations and involve working in chemically contaminated environments that might be present in North Korea. It will also home in on the Special Operations Command’s mission of countering weapons of mass destruction. Beyond Bronze Ram, highly classified Special Operations exercises in the United States, including those with scenarios to seize unsecured nuclear weapons or conduct clandestine paratrooper drops, have for several months reflected a possible North Korea contingency, military officials said, without providing details, because of operational sensitivity. Air Force B-1 bombers flying from Guam have been seen regularly over the Korean Peninsula amid the escalating tensions with Pyongyang — running regular training flights with Japanese and South Korean fighter jets that often provoke North Korea’s ire. B-52 bombers based in Louisiana are expected to join the B-1s stationed on Guam later this month, adding to the long-range aerial firepower. Pentagon officials said last week that three B-2 bombers and their crews had arrived in Guam from their base in Missouri. [https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/01/13/us/politics/00dc-military3/merlin_132057710_b87dab65-9145-46e9-b0e9-0d52c8a97ff5-superJumbo.jpg] Cho Myoung-gyon, the South Korean unification minister, left, and his North Korean counterpart, Ri Son-kwon, on Tuesday. Yonhap, via Associated Press But unlike the very public buildup of forces in the run-up to the 1991 Persian Gulf war and the 2003 Iraq war, which sought to pressure President Saddam Hussein of Iraq into a diplomatic settlement, the Pentagon is seeking to avoid making public all its preparations for fear of inadvertently provoking a response by Mr. Kim, North Korea’s leader. Last week, diplomats from North Korea and South Korea met for the first time in two years in a sign of thawing tensions. On Tuesday, Canada and the United States will host a meeting in Vancouver, British Columbia, of foreign ministers from countries that supported the United Nations-backed effort to repel North Korean forces after the 1950 invasion of South Korea. The ministers are seeking to advance the diplomatic initiative forged by Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson. It is a balance that Mr. Mattis and senior commanders are trying to strike in showing that the military, on the one hand, is ready to confront any challenge that North Korea presents, even as they strongly back diplomatic initiatives led by Mr. Tillerson to resolve the crisis. An exchange this month illustrated perfectly the fine line the Pentagon is walking, as an Air Force three-star general caught her colleague emphasizing military prowess perhaps a tad too much, and gently guided him back. During a briefing with reporters on Capitol Hill, Lt. Gen. Mark C. Nowland was asked whether the Air Force was prepared to take out North Korean air defenses. “If you’re asking us, are we ready to fight tonight, the answer is, yes, we will,” General Nowland, the Air Force’s top operations officer, responded. “The United States Air Force, if required, when called to do our job, will gain and maintain air supremacy.” The words were barely out of his mouth when Lt. Gen. VeraLinn Jamieson, the Air Force’s top intelligence officer, interrupted. “I’ll also add that right now, the Defense Department is in support of Secretary of State Tillerson, who’s got a campaign to be the lead with North Korea in a diplomatic endeavor,” General Jamieson said. General Nowland quickly acknowledged in a follow-up question that the military was in support of Mr. Tillerson’s diplomatic push. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Mon Jan 15 10:32:43 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 04:32:43 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The FBI Hand Behind Russia-gate Message-ID: <159B845C-154F-4AC2-915A-61D83EC6260E@gmail.com> Consortiumnews > “The FBI Hand Behind Russia-gate" Special Report: In the Watergate era, liberals warned about U.S. intelligence agencies manipulating U.S. politics, but now Trump-hatred has blinded many of them to this danger becoming real, as ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern notes. By Ray McGovern Russia-gate is becoming FBI-gate, thanks to the official release of unguarded text messages between loose-lipped FBI counterintelligence official Peter Strzok and his garrulous girlfriend, FBI lawyer Lisa Page. (Ten illustrative texts from their exchange appear at the end of this article.) [Picture: Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in the third presidential debate in 2016, during which Clinton called Trump Vladimir Putin’s “puppet.”] Despite his former job as chief of the FBI’s counterintelligence section, Strzok had the naive notion that texting on FBI phones could not be traced. Strzok must have slept through “Security 101.” Or perhaps he was busy texting during that class. Girlfriend Page cannot be happy at being misled by his assurance that using office phones would be a secure way to conduct their affair(s). It would have been unfortunate enough for Strzok and Page to have their adolescent-sounding texts merely exposed, revealing the reckless abandon of star-crossed lovers hiding (they thought) secrets from cuckolded spouses, office colleagues, and the rest of us. However, for the never-Trump plotters in the FBI, the official release of just a fraction (375) of almost 10,000 messages does incalculably more damage than that. We suddenly have documentary proof that key elements of the U.S. intelligence community were trying to short-circuit the U.S. democratic process. And that puts in a new and dark context the year-long promotion of Russia-gate. It now appears that it was not the Russians trying to rig the outcome of the U.S. election, but leading officials of the U.S. intelligence community, shadowy characters sometimes called the Deep State. More of the Strzok-Page texting dialogue is expected to be released. And the Department of Justice Inspector General reportedly has additional damaging texts from others on the team that Special Counsel Robert Mueller selected to help him investigate Russia-gate. Besides forcing the removal of Strzok and Page, the text exposures also sounded the death knell for the career of FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, in whose office some of the plotting took place and who has already announced his plans to retire soon. But the main casualty is the FBI’s 18-month campaign to sabotage candidate-and-now-President Donald Trump by using the Obama administration’s Russia-gate intelligence “assessment,” electronic surveillance of dubious legality, and a salacious dossier that could never pass the smell test, while at the same time using equally dubious techniques to immunize Hillary Clinton and her closest advisers from crimes that include lying to the FBI and endangering secrets. Ironically, the Strzok-Page texts provide something that the Russia-gate investigation has been sorely lacking: first-hand evidence of both corrupt intent and action. After months of breathless searching for “evidence” of Russian-Trump collusion designed to put Trump in the White House, what now exists is actual evidence that senior officials of the Obama administration colluded to keep Trump out of the White House – proof of what old-time gumshoes used to call “means, motive and opportunity.” Even more unfortunately for Russia-gate enthusiasts, the FBI lovers’ correspondence provides factual evidence exposing much of the made-up “Resistance” narrative – the contrived storyline that The New York Times and much of the rest of the U.S. mainstream media deemed fit to print with little skepticism and few if any caveats, a scenario about brilliantly devious Russians that not only lacks actual evidence – relying on unverified hearsay and rumor – but doesn’t make sense on its face. The Russia-gate narrative always hinged on the preposterous notion that Russian President Vladimir Putin foresaw years ago what no American political analyst considered even possible, the political ascendancy of Donald Trump. According to the narrative, the fortune-telling Putin then risked creating even worse tensions with a nuclear-armed America that would – by all odds – have been led by a vengeful President Hillary Clinton. Besides this wildly improbable storyline, there were flat denials from WikiLeaks, which distributed the supposedly “hacked” Democratic emails, that the information came from Russia – and there was the curious inability of the National Security Agency to use its immense powers to supply any technical evidence to support the Russia-hack scenario. The Trump Shock But the shock of Trump’s election and the decision of many never-Trumpers to cast their lot with the Resistance led to a situation in which any prudent skepticism or demand for evidence was swept aside. So, on Jan. 6, 2017, President Obama’s Director of National Intelligence James Clapper released an evidence-free report that he said was compiled by “hand-picked” analysts from the CIA, FBI and NSA, offering an “assessment” that Russia and President Putin were behind the release of the Democratic emails in a plot to help Trump win the presidency. Despite the extraordinary gravity of the charge, even New York Times correspondent Scott Shane noted that proof was lacking. He wrote at the time: “What is missing from the [the Jan. 6] public report is what many Americans most eagerly anticipated: hard evidence to back up the agencies’ claims that the Russian government engineered the election attack. … Instead, the message from the agencies essentially amounts to ‘trust us.’” But the “assessment” served a useful purpose for the never-Trumpers: it applied an official imprimatur on the case for delegitimizing Trump’s election and even raised the long-shot hope that the Electoral College might reverse the outcome and possibly install a compromise candidate, such as former Secretary of State Colin Powell, in the White House. Though the Powell ploy fizzled, the hope of somehow removing Trump from office continued to bubble, fueled by the growing hysteria around Russia-gate. Virtually all skepticism about the evidence-free “assessment” was banned. For months, the Times and other newspapers of record repeated the lie that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies had concurred in the conclusion about the Russian “hack.” Even when that falsehood was belatedly acknowledged, the major news outlets just shifted the phrasing slightly to say that U.S. intelligence agencies had reached the Russian “hack” conclusion. Shane’s blunt initial recognition about the lack of proof disappeared from the mainstream media’s approved narrative of Russia-gate. Doubts about the Russian “hack” or dissident suggestions that what we were witnessing was a “soft coup” were scoffed at by leading media commentators. Other warnings from veteran U.S. intelligence professionals about the weaknesses of the Russia-gate narrative and the danger of letting politicized intelligence overturn a constitutional election were also brushed aside in pursuit of the goal of removing Trump from the White House. It didn’t even seem to matter when new Russia-gate disclosures conflicted with the original narrative that Putin had somehow set Trump up as a Manchurian candidate. All normal journalistic skepticism was jettisoned. It was as if the Russia-gate advocates started with the conclusion that Trump must go and then made the facts fit into that mold, but anyone who noted the violations of normal investigative procedures was dismissed as a “Trump enabler” or a “Moscow stooge.” The Text Evidence But then came the FBI text messages, providing documentary evivdence that key FBI officials involved in the Russia-gate investigation were indeed deeply biased and out to get Trump, adding hard proof to Trump’s longstanding lament that he was the subject of a “witch hunt.” [Picture: Peter Strzok, who served as a Deputy Assistant Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, second in command of counterintelligence.] Justified or not, Trump’s feeling of vindication could hardly be more dangerous — particularly at a time when the most urgent need is to drain some testosterone from the self-styled Stable-Genius-in-Chief and his martinet generals. On the home front, Trump, his wealthy friends, and like-thinkers in Congress may now feel they have an even wider carte blanche to visit untold misery on the poor, the widow, the stranger and other vulnerable humans. That was always an underlying danger of the Resistance’s strategy to seize on whatever weapons were available – no matter how reckless or unfair – to “get Trump.” Beyond that, Russia-gate has become so central to the Washington establishment’s storyline that there appears to be no room for second-thoughts or turning back. The momentum is such that some Democrats and the media never-Trumpers can’t stop stoking the smoke of Russia-gate and holding out hope against hope that it will somehow justify Trump’s impeachment. Yet, the sordid process of using legal/investigative means to settle political scores further compromises the principle of the “rule of law” and integrity of journalism in the eyes of many Americans. After a year of Russia-gate, the “rule of law” and “pursuit of truth” appear to have been reduced to high-falutin’ phrases for political score-setttling, a process besmirched by Republicans in earlier pursuits of Democrats and now appearing to be a bipartisan method for punishing political rivals regardless of the lack of evidence. Strzok and Page Peter Strzok (pronounced “struck”) has an interesting pedigree with multiple tasks regarding both Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Trump. As the FBI’s chief of counterespionage during the investigation into then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s unauthorized use of a personal email server for classified information, Strzok reportedly changed the words “grossly negligent” (which could have triggered legal prosecution) to the far less serious “extremely careless” in FBI Director James Comey’s depiction of Clinton’s actions. This semantic shift cleared the way for Comey to conclude just 20 days before the Democratic National Convention began in July 2016, that “no reasonable prosecutor” would bring charges against Mrs. Clinton. Then, as Deputy Assistant Director of the Counterintelligence Division, Strzok led the FBI’s investigation into alleged Russian interference in the U.S. election of 2016. It is a safe bet that he took a strong hand in hand-picking the FBI contingent of analysts that joined “hand-picked” counterparts from CIA and NSA in preparing the evidence-free, Jan. 6, 2017 assessment accusing Russian President Vladimir Putin of interfering in the election of 2016. (Although accepted in Establishment groupthink as revealed truth, that poor excuse for analysis reflected the apogee of intelligence politicization — rivaled only by the fraudulent intelligence on “weapons of mass destruction“ in Iraq 15 years ago.) In June and July 2017 Strzok was the top FBI official working on Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into possible links between the Trump campaign and Russia, but was taken off that job when the Justice Department IG learned of the Strzok-Page text-message exchange and told Mueller. There is no little irony in the fact that what did in the FBI sweathearts was their visceral disdain for Mr. Trump, their cheerleading-cum-kid-gloves treatment of Mrs. Clinton and her associates, their 1950-ish, James Clapperesque attitude toward Russians as “almost genetically driven” to evil, and their (Strzok/Page) elitist conviction that they know far better what is good for the country than regular American citizens, including those “deplorables” whom Clinton said made up half of Trump’s supporters. But Strzok/Page had no idea that their hubris, elitism and scheming would be revealed in so tangible a way. Worst of all for them, the very thing that Strzok, in particular, worked so hard to achieve — the sabotaging of Trump and immunization of Mrs. Clinton and her closest advisers is now coming apart at the seams. Congress: Oversee? or Overlook? At this point, the $64 question is whether the various congressional oversight committees will remain ensconced in their customarily cozy role as “overlook” committees, or whether they will have the courage to attempt to carry out their Constitutional duty. The latter course would mean confronting a powerful Deep State and its large toolbox of well-practiced retaliatory techniques, including J. Edgar Hoover-style blackmail on steroids, enabled by electronic surveillance of just about everything and everyone. Yes, today’s technology permits blanket collection, and “Collect Everything” has become the motto. [Picture: Former FBI Director Robert Mueller.] Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-New York, with almost four decades of membership in the House and Senate, openly warned incoming President Trump in January 2017 against criticizing the U.S. intelligence community because U.S. intelligence officials have “six ways from Sunday to get back at you” if you are “dumb” enough to take them on. Thanks to the almost 10,000 text messages between Strzok and Page, only a small fraction of which were given to Congress four weeks ago, there is now real evidentiary meat on the bones of the suspicions that there indeed was a “deep-state coup” to “correct” the outcome of the 2016 election. We now know that the supposedly apolitical FBI officials had huge political axes to grind. The Strzok-Page exchanges drip with disdain for Trump and those deemed his smelly deplorable supporters. In one text message, Strzok expressed visceral contempt for those working-class Trump voters, writing on Aug. 26, 2016, “Just went to a southern Virginia Walmart. I could SMELL the Trump support. … it’s scary real down here.” The texts even show Strzok warning of the need for an “insurance policy” to thwart Trump on the off-chance that his poll numbers closed in on those of Mrs. Clinton. An Aug. 6, 2016 text message, for example, shows Page giving her knight in shining armor strong affirmation: “Maybe you’re meant to stay where you are because you’re meant to protect the country from that menace [Trump].” That text to Strzok includes a link to a David Brooks column in The New York Times, in which Brooks concludes with the clarion call: “There comes a time when neutrality and laying low become dishonorable. If you’re not in revolt, you’re in cahoots. When this period and your name are mentioned, decades hence, your grandkids will look away in shame.” Another text message shows that other senior government officials – alarmed at the possibility of a Trump presidency – joined the discussion. In an apparent reference to an August 2016 meeting with FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Strzok wrote to Page on Aug. 15, 2016, “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way he [Trump] gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk.” Strzok added, “It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event that you die before you’re 40.” Insurance Policy? Senate Judiciary Committee chair Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, says he will ask Strzok to explain the “insurance policy” when he calls him to testify. What seems already clear is that the celebrated “Steele Dossier” was part of the “insurance,” as was the evidence-less legend that Russia hacked the DNC’s and Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s emails and gave them to WikiLeaks. If congressional investigators have been paying attention, they already know what former weapons inspector Scott Ritter shared with Veteran intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) colleagues this week; namely, that Fusion GPS’s Glenn Simpson, who commissioned the Russia dossier using Democratic Party money, said he reached out to Steele after June 17, just three days before Steele’s first report was published, drawing on seven sources. “There is a snowball’s chance in hell that this is raw intelligence gathered by Steele; rather he seems to have drawn on a single ‘trusted intermediary’ to gather unsubstantiated rumor already in existence.” Another VIPS colleague, Phil Giraldi, writing out of his own experience in private sector consulting, added: “The fact that you do not control your sources frequently means that they will feed you what they think you want to hear. Since they are only doing it for money, the more lurid the details the better, as it increases the apparent value of the information. The private security firm in turn, which is also doing it for the money, will pass on the stories and even embroider them to keep the client happy and to encourage him to come back for more. When I read the Steele dossier it looked awfully familiar to me, like the scores of similar reports I had seen which combined bullshit with enough credible information to make the whole product look respectable.” It is now widely known that the Democrats ponied up the “insurance premiums,” so to speak, for former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele’s “dossier” of lurid — but largely unproven — “intelligence” on Trump and the Russians. If, as many have concluded, the dossier was used to help justify a FISA warrant to snoop on the Trump campaign, those involved will be in deep kimchi, if congressional overseers do their job. How, you might ask, could Strzok and associates undertake these extra-legal steps with such blithe disregard for the possible consequences should they be caught? The answer is easy; Mrs. Clinton was a shoo-in, remember? This was just extra insurance with no expectation of any “death benefit” ever coming into play — save for Trump’s electoral demise in November 2016. The attitude seemed to be that, if abuse of the FISA law should eventually be discovered — there would be little interest in a serious investigation by the editors of The New York Times and other anti-Trump publications and whatever troubles remained could be handled by President Hillary Clinton. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, who chairs the Judiciary Subcommittee of Judiciary on Crime and Terrorism, joined Sen. Grassley in signing the letter referring Christopher Steele to the Justice Department to investigate what appear to be false statements about the dossier. In signing, Graham noted the “many stop signs the Department of Justice ignored in its use of the dossier.” The signature of committee ranking member Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, however, was missing — an early sign that a highly partisan battle royale is in the offing. On Tuesday, Feinstein unilaterally released a voluminous transcript of Glenn Simpson’s earlier testimony and, as though on cue, Establishment pundits portrayed Steele as a good source and Fusion GPS’s Glenn Simpson as a victim. The Donnybrook is now underway; the outcome uncertain. [Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. He was an Army and CIA intelligence analyst for 30 years; prepared and briefed the President’s Daily Brief for Nixon, Ford, and Reagan; and is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).] +++++++++++++ Sample text messages between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, released to Congress and the media on December 13, 2016 ++++++++++++++ 03/04/2016 Strzok – God Hillary should win. 100,000,000-0. Page – I know ++++++++++++ 04/02/2016 Page – So look, you say we text on that phone when we talk about Hillary because it can’t be traced, you were just venting, bc you feel bad that you’re gone so much but that can’t be helped right now. ++++++++++ 07/08/2016 Strzok – And meanwhile, we have Black Lives Matter protestors, right now, chanting “no justice no peace” around DoJ and the White House… Page – That’s awful. +++++++++ 07/14/2016 Page – Have you read this? It’s really frightening. For Whites Sensing Decline, Donald Trump Unleashes Words of Resistance http://NYTI/ms/29WCu5! Strzok – I have not. But I think it’s clear he’s capturing all the white, poor voters who the mainstream republicans abandoned in all but name in the quest for the almighty $$$ Page – Yeah, it’s not good. Strzok – Poll Finds Emails Weighing on Hillary Clinton, Now Tied With Donald Trump http://nyti.ms/29RV5gf Page – It is +++++++++++++ 07/26/2016 Strzok – And hey. Congrats on a woman nominated for President in a major party! About damn time! Many many more returns of the day!! Page – That’s cute. Thanks ++++++++++ 08/06/2016 Page – Jesus. You should read this. And Trump should go f himself. Moment in Convention Glare Shakes Up Khans American Life http://nyti.ms/2aHulE0 Strzok – God that’s a great article. Thanks for sharing. And F TRUMP. ++++++++ 08/06/2016 Page – And maybe you’re meant to stay where you are because you’re meant to protect the country from that menace. To that end comma, read this: Page – Trump Enablers Will Finally Have to Take A Stand http://nyti.ms/2aFakry Strzok – Thanks. It’s absolutely true that we’re both very fortunate. And of course I’ll try and approach it that way. I just know it will be tough at times. I can protect our country at many levels, not sure if that helps ++++++++++++ 08/09/2016 Page – He’s not ever going to become president, right? Right?! Strzok – OMG did you hear what Trump just said? +++++++++++ 08/26/2016 Strzok – Just went to a southern Virginia Walmart. I could SMELL the Trump support… Page – Yep. Out to lunch with (redacted) We both hate everyone and everything. Page – Just riffing on the hot mess that is our country. Strzok – Yeah…it’s scary real down here +++++++++ 10/20/2016 Strzok: I am riled up. Trump is a f***ing idiot, is unable to provide a coherent answer. Strzok – I CAN’T PULL AWAY, WHAT THE F**K HAPPENED TO OUR COUNTRY (redacted)??!?! Page– I don’t know. But we’ll get it back. We’re America. We rock. Strzok– Donald just said “bad hombres” Strzok– Trump just said what the FBI did is disgraceful. END -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Mon Jan 15 10:55:13 2018 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 04:55:13 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons In-Reply-To: References: <2ab5175e797cf44579dae2f21.24d5dd889d.20180112175657.b0855b2db1.eae4627c@mail95.sea21.rsgsv.net> Message-ID: <003301d38def$5284ee60$f78ecb20$@comcast.net> Good article about the Iranian protests. Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn't like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called " color revolutions " of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. However, on the other hand we shouldn't be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it's bought and paid for proxies. Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are " home grown " and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can " walk and chew gum at the same time ", by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. David J. From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM To: Peace-discuss List Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: Hey Karen- I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. Keep Fighting, Lee Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list Image removed by sender. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 332 bytes Desc: not available URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jan 15 13:57:25 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 13:57:25 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons In-Reply-To: <003301d38def$5284ee60$f78ecb20$@comcast.net> References: <2ab5175e797cf44579dae2f21.24d5dd889d.20180112175657.b0855b2db1.eae4627c@mail95.sea21.rsgsv.net> <003301d38def$5284ee60$f78ecb20$@comcast.net> Message-ID: David Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson > wrote: Good article about the Iranian protests. Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. David J. From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM To: Peace-discuss List Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp > wrote: Hey Karen- I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. Keep Fighting, Lee Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From galliher at illinois.edu Mon Jan 15 15:02:31 2018 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 09:02:31 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons In-Reply-To: References: <2ab5175e797cf44579dae2f21.24d5dd889d.20180112175657.b0855b2db1.eae4627c@mail95.sea21.rsgsv.net> <003301d38def$5284ee60$f78ecb20$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <7ED17FDB-0A8A-4CDF-A4EC-593BB6465A66@illinois.edu> Karen & David-- You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). —CGE > On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > David > > Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. > > We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. > > > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >> >> Good article about the Iranian protests. >> >> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >> >> David J. >> >> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >> To: Peace-discuss List >> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >> >> >>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>> >>> Hey Karen- >>> >>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>> >>> Keep Fighting, >>> Lee >>> >>> From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jan 15 15:49:42 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 15:49:42 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! Message-ID: Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. Fab. From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM To: Karen Aram Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons Karen & David-- You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). —CGE > On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > David > > Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. > > We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. > > > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >> >> Good article about the Iranian protests. >> >> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >> >> David J. >> >> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >> To: Peace-discuss List >> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >> >> >>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>> >>> Hey Karen- >>> >>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>> >>> Keep Fighting, >>> Lee >>> >>> _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jan 15 15:56:57 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 15:56:57 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! 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) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:50 AM To: Estabrook, Carl G ; Karen Aram ; David Johnson Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net Subject: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. Fab. From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM To: Karen Aram Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons Karen & David-- You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). —CGE > On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > David > > Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. > > We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. > > > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >> >> Good article about the Iranian protests. >> >> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >> >> David J. >> >> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >> To: Peace-discuss List >> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >> >> >>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>> >>> Hey Karen- >>> >>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>> >>> Keep Fighting, >>> Lee >>> >>> _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jan 15 15:56:57 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 15:56:57 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! 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) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:50 AM To: Estabrook, Carl G ; Karen Aram ; David Johnson Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net Subject: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. Fab. From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM To: Karen Aram Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons Karen & David-- You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). —CGE > On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > David > > Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. > > We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. > > > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >> >> Good article about the Iranian protests. >> >> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >> >> David J. >> >> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >> To: Peace-discuss List >> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >> >> >>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>> >>> Hey Karen- >>> >>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>> >>> Keep Fighting, >>> Lee >>> >>> _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From galliher at illinois.edu Mon Jan 15 16:01:17 2018 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 10:01:17 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <55A15263-3A77-408C-972F-A280D83FA58D@illinois.edu> Isn't it racist to take umbrage at the Anglo-Saxon ‘shit’ while finding its Latinate equivalents (‘feces', ‘excrement') acceptable? > On Jan 15, 2018, at 9:49 AM, Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. > Fab. > From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. > To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org > Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! > > > > For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: > > > RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST > > The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! > > > Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza > 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) > > Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. > > Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. > > > > > > 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM > To: Karen Aram > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons > > Karen & David-- > > You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. > > I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. > > The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. > > As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). > > —CGE > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> David >> >> Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. >> >> We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. >> >> >> >>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >>> >>> Good article about the Iranian protests. >>> >>> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >>> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >>> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >>> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >>> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >>> >>> David J. >>> >>> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >>> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >>> To: Peace-discuss List >>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey Karen- >>>> >>>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>>> >>>> Keep Fighting, >>>> Lee >>>> >>>> > _______________________________________________ > 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 fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jan 15 16:04:50 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 16:04:50 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! In-Reply-To: <55A15263-3A77-408C-972F-A280D83FA58D@illinois.edu> References: <55A15263-3A77-408C-972F-A280D83FA58D@illinois.edu> Message-ID: Yeah, that's because of that "Norman Bastard and his Gang of Bandits" as our Founding Father Tom Paine called them in Common Sense--William Dubbed the Conqueror. Fab. 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: Carl G. Estabrook [mailto:galliher at illinois.edu] Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 10:01 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: Karen Aram ; David Johnson ; peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! Isn't it racist to take umbrage at the Anglo-Saxon ‘shit’ while finding its Latinate equivalents (‘feces', ‘excrement') acceptable? > On Jan 15, 2018, at 9:49 AM, Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. > Fab. > From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. > To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org > Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! > > > > For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: > > > RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST > > The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! > > > Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza > 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) > > Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. > > Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. > > > > > > 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM > To: Karen Aram > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons > > Karen & David-- > > You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. > > I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. > > The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. > > As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). > > —CGE > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> David >> >> Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. >> >> We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. >> >> >> >>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >>> >>> Good article about the Iranian protests. >>> >>> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >>> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >>> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >>> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >>> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >>> >>> David J. >>> >>> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >>> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >>> To: Peace-discuss List >>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey Karen- >>>> >>>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>>> >>>> Keep Fighting, >>>> Lee >>>> >>>> > _______________________________________________ > 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 galliher at illinois.edu Mon Jan 15 16:44:54 2018 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 10:44:54 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! In-Reply-To: References: <55A15263-3A77-408C-972F-A280D83FA58D@illinois.edu> Message-ID: Paine was one of the few honest men among that gang of bandits (‘Founding Fathers’). William of Normandy was a literal bastard, but the FFs deserve the epithet, for killing people to maintain slavery, which the British government was moving to abolish (as Gerald Horne points out in his 2014 book, “The Counter-Revolution of 1776”) - in part because of American economic competition. (I say that even though the first American wounded in the war - on Lexington Green, 19 April 1775 - was an Estabrook: Prince Estabrook was a slave who belonged to the family - there’s a plaque to him on the Green. But I’m glad to say that half the family were Loyalists who went to Nova Scotia; descended from the reprehensible part of the family, I still have distant Canadian cousins, after ten generations.) —CGE > On Jan 15, 2018, at 10:04 AM, Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Yeah, that's because of that "Norman Bastard and his Gang of Bandits" as our Founding Father Tom Paine called them in Common Sense--William Dubbed the Conqueror. Fab. > > 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: Carl G. Estabrook [mailto:galliher at illinois.edu] > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 10:01 AM > To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: Karen Aram ; David Johnson ; peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! > > Isn't it racist to take umbrage at the Anglo-Saxon ‘shit’ while finding its Latinate equivalents (‘feces', ‘excrement') acceptable? > > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 9:49 AM, Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. >> Fab. >> From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. >> To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org >> Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! >> >> >> >> For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: >> >> >> RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST >> >> The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! >> >> >> Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza >> 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) >> >> Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. >> >> Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. >> >> >> >> >> >> 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss >> Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM >> To: Karen Aram >> Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >> >> Karen & David-- >> >> You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. >> >> I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. >> >> The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. >> >> As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). >> >> —CGE >> >>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >>> >>> David >>> >>> Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. >>> >>> We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >>>> >>>> Good article about the Iranian protests. >>>> >>>> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >>>> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >>>> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >>>> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >>>> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >>>> >>>> David J. >>>> >>>> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >>>> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >>>> To: Peace-discuss List >>>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hey Karen- >>>>> >>>>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>>>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>>>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>>>> >>>>> Keep Fighting, >>>>> Lee >>>>> >>>>> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jan 15 16:49:47 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 16:49:47 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! In-Reply-To: References: <55A15263-3A77-408C-972F-A280D83FA58D@illinois.edu> Message-ID: In Common Sense Tom called Lexington and Concord "massacres"--of US citizen soldier Minutemen by trained Brit Mercenaries. Fab. Irish American 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: Carl G. Estabrook [mailto:galliher at illinois.edu] Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 10:45 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; Karen Aram Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! Paine was one of the few honest men among that gang of bandits (‘Founding Fathers’). William of Normandy was a literal bastard, but the FFs deserve the epithet, for killing people to maintain slavery, which the British government was moving to abolish (as Gerald Horne points out in his 2014 book, “The Counter-Revolution of 1776”) - in part because of American economic competition. (I say that even though the first American wounded in the war - on Lexington Green, 19 April 1775 - was an Estabrook: Prince Estabrook was a slave who belonged to the family - there’s a plaque to him on the Green. But I’m glad to say that half the family were Loyalists who went to Nova Scotia; descended from the reprehensible part of the family, I still have distant Canadian cousins, after ten generations.) —CGE > On Jan 15, 2018, at 10:04 AM, Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Yeah, that's because of that "Norman Bastard and his Gang of Bandits" as our Founding Father Tom Paine called them in Common Sense--William Dubbed the Conqueror. Fab. > > 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: Carl G. Estabrook [mailto:galliher at illinois.edu] > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 10:01 AM > To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: Karen Aram ; David Johnson ; peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! > > Isn't it racist to take umbrage at the Anglo-Saxon ‘shit’ while finding its Latinate equivalents (‘feces', ‘excrement') acceptable? > > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 9:49 AM, Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. >> Fab. >> From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. >> To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org >> Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! >> >> >> >> For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: >> >> >> RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST >> >> The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! >> >> >> Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza >> 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) >> >> Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. >> >> Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. >> >> >> >> >> >> 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss >> Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM >> To: Karen Aram >> Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >> >> Karen & David-- >> >> You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. >> >> I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. >> >> The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. >> >> As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). >> >> —CGE >> >>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >>> >>> David >>> >>> Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. >>> >>> We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >>>> >>>> Good article about the Iranian protests. >>>> >>>> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >>>> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >>>> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >>>> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >>>> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >>>> >>>> David J. >>>> >>>> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >>>> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >>>> To: Peace-discuss List >>>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hey Karen- >>>>> >>>>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>>>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>>>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>>>> >>>>> Keep Fighting, >>>>> Lee >>>>> >>>>> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 From email at addthis.com Mon Jan 15 21:40:52 2018 From: email at addthis.com (email at addthis.com) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 21:40:52 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Donald_Trump=E2=80=99s_mother_came_from?= =?utf-8?b?IGEg4oCcc2gqKmhvbGXigJ0gcGxhY2U=?= Message-ID: <20180115214052.0E9D67032396@legacyapi6-08-ussnn1.prod.dc.dynback.net> moboct1 at aim.com has shared an article with you! Donald Trump’s mother came from a “sh**hole” place -- https://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/niallodowd/donald-trump-mother-shithole-immigrant-bashing#.Wl0f49bRWt8.email To stop receiving any emails from AddThis, please visit: http://www.addthis.com/privacy/email-opt-out?e=LeFIiVmPXcFchUuPTZ9LrFSFS5hLwluEWYFajVaNFoJdmA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Mon Jan 15 22:44:09 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 16:44:09 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ALMA MATER - L.H.O.O.COL > On Jan 15, 2018, at 9:56 AM, Boyle, Francis A 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: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:50 AM > To: Estabrook, Carl G ; Karen Aram ; David Johnson > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! > > Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. > Fab. > From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. > To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org > Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! > > > > For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: > > > RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST > > The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! > > > Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza > 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) > > Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. > > Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. > > > > > > 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM > To: Karen Aram > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons > > Karen & David-- > > You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. > > I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. > > The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. > > As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). > > —CGE > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> David >> >> Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. >> >> We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. >> >> >> >>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >>> >>> Good article about the Iranian protests. >>> >>> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >>> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >>> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >>> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >>> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >>> >>> David J. >>> >>> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >>> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >>> To: Peace-discuss List >>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey Karen- >>>> >>>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>>> >>>> Keep Fighting, >>>> Lee >>>> >>>> > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From cgestabrook at gmail.com Mon Jan 15 22:44:09 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 16:44:09 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ALMA MATER - L.H.O.O.COL > On Jan 15, 2018, at 9:56 AM, Boyle, Francis A 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: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:50 AM > To: Estabrook, Carl G ; Karen Aram ; David Johnson > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! > > Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. > Fab. > From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. > To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org > Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! > > > > For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: > > > RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST > > The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! > > > Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza > 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) > > Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. > > Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. > > > > > > 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM > To: Karen Aram > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons > > Karen & David-- > > You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. > > I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. > > The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. > > As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). > > —CGE > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> David >> >> Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. >> >> We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. >> >> >> >>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >>> >>> Good article about the Iranian protests. >>> >>> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >>> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >>> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >>> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >>> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >>> >>> David J. >>> >>> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >>> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >>> To: Peace-discuss List >>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey Karen- >>>> >>>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>>> >>>> Keep Fighting, >>>> Lee >>>> >>>> > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jan 15 22:52:52 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 22:52:52 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice have argued and will continue to argue that the 2001 AUMF gives them the legal and US Constitutional authority to wage war all over the world forever. Perpetual War instead of Kant's Perpetual Peace, which I teach in my course on Jurisprudence. So we have to make our Stand against Perpetual War in front of this Shithole Law School on January 24 from 3-4pm. Fab Ed Norton Professor of Law From the Bowels of the Shithole UIUC Law School 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: C G Estabrook [mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 4:44 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Re: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! ALMA MATER - L.H.O.O.COL > On Jan 15, 2018, at 9:56 AM, Boyle, Francis A 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: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:50 AM > To: Estabrook, Carl G ; Karen Aram ; David Johnson > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! > > Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. > Fab. > From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. > To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org > Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! > > > > For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: > > > RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST > > The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! > > > Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza > 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) > > Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. > > Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. > > > > > > 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM > To: Karen Aram > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons > > Karen & David-- > > You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. > > I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. > > The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. > > As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). > > —CGE > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> David >> >> Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. >> >> We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. >> >> >> >>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >>> >>> Good article about the Iranian protests. >>> >>> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >>> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >>> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >>> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >>> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >>> >>> David J. >>> >>> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >>> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >>> To: Peace-discuss List >>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey Karen- >>>> >>>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>>> >>>> Keep Fighting, >>>> Lee >>>> >>>> > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jan 15 22:52:52 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 22:52:52 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice have argued and will continue to argue that the 2001 AUMF gives them the legal and US Constitutional authority to wage war all over the world forever. Perpetual War instead of Kant's Perpetual Peace, which I teach in my course on Jurisprudence. So we have to make our Stand against Perpetual War in front of this Shithole Law School on January 24 from 3-4pm. Fab Ed Norton Professor of Law From the Bowels of the Shithole UIUC Law School 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: C G Estabrook [mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 4:44 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Re: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! ALMA MATER - L.H.O.O.COL > On Jan 15, 2018, at 9:56 AM, Boyle, Francis A 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: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:50 AM > To: Estabrook, Carl G ; Karen Aram ; David Johnson > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! > > Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. > Fab. > From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. > To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org > Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! > > > > For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: > > > RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST > > The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! > > > Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza > 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) > > Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. > > Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. > > > > > > 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM > To: Karen Aram > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons > > Karen & David-- > > You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. > > I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. > > The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. > > As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). > > —CGE > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> David >> >> Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. >> >> We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. >> >> >> >>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >>> >>> Good article about the Iranian protests. >>> >>> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >>> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >>> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >>> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >>> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >>> >>> David J. >>> >>> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >>> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >>> To: Peace-discuss List >>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey Karen- >>>> >>>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>>> >>>> Keep Fighting, >>>> Lee >>>> >>>> > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jan 15 23:16:57 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 23:16:57 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Journalist Nick Turse blacklisted by US Africom, what do they not want him to cover? Message-ID: * Print * Leaflet * Feedback * Share » US AFRICOM blacklists reporter Nick Turse as “not a legitimate journalist” By Eddie Haywood WSWS.ORG 15 January 2018 Journalist Nick Turse, who has reported extensively on US military operations in Africa, was recently told that he has been deemed “not a legitimate journalist” by AFRICOM, the US military command which oversees operations across the continent. The move is of a piece with the US government’s drive to silence critical reporting by alternative news outlets and comes amid the global effort to censor oppositional and alternative viewpoints on the Internet. Turse explained in an article published by the Intercept on Saturday that AFRICOM officials began stonewalling his queries after he authored an article in July which documented torture by US-trained Cameroonian forces at a US base in Salak, Cameroon. For several years, the Pentagon has been perturbed by Turse’s reporting, which has exposed the vast spectrum of United States military operations across Africa, most of which it wishes to keep shrouded in secrecy. Turse related a telephone conversation in October with Lt. Commander Anthony Falvo, the head of AFRICOM’s public relations office, in which Falvo told him, “Nick, we’re not going to respond to any of your questions...We just don’t feel that we need to.” When asked by Turse if Falvo believed AFRICOM did not need to address questions from the press in general, or just Turse himself, Falvo stated abruptly, “No, just you. We don’t consider you a legitimate journalist, really.” Falvo then hung up on Turse. Turse noted several attempts by AFRICOM to stonewall his queries into US military operations on the continent in the weeks following his phone call with Falvo. During the course of his investigation into torture by US-trained Cameroonian forces, he stated that AFRICOM essentially ignored his emails and telephone calls. Around 10 days before his call with Falvo and after several fruitless phone calls to AFRICOM by Turse to verify details in his July article published by the Intercept, “Cameroonian troops tortured and killed prisoners at base used for US drone surveillance,” his call was finally taken by AFRICOM spokesperson Robyn Mack, who told Turse to proceed with his questions. Bizarrely, Turse says that while in the middle of giving her his list of queries, Mack interrupted, “Hello, hello, Nick are you there? Hello?” as if the two had a faulty connection. Turse replied several times that he was still on the line, but after several moments, Mack hung up. After several attempts to call back went unanswered, finally someone picked up the line. When Turse asked to speak to Mack, he was told that she “went out for lunch, along with everyone in the office.” On November 15, several days after the first phone call, Robyn Mack answered, but when Turse identified himself, Mack again hung up. Turse’s exposures have shed light on the Pentagon’s vast array of secret military bases and its operations across the African continent. In the course of several year of reporting Turse has sought to exhaustively documented the extent of Washington’s criminal drive to re-colonize Africa. Since October, when five Green Berets were killed in an ambush in Niger, exposing the extent and scale of the US military offensive in West Africa, AFRICOM and its offensive operations across the continent have come under greater scrutiny. With the blacklisting of a journalist who has exposed its criminal operations, the United States military is attempting to control the flow of information to those media outlets who toe the official line, such as the New York Times,Washington Post, and other such officially approved media organs which make up the corporate press on which the ruling class can depend. The antidemocratic attempt by the US government to establish “genuine journalism” coincides with Washington’s drive to censor the Internet in coordination with the big tech companies, including Google, Facebook and Twitter. The attempt to smear Turse as an illegitimate journalist comes after Google’s introduction last April of a new search engine algorithm which resulted in a decline in search results leading to sites with political views which are critical of the right-wing reaction coming out of Washington. Various left-leaning and anti-war websites have seen a drastic decline in incoming traffic from Google, with the World Socialist Web Site suffering the most with a 75 percent decline in incoming searches. The Intercept has also experienced a noticeable decline in traffic generated by Google searches. The attack on the democratic right of the American population to freedom of the press and access to information online should be taken within the broader context of the campaigns conducted against former NSA contractor Edward Snowden and journalist Julian Assange of Wikileaks, who have been condemned and pursued as criminals by Washington for exposing the crimes of US imperialism. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jan 15 23:30:04 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 23:30:04 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Journalist Nick Turse blacklisted by US Africom, what do they not want him to cover? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Turse has the definitive book on US military intervention throughout Africa. This book has been supplemented and updated by several articles you can find on Tom.Dispatch. Fab Ed Norton Professor of Law UIUC Shithouse College 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) From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 5:17 PM To: Peace-discuss List Subject: [Peace-discuss] Journalist Nick Turse blacklisted by US Africom, what do they not want him to cover? · Print · Leaflet · Feedback · Share » US AFRICOM blacklists reporter Nick Turse as “not a legitimate journalist” By Eddie Haywood WSWS.ORG 15 January 2018 Journalist Nick Turse, who has reported extensively on US military operations in Africa, was recently told that he has been deemed “not a legitimate journalist” by AFRICOM, the US military command which oversees operations across the continent. The move is of a piece with the US government’s drive to silence critical reporting by alternative news outlets and comes amid the global effort to censor oppositional and alternative viewpoints on the Internet. Turse explained in an article published by the Intercept on Saturday that AFRICOM officials began stonewalling his queries after he authored an article in July which documented torture by US-trained Cameroonian forces at a US base in Salak, Cameroon. For several years, the Pentagon has been perturbed by Turse’s reporting, which has exposed the vast spectrum of United States military operations across Africa, most of which it wishes to keep shrouded in secrecy. Turse related a telephone conversation in October with Lt. Commander Anthony Falvo, the head of AFRICOM’s public relations office, in which Falvo told him, “Nick, we’re not going to respond to any of your questions...We just don’t feel that we need to.” When asked by Turse if Falvo believed AFRICOM did not need to address questions from the press in general, or just Turse himself, Falvo stated abruptly, “No, just you. We don’t consider you a legitimate journalist, really.” Falvo then hung up on Turse. Turse noted several attempts by AFRICOM to stonewall his queries into US military operations on the continent in the weeks following his phone call with Falvo. During the course of his investigation into torture by US-trained Cameroonian forces, he stated that AFRICOM essentially ignored his emails and telephone calls. Around 10 days before his call with Falvo and after several fruitless phone calls to AFRICOM by Turse to verify details in his July article published by the Intercept, “Cameroonian troops tortured and killed prisoners at base used for US drone surveillance,” his call was finally taken by AFRICOM spokesperson Robyn Mack, who told Turse to proceed with his questions. Bizarrely, Turse says that while in the middle of giving her his list of queries, Mack interrupted, “Hello, hello, Nick are you there? Hello?” as if the two had a faulty connection. Turse replied several times that he was still on the line, but after several moments, Mack hung up. After several attempts to call back went unanswered, finally someone picked up the line. When Turse asked to speak to Mack, he was told that she “went out for lunch, along with everyone in the office.” On November 15, several days after the first phone call, Robyn Mack answered, but when Turse identified himself, Mack again hung up. Turse’s exposures have shed light on the Pentagon’s vast array of secret military bases and its operations across the African continent. In the course of several year of reporting Turse has sought to exhaustively documented the extent of Washington’s criminal drive to re-colonize Africa. Since October, when five Green Berets were killed in an ambush in Niger, exposing the extent and scale of the US military offensive in West Africa, AFRICOM and its offensive operations across the continent have come under greater scrutiny. With the blacklisting of a journalist who has exposed its criminal operations, the United States military is attempting to control the flow of information to those media outlets who toe the official line, such as the New York Times,Washington Post, and other such officially approved media organs which make up the corporate press on which the ruling class can depend. The antidemocratic attempt by the US government to establish “genuine journalism” coincides with Washington’s drive to censor the Internet in coordination with the big tech companies, including Google, Facebook and Twitter. The attempt to smear Turse as an illegitimate journalist comes after Google’s introduction last April of a new search engine algorithm which resulted in a decline in search results leading to sites with political views which are critical of the right-wing reaction coming out of Washington. Various left-leaning and anti-war websites have seen a drastic decline in incoming traffic from Google, with the World Socialist Web Site suffering the most with a 75 percent decline in incoming searches. The Intercept has also experienced a noticeable decline in traffic generated by Google searches. The attack on the democratic right of the American population to freedom of the press and access to information online should be taken within the broader context of the campaigns conducted against former NSA contractor Edward Snowden and journalist Julian Assange of Wikileaks, who have been condemned and pursued as criminals by Washington for exposing the crimes of US imperialism. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jan 15 23:40:12 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 23:40:12 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Journalist Nick Turse blacklisted by US Africom, what do they not want him to cover? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: “The Changing Face of Empire?” I have it. On Jan 15, 2018, at 15:30, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Turse has the definitive book on US military intervention throughout Africa. This book has been supplemented and updated by several articles you can find on Tom.Dispatch. Fab Ed Norton Professor of Law UIUC Shithouse College 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) From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 5:17 PM To: Peace-discuss List > Subject: [Peace-discuss] Journalist Nick Turse blacklisted by US Africom, what do they not want him to cover? • Print • Leaflet • Feedback • Share » US AFRICOM blacklists reporter Nick Turse as “not a legitimate journalist” By Eddie Haywood WSWS.ORG 15 January 2018 Journalist Nick Turse, who has reported extensively on US military operations in Africa, was recently told that he has been deemed “not a legitimate journalist” by AFRICOM, the US military command which oversees operations across the continent. The move is of a piece with the US government’s drive to silence critical reporting by alternative news outlets and comes amid the global effort to censor oppositional and alternative viewpoints on the Internet. Turse explained in an article published by the Intercept on Saturday that AFRICOM officials began stonewalling his queries after he authored an article in July which documented torture by US-trained Cameroonian forces at a US base in Salak, Cameroon. For several years, the Pentagon has been perturbed by Turse’s reporting, which has exposed the vast spectrum of United States military operations across Africa, most of which it wishes to keep shrouded in secrecy. Turse related a telephone conversation in October with Lt. Commander Anthony Falvo, the head of AFRICOM’s public relations office, in which Falvo told him, “Nick, we’re not going to respond to any of your questions...We just don’t feel that we need to.” When asked by Turse if Falvo believed AFRICOM did not need to address questions from the press in general, or just Turse himself, Falvo stated abruptly, “No, just you. We don’t consider you a legitimate journalist, really.” Falvo then hung up on Turse. Turse noted several attempts by AFRICOM to stonewall his queries into US military operations on the continent in the weeks following his phone call with Falvo. During the course of his investigation into torture by US-trained Cameroonian forces, he stated that AFRICOM essentially ignored his emails and telephone calls. Around 10 days before his call with Falvo and after several fruitless phone calls to AFRICOM by Turse to verify details in his July article published by the Intercept, “Cameroonian troops tortured and killed prisoners at base used for US drone surveillance,” his call was finally taken by AFRICOM spokesperson Robyn Mack, who told Turse to proceed with his questions. Bizarrely, Turse says that while in the middle of giving her his list of queries, Mack interrupted, “Hello, hello, Nick are you there? Hello?” as if the two had a faulty connection. Turse replied several times that he was still on the line, but after several moments, Mack hung up. After several attempts to call back went unanswered, finally someone picked up the line. When Turse asked to speak to Mack, he was told that she “went out for lunch, along with everyone in the office.” On November 15, several days after the first phone call, Robyn Mack answered, but when Turse identified himself, Mack again hung up. Turse’s exposures have shed light on the Pentagon’s vast array of secret military bases and its operations across the African continent. In the course of several year of reporting Turse has sought to exhaustively documented the extent of Washington’s criminal drive to re-colonize Africa. Since October, when five Green Berets were killed in an ambush in Niger, exposing the extent and scale of the US military offensive in West Africa, AFRICOM and its offensive operations across the continent have come under greater scrutiny. With the blacklisting of a journalist who has exposed its criminal operations, the United States military is attempting to control the flow of information to those media outlets who toe the official line, such as the New York Times,Washington Post, and other such officially approved media organs which make up the corporate press on which the ruling class can depend. The antidemocratic attempt by the US government to establish “genuine journalism” coincides with Washington’s drive to censor the Internet in coordination with the big tech companies, including Google, Facebook and Twitter. The attempt to smear Turse as an illegitimate journalist comes after Google’s introduction last April of a new search engine algorithm which resulted in a decline in search results leading to sites with political views which are critical of the right-wing reaction coming out of Washington. Various left-leaning and anti-war websites have seen a drastic decline in incoming traffic from Google, with the World Socialist Web Site suffering the most with a 75 percent decline in incoming searches. The Intercept has also experienced a noticeable decline in traffic generated by Google searches. The attack on the democratic right of the American population to freedom of the press and access to information online should be taken within the broader context of the campaigns conducted against former NSA contractor Edward Snowden and journalist Julian Assange of Wikileaks, who have been condemned and pursued as criminals by Washington for exposing the crimes of US imperialism. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bjornsona at ameritech.net Tue Jan 16 06:19:11 2018 From: bjornsona at ameritech.net (bjornsona at ameritech.net) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 00:19:11 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp/Nukes Japan Message-ID: The Perpetual War Machine is keeping us (and itself) busy. From the Middle East to the Pacific: surely it is no coincidence that on Jan. 8, 2018, President Trump told Congress he is willing to Ok the sale of $133 million in anti-ICBMs to Japan, followed by a mistaken drill for incoming ICBMs in Hawaii?  Not only will the initial sale of missiles cost $133 million (sold by Lockheed Martin, Raytheon & BAE Systems), the land platforms will be $ 2 billion. A chunk of change worth inconveniencing a few tourists in Hawaii for. In addition, this sale violates the 30-year-old International Nuclear Treaty, as the Russians have said, since the platforms can be loaded with any type of missile, nuclear or non. Continuing to put anti-ICBM platforms around North Korea (South Korea has them, Japan will) means the missiles are also aimed at China, certainly giving both North Korea and China the impression that the U. S. Is willing to use a preemptive strike. Found most of this in an article from CNN. Have tried to copy url. No t successful yet. Sending it for what it's worth. Sent from my LG Phoenix 2, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone ------ Original message------From: Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discussDate: Mon, Jan 15, 2018 9:04 AMTo: Karen Aram;Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net;Subject:Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons Karen & David-- You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). —CGE > On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > David > > Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. > > We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. > > > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >> >> Good article about the Iranian protests. >> >> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >> >> David J. >> >> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >> To: Peace-discuss List >> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >> >> >>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>> >>> Hey Karen- >>> >>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>> >>> Keep Fighting, >>> Lee >>> >>> _______________________________________________ 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 Jan 16 15:38:16 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 09:38:16 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Trump's crazy not to continue the Cold War! Message-ID: <835F6FE5-315B-4B49-8CFA-330A01A2CA16@gmail.com> http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/176373/tomgram%3A_alfred_mccoy%2C_tweeting_while_rome_burns/#more A strange piece by Alfred McCoy. No cold warrior from a generation ago could do better in defending the virtues of the American empire. He shows the effects of Trump Derangement Syndrome, excoriating what he sees as the Trump administration's departures from the neoconservative (and neoliberal) policies of the previous administration (and its predecessor) and all but praising its wars and war provocations "at the axial ends of Eurasia" (in a repeated Mackinderesque flourish). "As Trump undercuts the U.S. strategic position at the axial ends of Eurasia, China is pressing relentlessly to displace the United States and dominate that vast continent with what New York Times correspondent Edward Wong calls 'a blunt counterpoint... synonymous with brute strength, bribery and browbeating.’" He also buys the NYT account of Russian 'meddling' in Trump's election ('Russiagate')… —CGE -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jan 16 18:03:30 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 18:03:30 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Barak Appoints War Criminal Yaron! References: Message-ID: > > > Barak Appoints War Criminal Yaron > > by > > Francis A. Boyle > > Professor of International Law > > (The author served as Attorney in the lawsuit against General > Yaron in Ali Aidi v. Yaron, 672 Fed. Supp. 516 (D.D.C. 1987), Palestine > Yearbook of International Law, Vol. V, 1989.) > > Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak has nominated former Major General Amos > Yaron to serve as director-general of the Israeli Defense Ministry, while > Barak himself retains the portfolio of Minister of Defense. According to the > 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, Yaron, whose appointment must be confirmed by > the Israeli Cabinet, is a war criminal by virtue of his command > responsibility for the murder of about 2000 Palestinian and Lebanese > civilians during the 1982 Sabra and Shatila refugee camp massacre in Beirut, > Lebanon. Should Yaron's appointment be confirmed, the U.S. government will > be aiding and abetting the work of an infamous war criminal. In Fiscal Year > 2000, Israel is scheduled to receive $1.92 billion dollars in U.S. military > aid out of a total annual U.S. aid package to Israel worth $2.94 billion. > > In June 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon, driving as far north as the capital, > Beirut, purportedly in an effort to expel the Palestine Liberation > Organization. In August 1982, special U.S. envoy Philip Habib negotiated the > withdrawal of Palestinian forces from Beirut. According to that agreement > the United States government guaranteed the safety of the remaining > Palestinian civilians and obtained Israel's assurance that its armed forces > would not enter West Beirut. Israel, breaking its own pledge, occupied West > Beirut and surrounded the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps on September 15, > 1982. > > On September 16, then Brigadier General Amos Yaron, acting under orders from > the Israeli Ministry of Defense under General Ariel Sharon, allowed > Phalangist troops to enter the refugee camps even though the same troops had > previously engaged in massacres of Palestinians living in Lebanon. The > killing at the refugee camps went on for three days. During nighttime > Phalangist operations, Yaron's troops fired illumination rounds so the > Phalangists could continue their bloody work. Israeli troops, under the > command of Yaron, blocked the exits of the camps to prevent the refugees > from escaping and supplied the Phalangists with at least one bulldozer, > which was used to cover bodies with rubble. > > According to the official Israeli Commission of Inquiry into the massacre > (the so-called Kahan Commission), Yaron, who was present on the roof of the > IDF forward command post overlooking the Shatila camp on the evening of > September 16, knew then that women and children were being killed by > Phalangist militiamen who had entered the camps by prior arrangement with > the Israeli military. Not until the morning of September 18 did Yaron move > to end the killings. Israeli military intelligence later underestimated the > death toll at between 700 and 800, which was criminal enough. In his > testimony to the Kahan Commission, Yaron said he was "happy" about the > decision to send the Phalangist forces into the refugee camps because "the > fighting serves their purposes as well, so let them participate and not let > the IDF do everything." > > Under the terms of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, which was signed by > both the United States and Israel, by his complicity in the massacre, Yaron > allowed the willful causing of "great suffering" and "serious injury" to the > residents of the camps, who were legally "protected persons" thereunder. In > so doing, Yaron was guilty of "grave breaches" under Article 147 of the > Fourth Geneva Convention. In other words, because of his command > responsibilities during the Sabra and Shatila massacre, Yaron was personally > responsible for the commission of "war crimes" under general principles of > both customary and conventional international law. > > On August 1, 1986, the Israeli government announced that it was nominating > Yaron as its Military Attaché to the United States and Canada. Immediately > thereafter, this author and Mr. Abdeen Jabara, Esq. who had recently become > President of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) in > Washington, D.C., decided to launch a campaign to prevent the United States > government from accepting Yaron's diplomatic credentials and admitting him > into the country. Together, the two of us drafted telegrams to Secretary of > State George Shultz, Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger, and Attorney > General Edwin Meese pointing out that Yaron was responsible for the > commission of "grave breaches" of the Fourth Geneva Convention for the role > that he played in supervising the Sabra and Shatila massacre. As such, the > United States government was under an absolute obligation under the Fourth > Geneva Convention to prosecute Yaron for these heinous war crimes should he > set foot on United States territory. Therefore, the telegrams argued, the > United States government must not allow Yaron to enter the country for any > reason other than prosecution. Otherwise, the United States government would > be in breach of its own obligations under the Fourth Geneva Contention. > > ADC sent similar telegrams to the ambassadors for all states parties to the > Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, requesting that pursuant to common article > 1, their governments had an obligation to intervene with the United States > government to demand that the latter not accept Yaron's diplomatic > credentials. A few European states did indeed take this matter up with the > United States government. In the meantime, this author sent a letter to the > Legal Adviser to the Israeli Foreign Ministry stating that in the event > Yaron were to set foot upon United States territory, he would personally sue > Yaron in a U.S. court for his role in the Sabra and Shatila massacre. > > These vigorous efforts by this author, Jabara, the ADC, and others led the > Reagan administration to hold up Yaron's Letter of Accreditation for a > period of three months. According to the Israeli Press, these protests > against Yaron's appointment were instrumental in prompting Washington to > seek Yaron's recall. Israeli papers reported that the behind-the-scenes > diplomatic fury which resulted over Yaron's nomination came after the > Department of Defense received hundreds of letters from Arab-Americans and > liberal Jewish groups protesting Yaron's presence in the United States. > > Several meetings were held between Israeli Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin, > Prime Minister Shimon Peres, and U.S. Secretary of State George Shultz over > the question of Yaron's suitability to serve as Defense Attaché in light of > his involvement in the Beirut massacres. The Israeli daily Davar, associated > with the Labor Party, first broke the story of the meetings between U.S. and > Israeli officials over Yaron in its October 22 edition, indicating that > Washington and Tel Aviv had agreed that Yaron would be recalled but not > immediately. Both sides later denied that a deal had been made, although a > spokesperson for the Israeli Embassy in Washington, D.C., Yossi Gal, > confirmed that the negotiations had indeed taken place. On October 24, 1986 > the Reagan administration officially accepted Yaron's Letter of > Accreditation. > > Undaunted, ADC's Abdeen Jabara flew to Ottawa to convince the Canadian > government to refuse diplomatic accreditation to Yaron as Israel's Military > Attaché to Canada. To its great credit, on March 5, 1987 the Canadian > government refused to accept Yaron's diplomatic credentials. Explaining the > move, External Affairs Minister Joe Clark said that Canada did not consider > it "appropriate" to accept Yaron's credentials. Officials of the External > Affairs Ministry indicated privately that Canada had based its decision on > the findings of the Kahan Commission Report. > > On March 28 the Jerusalem Post reported that Yaron had asked his superiors > to cut short his Washington assignment. A "cool" reception from the > diplomatic community in the U.S., followed by Canada's refusal to accept his > appointment to Ottawa, were factors leading to Yaron's request to be > considered for a territorial command, according to their sources. > Apparently, Canada had rejected Yaron's credentials with Washington's > approval. > > In the meantime, this author, Abdeen Jabara, Linda Huber, Esq., an attorney > in Washington, D.C., Professor Linda Malone, now of the William and Mary > School of Law, and Albert Mokhiber, Esq., then ADC Legal Affairs Director > and later its President, convened at ADC Headquarters for the purpose of > preparing a civil lawsuit against Yaron on behalf of some of the victims of > the Sabra and Shatila massacre. This author and Linda Huber agreed to serve > as Attorneys of Record for three Palestinian women who survived the > massacre. The suit was filed in the United States District Court for the > District of Columbia on May 4, 1987. The Complaint alleged that Yaron bore > responsibility for the murder of the family members of the three Palestinian > women under international treaties including the Nuremberg Principles, which > forbid war crimes and crimes against humanity. > > The plaintiffs, Fatimeh Ali Aidi, Zeineb Sa'ad and Samia A. Khatib, all > three of whom resided in the Shatila camp, each asked for $100,000 in > punitive damages and an undetermined amount in compensatory damages against > Yaron. The Complaint stated that the husband of Fatimeh Ali Aidi, the father > and sister of Zeineb Sa'ad, and the mother, sister and five nieces and > nephews of Samia A. Khatib, were "murdered in the Shatila Camp by agents of > the defendant Yaron" and the IDF during Israel's occupation of West Beirut > in September 1982. The lawsuit stated that Yaron was guilty of violating the > Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, which prohibits the killing of civilians > under military occupation and incriminates an occupying power even if its > "agents" carry out the killing. Citing the Nuremberg Principles, which were > designed to prevent the repetition of crimes against humanity such as were > committed by the Nazi occupying power in Europe during the Second World War, > the suit alleged that Yaron's position of authority, and knowledge of the > ongoing massacre, rendered him personally responsible for the actions of the > Phalangists. > > Yaron was served with a summons to appear in court as he left his Chevy > Chase, Maryland apartment for work on the morning of May 5, one day after > the suit was filed. On May 20, 50 demonstrators picketed Yaron's apartment > building, calling attention to current efforts by France, Israel and the > Soviet Union to bring Nazi war criminals to justice, while Yaron continued > to enjoy diplomatic status in the United States. On May 26, a motion to > dismiss the case was filed by lawyers representing Yaron, claiming that he > enjoyed diplomatic immunity as Israel's Military Attaché, that the statute > of limitations had expired, and that the international treaties cited by the > plaintiffs allowed only governments, not individuals, to bring legal action > for alleged treaty violations. > > During the course of the Yaron litigation, the United States Department of > State took the official position that Yaron possessed diplomatic immunity > under the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and the U.S. > Diplomatic Relations Act of 1978. Yet, at the exact same time the U.S. State > Department was also involved in efforts to put former U.N. Secretary General > Kurt Waldheim on the so-called "watch list" in order to bar his entry into > the United States on the alleged grounds that he might have been an > accomplice to the commission of war crimes during the Second World War. The > U.S. Department of Justice so barred Waldheim as of April 27, 1987. By > contrast, Yaron was directly responsible for the murder of about 2000 > innocent Palestinian and Lebanese civilians, including women, children, and > old people. Unlike Waldheim, however, not only was Yaron permitted to enter > the United States, but the U.S. government also accorded him full diplomatic > privileges and immunities under the Vienna Convention. The gross hypocrisy > involved in these two contemporaneous decisions by the U.S. government could > not have been more blatant. > > Nevertheless, the Federal District Judge who handled the Yaron case decided > to defer to the wishes of the Department of State in this matter. The Judge > observed that this was not a criminal tribunal, but only a civil action. > Hence, the Judge ruled that Yaron was immune from civil proceedings in > United States courts irrespective of whether or not he would be immune from > criminal proceedings in some other forum. The Judge basically ignored expert > Affidavits submitted to the Court independently by three American Professors > of International Law, all of whom stated under oath that acknowledged war > criminals such as Yaron were both criminally and civilly liable for the > commission of their international crimes, whether in United States courts or > elsewhere. > > Despite this setback, ADC continued to mount its nationwide campaign to > convince Yaron that an acknowledged war criminal was not wanted by the > American people to be roaming the streets of their capital, and that he > should go home. Exactly one year after the Israeli government press office > had quietly announced the appointment of Yaron, the Jerusalem Post of Aug. > 1, 1987 reported that Yaron was to resign his diplomatic position "for > reasons related to a lingering controversy" about his role in the 1982 Sabra > and Shatila massacre. This "lingering controversy" was fueled by ADC's "Send > Yaron Home" campaign. According to the Jerusalem Post, although the Reagan > administration initially accepted Yaron's posting to Washington, it had > since been actively trying to encourage Israel to recall him. Eventually > Yaron returned home to Israel, where he currently lives and works with his > fellow war criminals in the IDF and the Israeli government. > > Under basic principles of international law, the U.S. government must be > concerned about directing billions of U.S. tax dollars to the control of an > acknowledged war criminal such as Yaron. Accordingly, the U.S. government > must discontinue all military assistance to Israel if Yaron's appointment is > confirmed. Also, there is no statute of limitations for war crimes. Should > Yaron attempt to return to the U.S., the U.S. government is obligated to > prosecute him for war crimes. The same conclusion follows for any other > State where Yaron might travel. Legally, General Yaron is just like General > Pinochet: Hostis humani generis--The enemy of all humankind! > > From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jan 16 19:31:44 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 19:31:44 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Journalist Nick Turse blacklisted by US Africom, what do they not want him to cover? References: Message-ID: Nick Turses’ more recent book is “Tomorrow’s Battlefield,” which I have, but not yet read. More recent: “Next Time They’ll Come to Count The Dead.” “The Changing Face of Empire?” I have it. On Jan 15, 2018, at 15:30, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Turse has the definitive book on US military intervention throughout Africa. This book has been supplemented and updated by several articles you can find on Tom.Dispatch. Fab Ed Norton Professor of Law UIUC Shithouse College 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) From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 5:17 PM To: Peace-discuss List > Subject: [Peace-discuss] Journalist Nick Turse blacklisted by US Africom, what do they not want him to cover? • Print • Leaflet • Feedback • Share » US AFRICOM blacklists reporter Nick Turse as “not a legitimate journalist” By Eddie Haywood WSWS.ORG 15 January 2018 Journalist Nick Turse, who has reported extensively on US military operations in Africa, was recently told that he has been deemed “not a legitimate journalist” by AFRICOM, the US military command which oversees operations across the continent. The move is of a piece with the US government’s drive to silence critical reporting by alternative news outlets and comes amid the global effort to censor oppositional and alternative viewpoints on the Internet. Turse explained in an article published by the Intercept on Saturday that AFRICOM officials began stonewalling his queries after he authored an article in July which documented torture by US-trained Cameroonian forces at a US base in Salak, Cameroon. For several years, the Pentagon has been perturbed by Turse’s reporting, which has exposed the vast spectrum of United States military operations across Africa, most of which it wishes to keep shrouded in secrecy. Turse related a telephone conversation in October with Lt. Commander Anthony Falvo, the head of AFRICOM’s public relations office, in which Falvo told him, “Nick, we’re not going to respond to any of your questions...We just don’t feel that we need to.” When asked by Turse if Falvo believed AFRICOM did not need to address questions from the press in general, or just Turse himself, Falvo stated abruptly, “No, just you. We don’t consider you a legitimate journalist, really.” Falvo then hung up on Turse. Turse noted several attempts by AFRICOM to stonewall his queries into US military operations on the continent in the weeks following his phone call with Falvo. During the course of his investigation into torture by US-trained Cameroonian forces, he stated that AFRICOM essentially ignored his emails and telephone calls. Around 10 days before his call with Falvo and after several fruitless phone calls to AFRICOM by Turse to verify details in his July article published by the Intercept, “Cameroonian troops tortured and killed prisoners at base used for US drone surveillance,” his call was finally taken by AFRICOM spokesperson Robyn Mack, who told Turse to proceed with his questions. Bizarrely, Turse says that while in the middle of giving her his list of queries, Mack interrupted, “Hello, hello, Nick are you there? Hello?” as if the two had a faulty connection. Turse replied several times that he was still on the line, but after several moments, Mack hung up. After several attempts to call back went unanswered, finally someone picked up the line. When Turse asked to speak to Mack, he was told that she “went out for lunch, along with everyone in the office.” On November 15, several days after the first phone call, Robyn Mack answered, but when Turse identified himself, Mack again hung up. Turse’s exposures have shed light on the Pentagon’s vast array of secret military bases and its operations across the African continent. In the course of several year of reporting Turse has sought to exhaustively documented the extent of Washington’s criminal drive to re-colonize Africa. Since October, when five Green Berets were killed in an ambush in Niger, exposing the extent and scale of the US military offensive in West Africa, AFRICOM and its offensive operations across the continent have come under greater scrutiny. With the blacklisting of a journalist who has exposed its criminal operations, the United States military is attempting to control the flow of information to those media outlets who toe the official line, such as the New York Times,Washington Post, and other such officially approved media organs which make up the corporate press on which the ruling class can depend. The antidemocratic attempt by the US government to establish “genuine journalism” coincides with Washington’s drive to censor the Internet in coordination with the big tech companies, including Google, Facebook and Twitter. The attempt to smear Turse as an illegitimate journalist comes after Google’s introduction last April of a new search engine algorithm which resulted in a decline in search results leading to sites with political views which are critical of the right-wing reaction coming out of Washington. Various left-leaning and anti-war websites have seen a drastic decline in incoming traffic from Google, with the World Socialist Web Site suffering the most with a 75 percent decline in incoming searches. The Intercept has also experienced a noticeable decline in traffic generated by Google searches. The attack on the democratic right of the American population to freedom of the press and access to information online should be taken within the broader context of the campaigns conducted against former NSA contractor Edward Snowden and journalist Julian Assange of Wikileaks, who have been condemned and pursued as criminals by Washington for exposing the crimes of US imperialism. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stuartnlevy at gmail.com Tue Jan 16 23:07:24 2018 From: stuartnlevy at gmail.com (Stuart Levy) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 17:07:24 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] (World Beyond War) - Video Highlights of No Foreign Bases Conference In-Reply-To: <5a5e643571e7a_71b460041b8528546@ip-10-0-0-133.mail> References: <5a5e643571e7a_71b460041b8528546@ip-10-0-0-133.mail> Message-ID: -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Video Highlights of No Foreign Bases Conference Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 20:44:38 +0000 (UTC) From: World Beyond War via WorldBeyondWar.org Reply-To: info at worldbeyondwar.org To: stuartnlevy at gmail.com Action Network Email *A No Foreign Bases conference* was held in Baltimore, Maryland, U.S., on January 12-14, 2018. World Beyond War was one of many organizations that put together this new coalition: http://noforeignbases.org *Here is a tiny fraction of the highlights in a one-hour video that can be used for local events:* *https://youtu.be/gqNFCyxj8qc * Full videos are here (by Wilton Vought): https://youtu.be/mTYfXwPLUbE David Swanson spoke with The Real News Network: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoqJyUcHCKY Learn where the bases are on the map: http://bit.ly/mappingmilitarism Visit David Vine's Base Nation: http://BaseNation.US Sign the Declaration of Peace . Find events all over the world that you can take part in . Join us on Facebook and Twitter . Support World Beyond War's work by clicking here . Sent via ActionNetwork.org . To update your email address, change your name or address, or to stop receiving emails from World Beyond War, please click here . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jan 17 00:04:32 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 00:04:32 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A_Why_today=C2=92s_meeting_on_inte?= =?utf-8?q?rnet_censorship_is_so_important_=287_PM_EST=29?= References: Message-ID: Subject: Why today’s meeting on internet censorship is so important (7 PM EST) Live video webinar with Chris Hedges and David North: Organizing resistance to Internet censorship [https://www.wsws.org/en/media/photos/legacy/frontpage/201801webinar340.jpg?v=2] Dear WSWS readers, Support has poured in from across the world in anticipation of tonight's event, "Organizing Resistance to Internet Censorship," featuring David North and Chris Hedges. The webinar will be broadcast at wsws.org/endcensorship and at facebook.com/wsws.org at 7:00 pm EST. See time zone conversions. WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has made a statement supporting the event, which will be read during the discussion. Prominent journalists and activists have issued calls to attend the meeting, including documentarian John Pilger. All over the world, registrants in the US, India, Pakistan, Mexico, Lebanon, Tunisia, Brazil, South Africa, Japan, across Europe, and in many other regions will be tuning in to attend this event live on Facebook and YouTube. The broad interest in this meeting is proof that opposition to Internet censorship is widespread and global. This is a unique event. It will lay out a political strategy to block corporate-government censorship and transform the internet into a platform of democratic discussion and world communication. We need your help in the final hours before the meeting. * Spend 10 minutes sharing this social media video about the event on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or via email to let others know. * Read and share the WSWS perspective, "Facebook announces major plan to censor news content" * Donate. This meeting has cost substantial resources to put on. Donate $250, $100, or $50 to help cover the associated costs. https://www.wsws.org/donate/. We hope you enjoy tonight's important world event, World Socialist Web Site [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/color-facebook-48.png] Share [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/color-twitter-48.png] Tweet [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/color-forwardtofriend-48.png] Forward Articles: Copyright (C) 2018 wsws.org, All rights reserved. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- To be unsubscribed from the World Socialist Web Site mailing list, simply click on the link below: Unsubscribe karenaram at hotmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 17 13:39:09 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 13:39:09 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS SHITHOLE/SHITHOUSE LAW SCHOOL! Message-ID: Today’s News Gazette has two stories on The Dreamers, which I would encourage you to read. The second article points out that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice will be immediately appealing to the United States Supreme Court against the 800,000 Dreamers. This Shithole/Shithouse Law School has invited out one of the top Trump/Sessions Henchman one week from now to propagandize for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice. It will be his very Office that will be arguing against the 800,000 Dreamers in the United States Supreme Court. And right now Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with His Man Gorsuch. I encourage everyone to attend our Rally against the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice in front of this Shithole/Shithouse Law School on Wednesday, January 24 from 3-4 pm. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law 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, January 14, 2018 7:45 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Session Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. ________________________________ ________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 17 13:39:09 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 13:39:09 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS SHITHOLE/SHITHOUSE LAW SCHOOL! Message-ID: Today’s News Gazette has two stories on The Dreamers, which I would encourage you to read. The second article points out that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice will be immediately appealing to the United States Supreme Court against the 800,000 Dreamers. This Shithole/Shithouse Law School has invited out one of the top Trump/Sessions Henchman one week from now to propagandize for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice. It will be his very Office that will be arguing against the 800,000 Dreamers in the United States Supreme Court. And right now Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with His Man Gorsuch. I encourage everyone to attend our Rally against the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice in front of this Shithole/Shithouse Law School on Wednesday, January 24 from 3-4 pm. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law 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, January 14, 2018 7:45 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Session Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. ________________________________ ________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 17 13:40:19 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 13:40:19 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS SHITHOLE/SHITHOUSE LAW SCHOOL! Message-ID: Today’s News Gazette has two stories on The Dreamers, which I would encourage you to read. The second article points out that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice will be immediately appealing to the United States Supreme Court against the 800,000 Dreamers. This Shithole/Shithouse Law School has invited out one of the top Trump/Sessions Henchman one week from now to propagandize for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice. It will be his very Office that will be arguing against the 800,000 Dreamers in the United States Supreme Court. And right now Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with His Man Gorsuch. I encourage everyone to attend our Rally against the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice in front of this Shithole/Shithouse Law School on Wednesday, January 24 from 3-4 pm. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law 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, January 14, 2018 7:45 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Session Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. ________________________________ ________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Wed Jan 17 13:47:07 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 07:47:07 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Help Stop Sexism! In-Reply-To: <5a5f50392e0d7_3922b95974590f0@asgworker-qmb2-15.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> References: <5a5f50392e0d7_3922b95974590f0@asgworker-qmb2-15.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> Message-ID: <671E2773-8278-4A48-9D24-51DC4ECE17D7@gmail.com> Sen. Cardin is a principal fomenter of the ‘Russiagate' nonsense - designed to force the Trump administration back into the Obama-Clinton politics of war and war provocations! Remember e.g. that Clinton as Secretary of State defended the US killing in Afghanistan by saying it was to secure the rights of women. We should listen to ‘Progressive Democrats of America’ only when they begin to call for bringing all US troops (and weapons) home. —CGE > On Jan 17, 2018, at 7:31 AM, Donna Smith for Progressive Democrats of America wrote: > > > Support the Women’s March > Dear Cg— > > Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) is a feminist organization. We became one of the first national organizations to endorse and work for legislation to lift the arbitrary deadline from the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). We’re helping lead-sponsors Senator Ben Cardin and Representative Jackie Spier gain cosponsors to enshrine equality in the U.S. Constitution. In all honesty, we’ve been critically important to this effort. > > PDAers Andrea Miller, Mike Hersh, and Stephen Spitz helped lead organizing efforts on Capitol Hill—arm in arm with the National Organization for Women (NOW), United For Equality, and our friends Maryland State Senators Susan Lee and Rieger Manno, (who is running for the open Maryland 6th District House seat). Together, we helped encourage Sen. Cardin to step up as the lead sponsor of the Senate “3 State” ERA resolution. We’ve organized events and mobilized support in D.C. and the yet-to-ratify states. > > Get involved with the Women's March > > Please Join Our Victory In 2018 Sustainers Team > Make automatic donations to elect feminist progressives > This year the Women’s March will take place in Las Vegas, and PDA Mega-activists Tisia, Hector, and the rest of the PDA Vegas crew are doing some serious heavy lifting to make sure that the show is a huge success. Please reply to this email with 1) whether you'll be attending, and 2) whether you can help volunteer. > > PDA is working with these stellar activists in Nevada (who’ve ratified the ERA!), as well as leaders in Virginia, Illinois, and other states who are nearing ratification. Andrea with People Demanding Action are working with talented, tireless leaders including Cathy Paganelli Kaelin, Tammy Simkins, Eileen Davis, Marena Groll, Portia Boulger, Diana Danis, and many many more. We are making real progress toward full inclusion of women and girls in the Constitution. The Women’s March is dedicated to this cause! > > National Women's March Anniversary: Power to the Polls > Sun., Jan. 21, 2018 • 10:00 AM > Sam Boyd Stadium > 7000 E Russell Rd > Las Vegas, NV 89122 > (FAQ ) > > Can't make it to an event? Then please drop in a donation to help us continue our fight for women via our work on the ERA, reproductive rights, and other issues impacting women across the country, and to help cover the cost of the cool PDA stuff we're mailing to the location. > > We support progressive feminist candidates who bring a chorus of diverse voices to our political discourse. Will you help us today with an automatic monthly gift of any amount? Help us continue our efforts to expand human rights and curb the excesses of the wealthy oligarchs who are well on their way to taking over our country. Together, we can win. We can’t do anything without you. > > In solidarity, > > Donna Smith for Deb, Mike F, Judy, Mike H, Janis, Dan, Kimberly, Amos, Dr Bill, and Bryan—your PDA National Team > > P.S. We’re proud to enthusiastically support and encourage women to stand up, speak out, and take power. Please click here to help us elect more strong feminist progressives to work for the ERA and all efforts for full equality for all. Please click here to make automatic monthly donations. > > Invest in progress now! > > > Progressive Democrats of America > Grand Rapids, MI 49515, United States > www.pdamerica.org > Paid for by Progressive Democrats of America > Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee > > This email was sent to cgestabrook at gmail.com . To stop receiving emails, click here . > Created with NationBuilder -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 17 13:51:32 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 13:51:32 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] DITTO: RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS SHITHOLE/SHITHOUSE LAW SCHOOL! Message-ID: Ditto: The Trump administration is issuing new guidelines to the nation’s overwhelmed immigration courts in hopes that new case priorities and goals will ease a massive backlog. A seven-page memo to immigration judges from James McHenry, the director of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, says the court should first tackle cases of those detained in immigration jail—with an aim of finishing at least 85% of such cases within two months—and cases with deadlines established by 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) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 7:39 AM To: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS SHITHOLE/SHITHOUSE LAW SCHOOL! Today’s News Gazette has two stories on The Dreamers, which I would encourage you to read. The second article points out that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice will be immediately appealing to the United States Supreme Court against the 800,000 Dreamers. This Shithole/Shithouse Law School has invited out one of the top Trump/Sessions Henchman one week from now to propagandize for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice. It will be his very Office that will be arguing against the 800,000 Dreamers in the United States Supreme Court. And right now Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with His Man Gorsuch. I encourage everyone to attend our Rally against the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice in front of this Shithole/Shithouse Law School on Wednesday, January 24 from 3-4 pm. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law 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, January 14, 2018 7:45 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Session Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. ________________________________ ________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 17 13:51:32 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 13:51:32 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] DITTO: RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS SHITHOLE/SHITHOUSE LAW SCHOOL! Message-ID: Ditto: The Trump administration is issuing new guidelines to the nation’s overwhelmed immigration courts in hopes that new case priorities and goals will ease a massive backlog. A seven-page memo to immigration judges from James McHenry, the director of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, says the court should first tackle cases of those detained in immigration jail—with an aim of finishing at least 85% of such cases within two months—and cases with deadlines established by 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) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 7:39 AM To: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS SHITHOLE/SHITHOUSE LAW SCHOOL! Today’s News Gazette has two stories on The Dreamers, which I would encourage you to read. The second article points out that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice will be immediately appealing to the United States Supreme Court against the 800,000 Dreamers. This Shithole/Shithouse Law School has invited out one of the top Trump/Sessions Henchman one week from now to propagandize for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice. It will be his very Office that will be arguing against the 800,000 Dreamers in the United States Supreme Court. And right now Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with His Man Gorsuch. I encourage everyone to attend our Rally against the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice in front of this Shithole/Shithouse Law School on Wednesday, January 24 from 3-4 pm. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law 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, January 14, 2018 7:45 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Session Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. ________________________________ ________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Wed Jan 17 14:14:00 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 08:14:00 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Help Stop Sexism! In-Reply-To: <671E2773-8278-4A48-9D24-51DC4ECE17D7@gmail.com> References: <5a5f50392e0d7_3922b95974590f0@asgworker-qmb2-15.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> <671E2773-8278-4A48-9D24-51DC4ECE17D7@gmail.com> Message-ID: A local friend points out “...Cardin is one of the biggest proponents for anti-BDS legislation and promoter of Israel!" How ‘progressive’… —CGE > On Jan 17, 2018, at 7:47 AM, C G Estabrook wrote: > > Sen. Cardin is a principal fomenter of the ‘Russiagate' nonsense - designed to force the Trump administration back into the Obama-Clinton politics of war and war provocations! > > Remember e.g. that Clinton as Secretary of State defended the US killing in Afghanistan by saying it was to secure the rights of women. > > We should listen to ‘Progressive Democrats of America’ only when they begin to call for bringing all US troops (and weapons) home. > > —CGE > > >> On Jan 17, 2018, at 7:31 AM, Donna Smith for Progressive Democrats of America > wrote: >> >> >> Support the Women’s March >> Dear Cg— >> >> Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) is a feminist organization. We became one of the first national organizations to endorse and work for legislation to lift the arbitrary deadline from the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). We’re helping lead-sponsors Senator Ben Cardin and Representative Jackie Spier gain cosponsors to enshrine equality in the U.S. Constitution. In all honesty, we’ve been critically important to this effort. >> >> PDAers Andrea Miller, Mike Hersh, and Stephen Spitz helped lead organizing efforts on Capitol Hill—arm in arm with the National Organization for Women (NOW), United For Equality, and our friends Maryland State Senators Susan Lee and Rieger Manno, (who is running for the open Maryland 6th District House seat). Together, we helped encourage Sen. Cardin to step up as the lead sponsor of the Senate “3 State” ERA resolution. We’ve organized events and mobilized support in D.C. and the yet-to-ratify states. >> >> Get involved with the Women's March >> >> Please Join Our Victory In 2018 Sustainers Team >> Make automatic donations to elect feminist progressives >> This year the Women’s March will take place in Las Vegas, and PDA Mega-activists Tisia, Hector, and the rest of the PDA Vegas crew are doing some serious heavy lifting to make sure that the show is a huge success. Please reply to this email with 1) whether you'll be attending, and 2) whether you can help volunteer. >> >> PDA is working with these stellar activists in Nevada (who’ve ratified the ERA!), as well as leaders in Virginia, Illinois, and other states who are nearing ratification. Andrea with People Demanding Action are working with talented, tireless leaders including Cathy Paganelli Kaelin, Tammy Simkins, Eileen Davis, Marena Groll, Portia Boulger, Diana Danis, and many many more. We are making real progress toward full inclusion of women and girls in the Constitution. The Women’s March is dedicated to this cause! >> >> National Women's March Anniversary: Power to the Polls >> Sun., Jan. 21, 2018 • 10:00 AM >> Sam Boyd Stadium >> 7000 E Russell Rd >> Las Vegas, NV 89122 >> (FAQ ) >> >> Can't make it to an event? Then please drop in a donation to help us continue our fight for women via our work on the ERA, reproductive rights, and other issues impacting women across the country, and to help cover the cost of the cool PDA stuff we're mailing to the location. >> >> We support progressive feminist candidates who bring a chorus of diverse voices to our political discourse. Will you help us today with an automatic monthly gift of any amount? Help us continue our efforts to expand human rights and curb the excesses of the wealthy oligarchs who are well on their way to taking over our country. Together, we can win. We can’t do anything without you. >> >> In solidarity, >> >> Donna Smith for Deb, Mike F, Judy, Mike H, Janis, Dan, Kimberly, Amos, Dr Bill, and Bryan—your PDA National Team >> >> P.S. We’re proud to enthusiastically support and encourage women to stand up, speak out, and take power. Please click here to help us elect more strong feminist progressives to work for the ERA and all efforts for full equality for all. Please click here to make automatic monthly donations. >> >> Invest in progress now! >> >> >> Progressive Democrats of America >> Grand Rapids, MI 49515, United States >> www.pdamerica.org >> Paid for by Progressive Democrats of America >> Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee >> >> This email was sent to cgestabrook at gmail.com . To stop receiving emails, click here . >> Created with NationBuilder > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Wed Jan 17 15:03:04 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 09:03:04 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Help Stop Sexism! In-Reply-To: References: <5a5f50392e0d7_3922b95974590f0@asgworker-qmb2-15.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> <671E2773-8278-4A48-9D24-51DC4ECE17D7@gmail.com> Message-ID: "Yep, that's one of the issues we stand for, CJ.” What issue, Mike? Bringing all US troops home? PDA seems to me to be a sheep-dogging operation, retrieving disaffected Democrats for the Obama-Clinton neocon & neoliberal policies - more war and more inequality. I’m opposed to those policies. Regards, C. G. Estabrook > On Jan 17, 2018, at 8:43 AM, Mike Fox wrote: > > Yep, that's one of the issues we stand for, CJ. > > Looks like there isn't a march in Champaign. Would you be willing to support another event with phone calls to fellow PDA members to make sure they're showing up/showing solidarity? > > Mike Fox > National Staff, Progressive Democrats Of America > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 8:47 AM, C G Estabrook > wrote: > Sen. Cardin is a principal fomenter of the ‘Russiagate' nonsense - designed to force the Trump administration back into the Obama-Clinton politics of war and war provocations! > > Remember e.g. that Clinton as Secretary of State defended the US killing in Afghanistan by saying it was to secure the rights of women. > > We should listen to ‘Progressive Democrats of America’ only when they begin to call for bringing all US troops (and weapons) home. > > —CGE > > >> On Jan 17, 2018, at 7:31 AM, Donna Smith for Progressive Democrats of America > wrote: >> >> >> Support the Women’s March >> Dear Cg— >> >> Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) is a feminist organization. We became one of the first national organizations to endorse and work for legislation to lift the arbitrary deadline from the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). We’re helping lead-sponsors Senator Ben Cardin and Representative Jackie Spier gain cosponsors to enshrine equality in the U.S. Constitution. In all honesty, we’ve been critically important to this effort. >> >> PDAers Andrea Miller, Mike Hersh, and Stephen Spitz helped lead organizing efforts on Capitol Hill—arm in arm with the National Organization for Women (NOW), United For Equality, and our friends Maryland State Senators Susan Lee and Rieger Manno, (who is running for the open Maryland 6th District House seat). Together, we helped encourage Sen. Cardin to step up as the lead sponsor of the Senate “3 State” ERA resolution. We’ve organized events and mobilized support in D.C. and the yet-to-ratify states. >> >> Get involved with the Women's March >> >> Please Join Our Victory In 2018 Sustainers Team >> Make automatic donations to elect feminist progressives >> This year the Women’s March will take place in Las Vegas, and PDA Mega-activists Tisia, Hector, and the rest of the PDA Vegas crew are doing some serious heavy lifting to make sure that the show is a huge success. Please reply to this email with 1) whether you'll be attending, and 2) whether you can help volunteer. >> >> PDA is working with these stellar activists in Nevada (who’ve ratified the ERA!), as well as leaders in Virginia, Illinois, and other states who are nearing ratification. Andrea with People Demanding Action are working with talented, tireless leaders including Cathy Paganelli Kaelin, Tammy Simkins, Eileen Davis, Marena Groll, Portia Boulger, Diana Danis, and many many more. We are making real progress toward full inclusion of women and girls in the Constitution. The Women’s March is dedicated to this cause! >> >> National Women's March Anniversary: Power to the Polls >> Sun., Jan. 21, 2018 • 10:00 AM >> Sam Boyd Stadium >> 7000 E Russell Rd >> Las Vegas, NV 89122 >> (FAQ ) >> >> Can't make it to an event? Then please drop in a donation to help us continue our fight for women via our work on the ERA, reproductive rights, and other issues impacting women across the country, and to help cover the cost of the cool PDA stuff we're mailing to the location. >> >> We support progressive feminist candidates who bring a chorus of diverse voices to our political discourse. Will you help us today with an automatic monthly gift of any amount? Help us continue our efforts to expand human rights and curb the excesses of the wealthy oligarchs who are well on their way to taking over our country. Together, we can win. We can’t do anything without you. >> >> In solidarity, >> >> Donna Smith for Deb, Mike F, Judy, Mike H, Janis, Dan, Kimberly, Amos, Dr Bill, and Bryan—your PDA National Team >> >> P.S. We’re proud to enthusiastically support and encourage women to stand up, speak out, and take power. Please click here to help us elect more strong feminist progressives to work for the ERA and all efforts for full equality for all. Please click here to make automatic monthly donations. >> >> Invest in progress now! >> >> >> Progressive Democrats of America >> Grand Rapids, MI 49515, United States >> www.pdamerica.org >> Paid for by Progressive Democrats of America >> Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee >> >> This email was sent to cgestabrook at gmail.com <>. To stop receiving emails, click here . >> Created with NationBuilder > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Wed Jan 17 15:23:35 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 09:23:35 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Help Stop Sexism! In-Reply-To: References: <5a5f50392e0d7_3922b95974590f0@asgworker-qmb2-15.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> <671E2773-8278-4A48-9D24-51DC4ECE17D7@gmail.com> Message-ID: And you evade my question on war policy, Mike. I've had one of your 'Healthcare Not Warfare’ stickers on my car for a while - but’s that’s not the position of Sen. Cardin, whom you cry up in your "Support the Women’s March” ad. Do you support him or his opponent in the Maryland Democratic primary? Your pedigree is attractive - but the last Democratic US president - he of the eight wars and “the most extreme terrorist campaign of modern times,” his drone assassinations - became president by co-opting the anti-war movement. Are you doing the same thing? Regards, CGE > On Jan 17, 2018, at 9:07 AM, Mike Fox wrote: > > You just don't know who we are, evidently, C.G. > > Our seminal campaign is Healthcare Not Warfare. We have an issue organizing team on End Wars And Occupations. Barbara Lee -- the single strongest peace advocate in congress -- is on our advisory board. Our org came out of the Dennis Kucinich campaign in 2004. We've never endorsed a corporatist Dem. We got Bernie to run and didn't endorse Clinton after she got the nomination. The only group with the word "Democrat" in it that I'm aware of that did that. > > Peace, health, and prosperity to you and yours, > > M > > > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 10:03 AM, C G Estabrook > wrote: > "Yep, that's one of the issues we stand for, CJ.” What issue, Mike? Bringing all US troops home? > > PDA seems to me to be a sheep-dogging operation, retrieving disaffected Democrats for the Obama-Clinton neocon & neoliberal policies - more war and more inequality. > > I’m opposed to those policies. Regards, C. G. Estabrook > > >> On Jan 17, 2018, at 8:43 AM, Mike Fox > wrote: >> >> Yep, that's one of the issues we stand for, CJ. >> >> Looks like there isn't a march in Champaign. Would you be willing to support another event with phone calls to fellow PDA members to make sure they're showing up/showing solidarity? >> >> Mike Fox >> National Staff, Progressive Democrats Of America >> >> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 8:47 AM, C G Estabrook > wrote: >> Sen. Cardin is a principal fomenter of the ‘Russiagate' nonsense - designed to force the Trump administration back into the Obama-Clinton politics of war and war provocations! >> >> Remember e.g. that Clinton as Secretary of State defended the US killing in Afghanistan by saying it was to secure the rights of women. >> >> We should listen to ‘Progressive Democrats of America’ only when they begin to call for bringing all US troops (and weapons) home. >> >> —CGE >> >> >>> On Jan 17, 2018, at 7:31 AM, Donna Smith for Progressive Democrats of America > wrote: >>> >>> >>> Support the Women’s March >>> Dear Cg— >>> >>> Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) is a feminist organization. We became one of the first national organizations to endorse and work for legislation to lift the arbitrary deadline from the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). We’re helping lead-sponsors Senator Ben Cardin and Representative Jackie Spier gain cosponsors to enshrine equality in the U.S. Constitution. In all honesty, we’ve been critically important to this effort. >>> >>> PDAers Andrea Miller, Mike Hersh, and Stephen Spitz helped lead organizing efforts on Capitol Hill—arm in arm with the National Organization for Women (NOW), United For Equality, and our friends Maryland State Senators Susan Lee and Rieger Manno, (who is running for the open Maryland 6th District House seat). Together, we helped encourage Sen. Cardin to step up as the lead sponsor of the Senate “3 State” ERA resolution. We’ve organized events and mobilized support in D.C. and the yet-to-ratify states. >>> >>> Get involved with the Women's March >>> >>> Please Join Our Victory In 2018 Sustainers Team >>> Make automatic donations to elect feminist progressives >>> This year the Women’s March will take place in Las Vegas, and PDA Mega-activists Tisia, Hector, and the rest of the PDA Vegas crew are doing some serious heavy lifting to make sure that the show is a huge success. Please reply to this email with 1) whether you'll be attending, and 2) whether you can help volunteer. >>> >>> PDA is working with these stellar activists in Nevada (who’ve ratified the ERA!), as well as leaders in Virginia, Illinois, and other states who are nearing ratification. Andrea with People Demanding Action are working with talented, tireless leaders including Cathy Paganelli Kaelin, Tammy Simkins, Eileen Davis, Marena Groll, Portia Boulger, Diana Danis, and many many more. We are making real progress toward full inclusion of women and girls in the Constitution. The Women’s March is dedicated to this cause! >>> >>> National Women's March Anniversary: Power to the Polls >>> Sun., Jan. 21, 2018 • 10:00 AM >>> Sam Boyd Stadium >>> 7000 E Russell Rd >>> Las Vegas, NV 89122 >>> (FAQ ) >>> >>> Can't make it to an event? Then please drop in a donation to help us continue our fight for women via our work on the ERA, reproductive rights, and other issues impacting women across the country, and to help cover the cost of the cool PDA stuff we're mailing to the location. >>> >>> We support progressive feminist candidates who bring a chorus of diverse voices to our political discourse. Will you help us today with an automatic monthly gift of any amount? Help us continue our efforts to expand human rights and curb the excesses of the wealthy oligarchs who are well on their way to taking over our country. Together, we can win. We can’t do anything without you. >>> >>> In solidarity, >>> >>> Donna Smith for Deb, Mike F, Judy, Mike H, Janis, Dan, Kimberly, Amos, Dr Bill, and Bryan—your PDA National Team >>> >>> P.S. We’re proud to enthusiastically support and encourage women to stand up, speak out, and take power. Please click here to help us elect more strong feminist progressives to work for the ERA and all efforts for full equality for all. Please click here to make automatic monthly donations. >>> >>> Invest in progress now! >>> >>> >>> Progressive Democrats of America >>> Grand Rapids, MI 49515, United States >>> www.pdamerica.org >>> Paid for by Progressive Democrats of America >>> Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee >>> >>> This email was sent to cgestabrook at gmail.com <>. To stop receiving emails, click here . >>> Created with NationBuilder >> >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Wed Jan 17 15:48:57 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 09:48:57 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] A 'progressive' Democrat Message-ID: "Why Senator Cardin Is a Fitting Opponent for Chelsea Manning" – Consortiumnews Chelsea Manning’s senatorial bid offers a contrast to the Russian fear-mongering of incumbent candidate Ben Cardin, says Norman Solomon. By Norman Solomon The top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Ben Cardin [Md.], has become a big star in national media by routinely denouncing Russia as a dire threat to American democracy. The senior senator from Maryland personifies the highly dangerous opportunism that has set in among leading Democrats on the subject of Russia. Chelsea Manning confirmed on Sunday that she is challenging Senator Cardin’s re-election effort in the Democratic primary this June. Her campaign has real potential to raise key issues. One of them revolves around the kind of bellicose rhetoric that heightens the dangers of conflict between the world’s two nuclear superpowers. Picture: Chelsea Manning on May 18, 2017 the day after her release from prison. (Twitter) In a typical foray into reckless hyperbole, Cardin told a public forum in November: “When you use cyber in an affirmative way to compromise our democratic, free election system, that’s an attack against America. It’s an act of war. It is an act of war.” Cardin is far from the only member of Congress to use “act of war” rhetoric about alleged Russian cyber actions. Republican ultra-hawk Arizona Senator John McCain has hurled the phrase at Russia. But the most use of the phrase comes from a range of Democrats, such as Connecticut Senator Richard Blumenthal and the normally sensible Northern California Representative Jackie Speier. As his party’s ranking member of the key Senate committee on foreign policy, Cardin is at the tip of the anti-Russia propaganda spear. After three decades in Congress including nearly a dozen years in the Senate, he’s an old hand at spinning. No one has worked harder to get political mileage out of “Russiagate.” A Distorted Report Last week, Cardin upped the ante with the release of a report that he commissioned. In effect, it’s a declaration of red-white-and-blue jihad against Russia. The report — which accuses Russian President Vladimir Putin of “a relentless assault to undermine democracy and the rule of law in Europe and the United States” — received massive coverage in U.S. news media. Conservative and liberal punditry voiced acclaim. “Never before in American history has so clear a threat to national security been so clearly ignored by a U.S. president,” a solo statement by Cardin declares on the opening page. With the truly repugnant President Trump in its crosshairs, the report’s most polemical claims — no matter how debatable or ahistorical — have predictably gotten a pass from mass media. But the much-ballyhooed report is a carefully selective and distorted version of history. The expansion of NATO up to Russia’s borders, the U.S. interference in dozens of countries’ elections (including in Russia during the Clinton administration), Washington’s support for repressive regimes in the past and present — such realities didn’t merit consideration or mention. Nor did facts such as the USA’s role as the world’s biggest arms merchant. Or the aggressively deadly U.S. military interventions in the recent past and present, from Afghanistan to Iraq to Libya. Such omissions are essential to the self-righteous tone of the Russiagate frenzy. Only with silence about basic truths of U.S. foreign policy can officials in Washington pose as leaders of an angelic nation that must confront satanic Russia. In light of what is at stake for human survival — with the odds of nuclear war shifting ominously because of the agenda that he’s helping to push — Senator Cardin can be understood as someone who avidly fits into patterns of nationalistic and militaristic madness. The sad fact is that he has plenty of company on Capitol Hill. Democratic leadership used to be much saner. Five decades ago, it was the fanatical Republican standard bearer Barry Goldwater who scorned reaching out to the Kremlin – while Democratic President Lyndon Johnson wisely sought détente with Russian leaders on behalf of peaceful coexistence and reducing the risks of nuclear conflagration. Right after being sentenced to prison in August 2013 for heroic whistleblowing that exposed many U.S. war crimes, Chelsea Manning released a statement that quoted Howard Zinn: “There is not a flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.” A nuclear war between the United States and Russia would do more than kill vast numbers of innocent people. Scientific research tells us that a nuclear holocaust would make the Earth “virtually uninhabitable.” The extreme hostility toward Russia that makes such an outcome more likely must be rejected. Senator Ben Cardin is one of the loudest and most prominent voices for such hostility. He should be challenged. Norman Solomon is the coordinator of the online activist group RootsAction.org and the executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy. He is the author of a dozen books including “War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death.” ### -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 17 15:51:02 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 15:51:02 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: "Protesting Harold Killer Koh" 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: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 9:48 AM To: 'C G Estabrook' ; 'Mike Fox' ; 'Donna Smith for Progressive Democrats of America' Cc: 'peace' Subject: RE: "Protesting Harold Killer Koh" Cardin is just massive warmongering against Russia. Ditto for 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) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 9:40 AM To: 'C G Estabrook' >; 'Mike Fox' >; 'Donna Smith for Progressive Democrats of America' > Cc: 'peace' > Subject: RE: "Protesting Harold Killer Koh" [cid:image001.jpg at 01D38F78.AEE50B10] Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 17, 2018 9:33 AM To: 'C G Estabrook' >; Mike Fox >; Donna Smith for Progressive Democrats of America > Cc: peace > Subject: FW: "Protesting Harold Killer Koh" “…particularly to the 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.” Chomsky {now 10,000+ people} Do the “Progressive Democrats” work with Killer Koh for legal advice and representation? What is your position on the Obama/Clinton/Killer Koh drone murder extermination campaign against Muslims/Arabs/Africans/Asians of Color now being continued and escalated by Trump? Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, November 10, 2016 4:01 PM To: 'SECTNS.aals at lists.aals.org' > Subject: "Protesting Harold Killer Koh" Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Francis Boyle via YouTube [mailto:noreply at youtube.com] Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2016 4:00 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Francis Boyle sent you a video: "Protesting Harold Koh" [http://s.ytimg.com/yt/img/email/digest/email_header.png] [https://yt3.ggpht.com/-w4phvYGWivc/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAAAA/_Vq2X19VNEk/s50-c-k-no-mo-rj-c0xffffff/photo.jpg] Francis Boyle has shared a video with you on YouTube [https://i.ytimg.com/vi/SXDXZHYCYKc/mqdefault.jpg] Protesting Harold Koh by UPTV6 Local activists gather to protest Harold Koh who is speaking at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Help center • Report spam ©2016 YouTube, LLC 901 Cherry Ave, San Bruno, CA 94066 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 30428 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: From naiman at justforeignpolicy.org Wed Jan 17 16:29:15 2018 From: naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (Robert Naiman) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 10:29:15 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] A 'progressive' Democrat Message-ID: Aren't you going to denounce Manning for impurely running as a Democrat against Cardin? Isn't she just legitimizing the hopelessly corrupt Democratic Party by running in a Democratic Primary? Surely the only morally pure way for her to challenge Cardin would be to run as a Green? ;) === Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 Senate: Wield the Constitution to Stop Saudi Starvation of Yemeni Children https://www.change.org/p/senate-invoke-war-powers-to-stop-saudi-from-starving-yemeni-kids On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 9:48 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss < peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > "Why Senator Cardin Is a Fitting Opponent for Chelsea Manning" – > Consortiumnews > > > *Chelsea Manning’s senatorial bid offers a contrast to the Russian > fear-mongering of incumbent candidate Ben Cardin, says Norman Solomon.* > By Norman Solomon > > The top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Ben Cardin > [Md.], has become a big star in national media by routinely denouncing > Russia as a dire threat to American democracy. The senior senator from > Maryland personifies the highly dangerous opportunism that has set in among > leading Democrats on the subject of Russia. > > Chelsea Manning confirmed on Sunday that she is challenging Senator > Cardin’s re-election effort in the Democratic primary this June. Her > campaign has real potential to raise key issues. One of them revolves > around the kind of bellicose rhetoric that heightens the dangers of > conflict between the world’s two nuclear superpowers. > > > *Picture: Chelsea Manning on May 18, 2017 the day after her release from > prison. (Twitter)* > In a typical foray into reckless hyperbole, Cardin told a public forum in > November: “When you use cyber in an affirmative way to compromise our > democratic, free election system, that’s an attack against America. It’s an > act of war. It is an act of war.” > > Cardin is far from the only member of Congress to use “act of war” > rhetoric about alleged Russian cyber actions. Republican ultra-hawk Arizona > Senator John McCain has hurled the phrase at Russia. But the most use of > the phrase comes from a range of Democrats, such as Connecticut > Senator Richard Blumenthal and the normally sensible Northern California > Representative Jackie Speier. > > As his party’s ranking member of the key Senate committee on foreign > policy, Cardin is at the tip of the anti-Russia propaganda spear. After > three decades in Congress including nearly a dozen years in the Senate, > he’s an old hand at spinning. No one has worked harder to get political > mileage out of “Russiagate.” > > *A Distorted Report* > > Last week, Cardin upped the ante with the release of a report that he > commissioned. In effect, it’s a declaration of red-white-and-blue jihad > against Russia. > > The report — which accuses Russian President Vladimir Putin of “a > relentless assault to undermine democracy and the rule of law in Europe and > the United States” — received massive coverage in U.S. news > media. Conservative and liberal punditry voiced acclaim. > > “Never before in American history has so clear a threat to national > security been so clearly ignored by a U.S. president,” a solo statement by > Cardin declares on the opening page. With the truly repugnant President > Trump in its crosshairs, the report’s most polemical claims — no matter how > debatable or ahistorical — have predictably gotten a pass from mass media. > > But the much-ballyhooed report is a carefully selective and distorted > version of history. > > The expansion of NATO up to Russia’s borders, the U.S. interference in > dozens of countries’ elections (including in Russia during the Clinton > administration), Washington’s support for repressive regimes in the past > and present — such realities didn’t merit consideration or mention. Nor did > facts such as the USA’s role as the world’s biggest arms merchant. Or the > aggressively deadly U.S. military interventions in the recent past and > present, from Afghanistan to Iraq to Libya. > > Such omissions are essential to the self-righteous tone of the Russiagate > frenzy. Only with silence about basic truths of U.S. foreign policy can > officials in Washington pose as leaders of an angelic nation that must > confront satanic Russia. > > In light of what is at stake for human survival — with the odds of nuclear > war shifting ominously because of the agenda that he’s helping to push — > Senator Cardin can be understood as someone who avidly fits into patterns > of nationalistic and militaristic madness. The sad fact is that he has > plenty of company on Capitol Hill. > > Democratic leadership used to be much saner. Five decades ago, it was the > fanatical Republican standard bearer Barry Goldwater who scorned reaching > out to the Kremlin – while Democratic President Lyndon Johnson wisely > sought détente with Russian leaders on behalf of peaceful coexistence and > reducing the risks of nuclear conflagration. > > Right after being sentenced to prison in August 2013 for heroic > whistleblowing that exposed many U.S. war crimes, Chelsea Manning released > a statement that quoted Howard Zinn: “There is not a flag large enough to > cover the shame of killing innocent people.” A nuclear war between the > United States and Russia would do more than kill vast numbers of innocent > people. Scientific research tells us that a nuclear holocaust would make > the Earth “virtually uninhabitable.” > > The extreme hostility toward Russia that makes such an outcome more > likely must be rejected. Senator Ben Cardin is one of the loudest and > most prominent voices for such hostility. He should be challenged. > > *Norman Solomon is the coordinator of the online activist group > RootsAction.org and the executive director of the > Institute for Public Accuracy. He is the author of a dozen books including > “War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death.”* > > *###* > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Wed Jan 17 17:40:07 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 17:40:07 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Help Stop Sexism! In-Reply-To: <68BB5A57-13D9-484B-86E3-FCB87E6324AA@gmail.com> References: <5a5f50392e0d7_3922b95974590f0@asgworker-qmb2-15.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> <671E2773-8278-4A48-9D24-51DC4ECE17D7@gmail.com> <68BB5A57-13D9-484B-86E3-FCB87E6324AA@gmail.com> Message-ID: Thanks Carl. I have a lot of respect for Cindy and the courageous anti-war stands she has consistently taken since the needless loss of her son in the Criminal Bush Jr War against Iraq that the Democrats did nothing to stop. Fab. 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: C G Estabrook [mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 11:37 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: Mike Fox ; Donna Smith for Progressive Democrats of America ; peace Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Help Stop Sexism! [Cindy Sheehan] The Women's March is utter liberal bullshit---the theme this year is "Power to the Polls." Yep, get to them polls and elect Demo-crackers and everything will be rosy, every woman's issue will be solved. It has YET to address war as an overwhelming woman's issue that needs to be ended to help protect all women (and their families) around the world, not just the pink pussy-hatted paraders here in the US. ### > On Jan 17, 2018, at 9:26 AM, Boyle, Francis A wrote: > > Yeah Carl.And do the “Progressive Democrats” stand for or against the Palestinian BDS Campaign? > > Fab > D in BDS. > > Francis 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] > On Behalf Of C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 9:24 AM > To: Mike Fox ; Donna Smith for Progressive > Democrats of America > Cc: peace ; peace-discuss > > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Help Stop Sexism! > > And you evade my question on war policy, Mike. > > I've had one of your 'Healthcare Not Warfare’ stickers on my car for a while - but’s that’s not the position of Sen. Cardin, whom you cry up in your "Support the Women’s March” ad. > > Do you support him or his opponent in the Maryland Democratic primary? > > Your pedigree is attractive - but the last Democratic US president - he of the eight wars and “the most extreme terrorist campaign of modern times,” his drone assassinations - became president by co-opting the anti-war movement. Are you doing the same thing? > > Regards, CGE > > > On Jan 17, 2018, at 9:07 AM, Mike Fox wrote: > > You just don't know who we are, evidently, C.G. > > Our seminal campaign is Healthcare Not Warfare. We have an issue organizing team on End Wars And Occupations. Barbara Lee -- the single strongest peace advocate in congress -- is on our advisory board. Our org came out of the Dennis Kucinich campaign in 2004. We've never endorsed a corporatist Dem. We got Bernie to run and didn't endorse Clinton after she got the nomination. The only group with the word "Democrat" in it that I'm aware of that did that. > > Peace, health, and prosperity to you and yours, > > M > > > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 10:03 AM, C G Estabrook wrote: > "Yep, that's one of the issues we stand for, CJ.” What issue, Mike? Bringing all US troops home? > > PDA seems to me to be a sheep-dogging operation, retrieving disaffected Democrats for the Obama-Clinton neocon & neoliberal policies - more war and more inequality. > > I’m opposed to those policies. Regards, C. G. Estabrook > > > On Jan 17, 2018, at 8:43 AM, Mike Fox wrote: > > Yep, that's one of the issues we stand for, CJ. > > Looks like there isn't a march in Champaign. Would you be willing to support another event with phone calls to fellow PDA members to make sure they're showing up/showing solidarity? > > Mike Fox > National Staff, Progressive Democrats Of America > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 8:47 AM, C G Estabrook wrote: > Sen. Cardin is a principal fomenter of the ‘Russiagate' nonsense - designed to force the Trump administration back into the Obama-Clinton politics of war and war provocations! > > Remember e.g. that Clinton as Secretary of State defended the US killing in Afghanistan by saying it was to secure the rights of women. > > We should listen to ‘Progressive Democrats of America’ only when they begin to call for bringing all US troops (and weapons) home. > > —CGE > > > On Jan 17, 2018, at 7:31 AM, Donna Smith for Progressive Democrats of America wrote: > > > Support the Women’s March > > Dear Cg— > Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) is a feminist organization. We became one of the first national organizations to endorse and work for legislation to lift the arbitrary deadline from the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). We’re helping lead-sponsors Senator Ben Cardin and Representative Jackie Spier gain cosponsors to enshrine equality in the U.S. Constitution. In all honesty, we’ve been critically important to this effort. > PDAers Andrea Miller, Mike Hersh, and Stephen Spitz helped lead organizing efforts on Capitol Hill—arm in arm with the National Organization for Women (NOW), United For Equality, and our friends Maryland State Senators Susan Lee and Rieger Manno, (who is running for the open Maryland 6th District House seat). Together, we helped encourage Sen. Cardin to step up as the lead sponsor of the Senate “3 State” ERA resolution. We’ve organized events and mobilized support in D.C. and the yet-to-ratify states. > Get involved with the Women's March > > > Please Join Our Victory In 2018 Sustainers Team Make automatic > donations to elect feminist progressives This year the Women’s March > will take place in Las Vegas, and PDA Mega-activists Tisia, Hector, and the rest of the PDA Vegas crew are doing some serious heavy lifting to make sure that the show is a huge success. Please reply to this email with 1) whether you'll be attending, and 2) whether you can help volunteer. > PDA is working with these stellar activists in Nevada (who’ve ratified the ERA!), as well as leaders in Virginia, Illinois, and other states who are nearing ratification. Andrea with People Demanding Action are working with talented, tireless leaders including Cathy Paganelli Kaelin, Tammy Simkins, Eileen Davis, Marena Groll, Portia Boulger, Diana Danis, and many many more. We are making real progress toward full inclusion of women and girls in the Constitution. The Women’s March is dedicated to this cause! > National Women's March Anniversary: Power to the Polls Sun., Jan. 21, > 2018 • 10:00 AM Sam Boyd Stadium > 7000 E Russell Rd > Las Vegas, NV 89122 > (FAQ) > Can't make it to an event? Then please drop in a donation to help us continue our fight for women via our work on the ERA, reproductive rights, and other issues impacting women across the country, and to help cover the cost of the cool PDA stuff we're mailing to the location. > We support progressive feminist candidates who bring a chorus of diverse voices to our political discourse. Will you help us today with an automatic monthly gift of any amount? Help us continue our efforts to expand human rights and curb the excesses of the wealthy oligarchs who are well on their way to taking over our country. Together, we can win. We can’t do anything without you. > In solidarity, > Donna Smith for Deb, Mike F, Judy, Mike H, Janis, Dan, Kimberly, Amos, > Dr Bill, and Bryan—your PDA National Team P.S. We’re proud to enthusiastically support and encourage women to stand up, speak out, and take power. Please click here to help us elect more strong feminist progressives to work for the ERA and all efforts for full equality for all. Please click here to make automatic monthly donations. > Invest in progress now! > > > Progressive Democrats of America > Grand Rapids, MI 49515, United States www.pdamerica.org > > Paid for by Progressive Democrats of America Not authorized by any > candidate or candidate's committee This email was sent to > cgestabrook at gmail.com. To stop receiving emails, click here. > Created with NationBuilder > > From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Wed Jan 17 18:45:32 2018 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 12:45:32 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] A 'progressive' Democrat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <010601d38fc3$5afe8260$10fb8720$@comcast.net> Whatever works ! David J. From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 10:29 AM To: C G Estabrook Cc: peace-discuss Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] A 'progressive' Democrat Aren't you going to denounce Manning for impurely running as a Democrat against Cardin? Isn't she just legitimizing the hopelessly corrupt Democratic Party by running in a Democratic Primary? Surely the only morally pure way for her to challenge Cardin would be to run as a Green? ;) === Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 Senate: Wield the Constitution to Stop Saudi Starvation of Yemeni Children https://www.change.org/p/senate-invoke-war-powers-to-stop-saudi-from-starving-yemeni-kids On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 9:48 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: "Why Senator Cardin Is a Fitting Opponent for Chelsea Manning" – Consortiumnews Chelsea Manning’s senatorial bid offers a contrast to the Russian fear-mongering of incumbent candidate Ben Cardin, says Norman Solomon. By Norman Solomon The top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Ben Cardin [Md.], has become a big star in national media by routinely denouncing Russia as a dire threat to American democracy. The senior senator from Maryland personifies the highly dangerous opportunism that has set in among leading Democrats on the subject of Russia. Chelsea Manning confirmed on Sunday that she is challenging Senator Cardin’s re-election effort in the Democratic primary this June. Her campaign has real potential to raise key issues. One of them revolves around the kind of bellicose rhetoric that heightens the dangers of conflict between the world’s two nuclear superpowers. Picture: Chelsea Manning on May 18, 2017 the day after her release from prison. (Twitter) In a typical foray into reckless hyperbole, Cardin told a public forum in November: “When you use cyber in an affirmative way to compromise our democratic, free election system, that’s an attack against America. It’s an act of war. It is an act of war.” Cardin is far from the only member of Congress to use “act of war” rhetoric about alleged Russian cyber actions. Republican ultra-hawk Arizona Senator John McCain has hurled the phrase at Russia. But the most use of the phrase comes from a range of Democrats, such as Connecticut Senator Richard Blumenthal and the normally sensible Northern California Representative Jackie Speier. As his party’s ranking member of the key Senate committee on foreign policy, Cardin is at the tip of the anti-Russia propaganda spear. After three decades in Congress including nearly a dozen years in the Senate, he’s an old hand at spinning. No one has worked harder to get political mileage out of “Russiagate.” A Distorted Report Last week, Cardin upped the ante with the release of a report that he commissioned. In effect, it’s a declaration of red-white-and-blue jihad against Russia. The report — which accuses Russian President Vladimir Putin of “a relentless assault to undermine democracy and the rule of law in Europe and the United States” — received massive coverage in U.S. news media. Conservative and liberal punditry voiced acclaim. “Never before in American history has so clear a threat to national security been so clearly ignored by a U.S. president,” a solo statement by Cardin declares on the opening page. With the truly repugnant President Trump in its crosshairs, the report’s most polemical claims — no matter how debatable or ahistorical — have predictably gotten a pass from mass media. But the much-ballyhooed report is a carefully selective and distorted version of history. The expansion of NATO up to Russia’s borders, the U.S. interference in dozens of countries’ elections (including in Russia during the Clinton administration), Washington’s support for repressive regimes in the past and present — such realities didn’t merit consideration or mention. Nor did facts such as the USA’s role as the world’s biggest arms merchant. Or the aggressively deadly U.S. military interventions in the recent past and present, from Afghanistan to Iraq to Libya. Such omissions are essential to the self-righteous tone of the Russiagate frenzy. Only with silence about basic truths of U.S. foreign policy can officials in Washington pose as leaders of an angelic nation that must confront satanic Russia. In light of what is at stake for human survival — with the odds of nuclear war shifting ominously because of the agenda that he’s helping to push — Senator Cardin can be understood as someone who avidly fits into patterns of nationalistic and militaristic madness. The sad fact is that he has plenty of company on Capitol Hill. Democratic leadership used to be much saner. Five decades ago, it was the fanatical Republican standard bearer Barry Goldwater who scorned reaching out to the Kremlin – while Democratic President Lyndon Johnson wisely sought détente with Russian leaders on behalf of peaceful coexistence and reducing the risks of nuclear conflagration. Right after being sentenced to prison in August 2013 for heroic whistleblowing that exposed many U.S. war crimes, Chelsea Manning released a statement that quoted Howard Zinn: “There is not a flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.” A nuclear war between the United States and Russia would do more than kill vast numbers of innocent people. Scientific research tells us that a nuclear holocaust would make the Earth “virtually uninhabitable.” The extreme hostility toward Russia that makes such an outcome more likely must be rejected. Senator Ben Cardin is one of the loudest and most prominent voices for such hostility. He should be challenged. Norman Solomon is the coordinator of the online activist group RootsAction.org and the executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy. He is the author of a dozen books including “War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death.” ### _______________________________________________ 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 Jan 17 19:29:43 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 19:29:43 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Help Stop Sexism! In-Reply-To: References: <5a5f50392e0d7_3922b95974590f0@asgworker-qmb2-15.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> <671E2773-8278-4A48-9D24-51DC4ECE17D7@gmail.com> Message-ID: I know nothing about Senator Cardin, or Maryland politics. I agree with Cindy Sheehan, in relation to “womens’ marches.” If we care about women, we should stop killing them, overseas, women of color, and on a daily basis with our foreign policy, of perpetual war. However, it should be noted, the local Progressive Democrats of America, did hold a joint panel last summer in relation to the “Costs of War” both human, and monetary. That program sparked a movement to produce a program comprising a member of WAND “Women’s Action for Nuclear Disarmament,” coming up in February. In addition to bringing Medea Benjamin of CODE PINK, to Champaign a couple years ago, speaking against war, they support healthcare over warfare. So let’s stop bashing the group and work with them in common cause to change US foreign policy. Chelsea Manning as a candidate opposing Cardin, is worth supporting, as she has proven herself to be not just courageous, but a true humanitarian. Hopefully now that PDA knows what we think of Senator Cardin, they will take another look at their promotion. On Jan 17, 2018, at 07:23, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: And you evade my question on war policy, Mike. I've had one of your 'Healthcare Not Warfare’ stickers on my car for a while - but’s that’s not the position of Sen. Cardin, whom you cry up in your "Support the Women’s March” ad. Do you support him or his opponent in the Maryland Democratic primary? Your pedigree is attractive - but the last Democratic US president - he of the eight wars and “the most extreme terrorist campaign of modern times,” his drone assassinations - became president by co-opting the anti-war movement. Are you doing the same thing? Regards, CGE On Jan 17, 2018, at 9:07 AM, Mike Fox > wrote: You just don't know who we are, evidently, C.G. Our seminal campaign is Healthcare Not Warfare. We have an issue organizing team on End Wars And Occupations. Barbara Lee -- the single strongest peace advocate in congress -- is on our advisory board. Our org came out of the Dennis Kucinich campaign in 2004. We've never endorsed a corporatist Dem. We got Bernie to run and didn't endorse Clinton after she got the nomination. The only group with the word "Democrat" in it that I'm aware of that did that. Peace, health, and prosperity to you and yours, M On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 10:03 AM, C G Estabrook > wrote: "Yep, that's one of the issues we stand for, CJ.” What issue, Mike? Bringing all US troops home? PDA seems to me to be a sheep-dogging operation, retrieving disaffected Democrats for the Obama-Clinton neocon & neoliberal policies - more war and more inequality. I’m opposed to those policies. Regards, C. G. Estabrook On Jan 17, 2018, at 8:43 AM, Mike Fox > wrote: Yep, that's one of the issues we stand for, CJ. Looks like there isn't a march in Champaign. Would you be willing to support another event with phone calls to fellow PDA members to make sure they're showing up/showing solidarity? Mike Fox National Staff, Progressive Democrats Of America On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 8:47 AM, C G Estabrook > wrote: Sen. Cardin is a principal fomenter of the ‘Russiagate' nonsense - designed to force the Trump administration back into the Obama-Clinton politics of war and war provocations! Remember e.g. that Clinton as Secretary of State defended the US killing in Afghanistan by saying it was to secure the rights of women. We should listen to ‘Progressive Democrats of America’ only when they begin to call for bringing all US troops (and weapons) home. —CGE On Jan 17, 2018, at 7:31 AM, Donna Smith for Progressive Democrats of America > wrote: [Progressive Democrats of America] Support the Women’s March Dear Cg— Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) is a feminist organization. We became one of the first national organizations to endorse and work for legislation to lift the arbitrary deadline from the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). We’re helping lead-sponsors Senator Ben Cardin and Representative Jackie Spier gain cosponsors to enshrine equality in the U.S. Constitution. In all honesty, we’ve been critically important to this effort. PDAers Andrea Miller, Mike Hersh, and Stephen Spitz helped lead organizing efforts on Capitol Hill—arm in arm with the National Organization for Women (NOW), United For Equality, and our friends Maryland State Senators Susan Lee and Rieger Manno, (who is running for the open Maryland 6th District House seat). Together, we helped encourage Sen. Cardin to step up as the lead sponsor of the Senate “3 State” ERA resolution. We’ve organized events and mobilized support in D.C. and the yet-to-ratify states. Get involved with the Women's March [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/pda/mailings/6331/attachments/original/womens_march_crowd_fist.jpg?1515790729] Please Join Our Victory In 2018 Sustainers Team Make automatic donations to elect feminist progressives This year the Women’s March will take place in Las Vegas, and PDA Mega-activists Tisia, Hector, and the rest of the PDA Vegas crew are doing some serious heavy lifting to make sure that the show is a huge success. Please reply to this email with 1) whether you'll be attending, and 2) whether you can help volunteer. PDA is working with these stellar activists in Nevada (who’ve ratified the ERA!), as well as leaders in Virginia, Illinois, and other states who are nearing ratification. Andrea with People Demanding Action are working with talented, tireless leaders including Cathy Paganelli Kaelin, Tammy Simkins, Eileen Davis, Marena Groll, Portia Boulger, Diana Danis, and many many more. We are making real progress toward full inclusion of women and girls in the Constitution. The Women’s March is dedicated to this cause! National Women's March Anniversary: Power to the Polls Sun., Jan. 21, 2018 • 10:00 AM Sam Boyd Stadium 7000 E Russell Rd Las Vegas, NV 89122 (FAQ) Can't make it to an event? Then please drop in a donation to help us continue our fight for women via our work on the ERA, reproductive rights, and other issues impacting women across the country, and to help cover the cost of the cool PDA stuff we're mailing to the location. We support progressive feminist candidates who bring a chorus of diverse voices to our political discourse. Will you help us today with an automatic monthly gift of any amount? Help us continue our efforts to expand human rights and curb the excesses of the wealthy oligarchs who are well on their way to taking over our country. Together, we can win. We can’t do anything without you. In solidarity, Donna Smith for Deb, Mike F, Judy, Mike H, Janis, Dan, Kimberly, Amos, Dr Bill, and Bryan—your PDA National Team P.S. We’re proud to enthusiastically support and encourage women to stand up, speak out, and take power. Please click here to help us elect more strong feminist progressives to work for the ERA and all efforts for full equality for all. Please click here to make automatic monthly donations. Invest in progress now! [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487344767/donate.png?1487344767] Progressive Democrats of America Grand Rapids, MI 49515, United States www.pdamerica.org [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487307268/facebook2.png?1487307268] [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487307284/twitter.png?1487307284] [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487307273/google.png?1487307273] [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487307279/rss.png?1487307279] [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487307275/linkedin.png?1487307275] [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487307286/youtube.png?1487307286] [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487307277/pinterest.png?1487307277] [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487307282/tumbler.png?1487307282] [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487307271/flickr.png?1487307271] Paid for by Progressive Democrats of America Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee This email was sent to cgestabrook at gmail.com. To stop receiving emails, click here. Created with NationBuilder _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7705086aec444afdd58c08d55dbe5af3%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636517994502542712&sdata=258jFQn99E41US%2FTNLjq9VuHu8TSJmbGJ2Oy4a6a%2BrE%3D&reserved=0 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stuartnlevy at gmail.com Wed Jan 17 20:37:25 2018 From: stuartnlevy at gmail.com (Stuart Levy) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 14:37:25 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Help Stop Sexism! In-Reply-To: References: <5a5f50392e0d7_3922b95974590f0@asgworker-qmb2-15.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> <671E2773-8278-4A48-9D24-51DC4ECE17D7@gmail.com> Message-ID: <0698cf08-fd2c-3bff-2382-fbe119330cc1@gmail.com> (removing the Peace list from this discussion) The Intercept just published this piece about Chelsea Manning's race for Senate in Maryland against Ben Cardin. I'm all for the ERA, but Cardin does not sound like any sort of prize we'd want to support in any other respect:      https://theintercept.com/2018/01/15/centrist-dems-launch-smear-campaign-against-young-trans-woman-all-to-keep-an-old-straight-white-man-in-power/ The depressing part of this argument is that there seems to be a full-force Dem invocation of Cold War rhetoric against Manning - not even complaining that she leaked the State Dept cables or the Collateral Murder videos from the Iraq war.   No.   Since she's opposing Cardin, she must be a tool of the Russian government.  Putin put her up to it.   Must be financing her campaign. Yuck. I'm leaving Mike Fox of PDA on this thread because of the article's pointing out a really nasty aspect of Cardin, his authoring of the infamous bill that would have made it a felony to support a boycott against Israel.    The ACLU condemned it. I support PDA, have been and will continue to be happy to work with local PDA organizers Deb Schrishuhn and Kevin Sandefur, but I too am uncomfortable with hearing that there'll be an event in PDA's name which is cheering on Ben Cardin. On 01/17/2018 01:29 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > I know nothing about Senator Cardin, or Maryland politics. I agree > with Cindy Sheehan, in relation to “womens’ marches.”  > If we care about women, we should stop killing them, overseas, women > of color, and on a daily basis with our foreign policy, of perpetual > war.  > > However, it should be noted, the local Progressive Democrats of > America, did hold a joint panel last summer in relation to the “Costs > of War” both human, and monetary. That program sparked a movement to > produce a program comprising a member of WAND “Women’s Action for > Nuclear Disarmament,” coming up in February. In addition to bringing > Medea Benjamin of CODE PINK, to Champaign a couple years ago, speaking > against war, they support healthcare over warfare.  > > So let’s stop bashing the group and work with them in common cause to > change US foreign policy.   > > Chelsea Manning as a candidate opposing Cardin, is worth supporting, > as she has proven herself to be not just courageous, but a true > humanitarian.   > > Hopefully now that PDA knows what we think of Senator Cardin, they > will take another look at their promotion. > >> On Jan 17, 2018, at 07:23, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss >> > > wrote: >> >> And you evade my question on war policy, Mike. >> >> I've had one of your 'Healthcare Not Warfare’ stickers on my car for >> a while - but’s that’s not the position of Sen. Cardin, whom you cry >> up in your "Support the Women’s March” ad.   >> >> Do you support him or his opponent in the Maryland Democratic primary? >> >> Your pedigree is attractive - but the last Democratic US president - >> he of the eight wars and “the most extreme terrorist campaign of >> modern times,” his drone assassinations - became president by >> co-opting the anti-war movement. Are you doing the same thing? >> >> Regards, CGE >> >> >>> On Jan 17, 2018, at 9:07 AM, Mike Fox >> > wrote: >>> >>> You just don't know who we are, evidently, C.G. >>> >>> Our seminal campaign is Healthcare Not Warfare.  We have an issue >>> organizing team on End Wars And Occupations.  Barbara Lee -- the >>> single strongest peace advocate in congress -- is on our advisory >>> board.  Our org came out of the Dennis Kucinich campaign in 2004.  >>>  We've never endorsed a corporatist Dem.  We got Bernie to run and >>> didn't endorse Clinton after she got the nomination.  The only group >>> with the word "Democrat" in it that I'm aware of that did that. >>> >>> Peace, health, and prosperity to you and yours, >>> >>> M >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 10:03 AM, C G >>> Estabrook > wrote: >>> >>> "Yep, that's one of the issues we stand for, CJ.” What issue, >>> Mike? Bringing all US troops home?  >>> >>> PDA seems to me to be a sheep-dogging operation, retrieving >>> disaffected Democrats for the Obama-Clinton neocon & neoliberal >>> policies - more war and more inequality.   >>> >>> I’m opposed to those policies. Regards, C. G. Estabrook >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 17, 2018, at 8:43 AM, Mike Fox >>> > wrote: >>>> >>>> Yep, that's one of the issues we stand for, CJ. >>>> >>>> Looks like there isn't a march in Champaign.  Would you be >>>> willing to support another event with phone calls to fellow PDA >>>> members to make sure they're showing up/showing solidarity? >>>> >>>> Mike Fox >>>> National Staff, Progressive Democrats Of America >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 8:47 AM, C G >>>> Estabrook >>> > wrote: >>>> >>>> Sen. Cardin is a principal fomenter of the ‘Russiagate' >>>> nonsense - designed to force the Trump administration back >>>> into the Obama-Clinton politics of war and war provocations! >>>> >>>> Remember e.g. that Clinton as Secretary of State defended >>>> the US killing in Afghanistan by saying it was to secure >>>> the rights of women.   >>>> >>>> We should listen to ‘Progressive Democrats of America’ only >>>> when they begin to call for bringing all US troops (and >>>> weapons) home. >>>> >>>> —CGE >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jan 17, 2018, at 7:31 AM, Donna Smith for Progressive >>>>> Democrats of America >>>> > wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Progressive Democrats of America >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Support the Women’s March >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dear Cg— >>>>> >>>>> Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) is a feminist >>>>> organization. We became one of the first national >>>>> organizations to endorse and work for legislation to lift >>>>> the arbitrary deadline from the Equal Rights Amendment >>>>> (ERA). We’re helping lead-sponsors Senator Ben Cardin and >>>>> Representative Jackie Spier gain cosponsors to enshrine >>>>> equality in the U.S. Constitution. In all honesty, we’ve >>>>> been critically important to this effort. >>>>> >>>>> PDAers Andrea Miller, Mike Hersh, and Stephen Spitz helped >>>>> lead organizing efforts on Capitol Hill—arm in arm with >>>>> the National Organization for Women (NOW), United For >>>>> Equality, and our friends Maryland State Senators Susan >>>>> Lee and Rieger Manno, (who is running for the open >>>>> Maryland 6th District House seat). Together, we helped >>>>> encourage Sen. Cardin to step up as the lead sponsor of >>>>> the Senate “3 State” ERA resolution. We’ve organized >>>>> events and mobilized support in D.C. and the yet-to-ratify >>>>> states. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Get involved with the Women's March >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Please Join Our Victory In 2018 Sustainers Team* >>>>> Make automatic donations to elect feminist progressives >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This year the Women’s March will take place in Las Vegas, >>>>> and PDA Mega-activists Tisia, Hector, and the rest of the >>>>> PDA Vegas crew are doing some serious heavy lifting to >>>>> make sure that the show is a huge success. Please reply to >>>>> this email with 1) whether you'll be attending, and 2) >>>>> whether you can help volunteer. >>>>> >>>>> PDA is working with these stellar activists in Nevada >>>>> (who’ve ratified the ERA!), as well as leaders in >>>>> Virginia, Illinois, and other states who are nearing >>>>> ratification. Andrea with People Demanding Action are >>>>> working with talented, tireless leaders including Cathy >>>>> Paganelli Kaelin, Tammy Simkins, Eileen Davis, Marena >>>>> Groll, Portia Boulger, Diana Danis, and many many more. We >>>>> are making real progress toward full inclusion of women >>>>> and girls in the Constitution. The Women’s March is >>>>> dedicated to this cause! >>>>> >>>>> National Women's March Anniversary: Power to the Polls >>>>> Sun., Jan. 21, 2018 • 10:00 AM >>>>> Sam Boyd Stadium >>>>> 7000 E Russell Rd >>>>> >>>>> Las Vegas, NV 89122 >>>>> >>>>> (FAQ >>>>> ) >>>>> >>>>> *Can't make it to an event?*  Then please drop in a >>>>> donation to help us continue our fight for women >>>>>  via >>>>> our work on the ERA, reproductive rights, and other issues >>>>> impacting women across the country, and to help cover the >>>>> cost of the* cool PDA stuff* we're mailing to the location. >>>>> >>>>> We support progressive feminist candidates >>>>>  who >>>>> bring a chorus of diverse voices to our political >>>>> discourse. Will you help us today with an automatic >>>>> monthly gift of any amount? >>>>>  Help >>>>> us continue our efforts to expand human rights and curb >>>>> the excesses of the wealthy oligarchs who are well on >>>>> their way to taking over our country. Together, we can >>>>> win. We can’t do anything without you. >>>>> >>>>> In solidarity, >>>>> >>>>> Donna Smith for Deb, Mike F, Judy, Mike H, Janis, Dan, >>>>> Kimberly, Amos, Dr Bill, and Bryan—your PDA National Team >>>>> >>>>> P.S. We’re proud to enthusiastically support and encourage >>>>> women to stand up, speak out, and take power. Please click >>>>> here >>>>>  to >>>>> help us elect more strong feminist progressives to work >>>>> for the ERA and all efforts for full equality for >>>>> all. Please click here >>>>>  to >>>>> make automatic monthly donations. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Invest in progress now! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Progressive Democrats of America >>>>> >>>>> Grand Rapids, MI 49515, United States  >>>>> www.pdamerica.org >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>          >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Paid for by Progressive Democrats of America >>>>> Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee >>>>> >>>>> This email was sent to cgestabrook at gmail.com. To stop >>>>> receiving emails, click here >>>>> . >>>>> Created with NationBuilder >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> >> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7705086aec444afdd58c08d55dbe5af3%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636517994502542712&sdata=258jFQn99E41US%2FTNLjq9VuHu8TSJmbGJ2Oy4a6a%2BrE%3D&reserved=0 > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Wed Jan 17 21:08:50 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 15:08:50 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Help Stop Sexism! In-Reply-To: <0698cf08-fd2c-3bff-2382-fbe119330cc1@gmail.com> References: <5a5f50392e0d7_3922b95974590f0@asgworker-qmb2-15.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> <671E2773-8278-4A48-9D24-51DC4ECE17D7@gmail.com> <0698cf08-fd2c-3bff-2382-fbe119330cc1@gmail.com> Message-ID: <70B30841-1433-4969-9D2A-AB02C5F2863B@gmail.com> An important intellectual tradition advises "Rarely affirm, seldom deny, always distinguish.” I think it should be followed. It seems necessary to distinguish between the PDA group and the anti-war movement. It looks like a group that needs to be bashed. Not as bad as MoveOn, perhaps, but close. The ‘costs of war,’ e.g., should be much, much higher: we should be demanding the US pay reparations for the wars it’s currently conducting. —CGE > On Jan 17, 2018, at 2:37 PM, Stuart Levy wrote: > > (removing the Peace list from this discussion) > > The Intercept just published this piece about Chelsea Manning's race for Senate in Maryland against Ben Cardin. > > I'm all for the ERA, but Cardin does not sound like any sort of prize we'd want to support in any other respect: > > https://theintercept.com/2018/01/15/centrist-dems-launch-smear-campaign-against-young-trans-woman-all-to-keep-an-old-straight-white-man-in-power/ > > The depressing part of this argument is that there seems to be a full-force Dem invocation of Cold War rhetoric against Manning - not even complaining that she leaked the State Dept cables or the Collateral Murder videos from the Iraq war. No. Since she's opposing Cardin, she must be a tool of the Russian government. Putin put her up to it. Must be financing her campaign. > > Yuck. > > I'm leaving Mike Fox of PDA on this thread because of the article's pointing out a really nasty aspect of Cardin, his authoring of the infamous bill that would have made it a felony to support a boycott against Israel. The ACLU condemned it. > > I support PDA, have been and will continue to be happy to work with local PDA organizers Deb Schrishuhn and Kevin Sandefur, but I too am uncomfortable with hearing that there'll be an event in PDA's name which is cheering on Ben Cardin. > > > On 01/17/2018 01:29 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> I know nothing about Senator Cardin, or Maryland politics. I agree with Cindy Sheehan, in relation to “womens’ marches.” >> If we care about women, we should stop killing them, overseas, women of color, and on a daily basis with our foreign policy, of perpetual war. >> >> However, it should be noted, the local Progressive Democrats of America, did hold a joint panel last summer in relation to the “Costs of War” both human, and monetary. That program sparked a movement to produce a program comprising a member of WAND “Women’s Action for Nuclear Disarmament,” coming up in February. In addition to bringing Medea Benjamin of CODE PINK, to Champaign a couple years ago, speaking against war, they support healthcare over warfare. >> >> So let’s stop bashing the group and work with them in common cause to change US foreign policy. >> >> Chelsea Manning as a candidate opposing Cardin, is worth supporting, as she has proven herself to be not just courageous, but a true humanitarian. >> >> Hopefully now that PDA knows what we think of Senator Cardin, they will take another look at their promotion. >> >>> On Jan 17, 2018, at 07:23, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: >>> >>> And you evade my question on war policy, Mike. >>> >>> I've had one of your 'Healthcare Not Warfare’ stickers on my car for a while - but’s that’s not the position of Sen. Cardin, whom you cry up in your "Support the Women’s March” ad. >>> >>> Do you support him or his opponent in the Maryland Democratic primary? >>> >>> Your pedigree is attractive - but the last Democratic US president - he of the eight wars and “the most extreme terrorist campaign of modern times,” his drone assassinations - became president by co-opting the anti-war movement. Are you doing the same thing? >>> >>> Regards, CGE >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 17, 2018, at 9:07 AM, Mike Fox wrote: >>>> >>>> You just don't know who we are, evidently, C.G. >>>> >>>> Our seminal campaign is Healthcare Not Warfare. We have an issue organizing team on End Wars And Occupations. Barbara Lee -- the single strongest peace advocate in congress -- is on our advisory board. Our org came out of the Dennis Kucinich campaign in 2004. We've never endorsed a corporatist Dem. We got Bernie to run and didn't endorse Clinton after she got the nomination. The only group with the word "Democrat" in it that I'm aware of that did that. >>>> >>>> Peace, health, and prosperity to you and yours, >>>> >>>> M >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 10:03 AM, C G Estabrook wrote: >>>> "Yep, that's one of the issues we stand for, CJ.” What issue, Mike? Bringing all US troops home? >>>> >>>> PDA seems to me to be a sheep-dogging operation, retrieving disaffected Democrats for the Obama-Clinton neocon & neoliberal policies - more war and more inequality. >>>> >>>> I’m opposed to those policies. Regards, C. G. Estabrook >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jan 17, 2018, at 8:43 AM, Mike Fox wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Yep, that's one of the issues we stand for, CJ. >>>>> >>>>> Looks like there isn't a march in Champaign. Would you be willing to support another event with phone calls to fellow PDA members to make sure they're showing up/showing solidarity? >>>>> >>>>> Mike Fox >>>>> National Staff, Progressive Democrats Of America >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 8:47 AM, C G Estabrook wrote: >>>>> Sen. Cardin is a principal fomenter of the ‘Russiagate' nonsense - designed to force the Trump administration back into the Obama-Clinton politics of war and war provocations! >>>>> >>>>> Remember e.g. that Clinton as Secretary of State defended the US killing in Afghanistan by saying it was to secure the rights of women. >>>>> >>>>> We should listen to ‘Progressive Democrats of America’ only when they begin to call for bringing all US troops (and weapons) home. >>>>> >>>>> —CGE >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Jan 17, 2018, at 7:31 AM, Donna Smith for Progressive Democrats of America wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Support the Women’s March >>>>>> >>>>>> Dear Cg— >>>>>> >>>>>> Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) is a feminist organization. We became one of the first national organizations to endorse and work for legislation to lift the arbitrary deadline from the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). We’re helping lead-sponsors Senator Ben Cardin and Representative Jackie Spier gain cosponsors to enshrine equality in the U.S. Constitution. In all honesty, we’ve been critically important to this effort. >>>>>> >>>>>> PDAers Andrea Miller, Mike Hersh, and Stephen Spitz helped lead organizing efforts on Capitol Hill—arm in arm with the National Organization for Women (NOW), United For Equality, and our friends Maryland State Senators Susan Lee and Rieger Manno, (who is running for the open Maryland 6th District House seat). Together, we helped encourage Sen. Cardin to step up as the lead sponsor of the Senate “3 State” ERA resolution. We’ve organized events and mobilized support in D.C. and the yet-to-ratify states. >>>>>> >>>>>> Get involved with the Women's March >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Please Join Our Victory In 2018 Sustainers Team >>>>>> Make automatic donations to elect feminist progressives >>>>>> >>>>>> This year the Women’s March will take place in Las Vegas, and PDA Mega-activists Tisia, Hector, and the rest of the PDA Vegas crew are doing some serious heavy lifting to make sure that the show is a huge success. Please reply to this email with 1) whether you'll be attending, and 2) whether you can help volunteer. >>>>>> >>>>>> PDA is working with these stellar activists in Nevada (who’ve ratified the ERA!), as well as leaders in Virginia, Illinois, and other states who are nearing ratification. Andrea with People Demanding Action are working with talented, tireless leaders including Cathy Paganelli Kaelin, Tammy Simkins, Eileen Davis, Marena Groll, Portia Boulger, Diana Danis, and many many more. We are making real progress toward full inclusion of women and girls in the Constitution. The Women’s March is dedicated to this cause! >>>>>> >>>>>> National Women's March Anniversary: Power to the Polls >>>>>> Sun., Jan. 21, 2018 • 10:00 AM >>>>>> Sam Boyd Stadium >>>>>> 7000 E Russell Rd >>>>>> Las Vegas, NV 89122 >>>>>> (FAQ) >>>>>> >>>>>> Can't make it to an event? Then please drop in a donation to help us continue our fight for women via our work on the ERA, reproductive rights, and other issues impacting women across the country, and to help cover the cost of the cool PDA stuff we're mailing to the location. >>>>>> >>>>>> We support progressive feminist candidates who bring a chorus of diverse voices to our political discourse. Will you help us today with an automatic monthly gift of any amount? Help us continue our efforts to expand human rights and curb the excesses of the wealthy oligarchs who are well on their way to taking over our country. Together, we can win. We can’t do anything without you. >>>>>> >>>>>> In solidarity, >>>>>> >>>>>> Donna Smith for Deb, Mike F, Judy, Mike H, Janis, Dan, Kimberly, Amos, Dr Bill, and Bryan—your PDA National Team >>>>>> >>>>>> P.S. We’re proud to enthusiastically support and encourage women to stand up, speak out, and take power. Please click here to help us elect more strong feminist progressives to work for the ERA and all efforts for full equality for all. Please click here to make automatic monthly donations. >>>>>> >>>>>> Invest in progress now! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Progressive Democrats of America >>>>>> Grand Rapids, MI 49515, United States >>>>>> www.pdamerica.org >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Paid for by Progressive Democrats of America >>>>>> Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee >>>>>> >>>>>> This email was sent to cgestabrook at gmail.com. To stop receiving emails, click here. >>>>>> Created with NationBuilder >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7705086aec444afdd58c08d55dbe5af3%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636517994502542712&sdata=258jFQn99E41US%2FTNLjq9VuHu8TSJmbGJ2Oy4a6a%2BrE%3D&reserved=0 >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 18 02:47:55 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 02:47:55 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] The White Rose (2 min.) References: <1008835709.91663.1516243675880.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1008835709.91663.1516243675880@mail.yahoo.com> Die Gedanken sind frei (Thoughts are free) | | | | | | | | | | | Die Gedanken sind frei (Thoughts are free) Rundfunk-Jugendchor Wernigerode, conducted by Friedrich Krell. Featured photograph: Hans Scholl, Sophie Scholl a... | | | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Thu Jan 18 03:50:44 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 21:50:44 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] A 'progressive' Democrat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7845F486-A65A-4C1F-8D6E-68A911CD631F@gmail.com> You got into the cooking sherry again, didn’t you, Bob? Regards, Carl > On Jan 17, 2018, at 10:29 AM, Robert Naiman wrote: > > Aren't you going to denounce Manning for impurely running as a Democrat against Cardin? > Isn't she just legitimizing the hopelessly corrupt Democratic Party by running in a Democratic Primary? > Surely the only morally pure way for her to challenge Cardin would be to run as a Green? > ;) > === > Robert Naiman > Policy Director > Just Foreign Policy > www.justforeignpolicy.org > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org > (202) 448-2898 x1 > > Senate: Wield the Constitution to Stop Saudi Starvation of Yemeni Children > https://www.change.org/p/senate-invoke-war-powers-to-stop-saudi-from-starving-yemeni-kids > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 9:48 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: > "Why Senator Cardin Is a Fitting Opponent for Chelsea Manning" – Consortiumnews > > Chelsea Manning’s senatorial bid offers a contrast to the Russian fear-mongering of incumbent candidate Ben Cardin, says Norman Solomon. > > By Norman Solomon > > The top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Ben Cardin [Md.], has become a big star in national media by routinely denouncing Russia as a dire threat to American democracy. The senior senator from Maryland personifies the highly dangerous opportunism that has set in among leading Democrats on the subject of Russia. > > Chelsea Manning confirmed on Sunday that she is challenging Senator Cardin’s re-election effort in the Democratic primary this June. Her campaign has real potential to raise key issues. One of them revolves around the kind of bellicose rhetoric that heightens the dangers of conflict between the world’s two nuclear superpowers. > > Picture: Chelsea Manning on May 18, 2017 the day after her release from prison. (Twitter) > > In a typical foray into reckless hyperbole, Cardin told a public forum in November: “When you use cyber in an affirmative way to compromise our democratic, free election system, that’s an attack against America. It’s an act of war. It is an act of war.” > > Cardin is far from the only member of Congress to use “act of war” rhetoric about alleged Russian cyber actions. Republican ultra-hawk Arizona Senator John McCain has hurled the phrase at Russia. But the most use of the phrase comes from a range of Democrats, such as Connecticut Senator Richard Blumenthal and the normally sensible Northern California Representative Jackie Speier. > > As his party’s ranking member of the key Senate committee on foreign policy, Cardin is at the tip of the anti-Russia propaganda spear. After three decades in Congress including nearly a dozen years in the Senate, he’s an old hand at spinning. No one has worked harder to get political mileage out of “Russiagate.” > > A Distorted Report > > Last week, Cardin upped the ante with the release of a report that he commissioned. In effect, it’s a declaration of red-white-and-blue jihad against Russia. > > The report — which accuses Russian President Vladimir Putin of “a relentless assault to undermine democracy and the rule of law in Europe and the United States” — received massive coverage in U.S. news media. Conservative and liberal punditry voiced acclaim. > > “Never before in American history has so clear a threat to national security been so clearly ignored by a U.S. president,” a solo statement by Cardin declares on the opening page. With the truly repugnant President Trump in its crosshairs, the report’s most polemical claims — no matter how debatable or ahistorical — have predictably gotten a pass from mass media. > > But the much-ballyhooed report is a carefully selective and distorted version of history. > > The expansion of NATO up to Russia’s borders, the U.S. interference in dozens of countries’ elections (including in Russia during the Clinton administration), Washington’s support for repressive regimes in the past and present — such realities didn’t merit consideration or mention. Nor did facts such as the USA’s role as the world’s biggest arms merchant. Or the aggressively deadly U.S. military interventions in the recent past and present, from Afghanistan to Iraq to Libya. > > Such omissions are essential to the self-righteous tone of the Russiagate frenzy. Only with silence about basic truths of U.S. foreign policy can officials in Washington pose as leaders of an angelic nation that must confront satanic Russia. > > In light of what is at stake for human survival — with the odds of nuclear war shifting ominously because of the agenda that he’s helping to push — Senator Cardin can be understood as someone who avidly fits into patterns of nationalistic and militaristic madness. The sad fact is that he has plenty of company on Capitol Hill. > > Democratic leadership used to be much saner. Five decades ago, it was the fanatical Republican standard bearer Barry Goldwater who scorned reaching out to the Kremlin – while Democratic President Lyndon Johnson wisely sought détente with Russian leaders on behalf of peaceful coexistence and reducing the risks of nuclear conflagration. > > Right after being sentenced to prison in August 2013 for heroic whistleblowing that exposed many U.S. war crimes, Chelsea Manning released a statement that quoted Howard Zinn: “There is not a flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.” A nuclear war between the United States and Russia would do more than kill vast numbers of innocent people. Scientific research tells us that a nuclear holocaust would make the Earth “virtually uninhabitable.” > > The extreme hostility toward Russia that makes such an outcome more likely must be rejected. Senator Ben Cardin is one of the loudest and most prominent voices for such hostility. He should be challenged. > > Norman Solomon is the coordinator of the online activist group RootsAction.org and the executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy. He is the author of a dozen books including “War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death.” > > ### > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Jan 18 04:06:33 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 22:06:33 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] A 'progressive' Democrat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <529E6F40-A5EC-4780-AB5A-36E4FCCBC94F@gmail.com> No. No. No. Regards, Carl > On Jan 17, 2018, at 10:29 AM, Robert Naiman wrote: > > Aren't you going to denounce Manning for impurely running as a Democrat against Cardin? > > Isn't she just legitimizing the hopelessly corrupt Democratic Party by running in a Democratic Primary? > > Surely the only morally pure way for her to challenge Cardin would be to run as a Green? > > ;) > > […] > > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 9:48 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: > "Why Senator Cardin Is a Fitting Opponent for Chelsea Manning" – Consortiumnews > > Chelsea Manning’s senatorial bid offers a contrast to the Russian fear-mongering of incumbent candidate Ben Cardin, says Norman Solomon. > > By Norman Solomon > > The top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Ben Cardin [Md.], has become a big star in national media by routinely denouncing Russia as a dire threat to American democracy. The senior senator from Maryland personifies the highly dangerous opportunism that has set in among leading Democrats on the subject of Russia. > > Chelsea Manning confirmed on Sunday that she is challenging Senator Cardin’s re-election effort in the Democratic primary this June. Her campaign has real potential to raise key issues. One of them revolves around the kind of bellicose rhetoric that heightens the dangers of conflict between the world’s two nuclear superpowers. > > Picture: Chelsea Manning on May 18, 2017 the day after her release from prison. (Twitter) > > In a typical foray into reckless hyperbole, Cardin told a public forum in November: “When you use cyber in an affirmative way to compromise our democratic, free election system, that’s an attack against America. It’s an act of war. It is an act of war.” > > Cardin is far from the only member of Congress to use “act of war” rhetoric about alleged Russian cyber actions. Republican ultra-hawk Arizona Senator John McCain has hurled the phrase at Russia. But the most use of the phrase comes from a range of Democrats, such as Connecticut Senator Richard Blumenthal and the normally sensible Northern California Representative Jackie Speier. > > As his party’s ranking member of the key Senate committee on foreign policy, Cardin is at the tip of the anti-Russia propaganda spear. After three decades in Congress including nearly a dozen years in the Senate, he’s an old hand at spinning. No one has worked harder to get political mileage out of “Russiagate.” > > A Distorted Report > > Last week, Cardin upped the ante with the release of a report that he commissioned. In effect, it’s a declaration of red-white-and-blue jihad against Russia. > > The report — which accuses Russian President Vladimir Putin of “a relentless assault to undermine democracy and the rule of law in Europe and the United States” — received massive coverage in U.S. news media. Conservative and liberal punditry voiced acclaim. > > “Never before in American history has so clear a threat to national security been so clearly ignored by a U.S. president,” a solo statement by Cardin declares on the opening page. With the truly repugnant President Trump in its crosshairs, the report’s most polemical claims — no matter how debatable or ahistorical — have predictably gotten a pass from mass media. > > But the much-ballyhooed report is a carefully selective and distorted version of history. > > The expansion of NATO up to Russia’s borders, the U.S. interference in dozens of countries’ elections (including in Russia during the Clinton administration), Washington’s support for repressive regimes in the past and present — such realities didn’t merit consideration or mention. Nor did facts such as the USA’s role as the world’s biggest arms merchant. Or the aggressively deadly U.S. military interventions in the recent past and present, from Afghanistan to Iraq to Libya. > > Such omissions are essential to the self-righteous tone of the Russiagate frenzy. Only with silence about basic truths of U.S. foreign policy can officials in Washington pose as leaders of an angelic nation that must confront satanic Russia. > > In light of what is at stake for human survival — with the odds of nuclear war shifting ominously because of the agenda that he’s helping to push — Senator Cardin can be understood as someone who avidly fits into patterns of nationalistic and militaristic madness. The sad fact is that he has plenty of company on Capitol Hill. > > Democratic leadership used to be much saner. Five decades ago, it was the fanatical Republican standard bearer Barry Goldwater who scorned reaching out to the Kremlin – while Democratic President Lyndon Johnson wisely sought détente with Russian leaders on behalf of peaceful coexistence and reducing the risks of nuclear conflagration. > > Right after being sentenced to prison in August 2013 for heroic whistleblowing that exposed many U.S. war crimes, Chelsea Manning released a statement that quoted Howard Zinn: “There is not a flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.” A nuclear war between the United States and Russia would do more than kill vast numbers of innocent people. Scientific research tells us that a nuclear holocaust would make the Earth “virtually uninhabitable.” > > The extreme hostility toward Russia that makes such an outcome more likely must be rejected. Senator Ben Cardin is one of the loudest and most prominent voices for such hostility. He should be challenged. > > Norman Solomon is the coordinator of the online activist group RootsAction.org and the executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy. He is the author of a dozen books including “War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death.” > > ### > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Jan 18 04:16:35 2018 From: naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (Robert Naiman) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 22:16:35 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] A 'progressive' Democrat In-Reply-To: <529E6F40-A5EC-4780-AB5A-36E4FCCBC94F@gmail.com> References: <529E6F40-A5EC-4780-AB5A-36E4FCCBC94F@gmail.com> Message-ID: OK, so let's do something to help the candidacy of Chelsea Manning. How about a fundraiser? On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 10:06 PM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss < peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > No. > > No. > > No. > > Regards, Carl > > > On Jan 17, 2018, at 10:29 AM, Robert Naiman > wrote: > > Aren't you going to denounce Manning for impurely running as a Democrat > against Cardin? > > Isn't she just legitimizing the hopelessly corrupt Democratic Party by > running in a Democratic Primary? > > Surely the only morally pure way for her to challenge Cardin would be to > run as a Green? > > ;) > > […] > > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 9:48 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss < > peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > >> "Why Senator Cardin Is a Fitting Opponent for Chelsea Manning" – >> Consortiumnews >> >> >> *Chelsea Manning’s senatorial bid offers a contrast to the Russian >> fear-mongering of incumbent candidate Ben Cardin, says Norman Solomon.* >> By Norman Solomon >> >> The top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Ben Cardin >> [Md.], has become a big star in national media by routinely denouncing >> Russia as a dire threat to American democracy. The senior senator from >> Maryland personifies the highly dangerous opportunism that has set in among >> leading Democrats on the subject of Russia. >> >> Chelsea Manning confirmed on Sunday that she is challenging Senator >> Cardin’s re-election effort in the Democratic primary this June. Her >> campaign has real potential to raise key issues. One of them revolves >> around the kind of bellicose rhetoric that heightens the dangers of >> conflict between the world’s two nuclear superpowers. >> >> >> *Picture: Chelsea Manning on May 18, 2017 the day after her release from >> prison. (Twitter)* >> In a typical foray into reckless hyperbole, Cardin told a public forum in >> November: “When you use cyber in an affirmative way to compromise our >> democratic, free election system, that’s an attack against America. It’s an >> act of war. It is an act of war.” >> >> Cardin is far from the only member of Congress to use “act of war” >> rhetoric about alleged Russian cyber actions. Republican ultra-hawk Arizona >> Senator John McCain has hurled the phrase at Russia. But the most use of >> the phrase comes from a range of Democrats, such as Connecticut >> Senator Richard Blumenthal and the normally sensible Northern California >> Representative Jackie Speier. >> >> As his party’s ranking member of the key Senate committee on foreign >> policy, Cardin is at the tip of the anti-Russia propaganda spear. After >> three decades in Congress including nearly a dozen years in the Senate, >> he’s an old hand at spinning. No one has worked harder to get political >> mileage out of “Russiagate.” >> >> *A Distorted Report* >> >> Last week, Cardin upped the ante with the release of a report that he >> commissioned. In effect, it’s a declaration of red-white-and-blue jihad >> against Russia. >> >> The report — which accuses Russian President Vladimir Putin of “a >> relentless assault to undermine democracy and the rule of law in Europe and >> the United States” — received massive coverage in U.S. news >> media. Conservative and liberal punditry voiced acclaim. >> >> “Never before in American history has so clear a threat to national >> security been so clearly ignored by a U.S. president,” a solo statement by >> Cardin declares on the opening page. With the truly repugnant President >> Trump in its crosshairs, the report’s most polemical claims — no matter how >> debatable or ahistorical — have predictably gotten a pass from mass media. >> >> But the much-ballyhooed report is a carefully selective and distorted >> version of history. >> >> The expansion of NATO up to Russia’s borders, the U.S. interference in >> dozens of countries’ elections (including in Russia during the Clinton >> administration), Washington’s support for repressive regimes in the past >> and present — such realities didn’t merit consideration or mention. Nor did >> facts such as the USA’s role as the world’s biggest arms merchant. Or the >> aggressively deadly U.S. military interventions in the recent past and >> present, from Afghanistan to Iraq to Libya. >> >> Such omissions are essential to the self-righteous tone of the Russiagate >> frenzy. Only with silence about basic truths of U.S. foreign policy can >> officials in Washington pose as leaders of an angelic nation that must >> confront satanic Russia. >> >> In light of what is at stake for human survival — with the odds of >> nuclear war shifting ominously because of the agenda that he’s helping to >> push — Senator Cardin can be understood as someone who avidly fits into >> patterns of nationalistic and militaristic madness. The sad fact is that he >> has plenty of company on Capitol Hill. >> >> Democratic leadership used to be much saner. Five decades ago, it was the >> fanatical Republican standard bearer Barry Goldwater who scorned reaching >> out to the Kremlin – while Democratic President Lyndon Johnson wisely >> sought détente with Russian leaders on behalf of peaceful coexistence and >> reducing the risks of nuclear conflagration. >> >> Right after being sentenced to prison in August 2013 for heroic >> whistleblowing that exposed many U.S. war crimes, Chelsea Manning released >> a statement that quoted Howard Zinn: “There is not a flag large enough to >> cover the shame of killing innocent people.” A nuclear war between the >> United States and Russia would do more than kill vast numbers of innocent >> people. Scientific research tells us that a nuclear holocaust would make >> the Earth “virtually uninhabitable.” >> >> The extreme hostility toward Russia that makes such an outcome more >> likely must be rejected. Senator Ben Cardin is one of the loudest and >> most prominent voices for such hostility. He should be challenged. >> >> *Norman Solomon is the coordinator of the online activist group >> RootsAction.org and the executive director of the >> Institute for Public Accuracy. He is the author of a dozen books including >> “War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death.”* >> >> *###* >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 Thu Jan 18 04:44:13 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 22:44:13 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] A 'progressive' Democrat In-Reply-To: References: <529E6F40-A5EC-4780-AB5A-36E4FCCBC94F@gmail.com> Message-ID: <133366E9-BF8C-44B9-B31E-63B75D0F837B@gmail.com> Sounds good. You’re the organizer. We could rent the Art Theatre (Leigh’s on the board) & show 'Collateral Murder' >. I wish there were a film/video of this: >, but I’ve heard of no plans for one. > On Jan 17, 2018, at 10:16 PM, Robert Naiman wrote: > > OK, so let's do something to help the candidacy of Chelsea Manning. > > How about a fundraiser? > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 10:06 PM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: > No. > > No. > > No. > > Regards, Carl > > >> On Jan 17, 2018, at 10:29 AM, Robert Naiman > wrote: >> >> Aren't you going to denounce Manning for impurely running as a Democrat against Cardin? >> >> Isn't she just legitimizing the hopelessly corrupt Democratic Party by running in a Democratic Primary? >> >> Surely the only morally pure way for her to challenge Cardin would be to run as a Green? >> >> ;) >> >> […] >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 9:48 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: >> "Why Senator Cardin Is a Fitting Opponent for Chelsea Manning" – Consortiumnews >> >> Chelsea Manning’s senatorial bid offers a contrast to the Russian fear-mongering of incumbent candidate Ben Cardin, says Norman Solomon. >> >> By Norman Solomon >> >> The top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Ben Cardin [Md.], has become a big star in national media by routinely denouncing Russia as a dire threat to American democracy. The senior senator from Maryland personifies the highly dangerous opportunism that has set in among leading Democrats on the subject of Russia. >> >> Chelsea Manning confirmed on Sunday that she is challenging Senator Cardin’s re-election effort in the Democratic primary this June. Her campaign has real potential to raise key issues. One of them revolves around the kind of bellicose rhetoric that heightens the dangers of conflict between the world’s two nuclear superpowers. >> >> Picture: Chelsea Manning on May 18, 2017 the day after her release from prison. (Twitter) >> >> In a typical foray into reckless hyperbole, Cardin told a public forum in November: “When you use cyber in an affirmative way to compromise our democratic, free election system, that’s an attack against America. It’s an act of war. It is an act of war.” >> >> Cardin is far from the only member of Congress to use “act of war” rhetoric about alleged Russian cyber actions. Republican ultra-hawk Arizona Senator John McCain has hurled the phrase at Russia. But the most use of the phrase comes from a range of Democrats, such as Connecticut Senator Richard Blumenthal and the normally sensible Northern California Representative Jackie Speier. >> >> As his party’s ranking member of the key Senate committee on foreign policy, Cardin is at the tip of the anti-Russia propaganda spear. After three decades in Congress including nearly a dozen years in the Senate, he’s an old hand at spinning. No one has worked harder to get political mileage out of “Russiagate.” >> >> A Distorted Report >> >> Last week, Cardin upped the ante with the release of a report that he commissioned. In effect, it’s a declaration of red-white-and-blue jihad against Russia. >> >> The report — which accuses Russian President Vladimir Putin of “a relentless assault to undermine democracy and the rule of law in Europe and the United States” — received massive coverage in U.S. news media. Conservative and liberal punditry voiced acclaim. >> >> “Never before in American history has so clear a threat to national security been so clearly ignored by a U.S. president,” a solo statement by Cardin declares on the opening page. With the truly repugnant President Trump in its crosshairs, the report’s most polemical claims — no matter how debatable or ahistorical — have predictably gotten a pass from mass media. >> >> But the much-ballyhooed report is a carefully selective and distorted version of history. >> >> The expansion of NATO up to Russia’s borders, the U.S. interference in dozens of countries’ elections (including in Russia during the Clinton administration), Washington’s support for repressive regimes in the past and present — such realities didn’t merit consideration or mention. Nor did facts such as the USA’s role as the world’s biggest arms merchant. Or the aggressively deadly U.S. military interventions in the recent past and present, from Afghanistan to Iraq to Libya. >> >> Such omissions are essential to the self-righteous tone of the Russiagate frenzy. Only with silence about basic truths of U.S. foreign policy can officials in Washington pose as leaders of an angelic nation that must confront satanic Russia. >> >> In light of what is at stake for human survival — with the odds of nuclear war shifting ominously because of the agenda that he’s helping to push — Senator Cardin can be understood as someone who avidly fits into patterns of nationalistic and militaristic madness. The sad fact is that he has plenty of company on Capitol Hill. >> >> Democratic leadership used to be much saner. Five decades ago, it was the fanatical Republican standard bearer Barry Goldwater who scorned reaching out to the Kremlin – while Democratic President Lyndon Johnson wisely sought détente with Russian leaders on behalf of peaceful coexistence and reducing the risks of nuclear conflagration. >> >> Right after being sentenced to prison in August 2013 for heroic whistleblowing that exposed many U.S. war crimes, Chelsea Manning released a statement that quoted Howard Zinn: “There is not a flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.” A nuclear war between the United States and Russia would do more than kill vast numbers of innocent people. Scientific research tells us that a nuclear holocaust would make the Earth “virtually uninhabitable.” >> >> The extreme hostility toward Russia that makes such an outcome more likely must be rejected. Senator Ben Cardin is one of the loudest and most prominent voices for such hostility. He should be challenged. >> >> Norman Solomon is the coordinator of the online activist group RootsAction.org and the executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy. He is the author of a dozen books including “War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death.” >> >> ### >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 deb.pdamerica at gmail.com Thu Jan 18 10:10:01 2018 From: deb.pdamerica at gmail.com (Debra Schrishuhn) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 04:10:01 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Help Stop Sexism! In-Reply-To: References: <5a5f50392e0d7_3922b95974590f0@asgworker-qmb2-15.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> <671E2773-8278-4A48-9D24-51DC4ECE17D7@gmail.com> Message-ID: Apologies to all for the length of this response. Some answers don't fit on a bumper sticker. First of all, Karen, thank you for your kind words about Progressive Democrats of America and our local work toward peace. You and Niloofar were driving partners in the Costs of War panel event, and even though it took a little bit of time, I am so glad it bore some useful fruit. Yes, we brought Medea Benjamin, who is also on our national advisory board, to Champaign for her book tour. She worked with PDA and other organizations to cover the Chicago and upstate area, then PDA arranged for three downstate stops through our local chapters in the Metro-East region, Springfield, and Champaign-Urbana. BTW, the CU stop was the most successful, and Medea was very pleased, and I thank all who attended and helped make it a great success, and those individuals and organizations who aided in the organizing effort. Mike Fox personally arranged a 3-day/7-stop tour for her in Florida, and PDA chapters across the country stepped up to host Medea and help her spread her message of peace. Carl, you should have read our "Help Stop Sexism!" email more carefully. In it we applaud Sen. Cardin as the lead sponsor in the US Senate for the bill removing the ratification deadline for the Equal Rights Amendment, another one of our long-standing issue efforts, and his leadership in that capacity is what we are praising in this email. It is by no means a blanket endorsement of his career or a specific endorsement for his re-election. He is the lead Senate sponsor for a bill to get the long-overdue ERA Amendment passed, and we acknowledge his leadership on this issue. Not to get too much in the weeds, but PDA's national endorsement policy--both of legislation and for candidates--comes from the ground up. In the case of US Senate candidates, PDA members in the entire state are polled after local chapters agree in principle and after the candidate completes an exhaustive questionnaire (this year I believe it is about 15 pages in length with numerous and pointed queries about the candidate's positions on international and domestic policy). To the best of my knowledge, neither Ms Manning nor Sen Cardin nor Maryland chapters have requested an endorsement in that Senate race, nor have the candidates completed the questionnaire. Mindful of our ability to affect races and of the limited number of solid progressive candidates running for federal office, PDA does not endorse in every federal race. Finally, PDA issue teams meet by conference call monthly and work behind the scenes, both inside and outside the Democratic party, to further goals of peace, prosperity, and equality--all fairly complicated concepts requiring more than absolutist statements to achieve measurable progress toward these goals. Here is the opening statement from our "End Wars and Occupations" issue team, as found on our web site pdamerica.org: "Since 2001, terrorism and instability have increased wherever the U.S. has intervened militarily. We call on the President and Congress to rethink the false premises of an ever-expanding 'global war on terror' in which Western-led alliances of absolute monarchs, corrupt governments and proxy forces fight endlessly proliferating enemies in more and more countries." You can read the full statement at our web site by going to pdamerica.org and clicking on the Issues page. It contains specific details on our position, legislation we have endorsed, our accomplishments, ongoing projects, and our coalition partners, including the following organizations: National Priorities Project (NPP), United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ), Code Pink, Win Without War, Project Defense Alternatives (PDA), US Labor Against the War (USLAW), Jobs NOT Wars Campaign, Peace Action On the Issues page of our web site, interested readers will also find equally detailed assessments of PDA's goals and work in the following areas: Healthcare Human Rights Equal Rights Amendment End Corporate Rule Stop Global Warming Voter Access Protection & Election Integrity Economic and Social Justice In addition right now we are working very closely with a range of organizations to get a clean DREAM Act passed, and I urge everyone reading this email to call your US Representative and US Senators and tell them to get this bill passed now, rather than allowing more young people to lose their protections under DACA. Again, I apologize for the length of this response,but hope that it clarifies PDA's mission and approach to national politics. The way for us to get more things done is for more people to become actively involved in local chapters and in our issue teams. For the latter, visit our web site at pdamerica.org. For the former, contact me at deb at pdamerica.org or contact Kevin Sandefur at kevin at sandefur.com. Central Illinois PDA meets monthly on the second Wednesday, 1pm Milo's Restaurant. All are welcome at our meetings. For a more progressive future, Debra Schrishuhn PDA National Staffer Chapter Co-Leader, Central Illinois PDA Progressive Democrats of America pdamerica.org On 1/17/18, Karen Aram via Peace wrote: > I know nothing about Senator Cardin, or Maryland politics. I agree with > Cindy Sheehan, in relation to “womens’ marches.” > If we care about women, we should stop killing them, overseas, women of > color, and on a daily basis with our foreign policy, of perpetual war. > > However, it should be noted, the local Progressive Democrats of America, did > hold a joint panel last summer in relation to the “Costs of War” both human, > and monetary. That program sparked a movement to produce a program > comprising a member of WAND “Women’s Action for Nuclear Disarmament,” coming > up in February. In addition to bringing Medea Benjamin of CODE PINK, to > Champaign a couple years ago, speaking against war, they support healthcare > over warfare. > > So let’s stop bashing the group and work with them in common cause to change > US foreign policy. > > Chelsea Manning as a candidate opposing Cardin, is worth supporting, as she > has proven herself to be not just courageous, but a true humanitarian. > > Hopefully now that PDA knows what we think of Senator Cardin, they will take > another look at their promotion. > > On Jan 17, 2018, at 07:23, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > > > wrote: > > And you evade my question on war policy, Mike. > > I've had one of your 'Healthcare Not Warfare’ stickers on my car for a while > - but’s that’s not the position of Sen. Cardin, whom you cry up in your > "Support the Women’s March” ad. > > Do you support him or his opponent in the Maryland Democratic primary? > > Your pedigree is attractive - but the last Democratic US president - he of > the eight wars and “the most extreme terrorist campaign of modern times,” > his drone assassinations - became president by co-opting the anti-war > movement. Are you doing the same thing? > > Regards, CGE > > > On Jan 17, 2018, at 9:07 AM, Mike Fox > > wrote: > > You just don't know who we are, evidently, C.G. > > Our seminal campaign is Healthcare Not Warfare. We have an issue organizing > team on End Wars And Occupations. Barbara Lee -- the single strongest peace > advocate in congress -- is on our advisory board. Our org came out of the > Dennis Kucinich campaign in 2004. We've never endorsed a corporatist Dem. > We got Bernie to run and didn't endorse Clinton after she got the > nomination. The only group with the word "Democrat" in it that I'm aware of > that did that. > > Peace, health, and prosperity to you and yours, > > M > > > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 10:03 AM, C G Estabrook > > wrote: > "Yep, that's one of the issues we stand for, CJ.” What issue, Mike? Bringing > all US troops home? > > PDA seems to me to be a sheep-dogging operation, retrieving disaffected > Democrats for the Obama-Clinton neocon & neoliberal policies - more war and > more inequality. > > I’m opposed to those policies. Regards, C. G. Estabrook > > > On Jan 17, 2018, at 8:43 AM, Mike Fox > > wrote: > > Yep, that's one of the issues we stand for, CJ. > > Looks like there isn't a march in Champaign. Would you be willing to > support another event with phone calls to fellow PDA members to make sure > they're showing up/showing solidarity? > > Mike Fox > National Staff, Progressive Democrats Of America > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 8:47 AM, C G Estabrook > > wrote: > Sen. Cardin is a principal fomenter of the ‘Russiagate' nonsense - designed > to force the Trump administration back into the Obama-Clinton politics of > war and war provocations! > > Remember e.g. that Clinton as Secretary of State defended the US killing in > Afghanistan by saying it was to secure the rights of women. > > We should listen to ‘Progressive Democrats of America’ only when they begin > to call for bringing all US troops (and weapons) home. > > —CGE > > > On Jan 17, 2018, at 7:31 AM, Donna Smith for Progressive Democrats of > America > wrote: > > [Progressive Democrats of > America] > > Support the Women’s > March > > Dear Cg— > > Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) is a feminist organization. We became > one of the first national organizations to endorse and work for legislation > to lift the arbitrary deadline from the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). We’re > helping lead-sponsors Senator Ben Cardin and Representative Jackie Spier > gain cosponsors to enshrine equality in the U.S. Constitution. In all > honesty, we’ve been critically important to this effort. > > PDAers Andrea Miller, Mike Hersh, and Stephen Spitz helped lead organizing > efforts on Capitol Hill—arm in arm with the National Organization for Women > (NOW), United For Equality, and our friends Maryland State Senators Susan > Lee and Rieger Manno, (who is running for the open Maryland 6th District > House seat). Together, we helped encourage Sen. Cardin to step up as the > lead sponsor of the Senate “3 State” ERA resolution. We’ve organized events > and mobilized support in D.C. and the yet-to-ratify states. > > Get involved with the Women's > March > > [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/pda/mailings/6331/attachments/original/womens_march_crowd_fist.jpg?1515790729] > > Please Join Our Victory In 2018 Sustainers Team > Make automatic donations to elect feminist > progressives > > This year the Women’s March will take place in Las Vegas, and PDA > Mega-activists Tisia, Hector, and the rest of the PDA Vegas crew are doing > some serious heavy lifting to make sure that the show is a huge success. > Please reply to this email with 1) whether you'll be attending, and 2) > whether you can help volunteer. > > PDA is working with these stellar activists in Nevada (who’ve ratified the > ERA!), as well as leaders in Virginia, Illinois, and other states who are > nearing ratification. Andrea with People Demanding Action are working with > talented, tireless leaders including Cathy Paganelli Kaelin, Tammy Simkins, > Eileen Davis, Marena Groll, Portia Boulger, Diana Danis, and many many more. > We are making real progress toward full inclusion of women and girls in the > Constitution. The Women’s March is dedicated to this cause! > > National Women's March Anniversary: Power to the Polls > Sun., Jan. 21, 2018 • 10:00 AM > Sam Boyd Stadium > 7000 E Russell > Rd > Las Vegas, NV > 89122 > (FAQ) > > Can't make it to an event? Then please drop in a donation to help us > continue our fight for > women > via our work on the ERA, reproductive rights, and other issues impacting > women across the country, and to help cover the cost of the cool PDA stuff > we're mailing to the location. > > We support progressive feminist > candidates > who bring a chorus of diverse voices to our political discourse. Will you > help us today with an automatic monthly gift of any > amount? > Help us continue our efforts to expand human rights and curb the excesses of > the wealthy oligarchs who are well on their way to taking over our country. > Together, we can win. We can’t do anything without you. > > In solidarity, > > Donna Smith for Deb, Mike F, Judy, Mike H, Janis, Dan, Kimberly, Amos, Dr > Bill, and Bryan—your PDA National Team > > P.S. We’re proud to enthusiastically support and encourage women to stand > up, speak out, and take power. Please click > here > to help us elect more strong feminist progressives to work for the ERA and > all efforts for full equality for all. Please click > here > to make automatic monthly donations. > > > Invest in progress now! > [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487344767/donate.png?1487344767] > > Progressive Democrats of America > > Grand Rapids, MI 49515, United States > www.pdamerica.org > > [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487307268/facebook2.png?1487307268] > [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487307284/twitter.png?1487307284] > > [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487307273/google.png?1487307273] > > [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487307279/rss.png?1487307279] > > [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487307275/linkedin.png?1487307275] > > [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487307286/youtube.png?1487307286] > > [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487307277/pinterest.png?1487307277] > > [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487307282/tumbler.png?1487307282] > > [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a554a898876e2025000004/attachments/original/1487307271/flickr.png?1487307271] > > > Paid for by Progressive Democrats of America > Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee > > > This email was sent to cgestabrook at gmail.com. To stop receiving emails, > click > here. > Created with > NationBuilder > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7705086aec444afdd58c08d55dbe5af3%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636517994502542712&sdata=258jFQn99E41US%2FTNLjq9VuHu8TSJmbGJ2Oy4a6a%2BrE%3D&reserved=0 > > From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jan 18 12:44:44 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 12:44:44 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The White Rose (2 min.) In-Reply-To: <1008835709.91663.1516243675880@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1008835709.91663.1516243675880.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1008835709.91663.1516243675880@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Sophie Sholl has been one of my heroes, since first hearing about her, there is a German film worth watching, about all the young heroes of “The White Rose.” On Jan 17, 2018, at 18:47, David Green via Peace-discuss > wrote: Die Gedanken sind frei (Thoughts are free) [https://s.yimg.com/nq/storm/assets/enhancrV2/23/logos/youtube.png] Die Gedanken sind frei (Thoughts are free) Rundfunk-Jugendchor Wernigerode, conducted by Friedrich Krell. Featured photograph: Hans Scholl, Sophie Scholl a... _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C71e18071d99e4a0d727a08d55e1def9a%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636518405018830265&sdata=jdMTM18KsiAfrdiEFJsQd%2BmRcKv1HewXr1Cv9DUpsAM%3D&reserved=0 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jan 18 16:57:16 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 16:57:16 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: [Rally for a Fair Contract] The GEO has filed an Unfair Labor Practice (ULP)... References: <1eee7336fc6811e7871f0002c993efd0-b09f9f38@f42eee719d6e4b0ae3ef4d18d032afc790c6647c1a11a68b944c6096c27f82f1> Message-ID: Subject: [Rally for a Fair Contract] The GEO has filed an Unfair Labor Practice (ULP)... Date: January 18, 2018 at 07:56:18 PST GEO posted in Rally for a Fair Contract. [https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-1/p100x100/19225726_10154954393534398_5593220885473273703_n.jpg?_nc_ad=z-m&_nc_cid=0&oh=bb265f033ef832a970225629d94aaac9&oe=5AE1E68D] GEO January 18 at 7:55am The GEO has filed an Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) charge against the University administration for failure to bargain wages with us at the table. Please read and share our press release. We hope to see you at Noon at the Alma Mater! FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: GRADUATE EMPLOYEES ORGANIZATION (GEO) OF UIUC RALLIES AT ALMA MATER AFTER FIL... Reply to this email to comment on this post. This message was sent to karenaram at hotmail.com. If you don't want to receive these emails from Facebook in the future, please unsubscribe. Facebook, Inc., Attention: Community Support, 1 Hacker Way, Menlo Park, CA 94025 [https://www.facebook.com/email_open_log_pic.php?mid=5630eb5ef96d9G59f6997cG5630eff8599abG3f3] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jan 18 18:57:33 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 18:57:33 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News Gazette on Trump Medical Exam Message-ID: Just love that Comma! Fab RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) 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: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 88865 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 88865 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jan 18 18:58:24 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 18:58:24 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: News Gazette on Trump Medical Exam Message-ID: Just love that Comma! Fab RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) 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: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 88865 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 88865 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jan 18 18:58:24 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 18:58:24 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: News Gazette on Trump Medical Exam Message-ID: Just love that Comma! Fab RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) 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: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 88865 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 88865 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Thu Jan 18 20:10:26 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:10:26 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] AU prof: the US threatened by Russian-influenced make-up artists; Vox tells us how... Message-ID: https://www.vox.com/world/2018/1/17/16878406/donald-trump-fox-news-russia-cia-foreign-spies Foreign spies could be manipulating Trump through Fox News: the risks of Trump’s Fox News obsession | Sean Illing Last month, AP reported that Russian intelligence agencies were pursuing journalists around the world in the same way they typically target politicians and government employees from hostile states. Much of this activity, according to the report, was aimed at dissident journalists and bloggers who are perceived as threats to the Russian regime. But Aki Peritz, a former CIA analyst and current adjunct professor at American University, believes that certain foreign spy agencies are very likely targeting one specific private institution: Fox News. The reason is simple enough: The president of the United States watches Fox News — a lot — and therefore the channel has enormous influence on what he thinks, tweets, and does. As of last November, Trump had tweeted about the Fox News show Fox & Friends 88 times, according to the Washington Post’s Philip Bump. I reached out to Peritz and asked him to lay out his case. A lightly edited transcript of our conversation follows. Sean Illing If you were a Russian spy, why would you target Fox News? Aki Peritz I wouldn’t merely say a Russian spy, I’d say a spy from any hostile intelligence service. We all know that the Russians are a hostile intelligence service, but they’re not the only game in town. It’s not like the Chinese are not involved in targeting media personalities. It’s not like the Iranians or other countries aren’t also targeting journalists. It’s important that we don’t make this purely about Russia. That said, if I were a hostile intelligence service, I would want to target the media source that the president, senior members of Congress and all their aides, many people in the Defense Department, people in the State Department, and the intelligence community watch. Fox, whatever you think of its content, has real power. They have all these networks into the government, but also into private industry and former government officials, who in turn influence the government. So to put it simply, an intelligence service is looking for a way into power, and Fox News is certainly that. It’s also very, very hard to penetrate the US government, but it’s pretty easy to penetrate a media organization. Sean Illing So it’s not about the content of Fox News programming so much as the influence they have on powerful people? Aki Peritz It goes beyond influence. Obviously that’s a major component of this, but we know the president specifically interacts with Fox News and with Fox News personalities like Sean Hannity on Twitter, and many of his ideas seems to be plucked right out of Fox’s talking points. We know that he talks to Sean Hannity. I’m sure that he talks to other people. There’s a regular interface, a dialogue that goes on between the president of the United States, presumably his senior-level officials, and this one particular company. On the one hand, wouldn’t it be great if you were a hostile intelligence service and you could influence a person like Sean Hannity? I do not believe that Sean Hannity is a Russian asset, but that’s not the point. If you’re a spy, maybe you try to work his producers or the person who does his makeup — you look for any way inside that world. Sean Illing Can you walk me through the approach or process? A spy agency decides Fox News has captured the president’s attention, so they start to monitor it closely. Then what? Aki Peritz First, let’s start with the easier part: collecting information on the president. We obviously have his Twitter feed, which is a gold mine for intelligence. How many other world leaders are there where we literally know what they’re thinking about every day, with no filter? How many other leaders just say what they feel when they feel it, almost every day? Twitter is an invaluable insight into the mind of this man, and every foreign intelligence agency knows it. Imagine if we knew this much about Vladimir Putin or Xi Jinping. It would be a massive intelligence gold mine. So back to Fox News. A spy agency will notice, as I’m sure everybody has at this point, that the president watches Fox News a lot: specifically programs like Fox & Friends and Sean Hannity’s program. This means the president’s senior staff and senior members of Congress and the intelligence and diplomatic community are also watching, mostly because they’re all waiting for the president to make his decisions. An intelligence service wants to collect information before it’s widely known, before it reaches decision-makers and the public. If you’ve co-opted a production assistant on one of these TV shows, they can tell you what’s coming, what message they’re going to pump out. They can send you an email or they can let you know what Fox News is going to be talking about and when. So they already know the script, and that’s one way to collect information. Sean Illing And what would you do if you wanted to start influencing this process? Aki Peritz Well, you try to nail down the person writing the scripts for Fox & Friends and you try to move key narratives around. You start putting ideas into the system, ideas which, eventually, will reach the president of the United States. This is not as difficult as you might expect. These are TV people; they’re not government people. They don’t expect to be co-opted by a hostile intelligence service, so these things happen very fast and without people really knowing it. They’re susceptible to blackmail. Sean Illing If you’re a spy looking to compromise or gain leverage over a journalist, be it at Fox or anywhere else, how would that process work? Aki Peritz The CIA has a general way of doing it, which is spot, assess, develop, and then recruit. You can say, “I want to target this organization. I know all the production assistants on Fox & Friends. Here are all their names.” Then you do a little bit of research on them, and then you bump into them at a party, or you go out for a drink, or you ask them out on a date, or you have your kids play with their kids at soccer. You facilitate some sort of contact, and then you see whether they’re interested or they have any vulnerabilities. Maybe this individual has money problems. Maybe they have a gambling problem. Maybe they’re cheating on their spouse. Then you use your knowledge to leverage access, and you’re in. That’s a very crude way of putting it, but that’s basically how it’s done. Sean Illing Have you seen any evidence that something like this is happening? Aki Peritz I do not see any direct evidence that this is currently occurring, and that’s why I wrote the piece. I don’t work at Fox News, so I don’t know what’s happening behind the scenes. I wrote this as a warning to the people who do work at Fox News, people like Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham, and the people that work for them. Whatever they believe or don’t believe, they are targets. The producers and assistants on these shows have probably never considered the possibility that their emails might be compromised or they might be subject to blackmail by a foreign national, by a foreign intelligence service, but they ought to be careful. That’s all I’m saying. ### -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jan 18 20:30:36 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 20:30:36 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] AU prof: the US threatened by Russian-influenced make-up artists; Vox tells us how... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: RUBBISH, I say, most of the journalists, and news that is being targeted are those reporting “real news," to the American people, like WSWS. ORG,, RT.Com, The Real News, TruthDig, etc., by the US CIA, and their contractors. On Jan 18, 2018, at 12:10, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: https://www.vox.com/world/2018/1/17/16878406/donald-trump-fox-news-russia-cia-foreign-spies Foreign spies could be manipulating Trump through Fox News: the risks of Trump’s Fox News obsession | Sean Illing Last month, AP reported that Russian intelligence agencies were pursuing journalists around the world in the same way they typically target politicians and government employees from hostile states. Much of this activity, according to the report, was aimed at dissident journalists and bloggers who are perceived as threats to the Russian regime. But Aki Peritz, a former CIA analyst and current adjunct professor at American University, believes that certain foreign spy agencies are very likely targeting one specific private institution: Fox News. The reason is simple enough: The president of the United States watches Fox News — a lot — and therefore the channel has enormous influence on what he thinks, tweets, and does. As of last November, Trump had tweeted about the Fox News show Fox & Friends 88 times, according to the Washington Post’s Philip Bump. I reached out to Peritz and asked him to lay out his case. A lightly edited transcript of our conversation follows. Sean Illing If you were a Russian spy, why would you target Fox News? Aki Peritz I wouldn’t merely say a Russian spy, I’d say a spy from any hostile intelligence service. We all know that the Russians are a hostile intelligence service, but they’re not the only game in town. It’s not like the Chinese are not involved in targeting media personalities. It’s not like the Iranians or other countries aren’t also targeting journalists. It’s important that we don’t make this purely about Russia. That said, if I were a hostile intelligence service, I would want to target the media source that the president, senior members of Congress and all their aides, many people in the Defense Department, people in the State Department, and the intelligence community watch. Fox, whatever you think of its content, has real power. They have all these networks into the government, but also into private industry and former government officials, who in turn influence the government. So to put it simply, an intelligence service is looking for a way into power, and Fox News is certainly that. It’s also very, very hard to penetrate the US government, but it’s pretty easy to penetrate a media organization. Sean Illing So it’s not about the content of Fox News programming so much as the influence they have on powerful people? Aki Peritz It goes beyond influence. Obviously that’s a major component of this, but we know the president specifically interacts with Fox News and with Fox News personalities like Sean Hannity on Twitter, and many of his ideas seems to be plucked right out of Fox’s talking points. We know that he talks to Sean Hannity. I’m sure that he talks to other people. There’s a regular interface, a dialogue that goes on between the president of the United States, presumably his senior-level officials, and this one particular company. On the one hand, wouldn’t it be great if you were a hostile intelligence service and you could influence a person like Sean Hannity? I do not believe that Sean Hannity is a Russian asset, but that’s not the point. If you’re a spy, maybe you try to work his producers or the person who does his makeup — you look for any way inside that world. Sean Illing Can you walk me through the approach or process? A spy agency decides Fox News has captured the president’s attention, so they start to monitor it closely. Then what? Aki Peritz First, let’s start with the easier part: collecting information on the president. We obviously have his Twitter feed, which is a gold mine for intelligence. How many other world leaders are there where we literally know what they’re thinking about every day, with no filter? How many other leaders just say what they feel when they feel it, almost every day? Twitter is an invaluable insight into the mind of this man, and every foreign intelligence agency knows it. Imagine if we knew this much about Vladimir Putin or Xi Jinping. It would be a massive intelligence gold mine. So back to Fox News. A spy agency will notice, as I’m sure everybody has at this point, that the president watches Fox News a lot: specifically programs like Fox & Friends and Sean Hannity’s program. This means the president’s senior staff and senior members of Congress and the intelligence and diplomatic community are also watching, mostly because they’re all waiting for the president to make his decisions. An intelligence service wants to collect information before it’s widely known, before it reaches decision-makers and the public. If you’ve co-opted a production assistant on one of these TV shows, they can tell you what’s coming, what message they’re going to pump out. They can send you an email or they can let you know what Fox News is going to be talking about and when. So they already know the script, and that’s one way to collect information. Sean Illing And what would you do if you wanted to start influencing this process? Aki Peritz Well, you try to nail down the person writing the scripts for Fox & Friends and you try to move key narratives around. You start putting ideas into the system, ideas which, eventually, will reach the president of the United States. This is not as difficult as you might expect. These are TV people; they’re not government people. They don’t expect to be co-opted by a hostile intelligence service, so these things happen very fast and without people really knowing it. They’re susceptible to blackmail. Sean Illing If you’re a spy looking to compromise or gain leverage over a journalist, be it at Fox or anywhere else, how would that process work? Aki Peritz The CIA has a general way of doing it, which is spot, assess, develop, and then recruit. You can say, “I want to target this organization. I know all the production assistants on Fox & Friends. Here are all their names.” Then you do a little bit of research on them, and then you bump into them at a party, or you go out for a drink, or you ask them out on a date, or you have your kids play with their kids at soccer. You facilitate some sort of contact, and then you see whether they’re interested or they have any vulnerabilities. Maybe this individual has money problems. Maybe they have a gambling problem. Maybe they’re cheating on their spouse. Then you use your knowledge to leverage access, and you’re in. That’s a very crude way of putting it, but that’s basically how it’s done. Sean Illing Have you seen any evidence that something like this is happening? Aki Peritz I do not see any direct evidence that this is currently occurring, and that’s why I wrote the piece. I don’t work at Fox News, so I don’t know what’s happening behind the scenes. I wrote this as a warning to the people who do work at Fox News, people like Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham, and the people that work for them. Whatever they believe or don’t believe, they are targets. The producers and assistants on these shows have probably never considered the possibility that their emails might be compromised or they might be subject to blackmail by a foreign national, by a foreign intelligence service, but they ought to be careful. That’s all I’m saying. ### _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C093d3dcf116e4caac9f408d55eaf969c%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636519030592854469&sdata=PBSnVsYGWGYxRuMkN6jGML%2BjE3Rz46ck6dbC8ne%2BvLA%3D&reserved=0 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Fri Jan 19 00:53:12 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 00:53:12 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Senate Debating Now/Vote Friday. Call Now For Dreamers! References: <5a6140eb6e246_1e7f03b1974977d5@asgworker-qmb2-20.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: From: Progressive Democrats of America > Subject: Senate Debating Now/Vote Friday. Call Now For Dreamers! [Progressive Democrats of America] [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a6880698876e272e000031/attachments/original/1487309819/rapid_response.png?1487309819] Karen -- It's been a long fight with folks willing to get arrested to make this happen. We're down to the wire. They vote Friday Please use this handy tool to call your Senators and congressperson right now (after hours calls fine.) [AZ_Rally_Woman_Flag.jpg] And after you've made the call, please forward to all of your contacts. We can win this if we all stand together. #NoDreamNoDeal In solidarity, Mike Fox for the PDA National Team PS: After you've made your calls, please help us as we continue the fight for humane and just immigration policy in general. INVEST IN PROGRESS NOW! [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a6880698876e272e000031/attachments/original/1488354721/donate.png?1488354721] Progressive Democrats of America Grand Rapids, MI 49515, United States www.pdamerica.org [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a6880698876e272e000031/attachments/original/1487307268/facebook2.png?1487307268] [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a6880698876e272e000031/attachments/original/1487307284/twitter.png?1487307284] [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a6880698876e272e000031/attachments/original/1487307273/google.png?1487307273] [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a6880698876e272e000031/attachments/original/1487307279/rss.png?1487307279] [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a6880698876e272e000031/attachments/original/1487307275/linkedin.png?1487307275] [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a6880698876e272e000031/attachments/original/1487307286/youtube.png?1487307286] [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a6880698876e272e000031/attachments/original/1487307277/pinterest.png?1487307277] [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a6880698876e272e000031/attachments/original/1487307282/tumbler.png?1487307282] [http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/58a6880698876e272e000031/attachments/original/1487307271/flickr.png?1487307271] Paid for by Progressive Democrats of America Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee This email was sent to karenaram at hotmail.com. To stop receiving emails, click here. Created with NationBuilder -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Fri Jan 19 01:27:36 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 19:27:36 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Identity, class, and war Message-ID: The Black Caucus’ “New Class”: Worthless, Warmongering Servants of Empire | Glen Ford | 18 Jan 2018 “The Democrats have perverted the electoral franchise of the nation’s most progressive constituency to the service of a global war machine and an all-pervasive national security state.” Hundreds of times this week, as at every yearly commemoration of Dr. Martin Luther King’s birthday, local preachers and politicians will cite the swelling ranks of the Congressional Black Caucus as proof that Dr. King’s “dream” has borne great fruit. Black representation in the U.S. House has grown from just nine members in 1968, when King was assassinated, to the current lineup of 44 full-voting House Democrats. But the majority of today’s Black denizens of Capitol Hill are in league with the very “triple evils” that King identified and struggled against: racism, extreme materialism (capitalism) and militarism. Under the leadership of the Democratic Party, they have perverted the electoral franchise of the nation’s most progressive constituency to the service of a global war machine and an all-pervasive national security state -- the antithesis of Dr. King’s vision. According to the first motto of Congressional Black Caucus, as formulated by Detroit Rep. Charles Diggs , “Black people have no permanent friends, no permanent enemies, just permanent interests.” The slogan was coined to signal the fledgling Black Caucus’s intention to pursue an independent Black politics in the wake of the dismantling of official apartheid. Instead, in the absence of a mass, grassroots movement, the emergent Black political class embedded itself in the corporate structures of the Democratic Party. Dr. King’s “dream” has been flipped, renovated, gentrified, and weaponized. “The Black Caucus Class of 2017 is wholly aligned with the War Party.” Since 2011, when a majority of Black lawmakers voted to continue the First Black President’s unprovoked bombing campaign against Libya, the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) has become a “permanent friend” of the worst enemies of mankind, culminating in a majority CBC vote for the bipartisan $700 billion Trump-Schumer-Pelosi war budget, last July. Most damning and ominous, was the behavior of the newest members of the Black Caucus, all five of whom supported the biggest military expenditure in the history of humanity. They are: Al Lawson (FL) A. Donald McEachin (VA) Dwight Evans (PA) Lisa Blunt Rochester (DE) Anthony Brown (MD) Fifty years after Dr. King’s death, the Black Caucus Class of 2017 is wholly aligned with the War Party, a hydra-headed beast whose enabling budget was authored by Donald Trump and endorsed by Democratic leaders in the House and Senate. “The Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) has become a ‘permanent friend’ of the worst enemies of mankind.” The rookie Black House members have also embraced the darkest forces of the national security state. Last week, the five novice warmongers joined with seven more senior CBC members in support of a bill to extend the National Security Agency’s powers to spy on Americans without a warrant . Most Democrats, including CBC members, voted “no,” but the 12 Black lawmakers followed House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi’s lead in siding with Republicans to pass the measure. In addition to the five members of the Class of 2017, the other Black Pawns of the Spy Machine are: Sanford Bishop (GA) Andre Carson (IN) James Clyburn (SC) Gregory Meeks (NY) David Scott (GA) Terri Sewell (AL) Marc Veasey (TX) Representatives Bishop, Meeks, Scott, Sewell and Veasey consistently earn the lowest scores on Black Agenda Report’s CBC Report Cards. The addition of the five new warmongers and spy-lovers effectively doubles the slime at the bottom of the Black Caucus barrel. Back in 2003, only four members of the Congressional Black Caucus supported George Bush’s request for War Powers to invade Iraq: William Jefferson (LA), Harold Ford, Jr. (TN), Albert Wynn (MD) and Sanford Bishop (GA). They were a tiny faction, exercising little influence over the larger Caucus -- which is why I called them “The Four Eunuchs of War ” in my writings in The Black Commentator . Fifteen years later, it is the anti-war faction of the Black Caucus that is tiny and ineffectual. The descent into Russiagate madness has reduced the handful of dependable Black Caucus anti-war votes by two, with the defection of Maxine Waters (CA) and Bobby Scott (VA). Soon, the pro-peace members won’t be numerous enough to rate the term “faction.” The Democratic Party is a corporate machine that is busily producing a Black misleadership class to serve the Lords of Capital and their global empire. The CBC Class of 2017 is a poison in the Black body politic. ### -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Fri Jan 19 12:05:46 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 12:05:46 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] US announces indefinite deployment of military forces in Syria Message-ID: * Print * Leaflet * Feedback * Share » US announces indefinite deployment of military forces in Syria 19 January 2018 US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson vowed yesterday that American imperialism will not relent from its neo-colonial ambition to overthrow the Russian- and Iranian-backed Syrian regime of President Bashar al-Assad. In a display of imperialist arrogance, Tillerson declared that the US will maintain military forces inside Syria indefinitely and not accept any government in Damascus that does not function as an American client state. Tillerson reaffirmed the determination of the US to pursue regime-change in Syria in a speech to the Hoover Institution at Stanford University in California. It was fitting that his address was hosted by former Bush administration National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, an individual who should be indicted for war crimes for her role in the illegal invasion of Iraq. The fraudulent pretext that the sole motive of the US in Syria was to combat the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has been cast aside. Throughout his speech, Tillerson repeatedly denounced Iran for supporting the Syrian government. The representative of the power that invaded Iraq and props up monarchial dictatorships in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states accused Tehran of seeking “dominance in the Middle East.” He declared that the US was committed to “reducing and expelling malicious Iranian influence from Syria.” Tillerson also demanded that Russia cease its backing for Damascus and “put new levels of pressure on the regime” to step aside and accept the installation of an American-controlled puppet state. The US objective, he asserted bluntly, was the “departure of Assad.” The criminality, and hypocrisy, of the American ruling class has no limit. Amid the hysterical accusations of “Russian meddling” in the US elections, Tillerson baldly asserted that the United States will decide the fate of Syria. Among the political forces that the US is working with are the very Islamist extremists that Washington exploited to justify its intervention into the seven-year civil war that has ravaged the country. The recklessness of the policy outlined by Tillerson is immense. In pursuit of regime-change, the US is seeking to effectively partition Syria, formally carving off the north into an American protectorate under the control of Kurdish nationalist forces, while placing the eastern region of the country under Islamist militias. Tillerson asserted that the US will channel so-called reconstruction aid into the areas held by its proxies, while seeking to enforce an economic embargo against the areas controlled by the Syrian government. The US zone will be protected from Syrian forces by the 2,000 US military personnel already in the country, and by US Air Force assets based in Iraq and the Gulf states. The day before Tillerson’s speech, a spokesperson for the US forces in the Middle East announced plans to assemble and arm a 30,000-strong anti-Assad militia. Among those whom the US intends to enlist are hundreds of former ISIS fighters and members of Al Qaeda-linked Islamist militias, such as the Al Nusra Front. A major aim of the US plans is to sabotage and derail the Russian-led steps toward the convening of talks on ending the civil war in Syria. A conference is scheduled to take place in Sochi, Russia next month, to which various anti-Assad factions have been invited. Now, these elements have instead been provided with open-ended US military and financial backing to continue fighting. It is estimated that the Syrian war has resulted in at least 500,000 deaths since 2011. More than five million people have fled the country as refugees, and at least six million more have been displaced from their homes within Syria. Entire cities and towns have been reduced to rubble by the indiscriminate bombardments carried out by all sides in the murderous conflict. Tillerson’s speech portends not only the continuation of the horrors inflicted on the Syrian masses, but a major escalation of the violence. The US agenda has been rejected by the Syrian government already. The Syrian foreign ministry issued a statement that said: “The American military presence on Syrian land is illegitimate and represents a blatant breach of international law and an aggression against national sovereignty.” Immediately on the horizon is the danger of large-scale military confrontations between US-backed forces, on one side, and the Syrian Army and the Iranian, Iraqi and Lebanese volunteers who are fighting alongside it in various Shiite militias. Having defeated rebel forces elsewhere in the country, the focus of Syrian government operations is shifting to retaking opposition-held territory in the north and east. In the air, these operations are still backed by Russian aircraft and helicopter gunships. The obvious question posed by Tillerson’s speech is whether American forces will attack Russian aircraft, with all the ramifications such an action would carry. There is also the danger that US attacks in Syria could lead to open war with Iran or ignite a new civil war inside Iraq, with Shiite militias taking up arms against the American-backed government in Baghdad. Turkey, a NATO ally of Washington, is no less opposed to the US plans. The Turkish government insists that the US-backed Kurdish nationalist YPG militia is a front for the separatist Kurdish Workers Party (PKK), which it condemns as a “terrorist” organisation and has brutally suppressed inside Turkey for decades. Last weekend, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan bitterly accused the Trump administration of “creating a terror army on our border.” While Tillerson’s speech yesterday gave verbal reassurances to “address Turkey’s concern with PKK terrorists” and vowed “close cooperation,” the fact remains that Washington is backing a formation that the Turkish ruling class views as a threat to its internal stability and territorial integrity. Erdogan has made repeated warnings that Turkey is prepared to invade northern Syria to prevent the YPG from consolidating the area into a de-facto Kurdish statelet. What would be the response of the United States? The new stage in US imperialist intrigue in the Middle East is a further indictment of the myriad pseudo-left formations that supported the conspiracy to overthrow the Assad regime, claiming that the American-backed rebels were carrying out a “revolution” for “democracy.” All those who opposed the US regime-change operation, including the World Socialist Web Site, were accused of “knee-jerk anti-imperialism.” Seven years on, the pro-imperialist character of the US proxy forces, whether it be the Kurdish nationalist formations or the Al Qaeda-aligned Islamist militias, is undeniable. As was the case from the outset, they are serving as Washington’s tool to undermine Iranian and Russian influence in the Middle East and assert American dominance over the oil-rich region. The outcome is the vastly heightened danger of a regional war or war between nuclear-armed powers. James Cogan WSWS.ORG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jan 19 12:10:00 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 12:10:00 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Francis Boyle sent you a video: "Conversation With Professor of International Law, Dr. Francis Boyle" In-Reply-To: References: <94eb2c0810d09aa33f05608ba5a4@google.com> Message-ID: Yeah, I said a month ago we were not leaving Syria. ISIS was all a pretext to get us in there and to keep us there. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law 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, December 17, 2017 10:25 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - Francis Boyle sent you a video: "Conversation With Professor of International Law, Dr. Francis Boyle" Published on Dec 17, 2017 Francis Boyle is a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law, with—among many degrees—a PhD in Political Science from Harvard University. See his full biography here: https://law.illinois.edu/faculty-rese... We recently had the chance to speak on a number of important, current issues, including Syria, Yemen, the DPRK, or North Korea, and the failure of supposedly alternative media. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Francis Boyle via YouTube [mailto:noreply at youtube.com] Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2017 10:23 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Francis Boyle sent you a video: "Conversation With Professor of International Law, Dr. Francis Boyle" [http://s.ytimg.com/yt/img/email/digest/email_header.png] [https://yt3.ggpht.com/-w4phvYGWivc/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAAAA/_Vq2X19VNEk/s50-c-k-no-mo-rj-c0xffffff/photo.jpg] Francis Boyle has shared a video with you on YouTube [https://i.ytimg.com/vi/0UEB38KWbU4/mqdefault.jpg] Conversation With Professor of International Law, Dr. Francis Boyle by Eva K Bartlett Francis Boyle is a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law, with—among many degrees—a PhD in Political Science from Harvard University. See his full biography here: ... Help center • Report spam ©2017 YouTube, LLC 901 Cherry Ave, San Bruno, CA 94066, USA ________________________________ 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 karenaram at hotmail.com Fri Jan 19 15:37:35 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 15:37:35 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Turkish attack on Syrian Kurds marks major escalation in Middle East Message-ID: Turkish attack on Syrian Kurds marks major escalation in Middle East By Hall Celik WSWS.ORG 19 January 2018 Late Wednesday night, the Turkish army launched an intensive artillery attack on Syrian Kurds in Afrin, a multi-ethnic region in northwestern Syria controlled by the US-backed Democratic Union Party (PYD) and its militia, the People’s Protection Units (YPG). This attack, announced long ago by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan with the words “we can come unexpectedly overnight,” currently takes the form of a massive artillery bombardment. However, Ankara’s threats show that they are preparing to launch an outright military occupation that could provoke war with Syria and a direct clash with US forces. The initial step for a Turkish invasion of Afrin came hours after a meeting of Turkey’s National Security Council (NSC) chaired by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, in Ankara. In a statement issued after the meeting, it warned that “Necessary steps would be taken immediately and resolutely to defeat any threat against Turkey from western Syria in the first stage.” In a comment aimed at the Kurdish groups, it added, “The establishment of a terror corridor and the formation of a terrorist army across the border will not be allowed.” The statement also criticized the United States as follows: “It is regrettable that a state, which is part of NATO and our ally in bilateral relations, declares the terrorists as its partner and provides them with weapons, without any concern for our safety.” After a Cabinet meeting following the NSC, Bekir Bozdag, Turkey’s deputy prime minister and government spokesman, told reporters, “Turkey has reached the limits of its patience. Nobody should expect Turkey to show more patience.” As the Turkish army launched its artillery attacks, the Syrian government warned yesterday that its air defenses stand ready to defend Syria against any “act of aggression.” According to the Syrian state news agency SANA, the Assad government will consider any Turkish military operations trespassing over Syria’s borders as an attempt to attack and violate the country’s territorial integrity. That is, as an act of war. Meanwhile, former PYD leader Saleh Moslem warned Ankara that if the Turkish army attacks Afrin, the war will rapidly spread back into Turkey itself. Earlier this week, General Sipan Hemo, the YPG Commander, told the Kurdish news agency ANF that they “will strongly respond to whoever attacks and threatens Afrin, Rojava or anywhere else, be it Erdogan or someone else.” A bitter conflict is emerging, above all between Ankara and Washington. The Trump administration has once again enraged Ankara with its recent threat to build a 30,000-strong border protection force drawn from the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), the Pentagon’s main proxy on the ground, which is dominated by the Kurdish YPG. In response, Ankara has sent Chief of General Staff Hulusi Akar and National Intelligence Organization (MIT) head Hakan Fidan to Moscow. They are now looking for support from Russia in Syria, including on “the use of Syria air space,” while also staying in close contact with Iran on the issue. This points to the deep internal tensions that are tearing apart the NATO military alliance between the United States, Canada, the European powers, and Turkey. While a member of the NATO alliance, Turkey is seeking support from the alliance’s main target—Russia—against the Kurdish forces long supported by the United States and its European allies in Syria. While apparently triggered by the US announcement of the creation of the border protection force, the Turkish aggression has long been under preparation. Ankara has repeatedly demanded the withdrawal of the PYD/YPG from Afrin, and asked Putin to remove Russian troops from the area, so that the Turkish army could take its “own measures to secure the borders.” The Turkish government’s attack on Afrin is a reactionary act of militarist aggression, stemming from its deep hostility to the Kurdish population. It is the outcome of the Turkish bourgeoisie’s collaboration with a quarter century of imperialist wars in the Middle East launched by Washington and its European allies. They have devastated whole societies in Iraq and Syria, turned tens of millions of people into refugees, and left more than a million dead. Washington and its European allies initially convinced the Turkish bourgeoisie to support and participate in the proxy war in Syria, because it initially shared the two principal aims of the imperialist powers themselves. The first was to prevent the spread of mass revolutionary movements in Tunisia and Egypt, which had overthrown two US-backed dictators, to the whole Middle East. The second was to strengthen NATO’s influence at the expense of Russia and Iran, by toppling their main regional ally, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Ankara enthusiastically participated in the imperialist proxy war in Syria, helping arm and protect Islamist militias that carried out attacks and terror bombings across Syria, which was part of the global strategy of US imperialism: to try to consolidate its declining world hegemony through the use of its residual military power in wars targeting Russia and China. As NATO’s Islamist proxies failed to topple Assad, however, and Washington turned ever more to Kurdish forces as its main proxy force in the region, Ankara turned ever more against US plans. The US war for regime change targeting Assad not only destroyed Syria, but also led to a US attempt at violent regime change inside Turkey itself—as Erdogan himself ended up on a hit list of Middle East heads of state targeted for murder by imperialism. As its relations with NATO and the European Union rapidly deteriorated, Ankara made a major shift toward a rapprochement with Russia and China, igniting a bitter conflict with the Obama administration and its European allies. In July 2016, a section of Turkey’s military launched an abortive putsch out of NATO’s Incirlik air base, encouraged by Washington and Berlin. Having escaped assassination, thanks to a mass mobilization of working people that defeated the coup, Erdogan imposed a state of emergency and succeeded in winning the April 2017 constitutional referendum to consolidate his power. He also ordered the Turkish army to launch its own invasion of Syria, “Operation Euphrates Shield,” against both the Islamic State (IS) militia and the Kurdish-nationalist People’s Protection Units. Also, together with Moscow and Tehran, he initiated the Astana talks for a “solution” in the Syrian civil war. The Erdogan government’s warmongering attitude in Syria has nothing to do with the real interests of the working people, as his henchmen allege. Having participated in the imperialist powers’ slaughter of the workers and oppressed masses of Syria despite broad popular opposition to the war inside Turkey, it is now launching another bloody onslaught for its own strategic interests. The Turkish military operation against Afrin will doubtless further escalate tensions within NATO, bringing Turkish troops not only into conflict with the US-backed Kurdish militia, or with Syrian troops who are still continuing their march northwards in the country. Turkish soldiers also risk entering into conflict with approximately 2,000 American troops in the territories controlled of the YPG/PYD. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From galliher at illinois.edu Fri Jan 19 15:55:31 2018 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 09:55:31 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Turkish attack on Syrian Kurds marks major escalation in Middle East In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4ED8491F-DB30-4FF5-A388-BC2CD694FB78@illinois.edu> usnews.com Tillerson Says U.S. Has No Intention to Build Border Force in Syria Jan. 17, 2018, at 11:25 p.m. ABOARD U.S. GOVERNMENT AIRCRAFT (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on Wednesday denied that the United States had any intention to build a Syria-Turkey border force, saying the issue, which has incensed Ankara, had been "misportrayed." Turkey has reacted angrily and warned of an imminent incursion into Syria's Afrin district after Washington said it would help Syrian Democratic Forces led by Kurdish YPG militias to set up a new 30,000 strong border force. On Wednesday, Turkey said it would not hesitate to take action in Afrin district and other regions across the border in Syria unless the United States withdrew support for the force. Tillerson told reporters he had met Turkey's foreign minister in Vancouver on Tuesday to clarify the issue. "That entire situation has been misportrayed, misdescribed. Some people misspoke. We are not creating a border security force at all," he said aboard his aircraft taking him back to Washington from Canada, where he hosted a meeting on North Korea. "I think it’s unfortunate that comments made by some left that impression. That is not what we’re doing." Copyright 2018 Thomson Reuters. > On Jan 19, 2018, at 9:37 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Turkish attack on Syrian Kurds marks major escalation in Middle East > By Hall Celik > WSWS.ORG > > 19 January 2018 > Late Wednesday night, the Turkish army launched an intensive artillery attack on Syrian Kurds in Afrin, a multi-ethnic region in northwestern Syria controlled by the US-backed Democratic Union Party (PYD) and its militia, the People’s Protection Units (YPG). > This attack, announced long ago by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan with the words “we can come unexpectedly overnight,” currently takes the form of a massive artillery bombardment. However, Ankara’s threats show that they are preparing to launch an outright military occupation that could provoke war with Syria and a direct clash with US forces. > The initial step for a Turkish invasion of Afrin came hours after a meeting of Turkey’s National Security Council (NSC) chaired by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, in Ankara. In a statement issued after the meeting, it warned that “Necessary steps would be taken immediately and resolutely to defeat any threat against Turkey from western Syria in the first stage.” In a comment aimed at the Kurdish groups, it added, “The establishment of a terror corridor and the formation of a terrorist army across the border will not be allowed.” > The statement also criticized the United States as follows: “It is regrettable that a state, which is part of NATO and our ally in bilateral relations, declares the terrorists as its partner and provides them with weapons, without any concern for our safety.” > After a Cabinet meeting following the NSC, Bekir Bozdag, Turkey’s deputy prime minister and government spokesman, told reporters, “Turkey has reached the limits of its patience. Nobody should expect Turkey to show more patience.” > As the Turkish army launched its artillery attacks, the Syrian government warned yesterday that its air defenses stand ready to defend Syria against any “act of aggression.” According to the Syrian state news agency SANA, the Assad government will consider any Turkish military operations trespassing over Syria’s borders as an attempt to attack and violate the country’s territorial integrity. That is, as an act of war. > Meanwhile, former PYD leader Saleh Moslem warned Ankara that if the Turkish army attacks Afrin, the war will rapidly spread back into Turkey itself. Earlier this week, General Sipan Hemo, the YPG Commander, told the Kurdish news agency ANF that they “will strongly respond to whoever attacks and threatens Afrin, Rojava or anywhere else, be it Erdogan or someone else.” > A bitter conflict is emerging, above all between Ankara and Washington. The Trump administration has once again enraged Ankara with its recent threat to build a 30,000-strong border protection force drawn from the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), the Pentagon’s main proxy on the ground, which is dominated by the Kurdish YPG. In response, Ankara has sent Chief of General Staff Hulusi Akar and National Intelligence Organization (MIT) head Hakan Fidan to Moscow. > They are now looking for support from Russia in Syria, including on “the use of Syria air space,” while also staying in close contact with Iran on the issue. > This points to the deep internal tensions that are tearing apart the NATO military alliance between the United States, Canada, the European powers, and Turkey. While a member of the NATO alliance, Turkey is seeking support from the alliance’s main target—Russia—against the Kurdish forces long supported by the United States and its European allies in Syria. > While apparently triggered by the US announcement of the creation of the border protection force, the Turkish aggression has long been under preparation. Ankara has repeatedly demanded the withdrawal of the PYD/YPG from Afrin, and asked Putin to remove Russian troops from the area, so that the Turkish army could take its “own measures to secure the borders.” > The Turkish government’s attack on Afrin is a reactionary act of militarist aggression, stemming from its deep hostility to the Kurdish population. It is the outcome of the Turkish bourgeoisie’s collaboration with a quarter century of imperialist wars in the Middle East launched by Washington and its European allies. They have devastated whole societies in Iraq and Syria, turned tens of millions of people into refugees, and left more than a million dead. > Washington and its European allies initially convinced the Turkish bourgeoisie to support and participate in the proxy war in Syria, because it initially shared the two principal aims of the imperialist powers themselves. The first was to prevent the spread of mass revolutionary movements in Tunisia and Egypt, which had overthrown two US-backed dictators, to the whole Middle East. The second was to strengthen NATO’s influence at the expense of Russia and Iran, by toppling their main regional ally, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. > Ankara enthusiastically participated in the imperialist proxy war in Syria, helping arm and protect Islamist militias that carried out attacks and terror bombings across Syria, which was part of the global strategy of US imperialism: to try to consolidate its declining world hegemony through the use of its residual military power in wars targeting Russia and China. > As NATO’s Islamist proxies failed to topple Assad, however, and Washington turned ever more to Kurdish forces as its main proxy force in the region, Ankara turned ever more against US plans. The US war for regime change targeting Assad not only destroyed Syria, but also led to a US attempt at violent regime change inside Turkey itself—as Erdogan himself ended up on a hit list of Middle East heads of state targeted for murder by imperialism. > As its relations with NATO and the European Union rapidly deteriorated, Ankara made a major shift toward a rapprochement with Russia and China, igniting a bitter conflict with the Obama administration and its European allies. In July 2016, a section of Turkey’s military launched an abortive putsch out of NATO’s Incirlik air base, encouraged by Washington and Berlin. > Having escaped assassination, thanks to a mass mobilization of working people that defeated the coup, Erdogan imposed a state of emergency and succeeded in winning the April 2017 constitutional referendum to consolidate his power. He also ordered the Turkish army to launch its own invasion of Syria, “Operation Euphrates Shield,” against both the Islamic State (IS) militia and the Kurdish-nationalist People’s Protection Units. Also, together with Moscow and Tehran, he initiated the Astana talks for a “solution” in the Syrian civil war. > The Erdogan government’s warmongering attitude in Syria has nothing to do with the real interests of the working people, as his henchmen allege. Having participated in the imperialist powers’ slaughter of the workers and oppressed masses of Syria despite broad popular opposition to the war inside Turkey, it is now launching another bloody onslaught for its own strategic interests. > The Turkish military operation against Afrin will doubtless further escalate tensions within NATO, bringing Turkish troops not only into conflict with the US-backed Kurdish militia, or with Syrian troops who are still continuing their march northwards in the country. Turkish soldiers also risk entering into conflict with approximately 2,000 American troops in the territories controlled of the YPG/PYD. > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From cgestabrook at gmail.com Fri Jan 19 16:35:22 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 10:35:22 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Turkish attack on Syrian Kurds marks major escalation in Middle East In-Reply-To: <4ED8491F-DB30-4FF5-A388-BC2CD694FB78@illinois.edu> References: <4ED8491F-DB30-4FF5-A388-BC2CD694FB78@illinois.edu> Message-ID: <98B6EF17-61F1-4D74-BEB8-02FC0961CC2B@gmail.com> https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/01/19/trumps-plan-b-for-syria-occupation-and-intimidation/ "...Turkey is more important to the US than Ukraine. It is the essential landbridge and energy hub that is destined to bind Europe and Asia together into the world’s biggest free trade zone. If Turkey breaks out of Washington’s orbit and moves into Moscow’s camp, Washington’s plan to ‘pivot to Asia’ will collapse in a heap. "So while McMaster might think that forward deterrence will prevent Russia from achieving its objectives, it’s clear that the policy is already working in Putin’s favor. Every miscue that Washington makes only adds to Putin’s credibility and reputation as a reliable partner. Simply put: The Russian president is gradually replacing Washington as the guarantor of regional security. This is a tectonic development and one that US powerbrokers will definitely regret in the future." > On Jan 19, 2018, at 9:55 AM, Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: > > usnews.com > Tillerson Says U.S. Has No Intention to Build Border Force in Syria > Jan. 17, 2018, at 11:25 p.m. > > ABOARD U.S. GOVERNMENT AIRCRAFT (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on Wednesday denied that the United States had any intention to build a Syria-Turkey border force, saying the issue, which has incensed Ankara, had been "misportrayed." > > Turkey has reacted angrily and warned of an imminent incursion into Syria's Afrin district after Washington said it would help Syrian Democratic Forces led by Kurdish YPG militias to set up a new 30,000 strong border force. > > On Wednesday, Turkey said it would not hesitate to take action in Afrin district and other regions across the border in Syria unless the United States withdrew support for the force. > > Tillerson told reporters he had met Turkey's foreign minister in Vancouver on Tuesday to clarify the issue. > > "That entire situation has been misportrayed, misdescribed. Some people misspoke. We are not creating a border security force at all," he said aboard his aircraft taking him back to Washington from Canada, where he hosted a meeting on North Korea. > > "I think it’s unfortunate that comments made by some left that impression. That is not what we’re doing." > > Copyright 2018 Thomson Reuters. > >> On Jan 19, 2018, at 9:37 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> Turkish attack on Syrian Kurds marks major escalation in Middle East >> By Hall Celik >> WSWS.ORG >> >> 19 January 2018 >> Late Wednesday night, the Turkish army launched an intensive artillery attack on Syrian Kurds in Afrin, a multi-ethnic region in northwestern Syria controlled by the US-backed Democratic Union Party (PYD) and its militia, the People’s Protection Units (YPG). >> This attack, announced long ago by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan with the words “we can come unexpectedly overnight,” currently takes the form of a massive artillery bombardment. However, Ankara’s threats show that they are preparing to launch an outright military occupation that could provoke war with Syria and a direct clash with US forces. >> The initial step for a Turkish invasion of Afrin came hours after a meeting of Turkey’s National Security Council (NSC) chaired by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, in Ankara. In a statement issued after the meeting, it warned that “Necessary steps would be taken immediately and resolutely to defeat any threat against Turkey from western Syria in the first stage.” In a comment aimed at the Kurdish groups, it added, “The establishment of a terror corridor and the formation of a terrorist army across the border will not be allowed.” >> The statement also criticized the United States as follows: “It is regrettable that a state, which is part of NATO and our ally in bilateral relations, declares the terrorists as its partner and provides them with weapons, without any concern for our safety.” >> After a Cabinet meeting following the NSC, Bekir Bozdag, Turkey’s deputy prime minister and government spokesman, told reporters, “Turkey has reached the limits of its patience. Nobody should expect Turkey to show more patience.” >> As the Turkish army launched its artillery attacks, the Syrian government warned yesterday that its air defenses stand ready to defend Syria against any “act of aggression.” According to the Syrian state news agency SANA, the Assad government will consider any Turkish military operations trespassing over Syria’s borders as an attempt to attack and violate the country’s territorial integrity. That is, as an act of war. >> Meanwhile, former PYD leader Saleh Moslem warned Ankara that if the Turkish army attacks Afrin, the war will rapidly spread back into Turkey itself. Earlier this week, General Sipan Hemo, the YPG Commander, told the Kurdish news agency ANF that they “will strongly respond to whoever attacks and threatens Afrin, Rojava or anywhere else, be it Erdogan or someone else.” >> A bitter conflict is emerging, above all between Ankara and Washington. The Trump administration has once again enraged Ankara with its recent threat to build a 30,000-strong border protection force drawn from the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), the Pentagon’s main proxy on the ground, which is dominated by the Kurdish YPG. In response, Ankara has sent Chief of General Staff Hulusi Akar and National Intelligence Organization (MIT) head Hakan Fidan to Moscow. >> They are now looking for support from Russia in Syria, including on “the use of Syria air space,” while also staying in close contact with Iran on the issue. >> This points to the deep internal tensions that are tearing apart the NATO military alliance between the United States, Canada, the European powers, and Turkey. While a member of the NATO alliance, Turkey is seeking support from the alliance’s main target—Russia—against the Kurdish forces long supported by the United States and its European allies in Syria. >> While apparently triggered by the US announcement of the creation of the border protection force, the Turkish aggression has long been under preparation. Ankara has repeatedly demanded the withdrawal of the PYD/YPG from Afrin, and asked Putin to remove Russian troops from the area, so that the Turkish army could take its “own measures to secure the borders.” >> The Turkish government’s attack on Afrin is a reactionary act of militarist aggression, stemming from its deep hostility to the Kurdish population. It is the outcome of the Turkish bourgeoisie’s collaboration with a quarter century of imperialist wars in the Middle East launched by Washington and its European allies. They have devastated whole societies in Iraq and Syria, turned tens of millions of people into refugees, and left more than a million dead. >> Washington and its European allies initially convinced the Turkish bourgeoisie to support and participate in the proxy war in Syria, because it initially shared the two principal aims of the imperialist powers themselves. The first was to prevent the spread of mass revolutionary movements in Tunisia and Egypt, which had overthrown two US-backed dictators, to the whole Middle East. The second was to strengthen NATO’s influence at the expense of Russia and Iran, by toppling their main regional ally, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. >> Ankara enthusiastically participated in the imperialist proxy war in Syria, helping arm and protect Islamist militias that carried out attacks and terror bombings across Syria, which was part of the global strategy of US imperialism: to try to consolidate its declining world hegemony through the use of its residual military power in wars targeting Russia and China. >> As NATO’s Islamist proxies failed to topple Assad, however, and Washington turned ever more to Kurdish forces as its main proxy force in the region, Ankara turned ever more against US plans. The US war for regime change targeting Assad not only destroyed Syria, but also led to a US attempt at violent regime change inside Turkey itself—as Erdogan himself ended up on a hit list of Middle East heads of state targeted for murder by imperialism. >> As its relations with NATO and the European Union rapidly deteriorated, Ankara made a major shift toward a rapprochement with Russia and China, igniting a bitter conflict with the Obama administration and its European allies. In July 2016, a section of Turkey’s military launched an abortive putsch out of NATO’s Incirlik air base, encouraged by Washington and Berlin. >> Having escaped assassination, thanks to a mass mobilization of working people that defeated the coup, Erdogan imposed a state of emergency and succeeded in winning the April 2017 constitutional referendum to consolidate his power. He also ordered the Turkish army to launch its own invasion of Syria, “Operation Euphrates Shield,” against both the Islamic State (IS) militia and the Kurdish-nationalist People’s Protection Units. Also, together with Moscow and Tehran, he initiated the Astana talks for a “solution” in the Syrian civil war. >> The Erdogan government’s warmongering attitude in Syria has nothing to do with the real interests of the working people, as his henchmen allege. Having participated in the imperialist powers’ slaughter of the workers and oppressed masses of Syria despite broad popular opposition to the war inside Turkey, it is now launching another bloody onslaught for its own strategic interests. >> The Turkish military operation against Afrin will doubtless further escalate tensions within NATO, bringing Turkish troops not only into conflict with the US-backed Kurdish militia, or with Syrian troops who are still continuing their march northwards in the country. Turkish soldiers also risk entering into conflict with approximately 2,000 American troops in the territories controlled of the YPG/PYD. >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 Fri Jan 19 16:54:20 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 16:54:20 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Turkish attack on Syrian Kurds marks major escalation in Middle East In-Reply-To: <98B6EF17-61F1-4D74-BEB8-02FC0961CC2B@gmail.com> References: <4ED8491F-DB30-4FF5-A388-BC2CD694FB78@illinois.edu> <98B6EF17-61F1-4D74-BEB8-02FC0961CC2B@gmail.com> Message-ID: Good article by Mike Whitney, and yes it is as predicted, US permanent occupation and partition of Syria in an effort to displace Assad with a US puppet. Syria is very important geo politically. However, its more than likely Russia will win out as the guarantor of regional security, along with China. China is funding military bases in Afghanistan and Pakistan, not arming, not occupying, only funding for the locals to manage on their own. On Jan 19, 2018, at 08:35, C G Estabrook > wrote: https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/01/19/trumps-plan-b-for-syria-occupation-and-intimidation/ "...Turkey is more important to the US than Ukraine. It is the essential landbridge and energy hub that is destined to bind Europe and Asia together into the world’s biggest free trade zone. If Turkey breaks out of Washington’s orbit and moves into Moscow’s camp, Washington’s plan to ‘pivot to Asia’ will collapse in a heap. "So while McMaster might think that forward deterrence will prevent Russia from achieving its objectives, it’s clear that the policy is already working in Putin’s favor. Every miscue that Washington makes only adds to Putin’s credibility and reputation as a reliable partner. Simply put: The Russian president is gradually replacing Washington as the guarantor of regional security. This is a tectonic development and one that US powerbrokers will definitely regret in the future." On Jan 19, 2018, at 9:55 AM, Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: usnews.com Tillerson Says U.S. Has No Intention to Build Border Force in Syria Jan. 17, 2018, at 11:25 p.m. ABOARD U.S. GOVERNMENT AIRCRAFT (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on Wednesday denied that the United States had any intention to build a Syria-Turkey border force, saying the issue, which has incensed Ankara, had been "misportrayed." Turkey has reacted angrily and warned of an imminent incursion into Syria's Afrin district after Washington said it would help Syrian Democratic Forces led by Kurdish YPG militias to set up a new 30,000 strong border force. On Wednesday, Turkey said it would not hesitate to take action in Afrin district and other regions across the border in Syria unless the United States withdrew support for the force. Tillerson told reporters he had met Turkey's foreign minister in Vancouver on Tuesday to clarify the issue. "That entire situation has been misportrayed, misdescribed. Some people misspoke. We are not creating a border security force at all," he said aboard his aircraft taking him back to Washington from Canada, where he hosted a meeting on North Korea. "I think it’s unfortunate that comments made by some left that impression. That is not what we’re doing." Copyright 2018 Thomson Reuters. On Jan 19, 2018, at 9:37 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss > wrote: Turkish attack on Syrian Kurds marks major escalation in Middle East By Hall Celik WSWS.ORG 19 January 2018 Late Wednesday night, the Turkish army launched an intensive artillery attack on Syrian Kurds in Afrin, a multi-ethnic region in northwestern Syria controlled by the US-backed Democratic Union Party (PYD) and its militia, the People’s Protection Units (YPG). This attack, announced long ago by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan with the words “we can come unexpectedly overnight,” currently takes the form of a massive artillery bombardment. However, Ankara’s threats show that they are preparing to launch an outright military occupation that could provoke war with Syria and a direct clash with US forces. The initial step for a Turkish invasion of Afrin came hours after a meeting of Turkey’s National Security Council (NSC) chaired by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, in Ankara. In a statement issued after the meeting, it warned that “Necessary steps would be taken immediately and resolutely to defeat any threat against Turkey from western Syria in the first stage.” In a comment aimed at the Kurdish groups, it added, “The establishment of a terror corridor and the formation of a terrorist army across the border will not be allowed.” The statement also criticized the United States as follows: “It is regrettable that a state, which is part of NATO and our ally in bilateral relations, declares the terrorists as its partner and provides them with weapons, without any concern for our safety.” After a Cabinet meeting following the NSC, Bekir Bozdag, Turkey’s deputy prime minister and government spokesman, told reporters, “Turkey has reached the limits of its patience. Nobody should expect Turkey to show more patience.” As the Turkish army launched its artillery attacks, the Syrian government warned yesterday that its air defenses stand ready to defend Syria against any “act of aggression.” According to the Syrian state news agency SANA, the Assad government will consider any Turkish military operations trespassing over Syria’s borders as an attempt to attack and violate the country’s territorial integrity. That is, as an act of war. Meanwhile, former PYD leader Saleh Moslem warned Ankara that if the Turkish army attacks Afrin, the war will rapidly spread back into Turkey itself. Earlier this week, General Sipan Hemo, the YPG Commander, told the Kurdish news agency ANF that they “will strongly respond to whoever attacks and threatens Afrin, Rojava or anywhere else, be it Erdogan or someone else.” A bitter conflict is emerging, above all between Ankara and Washington. The Trump administration has once again enraged Ankara with its recent threat to build a 30,000-strong border protection force drawn from the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), the Pentagon’s main proxy on the ground, which is dominated by the Kurdish YPG. In response, Ankara has sent Chief of General Staff Hulusi Akar and National Intelligence Organization (MIT) head Hakan Fidan to Moscow. They are now looking for support from Russia in Syria, including on “the use of Syria air space,” while also staying in close contact with Iran on the issue. This points to the deep internal tensions that are tearing apart the NATO military alliance between the United States, Canada, the European powers, and Turkey. While a member of the NATO alliance, Turkey is seeking support from the alliance’s main target—Russia—against the Kurdish forces long supported by the United States and its European allies in Syria. While apparently triggered by the US announcement of the creation of the border protection force, the Turkish aggression has long been under preparation. Ankara has repeatedly demanded the withdrawal of the PYD/YPG from Afrin, and asked Putin to remove Russian troops from the area, so that the Turkish army could take its “own measures to secure the borders.” The Turkish government’s attack on Afrin is a reactionary act of militarist aggression, stemming from its deep hostility to the Kurdish population. It is the outcome of the Turkish bourgeoisie’s collaboration with a quarter century of imperialist wars in the Middle East launched by Washington and its European allies. They have devastated whole societies in Iraq and Syria, turned tens of millions of people into refugees, and left more than a million dead. Washington and its European allies initially convinced the Turkish bourgeoisie to support and participate in the proxy war in Syria, because it initially shared the two principal aims of the imperialist powers themselves. The first was to prevent the spread of mass revolutionary movements in Tunisia and Egypt, which had overthrown two US-backed dictators, to the whole Middle East. The second was to strengthen NATO’s influence at the expense of Russia and Iran, by toppling their main regional ally, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Ankara enthusiastically participated in the imperialist proxy war in Syria, helping arm and protect Islamist militias that carried out attacks and terror bombings across Syria, which was part of the global strategy of US imperialism: to try to consolidate its declining world hegemony through the use of its residual military power in wars targeting Russia and China. As NATO’s Islamist proxies failed to topple Assad, however, and Washington turned ever more to Kurdish forces as its main proxy force in the region, Ankara turned ever more against US plans. The US war for regime change targeting Assad not only destroyed Syria, but also led to a US attempt at violent regime change inside Turkey itself—as Erdogan himself ended up on a hit list of Middle East heads of state targeted for murder by imperialism. As its relations with NATO and the European Union rapidly deteriorated, Ankara made a major shift toward a rapprochement with Russia and China, igniting a bitter conflict with the Obama administration and its European allies. In July 2016, a section of Turkey’s military launched an abortive putsch out of NATO’s Incirlik air base, encouraged by Washington and Berlin. Having escaped assassination, thanks to a mass mobilization of working people that defeated the coup, Erdogan imposed a state of emergency and succeeded in winning the April 2017 constitutional referendum to consolidate his power. He also ordered the Turkish army to launch its own invasion of Syria, “Operation Euphrates Shield,” against both the Islamic State (IS) militia and the Kurdish-nationalist People’s Protection Units. Also, together with Moscow and Tehran, he initiated the Astana talks for a “solution” in the Syrian civil war. The Erdogan government’s warmongering attitude in Syria has nothing to do with the real interests of the working people, as his henchmen allege. Having participated in the imperialist powers’ slaughter of the workers and oppressed masses of Syria despite broad popular opposition to the war inside Turkey, it is now launching another bloody onslaught for its own strategic interests. The Turkish military operation against Afrin will doubtless further escalate tensions within NATO, bringing Turkish troops not only into conflict with the US-backed Kurdish militia, or with Syrian troops who are still continuing their march northwards in the country. Turkish soldiers also risk entering into conflict with approximately 2,000 American troops in the territories controlled of the YPG/PYD. _______________________________________________ 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 fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jan 19 20:48:04 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 20:48:04 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The US Supreme Court just announced that it is going to hear Trump's Muslim Travel Ban this Spring with a decision by the end of June.. Sally Yates refused to enforce it in court and Trump fired her.This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Office will be arguing in favor of upholding it in the United State Supreme Court. Why did not this Shithole Law School and its Dean Iceman Amar bring in Sally Yates to "engage" the Champaign-Urbana Community instead of this Trump/Sessions/DepartmentOfInjustice Hatchetman? Fab 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, January 15, 2018 4:53 PM To: C G Estabrook Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! The Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice have argued and will continue to argue that the 2001 AUMF gives them the legal and US Constitutional authority to wage war all over the world forever. Perpetual War instead of Kant's Perpetual Peace, which I teach in my course on Jurisprudence. So we have to make our Stand against Perpetual War in front of this Shithole Law School on January 24 from 3-4pm. Fab Ed Norton Professor of Law From the Bowels of the Shithole UIUC Law School 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: C G Estabrook [mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 4:44 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Re: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! ALMA MATER - L.H.O.O.COL > On Jan 15, 2018, at 9:56 AM, Boyle, Francis A 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: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:50 AM > To: Estabrook, Carl G ; Karen Aram ; David Johnson > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! > > Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. > Fab. > From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. > To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org > Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! > > > > For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: > > > RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST > > The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! > > > Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza > 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) > > Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. > > Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. > > > > > > 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM > To: Karen Aram > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons > > Karen & David-- > > You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. > > I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. > > The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. > > As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). > > —CGE > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> David >> >> Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. >> >> We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. >> >> >> >>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >>> >>> Good article about the Iranian protests. >>> >>> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >>> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >>> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >>> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >>> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >>> >>> David J. >>> >>> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >>> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >>> To: Peace-discuss List >>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey Karen- >>>> >>>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>>> >>>> Keep Fighting, >>>> Lee >>>> >>>> > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jan 19 20:48:04 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 20:48:04 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The US Supreme Court just announced that it is going to hear Trump's Muslim Travel Ban this Spring with a decision by the end of June.. Sally Yates refused to enforce it in court and Trump fired her.This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Office will be arguing in favor of upholding it in the United State Supreme Court. Why did not this Shithole Law School and its Dean Iceman Amar bring in Sally Yates to "engage" the Champaign-Urbana Community instead of this Trump/Sessions/DepartmentOfInjustice Hatchetman? Fab 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, January 15, 2018 4:53 PM To: C G Estabrook Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! The Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice have argued and will continue to argue that the 2001 AUMF gives them the legal and US Constitutional authority to wage war all over the world forever. Perpetual War instead of Kant's Perpetual Peace, which I teach in my course on Jurisprudence. So we have to make our Stand against Perpetual War in front of this Shithole Law School on January 24 from 3-4pm. Fab Ed Norton Professor of Law From the Bowels of the Shithole UIUC Law School 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: C G Estabrook [mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 4:44 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Re: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! ALMA MATER - L.H.O.O.COL > On Jan 15, 2018, at 9:56 AM, Boyle, Francis A 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: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:50 AM > To: Estabrook, Carl G ; Karen Aram ; David Johnson > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! > > Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. > Fab. > From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. > To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org > Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! > > > > For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: > > > RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST > > The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! > > > Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza > 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) > > Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. > > Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. > > > > > > 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM > To: Karen Aram > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons > > Karen & David-- > > You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. > > I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. > > The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. > > As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). > > —CGE > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> David >> >> Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. >> >> We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. >> >> >> >>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >>> >>> Good article about the Iranian protests. >>> >>> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >>> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >>> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >>> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >>> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >>> >>> David J. >>> >>> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >>> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >>> To: Peace-discuss List >>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey Karen- >>>> >>>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>>> >>>> Keep Fighting, >>>> Lee >>>> >>>> > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jan 19 20:52:14 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 20:52:14 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! References: Message-ID: The US Supreme Court just announced that it is going to hear Trump's Muslim Travel Ban this Spring with a decision by the end of June.. Sally Yates refused to enforce it in court and Trump fired her.This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Office will be arguing in favor of upholding it in the United State Supreme Court. Why did not this Shithole Law School and its Dean Iceman Amar bring in Sally Yates to "engage" the Champaign-Urbana Community instead of this Trump/Sessions/DepartmentOfInjustice Hatchetman? Fab 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, January 15, 2018 4:53 PM To: C G Estabrook Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! The Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice have argued and will continue to argue that the 2001 AUMF gives them the legal and US Constitutional authority to wage war all over the world forever. Perpetual War instead of Kant's Perpetual Peace, which I teach in my course on Jurisprudence. So we have to make our Stand against Perpetual War in front of this Shithole Law School on January 24 from 3-4pm. Fab Ed Norton Professor of Law From the Bowels of the Shithole UIUC Law School 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: C G Estabrook [mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 4:44 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Re: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! ALMA MATER - L.H.O.O.COL > On Jan 15, 2018, at 9:56 AM, Boyle, Francis A 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: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:50 AM > To: Estabrook, Carl G ; Karen Aram ; David Johnson > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! > > Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. > Fab. > From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. > To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org > Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! > > > > For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: > > > RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST > > The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! > > > Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza > 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) > > Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. > > Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. > > > > > > 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM > To: Karen Aram > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons > > Karen & David-- > > You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. > > I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. > > The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. > > As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). > > —CGE > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> David >> >> Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. >> >> We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. >> >> >> >>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >>> >>> Good article about the Iranian protests. >>> >>> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >>> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >>> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >>> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >>> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >>> >>> David J. >>> >>> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >>> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >>> To: Peace-discuss List >>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey Karen- >>>> >>>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>>> >>>> Keep Fighting, >>>> Lee >>>> >>>> > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From karenaram at hotmail.com Fri Jan 19 21:46:50 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 21:46:50 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: It should always be noted, the Muslim Travel ban isn’t a ban against Muslims, its’ a ban on those nations for which we have destroyed and killed many people, who just happen to be Muslims. We’ve never attacked Saudi Arabia, Indonesia or Malaysia, they are not on the travel ban. Of course, we did have people killed in Indonesia in the 60’s, by the millions, but that was with use of the CIA and covert, so that doesn’t count. > On Jan 19, 2018, at 12:52, Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss wrote: > > The US Supreme Court just announced that it is going to hear Trump's Muslim Travel Ban this Spring with a decision by the end of June.. Sally Yates refused to enforce it in court and Trump fired her.This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Office will be arguing in favor of upholding it in the United State Supreme Court. Why did not this Shithole Law School and its Dean Iceman Amar bring in Sally Yates to "engage" the Champaign-Urbana Community instead of this Trump/Sessions/DepartmentOfInjustice Hatchetman? > > Fab > > > > 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, January 15, 2018 4:53 PM > To: C G Estabrook > Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! > > The Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice have argued and will continue to argue that the 2001 AUMF gives them the legal and US Constitutional authority to wage war all over the world forever. Perpetual War instead of Kant's Perpetual Peace, which I teach in my course on Jurisprudence. So we have to make our Stand against Perpetual War in front of this Shithole Law School on January 24 from 3-4pm. > Fab > Ed Norton Professor of Law > From the Bowels of the Shithole UIUC Law School > > 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: C G Estabrook [mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 4:44 PM > To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien > Subject: Re: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! > > ALMA MATER - L.H.O.O.COL > > > > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 9:56 AM, Boyle, Francis A 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: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:50 AM >> To: Estabrook, Carl G ; Karen Aram ; David Johnson >> Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> Subject: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! >> >> Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. >> Fab. >> From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. >> To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org >> Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! >> >> >> >> For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: >> >> >> RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST >> >> The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! >> >> >> Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza >> 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) >> >> Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. >> >> Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. >> >> >> >> >> >> 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss >> Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM >> To: Karen Aram >> Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >> >> Karen & David-- >> >> You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. >> >> I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. >> >> The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. >> >> As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). >> >> —CGE >> >>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >>> >>> David >>> >>> Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. >>> >>> We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >>>> >>>> Good article about the Iranian protests. >>>> >>>> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >>>> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >>>> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >>>> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >>>> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >>>> >>>> David J. >>>> >>>> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >>>> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >>>> To: Peace-discuss List >>>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hey Karen- >>>>> >>>>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>>>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>>>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>>>> >>>>> Keep Fighting, >>>>> Lee >>>>> >>>>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cfcac2808787c4e3561db08d55f7eb8d5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636519920222763294&sdata=eFNadb44YT8qCjpS0uQmlkPURbJibmidopQTmuepSW8%3D&reserved=0 > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cfcac2808787c4e3561db08d55f7eb8d5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636519920222763294&sdata=eFNadb44YT8qCjpS0uQmlkPURbJibmidopQTmuepSW8%3D&reserved=0 From karenaram at hotmail.com Sat Jan 20 16:18:14 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2018 16:18:14 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Women's March, one thing is missing, and its the most important thing....... Message-ID: [https://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/plugins/print-me/images/printme.png] 33 10 0 43 [https://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Womens_March_on_Washington_logo-400x150.png] There is one thing missing from the upcoming Women’s March publicity and philosophy: the urgent need for Peace not War! GLOBAL RESEARCH, By Cindy Sheehan and Rick Sterling… The March will speak out against hate, discrimination and exploitation. That’s good. The March will also speak out strongly in favor of equality, women’s reproductive choice and respect for all people regardless to disability, gender, orientation, etc.. That’s also good. But the subject of US military aggression and war is essential. We hope that many marchers will include this in their signage and discussions. Despite many antiwar groups and individuals actively advocating for “peace” to be in the platform/demands of the March, this is the second year peace is being minimized or ignored by the organizers. For the past century the US has intervened aggressively against governments the Washington establishment does not like. A partial list includes Philippines, Korea, Guatemala, Iran, Cuba, Chile, Vietnam,Angola, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Panama, Somalia, Haiti, Afghanistan, Iraq, Venezuela, Honduras, Libya and Syria! These acts of “regime change” have killed millions of people including many thousands of our own youth, both women and men. They have resulted in hundreds of thousands returning home injured physically or psychologically. Mothers, wives, sisters, aunts, and other family and friends have been profoundly, permanently, and unnecessarily handed a lifetime of pain and sorrow because of the US war machine. Shouldn’t it be a priority to change the policies and acts of economic aggression and military intervention that result in violence, war and destruction? Shouldn’t we address the causes of the refugee crisis as well as the symptom? After all, most refugees never wanted to leave their homelands. We are sure that most of the women and allies who will be attending the Women’s March agree with us on the need for action and protest against our ongoing wars. The escalating military budget is driving our country further and further into debt. Meanwhile infrastructure is decaying, health care and housing is diminishing and education is underfunded. College students now graduate with astronomical student debt. Meanwhile there is growing police oppression. We must include PEACE in our march because unless we can stop the trend, a nuclear war is going to destroy civilization. There is no such thing as a winnable nuclear war. Resisting the war machine and dismantling ALL nukes should be essential elements in our activism. The continuity of human life on our planet is at stake. These are Women’s issues. As we demand a change in tone and behaviour in the White House, we must also demand a change in US international foreign policy away from militarism and aggression. The demand for peace not war should be integral to the Women’s March. * Cindy Sheehan is the mother of Specialist Casey Sheehan who was killed in Iraq in 2004; she is an antiwar activist, author of seven books, Executive Producer and host of Cindy Sheehan’s Soapbox. Rick Sterling is an investigative journalist. The original source of this article is Global Research Copyright © Cindy Sheehan and Rick Sterling, Global Research, 2018 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jan 20 17:08:15 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2018 17:08:15 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! Message-ID: Today's Wall Street Journal has an article on the AFSCFME case currently pending before the US Supreme Court. The article points out that with Trump's Man Gorsuch on the Supreme Court, there is a good chance AFSCME will lose. That would be a terrible blow to Public Sector Unions, Unions in General and Organized and Organizing Labor around the country. Fab Former Executive Committee, American Federation of Teachers Local 2287 and Delegate to AFL-CIO Board of Champaign County, Illinois (1988-91) (elected by membership to 3 terms). 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: Friday, January 19, 2018 2:48 PM To: C G Estabrook ; David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! The US Supreme Court just announced that it is going to hear Trump's Muslim Travel Ban this Spring with a decision by the end of June.. Sally Yates refused to enforce it in court and Trump fired her.This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Office will be arguing in favor of upholding it in the United State Supreme Court. Why did not this Shithole Law School and its Dean Iceman Amar bring in Sally Yates to "engage" the Champaign-Urbana Community instead of this Trump/Sessions/DepartmentOfInjustice Hatchetman? Fab 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, January 15, 2018 4:53 PM To: C G Estabrook Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! The Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice have argued and will continue to argue that the 2001 AUMF gives them the legal and US Constitutional authority to wage war all over the world forever. Perpetual War instead of Kant's Perpetual Peace, which I teach in my course on Jurisprudence. So we have to make our Stand against Perpetual War in front of this Shithole Law School on January 24 from 3-4pm. Fab Ed Norton Professor of Law From the Bowels of the Shithole UIUC Law School 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: C G Estabrook [mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 4:44 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Re: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! ALMA MATER - L.H.O.O.COL > On Jan 15, 2018, at 9:56 AM, Boyle, Francis A 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: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:50 AM > To: Estabrook, Carl G ; Karen Aram ; David Johnson > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! > > Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. > Fab. > From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. > To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org > Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! > > > > For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: > > > RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST > > The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! > > > Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza > 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) > > Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. > > Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. > > > > > > 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM > To: Karen Aram > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons > > Karen & David-- > > You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. > > I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. > > The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. > > As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). > > —CGE > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> David >> >> Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. >> >> We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. >> >> >> >>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >>> >>> Good article about the Iranian protests. >>> >>> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >>> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >>> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >>> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >>> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >>> >>> David J. >>> >>> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >>> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >>> To: Peace-discuss List >>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey Karen- >>>> >>>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>>> >>>> Keep Fighting, >>>> Lee >>>> >>>> > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jan 20 17:08:15 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2018 17:08:15 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! Message-ID: Today's Wall Street Journal has an article on the AFSCFME case currently pending before the US Supreme Court. The article points out that with Trump's Man Gorsuch on the Supreme Court, there is a good chance AFSCME will lose. That would be a terrible blow to Public Sector Unions, Unions in General and Organized and Organizing Labor around the country. Fab Former Executive Committee, American Federation of Teachers Local 2287 and Delegate to AFL-CIO Board of Champaign County, Illinois (1988-91) (elected by membership to 3 terms). 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: Friday, January 19, 2018 2:48 PM To: C G Estabrook ; David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! The US Supreme Court just announced that it is going to hear Trump's Muslim Travel Ban this Spring with a decision by the end of June.. Sally Yates refused to enforce it in court and Trump fired her.This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Office will be arguing in favor of upholding it in the United State Supreme Court. Why did not this Shithole Law School and its Dean Iceman Amar bring in Sally Yates to "engage" the Champaign-Urbana Community instead of this Trump/Sessions/DepartmentOfInjustice Hatchetman? Fab 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, January 15, 2018 4:53 PM To: C G Estabrook Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! The Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice have argued and will continue to argue that the 2001 AUMF gives them the legal and US Constitutional authority to wage war all over the world forever. Perpetual War instead of Kant's Perpetual Peace, which I teach in my course on Jurisprudence. So we have to make our Stand against Perpetual War in front of this Shithole Law School on January 24 from 3-4pm. Fab Ed Norton Professor of Law From the Bowels of the Shithole UIUC Law School 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: C G Estabrook [mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 4:44 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Re: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! ALMA MATER - L.H.O.O.COL > On Jan 15, 2018, at 9:56 AM, Boyle, Francis A 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: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:50 AM > To: Estabrook, Carl G ; Karen Aram ; David Johnson > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! > > Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. > Fab. > From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. > To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org > Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! > > > > For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: > > > RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST > > The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! > > > Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza > 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) > > Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. > > Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. > > > > > > 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM > To: Karen Aram > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons > > Karen & David-- > > You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. > > I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. > > The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. > > As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). > > —CGE > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> David >> >> Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. >> >> We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. >> >> >> >>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >>> >>> Good article about the Iranian protests. >>> >>> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >>> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >>> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >>> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >>> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >>> >>> David J. >>> >>> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >>> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >>> To: Peace-discuss List >>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey Karen- >>>> >>>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>>> >>>> Keep Fighting, >>>> Lee >>>> >>>> > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jan 20 17:14:38 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2018 17:14:38 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! Message-ID: Subject: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! Today's Wall Street Journal has an article on the AFSCFME case currently pending before the US Supreme Court. The article points out that with Trump's Man Gorsuch on the Supreme Court, there is a good chance AFSCME will lose. That would be a terrible blow to Public Sector Unions, Unions in General and Organized and Organizing Labor around the country. Fab Former Executive Committee, American Federation of Teachers Local 2287 and Delegate to AFL-CIO Board of Champaign County, Illinois (1988-91) (elected by membership to 3 terms). 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: Friday, January 19, 2018 2:48 PM To: C G Estabrook ; David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! The US Supreme Court just announced that it is going to hear Trump's Muslim Travel Ban this Spring with a decision by the end of June.. Sally Yates refused to enforce it in court and Trump fired her.This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Office will be arguing in favor of upholding it in the United State Supreme Court. Why did not this Shithole Law School and its Dean Iceman Amar bring in Sally Yates to "engage" the Champaign-Urbana Community instead of this Trump/Sessions/DepartmentOfInjustice Hatchetman? Fab 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, January 15, 2018 4:53 PM To: C G Estabrook Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! The Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice have argued and will continue to argue that the 2001 AUMF gives them the legal and US Constitutional authority to wage war all over the world forever. Perpetual War instead of Kant's Perpetual Peace, which I teach in my course on Jurisprudence. So we have to make our Stand against Perpetual War in front of this Shithole Law School on January 24 from 3-4pm. Fab Ed Norton Professor of Law From the Bowels of the Shithole UIUC Law School 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: C G Estabrook [mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 4:44 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Re: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! ALMA MATER - L.H.O.O.COL > On Jan 15, 2018, at 9:56 AM, Boyle, Francis A 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: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:50 AM > To: Estabrook, Carl G ; Karen Aram ; David Johnson > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! > > Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. > Fab. > From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. > To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org > Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! > > > > For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: > > > RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST > > The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! > > > Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza > 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) > > Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. > > Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. > > > > > > 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM > To: Karen Aram > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons > > Karen & David-- > > You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. > > I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. > > The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. > > As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). > > —CGE > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> David >> >> Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. >> >> We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. >> >> >> >>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >>> >>> Good article about the Iranian protests. >>> >>> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >>> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >>> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >>> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >>> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >>> >>> David J. >>> >>> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >>> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >>> To: Peace-discuss List >>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey Karen- >>>> >>>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>>> >>>> Keep Fighting, >>>> Lee >>>> >>>> > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jan 20 17:41:27 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2018 17:41:27 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! Message-ID: As you can see, the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice have declared war on unions. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Office are doing their anti-union/labor dirty work at the US Supreme Court for them. Fab Former Executive Committee, American Federation of Teachers Local 2287 and Delegate to AFL-CIO Board of Champaign County, Illinois (1988-91) (elected by membership to 3 terms). Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) The Trump administration declares war on public sector unions.By Mark Joseph Stern 171207_JUR_sessions Attorney General Jeff Sessions participates in a session at the Global Forum on Asset Recovery on Monday in Washington. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images O n Wednesday night, the Trump administration declared war on public sector unions. Mark Joseph Stern Mark Joseph Stern Mark Joseph Stern is a writer for Slate. He covers the law and LGBTQ issues. In a brief filed with the Supreme Court, the Department of Justice reversed its position on the constitutionality of mandatory fees for public employees. The DOJ now believes that public sector unions may not charge these “fair share” fees, which support collective bargaining, to non-union members. It urged the court to strike down fair share fees as “compelled subsidization of speech” in violation of the First Amendment. Advertisement Conservative politicians have long dreamed of imposing these “right-to-work” rules on the entire American public sector, and the Supreme Court’s conservative justices have prepared for this moment. In 2018, they’ll almost certainly answer the Trump administration’s prayers and permanently hobble U.S. unions. The opportunity for the DOJ and the Supreme Court to target unions comes in the form of Janus v. AFSCME, which the justices agreed to hear in September. Bankrolled by the anti-union National Right to Work Foundation, Janus is a direct effort to overturn a 40-year-old landmark decision called Abood v. Detroit Board of Education. In Abood, the Supreme Court held that public sector unions, which represent government employees like teachers and firefighters, can collect agency fees from non-union workers. The court reasoned that these fees are often necessary to prevent “free riding”—non-union employees benefiting from bargaining funded by dues-paying union members. However, it held that unions could only use fair share fees to fund collective bargaining and could not, under the First Amendment, spend them on “political and ideological purposes.” Abood held fast for several decades in the face of a well-funded movement to reverse the decision and enfeeble public sector unions. But in recent years, the Supreme Court’s right-leaning justices have indicated their eagerness to revisit and overturn the ruling. In 2012, Justice Samuel Alito wrote an opinion for the court criticizing Abood as an “anomaly” that “represents a remarkable boon for unions.” Then, in a 2014 majority opinion limiting Abood’s application, Alito lambasted the precedent as a “questionable” and “unsupported” aberration that “seriously erred” in its First Amendment analysis. The justice was obviously laying the groundwork to overturn Abood in the next union case. That case arrived quickly. In 2015, the court agreed to hear Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, a challenge to Abood. At oral arguments in 2016, the conservative justices appeared ready to reverse the precedent. But Justice Antonin Scalia died just a month later, and the court split 4–4, allowing Abood to live another day. When an anonymous donor gave more than $17 million to keep Scalia’s seat in conservative hands, he or she likely had unions in mind. The Friedrichs stalemate proved that anti-union activists were tantalizingly close to reversing Abood. With just one more vote, the Supreme Court’s conservatives could abolish fair share fees in every state. And there is little doubt that Gorsuch, who takes an expansive view of “compelled speech,” will provide that fifth vote in Janus as his dark money benefactors intended. In 2018, they’ll almost certainly answer the Trump administration’s prayers and permanently hobble U.S. unions. Advertisement The Justice Department’s decision to abandon Abood as it lies on its deathbed was pretty much inevitable. For years, the conservative legal establishment that now populates Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ DOJ has hoped to topple the pro-union precedent. With Janus, this movement has been handed a kill shot. But as the DOJ’s brief illustrates, these well-laid plans do not make the case against Abood any more persuasive. The First Amendment argument against fair share fees is essentially a partisan attack on unions dressed up in constitutional garb. Echoing Alito, the DOJ asserts that there is no actual distinction between collective bargaining and political activities, because bargaining is political. It claims that union-employer negotiations over pay and working conditions “inherently implicates concerns of politics and public policy.” Thus, anti-union workers have a First Amendment right not to fund them. And what of the free-rider problem—the phenomenon of non-union employees enjoying the benefits secured through bargaining funded by their union colleagues? In Abood, the court recognized that government, acting as an employer, has an important interest in preventing free riders through fair share fees. But according to the DOJ, these “dissenting employees” are not actually free riders at all. They are “compelled riders” forced to subsidize speech about “issues on which they may strongly disagree” in contravention of the First Amendment. This argument rests on two premises that are not only conceptually flawed, but also biased against unions themselves. First, the DOJ assumes that the First Amendment flatly prohibits the government from compelling Americans to subsidize speech with which they disagree. But this happens all the time: Tax revenue, for instance, is frequently used to promote messages that a taxpayer does not endorse, yet nobody seriously believes that taxes are unconstitutional. If the government imposed a special assessment on teachers and used the funds to promote education policies that some teachers disliked, they would have no First Amendment right to stop paying the tax—even though the state is forcing them to subsidize expression that they oppose. Why is the constitutional calculation different when the government directs a union to collect fees and negotiate policies? The unspoken assumption seems to be that unions are always partisan and untrustworthy. Want More SCOTUS? Subscribe to Amicus. Join Dahlia Lithwick and her stable of standout guests for a discussion about the high court and the country’s most important cases. Second, the DOJ’s description of collective bargaining reflects a profoundly cynical view about the purpose of unions and the rights of workers. The DOJ insists that negotiations over basic terms of employment—health benefits, overtime pay, pensions—are “inherently political.” Really? Most teachers would probably not consider bargaining over the length of their lunch break to be “speech on politics.” But that is how the DOJ views every concession granted to public workers. Under this framework, anti-union employees do not reap the rewards secured by their dues-paying colleagues; rather, they are forced to accept benefits (like better pay) that they reject on political grounds. As the DOJ now conceives of them, public sector unions are essentially gravy trains that bilk money from the government, and free riders are noble “dissenting employees” who want less generous working conditions. Top Comment Hi Joe 6-pack and others like you! This is a liberal coastal elite here to say, "we told you so". Do you still think you made the right decision? More... 186 Comments Join In This vision of unions, of course, is fairly common, especially among Republicans. That is why 25 states, most of them right-leaning, have passed “right to work” laws that eliminate fair share fees. But 22 states and the District of Columbia have retained these fees, and public employees in those jurisdictions tend to have higher wages due to their increased bargaining power. There is no plausible constitutional argument, and certainly no credible originalist argument, against the constitutionality of fair share fees. And yet, in Janus, the Supreme Court will probably invalidate them, instantly undermining thousands of union contracts for millions of workers across the country. The Trump administration will deserve much credit for this union-busting coup. It was Trump, after all, who installed the justice who will soon enable this nakedly political ruling. And it is Trump’s DOJ that is helping the court pretend that there is a valid nonpartisan argument against fair share fees. American unions have withstood a relentless assault since their inception, and the anti-union onslaught of the last few decades contributed to the decline of the working class. Trump promised to fight for these “forgotten” workers. But he and his man on the bench now stand poised to deliver them a devastating blow. One more thing The Trump administration poses a unique threat to the rule of law. That’s why Slate has stepped up our legal coverage—watchdogging Jeff Sessions’ Justice Department, the Supreme Court, the crackdown on voting rights, and more. Our work is reaching more readers than ever—but online advertising revenues don’t fully cover our costs, and we don’t have print subscribers to help keep us afloat. So we need your help. If you think Slate’s journalism matters, become a Slate Plus member. You’ll get exclusive members-only content and a suite of great benefits—and you’ll help secure Slate’s future. Join Slate Plus 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: Saturday, January 20, 2018 11:08 AM To: C G Estabrook ; David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Cc: 'Campus Faculty Association' ; 'cfmembers at cfaillinois.org' Subject: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! Today's Wall Street Journal has an article on the AFSCFME case currently pending before the US Supreme Court. The article points out that with Trump's Man Gorsuch on the Supreme Court, there is a good chance AFSCME will lose. That would be a terrible blow to Public Sector Unions, Unions in General and Organized and Organizing Labor around the country. Fab Former Executive Committee, American Federation of Teachers Local 2287 and Delegate to AFL-CIO Board of Champaign County, Illinois (1988-91) (elected by membership to 3 terms). 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: Friday, January 19, 2018 2:48 PM To: C G Estabrook ; David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! The US Supreme Court just announced that it is going to hear Trump's Muslim Travel Ban this Spring with a decision by the end of June.. Sally Yates refused to enforce it in court and Trump fired her.This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Office will be arguing in favor of upholding it in the United State Supreme Court. Why did not this Shithole Law School and its Dean Iceman Amar bring in Sally Yates to "engage" the Champaign-Urbana Community instead of this Trump/Sessions/DepartmentOfInjustice Hatchetman? Fab 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, January 15, 2018 4:53 PM To: C G Estabrook Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! The Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice have argued and will continue to argue that the 2001 AUMF gives them the legal and US Constitutional authority to wage war all over the world forever. Perpetual War instead of Kant's Perpetual Peace, which I teach in my course on Jurisprudence. So we have to make our Stand against Perpetual War in front of this Shithole Law School on January 24 from 3-4pm. Fab Ed Norton Professor of Law From the Bowels of the Shithole UIUC Law School 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: C G Estabrook [mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 4:44 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Re: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! ALMA MATER - L.H.O.O.COL > On Jan 15, 2018, at 9:56 AM, Boyle, Francis A 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: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:50 AM > To: Estabrook, Carl G ; Karen Aram ; David Johnson > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! > > Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. > Fab. > From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. > To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org > Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! > > > > For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: > > > RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST > > The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! > > > Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza > 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) > > Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. > > Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. > > > > > > 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM > To: Karen Aram > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons > > Karen & David-- > > You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. > > I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. > > The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. > > As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). > > —CGE > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> David >> >> Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. >> >> We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. >> >> >> >>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >>> >>> Good article about the Iranian protests. >>> >>> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >>> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >>> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >>> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >>> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >>> >>> David J. >>> >>> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >>> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >>> To: Peace-discuss List >>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey Karen- >>>> >>>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>>> >>>> Keep Fighting, >>>> Lee >>>> >>>> > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jan 20 17:41:27 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2018 17:41:27 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! Message-ID: As you can see, the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice have declared war on unions. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Office are doing their anti-union/labor dirty work at the US Supreme Court for them. Fab Former Executive Committee, American Federation of Teachers Local 2287 and Delegate to AFL-CIO Board of Champaign County, Illinois (1988-91) (elected by membership to 3 terms). Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) The Trump administration declares war on public sector unions.By Mark Joseph Stern 171207_JUR_sessions Attorney General Jeff Sessions participates in a session at the Global Forum on Asset Recovery on Monday in Washington. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images O n Wednesday night, the Trump administration declared war on public sector unions. Mark Joseph Stern Mark Joseph Stern Mark Joseph Stern is a writer for Slate. He covers the law and LGBTQ issues. In a brief filed with the Supreme Court, the Department of Justice reversed its position on the constitutionality of mandatory fees for public employees. The DOJ now believes that public sector unions may not charge these “fair share” fees, which support collective bargaining, to non-union members. It urged the court to strike down fair share fees as “compelled subsidization of speech” in violation of the First Amendment. Advertisement Conservative politicians have long dreamed of imposing these “right-to-work” rules on the entire American public sector, and the Supreme Court’s conservative justices have prepared for this moment. In 2018, they’ll almost certainly answer the Trump administration’s prayers and permanently hobble U.S. unions. The opportunity for the DOJ and the Supreme Court to target unions comes in the form of Janus v. AFSCME, which the justices agreed to hear in September. Bankrolled by the anti-union National Right to Work Foundation, Janus is a direct effort to overturn a 40-year-old landmark decision called Abood v. Detroit Board of Education. In Abood, the Supreme Court held that public sector unions, which represent government employees like teachers and firefighters, can collect agency fees from non-union workers. The court reasoned that these fees are often necessary to prevent “free riding”—non-union employees benefiting from bargaining funded by dues-paying union members. However, it held that unions could only use fair share fees to fund collective bargaining and could not, under the First Amendment, spend them on “political and ideological purposes.” Abood held fast for several decades in the face of a well-funded movement to reverse the decision and enfeeble public sector unions. But in recent years, the Supreme Court’s right-leaning justices have indicated their eagerness to revisit and overturn the ruling. In 2012, Justice Samuel Alito wrote an opinion for the court criticizing Abood as an “anomaly” that “represents a remarkable boon for unions.” Then, in a 2014 majority opinion limiting Abood’s application, Alito lambasted the precedent as a “questionable” and “unsupported” aberration that “seriously erred” in its First Amendment analysis. The justice was obviously laying the groundwork to overturn Abood in the next union case. That case arrived quickly. In 2015, the court agreed to hear Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, a challenge to Abood. At oral arguments in 2016, the conservative justices appeared ready to reverse the precedent. But Justice Antonin Scalia died just a month later, and the court split 4–4, allowing Abood to live another day. When an anonymous donor gave more than $17 million to keep Scalia’s seat in conservative hands, he or she likely had unions in mind. The Friedrichs stalemate proved that anti-union activists were tantalizingly close to reversing Abood. With just one more vote, the Supreme Court’s conservatives could abolish fair share fees in every state. And there is little doubt that Gorsuch, who takes an expansive view of “compelled speech,” will provide that fifth vote in Janus as his dark money benefactors intended. In 2018, they’ll almost certainly answer the Trump administration’s prayers and permanently hobble U.S. unions. Advertisement The Justice Department’s decision to abandon Abood as it lies on its deathbed was pretty much inevitable. For years, the conservative legal establishment that now populates Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ DOJ has hoped to topple the pro-union precedent. With Janus, this movement has been handed a kill shot. But as the DOJ’s brief illustrates, these well-laid plans do not make the case against Abood any more persuasive. The First Amendment argument against fair share fees is essentially a partisan attack on unions dressed up in constitutional garb. Echoing Alito, the DOJ asserts that there is no actual distinction between collective bargaining and political activities, because bargaining is political. It claims that union-employer negotiations over pay and working conditions “inherently implicates concerns of politics and public policy.” Thus, anti-union workers have a First Amendment right not to fund them. And what of the free-rider problem—the phenomenon of non-union employees enjoying the benefits secured through bargaining funded by their union colleagues? In Abood, the court recognized that government, acting as an employer, has an important interest in preventing free riders through fair share fees. But according to the DOJ, these “dissenting employees” are not actually free riders at all. They are “compelled riders” forced to subsidize speech about “issues on which they may strongly disagree” in contravention of the First Amendment. This argument rests on two premises that are not only conceptually flawed, but also biased against unions themselves. First, the DOJ assumes that the First Amendment flatly prohibits the government from compelling Americans to subsidize speech with which they disagree. But this happens all the time: Tax revenue, for instance, is frequently used to promote messages that a taxpayer does not endorse, yet nobody seriously believes that taxes are unconstitutional. If the government imposed a special assessment on teachers and used the funds to promote education policies that some teachers disliked, they would have no First Amendment right to stop paying the tax—even though the state is forcing them to subsidize expression that they oppose. Why is the constitutional calculation different when the government directs a union to collect fees and negotiate policies? The unspoken assumption seems to be that unions are always partisan and untrustworthy. Want More SCOTUS? Subscribe to Amicus. Join Dahlia Lithwick and her stable of standout guests for a discussion about the high court and the country’s most important cases. Second, the DOJ’s description of collective bargaining reflects a profoundly cynical view about the purpose of unions and the rights of workers. The DOJ insists that negotiations over basic terms of employment—health benefits, overtime pay, pensions—are “inherently political.” Really? Most teachers would probably not consider bargaining over the length of their lunch break to be “speech on politics.” But that is how the DOJ views every concession granted to public workers. Under this framework, anti-union employees do not reap the rewards secured by their dues-paying colleagues; rather, they are forced to accept benefits (like better pay) that they reject on political grounds. As the DOJ now conceives of them, public sector unions are essentially gravy trains that bilk money from the government, and free riders are noble “dissenting employees” who want less generous working conditions. Top Comment Hi Joe 6-pack and others like you! This is a liberal coastal elite here to say, "we told you so". Do you still think you made the right decision? More... 186 Comments Join In This vision of unions, of course, is fairly common, especially among Republicans. That is why 25 states, most of them right-leaning, have passed “right to work” laws that eliminate fair share fees. But 22 states and the District of Columbia have retained these fees, and public employees in those jurisdictions tend to have higher wages due to their increased bargaining power. There is no plausible constitutional argument, and certainly no credible originalist argument, against the constitutionality of fair share fees. And yet, in Janus, the Supreme Court will probably invalidate them, instantly undermining thousands of union contracts for millions of workers across the country. The Trump administration will deserve much credit for this union-busting coup. It was Trump, after all, who installed the justice who will soon enable this nakedly political ruling. And it is Trump’s DOJ that is helping the court pretend that there is a valid nonpartisan argument against fair share fees. American unions have withstood a relentless assault since their inception, and the anti-union onslaught of the last few decades contributed to the decline of the working class. Trump promised to fight for these “forgotten” workers. But he and his man on the bench now stand poised to deliver them a devastating blow. One more thing The Trump administration poses a unique threat to the rule of law. That’s why Slate has stepped up our legal coverage—watchdogging Jeff Sessions’ Justice Department, the Supreme Court, the crackdown on voting rights, and more. Our work is reaching more readers than ever—but online advertising revenues don’t fully cover our costs, and we don’t have print subscribers to help keep us afloat. So we need your help. If you think Slate’s journalism matters, become a Slate Plus member. You’ll get exclusive members-only content and a suite of great benefits—and you’ll help secure Slate’s future. Join Slate Plus 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: Saturday, January 20, 2018 11:08 AM To: C G Estabrook ; David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Cc: 'Campus Faculty Association' ; 'cfmembers at cfaillinois.org' Subject: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! Today's Wall Street Journal has an article on the AFSCFME case currently pending before the US Supreme Court. The article points out that with Trump's Man Gorsuch on the Supreme Court, there is a good chance AFSCME will lose. That would be a terrible blow to Public Sector Unions, Unions in General and Organized and Organizing Labor around the country. Fab Former Executive Committee, American Federation of Teachers Local 2287 and Delegate to AFL-CIO Board of Champaign County, Illinois (1988-91) (elected by membership to 3 terms). 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: Friday, January 19, 2018 2:48 PM To: C G Estabrook ; David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! The US Supreme Court just announced that it is going to hear Trump's Muslim Travel Ban this Spring with a decision by the end of June.. Sally Yates refused to enforce it in court and Trump fired her.This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Office will be arguing in favor of upholding it in the United State Supreme Court. Why did not this Shithole Law School and its Dean Iceman Amar bring in Sally Yates to "engage" the Champaign-Urbana Community instead of this Trump/Sessions/DepartmentOfInjustice Hatchetman? Fab 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, January 15, 2018 4:53 PM To: C G Estabrook Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! The Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice have argued and will continue to argue that the 2001 AUMF gives them the legal and US Constitutional authority to wage war all over the world forever. Perpetual War instead of Kant's Perpetual Peace, which I teach in my course on Jurisprudence. So we have to make our Stand against Perpetual War in front of this Shithole Law School on January 24 from 3-4pm. Fab Ed Norton Professor of Law From the Bowels of the Shithole UIUC Law School 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: C G Estabrook [mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 4:44 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; C. G. ESTABROOK ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Re: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! ALMA MATER - L.H.O.O.COL > On Jan 15, 2018, at 9:56 AM, Boyle, Francis A 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: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:50 AM > To: Estabrook, Carl G ; Karen Aram ; David Johnson > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Resist Trump Machine at Shithole UIUC Law School on January 24, 3-4pm! > > Sorry I cannot be there tomorrow for the program. It is my first day of classes and I am teaching a maximum course load this semester, including International Human Rights Law. But I would greatly appreciate it if someone could announce our Rally against this Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman here at this Shithole College of Law on January 24 from 3-4pm. You will notice that in our press release I deliberately included that the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice are currently arguing "For War." Right now there is a lawsuit pending in Federal Court by a US Soldier not wanting to deploy to the Middle East because these wars were never authorized by Congress and are thus unconstitutional. It will be making its way to the Supreme Court. This Trump/Sessions Henchman and his Department and Office are arguing and will be arguing in favor of perpetual warfare around the world. Thanks. > Fab. > From the Bowels of the Shithole Law School. > To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org > Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - RESIST TRUMP MACHINE AT ILLINOIS LAW SCHOOL! > > > > For circulation to your groups, people and anyone you wish to attend the below: > > > RALLY AT THE UI LAW SCHOOL TO RESIST > > The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! > > > Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza > 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) > > Law Dean Amar is bringing in this Top Trump/Sessions Legal Henchman to propagandize Their Party Line. For the past year, he and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against Blacks; Against LGBTs; Against Labor;For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Right now, Trump has a solid right-wing majority on the Supreme Court with his Man Gorsuch. > > Please join us in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of elites, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Our continued militarization, and war on people around the world in order to occupy and steal their resources. With further oppression and exploitation of the working class, and People of Color in this nation. > > > > > > 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:03 AM > To: Karen Aram > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons > > Karen & David-- > > You both (and of course other members & friends of AWARE) are welcome to come talk about Iran & US fp on AWARE ON THE AIR at noon tomorrow. > > I’ll be discussing the remarkable mess of the Mueller investigation & war provocations vs. Russia. > > The program will finish up with part of the TRNN interview with Finkelstein, on his new book on Gaza. > > As always, I want to keep the program’s focus on US war-making (which Russiagate is finally about). > > —CGE > >> On Jan 15, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> David >> >> Agreed, which is one of the reasons I have deluged the Peace Discuss List with articles promoting varying perspectives of the protests in Iran. >> >> We are like spectators at a sporting event, we have our favorite teams but we have no influence on the outcome of the game other than to ensure fairness and no interference on the part of “money interests.” “Money interests" or those we have placed in power through either lack of interest or inability to change our system based on profit. Which is why “opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what “ as you say, should always be our main focus. >> >> >> >>> On Jan 15, 2018, at 02:55, David Johnson wrote: >>> >>> Good article about the Iranian protests. >>> >>> Based on what the U.S. State Dept. / CIA et al have done over the decades in overthrowing governments it didn’t like by means of economic sabotage and astro turf ( fake ) protest groups that were funded and trained and staffed with CIA operatives and hired criminals, culminating in the so called “ color revolutions “ of recent years, we need to be suspicious when things like that which is occurring in Iran happen. >>> However, on the other hand we shouldn’t be dismissive of all protest actions in a particular country that the U.S. government hates as phony and instigated. >>> The Iranian protests are legitimate and I support the Iranian Working class in their struggles against economic austerity as well as their desires to have a more democratic government. >>> That does NOT mean that I support ANY interference in the internal affairs of any country by the U.S. government and it’s bought and paid for proxies. >>> Sometimes it is difficult to determine what is legitimate or not but when it is the case that protests are “ home grown “ and legitimate, I think that anti-war / anti-imperialist activists can “ walk and chew gum at the same time “, by supporting the goals of Working people in a country while at the same time opposing any and all U.S. intervention no matter what. >>> >>> David J. >>> >>> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss >>> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 8:44 PM >>> To: Peace-discuss List >>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Lee Camp interviews Diane Perlman, on how to get rid of nuclear weapons >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 09:57, Lee Camp wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey Karen- >>>> >>>> I have a new episode of Redacted: VIP with Diane Perlman, a member of the group ICAN, which just won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work to get rid of nuclear weapons. Click here to watch. >>>> I also have a new article by a member of the Redacted team about what you aren't being told about the protests in Iran. And there's A LOT you aren't being told. Click here to read. >>>> And I have live shows coming up in Salt Lake City, Portland, Pittsburgh, Houston, Austin & more. Vote for your city and get details here. >>>> >>>> Keep Fighting, >>>> Lee >>>> >>>> > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From r-szoke at illinois.edu Sun Jan 21 04:34:08 2018 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2018 04:34:08 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Cognitive hygiene? WTF? Message-ID: Notes on Cognitive Hygiene Ron Szoke 1/20/18 Anticipation of Confirmation Bias “The human understanding is no dry light, but receives infusion from the will and affections; whence proceeds sciences which may be called "sciences as one would." For what a man had rather were true he more readily believes. Therefore he rejects difficult things from impatience of research; sober things, because they narrow hope; the deeper things of nature, from superstition; the light of experience, from arrogance and pride; things not commonly believed, out of deference to the opinion of the vulgar. Numberless in short are the ways, and sometimes imperceptible, in which the affections color and infect the understanding.” — Francis Bacon, c. 1620, as quoted by Carl Sagan —— Apophenia (/æpoʊˈfiːniə/) is the tendency to attribute meaning to perceived connections or patterns between seemingly unrelated things. Confirmation bias a variation of apophenia. The term (German: Apophänie) was coined by psychiatrist Klaus Conrad in his 1958 publication on the beginning stages of schizophrenia. He defined it as "unmotivated seeing of connections [accompanied by] a specific feeling of abnormal meaningfulness". He described the early stages of delusional thought as self-referential, over-interpretations of actual sensory perceptions, as opposed to hallucinations. Apophenia has come to imply a universal human tendency to seek patterns in random information, such as gambling. — Wikipedia —— divination (fortune telling) An undue opinion of our own importance in the scale of creation is at the bottom of our unwarrantable notions in this respect. --Charles Mackay Divination is the attempt to foretell the future or discover occult knowledge by interpreting omens or by using paranormal or supernatural powers. The list of items that have been used in divination is extraordinary. Below are listed just a few. Many end in 'mancy', from the ancient Greek manteia (divination), or 'scopy', from the Greek skopein (to look into, to behold). Most forms of divination rely on magical thinking, apophenia (finding meaning in meaningless patterns), and pareidolia (seeing distinct forms in vague and random patterns). —— magical thinking "...magical thinking is "a fundamental dimension of a child's thinking." --Zusne and Jones According to anthropologist Dr. Phillips Stevens Jr., magical thinking involves several elements, including a belief in the interconnectedness of all things through forces and powers that transcend both physical and spiritual connections. Magical thinking invests special powers and forces in many things that are seen as symbols. According to Stevens, "the vast majority of the world's peoples ... believe that there are real connections between the symbol and its referent, and that some real and potentially measurable power flows between them." He believes there is a neurobiological basis for this, though the specific content of any symbol is culturally determined. (Not that some symbols aren't universal, e.g., the egg, fire, water. Not that the egg, fire, or water symbolize the same things in all cultures.) One of the driving principles of magical thinking is the notion that things that resemble each other are causally connected in some way that defies scientific testing (the law of similarity). Another driving principle is the belief that "things that have been either in physical contact or in spatial or temporal association with other things retain a connection after they are separated" (the law of contagion) (Frazer; Stevens). Think of relics of saints that are supposed to transfer spiritual energy. Think of psychic detectives claiming that they can get information about a missing person by touching an object that belongs to the person (psychometry). Or think of the pet psychic who claims she can read your dog's mind by looking at a photo of the dog. Or think of Rupert Sheldrake's morphic resonance. Coincidentally, Sheldrake also studies psychic dogs. — The Skeptic’s Dictionary # # # -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sun Jan 21 17:31:38 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2018 17:31:38 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Excellent News Gazette article, pointing out potential financial dangers of recent Executive order. Message-ID: Sunday Extra: Executive order should be rescinded Sun, 01/21/2018 - 7:00am | The News-Gazette [http://www.news-gazette.com/sites/all/themes/custom/ng_fbg/images/32-facebook.png][http://www.news-gazette.com/sites/all/themes/custom/ng_fbg/images/32-twitter.png][http://www.news-gazette.com/sites/all/themes/custom/ng_fbg/images/print.png] By DIANNA VISEK On Dec. 21, the White House issued an executive order "Blocking the Property of Persons Involved in Serious Human Rights Abuse or Corruption." President Trump summarized his rationale as follows: "I therefore determine that serious human rights abuse and corruption around the world constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy and economy of the United States, and I hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat." "Serious human rights abuse" is undefined, but corruption is described as "the misappropriation of state assets, the expropriation of private assets for personal gain, corruption related to government contracts or the extraction of natural resources or bribery." This order only affects U.S. property owned by foreign individuals or entities, perhaps because there's no concern for due process. If the Treasury secretary in consultation with the attorney general and secretary of state determines that someone has engaged in corruption or serious human rights abuse, then his U.S. assets can be frozen without notice. What happens to the assets later isn't specified, except that the three Cabinet officers can unfreeze them. The annex at the end of the order lists 13 targeted individuals, but the scope could greatly expand. All countries, including the U.S., are guilty of corruption and human rights abuse to some degree. In many countries, wealthy individuals and major corporations have intimate ties to their governments which would make them vulnerable to this order. In fact, some observers wonder if China and Russia will be targeted as part of our recently declared economic war. The U.S. historically has been a safe place to invest. One of our attractions has been our commitment to due process and the rule of law. As a result, many foreign individuals have bought U.S. assets to protect their wealth. And many foreign corporations have bought American companies or set up subsidiaries to expand their markets. When assets can be frozen without due process, foreigners will reconsider investing in the U.S. With the development of the global economy, many countries now offer attractive investment opportunities. If foreigners start selling U.S. assets, the dollar and our stock, bond and real estate markets will drop in value. Our job market will also contract. Illinois doesn't need any more economic challenges. A greater danger is that targeted countries will retaliate. Why shouldn't they apply to us the same standards we apply to them? Our record on corruption and human rights abuse is problematic. Where would this cycle of retaliation end? There probably will be litigation to prevent this order from going into effect. Although corruption and human rights abuse are serious matters, this isn't an appropriate solution. The effects of this order could harm our economy and international relations in a manner that far outweighs any good it might do and might last long after Trump leaves office. This order is not in the best interest of the American people and should be rescinded. The order can be found at whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-blocking-property-persons-involved-serious-human-rights-abuse-corruption/. Dianna Visek of Urbana is the former chair of the Champaign County Libertarian Party. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 21 18:36:43 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2018 18:36:43 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Biss, BDS, etc. References: <1052969985.1536523.1516559803220.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1052969985.1536523.1516559803220@mail.yahoo.com> Thanks to David Johnson's and Joel Reinstein's interview with Daniel Biss and yesterday's World Labor Hour. Biss is an appealing candidate for obvious reasons to those reading this list, and I will likely vote for him. I appreciated Joel raising the issue of BDS, including the Illinois bill that Biss voted for (and that nobody opposed). Biss's analogy regarding using state investment to both move beyond dirty energy and oppose BDS made little or no sense. Just a bit of political hocus pocus, now you see it now you don't. Nevertheless, I wouldn't care if Biss opposed BDS, which I think is mostly over-rated as a tactic, and actually supported a two-state solution seriously promoted by USFP. But he gives no indication that he has ever lifted a finger to do so.  When I drive through Skokie on my way to Evanston (Dempster Ave.) there are synagogues with "We Stand with Israel" signs displayed. If Biss was interested in confronting the obstacles to two states, he might start there. That's his district. But clearly his political calculation is to play it "safe" with Jewish voters. If he doesn't understand that the primary obstacles to a two-state solution are the U.S. government and the Israel Lobby, then he is quite naïve or quite in denial. In addition, Joel's statement regarding support for Palestine as an aspect of "intersectional feminism" is also not my cup of tea. I'm not sure why the right of Palestinians to govern themselves should be put in those relatively narrow terms, and I don't see Jewish feminists who still identify as Zionists responding to that; nor do I see the "intersectional" movement as having much interest in Palestine, to be honest. There needs to be a more fundamental case made regarding Palestinian rights, and Israel's wholesale movement to the right as the result of the occupation. Joel asserted that Palestinians (in Palestine) support BDS, and that's well and good. But the Palestinians will need a much stronger resistance movement, otherwise there is no way BDS is going to contribute to their liberation. As the atheist Norman Finkelstein asserts in this context, "God only helps those who help themselves." One might argue that this discourse shouldn't be part of the gubernatorial race, and indeed there's no reason to place too much significance on it relative to those issues for which the governor is obviously most accountable for. Nevertheless, Illinois, including its "public" universities, does business with Israel (and its universities) in ways that should be opposed. I believe that Quinn and Rauner both went to Israel; is Biss willing to say he won't go--or at least not in order to strike deals with the apartheid state? That might have been a better line of questioning. On the other hand, if candidates at any level want to promote themselves as clean-living, family-devoted, etc., which have next to nothing to do with their political views, then perhaps they should at least deign to take a stand on war, foreign policy, etc., including I/P, which is pretty big issue in this state. I'm more interested in that than how pretty their children are, or even their track record as "community organizers." But then again, when Rauner/Killeen cut their deal with Israeli universities, where was Students for Justice in Palestine, Jewish Voice for Peace, etc.? This just went down without any organized response whatsoever.  DG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brussel at illinois.edu Sun Jan 21 19:03:28 2018 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2018 19:03:28 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Cognitive hygiene? WTF? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7B5563F5-66FB-4D7F-B045-D46CDB41C78C@illinois.edu> Just what got you on this track? An interesting diversion from my ordinary thoughts. —mkb On Jan 20, 2018, at 10:34 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss > wrote: Notes on Cognitive Hygiene Ron Szoke 1/20/18 Anticipation of Confirmation Bias “The human understanding is no dry light, but receives infusion from the will and affections; whence proceeds sciences which may be called "sciences as one would." For what a man had rather were true he more readily believes. Therefore he rejects difficult things from impatience of research; sober things, because they narrow hope; the deeper things of nature, from superstition; the light of experience, from arrogance and pride; things not commonly believed, out of deference to the opinion of the vulgar. Numberless in short are the ways, and sometimes imperceptible, in which the affections color and infect the understanding.” — Francis Bacon, c. 1620, as quoted by Carl Sagan —— Apophenia (/æpoʊˈfiːniə/) is the tendency to attribute meaning to perceived connections or patterns between seemingly unrelated things. Confirmation bias a variation of apophenia. The term (German: Apophänie) was coined by psychiatrist Klaus Conrad in his 1958 publication on the beginning stages of schizophrenia. He defined it as "unmotivated seeing of connections [accompanied by] a specific feeling of abnormal meaningfulness". He described the early stages of delusional thought as self-referential, over-interpretations of actual sensory perceptions, as opposed to hallucinations. Apophenia has come to imply a universal human tendency to seek patterns in random information, such as gambling. — Wikipedia —— divination (fortune telling) An undue opinion of our own importance in the scale of creation is at the bottom of our unwarrantable notions in this respect. --Charles Mackay Divination is the attempt to foretell the future or discover occult knowledge by interpreting omens or by using paranormal or supernatural powers. The list of items that have been used in divination is extraordinary. Below are listed just a few. Many end in 'mancy', from the ancient Greek manteia (divination), or 'scopy', from the Greek skopein (to look into, to behold). Most forms of divination rely on magical thinking, apophenia (finding meaning in meaningless patterns), and pareidolia (seeing distinct forms in vague and random patterns). —— magical thinking "...magical thinking is "a fundamental dimension of a child's thinking." --Zusne and Jones According to anthropologist Dr. Phillips Stevens Jr., magical thinking involves several elements, including a belief in the interconnectedness of all things through forces and powers that transcend both physical and spiritual connections. Magical thinking invests special powers and forces in many things that are seen as symbols. According to Stevens, "the vast majority of the world's peoples ... believe that there are real connections between the symbol and its referent, and that some real and potentially measurable power flows between them." He believes there is a neurobiological basis for this, though the specific content of any symbol is culturally determined. (Not that some symbols aren't universal, e.g., the egg, fire, water. Not that the egg, fire, or water symbolize the same things in all cultures.) One of the driving principles of magical thinking is the notion that things that resemble each other are causally connected in some way that defies scientific testing (the law of similarity). Another driving principle is the belief that "things that have been either in physical contact or in spatial or temporal association with other things retain a connection after they are separated" (the law of contagion) (Frazer; Stevens). Think of relics of saints that are supposed to transfer spiritual energy. Think of psychic detectives claiming that they can get information about a missing person by touching an object that belongs to the person (psychometry). Or think of the pet psychic who claims she can read your dog's mind by looking at a photo of the dog. Or think of Rupert Sheldrake's morphic resonance. Coincidentally, Sheldrake also studies psychic dogs. — The Skeptic’s Dictionary # # # _______________________________________________ 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 Sun Jan 21 19:39:59 2018 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2018 19:39:59 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Biss, BDS, etc. In-Reply-To: <1052969985.1536523.1516559803220@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1052969985.1536523.1516559803220.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1052969985.1536523.1516559803220@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <42D5C3C9-2AFC-48BA-8BF1-73D1849EFEEB@illinois.edu> Where one, politician or not, stands with respect to the Israel/Palestinian conflict reveals much about their general thinking. Biss’ stand against BDS makes him a less attractive person/candidate, but yes, what are the alternatives …? Your last sentence is revealing; were the organizations cited (SJP, JVP) aware of what was going on? —mkb On Jan 21, 2018, at 12:36 PM, David Green via Peace-discuss > wrote: Thanks to David Johnson's and Joel Reinstein's interview with Daniel Biss and yesterday's World Labor Hour. Biss is an appealing candidate for obvious reasons to those reading this list, and I will likely vote for him. I appreciated Joel raising the issue of BDS, including the Illinois bill that Biss voted for (and that nobody opposed). Biss's analogy regarding using state investment to both move beyond dirty energy and oppose BDS made little or no sense. Just a bit of political hocus pocus, now you see it now you don't. Nevertheless, I wouldn't care if Biss opposed BDS, which I think is mostly over-rated as a tactic, and actually supported a two-state solution seriously promoted by USFP. But he gives no indication that he has ever lifted a finger to do so. When I drive through Skokie on my way to Evanston (Dempster Ave.) there are synagogues with "We Stand with Israel" signs displayed. If Biss was interested in confronting the obstacles to two states, he might start there. That's his district. But clearly his political calculation is to play it "safe" with Jewish voters. If he doesn't understand that the primary obstacles to a two-state solution are the U.S. government and the Israel Lobby, then he is quite naïve or quite in denial. In addition, Joel's statement regarding support for Palestine as an aspect of "intersectional feminism" is also not my cup of tea. I'm not sure why the right of Palestinians to govern themselves should be put in those relatively narrow terms, and I don't see Jewish feminists who still identify as Zionists responding to that; nor do I see the "intersectional" movement as having much interest in Palestine, to be honest. There needs to be a more fundamental case made regarding Palestinian rights, and Israel's wholesale movement to the right as the result of the occupation. Joel asserted that Palestinians (in Palestine) support BDS, and that's well and good. But the Palestinians will need a much stronger resistance movement, otherwise there is no way BDS is going to contribute to their liberation. As the atheist Norman Finkelstein asserts in this context, "God only helps those who help themselves." One might argue that this discourse shouldn't be part of the gubernatorial race, and indeed there's no reason to place too much significance on it relative to those issues for which the governor is obviously most accountable for. Nevertheless, Illinois, including its "public" universities, does business with Israel (and its universities) in ways that should be opposed. I believe that Quinn and Rauner both went to Israel; is Biss willing to say he won't go--or at least not in order to strike deals with the apartheid state? That might have been a better line of questioning. On the other hand, if candidates at any level want to promote themselves as clean-living, family-devoted, etc., which have next to nothing to do with their political views, then perhaps they should at least deign to take a stand on war, foreign policy, etc., including I/P, which is pretty big issue in this state. I'm more interested in that than how pretty their children are, or even their track record as "community organizers." But then again, when Rauner/Killeen cut their deal with Israeli universities, where was Students for Justice in Palestine, Jewish Voice for Peace, etc.? This just went down without any organized response whatsoever. DG _______________________________________________ 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 Jan 21 20:32:15 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2018 20:32:15 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Biss, BDS, etc. In-Reply-To: <42D5C3C9-2AFC-48BA-8BF1-73D1849EFEEB@illinois.edu> References: <1052969985.1536523.1516559803220.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1052969985.1536523.1516559803220@mail.yahoo.com> <42D5C3C9-2AFC-48BA-8BF1-73D1849EFEEB@illinois.edu> Message-ID: <132040789.1576703.1516566735958@mail.yahoo.com> There aren't structures in place to mobilize much of a response, as far as I can tell. I suppose we all have to accept some responsibility for that. Perhaps the Salaita affair was the high point of the willingness of the community to respond to this issue. However one looks at it, that was I think more of a decisive defeat than people are willing to admit. On ‎Sunday‎, ‎January‎ ‎21‎, ‎2018‎ ‎01‎:‎40‎:‎14‎ ‎PM‎ ‎CST, Brussel, Morton K wrote: Where one, politician or not, stands with respect to the Israel/Palestinian conflict reveals much about their general thinking. Biss’ stand against BDS makes him a less attractive person/candidate, but yes, what are the alternatives …? Your last sentence is revealing; were the organizations cited (SJP, JVP) aware of what was going on? —mkb On Jan 21, 2018, at 12:36 PM, David Green via Peace-discuss wrote: Thanks to David Johnson's and Joel Reinstein's interview with Daniel Biss and yesterday's World Labor Hour. Biss is an appealing candidate for obvious reasons to those reading this list, and I will likely vote for him. I appreciated Joel raising the issue of BDS, including the Illinois bill that Biss voted for (and that nobody opposed). Biss's analogy regarding using state investment to both move beyond dirty energy and oppose BDS made little or no sense. Just a bit of political hocus pocus, now you see it now you don't. Nevertheless, I wouldn't care if Biss opposed BDS, which I think is mostly over-rated as a tactic, and actually supported a two-state solution seriously promoted by USFP. But he gives no indication that he has ever lifted a finger to do so.  When I drive through Skokie on my way to Evanston (Dempster Ave.) there are synagogues with "We Stand with Israel" signs displayed. If Biss was interested in confronting the obstacles to two states, he might start there. That's his district. But clearly his political calculation is to play it "safe" with Jewish voters. If he doesn't understand that the primary obstacles to a two-state solution are the U.S. government and the Israel Lobby, then he is quite naïve or quite in denial. In addition, Joel's statement regarding support for Palestine as an aspect of "intersectional feminism" is also not my cup of tea. I'm not sure why the right of Palestinians to govern themselves should be put in those relatively narrow terms, and I don't see Jewish feminists who still identify as Zionists responding to that; nor do I see the "intersectional" movement as having much interest in Palestine, to be honest. There needs to be a more fundamental case made regarding Palestinian rights, and Israel's wholesale movement to the right as the result of the occupation. Joel asserted that Palestinians (in Palestine) support BDS, and that's well and good. But the Palestinians will need a much stronger resistance movement, otherwise there is no way BDS is going to contribute to their liberation. As the atheist Norman Finkelstein asserts in this context, "God only helps those who help themselves." One might argue that this discourse shouldn't be part of the gubernatorial race, and indeed there's no reason to place too much significance on it relative to those issues for which the governor is obviously most accountable for. Nevertheless, Illinois, including its "public" universities, does business with Israel (and its universities) in ways that should be opposed. I believe that Quinn and Rauner both went to Israel; is Biss willing to say he won't go--or at least not in order to strike deals with the apartheid state? That might have been a better line of questioning. On the other hand, if candidates at any level want to promote themselves as clean-living, family-devoted, etc., which have next to nothing to do with their political views, then perhaps they should at least deign to take a stand on war, foreign policy, etc., including I/P, which is pretty big issue in this state. I'm more interested in that than how pretty their children are, or even their track record as "community organizers." But then again, when Rauner/Killeen cut their deal with Israeli universities, where was Students for Justice in Palestine, Jewish Voice for Peace, etc.? This just went down without any organized response whatsoever.  DG _______________________________________________ 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 Sun Jan 21 20:34:24 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2018 14:34:24 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Biss, BDS, etc. In-Reply-To: <1052969985.1536523.1516559803220@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1052969985.1536523.1516559803220.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1052969985.1536523.1516559803220@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9C26AE58-95C6-4F7E-8567-C3C5D536530D@gmail.com> A clear & convincing analysis, David. And “this discourse” is surely part of the gubernatorial race when the government of Israel can get the Illinois legislature to direct that state agencies (including the UI retirement system, etc.) withdraw funds from companies that observe the boycott of Israel's illegal occupation (without objection from our local representatives). State rep. Carol Ammons would have observed a boycott of apartheid S.Africa. Why not Israel, which enforces an anti-Palestinian apartheid in the Occupied Territories worse than that of S. Africa, a generation ago? That would be impossible without support form the US, including now the Illinois state government. —CGE > On Jan 21, 2018, at 12:36 PM, David Green via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Thanks to David Johnson's and Joel Reinstein's interview with Daniel Biss and yesterday's World Labor Hour. > > Biss is an appealing candidate for obvious reasons to those reading this list, and I will likely vote for him. > > I appreciated Joel raising the issue of BDS, including the Illinois bill that Biss voted for (and that nobody opposed). Biss's analogy regarding using state investment to both move beyond dirty energy and oppose BDS made little or no sense. Just a bit of political hocus pocus, now you see it now you don't. > > Nevertheless, I wouldn't care if Biss opposed BDS, which I think is mostly over-rated as a tactic, and actually supported a two-state solution seriously promoted by USFP. But he gives no indication that he has ever lifted a finger to do so. When I drive through Skokie on my way to Evanston (Dempster Ave.) there are synagogues with "We Stand with Israel" signs displayed. If Biss was interested in confronting the obstacles to two states, he might start there. That's his district. But clearly his political calculation is to play it "safe" with Jewish voters. > > If he doesn't understand that the primary obstacles to a two-state solution are the U.S. government and the Israel Lobby, then he is quite naïve or quite in denial. > > In addition, Joel's statement regarding support for Palestine as an aspect of "intersectional feminism" is also not my cup of tea. I'm not sure why the right of Palestinians to govern themselves should be put in those relatively narrow terms, and I don't see Jewish feminists who still identify as Zionists responding to that; nor do I see the "intersectional" movement as having much interest in Palestine, to be honest. There needs to be a more fundamental case made regarding Palestinian rights, and Israel's wholesale movement to the right as the result of the occupation. > > Joel asserted that Palestinians (in Palestine) support BDS, and that's well and good. But the Palestinians will need a much stronger resistance movement, otherwise there is no way BDS is going to contribute to their liberation. As the atheist Norman Finkelstein asserts in this context, "God only helps those who help themselves." > > One might argue that this discourse shouldn't be part of the gubernatorial race, and indeed there's no reason to place too much significance on it relative to those issues for which the governor is obviously most accountable for. Nevertheless, Illinois, including its "public" universities, does business with Israel (and its universities) in ways that should be opposed. I believe that Quinn and Rauner both went to Israel; is Biss willing to say he won't go--or at least not in order to strike deals with the apartheid state? That might have been a better line of questioning. > > On the other hand, if candidates at any level want to promote themselves as clean-living, family-devoted, etc., which have next to nothing to do with their political views, then perhaps they should at least deign to take a stand on war, foreign policy, etc., including I/P, which is pretty big issue in this state. I'm more interested in that than how pretty their children are, or even their track record as "community organizers." > > But then again, when Rauner/Killeen cut their deal with Israeli universities, where was Students for Justice in Palestine, Jewish Voice for Peace, etc.? This just went down without any organized response whatsoever. > > DG > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Sun Jan 21 20:45:19 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2018 14:45:19 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Biss, BDS, etc. In-Reply-To: <132040789.1576703.1516566735958@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1052969985.1536523.1516559803220.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1052969985.1536523.1516559803220@mail.yahoo.com> <42D5C3C9-2AFC-48BA-8BF1-73D1849EFEEB@illinois.edu> <132040789.1576703.1516566735958@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8F13BF60-9709-4446-A9DD-C068C8115FD8@gmail.com> Yes, indeed - "more of a decisive defeat than people are willing to admit.” > On Jan 21, 2018, at 2:32 PM, David Green via Peace-discuss wrote: > > There aren't structures in place to mobilize much of a response, as far as I can tell. I suppose we all have to accept some responsibility for that. Perhaps the Salaita affair was the high point of the willingness of the community to respond to this issue. However one looks at it, that was I think more of a decisive defeat than people are willing to admit. > On ‎Sunday‎, ‎January‎ ‎21‎, ‎2018‎ ‎01‎:‎40‎:‎14‎ ‎PM‎ ‎CST, Brussel, Morton K wrote: > > > Where one, politician or not, stands with respect to the Israel/Palestinian conflict reveals much about their general thinking. Biss’ stand against BDS makes him a less attractive person/candidate, but yes, what are the alternatives …? > > Your last sentence is revealing; were the organizations cited (SJP, JVP) aware of what was going on? > > —mkb > > >> On Jan 21, 2018, at 12:36 PM, David Green via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> Thanks to David Johnson's and Joel Reinstein's interview with Daniel Biss and yesterday's World Labor Hour. >> >> Biss is an appealing candidate for obvious reasons to those reading this list, and I will likely vote for him. >> >> I appreciated Joel raising the issue of BDS, including the Illinois bill that Biss voted for (and that nobody opposed). Biss's analogy regarding using state investment to both move beyond dirty energy and oppose BDS made little or no sense. Just a bit of political hocus pocus, now you see it now you don't. >> >> Nevertheless, I wouldn't care if Biss opposed BDS, which I think is mostly over-rated as a tactic, and actually supported a two-state solution seriously promoted by USFP. But he gives no indication that he has ever lifted a finger to do so. When I drive through Skokie on my way to Evanston (Dempster Ave.) there are synagogues with "We Stand with Israel" signs displayed. If Biss was interested in confronting the obstacles to two states, he might start there. That's his district. But clearly his political calculation is to play it "safe" with Jewish voters. >> >> If he doesn't understand that the primary obstacles to a two-state solution are the U.S. government and the Israel Lobby, then he is quite naïve or quite in denial. >> >> In addition, Joel's statement regarding support for Palestine as an aspect of "intersectional feminism" is also not my cup of tea. I'm not sure why the right of Palestinians to govern themselves should be put in those relatively narrow terms, and I don't see Jewish feminists who still identify as Zionists responding to that; nor do I see the "intersectional" movement as having much interest in Palestine, to be honest. There needs to be a more fundamental case made regarding Palestinian rights, and Israel's wholesale movement to the right as the result of the occupation. >> >> Joel asserted that Palestinians (in Palestine) support BDS, and that's well and good. But the Palestinians will need a much stronger resistance movement, otherwise there is no way BDS is going to contribute to their liberation. As the atheist Norman Finkelstein asserts in this context, "God only helps those who help themselves." >> >> One might argue that this discourse shouldn't be part of the gubernatorial race, and indeed there's no reason to place too much significance on it relative to those issues for which the governor is obviously most accountable for. Nevertheless, Illinois, including its "public" universities, does business with Israel (and its universities) in ways that should be opposed. I believe that Quinn and Rauner both went to Israel; is Biss willing to say he won't go--or at least not in order to strike deals with the apartheid state? That might have been a better line of questioning. >> >> On the other hand, if candidates at any level want to promote themselves as clean-living, family-devoted, etc., which have next to nothing to do with their political views, then perhaps they should at least deign to take a stand on war, foreign policy, etc., including I/P, which is pretty big issue in this state. I'm more interested in that than how pretty their children are, or even their track record as "community organizers." >> >> But then again, when Rauner/Killeen cut their deal with Israeli universities, where was Students for Justice in Palestine, Jewish Voice for Peace, etc.? This just went down without any organized response whatsoever. >> >> DG >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 galliher at illinois.edu Mon Jan 22 04:38:33 2018 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2018 22:38:33 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Cognitive hygiene? In-Reply-To: <7B5563F5-66FB-4D7F-B045-D46CDB41C78C@illinois.edu> References: <7B5563F5-66FB-4D7F-B045-D46CDB41C78C@illinois.edu> Message-ID: <3927B81C-9A61-47D2-9515-167AD41D6681@illinois.edu> Montaigne's maxim was QUE SAIS-JE? [What do I know?], which he had set on a personal medallion together with the Greek word EPOKHE [I hold back, or I reserve judgment] and a pair of scales, to remind himself of the potential equality of strength of two opposing arguments. Ron’s maxim is QUE SAVENT LES AUTRES? [What do others know?], and his answer seems to be RIEN [Nothing]. He doesn’t seem to reserve judgment, because he doesn’t think any arguments have strength; they are all merely psychological manifestations. But how can he sure that that opinion is more than a psychological manifestation? Is there a course of Cognitive Hygiene that, like mental philosopher’s stone, allows one to distinguish true opinions from those psychologically induced? (Is it called thinking?) Or maybe, when it comes to the philosophical quadrille, Ron is merely bemused by the poet’s question: "O body swayed to music, O brightening glance, How can we know the dancer from the dance?” —CGE > On Jan 21, 2018, at 1:03 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Just what got you on this track? An interesting diversion from my ordinary thoughts. > > —mkb > >> On Jan 20, 2018, at 10:34 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> Notes on Cognitive Hygiene >> >> Ron Szoke 1/20/18 >> >> Anticipation of Confirmation Bias >> “The human understanding is no dry light, but receives infusion from the will and affections; whence proceeds sciences which may be called "sciences as one would." For what a man had rather were true he more readily believes. Therefore he rejects difficult things from impatience of research; sober things, because they narrow hope; the deeper things of nature, from superstition; the light of experience, from arrogance and pride; things not commonly believed, out of deference to the opinion of the vulgar. Numberless in short are the ways, and sometimes imperceptible, in which the affections color and infect the understanding.” >> — Francis Bacon, c. 1620, as quoted by Carl Sagan >> —— >> >> Apophenia (/æpoʊˈfiːniə/) is the tendency to attribute meaning to perceived connections or patterns between seemingly unrelated things. Confirmation bias a variation of apophenia. >> >> The term (German: Apophänie) was coined by psychiatrist Klaus Conrad in his 1958 publication on the beginning stages of schizophrenia. He defined it as "unmotivated seeing of connections [accompanied by] a specific feeling of abnormal meaningfulness". He described the early stages of delusional thought as self-referential, over-interpretations of actual sensory perceptions, as opposed to hallucinations. >> >> Apophenia has come to imply a universal human tendency to seek patterns in random information, such as gambling. >> >> — Wikipedia >> >> —— >> >> divination (fortune telling) >> An undue opinion of our own importance in the scale of creation is at the bottom of our unwarrantable notions in this respect. --Charles Mackay >> Divination is the attempt to foretell the future or discover occult knowledge by interpreting omens or by using paranormal or supernatural powers. The list of items that have been used in divination is extraordinary. Below are listed just a few. Many end in 'mancy', from the ancient Greek manteia (divination), or 'scopy', from the Greek skopein (to look into, to behold). Most forms of divination rely on magical thinking, apophenia (finding meaning in meaningless patterns), and pareidolia (seeing distinct forms in vague and random patterns). >> —— >> >> magical thinking >> "...magical thinking is "a fundamental dimension of a child's thinking." --Zusne and Jones >> According to anthropologist Dr. Phillips Stevens Jr., magical thinking involves several elements, including a belief in the interconnectedness of all things through forces and powers that transcend both physical and spiritual connections. Magical thinking invests special powers and forces in many things that are seen as symbols. According to Stevens, "the vast majority of the world's peoples ... believe that there are real connections between the symbol and its referent, and that some real and potentially measurable power flows between them." He believes there is a neurobiological basis for this, though the specific content of any symbol is culturally determined. (Not that some symbols aren't universal, e.g., the egg, fire, water. Not that the egg, fire, or water symbolize the same things in all cultures.) >> One of the driving principles of magical thinking is the notion that things that resemble each other are causally connected in some way that defies scientific testing (the law of similarity). Another driving principle is the belief that "things that have been either in physical contact or in spatial or temporal association with other things retain a connection after they are separated" (the law of contagion) (Frazer; Stevens). Think of relics of saints that are supposed to transfer spiritual energy. Think of psychic detectives claiming that they can get information about a missing person by touching an object that belongs to the person (psychometry). Or think of the pet psychic who claims she can read your dog's mind by looking at a photo of the dog. Or think of Rupert Sheldrake's morphic resonance. Coincidentally, Sheldrake also studies psychic dogs. >> >> — The Skeptic’s Dictionary >> >> From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jan 22 14:44:08 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 14:44:08 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Cognitive hygiene? In-Reply-To: <3927B81C-9A61-47D2-9515-167AD41D6681@illinois.edu> References: <7B5563F5-66FB-4D7F-B045-D46CDB41C78C@illinois.edu> <3927B81C-9A61-47D2-9515-167AD41D6681@illinois.edu> Message-ID: I want one of those psychic dogs. Do you think they have them for adoption over at the Urbana Pet Shelter? Fab 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2018 10:39 PM To: Brussel, Morton K Cc: Szoke, Ron ; Peace Discuss Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Cognitive hygiene? Montaigne's maxim was QUE SAIS-JE? [What do I know?], which he had set on a personal medallion together with the Greek word EPOKHE [I hold back, or I reserve judgment] and a pair of scales, to remind himself of the potential equality of strength of two opposing arguments. Ron’s maxim is QUE SAVENT LES AUTRES? [What do others know?], and his answer seems to be RIEN [Nothing]. He doesn’t seem to reserve judgment, because he doesn’t think any arguments have strength; they are all merely psychological manifestations. But how can he sure that that opinion is more than a psychological manifestation? Is there a course of Cognitive Hygiene that, like mental philosopher’s stone, allows one to distinguish true opinions from those psychologically induced? (Is it called thinking?) Or maybe, when it comes to the philosophical quadrille, Ron is merely bemused by the poet’s question: "O body swayed to music, O brightening glance, How can we know the dancer from the dance?” —CGE > On Jan 21, 2018, at 1:03 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Just what got you on this track? An interesting diversion from my ordinary thoughts. > > —mkb > >> On Jan 20, 2018, at 10:34 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> Notes on Cognitive Hygiene >> >> Ron Szoke 1/20/18 >> >> Anticipation of Confirmation Bias >> “The human understanding is no dry light, but receives infusion from the will and affections; whence proceeds sciences which may be called "sciences as one would." For what a man had rather were true he more readily believes. Therefore he rejects difficult things from impatience of research; sober things, because they narrow hope; the deeper things of nature, from superstition; the light of experience, from arrogance and pride; things not commonly believed, out of deference to the opinion of the vulgar. Numberless in short are the ways, and sometimes imperceptible, in which the affections color and infect the understanding.” >> — Francis Bacon, c. 1620, as quoted by Carl Sagan —— >> >> Apophenia (/æpoʊˈfiːniə/) is the tendency to attribute meaning to perceived connections or patterns between seemingly unrelated things. Confirmation bias a variation of apophenia. >> >> The term (German: Apophänie) was coined by psychiatrist Klaus Conrad in his 1958 publication on the beginning stages of schizophrenia. He defined it as "unmotivated seeing of connections [accompanied by] a specific feeling of abnormal meaningfulness". He described the early stages of delusional thought as self-referential, over-interpretations of actual sensory perceptions, as opposed to hallucinations. >> >> Apophenia has come to imply a universal human tendency to seek patterns in random information, such as gambling. >> >> — Wikipedia >> >> —— >> >> divination (fortune telling) >> An undue opinion of our own importance in the scale of creation is at >> the bottom of our unwarrantable notions in this respect. --Charles Mackay Divination is the attempt to foretell the future or discover occult knowledge by interpreting omens or by using paranormal or supernatural powers. The list of items that have been used in divination is extraordinary. Below are listed just a few. Many end in 'mancy', from the ancient Greek manteia (divination), or 'scopy', from the Greek skopein (to look into, to behold). Most forms of divination rely on magical thinking, apophenia (finding meaning in meaningless patterns), and pareidolia (seeing distinct forms in vague and random patterns). >> —— >> >> magical thinking >> "...magical thinking is "a fundamental dimension of a child's >> thinking." --Zusne and Jones According to anthropologist Dr. Phillips >> Stevens Jr., magical thinking involves several elements, including a belief in the interconnectedness of all things through forces and powers that transcend both physical and spiritual connections. Magical thinking invests special powers and forces in many things that are seen as symbols. According to Stevens, "the vast majority of the world's peoples ... believe that there are real connections between the symbol and its referent, and that some real and potentially measurable power flows between them." He believes there is a neurobiological basis for this, though the specific content of any symbol is culturally determined. (Not that some symbols aren't universal, e.g., the egg, fire, water. Not that the egg, fire, or water symbolize the same things in all cultures.) One of the driving principles of magical thinking is the notion that things that resemble each other are causally connected in some way that defies scientific testing (the law of similarity). Another driving principle is the belief that "things that have been either in physical contact or in spatial or temporal association with other things retain a connection after they are separated" (the law of contagion) (Frazer; Stevens). Think of relics of saints that are supposed to transfer spiritual energy. Think of psychic detectives claiming that they can get information about a missing person by touching an object that belongs to the person (psychometry). Or think of the pet psychic who claims she can read your dog's mind by looking at a photo of the dog. Or think of Rupert Sheldrake's morphic resonance. Coincidentally, Sheldrake also studies psychic dogs. >> >> — The Skeptic’s Dictionary >> >> _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 22 16:32:42 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 16:32:42 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] From Anti-war.com References: <2113916750.1920157.1516638762162.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <2113916750.1920157.1516638762162@mail.yahoo.com> Turkey’s Long-Anticipated War With Syrian Kurds Begins in Earnest Fight will Strain US Alliances, Syria's Rivalries Jason Ditz Posted on January 21, 2018      >From Turkey’s initial invasion of Syria at Jarabulus, officials couched it as not just an invasion against ISIS, but against the Kurdish YPG as well. This weekend, Turkish troops pushed into their first YPG district, Syria’s Afrin District. Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan presented this offensive as starting in Afrin, then hitting Manbij, the other Kurdish territory west of the Euphrates. After that, the troops are expected to focus on the border territory, which is all east of the Euphrates. Not that the Turks are likely to just roll over the Kurds without substantial resistance, after years of US arming of the YPG. Indeed, already the YPG retaliated for the invasion with a missile strike against the Turkish border town of Reyhanli, killing one, wounding 32. This is a tough position for other participants in the Syrian War. The US, in particular, is an ally of Turkey, an ally of the YPG, and also an ally of the Free Syrian Army (FSA), a rebel group which has pledged Turkey 25,000 fighters to support the invasion. Both the YPG and FSA are awash in US-provided arms, with the Pentagon having armed YPG, and the CIA armed the FSA. The US calls for “restraint” are likely not to please anyone, however, as each group is going to see the US is insufficiently supporting them. Turkey has already warned anyone who doesn’t totally endorse the invasion is “supporting terror.” Syria is facing a similar problem. They don’t get along with the YPG, FSA, or Turkey, but feel obliged to oppose Turkish invasions of their territory. Since Turkey tends to give conquered Syrian territory to the FSA, Syria is liable to support the YPG, who aen’t outright rebels, but rather seek autonomy. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jan 22 16:40:08 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 16:40:08 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: From Anti-war.com In-Reply-To: <2113916750.1920157.1516638762162@mail.yahoo.com> References: <2113916750.1920157.1516638762162.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <2113916750.1920157.1516638762162@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: After 100 years the Ottoman Empire is back! Fab Francis 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of David Green via Peace-discuss Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 10:33 AM To: Peace-discuss List Subject: [Peace-discuss] From Anti-war.com Turkey’s Long-Anticipated War With Syrian Kurds Begins in Earnest Fight will Strain US Alliances, Syria's Rivalries Jason Ditz Posted on January 21, 2018 From Turkey’s initial invasion of Syria at Jarabulus, officials couched it as not just an invasion against ISIS, but against the Kurdish YPG as well. This weekend, Turkish troops pushed into their first YPG district, Syria’s Afrin District. [https://news.antiwar.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/00t.jpg]Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan presented this offensive as starting in Afrin, then hitting Manbij, the other Kurdish territory west of the Euphrates. After that, the troops are expected to focus on the border territory, which is all east of the Euphrates. Not that the Turks are likely to just roll over the Kurds without substantial resistance, after years of US arming of the YPG. Indeed, already the YPG retaliated for the invasion with a missile strike against the Turkish border town of Reyhanli, killing one, wounding 32. This is a tough position for other participants in the Syrian War. The US, in particular, is an ally of Turkey, an ally of the YPG, and also an ally of the Free Syrian Army (FSA), a rebel group which has pledged Turkey 25,000 fighters to support the invasion. Both the YPG and FSA are awash in US-provided arms, with the Pentagon having armed YPG, and the CIA armed the FSA. The US calls for “restraint” are likely not to please anyone, however, as each group is going to see the US is insufficiently supporting them. Turkey has already warned anyone who doesn’t totally endorse the invasion is “supporting terror.” Syria is facing a similar problem. They don’t get along with the YPG, FSA, or Turkey, but feel obliged to oppose Turkish invasions of their territory. Since Turkey tends to give conquered Syrian territory to the FSA, Syria is liable to support the YPG, who aen’t outright rebels, but rather seek autonomy. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: ATT00001.txt URL: From galliher at illinois.edu Mon Jan 22 16:42:33 2018 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 10:42:33 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] From Anti-war.com In-Reply-To: <2113916750.1920157.1516638762162@mail.yahoo.com> References: <2113916750.1920157.1516638762162.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <2113916750.1920157.1516638762162@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Olive Branch in one go; if all goes well (and that's a major "if") Damascus will control Idlib and Ankara will control Afrin. Roughly, that's the deal brokered by Moscow. [Pepe Escobar] > On Jan 22, 2018, at 10:32 AM, David Green via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Turkey’s Long-Anticipated War With Syrian Kurds Begins in Earnest > > Fight will Strain US Alliances, Syria's Rivalries Jason Ditz Posted on January 21, 2018 > From Turkey’s initial invasion of Syria at Jarabulus, officials couched it as not just an invasion against ISIS, but against the Kurdish YPG as well. This weekend, Turkish troops pushed into their first YPG district, Syria’s Afrin District. > > Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan presented this offensive as starting in Afrin, then hitting Manbij, the other Kurdish territory west of the Euphrates. After that, the troops are expected to focus on the border territory, which is all east of the Euphrates. > > Not that the Turks are likely to just roll over the Kurds without substantial resistance, after years of US arming of the YPG. Indeed, already the YPG retaliated for the invasion with a missile strike against the Turkish border town of Reyhanli, killing one, wounding 32 . > > This is a tough position for other participants in the Syrian War. The US, in particular, is an ally of Turkey, an ally of the YPG, and also an ally of the Free Syrian Army (FSA), a rebel group which has pledged Turkey 25,000 fighters to support the invasion. Both the YPG and FSA are awash in US-provided arms, with the Pentagon having armed YPG, and the CIA armed the FSA. > > The US calls for “restraint” are likely not to please anyone, however, as each group is going to see the US is insufficiently supporting them. Turkey has already warned anyone who doesn’t totally endorse the invasion is “supporting terror.” > > Syria is facing a similar problem. They don’t get along with the YPG, FSA, or Turkey, but feel obliged to oppose Turkish invasions of their territory. Since Turkey tends to give conquered Syrian territory to the FSA, Syria is liable to support the YPG, who aen’t outright rebels, but rather seek autonomy. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Mon Jan 22 19:50:56 2018 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 19:50:56 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Richest 10% of Americans Now Own 84% of All Stocks References: <21B45322-3293-4C9B-A518-8C749EFB46D9@illinois.edu> Message-ID: <4C929FC5-6563-418F-80EB-1C32F4D87E1B@illinois.edu> From: "Szoke, Ron" > Subject: The Richest 10% of Americans Now Own 84% of All Stocks | Money Date: January 22, 2018 at 1:48:15 PM CST http://time.com/money/5054009/stock-ownership-10-percent-richest/ The Richest 10% of Americans Now Own 84% of All Stocks The stock market continues to be one of President Donald Trump’s favorite indicators of the country’s health as stocks continue to hit all-time highs. But a shrinking share of Americans are getting rich off the market’s dizzying rise, according to a new analysis. The top 10% of American households, as defined by total wealth, now own 84% of all stocks in 2016, according to a recent paper by NYU economist Edward N. Wolff. 70 Record Closes for the Dow so far this year! We have NEVER had 70 Dow Records in a one year period. Wow! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) 4:25 PM - Dec 18, 2017 “Despite the fact that almost half of all households owned stock shares either directly or indirectly through mutual funds, trusts, or various pension accounts, the richest 10% of households controlled 84% of the total value of these stocks in 2016,” Wolff writes. That number—which accounts for individual shares as well as stocks held via mutual funds—represents a big change from 2001, when the top 10% owned just 77% of all stocks. Furthermore, while virtually all (94%) of the very rich reported having significant stock holdings—as defined as $10,000 or more in shares—only 27% of the middle class did. (The study framed that middle class as the group between the poorest 20% and the richest 20% of Americans.) The concentration of stock holdings among the rich, Wolff says, is due to the twin stock market busts of 2001 and 2008. While the middle class was scared off by these declines, he explains, wealthier investors were able to swoop in and increase their holdings. SPONSORED FINANCIAL CONTENT So where is middle-class wealth? Wolff finds that the majority of it remains tied to homes. That’s quite different from the wealth holdings of the very rich, whose assets are tied up in equities (whether as publicly held stocks or privately owned shares of businesses). For the richest Americans, a principal residence accounts for just 7.6% of their total wealth. So even as Trump touts stock market gains under his administration, only a fraction of Americans will be able to mark much of a change in their wealth status. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jan 22 21:37:16 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 21:37:16 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Upcoming rally reminder Message-ID: The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) For the past year, Deputy Solicitor General Stewart and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against African Americans; Against LGBTQs; Against Labor; For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Please join local progressive organizations in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of Trumpian sychophants, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jan 23 00:11:46 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 00:11:46 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Upcoming rally reminder against Trump Law School 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: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 3:38 PM To: peace Subject: Re: [Peace] Upcoming rally reminder On Jan 22, 2018, at 13:37, Karen Aram > wrote: The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) For the past year, Deputy Solicitor General Stewart and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against African Americans; Against LGBTQs; Against Labor; For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Please join local progressive organizations in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of Trumpian sychophants, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: ATT00001.txt URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jan 23 00:11:46 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 00:11:46 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Upcoming rally reminder against Trump Law School 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: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 3:38 PM To: peace Subject: Re: [Peace] Upcoming rally reminder On Jan 22, 2018, at 13:37, Karen Aram > wrote: The Dean’s Public Engagement Lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice! Wednesday, January 24, 3-4pm Law School Plaza 504 E Gregory Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 (Across from Krannert Art Museum) For the past year, Deputy Solicitor General Stewart and his Department have been arguing the Trump/Sessions Cases in the US Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts and will continue to do so for Trump/Sessions: The Muslim Travel Ban; Against Dreamers; Against Sanctuary Cities; Against Migrants; Against African Americans; Against LGBTQs; Against Labor; For War; etc. Every reprehensible policy and practice that Trump adopts will make its way to the US Supreme Court and Stewart and his Office will argue in favor of Trump/Sessions and against the American People. Please join local progressive organizations in demonstrating our concern over the continuing downward spiral of human rights both here and abroad by our government of Trumpian sychophants, with the abandonment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: ATT00001.txt URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Tue Jan 23 00:22:49 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 18:22:49 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vote against incumbent Democrats (& against incumbent Republicans) Message-ID: https://theintercept.com/2018/01/22/joseph-berrios-fritz-kaegi-chicago-property-taxes-cook-county-assessor/ '...candidate for governor state Sen. Daniel Biss has called Berrios’s assessment process a “self-dealing racket” while touting his own legislative plan to fix the system. Democratic frontrunner J.B. Pritzker also supports reforming property taxation but has avoided criticizing Berrios. The Cook County Democratic Party got behind Pritzker early. Property tax policy isn’t something Pritzker wants to be loud about on the campaign trail: The billionaire received a $230,000 property tax reduction on the Gold Coast mansion that he bought next door to his own, claiming it was “uninhabitable.”’ —CGE From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jan 23 12:58:48 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 12:58:48 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Pentagon Strategy Highlights Trump Failure to Oppose Military-Industrial Complex - Sputnik International 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, January 23, 2018 6:58 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Pentagon Strategy Highlights Trump Failure to Oppose Military-Industrial Complex - Sputnik International https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201801231060981636-pentagon-trump-fails-oppose-military-industry/ IMPERIALIST TRADITION University of Illinois Professor of International Law Francis Boyle told Sputnik hat Trump's new strategy document was set firmly in the tradition of US militarism and imperialism. "This document is a further continuation and escalation of the US Strategy of Unlimited Imperialism," he said. "The Pentagon is planning to fight and 'win' World War 3 against Russia and/or China as well as to control, dominate, terrorize and intimidate the rest of the world under one pretext or another. " President George W. Bush and his administration had sought to exploit the tragedy of the September 11, 2001 al-Qaeda terror attacks, Boyle recalled. In this image from video provided by the U.S. Navy, the guided-missile destroyer USS Porter (DDG 78) launches a tomahawk land attack missile in the Mediterranean Sea, Friday, April 7, 2017. (c) AP Photo/ Ford Williams/U.S. Navy Who Calls the Tune? How US Military-Industrial Complex Forming Trump's Syrian Policy The George W. Bush administration set forth to steal a hydrocarbon empire from the Muslim states and people of color living in Central Asia, the Middle East and Africa under the "bogus pretexts" of fighting a war against so-called international terrorism or Islamic fundamentalism, he said. Since then, US administrations had also used the justifications, or excuses of claiming to try and eliminate weapons of mass destruction, promote democracy and self-styled humanitarian intervention to try and justify their power grabs around the world, Boyle stated. "My teacher, mentor, and friend the late, great Professor Hans Morgenthau denominated 'unlimited imperialism.' The outstanding historic examples of unlimited imperialism... all have in common an urge toward expansion," he said. From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jan 23 13:02:39 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 13:02:39 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Pentagon Strategy Highlights Trump Failure to Oppose Military-Industrial Complex - Sputnik International 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, January 23, 2018 6:58 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Pentagon Strategy Highlights Trump Failure to Oppose Military-Industrial Complex - Sputnik International https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201801231060981636-pentagon-trump-fails-oppose-military-industry/ IMPERIALIST TRADITION University of Illinois Professor of International Law Francis Boyle told Sputnik hat Trump's new strategy document was set firmly in the tradition of US militarism and imperialism. "This document is a further continuation and escalation of the US Strategy of Unlimited Imperialism," he said. "The Pentagon is planning to fight and 'win' World War 3 against Russia and/or China as well as to control, dominate, terrorize and intimidate the rest of the world under one pretext or another. " President George W. Bush and his administration had sought to exploit the tragedy of the September 11, 2001 al-Qaeda terror attacks, Boyle recalled. In this image from video provided by the U.S. Navy, the guided-missile destroyer USS Porter (DDG 78) launches a tomahawk land attack missile in the Mediterranean Sea, Friday, April 7, 2017. (c) AP Photo/ Ford Williams/U.S. Navy Who Calls the Tune? How US Military-Industrial Complex Forming Trump's Syrian Policy The George W. Bush administration set forth to steal a hydrocarbon empire from the Muslim states and people of color living in Central Asia, the Middle East and Africa under the "bogus pretexts" of fighting a war against so-called international terrorism or Islamic fundamentalism, he said. Since then, US administrations had also used the justifications, or excuses of claiming to try and eliminate weapons of mass destruction, promote democracy and self-styled humanitarian intervention to try and justify their power grabs around the world, Boyle stated. "My teacher, mentor, and friend the late, great Professor Hans Morgenthau denominated 'unlimited imperialism.' The outstanding historic examples of unlimited imperialism... all have in common an urge toward expansion," he said. From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jan 23 13:02:39 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 13:02:39 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Pentagon Strategy Highlights Trump Failure to Oppose Military-Industrial Complex - Sputnik International 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, January 23, 2018 6:58 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Pentagon Strategy Highlights Trump Failure to Oppose Military-Industrial Complex - Sputnik International https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201801231060981636-pentagon-trump-fails-oppose-military-industry/ IMPERIALIST TRADITION University of Illinois Professor of International Law Francis Boyle told Sputnik hat Trump's new strategy document was set firmly in the tradition of US militarism and imperialism. "This document is a further continuation and escalation of the US Strategy of Unlimited Imperialism," he said. "The Pentagon is planning to fight and 'win' World War 3 against Russia and/or China as well as to control, dominate, terrorize and intimidate the rest of the world under one pretext or another. " President George W. Bush and his administration had sought to exploit the tragedy of the September 11, 2001 al-Qaeda terror attacks, Boyle recalled. In this image from video provided by the U.S. Navy, the guided-missile destroyer USS Porter (DDG 78) launches a tomahawk land attack missile in the Mediterranean Sea, Friday, April 7, 2017. (c) AP Photo/ Ford Williams/U.S. Navy Who Calls the Tune? How US Military-Industrial Complex Forming Trump's Syrian Policy The George W. Bush administration set forth to steal a hydrocarbon empire from the Muslim states and people of color living in Central Asia, the Middle East and Africa under the "bogus pretexts" of fighting a war against so-called international terrorism or Islamic fundamentalism, he said. Since then, US administrations had also used the justifications, or excuses of claiming to try and eliminate weapons of mass destruction, promote democracy and self-styled humanitarian intervention to try and justify their power grabs around the world, Boyle stated. "My teacher, mentor, and friend the late, great Professor Hans Morgenthau denominated 'unlimited imperialism.' The outstanding historic examples of unlimited imperialism... all have in common an urge toward expansion," he said. From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jan 23 17:08:24 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 17:08:24 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Pentagon Strategy Highlights Trumps Failure to Oppose Military Industrial Complex Message-ID: SEARCH [This is an aerial view of the five-sided Pentagon building, headquarters of the United States Department of Defense, in Arlington, Va., in 1975] Pentagon Strategy Highlights Trump Failure to Oppose Military-Industrial Complex © AP Photo/ OPINION 05:38 23.01.2018Get short URL 130 WASHINGTON (Sputnik) - The new US National Defense Strategy making great power competition with Russia and China a top priority confirms President Donald Trump’s surrender to the forces of the US military-industrial complex, analysts told Sputnik. On Friday, US Defense Secretary James Mattis while unveiling the 2018 US national defense strategy said the new doctrine emphasized that the United States will now focus on long-term competition with China and Russia. CAVING TO MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX On Monday, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said the Defense Department’s new strategy reflected a Cold War mentality and distorted facts about China’s diplomatic and defense policies. University of Louvain philosopher and political commentator Jean Bricmont told Sputnik the new strategy revealed the limits to which Trump felt able to go in reducing US interventionist and militaristic policies. "It was a welcome move by Trump to denounce the interventionist policies and the regime change operations of his opponents, but one could not expect too much from him, namely a policy that really rejects the demands of the military-industrial complex," he said. [In this image released by the U.S. Navy, the aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson, flanked by South Korean destroyers, from left, Yang Manchun and Sejong the Great, and the U.S.Navy's Wayne E. Meyer and USS Michael Murphy, transit the western Pacific Ocean Wednesday, May 3, 2017.] © AP PHOTO/ U.S. NAVY Peace Activist: Power and Influence of Armament Industry in US Exceeds That of Presidency The US military was in essence as huge bureaucracy, which was generally useless. So, it needed to find a justification for its own continued, expensive existence, Bricmont explained. "For that, we need a mission of a threat. Missions work for the idealist minded, threats for the supposedly pragmatist. For the latter, one has red scares, missile gaps… terrorism and the like," Bricoment said. Since the 1980’s, partly as a result of the embarrassment of the US defeat in Vietnam, the justification for American wars had been idealist, that is based on defending human rights and the right to protect, Bricmont recalled. "This justified the wars in Yugoslavia, Libya, and the arming of rebels in Syria," he said. Since 9/11, the United States had also engaged in the so-called "war on terror," Bricmont continued. Terrorism, however, had finally been defeated in Syria, at least for the time being and largely thanks to Russian help, and the last human rights intervention in Libya had led to the crisis of refugees. Therefore the United States needed a new justification for military spending, Bricmont observed. "So, great power competition is back. Of course, since neither Russia nor China have the slightest intention of attacking the US on its soil, this justification is just as bogus as the previous ones," he said. If Russia and China do not overreact by launching their own arms race, this increase of US military spending will further weaken the US economy and strengthen its supposed competitors, Bricmont predicted. "The basic [US] policies are always the same, only the ideological justification changes," he concluded. IMPERIALIST TRADITION University of Illinois Professor of International Law Francis Boyle told Sputnik hat Trump’s new strategy document was set firmly in the tradition of US militarism and imperialism. "This document is a further continuation and escalation of the US Strategy of Unlimited Imperialism," he said. "The Pentagon is planning to fight and ‘win’ World War 3 against Russia and/or China as well as to control, dominate, terrorize and intimidate the rest of the world under one pretext or another. " President George W. Bush and his administration had sought to exploit the tragedy of the September 11, 2001 al-Qaeda terror attacks, Boyle recalled. [In this image from video provided by the U.S. Navy, the guided-missile destroyer USS Porter (DDG 78) launches a tomahawk land attack missile in the Mediterranean Sea, Friday, April 7, 2017.] © AP PHOTO/ FORD WILLIAMS/U.S. NAVY Who Calls the Tune? How US Military-Industrial Complex Forming Trump's Syrian Policy The George W. Bush administration set forth to steal a hydrocarbon empire from the Muslim states and people of color living in Central Asia, the Middle East and Africa under the "bogus pretexts" of fighting a war against so-called international terrorism or Islamic fundamentalism, he said. Since then, US administrations had also used the justifications, or excuses of claiming to try and eliminate weapons of mass destruction, promote democracy and self-styled humanitarian intervention to try and justify their power grabs around the world, Boyle stated. "My teacher, mentor, and friend the late, great Professor Hans Morgenthau denominated ‘unlimited imperialism.’ The outstanding historic examples of unlimited imperialism… all have in common an urge toward expansion," he said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jan 23 19:14:10 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 19:14:10 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fight Internet Censorship Message-ID: [https://www.wsws.org/img/title.png] For an international coalition to fight Internet censorship An open letter from the International Editorial Board of the World Socialist Web Site to socialist, anti-war, left-wing and progressive websites, organizations and activists Representatives of websites or organizations interested in joining the coalition should direct inquries to endcensorship at wsws.org. Individuals who want to participate in the work of the coalition should submit this form. The United States government, in the closest collaboration with Google, Facebook, Twitter and other powerful information technology corporations, is implementing massive restrictions on Internet access to socialist, antiwar and progressive websites. Similar repressive policies are being enacted by capitalist governments in Europe and throughout the world. The new regime of censorship is being combined with an intensification of surveillance operations, aimed at monitoring what people read, write and think while on the Internet. The actions of this alliance of the state, military-intelligence agencies and oligopolistic technology corporations are a dangerous threat to freedom of speech and other core democratic rights. Under the fraudulent cover of eliminating "fake news" and "Russian meddling," the technological scaffolding of a 21st century capitalist police state is being erected. Join the coalition to fight Internet censorship! In the summer of 2017, the World Socialist Web Site published information exposing Google's manipulation of search results, beginning in April, to limit traffic to left-wing sites. The WSWS reported a nearly 70 percent decline in readers resulting from Google searches. Of the 150 top Google search terms that, until April 2017, had generated traffic to the WSWS, 145 no longer produced even a single search result for our website. The WSWS investigation also showed that other oppositional websites, like globalresearch.ca, consortiumnews.com, counterpunch.org, alternet.com, wikileaks.com and truthdig.org, had experienced substantial declines in Google search-generated readership. In an Open Letter to Google's principal executives, dated August 25, 2017, David North, the chairperson of the WSWS International Editorial Board, wrote: Censorship on this scale is political blacklisting. The obvious intent of Google's censorship algorithm is to block news that your company does not want reported and to suppress opinions with which you do not agree. Political blacklisting is not a legitimate exercise of whatever may be Google's prerogatives as a commercial enterprise. It is a gross abuse of monopolistic power. What you are doing is an attack on freedom of speech. We therefore call on you and Google to stop blacklisting the WSWS and renounce the censorship of all the left-wing, socialist, antiwar and progressive websites that have been affected adversely by your new discriminatory search policies. Google did not answer this letter. But an article reporting the findings of the WSWS, which appeared in The New York Times on September 26, 2017, cited Google's claim "that its search algorithm undergoes a rigorous testing process to ensure that its results do not reflect political, gender, racial or ethnic bias." This was an out-and-out lie. Since the initial WSWS exposure, the Government-Military-Intelligence-Corporate Technology Complex is making no secret of the fact that it is intensifying its censorship efforts on a global scale. In December 2017, the Trump administration repealed net neutrality, while governments in Germany, France and elsewhere also have begun crackdowns on Internet free speech. In January 2018, Facebook implemented changes to its newsfeed to block access to news, specifically targeting left-wing sites, with CEO Mark Zuckerberg claiming, in duplicitous corporate newspeak, that this change was to make users "feel more connected and less lonely." The threat to democratic rights is far-reaching and immediate. The development of the Internet in the 1990s created possibilities for a vast expansion in information sharing and world communications. But in response to exploding social inequality, growing popular discontent and heightened international tensions, the capitalist states and billionaire oligarchs who own and control information, artificial intelligence and communications technologies are transforming the Internet into a tool for state surveillance, dictatorship, private profit and war. In a statement sent to the World Socialist Web Site's January 16 Webinar Organizing Resistance to Internet Censorship, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange correctly warned: While the Internet has brought about a revolution in people's ability to educate themselves and others, the resulting democratic phenomena has shaken existing establishments to their core. Google, Facebook and their Chinese equivalents, who are socially, logistically and financially integrated with existing elites have moved to re-establish discourse control. Activist and filmmaker John Pilger, in another message to the WSWS webinar, condemned the manipulation of search results and algorithms as "rank censorship," adding, "With independent journalists ejected from the mainstream, the world wide web remains the vital source of serious disclosure and evidence-based analysis: true journalism." The ruling class has identified the Internet as a mortal threat to its monopolization of information and its ability to promote propaganda to wage war and legitimize the obscene concentration of wealth and extreme social inequality. Democracy and the free flow of information are incompatible with contemporary capitalism. Eight billionaires possess the same amount of wealth as the poorest half of the world's population, some 3.6 billion people. The oligarchy, in total control of the world economy, fears the Internet as an arena for discussion, information sharing, and political organization of the worldwide struggle against capitalist exploitation and imperialist wars. In 2017, 3.8 billion people used the Internet worldwide, some 52 percent of the total population, up from 1.0 billion, or 16 percent of the population, in 2005. Over 70 percent of young people are now online, a total of 830 million people, including 320 million in China and India alone. Mobile broadband subscriptions rose from roughly 1.7 billion in 2012 to over 5 billion in 2017, with the largest increases in Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Latin America. The world working class, larger, more connected and more internationally integrated than ever before, possesses tremendous potential political power. The arguments used by the Democratic and Republican parties and corporate media to justify Internet censorship, information control and police-state surveillance are a pack of lies. Their aim is to create an atmosphere of paranoiac fear to eliminate democratic rights and legal due process. Former US Army and FBI agent Clint Watts told the US Senate on January 17, "Lesser-educated populations around the world predominately arriving in cyberspace via mobile phones will be particularly vulnerable to the social media manipulation of terrorists and authoritarians." Facebook attorney Monika Bickert employed Orwellian language when she told the Senate, "We are increasingly finding new ways to disrupt false news and help people connect with authentic news--we know that's what they want to do." The invocation of "fake news" no less than "Russian meddling" is fraudulent. The Democrats, Republicans and the corporate media propagandists of The New York Times and Washington Post (which is owned by Amazon's Jeff Bezos) accuse oppositional websites of engaging in what is, in fact, the specialty of these capitalist publications, i.e., promulgating fake news. There is no better example of this than the false claims of "weapons of mass destruction," which preceded the 2003 invasion of Iraq and led to the deaths of over 1 million people. Totally unproven claims of "Russian meddling" are now being made by a government that is engaged in permanent war, has conducted regime change operations on every continent, and has troops stationed all over the world. The ruling class is using these concocted allegations to criminalize dissent and label the publication of critical opinions the equivalent of treason. Imperialist wars are always accompanied by political repression. Weeks after US entry into World War I, Congress passed the Espionage Act, and used it to jail socialists and deport radical immigrants. During World War II, the government blocked socialists from mailing their newspapers, prosecuted Trotskyists under the Smith Act, and interned over 100,000 Japanese in concentration camps. Facing mass opposition to the Vietnam War, the Johnson and Nixon administrations implemented the infamous COINTELPRO program to spy on innumerable civil rights and left-wing political activists. Since 2001, the Democrats and Republicans have established mass surveillance programs through the PATRIOT and FISA Acts, created a network of black site prisons, and protected CIA torturers under the guise of combating "terrorism." The US military views the democratic potential of social media as a major threat to its operations. In a December 21, 2016 strategy document, the US Army War College wrote, "The implications of social media and the rapid spread of information (and disinformation) in a highly digital city can be profound ... Here in the United States, the release of videos showing killings by police has led to significant protests and political movements." In another document, published in April 2017, the War College voiced its fear that "A population equipped with smartphones and willing to communicate to others about the events taking place in their area is able to generate a picture of ongoing events in real time across the span of that population." The scale of the danger must not be underestimated. As independent journalist Chris Hedges, who participated with David North in the WSWS webinar, has explained: This censorship is global. The German government's Network Enforcement Act fines social media companies for allegedly objectionable content. French President Emmanuel Macron has vowed to remove "fake news" from the internet. Facebook and Instagram erased the accounts of Ramzan Kadyrov, the dictator of the Chechen Republic, because he is on a U.S. sanctions list. Kadyrov is certainly repugnant, but this ban, as the American Civil Liberties Union points out, empowers the U.S. government to effectively censor content. Facebook, working with the Israeli government, has removed over 100 accounts of Palestinian activists. This is an ominous march to an Orwellian world of Thought Police, "Newspeak" and "thought-crime" or, as Facebook likes to call it, "de-ranking" and "counterspeech." [Truthdig.com, January 21, 2018] The mounting threat to the survival of basic democratic rights must be resisted. This requires the organization and coordination of a broad coalition against Internet censorship and surveillance. Toward this end, the World Socialist Web Site is sponsoring the formation of the International Coalition of Socialist, Antiwar and Progressive Websites. We welcome the participation of socialist, anti-war and progressive websites and organizations, as well as individual activists and journalists, who are willing and prepared to form a coalition for the specific purpose of opposing Internet censorship. However, for the International Coalition of Socialist, Antiwar and Progressive Websites to be effective, there must be an agreement on a specific set of principles, which should include: * Safeguarding the Internet as a platform for political organization and the free exchange of information, culture and diverse viewpoints, guided by the principle that access to the Internet is a right and must be free and equally available for all. * Uncompromising insistence on the complete independence of the Internet from control by governments and private corporations. * Unconditional defense of net neutrality and free, unfettered and equal access to the Internet. * The banning and illegalization of government and corporate manipulation of search algorithms and procedures, including the use of human evaluators, that restrict and block public visibility of websites. * Irreconcilable opposition to the use of the Internet and artificial intelligence technologies to carry out surveillance of web users. * Demanding the end to the persecution of Julian Assange and Edward Snowden and the complete restoration of their personal freedom. * Advocating the transformation of the corporate Internet monopolies into public utilities, under internationally coordinated democratic control, to provide the highest quality service, not private profit. * The fight against Internet censorship and the defense of democratic rights cannot be conducted through appeals to capitalist governments and the parties and politicians who serve their interests, but only in uncompromising struggle against them. Moreover, this struggle is international in scope and totally opposed to every form and manifestation of national chauvinism, racism and imperialist militarism. Therefore, those who are truly committed to the defense of democratic rights must direct their efforts to the mobilization of the working class of all countries. In accordance with these principles, the international coalition should undertake the following essential tasks: * Develop a systematic campaign of written exposes to be posted on the Internet and transmitted widely through all available forms of social media as well as through the distribution of printed leaflets, brochures and pamphlets to expose Government and corporate censorship. * Amplify awareness of the threat to Internet free speech by aiding one another in the sharing of articles, videos, interviews, graphics, and other content. * Organize meetings and establish discussion groups on the fight against Internet censorship in work places, neighborhoods, and schools. * Mobilize combined resources to defend and publicize websites, groups, and individuals who are targeted by the censors and the state. Agreement on the principles and tasks of the coalition will be an effective starting point for the development of an international counter-offensive against the conspiracy of governments and corporations to censor the Internet and destroy democratic rights. In the International Coalition of Socialist, Antiwar and Progressive Websites, there will inevitably be a wide range of opinions and conflicting views on many political questions. Participation does not require the acceptance of a single political line. The participating websites and organizations will be free to continue their own independent work. The World Socialist Web Site does not seek to dictate to other organizations what their politics should be, nor will we accept any restraints on our socialist political perspective in the interest of an unprincipled unity. However, the World Socialist Web Site, as the Internet presence of the International Committee of the Fourth International, will continue to advance its Marxist and socialist program, policies and analysis. We will seek to rally support for the expropriation of the technology monopolies, and the establishment of international and democratic control of the Internet. The WSWS will fight for the understanding that the effective defense of free speech and all democratic rights requires a struggle against imperialist war, the ending of the capitalist system, and the establishment of a socialist society. The WSWS will emphasize that Internet censorship, carried out by powerful capitalist states and immense transnational corporations, can be successfully opposed only to the extent that the great power of the international working class is brought to bear in this fight. It is critical to establish an understanding in the working class of the inseparable connection between the defense of their class interests--their living standards, working conditions, wages, etc.--and the fight for democratic rights. Without access to alternative news and social media, workers in different countries will not be able to effectively coordinate their common struggles. Unfettered access to the Internet will facilitate the international unity of the working class in the global fight for socialism, democracy and equality. The World Socialist Web Site is convinced that the struggle against Internet censorship, as a critical component of the defense of democratic rights, will be enthusiast ically supported by the working class. This is their fight. It is not simply that the involvement of the working class is important in order to defend free speech. Rather, the fight to defend free speech is important for the working class. During coalition work and discussions, we will seek to persuade others of this program and the revolutionary socialist approach to the fight against government-corporate control and censorship of the Internet. The World Socialist Web Site urges and welcomes the participation of all socialist, antiwar and progressive websites, organizations and activists to collaborate in the work of the International Coalition of Socialist, Antiwar and Progressive Websites. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jan 23 19:52:27 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 19:52:27 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Democrats cave in to Trump Message-ID: * Print * Leaflet * Feedback * Share » Federal shutdown ends as Democrats cave in to Trump By Patrick Martin 23 January 2018 The US Senate and House of Representatives voted Monday to approve a short-term budget resolution, putting an end to the partial shutdown of the federal government that began midnight Friday night. The deal leaves 800,000 DACA recipients without protection in what amounts to a total capitulation by Democrats to Trump and the Republicans. The Senate passed the three-week “continuing resolution,” authorizing federal government spending through February 8, by a vote of 81-18, with large majorities of both big-business parties supporting the bill: 48-2 for Republicans, 33-16 for Democrats. The House of Representatives passed the bill an hour later, by a margin of 266-150, with 45 Democrats joining a near-unanimous Republican caucus to send the legislation to the White House for Trump’s signature. The bill incorporates only one long-term policy action, reauthorizing the Children’s Health Insurance Program, which covers nine million children in low-income families, for another six years. Both parties allowed CHIP authorization to expire when the fiscal year began October 1, and half a dozen states have already begun notifying families of significant cutbacks in the program, set to begin by the end of this month. The CHIP extension was added to the continuing resolution that passed the House last week and was blocked in the Senate by a Democratic filibuster, carried out supposedly to demand the legalization of so-called “Dreamers,” undocumented immigrants brought to this country as children and protected against deportation under the DACA program. President Trump rescinded the executive order that was the basis of DACA, with the action to take effect March 5, when the Immigration and Customs Enforcement could begin rounding up DACA recipients using the personal information they had to supply to the government in order to be covered by the program. In the annals of cowardly capitulations, there are few spectacles that can match Monday’s collapse by the Democratic Party, which abandoned its blockade against the budget resolution less than 72 hours after it began. Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer announced the decision in a brief, nearly blubbering speech on the Senate floor, which combined phony invective directed against Trump with a complete surrender to the bigot-in-chief in the White House. In the end, the filibuster obtained only one “concession” from the Republicans: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell pledged publicly to allow a debate and vote on stand-alone legislation to deal with the DACA issue after February 8 if there is not a DACA provision in the final budget resolution. Even if he were to keep his promise, House Speaker Paul Ryan has already declared that no DACA legislation will be brought up before the House of Representatives unless it has White House support—meaning that the bill would have to incorporate the full panoply of Trump’s anti-immigrant program, including the wall along the US-Mexico border, a massive buildup of the border and immigration police, and strict new curbs on legal immigration. DACA recipients are living in a state of anger and anxiety. “Stupid Republicans. I hate Democrats for caving in, too,” wrote one DACA recipient on social media. “Don’t trust Chuck,” wrote another, referring to Senator Schumer. “I woke up at 3:30 last night and wasn’t able to go back to sleep with all this mess. I’ve lost a few pounds just worrying,” wrote one young woman. The surrender was not Schumer’s individual decision, but the action of the entire Democratic caucus, which had no stomach for any serious fight. At a lengthy closed-door meeting of the Senate Democrats on Monday morning, it was clear that many more than the 12 required to break a filibuster were going to vote to support the budget resolution. The minority of the Democratic caucus who voted against the surrender did so to preserve whatever fig leaf they could of credibility as defenders of the immigrant population. All six Senate Democrats who have been mentioned as possible 2020 presidential candidates, including Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Cory Booker, adopted this two-faced approach. In the wake of the debacle, two of the most right-wing Senate Democrats, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Doug Jones of Alabama, went to the White House for talks with Trump on the immigration issue. The desertion of the DACA recipients by the Senate Democrats was entirely predictable. During 2009-2010, when the Democrats controlled the White House and Congress with a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, they took no action on immigration, focusing instead on bailing out Wall Street and enacting Obama’s reactionary health care counter-reform. Obama only finally issued the executive order on DACA as a political maneuver to boost his reelection campaign in 2012. The Democrats are quite willing to shed tears over DACA recipients for electoral purposes in the Hispanic community, but Obama deported more undocumented immigrants than all previous presidents combined. With the installation of Trump in the White House, after a campaign in which he made racist bigotry against immigrants a central focus, the Democrats have only sabotaged efforts to fight back. In the course of the past year, they never made a significant issue of DACA, compared to their single-minded focus on the anti-Russian campaign. In the months since Trump announced the rescinding of DACA, the Democrats have also been more interested in the #MeToo campaign of increasingly reckless and largely unproven allegations of sexual harassment, which has targeted both Republicans and Democrats in Washington. These priorities are not the result merely of the choices made by Schumer, his deputy Richard Durbin, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. The focus of the Democrats on the anti-Russia campaign, and their indifference to the impending disaster facing DACA recipients, points to the basic political character of the Democratic Party, a capitalist party whose policies are set by Wall Street and the military-intelligence apparatus. The media apologists for the Democratic Party on such cable networks as CNN and MSNBC were largely at a loss Monday afternoon, unable to conceal the scale of the capitulation and the demoralizing impact this was likely to have on the electoral prospects of the Democratic Party in 2018. The New York Times was the first Democratic Party house organ to attempt transforming this debacle into a mini-triumph, in an editorial published Monday evening, beginning with the words, “Thank goodness that’s over,” followed by a series of complaints about Trump’s bad faith and inconsistency in negotiations. Claiming there were no winners to the shutdown—Trump and the Republicans, of course, would beg to differ—the Times wrote, “Nonetheless, the spotlight is now where it should be: on the failure of President Trump and Republicans in Congress to take care of the Dreamers, despite their repeated claims that they want to.” Perhaps the most shameless response came from Bernie Sanders, who sent out an email fundraising appeal only minutes after the continuing resolution passed the House and went to the White House, denouncing “the right-wing extremist agenda that Republican rule in Washington is forcing on the nation,” and saying nothing at all about the collaboration of the Democrats with that agenda. Sanders reiterated his call to “take back the Congress in 2018 from these extremists,” declaring that he would be traveling the country to stump for Democrats running for state and national office and would seek to engage those who supported his presidential campaign in 2016 in that effort. Sanders draws no conclusions from the Democratic Party capitulation Monday. On the contrary, the focus of his political activity is to block the development of an independent political movement of the working class that would challenge both the Democrats and the Republicans on the basis of a socialist and international program. The struggle to build such a movement is the central political orientation of the Socialist Equality Party. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Tue Jan 23 20:51:06 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 14:51:06 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vote against incumbent Democrats (& against incumbent Republicans) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7FC8B5D0-F997-42A1-9756-6BC40A669C98@gmail.com> Karen— I don’t think it’s up to you to censor posts to anti-war mailing lists. We gave a political establishment for that. You needn’t do their work. Regards, Carl > On Jan 23, 2018, at 1:22 PM, Karen Medina wrote: > > Carl, > You cc'd peace with this discussion topic. That was inappropriate. > Peace-discuss was the appropriate place, good job on sending it there > with the "To" > -karen medina > > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 6:22 PM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: >> https://theintercept.com/2018/01/22/joseph-berrios-fritz-kaegi-chicago-property-taxes-cook-county-assessor/ >> >> '...candidate for governor state Sen. Daniel Biss has called Berrios’s assessment process a “self-dealing racket” while touting his own legislative plan to fix the system. Democratic frontrunner J.B. Pritzker also supports reforming property taxation but has avoided criticizing Berrios. The Cook County Democratic Party got behind Pritzker early. Property tax policy isn’t something Pritzker wants to be loud about on the campaign trail: The billionaire received a $230,000 property tax reduction on the Gold Coast mansion that he bought next door to his own, claiming it was “uninhabitable.”’ >> >> —CGE >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > > > > -- > -- karen medina > "The really great make you feel that you, too, can become great." - Mark Twain From kmedina67 at gmail.com Tue Jan 23 21:09:04 2018 From: kmedina67 at gmail.com (Karen Medina) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 15:09:04 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vote against incumbent Democrats (& against incumbent Republicans) In-Reply-To: <7FC8B5D0-F997-42A1-9756-6BC40A669C98@gmail.com> References: <7FC8B5D0-F997-42A1-9756-6BC40A669C98@gmail.com> Message-ID: Dear Carl, We have 2 mailing lists. The peace list is for inviting people to events. The peace-discuss list is for discussion and the sharing of articles. -karen medina On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 2:51 PM, C G Estabrook wrote: > Karen— > > I don’t think it’s up to you to censor posts to anti-war mailing lists. > > We gave a political establishment for that. You needn’t do their work. > > Regards, Carl > > >> On Jan 23, 2018, at 1:22 PM, Karen Medina wrote: >> >> Carl, >> You cc'd peace with this discussion topic. That was inappropriate. >> Peace-discuss was the appropriate place, good job on sending it there >> with the "To" >> -karen medina >> >> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 6:22 PM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss >> wrote: >>> https://theintercept.com/2018/01/22/joseph-berrios-fritz-kaegi-chicago-property-taxes-cook-county-assessor/ >>> >>> '...candidate for governor state Sen. Daniel Biss has called Berrios’s assessment process a “self-dealing racket” while touting his own legislative plan to fix the system. Democratic frontrunner J.B. Pritzker also supports reforming property taxation but has avoided criticizing Berrios. The Cook County Democratic Party got behind Pritzker early. Property tax policy isn’t something Pritzker wants to be loud about on the campaign trail: The billionaire received a $230,000 property tax reduction on the Gold Coast mansion that he bought next door to his own, claiming it was “uninhabitable.”’ >>> >>> —CGE >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >> >> >> >> -- >> -- karen medina >> "The really great make you feel that you, too, can become great." - Mark Twain > -- -- karen medina "The really great make you feel that you, too, can become great." - Mark Twain From cgestabrook at gmail.com Tue Jan 23 21:15:16 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 15:15:16 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vote against incumbent Democrats (& against incumbent Republicans) In-Reply-To: References: <7FC8B5D0-F997-42A1-9756-6BC40A669C98@gmail.com> Message-ID: <8A39DE98-4F6B-44A0-8621-01FC76BABAFE@gmail.com> Dear Karen, Those are recommendations: it’s not up to you to enforce them (and suppress "rants,” as you said). —CGE > On Jan 23, 2018, at 3:09 PM, Karen Medina via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Dear Carl, > > We have 2 mailing lists. > The peace list is for inviting people to events. > The peace-discuss list is for discussion and the sharing of articles. > > -karen medina > > > > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 2:51 PM, C G Estabrook wrote: >> Karen— >> >> I don’t think it’s up to you to censor posts to anti-war mailing lists. >> >> We gave a political establishment for that. You needn’t do their work. >> >> Regards, Carl >> >> >>> On Jan 23, 2018, at 1:22 PM, Karen Medina wrote: >>> >>> Carl, >>> You cc'd peace with this discussion topic. That was inappropriate. >>> Peace-discuss was the appropriate place, good job on sending it there >>> with the "To" >>> -karen medina >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 6:22 PM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss >>> wrote: >>>> https://theintercept.com/2018/01/22/joseph-berrios-fritz-kaegi-chicago-property-taxes-cook-county-assessor/ >>>> >>>> '...candidate for governor state Sen. Daniel Biss has called Berrios’s assessment process a “self-dealing racket” while touting his own legislative plan to fix the system. Democratic frontrunner J.B. Pritzker also supports reforming property taxation but has avoided criticizing Berrios. The Cook County Democratic Party got behind Pritzker early. Property tax policy isn’t something Pritzker wants to be loud about on the campaign trail: The billionaire received a $230,000 property tax reduction on the Gold Coast mansion that he bought next door to his own, claiming it was “uninhabitable.”’ >>>> >>>> —CGE >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> -- karen medina >>> "The really great make you feel that you, too, can become great." - Mark Twain >> > > > > -- > -- karen medina > "The really great make you feel that you, too, can become great." - Mark Twain > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From stuartnlevy at gmail.com Tue Jan 23 22:02:20 2018 From: stuartnlevy at gmail.com (stuartnlevy) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 16:02:20 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vote against incumbent Democrats (& against incumbent Republicans) In-Reply-To: <8A39DE98-4F6B-44A0-8621-01FC76BABAFE@gmail.com> Message-ID: <5a67b0e9.02a6240a.d807a.363e@mx.google.com> It is up to anyone using the peace/peace-discuss lists to know what the appropriate uses for that list are, and perfectly reasonable for Karen to remind you of what we've gone over many times in the past. If you'd like to start a new list and attract people to it, by all means do.   -- Stuart -------- Original message --------From: C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss Date: 1/23/18 15:15 (GMT-06:00) To: Karen Medina Cc: Peace-discuss List Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Vote against incumbent Democrats (& against   incumbent Republicans) Dear Karen, Those are recommendations: it’s not up to you to enforce them (and suppress "rants,” as you said). —CGE > On Jan 23, 2018, at 3:09 PM, Karen Medina via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Dear Carl, > > We have 2 mailing lists. > The peace list is for inviting people to events. > The peace-discuss list is for discussion and the sharing of articles. > > -karen medina > > > > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 2:51 PM, C G Estabrook wrote: >> Karen— >> >> I don’t think it’s up to you to censor posts to anti-war mailing lists. >> >> We gave a political establishment for that. You needn’t do their work. >> >> Regards, Carl >> >> >>> On Jan 23, 2018, at 1:22 PM, Karen Medina wrote: >>> >>> Carl, >>> You cc'd peace with this discussion topic. That was inappropriate. >>> Peace-discuss was the appropriate place, good job on sending it there >>> with the "To" >>> -karen medina >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 6:22 PM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss >>> wrote: >>>> https://theintercept.com/2018/01/22/joseph-berrios-fritz-kaegi-chicago-property-taxes-cook-county-assessor/ >>>> >>>> '...candidate for governor state Sen. Daniel Biss has called Berrios’s assessment process a “self-dealing racket” while touting his own legislative plan to fix the system. Democratic frontrunner J.B. Pritzker also supports reforming property taxation but has avoided criticizing Berrios. The Cook County Democratic Party got behind Pritzker early. Property tax policy isn’t something Pritzker wants to be loud about on the campaign trail: The billionaire received a $230,000 property tax reduction on the Gold Coast mansion that he bought next door to his own, claiming it was “uninhabitable.”’ >>>> >>>> —CGE >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> -- karen medina >>> "The really great make you feel that you, too, can become great." - Mark Twain >> > > > > -- > -- karen medina > "The really great make you feel that you, too, can become great." - Mark Twain > _______________________________________________ > 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 fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 24 17:28:37 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 17:28:37 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: DOJ issues harsh warning to 23 cities In-Reply-To: <00B8B9E959B15263E65700E59F8C8228-212c4470b03e4d7c80ab6927cbca2cda@response.foxnews.com> References: <00B8B9E959B15263E65700E59F8C8228-212c4470b03e4d7c80ab6927cbca2cda@response.foxnews.com> Message-ID: The entire State of Illinois has been threatened by the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice. And previously Dean Iceman Ammar wrote an article trying to Sabotage the Sanctuary Movement that he circulated to lawyers, judges, law professors and others all over the country. That is what is at stake before the Shithole Trump College of Law at 3pm 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) From: FoxNews.com [mailto:foxnews at newsletters.foxnews.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2018 11:21 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Subject: DOJ issues harsh warning to 23 cities The Justice Department on Wednesday threatened to subpoena several jurisdictions across the country if they don’t turn over information about their sanctuary city policies toward illegal immigrants. More on this: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/01/24/doj-threatens-to-subpoena-23-jurisdictions-over-sanctuary-city-policies.html © 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. 1211 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY, 10036. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Fox News never sends unsolicited email. You received this email because you requested a subscription to Breaking Alerts from FoxNews.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 24 17:28:37 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 17:28:37 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: DOJ issues harsh warning to 23 cities In-Reply-To: <00B8B9E959B15263E65700E59F8C8228-212c4470b03e4d7c80ab6927cbca2cda@response.foxnews.com> References: <00B8B9E959B15263E65700E59F8C8228-212c4470b03e4d7c80ab6927cbca2cda@response.foxnews.com> Message-ID: The entire State of Illinois has been threatened by the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice. And previously Dean Iceman Ammar wrote an article trying to Sabotage the Sanctuary Movement that he circulated to lawyers, judges, law professors and others all over the country. That is what is at stake before the Shithole Trump College of Law at 3pm 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) From: FoxNews.com [mailto:foxnews at newsletters.foxnews.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2018 11:21 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Subject: DOJ issues harsh warning to 23 cities The Justice Department on Wednesday threatened to subpoena several jurisdictions across the country if they don’t turn over information about their sanctuary city policies toward illegal immigrants. More on this: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/01/24/doj-threatens-to-subpoena-23-jurisdictions-over-sanctuary-city-policies.html © 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. 1211 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY, 10036. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Fox News never sends unsolicited email. You received this email because you requested a subscription to Breaking Alerts from FoxNews.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jan 24 17:30:05 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 17:30:05 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: DOJ issues harsh warning to 23 cities In-Reply-To: References: <00B8B9E959B15263E65700E59F8C8228-212c4470b03e4d7c80ab6927cbca2cda@response.foxnews.com> Message-ID: The entire State of Illinois has been threatened by the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice. And previously Dean Iceman Ammar wrote an article trying to Sabotage the Sanctuary Movement that he circulated to lawyers, judges, law professors and others all over the country. That is what is at stake before the Shithole Trump College of Law at 3pm 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) From: FoxNews.com [mailto:foxnews at newsletters.foxnews.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2018 11:21 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: DOJ issues harsh warning to 23 cities The Justice Department on Wednesday threatened to subpoena several jurisdictions across the country if they don’t turn over information about their sanctuary city policies toward illegal immigrants. More on this: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/01/24/doj-threatens-to-subpoena-23-jurisdictions-over-sanctuary-city-policies.html © 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. 1211 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY, 10036. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Fox News never sends unsolicited email. You received this email because you requested a subscription to Breaking Alerts from FoxNews.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jan 24 23:43:39 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 23:43:39 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Todays Rally Message-ID: [https://scontent-ort2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-1/p80x80/21231628_832797780222402_8328448238208757798_n.png?oh=b1d05601271a906dd5a7f9e760875d84&oe=5AED5E46] Students for Economic Empowerment UIUC 18 mins · Thanks for coming out in the cold today! This is just a reminder that, as activists, we would advise that you make sure that all of your Facebook profile settings are set to the maximum amount of privacy. There have been issues of harassment recently against those who take a stand in the community against injustice, and those responsible like to use Facebook to gain information about those they intend to pray on. If you have any questions or concerns feel free to message the page or me personally and I will be happy to talk. Thanks again! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jan 25 03:49:55 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 03:49:55 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] U of I Rally at the COL Message-ID: * SPORTS»» * OPINIONS»» * LIFE & CULTURE»» * SPECIAL SECTIONS»» * BUZZ * SALARY GUIDE * CLASSIFIEDS University of Illinois College of Law faculty, students rally against Trump deputy solicitor general’s invitation to campus [International+law+professor+at+the+University+College+of+Law%2C+Francis+Boyle%2C+voicing+his+opinions+regarding+the+current+president+on+Wednesday.+] JEANNETTE YAN International law professor at the University College of Law, Francis Boyle, voicing his opinions regarding the current president on Wednesday. BY REBECCA WOOD, NEWS REPORTER JANUARY 24, 2018 Filed under Administration, Campus, Champaign-Urbana, News Protesters met at the University of Illinois College of Law to rally against Dean Vikram Amar’s decision to invite Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart to speak to students and faculty. Professor Francis Boyle, senior law professor at the College of Law, said, “This is the first time a high level henchman in the Trump administration has come to this campus and it’s inexcusable.” Boyle said they are against the College of Law giving Stewart attention to come to the University and to try to spread the Trump propaganda party line through campus. Madge O’Brien, local protester, said she doesn’t support the Trump administration’s policy on immigration and war, along with many other policies that it’s currently advocating. “I wish they would remember the statue of liberty and the message that it brings, which is, ‘Give me your tired, your poor, your restless, your refuge yearning to be free,’ and which has welcomed so many of our ancestors for the last 400 years,” O’Brien said. As Boyle was the only faculty member from the College of Law present at the rally, he spoke out against his fellow faculty members, calling some “bigots and racists against Muslims.” “This henchman has been working for the Trump department of injustice for the last year and helping them inflict every hideous atrocity you can possibly imagine on everyone in our country, including Latinos, undocumented people, gays, transgenders and Muslims,” Boyle said. He focused on the issue prominent at this University: Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. Boyle said there are “800,000 DACA kids … at risk as we speak, at risk of deportation.” He said this case is crucial as it makes its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court by Stewart. “For me, I’m the child of an immigrant, of course that’s ridiculous that they would bring a speaker that supports some of (Trump’s) very unpopular policies like the ban and deportations,” said Andrea Herrera, University alumna. With Ben Mueller, member of the C-U Immigration Forum, leading the protesters, they chanted: “No hate. No fear. Immigrants are welcome here.” Mueller said to the crowd that immigrants make our community a better place to live, and he encouraged the chancellor of the University to send a similar message to its students after the College of Law hosts Stewart. Boyle explained how, like DACA, the transgender policies and others Trump has tried to pass will occur more easily working under the deputy solicitor general. “(LGBTQ people are) humans just like the rest of us,” Boyle said. “They’re entitled to the same rights all the rest of us have, certainly that’s how I teach my law students to protect.” Boyle said their fear is the Department of Justice, particularly Stewart, taking orders from Trump without any effort to fight injustice. “When Trump says, ‘Jump,’ this henchman says, ‘How high?’” Boyle said. Gus Wood, member of the Graduate Employees’ Organization, explained fascism as a counter-revolutionary movement that deploys a mixture of social agitation, terrorist methods and resource deprivation. “The fascist state thrives on us individualizing our critic of Trump; they need it to survive,” Wood said. Wood said this fascist state began long before Trump, and his removal will not end that state because more will continue to carry it out in Washington. “The only constituency that benefits socially from this fascist movement are the white supremacist nationalists who need terror to be effective,” Wood said. He said the way to gain legitimate legislation is to seek leadership at the local level and to build up communities. Boyle told the people protesting the College of Law’s event that they are the cutting-edge Trump resistance in Champaign-Urbana. “So we are here to make a stand against Trump,” Boyle said. “This is the Trump resistance in our community and on our campus and to condemn what I would call the Trump College of Law for bringing (Stewart) in here.” rnwood2 at dailyillini.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jan 25 05:20:57 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 05:20:57 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: faculty, students rally against Trump deputy solicitor general at UofILL Trump College of Law - The Daily Illini Message-ID: My thanks to everyone for your efforts and your continued support. fab 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, January 24, 2018 11:18 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: faculty, students rally against Trump deputy solicitor general at UofILL Trump College of Law - The Daily Illini https://dailyillini.com/news/2018/01/24/university-illinois-college-law-faculty-students-rally-trump-deputy-solicitor-generals-invitation-campus/ University of Illinois College of Law faculty, students rally against Trump deputy solicitor general's invitation to campus JEANNETTE YAN International law professor at the University College of Law, Francis Boyle, voicing his opinions regarding the current president on Wednesday. BY REBECCA WOOD, NEWS REPORTER JANUARY 24, 2018 Filed under Administration, Campus, Champaign-Urbana, News Protesters met at the University of Illinois College of Law to rally against Dean Vikram Amar's decision to invite Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart to speak to students and faculty. Professor Francis Boyle, senior law professor at the College of Law, said, "This is the first time a high level henchman in the Trump administration has come to this campus and it's inexcusable." Boyle said they are against the College of Law giving Stewart attention to come to the University and to try to spread the Trump propaganda party line through campus. Madge O'Brien, local protester, said she doesn't support the Trump administration's policy on immigration and war, along with many other policies that it's currently advocating. "I wish they would remember the statue of liberty and the message that it brings, which is, 'Give me your tired, your poor, your restless, your refuge yearning to be free,' and which has welcomed so many of our ancestors for the last 400 years," O'Brien said. As Boyle was the only faculty member from the College of Law present at the rally, he spoke out against his fellow faculty members, calling some "bigots and racists against Muslims." "This henchman has been working for the Trump department of injustice for the last year and helping them inflict every hideous atrocity you can possibly imagine on everyone in our country, including Latinos, undocumented people, gays, transgenders and Muslims," Boyle said. He focused on the issue prominent at this University: Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. Boyle said there are "800,000 DACA kids ... at risk as we speak, at risk of deportation." He said this case is crucial as it makes its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court by Stewart. "For me, I'm the child of an immigrant, of course that's ridiculous that they would bring a speaker that supports some of (Trump's) very unpopular policies like the ban and deportations," said Andrea Herrera, University alumna. With Ben Mueller, member of the C-U Immigration Forum, leading the protesters, they chanted: "No hate. No fear. Immigrants are welcome here." Mueller said to the crowd that immigrants make our community a better place to live, and he encouraged the chancellor of the University to send a similar message to its students after the College of Law hosts Stewart. Boyle explained how, like DACA, the transgender policies and others Trump has tried to pass will occur more easily working under the deputy solicitor general. "(LGBTQ people are) humans just like the rest of us," Boyle said. "They're entitled to the same rights all the rest of us have, certainly that's how I teach my law students to protect." Boyle said their fear is the Department of Justice, particularly Stewart, taking orders from Trump without any effort to fight injustice. "When Trump says, 'Jump,' this henchman says, 'How high?'" Boyle said. Gus Wood, member of the Graduate Employees' Organization, explained fascism as a counter-revolutionary movement that deploys a mixture of social agitation, terrorist methods and resource deprivation. "The fascist state thrives on us individualizing our critic of Trump; they need it to survive," Wood said. Wood said this fascist state began long before Trump, and his removal will not end that state because more will continue to carry it out in Washington. "The only constituency that benefits socially from this fascist movement are the white supremacist nationalists who need terror to be effective," Wood said. He said the way to gain legitimate legislation is to seek leadership at the local level and to build up communities. Boyle told the people protesting the College of Law's event that they are the cutting-edge Trump resistance in Champaign-Urbana. "So we are here to make a stand against Trump," Boyle said. "This is the Trump resistance in our community and on our campus and to condemn what I would call the Trump College of Law for bringing (Stewart) in here." rnwood2 at dailyillini.com From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jan 25 05:20:57 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 05:20:57 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: faculty, students rally against Trump deputy solicitor general at UofILL Trump College of Law - The Daily Illini Message-ID: My thanks to everyone for your efforts and your continued support. fab 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, January 24, 2018 11:18 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: faculty, students rally against Trump deputy solicitor general at UofILL Trump College of Law - The Daily Illini https://dailyillini.com/news/2018/01/24/university-illinois-college-law-faculty-students-rally-trump-deputy-solicitor-generals-invitation-campus/ University of Illinois College of Law faculty, students rally against Trump deputy solicitor general's invitation to campus JEANNETTE YAN International law professor at the University College of Law, Francis Boyle, voicing his opinions regarding the current president on Wednesday. BY REBECCA WOOD, NEWS REPORTER JANUARY 24, 2018 Filed under Administration, Campus, Champaign-Urbana, News Protesters met at the University of Illinois College of Law to rally against Dean Vikram Amar's decision to invite Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart to speak to students and faculty. Professor Francis Boyle, senior law professor at the College of Law, said, "This is the first time a high level henchman in the Trump administration has come to this campus and it's inexcusable." Boyle said they are against the College of Law giving Stewart attention to come to the University and to try to spread the Trump propaganda party line through campus. Madge O'Brien, local protester, said she doesn't support the Trump administration's policy on immigration and war, along with many other policies that it's currently advocating. "I wish they would remember the statue of liberty and the message that it brings, which is, 'Give me your tired, your poor, your restless, your refuge yearning to be free,' and which has welcomed so many of our ancestors for the last 400 years," O'Brien said. As Boyle was the only faculty member from the College of Law present at the rally, he spoke out against his fellow faculty members, calling some "bigots and racists against Muslims." "This henchman has been working for the Trump department of injustice for the last year and helping them inflict every hideous atrocity you can possibly imagine on everyone in our country, including Latinos, undocumented people, gays, transgenders and Muslims," Boyle said. He focused on the issue prominent at this University: Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. Boyle said there are "800,000 DACA kids ... at risk as we speak, at risk of deportation." He said this case is crucial as it makes its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court by Stewart. "For me, I'm the child of an immigrant, of course that's ridiculous that they would bring a speaker that supports some of (Trump's) very unpopular policies like the ban and deportations," said Andrea Herrera, University alumna. With Ben Mueller, member of the C-U Immigration Forum, leading the protesters, they chanted: "No hate. No fear. Immigrants are welcome here." Mueller said to the crowd that immigrants make our community a better place to live, and he encouraged the chancellor of the University to send a similar message to its students after the College of Law hosts Stewart. Boyle explained how, like DACA, the transgender policies and others Trump has tried to pass will occur more easily working under the deputy solicitor general. "(LGBTQ people are) humans just like the rest of us," Boyle said. "They're entitled to the same rights all the rest of us have, certainly that's how I teach my law students to protect." Boyle said their fear is the Department of Justice, particularly Stewart, taking orders from Trump without any effort to fight injustice. "When Trump says, 'Jump,' this henchman says, 'How high?'" Boyle said. Gus Wood, member of the Graduate Employees' Organization, explained fascism as a counter-revolutionary movement that deploys a mixture of social agitation, terrorist methods and resource deprivation. "The fascist state thrives on us individualizing our critic of Trump; they need it to survive," Wood said. Wood said this fascist state began long before Trump, and his removal will not end that state because more will continue to carry it out in Washington. "The only constituency that benefits socially from this fascist movement are the white supremacist nationalists who need terror to be effective," Wood said. He said the way to gain legitimate legislation is to seek leadership at the local level and to build up communities. Boyle told the people protesting the College of Law's event that they are the cutting-edge Trump resistance in Champaign-Urbana. "So we are here to make a stand against Trump," Boyle said. "This is the Trump resistance in our community and on our campus and to condemn what I would call the Trump College of Law for bringing (Stewart) in here." rnwood2 at dailyillini.com From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jan 25 05:29:34 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 05:29:34 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: U of I Rally at the COL In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Now at home from the basketball game. I want to thank everyone out there for your efforts and support. And especially Karen who is Our Spark Plug. Fab. Francis 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2018 9:50 PM To: peace-discuss Subject: [Peace-discuss] U of I Rally at the COL · SPORTS»» · OPINIONS»» · LIFE & CULTURE»» · SPECIAL SECTIONS»» · BUZZ · SALARY GUIDE · CLASSIFIEDS University of Illinois College of Law faculty, students rally against Trump deputy solicitor general’s invitation to campus [International+law+professor+at+the+University+College+of+Law%2C+Francis+Boyle%2C+voicing+his+opinions+regarding+the+current+president+on+Wednesday.+] JEANNETTE YAN International law professor at the University College of Law, Francis Boyle, voicing his opinions regarding the current president on Wednesday. BY REBECCA WOOD, NEWS REPORTER JANUARY 24, 2018 Filed under Administration, Campus, Champaign-Urbana, News Protesters met at the University of Illinois College of Law to rally against Dean Vikram Amar’s decision to invite Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart to speak to students and faculty. Professor Francis Boyle, senior law professor at the College of Law, said, “This is the first time a high level henchman in the Trump administration has come to this campus and it’s inexcusable.” Boyle said they are against the College of Law giving Stewart attention to come to the University and to try to spread the Trump propaganda party line through campus. Madge O’Brien, local protester, said she doesn’t support the Trump administration’s policy on immigration and war, along with many other policies that it’s currently advocating. “I wish they would remember the statue of liberty and the message that it brings, which is, ‘Give me your tired, your poor, your restless, your refuge yearning to be free,’ and which has welcomed so many of our ancestors for the last 400 years,” O’Brien said. As Boyle was the only faculty member from the College of Law present at the rally, he spoke out against his fellow faculty members, calling some “bigots and racists against Muslims.” “This henchman has been working for the Trump department of injustice for the last year and helping them inflict every hideous atrocity you can possibly imagine on everyone in our country, including Latinos, undocumented people, gays, transgenders and Muslims,” Boyle said. He focused on the issue prominent at this University: Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. Boyle said there are “800,000 DACA kids … at risk as we speak, at risk of deportation.” He said this case is crucial as it makes its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court by Stewart. “For me, I’m the child of an immigrant, of course that’s ridiculous that they would bring a speaker that supports some of (Trump’s) very unpopular policies like the ban and deportations,” said Andrea Herrera, University alumna. With Ben Mueller, member of the C-U Immigration Forum, leading the protesters, they chanted: “No hate. No fear. Immigrants are welcome here.” Mueller said to the crowd that immigrants make our community a better place to live, and he encouraged the chancellor of the University to send a similar message to its students after the College of Law hosts Stewart. Boyle explained how, like DACA, the transgender policies and others Trump has tried to pass will occur more easily working under the deputy solicitor general. “(LGBTQ people are) humans just like the rest of us,” Boyle said. “They’re entitled to the same rights all the rest of us have, certainly that’s how I teach my law students to protect.” Boyle said their fear is the Department of Justice, particularly Stewart, taking orders from Trump without any effort to fight injustice. “When Trump says, ‘Jump,’ this henchman says, ‘How high?’” Boyle said. Gus Wood, member of the Graduate Employees’ Organization, explained fascism as a counter-revolutionary movement that deploys a mixture of social agitation, terrorist methods and resource deprivation. “The fascist state thrives on us individualizing our critic of Trump; they need it to survive,” Wood said. Wood said this fascist state began long before Trump, and his removal will not end that state because more will continue to carry it out in Washington. “The only constituency that benefits socially from this fascist movement are the white supremacist nationalists who need terror to be effective,” Wood said. He said the way to gain legitimate legislation is to seek leadership at the local level and to build up communities. Boyle told the people protesting the College of Law’s event that they are the cutting-edge Trump resistance in Champaign-Urbana. “So we are here to make a stand against Trump,” Boyle said. “This is the Trump resistance in our community and on our campus and to condemn what I would call the Trump College of Law for bringing (Stewart) in here.” rnwood2 at dailyillini.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: ATT00001.txt URL: From moboct1 at aim.com Thu Jan 25 15:26:36 2018 From: moboct1 at aim.com (Mildred O'brien) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 10:26:36 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: U of I Rally at the COL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1612ded8469-1720-c6add@webjas-vae054.srv.aolmail.net> Great coverage by the Daily Illini, and great effort by all the participants.  Thank you Karen Aram and all for organizing another successful event! Here is part of the sonnet by Emma Lazarus, inscribed on the base of the Statue of Liberty (which I misquoted):                                                          "Give me your tired, your poor,                                                           Your huddled masses yearning to be free,                                                           The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.                                                           Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,                                                           I lift my lamp beside the golden door." Midge O'Brien Don't think Trump remembers it but his parents probably, did at Ellis Island -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss To: peace-discuss Sent: Wed, Jan 24, 2018 11:30 pm Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: U of I Rally at the COL Now at  home from the basketball game. I want to thank everyone out there for your efforts and support. And especially Karen who is Our Spark Plug. Fab.   Francis 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2018 9:50 PM To: peace-discuss Subject: [Peace-discuss] U of I Rally at the COL   ·       SPORTS»» ·       OPINIONS»» ·       LIFE & CULTURE»» ·       SPECIAL SECTIONS»» ·       BUZZ ·       SALARY GUIDE ·       CLASSIFIEDS University of Illinois College of Law faculty, students rally against Trump deputy solicitor general’s invitation to campus JEANNETTE YAN International law professor at the University College of Law, Francis Boyle, voicing his opinions regarding the current president on Wednesday. BY REBECCA WOOD, NEWS REPORTER JANUARY 24, 2018 Filed under Administration, Campus, Champaign-Urbana, News Protesters met at the University of Illinois College of Law to rally against Dean Vikram Amar’s decision to invite Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart to speak to students and faculty. Professor Francis Boyle, senior law professor at the College of Law, said, “This is the first time a high level henchman in the Trump administration has come to this campus and it’s inexcusable.” Boyle said they are against the College of Law giving Stewart attention to come to the University and to try to spread the Trump propaganda party line through campus. Madge O’Brien, local protester, said she doesn’t support the Trump administration’s policy on immigration and war, along with many other policies that it’s currently advocating. “I wish they would remember the statue of liberty and the message that it brings, which is, ‘Give me your tired, your poor, your restless, your refuge yearning to be free,’ and which has welcomed so many of our ancestors for the last 400 years,” O’Brien said. As Boyle was the only faculty member from the College of Law present at the rally, he spoke out against his fellow faculty members, calling some “bigots and racists against Muslims.” “This henchman has been working for the Trump department of injustice for the last year and helping them inflict every hideous atrocity you can possibly imagine on everyone in our country, including Latinos, undocumented people, gays, transgenders and Muslims,” Boyle said. He focused on the issue prominent at this University: Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. Boyle said there are “800,000 DACA kids … at risk as we speak, at risk of deportation.” He said this case is crucial as it makes its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court by Stewart. “For me, I’m the child of an immigrant, of course that’s ridiculous that they would bring a speaker that supports some of (Trump’s) very unpopular policies like the ban and deportations,” said Andrea Herrera, University alumna. With Ben Mueller, member of the C-U Immigration Forum, leading the protesters, they chanted: “No hate. No fear. Immigrants are welcome here.” Mueller said to the crowd that immigrants make our community a better place to live, and he encouraged the chancellor of the University to send a similar message to its students after the College of Law hosts Stewart. Boyle explained how, like DACA, the transgender policies and others Trump has tried to pass will occur more easily working under the deputy solicitor general. “(LGBTQ people are) humans just like the rest of us,” Boyle said. “They’re entitled to the same rights all the rest of us have, certainly that’s how I teach my law students to protect.” Boyle said their fear is the Department of Justice, particularly Stewart, taking orders from Trump without any effort to fight injustice. “When Trump says, ‘Jump,’ this henchman says, ‘How high?’” Boyle said. Gus Wood, member of the Graduate Employees’ Organization, explained fascism as a counter-revolutionary movement that deploys a mixture of social agitation, terrorist methods and resource deprivation. “The fascist state thrives on us individualizing our critic of Trump; they need it to survive,” Wood said. Wood said this fascist state began long before Trump, and his removal will not end that state because more will continue to carry it out in Washington. “The only constituency that benefits socially from this fascist movement are the white supremacist nationalists who need terror to be effective,” Wood said. He said the way to gain legitimate legislation is to seek leadership at the local level and to build up communities. Boyle told the people protesting the College of Law’s event that they are the cutting-edge Trump resistance in Champaign-Urbana. “So we are here to make a stand against Trump,” Boyle said. “This is the Trump resistance in our community and on our campus and to condemn what I would call the Trump College of Law for bringing (Stewart) in here.” rnwood2 at dailyillini.com _______________________________________________ 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 Thu Jan 25 15:27:54 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:27:54 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: U of I Rally at the COL In-Reply-To: <1612ded8469-1720-c6add@webjas-vae054.srv.aolmail.net> References: <1612ded8469-1720-c6add@webjas-vae054.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: Thanks for being there Midge—as usual. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Mildred O'brien [mailto:moboct1 at aim.com] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 9:27 AM To: Boyle, Francis A ; peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] FW: U of I Rally at the COL Great coverage by the Daily Illini, and great effort by all the participants. Thank you Karen Aram and all for organizing another successful event! Here is part of the sonnet by Emma Lazarus, inscribed on the base of the Statue of Liberty (which I misquoted): "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to be free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door." Midge O'Brien Don't think Trump remembers it but his parents probably, did at Ellis Island -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss > To: peace-discuss > Sent: Wed, Jan 24, 2018 11:30 pm Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: U of I Rally at the COL Now at home from the basketball game. I want to thank everyone out there for your efforts and support. And especially Karen who is Our Spark Plug. Fab. Francis 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace-discuss Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2018 9:50 PM To: peace-discuss > Subject: [Peace-discuss] U of I Rally at the COL • SPORTS»» • OPINIONS»» • LIFE & CULTURE»» • SPECIAL SECTIONS»» • BUZZ • SALARY GUIDE • CLASSIFIEDS University of Illinois College of Law faculty, students rally against Trump deputy solicitor general’s invitation to campus [International+law+professor+at+the+University+College+of+Law%2C+Francis+Boyle%2C+voicing+his+opinions+regarding+the+current+president+on+Wednesday.+] JEANNETTE YAN International law professor at the University College of Law, Francis Boyle, voicing his opinions regarding the current president on Wednesday. BY REBECCA WOOD, NEWS REPORTER JANUARY 24, 2018 Filed under Administration, Campus, Champaign-Urbana, News Protesters met at the University of Illinois College of Law to rally against Dean Vikram Amar’s decision to invite Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart to speak to students and faculty. Professor Francis Boyle, senior law professor at the College of Law, said, “This is the first time a high level henchman in the Trump administration has come to this campus and it’s inexcusable.” Boyle said they are against the College of Law giving Stewart attention to come to the University and to try to spread the Trump propaganda party line through campus. Madge O’Brien, local protester, said she doesn’t support the Trump administration’s policy on immigration and war, along with many other policies that it’s currently advocating. “I wish they would remember the statue of liberty and the message that it brings, which is, ‘Give me your tired, your poor, your restless, your refuge yearning to be free,’ and which has welcomed so many of our ancestors for the last 400 years,” O’Brien said. As Boyle was the only faculty member from the College of Law present at the rally, he spoke out against his fellow faculty members, calling some “bigots and racists against Muslims.” “This henchman has been working for the Trump department of injustice for the last year and helping them inflict every hideous atrocity you can possibly imagine on everyone in our country, including Latinos, undocumented people, gays, transgenders and Muslims,” Boyle said. He focused on the issue prominent at this University: Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. Boyle said there are “800,000 DACA kids … at risk as we speak, at risk of deportation.” He said this case is crucial as it makes its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court by Stewart. “For me, I’m the child of an immigrant, of course that’s ridiculous that they would bring a speaker that supports some of (Trump’s) very unpopular policies like the ban and deportations,” said Andrea Herrera, University alumna. With Ben Mueller, member of the C-U Immigration Forum, leading the protesters, they chanted: “No hate. No fear. Immigrants are welcome here.” Mueller said to the crowd that immigrants make our community a better place to live, and he encouraged the chancellor of the University to send a similar message to its students after the College of Law hosts Stewart. Boyle explained how, like DACA, the transgender policies and others Trump has tried to pass will occur more easily working under the deputy solicitor general. “(LGBTQ people are) humans just like the rest of us,” Boyle said. “They’re entitled to the same rights all the rest of us have, certainly that’s how I teach my law students to protect.” Boyle said their fear is the Department of Justice, particularly Stewart, taking orders from Trump without any effort to fight injustice. “When Trump says, ‘Jump,’ this henchman says, ‘How high?’” Boyle said. Gus Wood, member of the Graduate Employees’ Organization, explained fascism as a counter-revolutionary movement that deploys a mixture of social agitation, terrorist methods and resource deprivation. “The fascist state thrives on us individualizing our critic of Trump; they need it to survive,” Wood said. Wood said this fascist state began long before Trump, and his removal will not end that state because more will continue to carry it out in Washington. “The only constituency that benefits socially from this fascist movement are the white supremacist nationalists who need terror to be effective,” Wood said. He said the way to gain legitimate legislation is to seek leadership at the local level and to build up communities. Boyle told the people protesting the College of Law’s event that they are the cutting-edge Trump resistance in Champaign-Urbana. “So we are here to make a stand against Trump,” Boyle said. “This is the Trump resistance in our community and on our campus and to condemn what I would call the Trump College of Law for bringing (Stewart) in here.” rnwood2 at dailyillini.com _______________________________________________ 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 Jan 25 16:57:10 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 16:57:10 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Link to COL U of I Rally Video January 24th. 2018 References: <1516898847370.31523@urbanaillinois.us> Message-ID: > > https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fyoutu.be%2FmRBJ5FLrwRo&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ca93bb2a3adfe46d4a71d08d564135103%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636524956482092298&sdata=XvUT%2Fd%2BnZQq516QEMLMzx1hf4PKm%2F9gxfQt5YacPIro%3D&reserved=0 > > > > From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jan 25 17:14:04 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 17:14:04 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Francis Boyle sent you a video: "U of I Law School Rally 1-24-18" 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: Francis Boyle via YouTube [mailto:noreply at youtube.com] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 11:03 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Subject: Francis Boyle sent you a video: "U of I Law School Rally 1-24-18" [https://s.ytimg.com/yt/img/email/digest/email_header.png] [https://yt3.ggpht.com/-w4phvYGWivc/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAAAA/_Vq2X19VNEk/s50-c-k-no-mo-rj-c0xffffff/photo.jpg] Francis Boyle has shared a video with you on YouTube [https://i.ytimg.com/vi/mRBJ5FLrwRo/mqdefault.jpg] U of I Law School Rally 1-24-18 by UPTV6 Community members protest a lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice. Help center • Report spam ©2018 YouTube, LLC 901 Cherry Ave, San Bruno, CA 94066, USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jan 25 17:14:04 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 17:14:04 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Francis Boyle sent you a video: "U of I Law School Rally 1-24-18" 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: Francis Boyle via YouTube [mailto:noreply at youtube.com] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 11:03 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Subject: Francis Boyle sent you a video: "U of I Law School Rally 1-24-18" [https://s.ytimg.com/yt/img/email/digest/email_header.png] [https://yt3.ggpht.com/-w4phvYGWivc/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAAAA/_Vq2X19VNEk/s50-c-k-no-mo-rj-c0xffffff/photo.jpg] Francis Boyle has shared a video with you on YouTube [https://i.ytimg.com/vi/mRBJ5FLrwRo/mqdefault.jpg] U of I Law School Rally 1-24-18 by UPTV6 Community members protest a lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice. Help center • Report spam ©2018 YouTube, LLC 901 Cherry Ave, San Bruno, CA 94066, USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jan 25 17:15:17 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 17:15:17 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Francis Boyle sent you a video: "U of I Law School Rally 1-24-18" 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: Francis Boyle via YouTube [mailto:noreply at youtube.com] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 11:03 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Subject: Francis Boyle sent you a video: "U of I Law School Rally 1-24-18" [https://s.ytimg.com/yt/img/email/digest/email_header.png] [https://yt3.ggpht.com/-w4phvYGWivc/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAAAA/_Vq2X19VNEk/s50-c-k-no-mo-rj-c0xffffff/photo.jpg] Francis Boyle has shared a video with you on YouTube [https://i.ytimg.com/vi/mRBJ5FLrwRo/mqdefault.jpg] U of I Law School Rally 1-24-18 by UPTV6 Community members protest a lecture by Malcolm Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General for the Trump/Sessions Department of Injustice. Help center • Report spam ©2018 YouTube, LLC 901 Cherry Ave, San Bruno, CA 94066, USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Fri Jan 26 04:54:12 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 04:54:12 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Intersectionality by Bruce Dixon of the Black Agenda Report Message-ID: Intersectionality is a Hole. Afro-Pessimism is a Shovel. We Need to Stop Digging Bruce A. Dixon, BAR managing editor 25 Jan 2018 [https://blackagendareport.com/themes/newsclick/assets/images/facebook.png] [https://blackagendareport.com/themes/newsclick/assets/images/twitter.png] [https://blackagendareport.com/themes/newsclick/assets/images/mail.png] [Intersectionality is a Hole. Afro-Pessimism is a Shovel. We Need to Stop Digging] Time to begin critically unpacking intersectionality and its nappy headed stepchild afro-pessimism The US left has a fundamental problem, perhaps the root of most of its other problems. That fundamental problem is that the US left is not organized as or led by any class conscious or class oriented formations. Union membership is somewhere around 5% of the workforce, and major unions have long been captured by the Democratic party. So the US left is composed of the black activists in their boxes, the gender activists in theirs, the immigrants and their friends over here, Latinos over there, the environmentalists in their corners and the rest in their own zones, each and every one doggedly “centering” their own experience, and if we’re lucky “intersecting” now and then. It’s a recipe for impotence and futility. But this is the US of A, we tell ourselves, where for some reason a class struggle oriented left has not emerged in any of our lifetimes. Adjusting to this toxic reality rather than taking the responsibility for changing it, US leftists have developed a self-deceiving and self-limiting language, a discourse that normalizes a kind of alternate universe in which class analysis is deprecated and discouraged and class struggle taken pretty much off the table. Intersectionality, and its nappy headed stepchild Afro-pessimism are prominent features of the stifling closet in which the US left has locked itself. The word intersectionality was originally used by legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw in her discussion of a civil rights lawsuit filed by a black woman who alleged she’d been discriminated against as a black person AND as a woman. Absurdly the court rejected her claim, saying the plaintiff needed to choose whether she alleged discrimination on the basis of gender or of race, but not both. Crenshaw coined the term intersectionality to cover these instances of multiple and overlapping oppressions. As a legal theory it hasn’t gained a lot of traction. But in the worlds of politics and the nonprofit industrial complex intersectionality has become a pervasive buzzword. In the worlds of politics and nonprofits intersectionality has become a sneaky substitute for the traditional left notion of solidarity developed in the process of ongoing collective struggle against the class enemy. Intersectionality doesn't deny the existence of class struggle, it just rhetorically demotes it to something co-equal with the fights against ableism and ageism and speciesism, against white supremacy, against gender oppression, and a long elastic list of others. What’s sneaky about the substitution of intersectionality for solidarity is that intersectionality allows the unexamined smuggling in of multiple notions which directly undermine the development and the operation of solidarity. Intersectionality means everybody is obligated to put their own special interest, their own oppression first – although they don’t always say that because the contradiction would be too obvious. The applicable terms of art are that everybody gets to “center” their own oppression, and cooperate as “allies” if and when their interests “intersect.” What this yields is silliness like honchos who run the pink pussy hat marches telling Cindy Sheehan earlier this month that their womens’ movement can’t be bothered to oppose war and imperialism “...until all women are free,” and the advocates of this or that cause demanding constant, elaborate performative rituals of those who would qualify for "allyship." The nonprofit industrial complex, funded as it is by the one percent, loves, promotes and lavishly rewards intersectionality at every turn because it buries and negates class struggle. Intersectionality normalizes the notion that the left is and ought to be a bunch of impotent constituency groups squabbling about privilege and “allyship” as they compete for funding and careers, not the the force working to overthrow the established order and fight for the power to build a new world. Even Hillary Clinton uses the word now. Afro-pessimism is a term coined by Dr. Frank Wilderson at UC Irvine, and a nappy headed stepchild of intersectionality. Afro-pessimism, to hear Wilderson tell it is the realization that black people have no natural allies anywhere, that we are born with ankle irons, whip marks on our backs, bulls eyes on our foreheads and nooses around our necks. Blackness, he says is “a condition of ontological death ,” and the dead have no allies, at least among the living. Wilderson is at least honest. He freely admits that afro-pessimism leads nowhere and offers no answers to any strategic or even tactical questions. Wilderson’s shtick is that of an old man throwing word grenades and he seems not to care much where or how they explode, as long as they do. Whatever works for him, I guess. But in the context of a US left that just doesn’t DO class struggle Wilderson’s grenades are being picked up and thrown again and again, both by old heads who ought to know better, and by younger ones looking to fit in with what bills itself as the movement. The intersectionality that dominates the US left is a kind of poisoned atmosphere in which the purple prose of afro-pessimism fits and thrives, a place where the dishonest can pretend, and the unwary can believe it provides the answers that even Wilderson says it does not. To be fair, some intersectional activists do pretend to embrace class struggle. Patrice Cullors one of the three ladies responsible for the #blacklivesmatter hashtag famously proclaimed herself and Alicia Garza were “trained Marxists.” One might imagine that a trained Marxist would look at US history and discerning that there are no leading class struggle organizations contending for power, try to figure out how to overcome the obstacles to their creation and successful operation. But the embrace of intersectionality has led the US left in precisely the opposite direction. Intersectionality pretends that class struggle and overthrowing the capitalist order and fighting for power are impractical, impossible, non-pragmatic or just secondary to gender struggles, to the plight of immigrants, to the environment, or in the case of afro-pessimism, to those permanent ankle chains, whip marks and nooses around our necks. Intersectionality calls upon the left to adjust to powerlessness and our poisoned atmosphere, not to contend for the power to change it. Intersectionality is deep a hole. Afro-pessimism is a shovel. The next thing we should do is stop digging. Bruce A. Dixon is managing editor at Black Agenda Report and co-chair of the GA Green Party. He lives and works near Marietta GA and can be reliably reached via email at bruce.dixon(at)blackagendareport.com. He’s trying to get better at answering his Twitter @brucedixon. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Fri Jan 26 06:56:55 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 00:56:55 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Intersectionality by Bruce Dixon of the Black Agenda Report In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <671E1B37-57C4-48DE-BF19-4DAEF73791EE@gmail.com> Facebook blocked my posting this. (They’ve now relented.) The political establishment likes identity politics & won’t countenance their being gainsaid, as Dixon does... > On Jan 25, 2018, at 10:54 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Intersectionality is a Hole. Afro-Pessimism is a Shovel. We Need to Stop Digging > Bruce A. Dixon, BAR managing editor 25 Jan 2018 > > > Time to begin critically unpacking intersectionality and its nappy headed stepchild afro-pessimism > The US left has a fundamental problem, perhaps the root of most of its other problems. That fundamental problem is that the US left is not organized as or led by any class conscious or class oriented formations. Union membership is somewhere around 5% of the workforce, and major unions have long been captured by the Democratic party. So the US left is composed of the black activists in their boxes, the gender activists in theirs, the immigrants and their friends over here, Latinos over there, the environmentalists in their corners and the rest in their own zones, each and every one doggedly “centering” their own experience, and if we’re lucky “intersecting” now and then. > > It’s a recipe for impotence and futility. But this is the US of A, we tell ourselves, where for some reason a class struggle oriented left has not emerged in any of our lifetimes. Adjusting to this toxic reality rather than taking the responsibility for changing it, US leftists have developed a self-deceiving and self-limiting language, a discourse that normalizes a kind of alternate universe in which class analysis is deprecated and discouraged and class struggle taken pretty much off the table. Intersectionality, and its nappy headed stepchild Afro-pessimism are prominent features of the stifling closet in which the US left has locked itself. > > The word intersectionality was originally used by legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw in her discussion of a civil rights lawsuit filed by a black woman who alleged she’d been discriminated against as a black person AND as a woman. Absurdly the court rejected her claim, saying the plaintiff needed to choose whether she alleged discrimination on the basis of gender or of race, but not both. Crenshaw coined the term intersectionality to cover these instances of multiple and overlapping oppressions. As a legal theory it hasn’t gained a lot of traction. But in the worlds of politics and the nonprofit industrial complex intersectionality has become a pervasive buzzword. > > In the worlds of politics and nonprofits intersectionality has become a sneaky substitute for the traditional left notion of solidarity developed in the process of ongoing collective struggle against the class enemy. Intersectionality doesn't deny the existence of class struggle, it just rhetorically demotes it to something co-equal with the fights against ableism and ageism and speciesism, against white supremacy, against gender oppression, and a long elastic list of others. What’s sneaky about the substitution of intersectionality for solidarity is that intersectionality allows the unexamined smuggling in of multiple notions which directly undermine the development and the operation of solidarity. Intersectionality means everybody is obligated to put their own special interest, their own oppression first – although they don’t always say that because the contradiction would be too obvious. The applicable terms of art are that everybody gets to “center” their own oppression, and cooperate as “allies” if and when their interests “intersect.” What this yields is silliness like honchos who run the pink pussy hat marches telling Cindy Sheehan earlier this month that their womens’ movement can’t be bothered to oppose war and imperialism “...until all women are free,” and the advocates of this or that cause demanding constant, elaborate performative rituals of those who would qualify for "allyship." > > The nonprofit industrial complex, funded as it is by the one percent, loves, promotes and lavishly rewards intersectionality at every turn because it buries and negates class struggle. Intersectionality normalizes the notion that the left is and ought to be a bunch of impotent constituency groups squabbling about privilege and “allyship” as they compete for funding and careers, not the the force working to overthrow the established order and fight for the power to build a new world. Even Hillary Clinton uses the word now. > > Afro-pessimism is a term coined by Dr. Frank Wilderson at UC Irvine, and a nappy headed stepchild of intersectionality. Afro-pessimism, to hear Wilderson tell it is the realization that black people have no natural allies anywhere, that we are born with ankle irons, whip marks on our backs, bulls eyes on our foreheads and nooses around our necks. Blackness, he says is “a condition of ontological death ,” and the dead have no allies, at least among the living. Wilderson is at least honest. He freely admits that afro-pessimism leads nowhere and offers no answers to any strategic or even tactical questions. Wilderson’s shtick is that of an old man throwing word grenades and he seems not to care much where or how they explode, as long as they do. Whatever works for him, I guess. > > But in the context of a US left that just doesn’t DO class struggle Wilderson’s grenades are being picked up and thrown again and again, both by old heads who ought to know better, and by younger ones looking to fit in with what bills itself as the movement. The intersectionality that dominates the US left is a kind of poisoned atmosphere in which the purple prose of afro-pessimism fits and thrives, a place where the dishonest can pretend, and the unwary can believe it provides the answers that even Wilderson says it does not. > > To be fair, some intersectional activists do pretend to embrace class struggle. Patrice Cullors one of the three ladies responsible for the #blacklivesmatter hashtag famously proclaimed herself and Alicia Garza were “trained Marxists.” One might imagine that a trained Marxist would look at US history and discerning that there are no leading class struggle organizations contending for power, try to figure out how to overcome the obstacles to their creation and successful operation. > > But the embrace of intersectionality has led the US left in precisely the opposite direction. Intersectionality pretends that class struggle and overthrowing the capitalist order and fighting for power are impractical, impossible, non-pragmatic or just secondary to gender struggles, to the plight of immigrants, to the environment, or in the case of afro-pessimism, to those permanent ankle chains, whip marks and nooses around our necks. Intersectionality calls upon the left to adjust to powerlessness and our poisoned atmosphere, not to contend for the power to change it. > > Intersectionality is deep a hole. Afro-pessimism is a shovel. The next thing we should do is stop digging. > > Bruce A. Dixon is managing editor at Black Agenda Report and co-chair of the GA Green Party. He lives and works near Marietta GA and can be reliably reached via email at bruce.dixon(at)blackagendareport.com. He’s trying to get better at answering his Twitter @brucedixon. > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jan 26 20:40:39 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 20:40:39 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Shithole! Message-ID: Shithole! Trump Henchman coming Trump College of Law Over my dead body unopposed! Assembled poor, oppressed, downtrodden Trump Victims Against Trump Henchman Before Trump Law School Shithole! Shithole! Shithole! Our cry Our refrain Shithole Trump Department of Injustice At Shithole Trump College of Law Trump Resistance Democracy Use it or lose it! We used it! So must you! [cid:image002.jpg at 01D396B3.6FAE6990] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 24494 bytes Desc: image002.jpg URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jan 26 20:41:46 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 20:41:46 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Shithole! Message-ID: Shithole! Trump Henchman coming Trump College of Law Over my dead body unopposed! Assembled poor, oppressed, downtrodden Trump Victims Against Trump Henchman Before Trump Law School Shithole! Shithole! Shithole! Our cry Our refrain Shithole Trump Department of Injustice At Shithole Trump College of Law Trump Resistance Democracy Use it or lose it! We used it! So must you! [cid:image002.jpg at 01D396B3.6FAE6990] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 24494 bytes Desc: image002.jpg URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jan 26 20:41:46 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 20:41:46 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Shithole! Message-ID: Shithole! Trump Henchman coming Trump College of Law Over my dead body unopposed! Assembled poor, oppressed, downtrodden Trump Victims Against Trump Henchman Before Trump Law School Shithole! Shithole! Shithole! Our cry Our refrain Shithole Trump Department of Injustice At Shithole Trump College of Law Trump Resistance Democracy Use it or lose it! We used it! So must you! [cid:image002.jpg at 01D396B3.6FAE6990] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 24494 bytes Desc: image002.jpg URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 26 22:12:26 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 22:12:26 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Today's letter to News-Gazette References: <182251147.1364085.1517004746525.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <182251147.1364085.1517004746525@mail.yahoo.com> Regarding “Road to Ruin” (1/21), the editors—as always—relyon the Koch Brothers’ (American Legislative Exchange Council, Illinois PolicyInstitute) analysis of yearly Illinois population loss of ¼ of 1% to argue forlower taxes, decreased environmental and workplace regulation, and governmentalausterity in all areas that actually help people (which excludes militaryspending). This is part of a national libertarian-neoliberal agenda to convincestate legislatures to participate in a race to the bottom characterized by decreasedtaxes on the wealthy, increased concentration of wealth, income stagnation forat least the bottom 50%, destruction of remaining unions (especially publicemployees), privatization of public education, and opposition to private insurance-basedObamacare, which for the Koch Brothers isn’t privatized enough. Such state-level policies, when implementedin a critical mass of states, insure a continuation of the above trends in allstates, whether they gain or lose population—a trivial artifact of the brutalclass warfare promoted by the Koch Brothers and the editors of theNews-Gazette. The federal context ofstate-level policy is vital: a privatized healthcare system that wastes atrillion dollars or two; a military-industrial complex that spends anothertrillion in an effort to rule the global economy; Wall Street’s successful legislativeeffort to accumulate ½ of national wealth in the hands of the 1%. Illinois is indeed burdened by aregressive state/local tax system that is easy prey for austerity-mongers.Moreover, both the Koch Brothers-Rauner Republican Party and the Goldman Sachs-Madigan-EmanuelDemocratic Party are in on the fix. Road to ruin | | | | | | | | | | | Road to ruin Population shifts within the United States — who moves where and why — speaks volumes about how well the 50 stat... | | | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From r-szoke at illinois.edu Fri Jan 26 22:34:09 2018 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 22:34:09 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] What, no OBJECTIVIE TRUTH? Message-ID: A note on alleged “relativism” & “subjectivism”: [page1image3848128.png] https://nyti.ms/2Fdsgby Opinion | CONTRIBUTING OP-ED WRITER Is President Trump a Stealth Postmodernist or Just a Liar? Thomas B. Edsall NYT JAN. 25, 2018 How should we explain the fact that President Trump got away with making 2,140 false or misleading claims during his initial year in office? Both the left, in “America’s First Postmodern President” (written by Jeet Heer in The New Republic last summer), and the right, in “Donald Trump is the First President to Turn Postmodernism Against Itself” (written by David Ernst in The Federalist a year ago), have argued that Trump, without knowing the first thing about, say, Michel Foucault, is an avatar of the rejection of objective truth. Postmodernists, Heer wrote, describe a world where Fragmented sound bites have replaced linear thinking, where nostalgia (“Make America Great Again”) has replaced historical consciousness or felt experiences of the past, where simulacra is indistinguishable from reality, where an aesthetic of pastiche and kitsch (Trump Tower) replaces modernism’s striving for purity and elitism, and where a shared plebeian culture of vulgarity papers over intensifying class disparities. In virtually every detail, Trump seems like the perfect manifestation of postmodernism. Along parallel lines, Ernst wrote, if the only one true thing in the world is that all truth and morality are relative, then anyone who pretends otherwise is either an idiot or a fraud. Hence the contemporary appeal of the antihero, and the disappearance of the traditional hero. Scholars of contemporary philosophy argue that postmodernism does not dispute the existence of truth, per se, but rather seeks to interrogate the sources and interests of those making assertions of truth. As Casey Williams wrote in The Stone in The Times last April: Call it what you want: relativism, constructivism, deconstruction, postmodernism, critique. The idea is the same: Truth is not found, but made, and making truth means exercising power. It is not usually the job of political journalists to analyze postmodernism, so I turned to some scholars who are devoted to the subject. Trump’s “truths,” as Alan Schrift, a professor of philosophy at Grinnell College, pointed out, are not socially constructed but emerge from his own personal sense of what will promote his popularity, his power, and his wealth. This is why his particular, and acute, narcissism is so dangerous: he appeals to no social standards at all, only his own imagination as to what is in his own personal interest. Put in the most straightforward terms, Johanna Oksala, a professor of social science and cultural studies at the Pratt Institute, responded by email to my inquiry: I don’t think Trump should be called a postmodern president, but simply a liar. For something to be objectively true, Oksala wrote, does not mean that we have to have (or can have) absolute and eternally infallible knowledge of it. But our knowledge claims have to be available for public scrutiny by the scientific community and go through a rigorous peer- review process in order to qualify as scientific or objective truths. In the Trump era, the core concept of truth has become deeply politicized and among Trump supporters there is scant appetite for “a rigorous peer-review process.” Andrew Cutrofello, a professor of philosophy at Loyola University Chicago, argues this point in an email: In the present political climate truth and power have become uncoupled to a certain extent. It’s natural to wonder whether this means the notion of objective truth has been undermined. But it could be the opposite, namely, that what we’re living through isn’t the loss of the category of objective truth but rather a battle over who has objective truth on their side. In other words, the very category of objective truth has become an ideological weapon, having been displaced from relatively neutral territory to the political battlefield. For some scholars, the attempt to link Trump’s lies — his falsehoods, his prevarications, his exaggerations, his duplicity, his “truthful hyperbole” — with postmodernism grows out of a misperception of the term. Todd May, a professor of philosophy and religion at Clemson, wrote by email that In philosophy, the dominant idea was probably Jean-Francois Lyotard’s view that we are at “the end of grand narratives,” the end of the idea that our history or our world or our existence can be accounted for by a single overarching narrative that accounts for it (or them). In “The Postmodern Condition,” Lyotard conducted a full-scale assault on the idea of a grand narrative as well as an assault on established norms. He wrote: “Simplifying to the extreme, I define postmodern as incredulity toward metanarratives. ... Postmodern knowledge is not simply a tool of the authorities; it refines our sensitivity to differences and reinforces our ability to tolerate the incommensurable.” Daniel Dennett, a professor of philosophy at Tufts, has given much thought to the current state of events. “We’re entering a period of epistemological murk and uncertainty that we’ve not experienced since the Middle Ages,” he told The Guardian. In a 1998 essay, “Postmodernism and Truth,” Dennett explains why, in his view, objective truth is in fact something real, verifiable and of vast importance: We are the species that discovered doubt. Is there enough food laid by for winter? Have I miscalculated? Is my mate cheating on me? Should we have moved south? Is it safe to enter this cave? Dennett adamantly rejects “a slide into some form of relativism.” He argues that while “it is true that past scientific orthodoxies have themselves inspired policies that hindsight reveals to be seriously flawed” and that “the methods of science aren’t foolproof,” it is also true that they are indefinitely perfectible. Just as important: there is a tradition of criticism that enforces improvement whenever and wherever flaws are discovered. The methods of science, like everything else under the sun, are themselves objects of scientific scrutiny, as method becomes methodology, the analysis of methods. Trump’s utter indifference to the truth, what some of his critics have come to call his “normlessness,” is intensely alarming to many Washington analysts. Never before have we had a president, E.J. Dionne, Norman Ornstein and Thomas Mann write in their book, “One Nation After Trump,” who aroused such grave and widespread doubts about his commitment to the institutions of self-government, to the norms democracy requires, to the legitimacy of opposition in a free republic, and to the need for basic knowledge about major policy questions and about how government works. They continue: Norms, we argue, are often more important than formal rules in ensuring the function of a constitutional republic. Observing that “Trump has violated these basic understandings of how our democracy works in an unprecedented way,” Dionne, Mann and Ornstein go on: This norm breaking, is not simply a matter of political nicety. It is part of Trump’s larger assault on our institutions, his tendency to think in autocratic terms, his abusive attitude toward the judicial system, and his disrespect for civil servants and the day-to-day work of government. We show how Trump’s words and behavior parallel those of authoritarian leaders, past and present. William M. Kurtines, Jacob Gewirtz and Jacob L. Lamb draw attention to the link between normlessness and moral disorder. In the Handbook of Moral Behavior and Development (Vol. 3), they write, “Durkheim identified anomie — a condition of normlessness or moral deregulation — as a moral disease more likely to afflict the top than the bottom of society.” Wealth, according to Durkheim, deceives us into believing that we depend on ourselves only. Reducing the resistance we encounter from objects, it suggests the possibility of unlimited success against them. The less limited one feels, the more intolerable all limitation appears. Trump’s status and wealth have allowed him to ignore limits, norms, rules and regulations and have created a vicious circle — as violations of customary norms go unpunished, such violations become ever more widespread. Gary Gutting, an emeritus professor of philosophy at Notre Dame, focuses on the crucial role of power in postmodernism — the power to defy norms and the power to determine the veracity of competing claims. He emailed me: The “modern” in “postmodern” refers to the idea that we should seek truth by the objective methods of reason and science — not by appeals to emotion or tradition. ‘Postmodern’ is often used to refer to those who think there is no objective truth, just various devices we use to con people into agreeing with us. In this sense, Trump is postmodern. But serious postmodern thinkers like Foucault accept the ideal of objective truth. They point out, however, that practices and institutions claiming to be based on scientific truths often turn out to seek power as much or more than truth. Foucault, in particular, worried that what we think of as scientifically enlightened ways of improving society are often covers for increasing power over the people we claim to be helping. For Foucault, Trump, who seeks not truth but only power, would be an extreme example of what serious postmodernism opposes. There was a period, Stephen Greenblatt, a professor of the humanities at Harvard said by email, when a strain in postmodernism was so giddily determined to call into question the posturing of Enlightenment scientism that its advocates recklessly dismissed the very existence of objective truths. To these earlier advocates of postmodernism, everything is just the game of power, they noisily declared, assuring themselves that their deconstructive claims would somehow always be in the service of radical critique. This view, however, “was eviscerated by philosophers like Bernard Williams and has, I think, virtually no current standing.” David Bromwich, a professor of English at Yale, contended that academic skepticism about objective truth doesn’t as a rule deny that we can know the fact of the matter — e.g. the answer to the question “How many German troops crossed bridges over the Rhine on March 7, 1936?” Or “By how many degrees did the average global temperature rise between 1987 and 2017?” Instead, Bromwich argues that academic skepticism is directed against the assumption that any particular interpretation of the facts should be trusted as quite reliable. These movements in theoretical analysis are, however, alien to Trump, Bromwich wrote: Anyway, none of it was required to create Trump’s attitude toward fact and truth. He seems a demagogue of a familiar modern type, but far less coherent and more capricious than most of his predecessors. In an essay in the London Review of Books last year, Bromwich provided insight into how Trump justifies his falsehoods. Bromwich cited a January 2017 ABC interview of Trump by the journalist David Muir, in which Muir repeatedly challenged Trump’s claim that Clinton only won the popular vote because three to five million illegal ballots were cast for her by undocumented immigrants and other noncitizens. In the transcript, Muir and Trump go back and forth for 1,168 words — an eternity on television — until Trump acknowledges how he justifies the claim: “You know what’s important, millions of people agree with me.” Trump told Muir that people called in to say, “ ‘We agree with Mr. Trump. We agree.’ They’re very smart people.” The Muir interview provides evidence in support of a thesis developed by Carlos Prado, professor emeritus of philosophy at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario. Prado argues that instead of representing postmodernism, Trump embodies a very different phenomenon: “Post-Truth.” “Users of post-truth see themselves as expressing their opinions, but opinions that call for no verification, and in being their opinions, are on a par with anyone else’s opinions,” Prado writes in a forthcoming book, “The New Subjectivism”: Post-truth is the final step in the misguided move away from objective truth to relativization of truth. If truth is objective, assertions or propositions are true depending on how things are. If truth is relative, assertions or propositions are true depending on how people take things to be. Trump’s post-truths have drawn a conservative audience of American voters inured to lying. A majority of voters, 59 percent, in an April 2017 Washington Post- ABC News poll, agreed that the Trump administration “regularly makes false claims up,” but, in the same survey, 52 percent said news organizations “regularly produce false stories.” An October 2017 Politico/Morning Consult poll found that a plurality of voters, 46 percent, believe the media fabricate stories about Trump compared to 37 percent who say the media report accurately. “The criticism of postmodern theory as ‘anything goes relativism’ is a bum rap,” says John Caputo, emeritus professor of religion at Syracuse University: In postmodern theory we are better served by the idea of having ‘good reasons,’ meaning the best idea that anybody has at the moment, remembering that some obscure fellow working in a patent office because he can’t find a job teaching physics is liable to change the face of physics tomorrow morning. The problem with Trump, according to Caputo, is not that he is an “anything goes relativist,” but that he is an authoritarian, a would-be strong man, who launches vile personal attacks on anyone who criticizes him. Judith Butler, a professor of comparative literature and the founding director of the program of critical theory at the University of California, Berkeley, voiced disbelief that anyone would be inclined to blame intellectual trends in the academy or in the arts for the way that Trump speaks, thinks, or acts. Given that he does not read very much at all, and that the kind of literary and social theory you reference depends on reading closely, the two trends could not be further apart. Along similar lines, Colin Koopman, a professor of philosophy at the University of Oregon, argued that what is disturbing about Trump is that “he does not value truth in the sense of offering justifications and reasons to those at whom he speaks or tweets.” As a result, Koopman continued in an email, only those who are cynical about truth itself can take him seriously. His style is not “postmodern” at all, but is rather cynical. If postmodernism does not account for Trump’s bludgeoning of the truth, what does? A field that provides insight into the Trump phenomenon is evolutionary theory. Steven Pinker, professor of psychology at Harvard and author of the forthcoming book “Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress,” emailed me his thoughts: The answer lies in raw tribalism: when someone is perceived as a champion of one’s coalition, all is forgiven. The same is true for opinions: a particular issue can become a sacred value, shibboleth, or affirmation of allegiance to one’s team, and its content no longer matters. This is part of a growing realization in political psychology that tribalism has been underestimated in our understanding of politics, and ideological coherence and political and scientific literacy overestimated. Once tribalism becomes embedded in the political system, Pinker wrote, the full ingenuity of human cognition is recruited to valorize the champion and shore up the sacred beliefs. You can always dismiss criticism as being motivated by the bias of one’s enemies. Our cognitive and linguistic faculties are endlessly creative — that’s what makes our species so smart — and that creativity can be always deployed to reframe issues in congenial or invidious terms. Don Symons, professor of anthropology emeritus at the University of California-Santa Barbara, made a similar point in an email: Our species is profoundly coalitional, and in most times and places moral prescriptions apply only to one’s in-group, not to humanity in general. I don’t see any evidence that we evolved innate, universal moral rules about how to treat all humans. That’s why history, as James Joyce said, is a nightmare. Prehistory is worse. I assume that coalitional-thinking is what Trump was getting at when he claimed that he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and his base would still love him. It’s not that they feel that killing a random stranger for no reason is morally ok; it’s that loyalty to their coalition leader is primary. If tribalism has begun to supplant traditional partisanship, their argument suggests, lying in politics will metastasize as traditional constraints continue to fall by the wayside. Trump’s success, such as it is, has been to accelerate the ongoing transformation of traditional political competition into an atavistic struggle in which each side claims moral superiority and defines the opposition as evil. These developments have been unfolding for decades, but the 2016 election was a turning point that appears to have the potential to corrupt the system beyond repair. Trump is determined to leave the destruction of democratic procedure as his legacy. Instead of granting him the title of postmodernist, let’s say instead that Trump is a nihilist who seeks to trample, to trash, to blight, to break and to burn. I invite you to follow me on Twitter, @Edsall. Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter. © 2018 The New York Times Company -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: page1image3848128.png Type: image/png Size: 3959 bytes Desc: page1image3848128.png URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 26 22:50:18 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 22:50:18 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] This week in Zionism References: <1751348751.1375207.1517007018308.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1751348751.1375207.1517007018308@mail.yahoo.com> Israel, are you a real state? Summary of Oren, Tamimi, and assassinating Arafat issues. | | | | | | | | | | | Israel, are you a real state? Michael Oren has made himself a laughingstock by starting an investigation into whether the Tamimi family of Nab... | | | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brussel at illinois.edu Fri Jan 26 22:56:41 2018 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 22:56:41 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] What, no OBJECTIVIE TRUTH? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2CA5E152-2994-493B-B462-C70CE9E876E6@illinois.edu> Yes, academics have to have their say, and insofar as Trump is the target, he has been revealed as ignorant, narcissistic, and stupid. A noxious brew. Jean Bricmont treated much of this quite some time ago. On Jan 26, 2018, at 4:34 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss > wrote: A note on alleged “relativism” & “subjectivism”: https://nyti.ms/2Fdsgby Opinion | CONTRIBUTING OP-ED WRITER Is President Trump a Stealth Postmodernist or Just a Liar? Thomas B. Edsall NYT JAN. 25, 2018 How should we explain the fact that President Trump got away with making 2,140 false or misleading claims during his initial year in office? Both the left, in “America’s First Postmodern President” (written by Jeet Heer in The New Republic last summer), and the right, in “Donald Trump is the First President to Turn Postmodernism Against Itself” (written by David Ernst in The Federalist a year ago), have argued that Trump, without knowing the first thing about, say, Michel Foucault, is an avatar of the rejection of objective truth. Postmodernists, Heer wrote, describe a world where Fragmented sound bites have replaced linear thinking, where nostalgia (“Make America Great Again”) has replaced historical consciousness or felt experiences of the past, where simulacra is indistinguishable from reality, where an aesthetic of pastiche and kitsch (Trump Tower) replaces modernism’s striving for purity and elitism, and where a shared plebeian culture of vulgarity papers over intensifying class disparities. In virtually every detail, Trump seems like the perfect manifestation of postmodernism. Along parallel lines, Ernst wrote, if the only one true thing in the world is that all truth and morality are relative, then anyone who pretends otherwise is either an idiot or a fraud. Hence the contemporary appeal of the antihero, and the disappearance of the traditional hero. Scholars of contemporary philosophy argue that postmodernism does not dispute the existence of truth, per se, but rather seeks to interrogate the sources and interests of those making assertions of truth. As Casey Williams wrote in The Stone in The Times last April: Call it what you want: relativism, constructivism, deconstruction, postmodernism, critique. The idea is the same: Truth is not found, but made, and making truth means exercising power. It is not usually the job of political journalists to analyze postmodernism, so I turned to some scholars who are devoted to the subject. Trump’s “truths,” as Alan Schrift, a professor of philosophy at Grinnell College, pointed out, are not socially constructed but emerge from his own personal sense of what will promote his popularity, his power, and his wealth. This is why his particular, and acute, narcissism is so dangerous: he appeals to no social standards at all, only his own imagination as to what is in his own personal interest. Put in the most straightforward terms, Johanna Oksala, a professor of social science and cultural studies at the Pratt Institute, responded by email to my inquiry: I don’t think Trump should be called a postmodern president, but simply a liar. For something to be objectively true, Oksala wrote, does not mean that we have to have (or can have) absolute and eternally infallible knowledge of it. But our knowledge claims have to be available for public scrutiny by the scientific community and go through a rigorous peer- review process in order to qualify as scientific or objective truths. In the Trump era, the core concept of truth has become deeply politicized and among Trump supporters there is scant appetite for “a rigorous peer-review process.” Andrew Cutrofello, a professor of philosophy at Loyola University Chicago, argues this point in an email: In the present political climate truth and power have become uncoupled to a certain extent. It’s natural to wonder whether this means the notion of objective truth has been undermined. But it could be the opposite, namely, that what we’re living through isn’t the loss of the category of objective truth but rather a battle over who has objective truth on their side. In other words, the very category of objective truth has become an ideological weapon, having been displaced from relatively neutral territory to the political battlefield. For some scholars, the attempt to link Trump’s lies — his falsehoods, his prevarications, his exaggerations, his duplicity, his “truthful hyperbole” — with postmodernism grows out of a misperception of the term. Todd May, a professor of philosophy and religion at Clemson, wrote by email that In philosophy, the dominant idea was probably Jean-Francois Lyotard’s view that we are at “the end of grand narratives,” the end of the idea that our history or our world or our existence can be accounted for by a single overarching narrative that accounts for it (or them). In “The Postmodern Condition,” Lyotard conducted a full-scale assault on the idea of a grand narrative as well as an assault on established norms. He wrote: “Simplifying to the extreme, I define postmodern as incredulity toward metanarratives. ... Postmodern knowledge is not simply a tool of the authorities; it refines our sensitivity to differences and reinforces our ability to tolerate the incommensurable.” Daniel Dennett, a professor of philosophy at Tufts, has given much thought to the current state of events. “We’re entering a period of epistemological murk and uncertainty that we’ve not experienced since the Middle Ages,” he told The Guardian. In a 1998 essay, “Postmodernism and Truth,” Dennett explains why, in his view, objective truth is in fact something real, verifiable and of vast importance: We are the species that discovered doubt. Is there enough food laid by for winter? Have I miscalculated? Is my mate cheating on me? Should we have moved south? Is it safe to enter this cave? Dennett adamantly rejects “a slide into some form of relativism.” He argues that while “it is true that past scientific orthodoxies have themselves inspired policies that hindsight reveals to be seriously flawed” and that “the methods of science aren’t foolproof,” it is also true that they are indefinitely perfectible. Just as important: there is a tradition of criticism that enforces improvement whenever and wherever flaws are discovered. The methods of science, like everything else under the sun, are themselves objects of scientific scrutiny, as method becomes methodology, the analysis of methods. Trump’s utter indifference to the truth, what some of his critics have come to call his “normlessness,” is intensely alarming to many Washington analysts. Never before have we had a president, E.J. Dionne, Norman Ornstein and Thomas Mann write in their book, “One Nation After Trump,” who aroused such grave and widespread doubts about his commitment to the institutions of self-government, to the norms democracy requires, to the legitimacy of opposition in a free republic, and to the need for basic knowledge about major policy questions and about how government works. They continue: Norms, we argue, are often more important than formal rules in ensuring the function of a constitutional republic. Observing that “Trump has violated these basic understandings of how our democracy works in an unprecedented way,” Dionne, Mann and Ornstein go on: This norm breaking, is not simply a matter of political nicety. It is part of Trump’s larger assault on our institutions, his tendency to think in autocratic terms, his abusive attitude toward the judicial system, and his disrespect for civil servants and the day-to-day work of government. We show how Trump’s words and behavior parallel those of authoritarian leaders, past and present. William M. Kurtines, Jacob Gewirtz and Jacob L. Lamb draw attention to the link between normlessness and moral disorder. In the Handbook of Moral Behavior and Development (Vol. 3), they write, “Durkheim identified anomie — a condition of normlessness or moral deregulation — as a moral disease more likely to afflict the top than the bottom of society.” Wealth, according to Durkheim, deceives us into believing that we depend on ourselves only. Reducing the resistance we encounter from objects, it suggests the possibility of unlimited success against them. The less limited one feels, the more intolerable all limitation appears. Trump’s status and wealth have allowed him to ignore limits, norms, rules and regulations and have created a vicious circle — as violations of customary norms go unpunished, such violations become ever more widespread. Gary Gutting, an emeritus professor of philosophy at Notre Dame, focuses on the crucial role of power in postmodernism — the power to defy norms and the power to determine the veracity of competing claims. He emailed me: The “modern” in “postmodern” refers to the idea that we should seek truth by the objective methods of reason and science — not by appeals to emotion or tradition. ‘Postmodern’ is often used to refer to those who think there is no objective truth, just various devices we use to con people into agreeing with us. In this sense, Trump is postmodern. But serious postmodern thinkers like Foucault accept the ideal of objective truth. They point out, however, that practices and institutions claiming to be based on scientific truths often turn out to seek power as much or more than truth. Foucault, in particular, worried that what we think of as scientifically enlightened ways of improving society are often covers for increasing power over the people we claim to be helping. For Foucault, Trump, who seeks not truth but only power, would be an extreme example of what serious postmodernism opposes. There was a period, Stephen Greenblatt, a professor of the humanities at Harvard said by email, when a strain in postmodernism was so giddily determined to call into question the posturing of Enlightenment scientism that its advocates recklessly dismissed the very existence of objective truths. To these earlier advocates of postmodernism, everything is just the game of power, they noisily declared, assuring themselves that their deconstructive claims would somehow always be in the service of radical critique. This view, however, “was eviscerated by philosophers like Bernard Williams and has, I think, virtually no current standing.” David Bromwich, a professor of English at Yale, contended that academic skepticism about objective truth doesn’t as a rule deny that we can know the fact of the matter — e.g. the answer to the question “How many German troops crossed bridges over the Rhine on March 7, 1936?” Or “By how many degrees did the average global temperature rise between 1987 and 2017?” Instead, Bromwich argues that academic skepticism is directed against the assumption that any particular interpretation of the facts should be trusted as quite reliable. These movements in theoretical analysis are, however, alien to Trump, Bromwich wrote: Anyway, none of it was required to create Trump’s attitude toward fact and truth. He seems a demagogue of a familiar modern type, but far less coherent and more capricious than most of his predecessors. In an essay in the London Review of Books last year, Bromwich provided insight into how Trump justifies his falsehoods. Bromwich cited a January 2017 ABC interview of Trump by the journalist David Muir, in which Muir repeatedly challenged Trump’s claim that Clinton only won the popular vote because three to five million illegal ballots were cast for her by undocumented immigrants and other noncitizens. In the transcript, Muir and Trump go back and forth for 1,168 words — an eternity on television — until Trump acknowledges how he justifies the claim: “You know what’s important, millions of people agree with me.” Trump told Muir that people called in to say, “ ‘We agree with Mr. Trump. We agree.’ They’re very smart people.” The Muir interview provides evidence in support of a thesis developed by Carlos Prado, professor emeritus of philosophy at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario. Prado argues that instead of representing postmodernism, Trump embodies a very different phenomenon: “Post-Truth.” “Users of post-truth see themselves as expressing their opinions, but opinions that call for no verification, and in being their opinions, are on a par with anyone else’s opinions,” Prado writes in a forthcoming book, “The New Subjectivism”: Post-truth is the final step in the misguided move away from objective truth to relativization of truth. If truth is objective, assertions or propositions are true depending on how things are. If truth is relative, assertions or propositions are true depending on how people take things to be. Trump’s post-truths have drawn a conservative audience of American voters inured to lying. A majority of voters, 59 percent, in an April 2017 Washington Post- ABC News poll, agreed that the Trump administration “regularly makes false claims up,” but, in the same survey, 52 percent said news organizations “regularly produce false stories.” An October 2017 Politico/Morning Consult poll found that a plurality of voters, 46 percent, believe the media fabricate stories about Trump compared to 37 percent who say the media report accurately. “The criticism of postmodern theory as ‘anything goes relativism’ is a bum rap,” says John Caputo, emeritus professor of religion at Syracuse University: In postmodern theory we are better served by the idea of having ‘good reasons,’ meaning the best idea that anybody has at the moment, remembering that some obscure fellow working in a patent office because he can’t find a job teaching physics is liable to change the face of physics tomorrow morning. The problem with Trump, according to Caputo, is not that he is an “anything goes relativist,” but that he is an authoritarian, a would-be strong man, who launches vile personal attacks on anyone who criticizes him. Judith Butler, a professor of comparative literature and the founding director of the program of critical theory at the University of California, Berkeley, voiced disbelief that anyone would be inclined to blame intellectual trends in the academy or in the arts for the way that Trump speaks, thinks, or acts. Given that he does not read very much at all, and that the kind of literary and social theory you reference depends on reading closely, the two trends could not be further apart. Along similar lines, Colin Koopman, a professor of philosophy at the University of Oregon, argued that what is disturbing about Trump is that “he does not value truth in the sense of offering justifications and reasons to those at whom he speaks or tweets.” As a result, Koopman continued in an email, only those who are cynical about truth itself can take him seriously. His style is not “postmodern” at all, but is rather cynical. If postmodernism does not account for Trump’s bludgeoning of the truth, what does? A field that provides insight into the Trump phenomenon is evolutionary theory. Steven Pinker, professor of psychology at Harvard and author of the forthcoming book “Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress,” emailed me his thoughts: The answer lies in raw tribalism: when someone is perceived as a champion of one’s coalition, all is forgiven. The same is true for opinions: a particular issue can become a sacred value, shibboleth, or affirmation of allegiance to one’s team, and its content no longer matters. This is part of a growing realization in political psychology that tribalism has been underestimated in our understanding of politics, and ideological coherence and political and scientific literacy overestimated. Once tribalism becomes embedded in the political system, Pinker wrote, the full ingenuity of human cognition is recruited to valorize the champion and shore up the sacred beliefs. You can always dismiss criticism as being motivated by the bias of one’s enemies. Our cognitive and linguistic faculties are endlessly creative — that’s what makes our species so smart — and that creativity can be always deployed to reframe issues in congenial or invidious terms. Don Symons, professor of anthropology emeritus at the University of California-Santa Barbara, made a similar point in an email: Our species is profoundly coalitional, and in most times and places moral prescriptions apply only to one’s in-group, not to humanity in general. I don’t see any evidence that we evolved innate, universal moral rules about how to treat all humans. That’s why history, as James Joyce said, is a nightmare. Prehistory is worse. I assume that coalitional-thinking is what Trump was getting at when he claimed that he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and his base would still love him. It’s not that they feel that killing a random stranger for no reason is morally ok; it’s that loyalty to their coalition leader is primary. If tribalism has begun to supplant traditional partisanship, their argument suggests, lying in politics will metastasize as traditional constraints continue to fall by the wayside. Trump’s success, such as it is, has been to accelerate the ongoing transformation of traditional political competition into an atavistic struggle in which each side claims moral superiority and defines the opposition as evil. These developments have been unfolding for decades, but the 2016 election was a turning point that appears to have the potential to corrupt the system beyond repair. Trump is determined to leave the destruction of democratic procedure as his legacy. Instead of granting him the title of postmodernist, let’s say instead that Trump is a nihilist who seeks to trample, to trash, to blight, to break and to burn. I invite you to follow me on Twitter, @Edsall. Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter. © 2018 The New York Times Company _______________________________________________ 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 Sat Jan 27 01:58:32 2018 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 19:58:32 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] What, no OBJECTIVIE TRUTH? In-Reply-To: <2CA5E152-2994-493B-B462-C70CE9E876E6@illinois.edu> References: <2CA5E152-2994-493B-B462-C70CE9E876E6@illinois.edu> Message-ID: <60062970-4960-4E74-9D3B-1B69099160F4@illinois.edu> I hear Mao Zedong didn’t brush his teeth in his old age. That’s surely more important than the policies of the Chinese government 1949-76… Trump’s critics seem to lack the courage to admit what his real sins are: he was the first major party presidential candidate in 40 years to attack the neoliberal and neoconservative policies followed by all administrations in those years - policies that produced always more war and more inequality. He must be made to conform, by whatever means... > On Jan 26, 2018, at 4:56 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Yes, academics have to have their say, and insofar as Trump is the target, he has been revealed as ignorant, narcissistic, and stupid. A noxious brew. Jean Bricmont treated much of this quite some time ago. > >> On Jan 26, 2018, at 4:34 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> A note on alleged “relativism” & “subjectivism”: >> >> https://nyti.ms/2Fdsgby >> Opinion | CONTRIBUTING OP-ED WRITER >> >> Is President Trump a Stealth Postmodernist or Just a Liar? >> Thomas B. Edsall NYT JAN. 25, 2018 >> How should we explain the fact that President Trump got away with making 2,140 false or misleading claims during his initial year in office? >> >> Both the left, in “America’s First Postmodern President” (written by Jeet Heer in The New Republic last summer), and the right, in “Donald Trump is the First President to Turn Postmodernism Against Itself” (written by David Ernst in The Federalist a year ago), have argued that Trump, without knowing the first thing about, say, Michel Foucault, is an avatar of the rejection of objective truth. >> >> Postmodernists, Heer wrote, describe a world where >> >> Fragmented sound bites have replaced linear thinking, where nostalgia (“Make America Great Again”) has replaced historical consciousness or felt experiences of the past, where simulacra is indistinguishable from reality, where an aesthetic of pastiche and kitsch (Trump Tower) replaces modernism’s striving for purity and elitism, and where a shared plebeian culture of vulgarity papers over intensifying class disparities. In virtually every detail, Trump seems like the perfect manifestation of postmodernism. >> >> Along parallel lines, Ernst wrote, >> >> if the only one true thing in the world is that all truth and morality are relative, then anyone who pretends otherwise is either an idiot or a fraud. Hence the contemporary appeal of the antihero, and the disappearance of the traditional hero. >> >> Scholars of contemporary philosophy argue that postmodernism does not dispute the existence of truth, per se, but rather seeks to interrogate the sources and interests of those making assertions of truth. As Casey Williams wrote in The Stone in The Times last April: >> >> Call it what you want: relativism, constructivism, deconstruction, postmodernism, critique. The idea is the same: Truth is not found, but made, and making truth means exercising power. >> >> It is not usually the job of political journalists to analyze postmodernism, so I turned to some scholars who are devoted to the subject. >> >> Trump’s “truths,” as Alan Schrift, a professor of philosophy at Grinnell College, pointed out, >> >> are not socially constructed but emerge from his own personal sense of what will promote his popularity, his power, and his wealth. This is why his particular, and acute, narcissism is so dangerous: he appeals to no social standards at all, only his own imagination as to what is in his own personal interest. >> >> Put in the most straightforward terms, Johanna Oksala, a professor of social science and cultural studies at the Pratt Institute, responded by email to my inquiry: >> >> I don’t think Trump should be called a postmodern president, but simply a liar. For something to be objectively true, Oksala wrote, >> >> does not mean that we have to have (or can have) absolute and eternally infallible knowledge of it. But our knowledge claims have to be available for public scrutiny by the scientific community and go through a rigorous peer- review process in order to qualify as scientific or objective truths. >> >> In the Trump era, the core concept of truth has become deeply politicized and among Trump supporters there is scant appetite for “a rigorous peer-review process.” Andrew Cutrofello, a professor of philosophy at Loyola University Chicago, argues this point in an email: >> >> In the present political climate truth and power have become uncoupled to a certain extent. It’s natural to wonder whether this means the notion of objective truth has been undermined. But it could be the opposite, namely, that what we’re living through isn’t the loss of the category of objective truth but rather a battle over who has objective truth on their side. In other words, the very category of objective truth has become an ideological weapon, having been displaced from relatively neutral territory to the political battlefield. >> >> For some scholars, the attempt to link Trump’s lies — his falsehoods, his prevarications, his exaggerations, his duplicity, his “truthful hyperbole” — with postmodernism grows out of a misperception of the term. >> >> Todd May, a professor of philosophy and religion at Clemson, wrote by email that >> >> In philosophy, the dominant idea was probably Jean-Francois Lyotard’s view >> >> that we are at “the end of grand narratives,” the end of the idea that our history or our world or our existence can be accounted for by a single overarching narrative that accounts for it (or them). >> >> In “The Postmodern Condition,” Lyotard conducted a full-scale assault on the idea of a grand narrative as well as an assault on established norms. He wrote: “Simplifying to the extreme, I define postmodern as incredulity toward metanarratives. ... Postmodern knowledge is not simply a tool of the authorities; it refines our sensitivity to differences and reinforces our ability to tolerate the incommensurable.” >> >> Daniel Dennett, a professor of philosophy at Tufts, has given much thought to the current state of events. “We’re entering a period of epistemological murk and uncertainty that we’ve not experienced since the Middle Ages,” he told The Guardian. In a 1998 essay, “Postmodernism and Truth,” Dennett explains why, in his view, objective truth is in fact something real, verifiable and of vast importance: >> >> We are the species that discovered doubt. Is there enough food laid by for winter? Have I miscalculated? Is my mate cheating on me? Should we have moved south? Is it safe to enter this cave? >> >> Dennett adamantly rejects “a slide into some form of relativism.” He argues that while “it is true that past scientific orthodoxies have themselves inspired policies that hindsight reveals to be seriously flawed” and that “the methods of science aren’t foolproof,” it is also true that >> >> they are indefinitely perfectible. Just as important: there is a tradition of criticism that enforces improvement whenever and wherever flaws are discovered. The methods of science, like everything else under the sun, are themselves objects of scientific scrutiny, as method becomes methodology, the analysis of methods. >> >> Trump’s utter indifference to the truth, what some of his critics have come to call his “normlessness,” is intensely alarming to many Washington analysts. >> >> Never before have we had a president, E.J. Dionne, Norman Ornstein and >> >> Thomas Mann write in their book, “One Nation After Trump,” >> >> who aroused such grave and widespread doubts about his commitment to the institutions of self-government, to the norms democracy requires, to the legitimacy of opposition in a free republic, and to the need for basic knowledge about major policy questions and about how government works. >> >> They continue: >> >> Norms, we argue, are often more important than formal rules in ensuring the function of a constitutional republic. >> >> Observing that “Trump has violated these basic understandings of how our democracy works in an unprecedented way,” Dionne, Mann and Ornstein go on: >> >> This norm breaking, is not simply a matter of political nicety. It is part of Trump’s larger assault on our institutions, his tendency to think in autocratic terms, his abusive attitude toward the judicial system, and his disrespect for civil servants and the day-to-day work of government. We show how Trump’s words and behavior parallel those of authoritarian leaders, past and present. >> >> William M. Kurtines, Jacob Gewirtz and Jacob L. Lamb draw attention to the link between normlessness and moral disorder. In the Handbook of Moral Behavior and Development (Vol. 3), they write, “Durkheim identified anomie — a condition of normlessness or moral deregulation — as a moral disease more likely to afflict the top than the bottom of society.” >> >> Wealth, according to Durkheim, >> >> deceives us into believing that we depend on ourselves only. Reducing the resistance we encounter from objects, it suggests the possibility of unlimited success against them. The less limited one feels, the more intolerable all limitation appears. >> >> Trump’s status and wealth have allowed him to ignore limits, norms, rules and regulations and have created a vicious circle — as violations of customary norms go >> >> unpunished, such violations become ever more widespread. >> >> Gary Gutting, an emeritus professor of philosophy at Notre Dame, focuses on the crucial role of power in postmodernism — the power to defy norms and the power to determine the veracity of competing claims. He emailed me: >> >> The “modern” in “postmodern” refers to the idea that we should seek truth by the objective methods of reason and science — not by appeals to emotion or tradition. ‘Postmodern’ is often used to refer to those who think there is no objective truth, just various devices we use to con people into agreeing with us. In this sense, Trump is postmodern. >> >> But serious postmodern thinkers like Foucault accept the ideal of objective truth. They point out, however, that practices and institutions claiming to be based on scientific truths often turn out to seek power as much or more than truth. Foucault, in particular, worried that what we think of as scientifically enlightened ways of improving society are often covers for increasing power over the people we claim to be helping. >> >> For Foucault, Trump, who seeks not truth but only power, would be an extreme example of what serious postmodernism opposes. >> >> There was a period, Stephen Greenblatt, a professor of the humanities at Harvard said by email, when >> >> a strain in postmodernism was so giddily determined to call into question the posturing of Enlightenment scientism that its advocates recklessly dismissed the very existence of objective truths. >> >> To these earlier advocates of postmodernism, >> >> everything is just the game of power, they noisily declared, assuring themselves that their deconstructive claims would somehow always be in the service of radical critique. >> >> This view, however, “was eviscerated by philosophers like Bernard Williams and has, I think, virtually no current standing.” >> >> David Bromwich, a professor of English at Yale, contended that >> >> academic skepticism about objective truth doesn’t as a rule deny that we can know the fact of the matter — e.g. the answer to the question “How many German troops crossed bridges over the Rhine on March 7, 1936?” Or “By how many degrees did the average global temperature rise between 1987 and 2017?” >> >> Instead, Bromwich argues that academic skepticism >> >> is directed against the assumption that any particular interpretation of the facts should be trusted as quite reliable. >> >> These movements in theoretical analysis are, however, alien to Trump, Bromwich wrote: >> >> Anyway, none of it was required to create Trump’s attitude toward fact and truth. He seems a demagogue of a familiar modern type, but far less coherent and more capricious than most of his predecessors. >> >> In an essay in the London Review of Books last year, Bromwich provided insight into how Trump justifies his falsehoods. Bromwich cited a January 2017 ABC interview of Trump by the journalist David Muir, in which Muir repeatedly challenged Trump’s claim that Clinton only won the popular vote because three to five million illegal ballots were cast for her by undocumented immigrants and other noncitizens. >> >> In the transcript, Muir and Trump go back and forth for 1,168 words — an eternity on television — until Trump acknowledges how he justifies the claim: “You know what’s important, millions of people agree with me.” Trump told Muir that people called in to say, “ ‘We agree with Mr. Trump. We agree.’ They’re very smart people.” >> >> The Muir interview provides evidence in support of a thesis developed by Carlos Prado, professor emeritus of philosophy at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario. Prado argues that instead of representing postmodernism, Trump embodies a very different phenomenon: “Post-Truth.” >> >> “Users of post-truth see themselves as expressing their opinions, but opinions that call for no verification, and in being their opinions, are on a par with anyone else’s opinions,” Prado writes in a forthcoming book, “The New Subjectivism”: >> >> Post-truth is the final step in the misguided move away from objective truth to relativization of truth. If truth is objective, assertions or propositions are true depending on how things are. If truth is relative, assertions or propositions are true depending on how people take things to be. >> >> Trump’s post-truths have drawn a conservative audience of American voters inured to lying. A majority of voters, 59 percent, in an April 2017 Washington Post- ABC News poll, agreed that the Trump administration “regularly makes false claims up,” but, in the same survey, 52 percent said news organizations “regularly produce false stories.” An October 2017 Politico/Morning Consult poll found that a plurality of voters, 46 percent, believe the media fabricate stories about Trump compared to 37 percent who say the media report accurately. >> >> “The criticism of postmodern theory as ‘anything goes relativism’ is a bum rap,” says John Caputo, emeritus professor of religion at Syracuse University: >> >> In postmodern theory we are better served by the idea of having ‘good reasons,’ meaning the best idea that anybody has at the moment, remembering that some obscure fellow working in a patent office because he can’t find a job teaching physics is liable to change the face of physics tomorrow morning. >> >> The problem with Trump, according to Caputo, >> >> is not that he is an “anything goes relativist,” but that he is an authoritarian, a would-be strong man, who launches vile personal attacks on anyone who criticizes him. >> >> Judith Butler, a professor of comparative literature and the founding director of the program of critical theory at the University of California, Berkeley, voiced disbelief that >> >> anyone would be inclined to blame intellectual trends in the academy or in the arts for the way that Trump speaks, thinks, or acts. Given that he does not read very much at all, and that the kind of literary and social theory you reference depends on reading closely, the two trends could not be further apart. >> >> Along similar lines, Colin Koopman, a professor of philosophy at the University of Oregon, argued that what is disturbing about Trump is that “he does not value truth in the sense of offering justifications and reasons to those at whom he speaks or tweets.” >> >> As a result, Koopman continued in an email, >> >> only those who are cynical about truth itself can take him seriously. His style is not “postmodern” at all, but is rather cynical. >> >> If postmodernism does not account for Trump’s bludgeoning of the truth, what does? A field that provides insight into the Trump phenomenon is evolutionary theory. >> >> Steven Pinker, professor of psychology at Harvard and author of the forthcoming book “Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress,” emailed me his thoughts: >> >> The answer lies in raw tribalism: when someone is perceived as a champion of one’s coalition, all is forgiven. The same is true for opinions: a particular issue can become a sacred value, shibboleth, or affirmation of allegiance to one’s team, and its content no longer matters. This is part of a growing realization in political psychology that tribalism has been underestimated in our understanding of politics, and ideological coherence and political and scientific literacy overestimated. >> >> Once tribalism becomes embedded in the political system, Pinker wrote, >> >> the full ingenuity of human cognition is recruited to valorize the champion and shore up the sacred beliefs. You can always dismiss criticism as being motivated by the bias of one’s enemies. Our cognitive and linguistic faculties are endlessly creative — that’s what makes our species so smart — and that creativity can be >> >> always deployed to reframe issues in congenial or invidious terms. >> >> Don Symons, professor of anthropology emeritus at the University of California-Santa Barbara, made a similar point in an email: >> >> Our species is profoundly coalitional, and in most times and places moral prescriptions apply only to one’s in-group, not to humanity in general. I don’t see any evidence that we evolved innate, universal moral rules about how to treat all humans. That’s why history, as James Joyce said, is a nightmare. Prehistory is worse. I assume that coalitional-thinking is what Trump was getting at when he claimed that he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and his base would still love him. It’s not that they feel that killing a random stranger for no reason is morally ok; it’s that loyalty to their coalition leader is primary. >> >> If tribalism has begun to supplant traditional partisanship, their argument suggests, lying in politics will metastasize as traditional constraints continue to fall by the wayside. >> >> Trump’s success, such as it is, has been to accelerate the ongoing transformation of traditional political competition into an atavistic struggle in which each side claims moral superiority and defines the opposition as evil. >> >> These developments have been unfolding for decades, but the 2016 election was a turning point that appears to have the potential to corrupt the system beyond repair. Trump is determined to leave the destruction of democratic procedure as his legacy. Instead of granting him the title of postmodernist, let’s say instead that Trump is a nihilist who seeks to trample, to trash, to blight, to break and to burn. >> >> I invite you to follow me on Twitter, @Edsall. >> >> Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter. >> >> © 2018 The New York Times Company >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 stuartnlevy at gmail.com Sat Jan 27 03:19:39 2018 From: stuartnlevy at gmail.com (Stuart Levy) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 21:19:39 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Today's letter to News-Gazette In-Reply-To: <182251147.1364085.1517004746525@mail.yahoo.com> References: <182251147.1364085.1517004746525.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <182251147.1364085.1517004746525@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: David, what an excellent letter.   Thank you for exposing class warfare so clearly. And, glad you included the final sentence.   This isn't a matter of party A vs. party B. On 01/26/2018 04:12 PM, David Green via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Regarding “Road to Ruin” (1/21), the editors—as always—rely on the > Koch Brothers’ (American Legislative Exchange Council, Illinois Policy > Institute) analysis of yearly Illinois population loss of ¼ of 1% to > argue for lower taxes, decreased environmental and workplace > regulation, and governmental austerity in all areas that actually help > people (which excludes military spending). > > This is part of a national libertarian-neoliberal agenda to convince > state legislatures to participate in a race to the bottom > characterized by decreased taxes on the wealthy, increased > concentration of wealth, income stagnation for at least the bottom > 50%, destruction of remaining unions (especially public employees), > privatization of public education, and opposition to private > insurance-based Obamacare, which for the Koch Brothers isn’t > privatized enough. > > Such state-level policies, when implemented in a critical mass of > states, insure a continuation of the above trends in all states, > whether they gain or lose population—a trivial artifact of the brutal > class warfare promoted by the Koch Brothers and the editors of the > News-Gazette. > > The federal context of state-level policy is vital: a privatized > healthcare system that wastes a trillion dollars or two; a > military-industrial complex that spends another trillion in an effort > to rule the global economy; Wall Street’s successful legislative > effort to accumulate ½ of national wealth in the hands of the 1%. > > Illinois is indeed burdened by a regressive state/local tax system > that is easy prey for austerity-mongers. Moreover, both the Koch > Brothers-Rauner Republican Party and the Goldman Sachs-Madigan-Emanuel > Democratic Party are in on the fix. > > Road to ruin > > > > > > > > > > > Road to ruin > > Population shifts within the United States — who moves where and why — > speaks volumes about how well the 50 stat... > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Sat Jan 27 04:31:31 2018 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2018 04:31:31 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] What, no OBJECTIVIE TRUTH? In-Reply-To: <60062970-4960-4E74-9D3B-1B69099160F4@illinois.edu> References: <2CA5E152-2994-493B-B462-C70CE9E876E6@illinois.edu> <60062970-4960-4E74-9D3B-1B69099160F4@illinois.edu> Message-ID: <032C69C6-33AF-4375-83D4-094FD3E75773@illinois.edu> It seems like you think Trump is brilliant (certainly not ignorant), analytical (has thought through his political statements and positions), and an anticapitalist to boot. Sad. > On Jan 26, 2018, at 7:58 PM, Carl G. Estabrook wrote: > > I hear Mao Zedong didn’t brush his teeth in his old age. That’s surely more important than the policies of the Chinese government 1949-76… > > Trump’s critics seem to lack the courage to admit what his real sins are: he was the first major party presidential candidate in 40 years to attack the neoliberal and neoconservative policies followed by all administrations in those years - policies that produced always more war and more inequality. > > He must be made to conform, by whatever means... > > >> On Jan 26, 2018, at 4:56 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> Yes, academics have to have their say, and insofar as Trump is the target, he has been revealed as ignorant, narcissistic, and stupid. A noxious brew. Jean Bricmont treated much of this quite some time ago. >> >>> On Jan 26, 2018, at 4:34 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss wrote: >>> >>> A note on alleged “relativism” & “subjectivism”: >>> >>> https://nyti.ms/2Fdsgby >>> Opinion | CONTRIBUTING OP-ED WRITER >>> >>> Is President Trump a Stealth Postmodernist or Just a Liar? >>> Thomas B. Edsall NYT JAN. 25, 2018 >>> How should we explain the fact that President Trump got away with making 2,140 false or misleading claims during his initial year in office? >>> >>> Both the left, in “America’s First Postmodern President” (written by Jeet Heer in The New Republic last summer), and the right, in “Donald Trump is the First President to Turn Postmodernism Against Itself” (written by David Ernst in The Federalist a year ago), have argued that Trump, without knowing the first thing about, say, Michel Foucault, is an avatar of the rejection of objective truth. >>> >>> Postmodernists, Heer wrote, describe a world where >>> >>> Fragmented sound bites have replaced linear thinking, where nostalgia (“Make America Great Again”) has replaced historical consciousness or felt experiences of the past, where simulacra is indistinguishable from reality, where an aesthetic of pastiche and kitsch (Trump Tower) replaces modernism’s striving for purity and elitism, and where a shared plebeian culture of vulgarity papers over intensifying class disparities. In virtually every detail, Trump seems like the perfect manifestation of postmodernism. >>> >>> Along parallel lines, Ernst wrote, >>> >>> if the only one true thing in the world is that all truth and morality are relative, then anyone who pretends otherwise is either an idiot or a fraud. Hence the contemporary appeal of the antihero, and the disappearance of the traditional hero. >>> >>> Scholars of contemporary philosophy argue that postmodernism does not dispute the existence of truth, per se, but rather seeks to interrogate the sources and interests of those making assertions of truth. As Casey Williams wrote in The Stone in The Times last April: >>> >>> Call it what you want: relativism, constructivism, deconstruction, postmodernism, critique. The idea is the same: Truth is not found, but made, and making truth means exercising power. >>> >>> It is not usually the job of political journalists to analyze postmodernism, so I turned to some scholars who are devoted to the subject. >>> >>> Trump’s “truths,” as Alan Schrift, a professor of philosophy at Grinnell College, pointed out, >>> >>> are not socially constructed but emerge from his own personal sense of what will promote his popularity, his power, and his wealth. This is why his particular, and acute, narcissism is so dangerous: he appeals to no social standards at all, only his own imagination as to what is in his own personal interest. >>> >>> Put in the most straightforward terms, Johanna Oksala, a professor of social science and cultural studies at the Pratt Institute, responded by email to my inquiry: >>> >>> I don’t think Trump should be called a postmodern president, but simply a liar. For something to be objectively true, Oksala wrote, >>> >>> does not mean that we have to have (or can have) absolute and eternally infallible knowledge of it. But our knowledge claims have to be available for public scrutiny by the scientific community and go through a rigorous peer- review process in order to qualify as scientific or objective truths. >>> >>> In the Trump era, the core concept of truth has become deeply politicized and among Trump supporters there is scant appetite for “a rigorous peer-review process.” Andrew Cutrofello, a professor of philosophy at Loyola University Chicago, argues this point in an email: >>> >>> In the present political climate truth and power have become uncoupled to a certain extent. It’s natural to wonder whether this means the notion of objective truth has been undermined. But it could be the opposite, namely, that what we’re living through isn’t the loss of the category of objective truth but rather a battle over who has objective truth on their side. In other words, the very category of objective truth has become an ideological weapon, having been displaced from relatively neutral territory to the political battlefield. >>> >>> For some scholars, the attempt to link Trump’s lies — his falsehoods, his prevarications, his exaggerations, his duplicity, his “truthful hyperbole” — with postmodernism grows out of a misperception of the term. >>> >>> Todd May, a professor of philosophy and religion at Clemson, wrote by email that >>> >>> In philosophy, the dominant idea was probably Jean-Francois Lyotard’s view >>> >>> that we are at “the end of grand narratives,” the end of the idea that our history or our world or our existence can be accounted for by a single overarching narrative that accounts for it (or them). >>> >>> In “The Postmodern Condition,” Lyotard conducted a full-scale assault on the idea of a grand narrative as well as an assault on established norms. He wrote: “Simplifying to the extreme, I define postmodern as incredulity toward metanarratives. ... Postmodern knowledge is not simply a tool of the authorities; it refines our sensitivity to differences and reinforces our ability to tolerate the incommensurable.” >>> >>> Daniel Dennett, a professor of philosophy at Tufts, has given much thought to the current state of events. “We’re entering a period of epistemological murk and uncertainty that we’ve not experienced since the Middle Ages,” he told The Guardian. In a 1998 essay, “Postmodernism and Truth,” Dennett explains why, in his view, objective truth is in fact something real, verifiable and of vast importance: >>> >>> We are the species that discovered doubt. Is there enough food laid by for winter? Have I miscalculated? Is my mate cheating on me? Should we have moved south? Is it safe to enter this cave? >>> >>> Dennett adamantly rejects “a slide into some form of relativism.” He argues that while “it is true that past scientific orthodoxies have themselves inspired policies that hindsight reveals to be seriously flawed” and that “the methods of science aren’t foolproof,” it is also true that >>> >>> they are indefinitely perfectible. Just as important: there is a tradition of criticism that enforces improvement whenever and wherever flaws are discovered. The methods of science, like everything else under the sun, are themselves objects of scientific scrutiny, as method becomes methodology, the analysis of methods. >>> >>> Trump’s utter indifference to the truth, what some of his critics have come to call his “normlessness,” is intensely alarming to many Washington analysts. >>> >>> Never before have we had a president, E.J. Dionne, Norman Ornstein and >>> >>> Thomas Mann write in their book, “One Nation After Trump,” >>> >>> who aroused such grave and widespread doubts about his commitment to the institutions of self-government, to the norms democracy requires, to the legitimacy of opposition in a free republic, and to the need for basic knowledge about major policy questions and about how government works. >>> >>> They continue: >>> >>> Norms, we argue, are often more important than formal rules in ensuring the function of a constitutional republic. >>> >>> Observing that “Trump has violated these basic understandings of how our democracy works in an unprecedented way,” Dionne, Mann and Ornstein go on: >>> >>> This norm breaking, is not simply a matter of political nicety. It is part of Trump’s larger assault on our institutions, his tendency to think in autocratic terms, his abusive attitude toward the judicial system, and his disrespect for civil servants and the day-to-day work of government. We show how Trump’s words and behavior parallel those of authoritarian leaders, past and present. >>> >>> William M. Kurtines, Jacob Gewirtz and Jacob L. Lamb draw attention to the link between normlessness and moral disorder. In the Handbook of Moral Behavior and Development (Vol. 3), they write, “Durkheim identified anomie — a condition of normlessness or moral deregulation — as a moral disease more likely to afflict the top than the bottom of society.” >>> >>> Wealth, according to Durkheim, >>> >>> deceives us into believing that we depend on ourselves only. Reducing the resistance we encounter from objects, it suggests the possibility of unlimited success against them. The less limited one feels, the more intolerable all limitation appears. >>> >>> Trump’s status and wealth have allowed him to ignore limits, norms, rules and regulations and have created a vicious circle — as violations of customary norms go >>> >>> unpunished, such violations become ever more widespread. >>> >>> Gary Gutting, an emeritus professor of philosophy at Notre Dame, focuses on the crucial role of power in postmodernism — the power to defy norms and the power to determine the veracity of competing claims. He emailed me: >>> >>> The “modern” in “postmodern” refers to the idea that we should seek truth by the objective methods of reason and science — not by appeals to emotion or tradition. ‘Postmodern’ is often used to refer to those who think there is no objective truth, just various devices we use to con people into agreeing with us. In this sense, Trump is postmodern. >>> >>> But serious postmodern thinkers like Foucault accept the ideal of objective truth. They point out, however, that practices and institutions claiming to be based on scientific truths often turn out to seek power as much or more than truth. Foucault, in particular, worried that what we think of as scientifically enlightened ways of improving society are often covers for increasing power over the people we claim to be helping. >>> >>> For Foucault, Trump, who seeks not truth but only power, would be an extreme example of what serious postmodernism opposes. >>> >>> There was a period, Stephen Greenblatt, a professor of the humanities at Harvard said by email, when >>> >>> a strain in postmodernism was so giddily determined to call into question the posturing of Enlightenment scientism that its advocates recklessly dismissed the very existence of objective truths. >>> >>> To these earlier advocates of postmodernism, >>> >>> everything is just the game of power, they noisily declared, assuring themselves that their deconstructive claims would somehow always be in the service of radical critique. >>> >>> This view, however, “was eviscerated by philosophers like Bernard Williams and has, I think, virtually no current standing.” >>> >>> David Bromwich, a professor of English at Yale, contended that >>> >>> academic skepticism about objective truth doesn’t as a rule deny that we can know the fact of the matter — e.g. the answer to the question “How many German troops crossed bridges over the Rhine on March 7, 1936?” Or “By how many degrees did the average global temperature rise between 1987 and 2017?” >>> >>> Instead, Bromwich argues that academic skepticism >>> >>> is directed against the assumption that any particular interpretation of the facts should be trusted as quite reliable. >>> >>> These movements in theoretical analysis are, however, alien to Trump, Bromwich wrote: >>> >>> Anyway, none of it was required to create Trump’s attitude toward fact and truth. He seems a demagogue of a familiar modern type, but far less coherent and more capricious than most of his predecessors. >>> >>> In an essay in the London Review of Books last year, Bromwich provided insight into how Trump justifies his falsehoods. Bromwich cited a January 2017 ABC interview of Trump by the journalist David Muir, in which Muir repeatedly challenged Trump’s claim that Clinton only won the popular vote because three to five million illegal ballots were cast for her by undocumented immigrants and other noncitizens. >>> >>> In the transcript, Muir and Trump go back and forth for 1,168 words — an eternity on television — until Trump acknowledges how he justifies the claim: “You know what’s important, millions of people agree with me.” Trump told Muir that people called in to say, “ ‘We agree with Mr. Trump. We agree.’ They’re very smart people.” >>> >>> The Muir interview provides evidence in support of a thesis developed by Carlos Prado, professor emeritus of philosophy at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario. Prado argues that instead of representing postmodernism, Trump embodies a very different phenomenon: “Post-Truth.” >>> >>> “Users of post-truth see themselves as expressing their opinions, but opinions that call for no verification, and in being their opinions, are on a par with anyone else’s opinions,” Prado writes in a forthcoming book, “The New Subjectivism”: >>> >>> Post-truth is the final step in the misguided move away from objective truth to relativization of truth. If truth is objective, assertions or propositions are true depending on how things are. If truth is relative, assertions or propositions are true depending on how people take things to be. >>> >>> Trump’s post-truths have drawn a conservative audience of American voters inured to lying. A majority of voters, 59 percent, in an April 2017 Washington Post- ABC News poll, agreed that the Trump administration “regularly makes false claims up,” but, in the same survey, 52 percent said news organizations “regularly produce false stories.” An October 2017 Politico/Morning Consult poll found that a plurality of voters, 46 percent, believe the media fabricate stories about Trump compared to 37 percent who say the media report accurately. >>> >>> “The criticism of postmodern theory as ‘anything goes relativism’ is a bum rap,” says John Caputo, emeritus professor of religion at Syracuse University: >>> >>> In postmodern theory we are better served by the idea of having ‘good reasons,’ meaning the best idea that anybody has at the moment, remembering that some obscure fellow working in a patent office because he can’t find a job teaching physics is liable to change the face of physics tomorrow morning. >>> >>> The problem with Trump, according to Caputo, >>> >>> is not that he is an “anything goes relativist,” but that he is an authoritarian, a would-be strong man, who launches vile personal attacks on anyone who criticizes him. >>> >>> Judith Butler, a professor of comparative literature and the founding director of the program of critical theory at the University of California, Berkeley, voiced disbelief that >>> >>> anyone would be inclined to blame intellectual trends in the academy or in the arts for the way that Trump speaks, thinks, or acts. Given that he does not read very much at all, and that the kind of literary and social theory you reference depends on reading closely, the two trends could not be further apart. >>> >>> Along similar lines, Colin Koopman, a professor of philosophy at the University of Oregon, argued that what is disturbing about Trump is that “he does not value truth in the sense of offering justifications and reasons to those at whom he speaks or tweets.” >>> >>> As a result, Koopman continued in an email, >>> >>> only those who are cynical about truth itself can take him seriously. His style is not “postmodern” at all, but is rather cynical. >>> >>> If postmodernism does not account for Trump’s bludgeoning of the truth, what does? A field that provides insight into the Trump phenomenon is evolutionary theory. >>> >>> Steven Pinker, professor of psychology at Harvard and author of the forthcoming book “Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress,” emailed me his thoughts: >>> >>> The answer lies in raw tribalism: when someone is perceived as a champion of one’s coalition, all is forgiven. The same is true for opinions: a particular issue can become a sacred value, shibboleth, or affirmation of allegiance to one’s team, and its content no longer matters. This is part of a growing realization in political psychology that tribalism has been underestimated in our understanding of politics, and ideological coherence and political and scientific literacy overestimated. >>> >>> Once tribalism becomes embedded in the political system, Pinker wrote, >>> >>> the full ingenuity of human cognition is recruited to valorize the champion and shore up the sacred beliefs. You can always dismiss criticism as being motivated by the bias of one’s enemies. Our cognitive and linguistic faculties are endlessly creative — that’s what makes our species so smart — and that creativity can be >>> >>> always deployed to reframe issues in congenial or invidious terms. >>> >>> Don Symons, professor of anthropology emeritus at the University of California-Santa Barbara, made a similar point in an email: >>> >>> Our species is profoundly coalitional, and in most times and places moral prescriptions apply only to one’s in-group, not to humanity in general. I don’t see any evidence that we evolved innate, universal moral rules about how to treat all humans. That’s why history, as James Joyce said, is a nightmare. Prehistory is worse. I assume that coalitional-thinking is what Trump was getting at when he claimed that he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and his base would still love him. It’s not that they feel that killing a random stranger for no reason is morally ok; it’s that loyalty to their coalition leader is primary. >>> >>> If tribalism has begun to supplant traditional partisanship, their argument suggests, lying in politics will metastasize as traditional constraints continue to fall by the wayside. >>> >>> Trump’s success, such as it is, has been to accelerate the ongoing transformation of traditional political competition into an atavistic struggle in which each side claims moral superiority and defines the opposition as evil. >>> >>> These developments have been unfolding for decades, but the 2016 election was a turning point that appears to have the potential to corrupt the system beyond repair. Trump is determined to leave the destruction of democratic procedure as his legacy. Instead of granting him the title of postmodernist, let’s say instead that Trump is a nihilist who seeks to trample, to trash, to blight, to break and to burn. >>> >>> I invite you to follow me on Twitter, @Edsall. >>> >>> Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter. >>> >>> © 2018 The New York Times Company >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 galliher at illinois.edu Sat Jan 27 10:23:37 2018 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2018 04:23:37 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] What, no OBJECTIVIE TRUTH? In-Reply-To: <032C69C6-33AF-4375-83D4-094FD3E75773@illinois.edu> References: <2CA5E152-2994-493B-B462-C70CE9E876E6@illinois.edu> <60062970-4960-4E74-9D3B-1B69099160F4@illinois.edu> <032C69C6-33AF-4375-83D4-094FD3E75773@illinois.edu> Message-ID: I don’t think Trump is brilliant (though not much more ignorant than the average American academic) but that he has thought through his political statements and positions in a manner not qualitatively different from that of Rubio or Pelosi. I think he came into office with two constituencies, the corporate globalists (representing the interests of the 1%) and the economic nationalists (representing the interests of an aggrieved middle class - who made him president). Cohn spoke for the former, Bannon the latter. The former are directing policy. Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 26, 2018, at 10:31 PM, Brussel, Morton K wrote: > > It seems like you think Trump is brilliant (certainly not ignorant), analytical (has thought through his political statements and positions), and an anticapitalist to boot. Sad. > > > >> On Jan 26, 2018, at 7:58 PM, Carl G. Estabrook wrote: >> >> I hear Mao Zedong didn’t brush his teeth in his old age. That’s surely more important than the policies of the Chinese government 1949-76… >> >> Trump’s critics seem to lack the courage to admit what his real sins are: he was the first major party presidential candidate in 40 years to attack the neoliberal and neoconservative policies followed by all administrations in those years - policies that produced always more war and more inequality. >> >> He must be made to conform, by whatever means... >> >> >>> On Jan 26, 2018, at 4:56 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss wrote: >>> >>> Yes, academics have to have their say, and insofar as Trump is the target, he has been revealed as ignorant, narcissistic, and stupid. A noxious brew. Jean Bricmont treated much of this quite some time ago. >>> >>>> On Jan 26, 2018, at 4:34 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss wrote: >>>> >>>> A note on alleged “relativism” & “subjectivism”: >>>> >>>> https://nyti.ms/2Fdsgby >>>> Opinion | CONTRIBUTING OP-ED WRITER >>>> >>>> Is President Trump a Stealth Postmodernist or Just a Liar? >>>> Thomas B. Edsall NYT JAN. 25, 2018 >>>> How should we explain the fact that President Trump got away with making 2,140 false or misleading claims during his initial year in office? >>>> >>>> Both the left, in “America’s First Postmodern President” (written by Jeet Heer in The New Republic last summer), and the right, in “Donald Trump is the First President to Turn Postmodernism Against Itself” (written by David Ernst in The Federalist a year ago), have argued that Trump, without knowing the first thing about, say, Michel Foucault, is an avatar of the rejection of objective truth. >>>> >>>> Postmodernists, Heer wrote, describe a world where >>>> >>>> Fragmented sound bites have replaced linear thinking, where nostalgia (“Make America Great Again”) has replaced historical consciousness or felt experiences of the past, where simulacra is indistinguishable from reality, where an aesthetic of pastiche and kitsch (Trump Tower) replaces modernism’s striving for purity and elitism, and where a shared plebeian culture of vulgarity papers over intensifying class disparities. In virtually every detail, Trump seems like the perfect manifestation of postmodernism. >>>> >>>> Along parallel lines, Ernst wrote, >>>> >>>> if the only one true thing in the world is that all truth and morality are relative, then anyone who pretends otherwise is either an idiot or a fraud. Hence the contemporary appeal of the antihero, and the disappearance of the traditional hero. >>>> >>>> Scholars of contemporary philosophy argue that postmodernism does not dispute the existence of truth, per se, but rather seeks to interrogate the sources and interests of those making assertions of truth. As Casey Williams wrote in The Stone in The Times last April: >>>> >>>> Call it what you want: relativism, constructivism, deconstruction, postmodernism, critique. The idea is the same: Truth is not found, but made, and making truth means exercising power. >>>> >>>> It is not usually the job of political journalists to analyze postmodernism, so I turned to some scholars who are devoted to the subject. >>>> >>>> Trump’s “truths,” as Alan Schrift, a professor of philosophy at Grinnell College, pointed out, >>>> >>>> are not socially constructed but emerge from his own personal sense of what will promote his popularity, his power, and his wealth. This is why his particular, and acute, narcissism is so dangerous: he appeals to no social standards at all, only his own imagination as to what is in his own personal interest. >>>> >>>> Put in the most straightforward terms, Johanna Oksala, a professor of social science and cultural studies at the Pratt Institute, responded by email to my inquiry: >>>> >>>> I don’t think Trump should be called a postmodern president, but simply a liar. For something to be objectively true, Oksala wrote, >>>> >>>> does not mean that we have to have (or can have) absolute and eternally infallible knowledge of it. But our knowledge claims have to be available for public scrutiny by the scientific community and go through a rigorous peer- review process in order to qualify as scientific or objective truths. >>>> >>>> In the Trump era, the core concept of truth has become deeply politicized and among Trump supporters there is scant appetite for “a rigorous peer-review process.” Andrew Cutrofello, a professor of philosophy at Loyola University Chicago, argues this point in an email: >>>> >>>> In the present political climate truth and power have become uncoupled to a certain extent. It’s natural to wonder whether this means the notion of objective truth has been undermined. But it could be the opposite, namely, that what we’re living through isn’t the loss of the category of objective truth but rather a battle over who has objective truth on their side. In other words, the very category of objective truth has become an ideological weapon, having been displaced from relatively neutral territory to the political battlefield. >>>> >>>> For some scholars, the attempt to link Trump’s lies — his falsehoods, his prevarications, his exaggerations, his duplicity, his “truthful hyperbole” — with postmodernism grows out of a misperception of the term. >>>> >>>> Todd May, a professor of philosophy and religion at Clemson, wrote by email that >>>> >>>> In philosophy, the dominant idea was probably Jean-Francois Lyotard’s view >>>> >>>> that we are at “the end of grand narratives,” the end of the idea that our history or our world or our existence can be accounted for by a single overarching narrative that accounts for it (or them). >>>> >>>> In “The Postmodern Condition,” Lyotard conducted a full-scale assault on the idea of a grand narrative as well as an assault on established norms. He wrote: “Simplifying to the extreme, I define postmodern as incredulity toward metanarratives. ... Postmodern knowledge is not simply a tool of the authorities; it refines our sensitivity to differences and reinforces our ability to tolerate the incommensurable.” >>>> >>>> Daniel Dennett, a professor of philosophy at Tufts, has given much thought to the current state of events. “We’re entering a period of epistemological murk and uncertainty that we’ve not experienced since the Middle Ages,” he told The Guardian. In a 1998 essay, “Postmodernism and Truth,” Dennett explains why, in his view, objective truth is in fact something real, verifiable and of vast importance: >>>> >>>> We are the species that discovered doubt. Is there enough food laid by for winter? Have I miscalculated? Is my mate cheating on me? Should we have moved south? Is it safe to enter this cave? >>>> >>>> Dennett adamantly rejects “a slide into some form of relativism.” He argues that while “it is true that past scientific orthodoxies have themselves inspired policies that hindsight reveals to be seriously flawed” and that “the methods of science aren’t foolproof,” it is also true that >>>> >>>> they are indefinitely perfectible. Just as important: there is a tradition of criticism that enforces improvement whenever and wherever flaws are discovered. The methods of science, like everything else under the sun, are themselves objects of scientific scrutiny, as method becomes methodology, the analysis of methods. >>>> >>>> Trump’s utter indifference to the truth, what some of his critics have come to call his “normlessness,” is intensely alarming to many Washington analysts. >>>> >>>> Never before have we had a president, E.J. Dionne, Norman Ornstein and >>>> >>>> Thomas Mann write in their book, “One Nation After Trump,” >>>> >>>> who aroused such grave and widespread doubts about his commitment to the institutions of self-government, to the norms democracy requires, to the legitimacy of opposition in a free republic, and to the need for basic knowledge about major policy questions and about how government works. >>>> >>>> They continue: >>>> >>>> Norms, we argue, are often more important than formal rules in ensuring the function of a constitutional republic. >>>> >>>> Observing that “Trump has violated these basic understandings of how our democracy works in an unprecedented way,” Dionne, Mann and Ornstein go on: >>>> >>>> This norm breaking, is not simply a matter of political nicety. It is part of Trump’s larger assault on our institutions, his tendency to think in autocratic terms, his abusive attitude toward the judicial system, and his disrespect for civil servants and the day-to-day work of government. We show how Trump’s words and behavior parallel those of authoritarian leaders, past and present. >>>> >>>> William M. Kurtines, Jacob Gewirtz and Jacob L. Lamb draw attention to the link between normlessness and moral disorder. In the Handbook of Moral Behavior and Development (Vol. 3), they write, “Durkheim identified anomie — a condition of normlessness or moral deregulation — as a moral disease more likely to afflict the top than the bottom of society.” >>>> >>>> Wealth, according to Durkheim, >>>> >>>> deceives us into believing that we depend on ourselves only. Reducing the resistance we encounter from objects, it suggests the possibility of unlimited success against them. The less limited one feels, the more intolerable all limitation appears. >>>> >>>> Trump’s status and wealth have allowed him to ignore limits, norms, rules and regulations and have created a vicious circle — as violations of customary norms go >>>> >>>> unpunished, such violations become ever more widespread. >>>> >>>> Gary Gutting, an emeritus professor of philosophy at Notre Dame, focuses on the crucial role of power in postmodernism — the power to defy norms and the power to determine the veracity of competing claims. He emailed me: >>>> >>>> The “modern” in “postmodern” refers to the idea that we should seek truth by the objective methods of reason and science — not by appeals to emotion or tradition. ‘Postmodern’ is often used to refer to those who think there is no objective truth, just various devices we use to con people into agreeing with us. In this sense, Trump is postmodern. >>>> >>>> But serious postmodern thinkers like Foucault accept the ideal of objective truth. They point out, however, that practices and institutions claiming to be based on scientific truths often turn out to seek power as much or more than truth. Foucault, in particular, worried that what we think of as scientifically enlightened ways of improving society are often covers for increasing power over the people we claim to be helping. >>>> >>>> For Foucault, Trump, who seeks not truth but only power, would be an extreme example of what serious postmodernism opposes. >>>> >>>> There was a period, Stephen Greenblatt, a professor of the humanities at Harvard said by email, when >>>> >>>> a strain in postmodernism was so giddily determined to call into question the posturing of Enlightenment scientism that its advocates recklessly dismissed the very existence of objective truths. >>>> >>>> To these earlier advocates of postmodernism, >>>> >>>> everything is just the game of power, they noisily declared, assuring themselves that their deconstructive claims would somehow always be in the service of radical critique. >>>> >>>> This view, however, “was eviscerated by philosophers like Bernard Williams and has, I think, virtually no current standing.” >>>> >>>> David Bromwich, a professor of English at Yale, contended that >>>> >>>> academic skepticism about objective truth doesn’t as a rule deny that we can know the fact of the matter — e.g. the answer to the question “How many German troops crossed bridges over the Rhine on March 7, 1936?” Or “By how many degrees did the average global temperature rise between 1987 and 2017?” >>>> >>>> Instead, Bromwich argues that academic skepticism >>>> >>>> is directed against the assumption that any particular interpretation of the facts should be trusted as quite reliable. >>>> >>>> These movements in theoretical analysis are, however, alien to Trump, Bromwich wrote: >>>> >>>> Anyway, none of it was required to create Trump’s attitude toward fact and truth. He seems a demagogue of a familiar modern type, but far less coherent and more capricious than most of his predecessors. >>>> >>>> In an essay in the London Review of Books last year, Bromwich provided insight into how Trump justifies his falsehoods. Bromwich cited a January 2017 ABC interview of Trump by the journalist David Muir, in which Muir repeatedly challenged Trump’s claim that Clinton only won the popular vote because three to five million illegal ballots were cast for her by undocumented immigrants and other noncitizens. >>>> >>>> In the transcript, Muir and Trump go back and forth for 1,168 words — an eternity on television — until Trump acknowledges how he justifies the claim: “You know what’s important, millions of people agree with me.” Trump told Muir that people called in to say, “ ‘We agree with Mr. Trump. We agree.’ They’re very smart people.” >>>> >>>> The Muir interview provides evidence in support of a thesis developed by Carlos Prado, professor emeritus of philosophy at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario. Prado argues that instead of representing postmodernism, Trump embodies a very different phenomenon: “Post-Truth.” >>>> >>>> “Users of post-truth see themselves as expressing their opinions, but opinions that call for no verification, and in being their opinions, are on a par with anyone else’s opinions,” Prado writes in a forthcoming book, “The New Subjectivism”: >>>> >>>> Post-truth is the final step in the misguided move away from objective truth to relativization of truth. If truth is objective, assertions or propositions are true depending on how things are. If truth is relative, assertions or propositions are true depending on how people take things to be. >>>> >>>> Trump’s post-truths have drawn a conservative audience of American voters inured to lying. A majority of voters, 59 percent, in an April 2017 Washington Post- ABC News poll, agreed that the Trump administration “regularly makes false claims up,” but, in the same survey, 52 percent said news organizations “regularly produce false stories.” An October 2017 Politico/Morning Consult poll found that a plurality of voters, 46 percent, believe the media fabricate stories about Trump compared to 37 percent who say the media report accurately. >>>> >>>> “The criticism of postmodern theory as ‘anything goes relativism’ is a bum rap,” says John Caputo, emeritus professor of religion at Syracuse University: >>>> >>>> In postmodern theory we are better served by the idea of having ‘good reasons,’ meaning the best idea that anybody has at the moment, remembering that some obscure fellow working in a patent office because he can’t find a job teaching physics is liable to change the face of physics tomorrow morning. >>>> >>>> The problem with Trump, according to Caputo, >>>> >>>> is not that he is an “anything goes relativist,” but that he is an authoritarian, a would-be strong man, who launches vile personal attacks on anyone who criticizes him. >>>> >>>> Judith Butler, a professor of comparative literature and the founding director of the program of critical theory at the University of California, Berkeley, voiced disbelief that >>>> >>>> anyone would be inclined to blame intellectual trends in the academy or in the arts for the way that Trump speaks, thinks, or acts. Given that he does not read very much at all, and that the kind of literary and social theory you reference depends on reading closely, the two trends could not be further apart. >>>> >>>> Along similar lines, Colin Koopman, a professor of philosophy at the University of Oregon, argued that what is disturbing about Trump is that “he does not value truth in the sense of offering justifications and reasons to those at whom he speaks or tweets.” >>>> >>>> As a result, Koopman continued in an email, >>>> >>>> only those who are cynical about truth itself can take him seriously. His style is not “postmodern” at all, but is rather cynical. >>>> >>>> If postmodernism does not account for Trump’s bludgeoning of the truth, what does? A field that provides insight into the Trump phenomenon is evolutionary theory. >>>> >>>> Steven Pinker, professor of psychology at Harvard and author of the forthcoming book “Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress,” emailed me his thoughts: >>>> >>>> The answer lies in raw tribalism: when someone is perceived as a champion of one’s coalition, all is forgiven. The same is true for opinions: a particular issue can become a sacred value, shibboleth, or affirmation of allegiance to one’s team, and its content no longer matters. This is part of a growing realization in political psychology that tribalism has been underestimated in our understanding of politics, and ideological coherence and political and scientific literacy overestimated. >>>> >>>> Once tribalism becomes embedded in the political system, Pinker wrote, >>>> >>>> the full ingenuity of human cognition is recruited to valorize the champion and shore up the sacred beliefs. You can always dismiss criticism as being motivated by the bias of one’s enemies. Our cognitive and linguistic faculties are endlessly creative — that’s what makes our species so smart — and that creativity can be >>>> >>>> always deployed to reframe issues in congenial or invidious terms. >>>> >>>> Don Symons, professor of anthropology emeritus at the University of California-Santa Barbara, made a similar point in an email: >>>> >>>> Our species is profoundly coalitional, and in most times and places moral prescriptions apply only to one’s in-group, not to humanity in general. I don’t see any evidence that we evolved innate, universal moral rules about how to treat all humans. That’s why history, as James Joyce said, is a nightmare. Prehistory is worse. I assume that coalitional-thinking is what Trump was getting at when he claimed that he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and his base would still love him. It’s not that they feel that killing a random stranger for no reason is morally ok; it’s that loyalty to their coalition leader is primary. >>>> >>>> If tribalism has begun to supplant traditional partisanship, their argument suggests, lying in politics will metastasize as traditional constraints continue to fall by the wayside. >>>> >>>> Trump’s success, such as it is, has been to accelerate the ongoing transformation of traditional political competition into an atavistic struggle in which each side claims moral superiority and defines the opposition as evil. >>>> >>>> These developments have been unfolding for decades, but the 2016 election was a turning point that appears to have the potential to corrupt the system beyond repair. Trump is determined to leave the destruction of democratic procedure as his legacy. Instead of granting him the title of postmodernist, let’s say instead that Trump is a nihilist who seeks to trample, to trash, to blight, to break and to burn. >>>> >>>> I invite you to follow me on Twitter, @Edsall. >>>> >>>> Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter. >>>> >>>> © 2018 The New York Times Company >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 Sat Jan 27 13:29:50 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2018 13:29:50 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Plutocrats convene in Davos Message-ID: * Print * Leaflet * Feedback * Share » The “fractured world”: Plutocrats convene in Davos amid war and great-power conflict 27 January 2018 Thousands of business executives, central bankers, and world leaders gathered at the World Economic Forum this week in Davos, Switzerland. The general mood was one of apprehension over every aspect of global politics and economics, from the possibility of a financial collapse on the scale of 2008, to the threat of a new world war and the growth of social anger around the world. Even though a typical billionaire attendee will have been nearly 20 percent richer than he was last year, and will have acquired more than a few new houses, airplanes, paintings, boats and jewels, “Davos man” was nervous. Perhaps never in the forum’s 47-year existence has its program reflected such unease. The vapidly resolute topics of recent years, such as “Resilient Dynamism” and “The Reshaping of the World” have been replaced with a soberer theme: “A Fractured World.” The event’s official summary contrasts the utopian vision promoted at the turn of the century, based on the belief that “greater economic interdependence among countries, buttressed by liberal democratic institutions, would ensure peace and stability well into the new century,” with the “changed” reality that “geostrategic fissures have re-emerged on multiple fronts with wide-ranging political, economic and social consequences.” The most serious of these fissures is the imminent threat of a war between major world powers. As the summit ended, this reality was brought home by a cover story in the Economist, published online Thursday, “The next war: The growing danger of great-power conflict.” The article’s introductory paragraphs paint a bleak picture. “In the past 25 years war has claimed too many lives. Yet even as civil and religious strife have raged in Syria, central Africa, Afghanistan and Iraq, a devastating clash between the world’s great powers has remained almost unimaginable.” “No longer,” declare the magazine’s editors. Amid the erosion of “the extraordinary military dominance that America and its allies have enjoyed,” war “on a scale and intensity not seen since the second world war is once again plausible. The world is not prepared.” The Economist noted the publication on January 19 of the Pentagon’s 2018 National Defense Strategy, which declared that “Inter-state strategic competition, not terrorism, is now the primary concern in US national security,” and argued for an aggressive expansion of the United States’ nuclear forces that could potentially put it in violation of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty. In the week following the publication of that document, an extraordinary series of events has reaffirmed its central message, that “great power” conflict is now on the agenda. On Tuesday, General Sir Nick Carter, the head of the British Army, proclaimed that the present global situation has “parallels with 1914,” declaring, “Our generation has become used to wars of choice since the end of the Cold War, but we may not have a choice about conflict with Russia.” On Tuesday, US CIA Director Mike Pompeo broached the possibility of a preemptive strike on North Korea. Two days later, General Robert Neller, the head of the Marine Corps, publicly discussed the possibility of a ground invasion of the impoverished country, declaring that such a war “will be a very, very kinetic, physical, violent fight.” To back up its threats, the US this month deployed nuclear-capable B-2 bombers to Guam, bringing nuclear strikes by supersonic stealth aircraft against North Korea within the realm of possibility. Any war with North Korea could quickly expand to involve China and Russia. The Davos summit took place against the backdrop of the widening offensive by Turkey against Kurdish militias backed by the United States, raising the danger that “US and Turkish soldiers, two NATO allies, could soon clash,” as the Wall Street Journal bluntly put it. The expanding war in Syria involves not only the US and Turkey, but Iran and Russia as well. Adding to the tensions is the fact that the tanks being used to pound the positions of US-backed militias had been supplied by Germany, which has grown increasingly distant from its transatlantic NATO ally. While the United States has played the most aggressive role in stoking up global tensions, the world leaders at Davos made it clear that they would not be out-done by American belligerence. German Chancellor Angela Merkel gave a speech to the forum in which she declared that “Europe has not been the most active continent on foreign policy, and that we often depended on the United States, which is now concentrating more on itself, must compel us to say: we have to assume more responsibility; we have to take our fate into our hands.” That is, Germany and Europe must remilitarize. The threat of war was only one of the threats vexing the Davos elite. The past week saw a spate of warnings that red-hot stock markets are on the verge of a meltdown. William White, the chairman of the OECD review board, declaring this week: “All the market indicators right now look very similar to what we saw before the Lehman crisis.” Among the most contentious summit panels was one titled, “Could 2018 Be the Year of the Next Financial Crisis?" Even more imminent was the threat of trade war, implying the potential breakdown of the dollar-denominated international monetary system. Trump, despite his relatively subdued (for him) closing address, went to Davos guns blazing, having just slapped tariffs of up to 50 percent on imports of solar panels and washing machines. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin sparked a substantial selloff of the dollar this week after he declared, “a weaker dollar is good,” leaving the greenback down by 10 percent for the year, and spurring warnings of a competitive devaluation of the euro in a retaliatory trade war measure. And yet, amid all of these dangers, panel moderator Heather Long declared that the “biggest topic at Davos” and the “biggest topic around the world,” was “inequality.” A newly-released report by Oxfam showed that just one percent of the population accumulated 82 percent of all social wealth created in the past year. In his annual letter to CEOs attending Davos, Blackrock Chief Executive Larry Fink warned that, even though “those with capital have reaped enormous benefits… popular frustration and apprehension about the future simultaneously reached new heights” amid “low wage growth” and “inadequate retirement systems.” After enumerating the various geopolitical tensions and social crises gripping the world, the summit’s official program summary sanguinely pronounced that “By coming together at the start of the year, we can shape the future by joining this unparalleled global effort in co-design, co-creation and collaboration” in order to create a “shared future.” Few to none of the assembled billionaires took this feel-good nonsense seriously. When they step off their private jets from Davos, they will resume their daily business of plotting wars, scheming to enrich themselves, and devising ways to suppress and repress social discontent—although perhaps with a heightened awareness that, if the world is in crisis, the working class may soon hold them responsible. Andre Damon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sat Jan 27 13:48:12 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2018 13:48:12 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] What, no OBJECTIVIE TRUTH? In-Reply-To: References: <2CA5E152-2994-493B-B462-C70CE9E876E6@illinois.edu> <60062970-4960-4E74-9D3B-1B69099160F4@illinois.edu> <032C69C6-33AF-4375-83D4-094FD3E75773@illinois.edu> Message-ID: All Academic discussions analyzing Trump’s motivations, his brain, his ideals, what he said and does, is like Nero playing his fiddle while Rome burns. Its like the elementary school discussions focusing, on Hitler, the man, rather than the material conditions that created him. We need to wake up to the realities we face today with the corporate control of the USG, no matter which Party or which person, is President. Some refer to it as the Deep State, others the Military Industrial Complex, the Establishment , etc. Far better to look at the structure of government and how we can “restructure" it, if we are to prevent the continued descent of humanity and “what is yet to come.” > On Jan 27, 2018, at 02:23, Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: > > I don’t think Trump is brilliant (though not much more ignorant than the average American academic) but that he has thought through his political statements and positions in a manner not qualitatively different from that of Rubio or Pelosi. > > I think he came into office with two constituencies, the corporate globalists (representing the interests of the 1%) and the economic nationalists (representing the interests of an aggrieved middle class - who made him president). Cohn spoke for the former, Bannon the latter. > > The former are directing policy. > > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Jan 26, 2018, at 10:31 PM, Brussel, Morton K wrote: >> >> It seems like you think Trump is brilliant (certainly not ignorant), analytical (has thought through his political statements and positions), and an anticapitalist to boot. Sad. >> >> >> >>> On Jan 26, 2018, at 7:58 PM, Carl G. Estabrook wrote: >>> >>> I hear Mao Zedong didn’t brush his teeth in his old age. That’s surely more important than the policies of the Chinese government 1949-76… >>> >>> Trump’s critics seem to lack the courage to admit what his real sins are: he was the first major party presidential candidate in 40 years to attack the neoliberal and neoconservative policies followed by all administrations in those years - policies that produced always more war and more inequality. >>> >>> He must be made to conform, by whatever means... >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 26, 2018, at 4:56 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss wrote: >>>> >>>> Yes, academics have to have their say, and insofar as Trump is the target, he has been revealed as ignorant, narcissistic, and stupid. A noxious brew. Jean Bricmont treated much of this quite some time ago. >>>> >>>>> On Jan 26, 2018, at 4:34 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss wrote: >>>>> >>>>> A note on alleged “relativism” & “subjectivism”: >>>>> >>>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fnyti.ms%2F2Fdsgby&data=02%7C01%7C%7C2f77ba791b434dcac5d108d5657014a8%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636526454411068666&sdata=XVK9AVQ9ZEKn2Wf5HasTIS81ZojGDjB3BmnIPCHzu5Y%3D&reserved=0 >>>>> Opinion | CONTRIBUTING OP-ED WRITER >>>>> >>>>> Is President Trump a Stealth Postmodernist or Just a Liar? >>>>> Thomas B. Edsall NYT JAN. 25, 2018 >>>>> How should we explain the fact that President Trump got away with making 2,140 false or misleading claims during his initial year in office? >>>>> >>>>> Both the left, in “America’s First Postmodern President” (written by Jeet Heer in The New Republic last summer), and the right, in “Donald Trump is the First President to Turn Postmodernism Against Itself” (written by David Ernst in The Federalist a year ago), have argued that Trump, without knowing the first thing about, say, Michel Foucault, is an avatar of the rejection of objective truth. >>>>> >>>>> Postmodernists, Heer wrote, describe a world where >>>>> >>>>> Fragmented sound bites have replaced linear thinking, where nostalgia (“Make America Great Again”) has replaced historical consciousness or felt experiences of the past, where simulacra is indistinguishable from reality, where an aesthetic of pastiche and kitsch (Trump Tower) replaces modernism’s striving for purity and elitism, and where a shared plebeian culture of vulgarity papers over intensifying class disparities. In virtually every detail, Trump seems like the perfect manifestation of postmodernism. >>>>> >>>>> Along parallel lines, Ernst wrote, >>>>> >>>>> if the only one true thing in the world is that all truth and morality are relative, then anyone who pretends otherwise is either an idiot or a fraud. Hence the contemporary appeal of the antihero, and the disappearance of the traditional hero. >>>>> >>>>> Scholars of contemporary philosophy argue that postmodernism does not dispute the existence of truth, per se, but rather seeks to interrogate the sources and interests of those making assertions of truth. As Casey Williams wrote in The Stone in The Times last April: >>>>> >>>>> Call it what you want: relativism, constructivism, deconstruction, postmodernism, critique. The idea is the same: Truth is not found, but made, and making truth means exercising power. >>>>> >>>>> It is not usually the job of political journalists to analyze postmodernism, so I turned to some scholars who are devoted to the subject. >>>>> >>>>> Trump’s “truths,” as Alan Schrift, a professor of philosophy at Grinnell College, pointed out, >>>>> >>>>> are not socially constructed but emerge from his own personal sense of what will promote his popularity, his power, and his wealth. This is why his particular, and acute, narcissism is so dangerous: he appeals to no social standards at all, only his own imagination as to what is in his own personal interest. >>>>> >>>>> Put in the most straightforward terms, Johanna Oksala, a professor of social science and cultural studies at the Pratt Institute, responded by email to my inquiry: >>>>> >>>>> I don’t think Trump should be called a postmodern president, but simply a liar. For something to be objectively true, Oksala wrote, >>>>> >>>>> does not mean that we have to have (or can have) absolute and eternally infallible knowledge of it. But our knowledge claims have to be available for public scrutiny by the scientific community and go through a rigorous peer- review process in order to qualify as scientific or objective truths. >>>>> >>>>> In the Trump era, the core concept of truth has become deeply politicized and among Trump supporters there is scant appetite for “a rigorous peer-review process.” Andrew Cutrofello, a professor of philosophy at Loyola University Chicago, argues this point in an email: >>>>> >>>>> In the present political climate truth and power have become uncoupled to a certain extent. It’s natural to wonder whether this means the notion of objective truth has been undermined. But it could be the opposite, namely, that what we’re living through isn’t the loss of the category of objective truth but rather a battle over who has objective truth on their side. In other words, the very category of objective truth has become an ideological weapon, having been displaced from relatively neutral territory to the political battlefield. >>>>> >>>>> For some scholars, the attempt to link Trump’s lies — his falsehoods, his prevarications, his exaggerations, his duplicity, his “truthful hyperbole” — with postmodernism grows out of a misperception of the term. >>>>> >>>>> Todd May, a professor of philosophy and religion at Clemson, wrote by email that >>>>> >>>>> In philosophy, the dominant idea was probably Jean-Francois Lyotard’s view >>>>> >>>>> that we are at “the end of grand narratives,” the end of the idea that our history or our world or our existence can be accounted for by a single overarching narrative that accounts for it (or them). >>>>> >>>>> In “The Postmodern Condition,” Lyotard conducted a full-scale assault on the idea of a grand narrative as well as an assault on established norms. He wrote: “Simplifying to the extreme, I define postmodern as incredulity toward metanarratives. ... Postmodern knowledge is not simply a tool of the authorities; it refines our sensitivity to differences and reinforces our ability to tolerate the incommensurable.” >>>>> >>>>> Daniel Dennett, a professor of philosophy at Tufts, has given much thought to the current state of events. “We’re entering a period of epistemological murk and uncertainty that we’ve not experienced since the Middle Ages,” he told The Guardian. In a 1998 essay, “Postmodernism and Truth,” Dennett explains why, in his view, objective truth is in fact something real, verifiable and of vast importance: >>>>> >>>>> We are the species that discovered doubt. Is there enough food laid by for winter? Have I miscalculated? Is my mate cheating on me? Should we have moved south? Is it safe to enter this cave? >>>>> >>>>> Dennett adamantly rejects “a slide into some form of relativism.” He argues that while “it is true that past scientific orthodoxies have themselves inspired policies that hindsight reveals to be seriously flawed” and that “the methods of science aren’t foolproof,” it is also true that >>>>> >>>>> they are indefinitely perfectible. Just as important: there is a tradition of criticism that enforces improvement whenever and wherever flaws are discovered. The methods of science, like everything else under the sun, are themselves objects of scientific scrutiny, as method becomes methodology, the analysis of methods. >>>>> >>>>> Trump’s utter indifference to the truth, what some of his critics have come to call his “normlessness,” is intensely alarming to many Washington analysts. >>>>> >>>>> Never before have we had a president, E.J. Dionne, Norman Ornstein and >>>>> >>>>> Thomas Mann write in their book, “One Nation After Trump,” >>>>> >>>>> who aroused such grave and widespread doubts about his commitment to the institutions of self-government, to the norms democracy requires, to the legitimacy of opposition in a free republic, and to the need for basic knowledge about major policy questions and about how government works. >>>>> >>>>> They continue: >>>>> >>>>> Norms, we argue, are often more important than formal rules in ensuring the function of a constitutional republic. >>>>> >>>>> Observing that “Trump has violated these basic understandings of how our democracy works in an unprecedented way,” Dionne, Mann and Ornstein go on: >>>>> >>>>> This norm breaking, is not simply a matter of political nicety. It is part of Trump’s larger assault on our institutions, his tendency to think in autocratic terms, his abusive attitude toward the judicial system, and his disrespect for civil servants and the day-to-day work of government. We show how Trump’s words and behavior parallel those of authoritarian leaders, past and present. >>>>> >>>>> William M. Kurtines, Jacob Gewirtz and Jacob L. Lamb draw attention to the link between normlessness and moral disorder. In the Handbook of Moral Behavior and Development (Vol. 3), they write, “Durkheim identified anomie — a condition of normlessness or moral deregulation — as a moral disease more likely to afflict the top than the bottom of society.” >>>>> >>>>> Wealth, according to Durkheim, >>>>> >>>>> deceives us into believing that we depend on ourselves only. Reducing the resistance we encounter from objects, it suggests the possibility of unlimited success against them. The less limited one feels, the more intolerable all limitation appears. >>>>> >>>>> Trump’s status and wealth have allowed him to ignore limits, norms, rules and regulations and have created a vicious circle — as violations of customary norms go >>>>> >>>>> unpunished, such violations become ever more widespread. >>>>> >>>>> Gary Gutting, an emeritus professor of philosophy at Notre Dame, focuses on the crucial role of power in postmodernism — the power to defy norms and the power to determine the veracity of competing claims. He emailed me: >>>>> >>>>> The “modern” in “postmodern” refers to the idea that we should seek truth by the objective methods of reason and science — not by appeals to emotion or tradition. ‘Postmodern’ is often used to refer to those who think there is no objective truth, just various devices we use to con people into agreeing with us. In this sense, Trump is postmodern. >>>>> >>>>> But serious postmodern thinkers like Foucault accept the ideal of objective truth. They point out, however, that practices and institutions claiming to be based on scientific truths often turn out to seek power as much or more than truth. Foucault, in particular, worried that what we think of as scientifically enlightened ways of improving society are often covers for increasing power over the people we claim to be helping. >>>>> >>>>> For Foucault, Trump, who seeks not truth but only power, would be an extreme example of what serious postmodernism opposes. >>>>> >>>>> There was a period, Stephen Greenblatt, a professor of the humanities at Harvard said by email, when >>>>> >>>>> a strain in postmodernism was so giddily determined to call into question the posturing of Enlightenment scientism that its advocates recklessly dismissed the very existence of objective truths. >>>>> >>>>> To these earlier advocates of postmodernism, >>>>> >>>>> everything is just the game of power, they noisily declared, assuring themselves that their deconstructive claims would somehow always be in the service of radical critique. >>>>> >>>>> This view, however, “was eviscerated by philosophers like Bernard Williams and has, I think, virtually no current standing.” >>>>> >>>>> David Bromwich, a professor of English at Yale, contended that >>>>> >>>>> academic skepticism about objective truth doesn’t as a rule deny that we can know the fact of the matter — e.g. the answer to the question “How many German troops crossed bridges over the Rhine on March 7, 1936?” Or “By how many degrees did the average global temperature rise between 1987 and 2017?” >>>>> >>>>> Instead, Bromwich argues that academic skepticism >>>>> >>>>> is directed against the assumption that any particular interpretation of the facts should be trusted as quite reliable. >>>>> >>>>> These movements in theoretical analysis are, however, alien to Trump, Bromwich wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Anyway, none of it was required to create Trump’s attitude toward fact and truth. He seems a demagogue of a familiar modern type, but far less coherent and more capricious than most of his predecessors. >>>>> >>>>> In an essay in the London Review of Books last year, Bromwich provided insight into how Trump justifies his falsehoods. Bromwich cited a January 2017 ABC interview of Trump by the journalist David Muir, in which Muir repeatedly challenged Trump’s claim that Clinton only won the popular vote because three to five million illegal ballots were cast for her by undocumented immigrants and other noncitizens. >>>>> >>>>> In the transcript, Muir and Trump go back and forth for 1,168 words — an eternity on television — until Trump acknowledges how he justifies the claim: “You know what’s important, millions of people agree with me.” Trump told Muir that people called in to say, “ ‘We agree with Mr. Trump. We agree.’ They’re very smart people.” >>>>> >>>>> The Muir interview provides evidence in support of a thesis developed by Carlos Prado, professor emeritus of philosophy at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario. Prado argues that instead of representing postmodernism, Trump embodies a very different phenomenon: “Post-Truth.” >>>>> >>>>> “Users of post-truth see themselves as expressing their opinions, but opinions that call for no verification, and in being their opinions, are on a par with anyone else’s opinions,” Prado writes in a forthcoming book, “The New Subjectivism”: >>>>> >>>>> Post-truth is the final step in the misguided move away from objective truth to relativization of truth. If truth is objective, assertions or propositions are true depending on how things are. If truth is relative, assertions or propositions are true depending on how people take things to be. >>>>> >>>>> Trump’s post-truths have drawn a conservative audience of American voters inured to lying. A majority of voters, 59 percent, in an April 2017 Washington Post- ABC News poll, agreed that the Trump administration “regularly makes false claims up,” but, in the same survey, 52 percent said news organizations “regularly produce false stories.” An October 2017 Politico/Morning Consult poll found that a plurality of voters, 46 percent, believe the media fabricate stories about Trump compared to 37 percent who say the media report accurately. >>>>> >>>>> “The criticism of postmodern theory as ‘anything goes relativism’ is a bum rap,” says John Caputo, emeritus professor of religion at Syracuse University: >>>>> >>>>> In postmodern theory we are better served by the idea of having ‘good reasons,’ meaning the best idea that anybody has at the moment, remembering that some obscure fellow working in a patent office because he can’t find a job teaching physics is liable to change the face of physics tomorrow morning. >>>>> >>>>> The problem with Trump, according to Caputo, >>>>> >>>>> is not that he is an “anything goes relativist,” but that he is an authoritarian, a would-be strong man, who launches vile personal attacks on anyone who criticizes him. >>>>> >>>>> Judith Butler, a professor of comparative literature and the founding director of the program of critical theory at the University of California, Berkeley, voiced disbelief that >>>>> >>>>> anyone would be inclined to blame intellectual trends in the academy or in the arts for the way that Trump speaks, thinks, or acts. Given that he does not read very much at all, and that the kind of literary and social theory you reference depends on reading closely, the two trends could not be further apart. >>>>> >>>>> Along similar lines, Colin Koopman, a professor of philosophy at the University of Oregon, argued that what is disturbing about Trump is that “he does not value truth in the sense of offering justifications and reasons to those at whom he speaks or tweets.” >>>>> >>>>> As a result, Koopman continued in an email, >>>>> >>>>> only those who are cynical about truth itself can take him seriously. His style is not “postmodern” at all, but is rather cynical. >>>>> >>>>> If postmodernism does not account for Trump’s bludgeoning of the truth, what does? A field that provides insight into the Trump phenomenon is evolutionary theory. >>>>> >>>>> Steven Pinker, professor of psychology at Harvard and author of the forthcoming book “Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress,” emailed me his thoughts: >>>>> >>>>> The answer lies in raw tribalism: when someone is perceived as a champion of one’s coalition, all is forgiven. The same is true for opinions: a particular issue can become a sacred value, shibboleth, or affirmation of allegiance to one’s team, and its content no longer matters. This is part of a growing realization in political psychology that tribalism has been underestimated in our understanding of politics, and ideological coherence and political and scientific literacy overestimated. >>>>> >>>>> Once tribalism becomes embedded in the political system, Pinker wrote, >>>>> >>>>> the full ingenuity of human cognition is recruited to valorize the champion and shore up the sacred beliefs. You can always dismiss criticism as being motivated by the bias of one’s enemies. Our cognitive and linguistic faculties are endlessly creative — that’s what makes our species so smart — and that creativity can be >>>>> >>>>> always deployed to reframe issues in congenial or invidious terms. >>>>> >>>>> Don Symons, professor of anthropology emeritus at the University of California-Santa Barbara, made a similar point in an email: >>>>> >>>>> Our species is profoundly coalitional, and in most times and places moral prescriptions apply only to one’s in-group, not to humanity in general. I don’t see any evidence that we evolved innate, universal moral rules about how to treat all humans. That’s why history, as James Joyce said, is a nightmare. Prehistory is worse. I assume that coalitional-thinking is what Trump was getting at when he claimed that he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and his base would still love him. It’s not that they feel that killing a random stranger for no reason is morally ok; it’s that loyalty to their coalition leader is primary. >>>>> >>>>> If tribalism has begun to supplant traditional partisanship, their argument suggests, lying in politics will metastasize as traditional constraints continue to fall by the wayside. >>>>> >>>>> Trump’s success, such as it is, has been to accelerate the ongoing transformation of traditional political competition into an atavistic struggle in which each side claims moral superiority and defines the opposition as evil. >>>>> >>>>> These developments have been unfolding for decades, but the 2016 election was a turning point that appears to have the potential to corrupt the system beyond repair. Trump is determined to leave the destruction of democratic procedure as his legacy. Instead of granting him the title of postmodernist, let’s say instead that Trump is a nihilist who seeks to trample, to trash, to blight, to break and to burn. >>>>> >>>>> I invite you to follow me on Twitter, @Edsall. >>>>> >>>>> Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter. >>>>> >>>>> © 2018 The New York Times Company >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C2f77ba791b434dcac5d108d5657014a8%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636526454411068666&sdata=yb61mT09OldN0Yirn9bGhEdghQziuw4hD1GBtaF4Sj4%3D&reserved=0 >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C2f77ba791b434dcac5d108d5657014a8%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636526454411068666&sdata=yb61mT09OldN0Yirn9bGhEdghQziuw4hD1GBtaF4Sj4%3D&reserved=0 >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C2f77ba791b434dcac5d108d5657014a8%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636526454411068666&sdata=yb61mT09OldN0Yirn9bGhEdghQziuw4hD1GBtaF4Sj4%3D&reserved=0 From karenaram at hotmail.com Sat Jan 27 14:22:28 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2018 14:22:28 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Today's letter to News-Gazette In-Reply-To: References: <182251147.1364085.1517004746525.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <182251147.1364085.1517004746525@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: It is an excellent letter as Stuart notes, and it provides a glimpse of why so many of us, are socialists opposing the one Party system, whether Democrat or Republican. On Jan 26, 2018, at 19:19, Stuart Levy via Peace-discuss > wrote: David, what an excellent letter. Thank you for exposing class warfare so clearly. And, glad you included the final sentence. This isn't a matter of party A vs. party B. On 01/26/2018 04:12 PM, David Green via Peace-discuss wrote: Regarding “Road to Ruin” (1/21), the editors—as always—rely on the Koch Brothers’ (American Legislative Exchange Council, Illinois Policy Institute) analysis of yearly Illinois population loss of ¼ of 1% to argue for lower taxes, decreased environmental and workplace regulation, and governmental austerity in all areas that actually help people (which excludes military spending). This is part of a national libertarian-neoliberal agenda to convince state legislatures to participate in a race to the bottom characterized by decreased taxes on the wealthy, increased concentration of wealth, income stagnation for at least the bottom 50%, destruction of remaining unions (especially public employees), privatization of public education, and opposition to private insurance-based Obamacare, which for the Koch Brothers isn’t privatized enough. Such state-level policies, when implemented in a critical mass of states, insure a continuation of the above trends in all states, whether they gain or lose population—a trivial artifact of the brutal class warfare promoted by the Koch Brothers and the editors of the News-Gazette. The federal context of state-level policy is vital: a privatized healthcare system that wastes a trillion dollars or two; a military-industrial complex that spends another trillion in an effort to rule the global economy; Wall Street’s successful legislative effort to accumulate ½ of national wealth in the hands of the 1%. Illinois is indeed burdened by a regressive state/local tax system that is easy prey for austerity-mongers. Moreover, both the Koch Brothers-Rauner Republican Party and the Goldman Sachs-Madigan-Emanuel Democratic Party are in on the fix. Road to ruin Road to ruin Population shifts within the United States — who moves where and why — speaks volumes about how well the 50 stat... _______________________________________________ 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://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C3e3ac7e8cfc848fcf49408d56534dc69%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636526200059955385&sdata=1L8xG%2BnUygn%2BTcnzEkTUyj87Sem2Sqigty1PqJjEvLk%3D&reserved=0 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 27 21:37:31 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2018 21:37:31 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] One Percent majority: A 50-point plan for corporate rule References: <942708358.1805198.1517089051320.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <942708358.1805198.1517089051320@mail.yahoo.com> This 46 minute podcast elaborates on the points I was making in my letter published yesterday. A very efficient discussion that hits all the right notes.  One Percent majority: A 50-point plan for corporate rule. | | | | | | | | | | | One Percent majority: A 50-point plan for corporate rule. Political economist Gordon Lafer examines the state-by-state capture of legislatures by corporate lobbyists, buy... | | | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mkb3 at icloud.com Sat Jan 27 22:49:17 2018 From: mkb3 at icloud.com (Morton K. Brussel) Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2018 16:49:17 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: [ufpj-activist] End on the war on terror References: Message-ID: Lee Camp, new to me, but hits the nails on their heads. Quite a performance, if a little raucous. > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Kevin Zeese > > Subject: [ufpj-activist] End on the war on terror > Date: January 27, 2018 at 12:25:42 PM CST > To: ufpj-activist > > > This episode of Redacted Tonight opens with an excellent monologue from Lee Camp. He focuses on the new national defense strategy and a speech by General Mattis at Johns Hopkins where he declared the US had won the war on terror and now the US was switching its focus on to competitor nations. Lee does a solid rebuttal and analysis. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBdZbL7c4U4&mc_cid=7fc6d33c37&mc_eid=51b0914258 > > @KBZeese > Build power and resistance > Popular Resistance > www.PopularResistance.org Shift Wealth: Economic Democracy > Its Our Economy > www.ItsOurEconomy.US > Democratize the Media > Clearing the FOG (Forces of Greed) > Radio http://www.ClearingTheFOGRadio.org _______________________________________________ > ufpj-activist mailing list > > Guidelines: %(http://www.unitedforpeace.org/listserv-community-guidelines ) > Post: ufpj-activist at lists.mayfirst.org > List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/ufpj-activist > > To Unsubscribe > Send email to: ufpj-activist-unsubscribe at lists.mayfirst.org > Or visit: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/ufpj-activist/mkb0029%40gmail.com > > You are subscribed as: mkb0029 at gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sun Jan 28 00:11:11 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2018 00:11:11 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Support the GEO for the 22nd Bargaining Session Message-ID: Support labor, support our grad employees at the U of I GEO: "At our last bargaining session, we presented the Admin with a comprehensive proposal with everything left on the table. This proposal included movement from on our original proposal on wages, healthcare, appointment terms, and child care. We did this in yet another attempt to do everything we can do avoid a strike." ...See More [https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-0/c0.14.736.387/p552x414/27163983_10155571703469398_7624478380542108873_o.jpg?oh=b31864b1ce4a04c5569d819fa1de1732&oe=5B1F5E12] JAN30 Going All Out for the 22nd Bargaining Session Tue 8:25 AM CST · Illinois Fire Service Institute · Champaign, IL Muhammad and Joel are going -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sun Jan 28 00:52:17 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2018 00:52:17 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Will there be a US nuclear sneak attack on North Korea? Message-ID: * Print * Leaflet * Feedback * Share » Will there be a US nuclear sneak attack on North Korea? By Bill Van Auken WSWS.ORG 26 January 2018 Under the cover of the pre-Winter Olympics thaw between North and South Korea and the momentary lull in the “fire and fury” rhetoric from the Trump White House, there are growing signs that the Pentagon and the CIA are pressing ahead with preparations for a preemptive war against North Korea, including the use of nuclear weapons. There have been multiple reports in the American corporate media of behind-the-scenes discussions between the US military and intelligence apparatus and the Trump administration of the feasibility of a so-called “bloody nose” attack, involving US air strikes on North Korean nuclear facilities, with the expectation—however ill-founded—that they would not provoke a full-scale war. In a rare public speech, CIA Director Mike Pompeo hinted obliquely at these plans. Speaking before the right-wing think tank American Enterprise Institute Tuesday, Pompeo warned that Pyongyang was a “handful of months” away from achieving the capability of staging a nuclear attack against the US mainland. The CIA director said that Washington was “going to foreclose that risk” and “denuclearize permanently” North Korea. While asserting that the Trump administration was committed to a “solution through diplomatic means”—a claim belied by Trump’s chiding of his Secretary of State Rex Tillerson last October for “wasting his time” by seeking negotiations with the government of Kim Jung Un—Pompeo said that the CIA was working with the Pentagon to “prepare a series of options to make sure that we can deliver a range of things so the president will have the full suite of possibilities.” He added that he would “leave to others to address the capacity or the wisdom of a preemptive strike.” The issue of “capacity,” however, is already being decided through a series of ominous actions taken by the US military. Earlier this month, the Air Force deployed six B-52H Stratofortress bombers along with 300 Airmen from Barksdale Air Base in Louisiana to Guam to replace six B-1B Lancer bombers. The positioning of the B-52s, which unlike the B-1B bombers are capable of delivering nuclear weapons, marks a major escalation. [http://www.wsws.org/asset/76177bb0-f539-40c2-ad60-ffa95ef11f5C/image.jpg?rendition=image480]US B-2 nuclear capable bomber “The B-52H’s return to the Pacific will provide [US Pacific Command] and its regional allies and partners with a credible, strategic power projection platform,” the Air Force said in a statement. “The B-52 is capable of flying at high subsonic speeds at altitudes up to 50,000 feet and can carry nuclear or precision guided conventional ordnance with worldwide precision navigation capability. This forward-deployed presence demonstrates the continued commitment of the US to allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific region.” A week earlier, the Pentagon deployed three B-2 nuclear-capable stealth bombers to the Guam air base. The deployments mark the first time in nearly two and a half years that all three bombers—the B-52s, B-2s and B-1Bs—have been assembled together in Guam, only 2,200 miles away from targets in North Korea. The Bloomberg News agency reported Wednesday that the US Air Force “deployed an upgraded version of the U.S’s largest non-nuclear bomb—a 30,000-pound “bunker buster” that can only be carried by the B-2 stealth bombers now based in Guam.” The weapon, which is larger than the so-called Mother of all Bombs (MOAB) dropped on Afghanistan last April “could be used if the US decided to hit underground nuclear missile facilities in North Korea,” Bloomberg reported Meanwhile, the USS Carl Vinson, a US Navy Nimitz-class supercarrier, together with its accompanying strike group of guided-missile destroyers and other warships, departed from San Diego earlier this month and is scheduled to arrive off the Korean peninsula in advance of the Winter Olympic Games set to begin in Pyeongchang, South Korea on February 9. It will join the USS Ronald Reagan carrier battle group already deployed in Japan. The USS Wasp, a 40,000-ton miniature aircraft carrier, is now operating from Japan, carrying F-35B jets, the Pentagon’s most advanced warplanes, which are capable of carrying B61 thermonuclear gravity bombs, a ground-penetrating bunker buster weapon that could be used against underground nuclear and command and control facilities in North Korea. Alongside this buildup of nuclear strike forces, US ground and airborne troops have been rehearsing for an invasion at bases throughout the United States, while 1,000 Army reservists have been called up for active duty to man “mobilization centers” used for the rapid movement of troops overseas. These feverish military preparations are taking place as South Korea has persuaded Washington to call off planned joint military exercises on the Korean peninsula itself, which Pyongyang had denounced as a provocation and preparation for invasion. The South Korean government of President Moon Jae-in has used the upcoming 2018 Olympics Winter Games to resume dialogue with North Korea, which has agreed to send a large delegation to the games, with North and South Korean women ice hockey players joining for the first time in a unified team. Kim Jong-un issued a conciliatory statement Thursday calling for all Koreans “at home and abroad” to work to “rapidly improve north-south relations” and for a “breakthrough for independent reunification.” In Davos, meanwhile, South Korea’s Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-wha said at a news briefing, “The nuclear issue has to be solved through negotiations and diplomatic endeavors. This idea of a military solution is unacceptable.” She declined to comment when asked if Washington had given Seoul clear assurances that it would not carry out a unilateral military strike. She added, “This is our fate that is at stake. Any option that is to be taken on the Korean peninsula, cannot be implemented without us going along.” It is by no means clear, however, that the Trump administration has given Seoul any veto power over US military action. There is no doubt that Washington views the talks between Seoul and Pyongyang as a threat to its policy of “maximum pressure” against North Korea and a potential obstacle to its preparations for war. Far from decreasing the US war drive, any move toward accommodation between Seoul and Pyongyang is likely to only increase the pressure within the US ruling establishment and its military and intelligence apparatus to resolve the issue by means of military aggression. Amid the US military buildup, the US government Wednesday rolled out a new round of sanctions aimed at strangling North Korea’s economy. These latest sanctions targeted nine entities, 16 individuals and six North Korean ships. Among those on the sanction list were two China-based trading firms. Beijing reacted with hostility to the new sanctions. “China resolutely opposes any country using its own laws to carry out long-arm jurisdiction on Chinese companies or individuals,” a foreign ministry spokesperson said. The continuing danger of war on the Korean peninsula, which carries with it the threat of a nuclear conflagration that could claim the lives of millions, was cited Thursday by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists in moving its so-called Doomsday Clock, which it has maintained since 1947, 30 seconds forwards, to two minutes to midnight. This is only the second time in more than seven decades that the group has assessed this grave a threat of nuclear war. It also cited the Trump administration’s threat to upend the Iran nuclear deal and rising tensions between the US and Russia, the world’s two largest nuclear powers. It called attention as well to the Trump administration’s Nuclear Posture Review which seeks to “increase the types and roles of nuclear weapons in US defense plans and lower the threshold” for their use. The administration and the Pentagon have also recently issued a National Security Strategy and a National Defense Strategy, which spell out a fundamental shift in US strategy, replacing the two-decade-old “global war on terror” with the preparation for “great power” conflict and world war, in which an emphasis is placed on the buildup of Washington’s nuclear arsenal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rwhelbig at gmail.com Sun Jan 28 01:35:08 2018 From: rwhelbig at gmail.com (Roger Helbig) Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2018 17:35:08 -0800 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Will there be a US nuclear sneak attack on North Korea? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: absolutely NOT - it would be insane because Japan and the rest of the world would suffer the effects. On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 4:52 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss < peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > > > - Print > > - Leaflet > > - Feedback > > - Share » > > Will there be a US nuclear sneak attack on North Korea? By Bill Van Auken *WSWS.ORG > * > 26 January 2018 > > Under the cover of the pre-Winter Olympics thaw between North and South > Korea and the momentary lull in the “fire and fury” rhetoric from the Trump > White House, there are growing signs that the Pentagon and the CIA are > pressing ahead with preparations for a preemptive war against North Korea, > including the use of nuclear weapons. > > There have been multiple reports in the American corporate media of > behind-the-scenes discussions between the US military and intelligence > apparatus and the Trump administration of the feasibility of a so-called > “bloody nose” attack, involving US air strikes on North Korean nuclear > facilities, with the expectation—however ill-founded—that they would not > provoke a full-scale war. > > In a rare public speech, CIA Director Mike Pompeo hinted obliquely at > these plans. Speaking before the right-wing think tank American Enterprise > Institute Tuesday, Pompeo warned that Pyongyang was a “handful of months” > away from achieving the capability of staging a nuclear attack against the > US mainland. > > The CIA director said that Washington was “going to foreclose that risk” > and “denuclearize permanently” North Korea. > > While asserting that the Trump administration was committed to a “solution > through diplomatic means”—a claim belied by Trump’s chiding of his > Secretary of State Rex Tillerson last October for “wasting his time” by > seeking negotiations with the government of Kim Jung Un—Pompeo said that > the CIA was working with the Pentagon to “prepare a series of options to > make sure that we can deliver a range of things so the president will have > the full suite of possibilities.” > > He added that he would “leave to others to address the capacity or the > wisdom of a preemptive strike.” > > The issue of “capacity,” however, is already being decided through a > series of ominous actions taken by the US military. > > Earlier this month, the Air Force deployed six B-52H Stratofortress > bombers along with 300 Airmen from Barksdale Air Base in Louisiana to Guam > to replace six B-1B Lancer bombers. The positioning of the B-52s, which > unlike the B-1B bombers are capable of delivering nuclear weapons, marks a > major escalation. > US B-2 nuclear capable bomber > > “The B-52H’s return to the Pacific will provide [US Pacific Command] and > its regional allies and partners with a credible, strategic power > projection platform,” the Air Force said in a statement. “The B-52 is > capable of flying at high subsonic speeds at altitudes up to 50,000 feet > and can carry nuclear or precision guided conventional ordnance with > worldwide precision navigation capability. This forward-deployed presence > demonstrates the continued commitment of the US to allies and partners in > the Indo-Pacific region.” > > A week earlier, the Pentagon deployed three B-2 nuclear-capable stealth > bombers to the Guam air base. > > The deployments mark the first time in nearly two and a half years that > all three bombers—the B-52s, B-2s and B-1Bs—have been assembled together in > Guam, only 2,200 miles away from targets in North Korea. > > The Bloomberg News agency reported Wednesday that the US Air Force > “deployed an upgraded version of the U.S’s largest non-nuclear bomb—a > 30,000-pound “bunker buster” that can only be carried by the B-2 stealth > bombers now based in Guam.” > > The weapon, which is larger than the so-called Mother of all Bombs (MOAB) > dropped on Afghanistan last April “could be used if the US decided to hit > underground nuclear missile facilities in North Korea,” Bloomberg reported > > Meanwhile, the USS Carl Vinson, a US Navy Nimitz-class supercarrier, > together with its accompanying strike group of guided-missile destroyers > and other warships, departed from San Diego earlier this month and is > scheduled to arrive off the Korean peninsula in advance of the Winter > Olympic Games set to begin in Pyeongchang, South Korea on February 9. It > will join the USS Ronald Reagan carrier battle group already deployed in > Japan. > > The USS Wasp, a 40,000-ton miniature aircraft carrier, is now operating > from Japan, carrying F-35B jets, the Pentagon’s most advanced warplanes, > which are capable of carrying B61 thermonuclear gravity bombs, a > ground-penetrating bunker buster weapon that could be used against > underground nuclear and command and control facilities in North Korea. > > Alongside this buildup of nuclear strike forces, US ground and airborne > troops have been rehearsing for an invasion at bases throughout the United > States, while 1,000 Army reservists have been called up for active duty to > man “mobilization centers” used for the rapid movement of troops overseas. > > These feverish military preparations are taking place as South Korea has > persuaded Washington to call off planned joint military exercises on the > Korean peninsula itself, which Pyongyang had denounced as a provocation and > preparation for invasion. > > The South Korean government of President Moon Jae-in has used the upcoming > 2018 Olympics Winter Games to resume dialogue with North Korea, which has > agreed to send a large delegation to the games, with North and South Korean > women ice hockey players joining for the first time in a unified team. > > Kim Jong-un issued a conciliatory statement Thursday calling for all > Koreans “at home and abroad” to work to “rapidly improve north-south > relations” and for a “breakthrough for independent reunification.” > > In Davos, meanwhile, South Korea’s Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-wha said at > a news briefing, “The nuclear issue has to be solved through negotiations > and diplomatic endeavors. This idea of a military solution is unacceptable.” > > She declined to comment when asked if Washington had given Seoul clear > assurances that it would not carry out a unilateral military strike. She > added, “This is our fate that is at stake. Any option that is to be taken > on the Korean peninsula, cannot be implemented without us going along.” > > It is by no means clear, however, that the Trump administration has given > Seoul any veto power over US military action. There is no doubt that > Washington views the talks between Seoul and Pyongyang as a threat to its > policy of “maximum pressure” against North Korea and a potential obstacle > to its preparations for war. Far from decreasing the US war drive, any move > toward accommodation between Seoul and Pyongyang is likely to only increase > the pressure within the US ruling establishment and its military and > intelligence apparatus to resolve the issue by means of military aggression. > > Amid the US military buildup, the US government Wednesday rolled out a new > round of sanctions aimed at strangling North Korea’s economy. These latest > sanctions targeted nine entities, 16 individuals and six North Korean > ships. Among those on the sanction list were two China-based trading firms. > > Beijing reacted with hostility to the new sanctions. “China resolutely > opposes any country using its own laws to carry out long-arm jurisdiction > on Chinese companies or individuals,” a foreign ministry spokesperson said. > > The continuing danger of war on the Korean peninsula, which carries with > it the threat of a nuclear conflagration that could claim the lives of > millions, was cited Thursday by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists in > moving its so-called Doomsday Clock, which it has maintained since 1947, 30 > seconds forwards, to two minutes to midnight. This is only the second time > in more than seven decades that the group has assessed this grave a threat > of nuclear war. > > It also cited the Trump administration’s threat to upend the Iran nuclear > deal and rising tensions between the US and Russia, the world’s two largest > nuclear powers. It called attention as well to the Trump administration’s > Nuclear Posture Review which seeks to “increase the types and roles of > nuclear weapons in US defense plans and lower the threshold” for their use. > > The administration and the Pentagon have also recently issued a National > Security Strategy and a National Defense Strategy, which spell out a > fundamental shift in US strategy, replacing the two-decade-old “global war > on terror” with the preparation for “great power” conflict and world war, > in which an emphasis is placed on the buildup of Washington’s nuclear > arsenal. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Jan 28 14:34:15 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2018 14:34:15 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News Gazette for Chief Illiniwak: Oskee Bow Wow Forever! Message-ID: 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. [cid:image005.jpg at 01D39812.C7028220] 81. Doctor Illiniwak, M.D. Got a note >From a Doctor MD not PHD Saying he was just like me Illinois BS U Chicago Med Harvard Public Health He was so irate Against me for Chief Illiniwak That he told the Prez Of his beloved Alma Mater That he would not give a dime So long as I taught here Just like me? A sick puppy Pathetic Physician Typical Illinois BS Cult of Chief Illiniwak Brainwashing kids To become die-hard bigots and racists For the rest of their lives I pity his poor patients Dr. Illiniwak needs a Shrink! [cid:image006.png at 01D39812.C7028220] 83. The Principles on Which We Stand at the University of Illinois The Principles on Which We Stand At the University of Illinois: 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 Anthro 101 The Cult of Chief Illiniwak 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) ________________________________ 1 Guess who? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 53185 bytes Desc: image005.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.png Type: image/png Size: 393228 bytes Desc: image006.png URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sun Jan 28 16:23:41 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2018 16:23:41 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Chris Hedges interviews David North Message-ID: https://www.rt.com/shows/on-contact/417193-capitalist-crisis-us-issue/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From divisek at yahoo.com Sun Jan 28 16:28:52 2018 From: divisek at yahoo.com (Dianna Visek) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2018 16:28:52 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Scandal to End All Scandals References: <1928291782.2058832.1517156932255.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1928291782.2058832.1517156932255@mail.yahoo.com> It will be interesting to see where this goes.  Although I dislike Trump, this behavior is a new low.  DV The Scandal to End All Scandals - Wayne Root | | | | | | | | | | | The Scandal to End All Scandals - Wayne Root I’d like to write more about the booming Trump economy. About bonuses for 2 million workers and bigger paychecks... | | | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sun Jan 28 17:09:04 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2018 17:09:04 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] US Squatting in Syria Message-ID: Henningsen: US ‘Squatting’ in Syria, Attempting to Manage NATO, Turkey, Kurds and Russia JANUARY 26, 2018 BY 21WIRE 2 COMMENTS The situation with NATO, Turkey and the Kurds in Syria is of central geopolitical importance for the United States. What’s at stake? In short, continued control and influence in Middle East affairs… Executive Editor of 21st Century Wire, Patrick Henningsen, speaks to RT International: Partial transcript… PH: “Who’s going to manage this situation? Is it going to be Turkey or Russia? Or, is the U.S. going to have some stake in that? That’s what’s at stake, that’s why they [the US] are squatting. U.S. needs to be involved in this conflict.” RT: ‘Why is Turkey so concerned about the Kurds? PH: “Both Turkey and the U.S. are using the exact same justification for mounting operations inside of Syria…which is ‘anti-terror’…or the fight against terrorists. Even though Turkey proper hasn’t been attacked, it’s labeled this as an existential crisis, as the U.S. did with ISIS.” RT: ‘What’s at stake here with Turkey? PH: “Maybe some type of demographic change […] a transformation to have more ‘pro-Ankara’, possibly Muslim Brotherhood Arab factions. Right now, some Free Syrian Army are fighting on behalf of Turkey in this fight […] a new front in this war.” RT: ‘How do you see this playing out, this potential confrontation? PH: “I think the U.S. will avoid that (confrontation) at all costs. They haven’t escalated because all parties agree that will mean WWIII… or it will lead to a bigger conflict. The big loser here is Syria. It’s not the best situation for Syria, in terms of the rest of the powers involved. But it’s better than a greater, wider war.” READ MORE TURKEY & SYRIA NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Turkey Files & 21st Century Wire Syria Files -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sun Jan 28 18:18:03 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2018 18:18:03 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Kiev is preparing to invade Donbass, from "Fort Russ" Message-ID: The US has a habit of goading its vassals into attacking during international sports events. The coup in Ukraine happened during the Sochi Olympics. The attackon South Ossetia happened during the Beijing Olympics. The Olympics, the World Cup AND the Russian elections are coming up. The US has been arming and training the Ukrainians, especially the Nazis among them. My friend Russell is fighting the Nazis in Donbass. He has a question for Americans.... ''It's coming. We and our friends are ready, but many good people will die before the ukrop nazis are wiped out. And remember, when the attack begins, the order comes from Washington. So, what will the "American people" do about it?'' KIEV IS PREPARING TO INVADE DONBASS - WILL RUSSIA STEP IN THIS TIME? Donbass Invasion law on reintegration Novorossia Russia Kiev is preparing to invade Donbass - will Russia step in this time? January 23 , 2017 - Fort Russ News - Rusvesna - translated by Inessa Sinchougova [https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-YAX55oMaNzM/Wma3R7nLwsI/AAAAAAAAHzA/UWMh3fXBPAIyx5ukBjSo8-6Eyj_IiWEsgCLcBGAs/s640/vsu_aviaciya%2B%25281%2529.jpg] For two years, Kiev has been preparing for the armed invasion of Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics; the Ukrainian army has significantly improved its performance, says State Duma deputy from Crimea, Ruslan Balbek. The President of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko, referring to the law adopted by the Verkhovna Rada on the reintegration of Donbass "the tool of returning these territories to the sovereignty of Ukraine." "Kiev has been preparing for two years and does not hide this. It should be recognized that the Ukrainian army has significantly improved its performance metrics and is preparing to apply them in practice. I have no doubt that the order for an offensive along the entire front line will be given," said Balbek. The politician suggested that in this scenario, weakly controlled military groups near Russian borders will emerge "which is, therefore, a threat to state infrastructure and the peaceful life of our citizens." "This is a threat to national security, which we must eliminate, even if preventive measures are needed. And, of course, most importantly, in March 2014, our country did not allow the Russian-speaking population of the Crimea to be torn to pieces. I do not believe that we can abandon hundreds of thousands of Donbass residents to the Ukrainian military" he added. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sun Jan 28 19:14:44 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2018 19:14:44 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Trump's crazy not to continue the Cold War! In-Reply-To: <835F6FE5-315B-4B49-8CFA-330A01A2CA16@gmail.com> References: <835F6FE5-315B-4B49-8CFA-330A01A2CA16@gmail.com> Message-ID: Carl I meant to comment on this a while back. While I agree with McCoy’s assessment of US goals of containment of Eurasia, which he thoroughly documents, as well as his exposure of the CIA “involvement” in drugs in SE Asia, and elsewhere. I have noted in addition to that which you refer, sees China and Russia through the same eyes as promoted by the USG, as threats to the West, and SE Asia. Some time ago, I noted his having spent a lot of time in the Philippines he has the same view as many small vulnerable nations, that a growing and prosperous China, are a danger to them. Given the Chinese control and influence of banking and commerce throughout SE Asia, many indigenous folks have always feared China, the “red scare” another influence from the west. It’s much the same as the fear of “Jews” in Europe during the early and mid1900’s. What I see is a fear of Chinese business influence coming from the overseas Chinese, dating back decades, being now applied to the mainland of today. Many westerners living in Asia, are influenced by the locals who don’t like the competition, and vice versa, many locals being influenced by the west. However, many Asian nations/leaders are waking up to the realities of US militarism, hegemony and imperialism being much more frightening, than Chinese business and investments, but many like McCoy, who is old, maintain their views. Thus, they see three giants being the problem, rather than the one proven problem. On Jan 16, 2018, at 07:38, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/176373/tomgram%3A_alfred_mccoy%2C_tweeting_while_rome_burns/#more A strange piece by Alfred McCoy. No cold warrior from a generation ago could do better in defending the virtues of the American empire. He shows the effects of Trump Derangement Syndrome, excoriating what he sees as the Trump administration's departures from the neoconservative (and neoliberal) policies of the previous administration (and its predecessor) and all but praising its wars and war provocations "at the axial ends of Eurasia" (in a repeated Mackinderesque flourish). "As Trump undercuts the U.S. strategic position at the axial ends of Eurasia, China is pressing relentlessly to displace the United States and dominate that vast continent with what New York Times correspondent Edward Wong calls 'a blunt counterpoint... synonymous with brute strength, bribery and browbeating.’" He also buys the NYT account of Russian 'meddling' in Trump's election ('Russiagate')… —CGE _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C056864df64c24d9c04c408d55cf73cdb%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636517139303185408&sdata=9m4iCNYhaTJ%2Bc7zKg7Mpy2SN7l5dBcM1H%2FsqM5JBhHI%3D&reserved=0 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brussel at illinois.edu Sun Jan 28 19:51:32 2018 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2018 19:51:32 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Trump's crazy not to continue the Cold War! In-Reply-To: References: <835F6FE5-315B-4B49-8CFA-330A01A2CA16@gmail.com> Message-ID: Of possible interest: I read McCoy’s piece on tomdispatch.com, and couldn’t believe it was promoted there. Therefore, I sent off an email to tomdispatch explaining surprise and disappointment at McCoy’s acceptance of the standard views of the NYT, WP, WSJ, etc. regarding the dangers from Russia and China, not to say N. Korea and Iran. Yes, a better informed(?) cold warrior, McCoy, who stressed the need for a continued U.S. imperium. —mkb On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:14 PM, Karen Aram via Peace > wrote: Carl I meant to comment on this a while back. While I agree with McCoy’s assessment of US goals of containment of Eurasia, which he thoroughly documents, as well as his exposure of the CIA “involvement” in drugs in SE Asia, and elsewhere. I have noted in addition to that which you refer, sees China and Russia through the same eyes as promoted by the USG, as threats to the West, and SE Asia. Some time ago, I noted his having spent a lot of time in the Philippines he has the same view as many small vulnerable nations, that a growing and prosperous China, are a danger to them. Given the Chinese control and influence of banking and commerce throughout SE Asia, many indigenous folks have always feared China, the “red scare” another influence from the west. It’s much the same as the fear of “Jews” in Europe during the early and mid1900’s. What I see is a fear of Chinese business influence coming from the overseas Chinese, dating back decades, being now applied to the mainland of today. Many westerners living in Asia, are influenced by the locals who don’t like the competition, and vice versa, many locals being influenced by the west. However, many Asian nations/leaders are waking up to the realities of US militarism, hegemony and imperialism being much more frightening, than Chinese business and investments, but many like McCoy, who is old, maintain their views. Thus, they see three giants being the problem, rather than the one proven problem. On Jan 16, 2018, at 07:38, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/176373/tomgram%3A_alfred_mccoy%2C_tweeting_while_rome_burns/#more A strange piece by Alfred McCoy. No cold warrior from a generation ago could do better in defending the virtues of the American empire. He shows the effects of Trump Derangement Syndrome, excoriating what he sees as the Trump administration's departures from the neoconservative (and neoliberal) policies of the previous administration (and its predecessor) and all but praising its wars and war provocations "at the axial ends of Eurasia" (in a repeated Mackinderesque flourish). "As Trump undercuts the U.S. strategic position at the axial ends of Eurasia, China is pressing relentlessly to displace the United States and dominate that vast continent with what New York Times correspondent Edward Wong calls 'a blunt counterpoint... synonymous with brute strength, bribery and browbeating.’" He also buys the NYT account of Russian 'meddling' in Trump's election ('Russiagate')… —CGE _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C056864df64c24d9c04c408d55cf73cdb%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636517139303185408&sdata=9m4iCNYhaTJ%2Bc7zKg7Mpy2SN7l5dBcM1H%2FsqM5JBhHI%3D&reserved=0 _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sun Jan 28 20:26:39 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2018 20:26:39 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Trump's crazy not to continue the Cold War! In-Reply-To: References: <835F6FE5-315B-4B49-8CFA-330A01A2CA16@gmail.com> Message-ID: Thank you. On Jan 28, 2018, at 11:51, Brussel, Morton K > wrote: Of possible interest: I read McCoy’s piece on tomdispatch.com, and couldn’t believe it was promoted there. Therefore, I sent off an email to tomdispatch explaining surprise and disappointment at McCoy’s acceptance of the standard views of the NYT, WP, WSJ, etc. regarding the dangers from Russia and China, not to say N. Korea and Iran. Yes, a better informed(?) cold warrior, McCoy, who stressed the need for a continued U.S. imperium. —mkb On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:14 PM, Karen Aram via Peace > wrote: Carl I meant to comment on this a while back. While I agree with McCoy’s assessment of US goals of containment of Eurasia, which he thoroughly documents, as well as his exposure of the CIA “involvement” in drugs in SE Asia, and elsewhere. I have noted in addition to that which you refer, he sees China and Russia through the same eyes as promoted by the USG, as threats to the West, and SE Asia. Some time ago, I noted his having spent a lot of time in the Philippines he has the same view as many small vulnerable nations, that a growing and prosperous China, are a danger to them. Given the Chinese control and influence of banking and commerce throughout SE Asia, many indigenous folks have always feared China, a result of the “red scare” another influence from the West. It’s much the same as the fear of “Jews” in Europe during the early and mid1900’s. What I see is a fear of Chinese business influence coming from the “overseas Chinese, dating back decades," being now applied to the mainland of today. Many westerners living in Asia, are influenced by the locals, who don’t like the competition, and vice versa, many locals being influenced by the West. However, many Asian nations/leaders are waking up to the realities of US militarism, hegemony and imperialism being much more frightening, than Chinese business and investments, but many like McCoy, who is old, maintain their view of the past. Thus, they see three giants being the problem, rather than the one “proven" problem. On Jan 16, 2018, at 07:38, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/176373/tomgram%3A_alfred_mccoy%2C_tweeting_while_rome_burns/#more A strange piece by Alfred McCoy. No cold warrior from a generation ago could do better in defending the virtues of the American empire. He shows the effects of Trump Derangement Syndrome, excoriating what he sees as the Trump administration's departures from the neoconservative (and neoliberal) policies of the previous administration (and its predecessor) and all but praising its wars and war provocations "at the axial ends of Eurasia" (in a repeated Mackinderesque flourish). "As Trump undercuts the U.S. strategic position at the axial ends of Eurasia, China is pressing relentlessly to displace the United States and dominate that vast continent with what New York Times correspondent Edward Wong calls 'a blunt counterpoint... synonymous with brute strength, bribery and browbeating.’" He also buys the NYT account of Russian 'meddling' in Trump's election ('Russiagate')… —CGE _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7C056864df64c24d9c04c408d55cf73cdb%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636517139303185408&sdata=9m4iCNYhaTJ%2Bc7zKg7Mpy2SN7l5dBcM1H%2FsqM5JBhHI%3D&reserved=0 _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sun Jan 28 20:28:47 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2018 20:28:47 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: [ufpj-activist] Fwd: A very sad loss References: <0598B819-1F64-4F27-ACE8-811E76184F26@illinois.edu> Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: From: "Brussel, Morton K" > Subject: Re: [ufpj-activist] Fwd: A very sad loss Date: January 28, 2018 at 11:37:21 PST To: Kevin Zeese > Cc: ufpj-activist > Truly sad and unfortunate. Many of us had come to rely on Consortium News. Now what? —mkb On Jan 28, 2018, at 11:09 AM, Kevin Zeese > wrote: Bob Parry died last night. A major loss to our ability to understand what is happening in our world. He will be greatly missed. KZ -----Forwarded Message----- From: Raymond L McGovern died last night. Proximate cause: a third stroke. Actual cause: shock -- yes shock -- at how corrupt his beloved profession of journalism has become. After his first stroke in December, greatly hindered with terribly blurred vision, he apologized. He told me it was a VERY hard effort to write this apologia. It is worth reading again: https://consortiumnews.com/2017/12/31/an-apology-and-explanation/ May he rest in peace; and may we take up from where he left off. Ray McGovern @KBZeese Build power and resistance Popular Resistance www.PopularResistance.org Shift Wealth: Economic Democracy Its Our Economy www.ItsOurEconomy.US Democratize the Media Clearing the FOG (Forces of Greed) Radio http://www.ClearingTheFOGRadio.org _______________________________________________ ufpj-activist mailing list Guidelines: %(http://www.unitedforpeace.org/listserv-community-guidelines) Post: ufpj-activist at lists.mayfirst.org List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/ufpj-activist To Unsubscribe Send email to: ufpj-activist-unsubscribe at lists.mayfirst.org Or visit: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/ufpj-activist/mkb0029%40gmail.com You are subscribed as: mkb0029 at gmail.com _______________________________________________ ufpj-activist mailing list Guidelines: %(https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.unitedforpeace.org%2Flistserv-community-guidelines&data=02%7C01%7C%7C1e2ebd42776645e9f17c08d566869480%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636527650559505420&sdata=rRq0KVluzxf26ZCiGw28xipqhsaL4p9xemyKRwNsFes%3D&reserved=0) Post: ufpj-activist at lists.mayfirst.org List info: https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.mayfirst.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fufpj-activist&data=02%7C01%7C%7C1e2ebd42776645e9f17c08d566869480%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636527650559505420&sdata=G6vvTjsdyRSHkzETb3J%2BJxwzdbrK%2FK%2FseJvsLMvNPmY%3D&reserved=0 To Unsubscribe Send email to: ufpj-activist-unsubscribe at lists.mayfirst.org Or visit: https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.mayfirst.org%2Fmailman%2Foptions%2Fufpj-activist%2Fkarenaram%2540hotmail.com&data=02%7C01%7C%7C1e2ebd42776645e9f17c08d566869480%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636527650559505420&sdata=10Pj%2FR0GUXi%2FEbYL0jdm6xsMKid7kZB%2BgU3wPcME5Ns%3D&reserved=0 You are subscribed as: karenaram at hotmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Mon Jan 29 01:25:00 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2018 19:25:00 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: [ufpj-activist] Fwd: A very sad loss In-Reply-To: References: <0598B819-1F64-4F27-ACE8-811E76184F26@illinois.edu> Message-ID: <449BF8AE-A17F-4B84-BB18-FF5E1747AF91@gmail.com> A distinct loss. Requiescat in pace. The rest of us should work harder. > On Jan 28, 2018, at 2:28 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> From: "Brussel, Morton K" >> Subject: Re: [ufpj-activist] Fwd: A very sad loss >> Date: January 28, 2018 at 11:37:21 PST >> To: Kevin Zeese >> Cc: ufpj-activist >> >> Truly sad and unfortunate. Many of us had come to rely on Consortium News. Now what? >> >> —mkb >> >> >>> On Jan 28, 2018, at 11:09 AM, Kevin Zeese wrote: >>> >>> Bob Parry died last night. A major loss to our ability to understand what is happening in our world. He will be greatly missed. >>> >>> KZ >>> >>> >>>> -----Forwarded Message----- >>>> From: Raymond L McGovern >>>> >>>> died last night. Proximate cause: a third stroke. Actual cause: shock -- yes shock -- at how corrupt his beloved profession of journalism has become. >>>> >>>> After his first stroke in December, greatly hindered with terribly blurred vision, he apologized. He told me it was a VERY hard effort to write this apologia. It is worth reading again: >>>> https://consortiumnews.com/2017/12/31/an-apology-and-explanation/ >>>> >>>> May he rest in peace; and may we take up from where he left off. >>>> >>>> Ray McGovern >>> >>> >>> >>> @KBZeese >>> Build power and resistance >>> Popular Resistance >>> www.PopularResistance.org >>> Shift Wealth: Economic Democracy >>> Its Our Economy >>> www.ItsOurEconomy.US >>> Democratize the Media >>> Clearing the FOG (Forces of Greed) >>> Radio http://www.ClearingTheFOGRadio.org >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ufpj-activist mailing list >>> >>> Guidelines: %(http://www.unitedforpeace.org/listserv-community-guidelines) >>> Post: ufpj-activist at lists.mayfirst.org >>> List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/ufpj-activist >>> >>> To Unsubscribe >>> Send email to: ufpj-activist-unsubscribe at lists.mayfirst.org >>> Or visit: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/ufpj-activist/mkb0029%40gmail.com >>> >>> You are subscribed as: mkb0029 at gmail.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ufpj-activist mailing list >> >> Guidelines: %(https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.unitedforpeace.org%2Flistserv-community-guidelines&data=02%7C01%7C%7C1e2ebd42776645e9f17c08d566869480%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636527650559505420&sdata=rRq0KVluzxf26ZCiGw28xipqhsaL4p9xemyKRwNsFes%3D&reserved=0) >> Post: ufpj-activist at lists.mayfirst.org >> List info: https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.mayfirst.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fufpj-activist&data=02%7C01%7C%7C1e2ebd42776645e9f17c08d566869480%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636527650559505420&sdata=G6vvTjsdyRSHkzETb3J%2BJxwzdbrK%2FK%2FseJvsLMvNPmY%3D&reserved=0 >> >> To Unsubscribe >> Send email to: ufpj-activist-unsubscribe at lists.mayfirst.org >> Or visit: https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.mayfirst.org%2Fmailman%2Foptions%2Fufpj-activist%2Fkarenaram%2540hotmail.com&data=02%7C01%7C%7C1e2ebd42776645e9f17c08d566869480%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636527650559505420&sdata=10Pj%2FR0GUXi%2FEbYL0jdm6xsMKid7kZB%2BgU3wPcME5Ns%3D&reserved=0 >> >> You are subscribed as: karenaram at hotmail.com > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jan 29 15:12:18 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 15:12:18 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Here's a kind of howler of the age of information-gathering and surveillance. Message-ID: TOM DISPATCH: Here's a kind of howler of the age of information-gathering and surveillance. Running around secret military bases with your Fitbit on now allows others out here to locate those bases from Afghanistan to god knows where. No more secrets on this Fitbitted planet of ours. Tom "Sensitive information about the location and staffing of military bases and spy outposts around the world has been revealed by a fitness tracking company. "The details were released by Strava in a data visualisation map that shows all the activity tracked by users of its app, which allows people to record their exercise and share it with others. "The map, released in November 2017, shows every single activity ever uploaded to Strava – more than 3 trillion individual GPS data points, according to the company. The app can be used on various devices including smartphones and fitness trackers like Fitbit to see popular running routes in major cities, or spot individuals in more remote areas who have unusual exercise patterns. "However, over the weekend military analysts noticed that the map is also detailed enough that it potentially gives away extremely sensitive information about a subset of Strava users: military personnel on active service. "Nathan Ruser, an analyst with the Institute for United Conflict Analysts, first noted the lapse. The heatmap “looks very pretty” he wrote, but is “not amazing for Op-Sec” – short for operational security. “US Bases are clearly identifiable and mappable.” “If soldiers use the app like normal people do, by turning it on tracking when they go to do exercise, it could be especially dangerous,” Ruser added, highlighting one particular track that “looks like it logs a regular jogging route.” “In Syria, known coalition (ie US) bases light up the night,” writes analyst Tobias Schneider. “Some light markers over known Russian positions, no notable colouring for Iranian bases … A lot of people are going to have to sit through lectures come Monday morning.” "In locations like Afghanistan, Djibouti and Syria, the users of Strava seem to be almost exclusively foreign military personnel, meaning that bases stand out brightly. In Helmand province, Afghanistan, for instance, the locations of forward operating bases can be clearly seen, glowing white against the black map. "Zooming in on one of the larger bases clearly reveals its internal layout, as mapped out by the tracked jogging routes of numerous soldiers. The base itself is not visible on the satellite views of commercial providers such as Google Maps or Apple’s Maps, yet it can be clearly seen through Strava...." https://www.theguardian.com/…/fitness-tracking-app-gives-aw… -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jan 29 15:14:05 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 15:14:05 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] One Percent majority: A 50-point plan for corporate rule In-Reply-To: <942708358.1805198.1517089051320@mail.yahoo.com> References: <942708358.1805198.1517089051320.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <942708358.1805198.1517089051320@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: David, Thank you, this is very good. A rather dystopian prognosis. On Jan 27, 2018, at 13:37, David Green via Peace-discuss > wrote: This 46 minute podcast elaborates on the points I was making in my letter published yesterday. A very efficient discussion that hits all the right notes. One Percent majority: A 50-point plan for corporate rule. One Percent majority: A 50-point plan for corporate rule. Political economist Gordon Lafer examines the state-by-state capture of legislatures by corporate lobbyists, buy... _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cc34984dbf26446511c1308d565ce4f82%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636526859152304781&sdata=5MLMuhCnkfhLQIiwDGbcLO2Erbl7h1oQ9X5tLCF1wsk%3D&reserved=0 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jan 29 16:46:48 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 16:46:48 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A_WSWS_Chairperson_David_North_int?= =?utf-8?q?erviewed_on_Chris_Hedges=E2=80=99_On_Contact?= References: <380cabff931cd452085b8d4a5.2cb7388bc9.20180129164444.fef1db1e69.fb068e97@mail92.suw91.mcdlv.net> Message-ID: [https://gallery.mailchimp.com/380cabff931cd452085b8d4a5/images/3f463dd2-fd12-43f3-8738-5ab4826bcca7.png] Dear Karen, Chris Hedge's RT show "On Contact" interviewed WSWS chairperson David North last month. The video of the interview, which was posted yesterday, is available here. [https://gallery.mailchimp.com/380cabff931cd452085b8d4a5/images/fd584bc9-3ef6-4723-9c9b-60e25ef431eb.png] North and Hedges discussed the political crisis in the US, internet censorship, the Russian Revolution and the growth of the class struggle around the world. Share this video (or the post on YouTube) as widely as possible. Fraternally, World Socialist Web Site Other recent articles from the WSWS: * 2018 begins with US police reign of terror * The media’s guilty silence on Hawaii nuclear war alert * Will ICE raid this Detroit Church? [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/color-facebook-48.png] Share [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/color-twitter-48.png] Tweet [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/color-forwardtofriend-48.png] Forward World Socialist Web Site | wsws.org Articles: Copyright © 2017 wsws.org, All rights reserved. unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jan 29 16:49:18 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 16:49:18 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: [All Out for the 22nd Bargaining Session] Timeline Photos References: Message-ID: GEO posted in All Out for the 22nd Bargaining Session. [https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-1/p100x100/19225726_10154954393534398_5593220885473273703_n.jpg?_nc_ad=z-m&_nc_cid=0&oh=bb265f033ef832a970225629d94aaac9&oe=5AE1E68D] GEO January 29 at 8:45am [https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/q85/p200x200/27459373_10155572019639398_2386858879661084892_n.jpg?_nc_ad=z-m&_nc_cid=0&oh=76a5a2ce606e62e81f748c1033bbd8b3&oe=5ADF7B51] The Admin refused to even respond to our comprehensive proposal at our last bargaining session. Let'... [https://static.xx.fbcdn.net/rsrc.php/v3/yn/r/A9uao6Uj7et.png] Like [https://static.xx.fbcdn.net/rsrc.php/v3/y9/r/2St6pqDd5yX.png] Comment [https://static.xx.fbcdn.net/rsrc.php/v3/yl/r/lIocuW4K69q.png] Share View on Facebook Edit Email Settings Reply to this email to comment on this post. This message was sent to karenaram at hotmail.com. If you don't want to receive these emails from Facebook in the future, please unsubscribe. Facebook, Inc., Attention: Community Support, 1 Hacker Way, Menlo Park, CA 94025 [https://www.facebook.com/email_open_log_pic.php?mid=563ecb153ab1aG59f6997cG563ecfae9adecG3f3] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jan 29 17:37:04 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 17:37:04 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Democracy Now on MLK Message-ID: https://www.democracynow.org/2018/1/25/mlks_radical_final_years_civil_rights -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jan 29 19:04:06 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 19:04:06 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Chief Illiniwak: Chancellor Jones' "Conversations" over Racial Discrimination Message-ID: >From today's page 1 story on Chief Illiniwak in the Chicago Tribune: ..."(He) {Chancellor Jones} has said publicly several times that identifying a mascot will not resolve the issues we face regarding the Chief and native imagery," university spokeswoman Robin Kaler said. "He feels strongly that a campuswide conversation on the issue is vital to identifying a path forward." Events meant to spur those conversations have been in the works for months, Kaler said, and will take place sometime in the spring... ILLINIWAK: RACIAL DISCRIMINATION! by Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Board of Directors, Amnesty International USA (1988-92) Holder of 2 Football Season Tickets (Since About 1981) Holder of 2 Basketball Season Tickets (Since About 1982) In his letter of 16 July 1997 to Ms. Susan Gravenhorst, Chair of the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois, Professor Mort Winston, Chair of the Board of Directors of Amnesty International USA (AIUSA) and a prominent University of Illinois Alumnus, called "Chief" Illiniwak a "human rights violation," condemned it in no uncertain terms, and demanded the elimination of this racist mascot. Before he joined the AIUSA Board, Professor Winston was the leading AIUSA expert on, and activist against, racism and apartheid in South Africa prior to the Mandela revolution. Professor Winston knows a human rights violation when he sees one. The same is true for me. In addition to serving four years as a Member of the Board of Directors of Amnesty International USA, I was the person who single-handedly convinced the ultra-conservative Faculty of the University of Illinois College of Law to introduce a course on International Human Rights Law into the Law School Curriculum as Law 370, and have taught this course for many years to about 30 students per year. Illiniwak is indeed a human rights violation. The United States government is a contracting party to the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Hence, this Racial Discrimination Convention is a "treaty' and thus the "supreme Law of the Land" under the so-called Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the United States Constitution: Article VI .... This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. In other words, the Racial Discrimination Convention absolutely binds the entirety of the State of Illinois, including therein the University of Illinois. Article 1(1) of the Racial Discrimination Convention defines the term "racial discrimination" as follows: "In this Convention the term 'racial discrimination' shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life." (Emphasis added.) Obviously, Illiniwak is a "distinction" on the multiple bases of "race," and "colour," and "descent." Illiniwak definitely has the "effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life" for Native American Students, Faculty, Staff and Community Members here at the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign. In accordance with the terms of this Racial Discrimination Convention to which the United States is a party, Illiniwak constitutes "racial discrimination" by the University of Illinois against Native Americans. Article 2, paragraph 1 of the Racial Discrimination Convention provides as follows: Article 2 1. States Parties condemn racial discrimination and undertake to pursue by all appropriate means and without delay a policy of eliminating racial discrimination in all its forms, and promoting understanding among all races, and to this end: (a) Each State Party undertakes to engage in no act or practice of racial discrimination against persons, groups of persons or institutions and to ensure that all public authorities and public institutions, national and local, shall act in conformity with this obligation; (b) Each State Party undertakes not to sponsor, defend or support racial discrimination by any persons or organizations; (c) Each State Party shall take effective measures to review governmental, national and local policies, and to amend, rescind or nullify any laws and regulations which have the effect of creating or perpetuating racial discrimination wherever it exists; (d) Each State Party shall prohibit and bring to an end, by all appropriate means, including legislation as required by circumstances, racial discrimination by any persons, group or organization; (e) Each State Party undertakes to encourage, where appropriate, integrationist multi-racial organizations and movements and other means of eliminating barriers between races, and to discourage anything which tends to strengthen racial division. [Emphasis added.] Clearly, Illiniwak places the United States of America in breach of these most solemn obligations under Article 2 of the Racial Discrimination Convention. Illiniwak contravenes Racial Discrimination Convention Article 2. The conclusion is inexorable that to be in accordance with the terms of the Racial Discrimination Convention, the University of Illinois must eliminate Illiniwak. Article 4 of the Racial Discrimination Convention clearly requires the Government of the United States of America to eliminate Illiniwak in no uncertain terms: Article 4 States Parties condemn all propaganda and all organizations which are based on ideas or theories of superiority of one race or group of persons of one colour or ethnic origin, or which attempt to justify or promote racial hatred and discrimination in any form, and undertake to adopt immediate and positive measures designed to eradicate all incitement to, or acts of, such discrimination, and to this end, with due regard to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of this Convention, inter alia: (a) Shall declare an offence punishable by law all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination, as well as all acts of violence or incitement to such acts against any race or group of persons of another colour or ethnic origin, and also the provision of any assistance to racist activities, including the financing thereof; (b) Shall declare illegal and prohibit organizations, and also organized and all other propaganda activities, which promote and incite racial discrimination, and shall recognize participation in such organizations or activities as an offence punishable by law; (c) Shall not permit public authorities or public institutions, national or local, to promote or incite racial discrimination. [Emphasis added.] Notice in particular the requirement of Article 4(c) of the Racial Discrimination Convention: "Shall not permit public authorities or public institutions, national or local, to promote or incite racial discrimination." To the contrary, the University of Illinois deliberately promotes and incites racial discrimination against Native Americans by means of Illiniwak for the quite mercenary purpose of making money! Article 5 of the Racial Discrimination Convention expressly requires the United States government "to prohibit and to eliminate racial discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the right of everyone, without distinction as to race, colour, or national or ethnic origin, to equality before the law, notably in the enjoyment of the following rights..." (Emphasis added.) The conclusion is inexorable that Illiniwak contravenes Article 5 of the Racial Discrimination Convention. Furthermore, Illiniwak also contravenes Article 6 of the Racial Discrimination Convention: Article 6 States Parties shall assure to everyone within their jurisdiction effective protection and remedies through the competent national tribunals and other State institutions against any acts of racial discrimination which violate his human rights and fundamental freedoms contrary to this Convention, as well as the right to seek from such tribunals just and adequate reparation or satisfaction for any damage suffered as a result of such discrimination. Finally, Illiniwak contravenes Article 7 of the Racial Discrimination Convention: Article 7 States Parties undertake to adopt immediate and effective measures, particularly in the fields of teaching, education, culture and information, with a view to combating prejudices which lead to racial discrimination and to promoting understanding, tolerance and friendship among nations and racial or ethnical groups, as well as to propagating the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and this Convention. The conclusion is inexorable that to be in accordance with the terms of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination the University of Illinois--a Public Institution--must eliminate Illiniwak. As can be seen from the above analysis, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination expressly incorporates by reference the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). No point would be served here by detailing all the provisions of the UDHR that are currently being violated by Illiniwak. But in particular, I wish to draw to your attention UDHR Articles 1 and 2: Article 1 All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. Article 2 Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. (Emphasis added.) The United States government has been in the vanguard of the worldwide movement to establish that these fundamental provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, inter alia, constitute customary international law. Customary international law is part of the common law of the United States of America and the common law of all the States of the Union. Customary international law applies to and binds the State of Illinois and the University of Illinois. Clearly, by means of Illiniwak the University of Illinois refuses to act towards Native Americans "in a spirit of brotherhood" in violation of UDHR Article 1. Similarly, Illiniwak constitutes a "distinction" on the prohibited grounds of race, colour and religion, inter alia, in gross violation of UDHR Article 2. In other words, Illiniwak violates these most fundamental protections of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, inter alia, and thus violates customary international law and therefore the common law of both the United States and the State of Illinois. I wish to end this Memorandum by joining those eloquent and powerful words addressed to Trustee Susan Gravenhorst by Professor Mort Winston, Chair of the Board of Directors of Amnesty International, my fellow AIUSA Board Colleague and Comrade-in-Arms in the long but successful struggle against racism and apartheid in South Africa: In your present position as Chair of the Board of Trustees, you can steer university policy on this issue towards the greater good. I urge you to do so. UIUC's sport's fans and the marching band can find another mascot. Have a contest. Pick an animal or some culturally neutral symbol. Show some moral leadership so that perhaps the professional sports teams that also dishonor American Indians by debasing their cultural symbols will one day follow suit. But above all stop pretending that keeping "Chief Illiniwek" alive is somehow "honoring" the Native Americans who once roamed the plains where the University of Illinois now stands. In short, "Do the Right Thing -- Get Rid of the Chief!" F.A.B. 25 July 1997 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 divisek at yahoo.com Mon Jan 29 19:31:11 2018 From: divisek at yahoo.com (Dianna Visek) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 19:31:11 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Ted Rall on how D's have hijacked the left References: <1394187387.2794056.1517254271431.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1394187387.2794056.1517254271431@mail.yahoo.com> Democrats Have Hijacked the Anti-Trump Resistance | | | | Democrats Have Hijacked the Anti-Trump Resistance Rasmussen Reports Leftists want to change the world. They want peace, equal income, equal wealth, equal rights for everybody. | | | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jan 29 21:43:54 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 21:43:54 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Ted Rall on how D's have hijacked the left In-Reply-To: <1394187387.2794056.1517254271431@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1394187387.2794056.1517254271431.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1394187387.2794056.1517254271431@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Good article, but the fact is, the Democrats didn’t take over the left, they maybe left of the Republicans, but they have never really been the “left”. Also, a revolution today would be more “democratic” than what we get with elections. Elections are rigged, beginning with the primaries. Revolutions frequently, unlike coup de tats which are overthrow by the military, actually represent the will of the people, or at least some people. They usually take place when the will of the people has not been carried out by elected representatives. The critical issue is who takes power after the revolution, thats the hard part. Chris Hedges says: “we shouldn’t attempt to take or hold power, we should simply “scare” power. There needs to be an organized Party, with a structure, that doesn’t represent the same “for profit interests” that were overthrown. Worse, is a takeover by the right. On Jan 29, 2018, at 11:31, Dianna Visek via Peace-discuss > wrote: Democrats Have Hijacked the Anti-Trump Resistance Democrats Have Hijacked the Anti-Trump Resistance Rasmussen Reports Leftists want to change the world. They want peace, equal income, equal wealth, equal rights for everybody. _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.chambana.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpeace-discuss&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ceede54e0dad941c6abe508d5674eef20%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636528511063242347&sdata=IQu0vXp%2FJT9HULOJnc6jw6Qg8Y5MSgsgTBMoLotgFLM%3D&reserved=0 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Tue Jan 30 00:37:23 2018 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 18:37:23 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] corporate Democrats undermining grassroots progressive populist Democrats in the upcoming Democratic primary elections Message-ID: <001201d39962$7f2b3860$7d81a920$@comcast.net> AARON MATÉ: It's The Real News. I'm Aaron Maté. In his farewell address to the nation one year ago, President Obama urged Americans to get involved in politics and run for office. BARACK OBAMA: If you're disappointed by your elected officials, grab a clipboard, get some signatures and run for office yourself. Show up. Dive in. Stay at it. AARON MATÉ: Well, one year later, many progressives are doing just that. According to a major new report, they are facing strong opposition from the centrist wing of the Democratic Party that Obama represents. In the Intercept, Lee Fang and Ryan Grim report, "In district after district, the National Party is throwing its weight behind candidates who are out of step with the national mood." The piece is called "The Dead Enders: Candidates who signed up to battle Donald Trump must get past the Democratic Party first." Lee Fang joins me now, investigative journalist with The Intercept. Lee, welcome. So, you did more than 50 interviews coast to coast. What is your sense of what's going on with the Democratic Party and the progressive candidates who you spoke to? LEE FANG: Well, as you mentioned, we talked to a lot of folks, talked to political operatives, candidates, Members of Congress. This is a very unique time for the Democratic Party. There are dozens of very serious progressives who are running for Congress, taking that call from Obama very seriously and putting together a campaign staff, raising money, putting forth well thought out policy positions that are very bold and progressive. And these are first time candidates and they're finding in race after race, that the Democratic Party establishment is doing everything they can to sideline more left of center candidates in favor of party chosen, more centrist, business friendly political candidates who can simply raise the most money and who have shown a history of being favorable to business interests. This is something that has gone on for a very long time but the Democratic Party establishment, the DCCC, the arm of the Democratic Party dedicated to electing Members of Congress to the House of Representatives has really taken this very long standing tradition and gone into overdrive the campaign cycle, working with other affiliate Democrat groups to kind of handpick centrist and conservative Democrats in competitive races across the country. AARON MATÉ: And one litmus test that you point out in your piece that the party is using in terms of how to choose candidates is something called “the phone test.” Can you talk about that? LEE FANG: That's right. We've heard from candidates that the D-trip will go out and rather than asking a candidate where they stand on the issues, what are the most important societal or economic concerns in their district, they do a phone test, which is they're asking candidates to take out their phone, go through their Rolodex or their list of contacts and show them that they can raise 100,000, 200,000, up to 250,000 dollars just from the contacts in their phone. So, they're going to folks who are deep in the business community, folks who have maybe served in the state legislature, who have an experience raising this type of cash or folks who were candidates for office in 2016 who have established donor networks. That's the main litmus test that we've heard over and over again for candidates. And you know, for some folks, if you look at the first or second quarter of fundraising, they can raise a lot of money because they have a lot of wealthy contributors who can max out in their campaign, giving big checks of 1,000 dollars or 2,700 dollars. But for first time candidates, a lot of those folks are relying on small contributions, contributions of 50 dollars or 100 dollars and it's hard to demonstrate to party officials, that they can raise big cash early in the campaign. But the flip side of this whole kind of strategy from the DCCC is that the big donors max out early on and you can't tap them later in the campaign but the small donors are in some ways a more efficient way to run a campaign because small donors will also volunteer. They can continually give throughout the campaign and there's a higher level of engagement. So, even that Rolodex test is a kind of a weak litmus test. AARON MATÉ: Now, one interesting phenomenon that you point out is that the DCCC and other prominent centrist groups are throwing their weight behind candidates who have most recently lost. For example, Angie Craig in Minneapolis. LEE FANG: Yeah, that's right. AARON MATÉ: Or Minnesota. LEE FANG: That's right. Angie Craig ran for office, got the Democratic Party kind of establishment machinery support in a district just kind of south of St. Paul. It's a suburban seat. She raise a lot of money. I believe spent almost $3.8 million but came up short. Basically got the same number votes as a previous Democrat that spent a fraction of that money. Other similar cases, Chrissy Houlahan in northeast Pennsylvania was the kind of party establishment candidate. She ran a very centrist campaign, not mentioning many policy issues, doing most of her campaign outreaching to Republicans, hoping to peel off suburban and kind of independent voters who had traditionally voted Republican. Didn't kind of embrace any big picture populist issues like Medicare For All or a carbon tax, opposition to free trade deals. And again, this is another example of a candidate who lost, who underperformed Clinton in this district. Raised a lot of money but underperformed the top of the ballot. So, maybe, in one sense, you would assume that the party would say, “Okay, this is a candidate that can't do well. Maybe this independent, centrist model doesn't resonate with voters,” but instead the Democratic establishment is doing everything they can to promote those same candidates from two years ago that underperformed the ticket, maybe they can raise the most money or perhaps because of their centrist policy positions. And they're sidelining populist progressives who are kind of doing the very opposite. They're embracing big, bold ideas. They're working with grassroots groups. They're building a huge campaign operation of volunteers and they say then for these kind of more grassroots candidates, Jeff Erdmann in Minnesota, in the same district, and Jess King in northeast Pennsylvania, they say they've been completely shut out. That the DCCC, other kind of affiliate Democratic groups that are close to the party have endorsed the centrists. They're funneling large amounts of money. They're bringing members of Congress who are Democrats into the district to endorse the centrist candidate. You know, for a lot of these races, these endorsements and the money makes a big difference. It's hard for people who are already focusing on the Trump administration and are focusing on the other big fights in politics, to kind of follow every single one of these smaller primary campaigns. AARON MATÉ: Based on your reporting for this piece and your overall reporting on the role of money in politics, to what extent can we attribute all this to sort of a consultancy industrial complex? The need for candidates to raise money for the purpose of being able to pay for these high-priced consultants that dominate the party? LEE FANG: Look, a lot of my reporting is on the role of special interests influencing the policy process, influencing regulators, lawmakers, kind of shifting the priorities of public officials to favor special interests that kind of game the process. But another aspect of this is simply the kind of nuts and bolts of campaigning. As the price of elections go higher and higher, there's more kind of an incentive for consultants to gain the process and win these kind of lucrative contracts to manage these campaigns. Some of these Congressional campaigns, they cost maybe a couple hundred thousand dollars a decade or two ago, now cost 10 million dollars, 15 million dollars. Even higher than that. For campaign consultants, particularly folks who work in advertising, television, digital advertising and in fundraising, they receive a percentage of the amount spent. If you're a TV consultant, you can make between 5 and 15% of each TV buy, of other advertising buys. There's a strong incentive for Democratic consultants to steer the party to support the candidate that they think will not only raise and spend the most money, but will go with their consulting firm. This is a dynamic that's existed for a very long time but for the candidates that we've spoken to, both on the record for the story and off the record, there's a lot of kind of quiet complaints about this. They see the party steering money and resources to candidates that are hiring consulting firms that are connected to the party. This is kind of a level of corruption that doesn't raise to the same level of oil companies buying legislation but it does make a big difference in campaigns if these consultants perhaps don't perform the best or if they're changing the makeup of the next wave of the Democratic Party. I mean, we could have a completely new Democratic Party after the midterm elections, if there is truly a wave. We have dozens or perhaps hundreds of new Democrats in office but they've been chosen by a certain select class of campaign consultants. That makes a big difference in terms of politics and policy for the foreseeable future. AARON MATÉ: Right. I mean, you point out that part the reason why Obama may not have been more progressive when he was in office was that he was surrounded in Congress by a large number of centrist Democrats. Speaking of centrist Democrats, I want to play a clip of Chuck Schumer. This is him in early 2016 outlining the Democratic strategy of basically seeking suburban voters who voted for Mitt Romney, not working-class voters, who Schumer said that the party can afford to lose. CHUCK SCHUMER: For every blue-collar Democrat we will lose in western PA, we will pick up two, three moderate Republicans in the suburbs of Philadelphia. You can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin. AARON MATÉ: That's Chuck Schumer speaking way before the 2016 general election and we know how that turned out. The Democrats lost Ohio. They lost Wisconsin. They lost Pennsylvania and they lost the election. Lee Fang, final thoughts as we wrap? LEE FANG: Well, this has been the conventional wisdom of Democrats. You know, it was definitely the guiding strategy in 2016 but this has been the conventional wisdom for over 10 years now. In the piece, we show how previous wave elections like in 2006 simply didn't work. A lot of the centrist, conservative Democrats that based their campaign around reaching out to Republicans or co-opting Republican ideas actually lost and the more progressive candidates were shut out by the party. People like...Porter, John Hall, Gary McInerney, who didn't receive any significant support from the DCCC or from the Democratic consultant class, they ended up winning. So, even though we've got this long history of evidence of what works and what doesn't work. The Democratic Party is simply kind of going back to what doesn't work. AARON MATÉ: The piece is called, "The Dead Enders: Candidates who signed up to battle Donald Trump must get past the Democratic Party first." Lee Fang of The Intercept, thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Tue Jan 30 00:41:50 2018 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 18:41:50 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] corporate Democrats undermining grassroots progressive populist Democrats in the upcoming Democratic primary elections Message-ID: <001c01d39963$1e6e6640$5b4b32c0$@comcast.net> AARON MATÉ: It's The Real News. I'm Aaron Maté. In his farewell address to the nation one year ago, President Obama urged Americans to get involved in politics and run for office. BARACK OBAMA: If you're disappointed by your elected officials, grab a clipboard, get some signatures and run for office yourself. Show up. Dive in. Stay at it. AARON MATÉ: Well, one year later, many progressives are doing just that. According to a major new report, they are facing strong opposition from the centrist wing of the Democratic Party that Obama represents. In the Intercept, Lee Fang and Ryan Grim report, "In district after district, the National Party is throwing its weight behind candidates who are out of step with the national mood." The piece is called "The Dead Enders: Candidates who signed up to battle Donald Trump must get past the Democratic Party first." Lee Fang joins me now, investigative journalist with The Intercept. Lee, welcome. So, you did more than 50 interviews coast to coast. What is your sense of what's going on with the Democratic Party and the progressive candidates who you spoke to? LEE FANG: Well, as you mentioned, we talked to a lot of folks, talked to political operatives, candidates, Members of Congress. This is a very unique time for the Democratic Party. There are dozens of very serious progressives who are running for Congress, taking that call from Obama very seriously and putting together a campaign staff, raising money, putting forth well thought out policy positions that are very bold and progressive. And these are first time candidates and they're finding in race after race, that the Democratic Party establishment is doing everything they can to sideline more left of center candidates in favor of party chosen, more centrist, business friendly political candidates who can simply raise the most money and who have shown a history of being favorable to business interests. This is something that has gone on for a very long time but the Democratic Party establishment, the DCCC, the arm of the Democratic Party dedicated to electing Members of Congress to the House of Representatives has really taken this very long standing tradition and gone into overdrive the campaign cycle, working with other affiliate Democrat groups to kind of handpick centrist and conservative Democrats in competitive races across the country. AARON MATÉ: And one litmus test that you point out in your piece that the party is using in terms of how to choose candidates is something called “the phone test.” Can you talk about that? LEE FANG: That's right. We've heard from candidates that the D-trip will go out and rather than asking a candidate where they stand on the issues, what are the most important societal or economic concerns in their district, they do a phone test, which is they're asking candidates to take out their phone, go through their Rolodex or their list of contacts and show them that they can raise 100,000, 200,000, up to 250,000 dollars just from the contacts in their phone. So, they're going to folks who are deep in the business community, folks who have maybe served in the state legislature, who have an experience raising this type of cash or folks who were candidates for office in 2016 who have established donor networks. That's the main litmus test that we've heard over and over again for candidates. And you know, for some folks, if you look at the first or second quarter of fundraising, they can raise a lot of money because they have a lot of wealthy contributors who can max out in their campaign, giving big checks of 1,000 dollars or 2,700 dollars. But for first time candidates, a lot of those folks are relying on small contributions, contributions of 50 dollars or 100 dollars and it's hard to demonstrate to party officials, that they can raise big cash early in the campaign. But the flip side of this whole kind of strategy from the DCCC is that the big donors max out early on and you can't tap them later in the campaign but the small donors are in some ways a more efficient way to run a campaign because small donors will also volunteer. They can continually give throughout the campaign and there's a higher level of engagement. So, even that Rolodex test is a kind of a weak litmus test. AARON MATÉ: Now, one interesting phenomenon that you point out is that the DCCC and other prominent centrist groups are throwing their weight behind candidates who have most recently lost. For example, Angie Craig in Minneapolis. LEE FANG: Yeah, that's right. AARON MATÉ: Or Minnesota. LEE FANG: That's right. Angie Craig ran for office, got the Democratic Party kind of establishment machinery support in a district just kind of south of St. Paul. It's a suburban seat. She raise a lot of money. I believe spent almost $3.8 million but came up short. Basically got the same number votes as a previous Democrat that spent a fraction of that money. Other similar cases, Chrissy Houlahan in northeast Pennsylvania was the kind of party establishment candidate. She ran a very centrist campaign, not mentioning many policy issues, doing most of her campaign outreaching to Republicans, hoping to peel off suburban and kind of independent voters who had traditionally voted Republican. Didn't kind of embrace any big picture populist issues like Medicare For All or a carbon tax, opposition to free trade deals. And again, this is another example of a candidate who lost, who underperformed Clinton in this district. Raised a lot of money but underperformed the top of the ballot. So, maybe, in one sense, you would assume that the party would say, “Okay, this is a candidate that can't do well. Maybe this independent, centrist model doesn't resonate with voters,” but instead the Democratic establishment is doing everything they can to promote those same candidates from two years ago that underperformed the ticket, maybe they can raise the most money or perhaps because of their centrist policy positions. And they're sidelining populist progressives who are kind of doing the very opposite. They're embracing big, bold ideas. They're working with grassroots groups. They're building a huge campaign operation of volunteers and they say then for these kind of more grassroots candidates, Jeff Erdmann in Minnesota, in the same district, and Jess King in northeast Pennsylvania, they say they've been completely shut out. That the DCCC, other kind of affiliate Democratic groups that are close to the party have endorsed the centrists. They're funneling large amounts of money. They're bringing members of Congress who are Democrats into the district to endorse the centrist candidate. You know, for a lot of these races, these endorsements and the money makes a big difference. It's hard for people who are already focusing on the Trump administration and are focusing on the other big fights in politics, to kind of follow every single one of these smaller primary campaigns. AARON MATÉ: Based on your reporting for this piece and your overall reporting on the role of money in politics, to what extent can we attribute all this to sort of a consultancy industrial complex? The need for candidates to raise money for the purpose of being able to pay for these high-priced consultants that dominate the party? LEE FANG: Look, a lot of my reporting is on the role of special interests influencing the policy process, influencing regulators, lawmakers, kind of shifting the priorities of public officials to favor special interests that kind of game the process. But another aspect of this is simply the kind of nuts and bolts of campaigning. As the price of elections go higher and higher, there's more kind of an incentive for consultants to gain the process and win these kind of lucrative contracts to manage these campaigns. Some of these Congressional campaigns, they cost maybe a couple hundred thousand dollars a decade or two ago, now cost 10 million dollars, 15 million dollars. Even higher than that. For campaign consultants, particularly folks who work in advertising, television, digital advertising and in fundraising, they receive a percentage of the amount spent. If you're a TV consultant, you can make between 5 and 15% of each TV buy, of other advertising buys. There's a strong incentive for Democratic consultants to steer the party to support the candidate that they think will not only raise and spend the most money, but will go with their consulting firm. This is a dynamic that's existed for a very long time but for the candidates that we've spoken to, both on the record for the story and off the record, there's a lot of kind of quiet complaints about this. They see the party steering money and resources to candidates that are hiring consulting firms that are connected to the party. This is kind of a level of corruption that doesn't raise to the same level of oil companies buying legislation but it does make a big difference in campaigns if these consultants perhaps don't perform the best or if they're changing the makeup of the next wave of the Democratic Party. I mean, we could have a completely new Democratic Party after the midterm elections, if there is truly a wave. We have dozens or perhaps hundreds of new Democrats in office but they've been chosen by a certain select class of campaign consultants. That makes a big difference in terms of politics and policy for the foreseeable future. AARON MATÉ: Right. I mean, you point out that part the reason why Obama may not have been more progressive when he was in office was that he was surrounded in Congress by a large number of centrist Democrats. Speaking of centrist Democrats, I want to play a clip of Chuck Schumer. This is him in early 2016 outlining the Democratic strategy of basically seeking suburban voters who voted for Mitt Romney, not working-class voters, who Schumer said that the party can afford to lose. CHUCK SCHUMER: For every blue-collar Democrat we will lose in western PA, we will pick up two, three moderate Republicans in the suburbs of Philadelphia. You can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin. AARON MATÉ: That's Chuck Schumer speaking way before the 2016 general election and we know how that turned out. The Democrats lost Ohio. They lost Wisconsin. They lost Pennsylvania and they lost the election. Lee Fang, final thoughts as we wrap? LEE FANG: Well, this has been the conventional wisdom of Democrats. You know, it was definitely the guiding strategy in 2016 but this has been the conventional wisdom for over 10 years now. In the piece, we show how previous wave elections like in 2006 simply didn't work. A lot of the centrist, conservative Democrats that based their campaign around reaching out to Republicans or co-opting Republican ideas actually lost and the more progressive candidates were shut out by the party. People like...Porter, John Hall, Gary McInerney, who didn't receive any significant support from the DCCC or from the Democratic consultant class, they ended up winning. So, even though we've got this long history of evidence of what works and what doesn't work. The Democratic Party is simply kind of going back to what doesn't work. AARON MATÉ: The piece is called, "The Dead Enders: Candidates who signed up to battle Donald Trump must get past the Democratic Party first." Lee Fang of The Intercept, thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Tue Jan 30 00:38:45 2018 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 18:38:45 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] corporate Democrats undermining grassroots progressive populist Democrats in the upcoming Democratic primary elections Message-ID: <001701d39962$b00a8300$101f8900$@comcast.net> AARON MATÉ: It's The Real News. I'm Aaron Maté. In his farewell address to the nation one year ago, President Obama urged Americans to get involved in politics and run for office. BARACK OBAMA: If you're disappointed by your elected officials, grab a clipboard, get some signatures and run for office yourself. Show up. Dive in. Stay at it. AARON MATÉ: Well, one year later, many progressives are doing just that. According to a major new report, they are facing strong opposition from the centrist wing of the Democratic Party that Obama represents. In the Intercept, Lee Fang and Ryan Grim report, "In district after district, the National Party is throwing its weight behind candidates who are out of step with the national mood." The piece is called "The Dead Enders: Candidates who signed up to battle Donald Trump must get past the Democratic Party first." Lee Fang joins me now, investigative journalist with The Intercept. Lee, welcome. So, you did more than 50 interviews coast to coast. What is your sense of what's going on with the Democratic Party and the progressive candidates who you spoke to? LEE FANG: Well, as you mentioned, we talked to a lot of folks, talked to political operatives, candidates, Members of Congress. This is a very unique time for the Democratic Party. There are dozens of very serious progressives who are running for Congress, taking that call from Obama very seriously and putting together a campaign staff, raising money, putting forth well thought out policy positions that are very bold and progressive. And these are first time candidates and they're finding in race after race, that the Democratic Party establishment is doing everything they can to sideline more left of center candidates in favor of party chosen, more centrist, business friendly political candidates who can simply raise the most money and who have shown a history of being favorable to business interests. This is something that has gone on for a very long time but the Democratic Party establishment, the DCCC, the arm of the Democratic Party dedicated to electing Members of Congress to the House of Representatives has really taken this very long standing tradition and gone into overdrive the campaign cycle, working with other affiliate Democrat groups to kind of handpick centrist and conservative Democrats in competitive races across the country. AARON MATÉ: And one litmus test that you point out in your piece that the party is using in terms of how to choose candidates is something called “the phone test.” Can you talk about that? LEE FANG: That's right. We've heard from candidates that the D-trip will go out and rather than asking a candidate where they stand on the issues, what are the most important societal or economic concerns in their district, they do a phone test, which is they're asking candidates to take out their phone, go through their Rolodex or their list of contacts and show them that they can raise 100,000, 200,000, up to 250,000 dollars just from the contacts in their phone. So, they're going to folks who are deep in the business community, folks who have maybe served in the state legislature, who have an experience raising this type of cash or folks who were candidates for office in 2016 who have established donor networks. That's the main litmus test that we've heard over and over again for candidates. And you know, for some folks, if you look at the first or second quarter of fundraising, they can raise a lot of money because they have a lot of wealthy contributors who can max out in their campaign, giving big checks of 1,000 dollars or 2,700 dollars. But for first time candidates, a lot of those folks are relying on small contributions, contributions of 50 dollars or 100 dollars and it's hard to demonstrate to party officials, that they can raise big cash early in the campaign. But the flip side of this whole kind of strategy from the DCCC is that the big donors max out early on and you can't tap them later in the campaign but the small donors are in some ways a more efficient way to run a campaign because small donors will also volunteer. They can continually give throughout the campaign and there's a higher level of engagement. So, even that Rolodex test is a kind of a weak litmus test. AARON MATÉ: Now, one interesting phenomenon that you point out is that the DCCC and other prominent centrist groups are throwing their weight behind candidates who have most recently lost. For example, Angie Craig in Minneapolis. LEE FANG: Yeah, that's right. AARON MATÉ: Or Minnesota. LEE FANG: That's right. Angie Craig ran for office, got the Democratic Party kind of establishment machinery support in a district just kind of south of St. Paul. It's a suburban seat. She raise a lot of money. I believe spent almost $3.8 million but came up short. Basically got the same number votes as a previous Democrat that spent a fraction of that money. Other similar cases, Chrissy Houlahan in northeast Pennsylvania was the kind of party establishment candidate. She ran a very centrist campaign, not mentioning many policy issues, doing most of her campaign outreaching to Republicans, hoping to peel off suburban and kind of independent voters who had traditionally voted Republican. Didn't kind of embrace any big picture populist issues like Medicare For All or a carbon tax, opposition to free trade deals. And again, this is another example of a candidate who lost, who underperformed Clinton in this district. Raised a lot of money but underperformed the top of the ballot. So, maybe, in one sense, you would assume that the party would say, “Okay, this is a candidate that can't do well. Maybe this independent, centrist model doesn't resonate with voters,” but instead the Democratic establishment is doing everything they can to promote those same candidates from two years ago that underperformed the ticket, maybe they can raise the most money or perhaps because of their centrist policy positions. And they're sidelining populist progressives who are kind of doing the very opposite. They're embracing big, bold ideas. They're working with grassroots groups. They're building a huge campaign operation of volunteers and they say then for these kind of more grassroots candidates, Jeff Erdmann in Minnesota, in the same district, and Jess King in northeast Pennsylvania, they say they've been completely shut out. That the DCCC, other kind of affiliate Democratic groups that are close to the party have endorsed the centrists. They're funneling large amounts of money. They're bringing members of Congress who are Democrats into the district to endorse the centrist candidate. You know, for a lot of these races, these endorsements and the money makes a big difference. It's hard for people who are already focusing on the Trump administration and are focusing on the other big fights in politics, to kind of follow every single one of these smaller primary campaigns. AARON MATÉ: Based on your reporting for this piece and your overall reporting on the role of money in politics, to what extent can we attribute all this to sort of a consultancy industrial complex? The need for candidates to raise money for the purpose of being able to pay for these high-priced consultants that dominate the party? LEE FANG: Look, a lot of my reporting is on the role of special interests influencing the policy process, influencing regulators, lawmakers, kind of shifting the priorities of public officials to favor special interests that kind of game the process. But another aspect of this is simply the kind of nuts and bolts of campaigning. As the price of elections go higher and higher, there's more kind of an incentive for consultants to gain the process and win these kind of lucrative contracts to manage these campaigns. Some of these Congressional campaigns, they cost maybe a couple hundred thousand dollars a decade or two ago, now cost 10 million dollars, 15 million dollars. Even higher than that. For campaign consultants, particularly folks who work in advertising, television, digital advertising and in fundraising, they receive a percentage of the amount spent. If you're a TV consultant, you can make between 5 and 15% of each TV buy, of other advertising buys. There's a strong incentive for Democratic consultants to steer the party to support the candidate that they think will not only raise and spend the most money, but will go with their consulting firm. This is a dynamic that's existed for a very long time but for the candidates that we've spoken to, both on the record for the story and off the record, there's a lot of kind of quiet complaints about this. They see the party steering money and resources to candidates that are hiring consulting firms that are connected to the party. This is kind of a level of corruption that doesn't raise to the same level of oil companies buying legislation but it does make a big difference in campaigns if these consultants perhaps don't perform the best or if they're changing the makeup of the next wave of the Democratic Party. I mean, we could have a completely new Democratic Party after the midterm elections, if there is truly a wave. We have dozens or perhaps hundreds of new Democrats in office but they've been chosen by a certain select class of campaign consultants. That makes a big difference in terms of politics and policy for the foreseeable future. AARON MATÉ: Right. I mean, you point out that part the reason why Obama may not have been more progressive when he was in office was that he was surrounded in Congress by a large number of centrist Democrats. Speaking of centrist Democrats, I want to play a clip of Chuck Schumer. This is him in early 2016 outlining the Democratic strategy of basically seeking suburban voters who voted for Mitt Romney, not working-class voters, who Schumer said that the party can afford to lose. CHUCK SCHUMER: For every blue-collar Democrat we will lose in western PA, we will pick up two, three moderate Republicans in the suburbs of Philadelphia. You can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin. AARON MATÉ: That's Chuck Schumer speaking way before the 2016 general election and we know how that turned out. The Democrats lost Ohio. They lost Wisconsin. They lost Pennsylvania and they lost the election. Lee Fang, final thoughts as we wrap? LEE FANG: Well, this has been the conventional wisdom of Democrats. You know, it was definitely the guiding strategy in 2016 but this has been the conventional wisdom for over 10 years now. In the piece, we show how previous wave elections like in 2006 simply didn't work. A lot of the centrist, conservative Democrats that based their campaign around reaching out to Republicans or co-opting Republican ideas actually lost and the more progressive candidates were shut out by the party. People like...Porter, John Hall, Gary McInerney, who didn't receive any significant support from the DCCC or from the Democratic consultant class, they ended up winning. So, even though we've got this long history of evidence of what works and what doesn't work. The Democratic Party is simply kind of going back to what doesn't work. AARON MATÉ: The piece is called, "The Dead Enders: Candidates who signed up to battle Donald Trump must get past the Democratic Party first." Lee Fang of The Intercept, thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Tue Jan 30 00:44:10 2018 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 18:44:10 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] corporate Democrats undermining grassroots progressive populist Democrats in the upcoming Democratic primary elections Message-ID: <002101d39963$728d9610$57a8c230$@comcast.net> AARON MATÉ: It's The Real News. I'm Aaron Maté. In his farewell address to the nation one year ago, President Obama urged Americans to get involved in politics and run for office. BARACK OBAMA: If you're disappointed by your elected officials, grab a clipboard, get some signatures and run for office yourself. Show up. Dive in. Stay at it. AARON MATÉ: Well, one year later, many progressives are doing just that. According to a major new report, they are facing strong opposition from the centrist wing of the Democratic Party that Obama represents. In the Intercept, Lee Fang and Ryan Grim report, "In district after district, the National Party is throwing its weight behind candidates who are out of step with the national mood." The piece is called "The Dead Enders: Candidates who signed up to battle Donald Trump must get past the Democratic Party first." Lee Fang joins me now, investigative journalist with The Intercept. Lee, welcome. So, you did more than 50 interviews coast to coast. What is your sense of what's going on with the Democratic Party and the progressive candidates who you spoke to? LEE FANG: Well, as you mentioned, we talked to a lot of folks, talked to political operatives, candidates, Members of Congress. This is a very unique time for the Democratic Party. There are dozens of very serious progressives who are running for Congress, taking that call from Obama very seriously and putting together a campaign staff, raising money, putting forth well thought out policy positions that are very bold and progressive. And these are first time candidates and they're finding in race after race, that the Democratic Party establishment is doing everything they can to sideline more left of center candidates in favor of party chosen, more centrist, business friendly political candidates who can simply raise the most money and who have shown a history of being favorable to business interests. This is something that has gone on for a very long time but the Democratic Party establishment, the DCCC, the arm of the Democratic Party dedicated to electing Members of Congress to the House of Representatives has really taken this very long standing tradition and gone into overdrive the campaign cycle, working with other affiliate Democrat groups to kind of handpick centrist and conservative Democrats in competitive races across the country. AARON MATÉ: And one litmus test that you point out in your piece that the party is using in terms of how to choose candidates is something called “the phone test.” Can you talk about that? LEE FANG: That's right. We've heard from candidates that the D-trip will go out and rather than asking a candidate where they stand on the issues, what are the most important societal or economic concerns in their district, they do a phone test, which is they're asking candidates to take out their phone, go through their Rolodex or their list of contacts and show them that they can raise 100,000, 200,000, up to 250,000 dollars just from the contacts in their phone. So, they're going to folks who are deep in the business community, folks who have maybe served in the state legislature, who have an experience raising this type of cash or folks who were candidates for office in 2016 who have established donor networks. That's the main litmus test that we've heard over and over again for candidates. And you know, for some folks, if you look at the first or second quarter of fundraising, they can raise a lot of money because they have a lot of wealthy contributors who can max out in their campaign, giving big checks of 1,000 dollars or 2,700 dollars. But for first time candidates, a lot of those folks are relying on small contributions, contributions of 50 dollars or 100 dollars and it's hard to demonstrate to party officials, that they can raise big cash early in the campaign. But the flip side of this whole kind of strategy from the DCCC is that the big donors max out early on and you can't tap them later in the campaign but the small donors are in some ways a more efficient way to run a campaign because small donors will also volunteer. They can continually give throughout the campaign and there's a higher level of engagement. So, even that Rolodex test is a kind of a weak litmus test. AARON MATÉ: Now, one interesting phenomenon that you point out is that the DCCC and other prominent centrist groups are throwing their weight behind candidates who have most recently lost. For example, Angie Craig in Minneapolis. LEE FANG: Yeah, that's right. AARON MATÉ: Or Minnesota. LEE FANG: That's right. Angie Craig ran for office, got the Democratic Party kind of establishment machinery support in a district just kind of south of St. Paul. It's a suburban seat. She raise a lot of money. I believe spent almost $3.8 million but came up short. Basically got the same number votes as a previous Democrat that spent a fraction of that money. Other similar cases, Chrissy Houlahan in northeast Pennsylvania was the kind of party establishment candidate. She ran a very centrist campaign, not mentioning many policy issues, doing most of her campaign outreaching to Republicans, hoping to peel off suburban and kind of independent voters who had traditionally voted Republican. Didn't kind of embrace any big picture populist issues like Medicare For All or a carbon tax, opposition to free trade deals. And again, this is another example of a candidate who lost, who underperformed Clinton in this district. Raised a lot of money but underperformed the top of the ballot. So, maybe, in one sense, you would assume that the party would say, “Okay, this is a candidate that can't do well. Maybe this independent, centrist model doesn't resonate with voters,” but instead the Democratic establishment is doing everything they can to promote those same candidates from two years ago that underperformed the ticket, maybe they can raise the most money or perhaps because of their centrist policy positions. And they're sidelining populist progressives who are kind of doing the very opposite. They're embracing big, bold ideas. They're working with grassroots groups. They're building a huge campaign operation of volunteers and they say then for these kind of more grassroots candidates, Jeff Erdmann in Minnesota, in the same district, and Jess King in northeast Pennsylvania, they say they've been completely shut out. That the DCCC, other kind of affiliate Democratic groups that are close to the party have endorsed the centrists. They're funneling large amounts of money. They're bringing members of Congress who are Democrats into the district to endorse the centrist candidate. You know, for a lot of these races, these endorsements and the money makes a big difference. It's hard for people who are already focusing on the Trump administration and are focusing on the other big fights in politics, to kind of follow every single one of these smaller primary campaigns. AARON MATÉ: Based on your reporting for this piece and your overall reporting on the role of money in politics, to what extent can we attribute all this to sort of a consultancy industrial complex? The need for candidates to raise money for the purpose of being able to pay for these high-priced consultants that dominate the party? LEE FANG: Look, a lot of my reporting is on the role of special interests influencing the policy process, influencing regulators, lawmakers, kind of shifting the priorities of public officials to favor special interests that kind of game the process. But another aspect of this is simply the kind of nuts and bolts of campaigning. As the price of elections go higher and higher, there's more kind of an incentive for consultants to gain the process and win these kind of lucrative contracts to manage these campaigns. Some of these Congressional campaigns, they cost maybe a couple hundred thousand dollars a decade or two ago, now cost 10 million dollars, 15 million dollars. Even higher than that. For campaign consultants, particularly folks who work in advertising, television, digital advertising and in fundraising, they receive a percentage of the amount spent. If you're a TV consultant, you can make between 5 and 15% of each TV buy, of other advertising buys. There's a strong incentive for Democratic consultants to steer the party to support the candidate that they think will not only raise and spend the most money, but will go with their consulting firm. This is a dynamic that's existed for a very long time but for the candidates that we've spoken to, both on the record for the story and off the record, there's a lot of kind of quiet complaints about this. They see the party steering money and resources to candidates that are hiring consulting firms that are connected to the party. This is kind of a level of corruption that doesn't raise to the same level of oil companies buying legislation but it does make a big difference in campaigns if these consultants perhaps don't perform the best or if they're changing the makeup of the next wave of the Democratic Party. I mean, we could have a completely new Democratic Party after the midterm elections, if there is truly a wave. We have dozens or perhaps hundreds of new Democrats in office but they've been chosen by a certain select class of campaign consultants. That makes a big difference in terms of politics and policy for the foreseeable future. AARON MATÉ: Right. I mean, you point out that part the reason why Obama may not have been more progressive when he was in office was that he was surrounded in Congress by a large number of centrist Democrats. Speaking of centrist Democrats, I want to play a clip of Chuck Schumer. This is him in early 2016 outlining the Democratic strategy of basically seeking suburban voters who voted for Mitt Romney, not working-class voters, who Schumer said that the party can afford to lose. CHUCK SCHUMER: For every blue-collar Democrat we will lose in western PA, we will pick up two, three moderate Republicans in the suburbs of Philadelphia. You can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin. AARON MATÉ: That's Chuck Schumer speaking way before the 2016 general election and we know how that turned out. The Democrats lost Ohio. They lost Wisconsin. They lost Pennsylvania and they lost the election. Lee Fang, final thoughts as we wrap? LEE FANG: Well, this has been the conventional wisdom of Democrats. You know, it was definitely the guiding strategy in 2016 but this has been the conventional wisdom for over 10 years now. In the piece, we show how previous wave elections like in 2006 simply didn't work. A lot of the centrist, conservative Democrats that based their campaign around reaching out to Republicans or co-opting Republican ideas actually lost and the more progressive candidates were shut out by the party. People like...Porter, John Hall, Gary McInerney, who didn't receive any significant support from the DCCC or from the Democratic consultant class, they ended up winning. So, even though we've got this long history of evidence of what works and what doesn't work. The Democratic Party is simply kind of going back to what doesn't work. AARON MATÉ: The piece is called, "The Dead Enders: Candidates who signed up to battle Donald Trump must get past the Democratic Party first." Lee Fang of The Intercept, thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jan 30 03:24:13 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 03:24:13 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Chief Illiniwak: Chancellor Jones' "Conversations" over Racial Discrimination--STALL-JOB! Message-ID: From: NatNews at yahoogroups.com on behalf of Robert Schmidt Sent: Fri 2/23/2007 7:22 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) Francis 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 1:04 PM To: Peace-discuss List (peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Chief Illiniwak: Chancellor Jones' "Conversations" over Racial Discrimination >From today's page 1 story on Chief Illiniwak in the Chicago Tribune: ..."(He) {Chancellor Jones} has said publicly several times that identifying a mascot will not resolve the issues we face regarding the Chief and native imagery," university spokeswoman Robin Kaler said. "He feels strongly that a campuswide conversation on the issue is vital to identifying a path forward." Events meant to spur those conversations have been in the works for months, Kaler said, and will take place sometime in the spring... ILLINIWAK: RACIAL DISCRIMINATION! by Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Board of Directors, Amnesty International USA (1988-92) Holder of 2 Football Season Tickets (Since About 1981) Holder of 2 Basketball Season Tickets (Since About 1982) In his letter of 16 July 1997 to Ms. Susan Gravenhorst, Chair of the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois, Professor Mort Winston, Chair of the Board of Directors of Amnesty International USA (AIUSA) and a prominent University of Illinois Alumnus, called "Chief" Illiniwak a "human rights violation," condemned it in no uncertain terms, and demanded the elimination of this racist mascot. Before he joined the AIUSA Board, Professor Winston was the leading AIUSA expert on, and activist against, racism and apartheid in South Africa prior to the Mandela revolution. Professor Winston knows a human rights violation when he sees one. The same is true for me. In addition to serving four years as a Member of the Board of Directors of Amnesty International USA, I was the person who single-handedly convinced the ultra-conservative Faculty of the University of Illinois College of Law to introduce a course on International Human Rights Law into the Law School Curriculum as Law 370, and have taught this course for many years to about 30 students per year. Illiniwak is indeed a human rights violation. The United States government is a contracting party to the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Hence, this Racial Discrimination Convention is a "treaty' and thus the "supreme Law of the Land" under the so-called Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the United States Constitution: Article VI .... This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. In other words, the Racial Discrimination Convention absolutely binds the entirety of the State of Illinois, including therein the University of Illinois. Article 1(1) of the Racial Discrimination Convention defines the term "racial discrimination" as follows: "In this Convention the term 'racial discrimination' shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life." (Emphasis added.) Obviously, Illiniwak is a "distinction" on the multiple bases of "race," and "colour," and "descent." Illiniwak definitely has the "effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life" for Native American Students, Faculty, Staff and Community Members here at the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign. In accordance with the terms of this Racial Discrimination Convention to which the United States is a party, Illiniwak constitutes "racial discrimination" by the University of Illinois against Native Americans. Article 2, paragraph 1 of the Racial Discrimination Convention provides as follows: Article 2 1. States Parties condemn racial discrimination and undertake to pursue by all appropriate means and without delay a policy of eliminating racial discrimination in all its forms, and promoting understanding among all races, and to this end: (a) Each State Party undertakes to engage in no act or practice of racial discrimination against persons, groups of persons or institutions and to ensure that all public authorities and public institutions, national and local, shall act in conformity with this obligation; (b) Each State Party undertakes not to sponsor, defend or support racial discrimination by any persons or organizations; (c) Each State Party shall take effective measures to review governmental, national and local policies, and to amend, rescind or nullify any laws and regulations which have the effect of creating or perpetuating racial discrimination wherever it exists; (d) Each State Party shall prohibit and bring to an end, by all appropriate means, including legislation as required by circumstances, racial discrimination by any persons, group or organization; (e) Each State Party undertakes to encourage, where appropriate, integrationist multi-racial organizations and movements and other means of eliminating barriers between races, and to discourage anything which tends to strengthen racial division. [Emphasis added.] Clearly, Illiniwak places the United States of America in breach of these most solemn obligations under Article 2 of the Racial Discrimination Convention. Illiniwak contravenes Racial Discrimination Convention Article 2. The conclusion is inexorable that to be in accordance with the terms of the Racial Discrimination Convention, the University of Illinois must eliminate Illiniwak. Article 4 of the Racial Discrimination Convention clearly requires the Government of the United States of America to eliminate Illiniwak in no uncertain terms: Article 4 States Parties condemn all propaganda and all organizations which are based on ideas or theories of superiority of one race or group of persons of one colour or ethnic origin, or which attempt to justify or promote racial hatred and discrimination in any form, and undertake to adopt immediate and positive measures designed to eradicate all incitement to, or acts of, such discrimination, and to this end, with due regard to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of this Convention, inter alia: (a) Shall declare an offence punishable by law all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination, as well as all acts of violence or incitement to such acts against any race or group of persons of another colour or ethnic origin, and also the provision of any assistance to racist activities, including the financing thereof; (b) Shall declare illegal and prohibit organizations, and also organized and all other propaganda activities, which promote and incite racial discrimination, and shall recognize participation in such organizations or activities as an offence punishable by law; (c) Shall not permit public authorities or public institutions, national or local, to promote or incite racial discrimination. [Emphasis added.] Notice in particular the requirement of Article 4(c) of the Racial Discrimination Convention: "Shall not permit public authorities or public institutions, national or local, to promote or incite racial discrimination." To the contrary, the University of Illinois deliberately promotes and incites racial discrimination against Native Americans by means of Illiniwak for the quite mercenary purpose of making money! Article 5 of the Racial Discrimination Convention expressly requires the United States government "to prohibit and to eliminate racial discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the right of everyone, without distinction as to race, colour, or national or ethnic origin, to equality before the law, notably in the enjoyment of the following rights..." (Emphasis added.) The conclusion is inexorable that Illiniwak contravenes Article 5 of the Racial Discrimination Convention. Furthermore, Illiniwak also contravenes Article 6 of the Racial Discrimination Convention: Article 6 States Parties shall assure to everyone within their jurisdiction effective protection and remedies through the competent national tribunals and other State institutions against any acts of racial discrimination which violate his human rights and fundamental freedoms contrary to this Convention, as well as the right to seek from such tribunals just and adequate reparation or satisfaction for any damage suffered as a result of such discrimination. Finally, Illiniwak contravenes Article 7 of the Racial Discrimination Convention: Article 7 States Parties undertake to adopt immediate and effective measures, particularly in the fields of teaching, education, culture and information, with a view to combating prejudices which lead to racial discrimination and to promoting understanding, tolerance and friendship among nations and racial or ethnical groups, as well as to propagating the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and this Convention. The conclusion is inexorable that to be in accordance with the terms of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination the University of Illinois--a Public Institution--must eliminate Illiniwak. As can be seen from the above analysis, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination expressly incorporates by reference the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). No point would be served here by detailing all the provisions of the UDHR that are currently being violated by Illiniwak. But in particular, I wish to draw to your attention UDHR Articles 1 and 2: Article 1 All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. Article 2 Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. (Emphasis added.) The United States government has been in the vanguard of the worldwide movement to establish that these fundamental provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, inter alia, constitute customary international law. Customary international law is part of the common law of the United States of America and the common law of all the States of the Union. Customary international law applies to and binds the State of Illinois and the University of Illinois. Clearly, by means of Illiniwak the University of Illinois refuses to act towards Native Americans "in a spirit of brotherhood" in violation of UDHR Article 1. Similarly, Illiniwak constitutes a "distinction" on the prohibited grounds of race, colour and religion, inter alia, in gross violation of UDHR Article 2. In other words, Illiniwak violates these most fundamental protections of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, inter alia, and thus violates customary international law and therefore the common law of both the United States and the State of Illinois. I wish to end this Memorandum by joining those eloquent and powerful words addressed to Trustee Susan Gravenhorst by Professor Mort Winston, Chair of the Board of Directors of Amnesty International, my fellow AIUSA Board Colleague and Comrade-in-Arms in the long but successful struggle against racism and apartheid in South Africa: In your present position as Chair of the Board of Trustees, you can steer university policy on this issue towards the greater good. I urge you to do so. UIUC's sport's fans and the marching band can find another mascot. Have a contest. Pick an animal or some culturally neutral symbol. Show some moral leadership so that perhaps the professional sports teams that also dishonor American Indians by debasing their cultural symbols will one day follow suit. But above all stop pretending that keeping "Chief Illiniwek" alive is somehow "honoring" the Native Americans who once roamed the plains where the University of Illinois now stands. In short, "Do the Right Thing -- Get Rid of the Chief!" F.A.B. 25 July 1997 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 Jan 30 03:49:21 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 03:49:21 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Chief Illiniwak: Chancellor Jones' "Conversations" over Racial Discrimination--STALL-JOB! Message-ID: The Chief Illiniwak Spectacle! So here we are at Memorial Stadium on a beautiful Fall Saturday afternoon during the Michigan-Illiniwak Football Game. There are 77,000 drunken fans here and the game is covered nationwide and live by CBS TV. For the drunken fans on the radio, Jim Turpin of the News-Gazoo/ WDWS Illiniwak Media Empire attempts and fumbles the play-by-play calls. It is half-time. Time for the Chief Illiniwak Spectacle. So here goes: 1. The Marching Illiniwak Drum/Dumb Corps take the field at Memorial stadium and proceed to strike up the special Illiniwak drumbeat that I had previously composed for them, all saying in unison over the gigantic stadium sound speaker system: Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! This special dumb-beat continues ad nauseam throughout the performance. 2. Now, out comes the rest of the University of Illiniwak's "Marching Illiniwak" band and strikes up the music for the famous pop song "The Lion Sleeps Tonight" by The Tokens. 3. Then, out comes the University of Illiniwak's Glee Club and sings my song "The Chancellor Sleeps Tonight" over a special microphone/amplification system fed through the gigantic stadium speakers so that everyone can hear the magnificent lyrics: The Chancellor Sleeps Tonight Hush my Illiniwaks, my little Illiniwaks, the Chancellor Sleeps Tonight! Aaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! Hush my Illiniwaks, my quiet Illiniwaks, the Chancellor Sleeps Tonight! Aaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh! Illiniwak, Illiniwak, Illiniwak, Illiniwak, Illiniwak,Illiniwak,Illiniwak. Illiniwak, Illiniwak Illiniwak, Illiniwak, Illiniwak, Illiniwak,Illiniwak,Illiniwak. Illiniwak, Oh! Bee Wah do do do do ayy! Oh! Bee Wah doo doo doo doo ayy! The Mighty Chancellor Sleeps Tonight! Ooh! Ooh! Ooh! Ooh! Ooh! Ooh! Ooh! The Glee Club repeats these lyrics ad nauseam throughout the Chief Illiniwak Spectacle! 4. Next the Marching Illiniwaks execute their famous "Three-in-One" Illiniwak March. 5. Now the most electrifying moment in sports history: Little Red Sambo Himself, Chief Illiniwak, runs through the band, pops out, and does his little Hollywood jig at mid-field. 6. Finally, all 77,000 drunken fans in the stadium begin to chant in unison and in time with the band and the Glee Club, adding in for emphasis, support, and of course dignity: Illiniwak, Illiniwak, Illiniwak, Illiniwak, Illiniwak,Illiniwak,Illiniwak, Illiniwak, Illiniwak, Illiniwak, Illiniwak, Illiniwak, Illiniwak,Illiniwak,Illiniwak,Illiniwak, Illiniwak, Illiniwak, Illiniwak, Illiniwak, Illiniwak,Illiniwak,Illiniwak, Illiniwak Repeated ad nauseam. This magnificent "Chief Illiniwak Spectacle" will of course be shown nation-wide to an audience of tens of millions of football fans and admirers of our "flagship" State University in the Great State of Illiniwaks. The University of Illiniwaks at Urbana-Champaign! Home of the Marching Illiniwaks Band and their Official Mascot, Chief Illiniwak, Little Red Sambo Himself. Certainly the type of University you want to send your children to--unless they are Native American, African American, Asian American, or Latino/a. [http://www.uihistorytraditions.org/sites/default/files/styles/square219/public/imagelinks/Dialog.jpg?itok=cnbyEp56] Francis A. Boyle Law Building 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, January 29, 2018 9:24 PM To: Peace-discuss List (peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net) Subject: Chief Illiniwak: Chancellor Jones' "Conversations" over Racial Discrimination--STALL-JOB! From: NatNews at yahoogroups.com on behalf of Robert Schmidt Sent: Fri 2/23/2007 7:22 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) Francis 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 1:04 PM To: Peace-discuss List (peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net) > Subject: [Peace-discuss] Chief Illiniwak: Chancellor Jones' "Conversations" over Racial Discrimination >From today's page 1 story on Chief Illiniwak in the Chicago Tribune: ..."(He) {Chancellor Jones} has said publicly several times that identifying a mascot will not resolve the issues we face regarding the Chief and native imagery," university spokeswoman Robin Kaler said. "He feels strongly that a campuswide conversation on the issue is vital to identifying a path forward." Events meant to spur those conversations have been in the works for months, Kaler said, and will take place sometime in the spring... ILLINIWAK: RACIAL DISCRIMINATION! by Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Board of Directors, Amnesty International USA (1988-92) Holder of 2 Football Season Tickets (Since About 1981) Holder of 2 Basketball Season Tickets (Since About 1982) In his letter of 16 July 1997 to Ms. Susan Gravenhorst, Chair of the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois, Professor Mort Winston, Chair of the Board of Directors of Amnesty International USA (AIUSA) and a prominent University of Illinois Alumnus, called "Chief" Illiniwak a "human rights violation," condemned it in no uncertain terms, and demanded the elimination of this racist mascot. Before he joined the AIUSA Board, Professor Winston was the leading AIUSA expert on, and activist against, racism and apartheid in South Africa prior to the Mandela revolution. Professor Winston knows a human rights violation when he sees one. The same is true for me. In addition to serving four years as a Member of the Board of Directors of Amnesty International USA, I was the person who single-handedly convinced the ultra-conservative Faculty of the University of Illinois College of Law to introduce a course on International Human Rights Law into the Law School Curriculum as Law 370, and have taught this course for many years to about 30 students per year. Illiniwak is indeed a human rights violation. The United States government is a contracting party to the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Hence, this Racial Discrimination Convention is a "treaty' and thus the "supreme Law of the Land" under the so-called Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the United States Constitution: Article VI .... This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. In other words, the Racial Discrimination Convention absolutely binds the entirety of the State of Illinois, including therein the University of Illinois. Article 1(1) of the Racial Discrimination Convention defines the term "racial discrimination" as follows: "In this Convention the term 'racial discrimination' shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life." (Emphasis added.) Obviously, Illiniwak is a "distinction" on the multiple bases of "race," and "colour," and "descent." Illiniwak definitely has the "effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life" for Native American Students, Faculty, Staff and Community Members here at the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign. In accordance with the terms of this Racial Discrimination Convention to which the United States is a party, Illiniwak constitutes "racial discrimination" by the University of Illinois against Native Americans. Article 2, paragraph 1 of the Racial Discrimination Convention provides as follows: Article 2 1. States Parties condemn racial discrimination and undertake to pursue by all appropriate means and without delay a policy of eliminating racial discrimination in all its forms, and promoting understanding among all races, and to this end: (a) Each State Party undertakes to engage in no act or practice of racial discrimination against persons, groups of persons or institutions and to ensure that all public authorities and public institutions, national and local, shall act in conformity with this obligation; (b) Each State Party undertakes not to sponsor, defend or support racial discrimination by any persons or organizations; (c) Each State Party shall take effective measures to review governmental, national and local policies, and to amend, rescind or nullify any laws and regulations which have the effect of creating or perpetuating racial discrimination wherever it exists; (d) Each State Party shall prohibit and bring to an end, by all appropriate means, including legislation as required by circumstances, racial discrimination by any persons, group or organization; (e) Each State Party undertakes to encourage, where appropriate, integrationist multi-racial organizations and movements and other means of eliminating barriers between races, and to discourage anything which tends to strengthen racial division. [Emphasis added.] Clearly, Illiniwak places the United States of America in breach of these most solemn obligations under Article 2 of the Racial Discrimination Convention. Illiniwak contravenes Racial Discrimination Convention Article 2. The conclusion is inexorable that to be in accordance with the terms of the Racial Discrimination Convention, the University of Illinois must eliminate Illiniwak. Article 4 of the Racial Discrimination Convention clearly requires the Government of the United States of America to eliminate Illiniwak in no uncertain terms: Article 4 States Parties condemn all propaganda and all organizations which are based on ideas or theories of superiority of one race or group of persons of one colour or ethnic origin, or which attempt to justify or promote racial hatred and discrimination in any form, and undertake to adopt immediate and positive measures designed to eradicate all incitement to, or acts of, such discrimination, and to this end, with due regard to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of this Convention, inter alia: (a) Shall declare an offence punishable by law all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination, as well as all acts of violence or incitement to such acts against any race or group of persons of another colour or ethnic origin, and also the provision of any assistance to racist activities, including the financing thereof; (b) Shall declare illegal and prohibit organizations, and also organized and all other propaganda activities, which promote and incite racial discrimination, and shall recognize participation in such organizations or activities as an offence punishable by law; (c) Shall not permit public authorities or public institutions, national or local, to promote or incite racial discrimination. [Emphasis added.] Notice in particular the requirement of Article 4(c) of the Racial Discrimination Convention: "Shall not permit public authorities or public institutions, national or local, to promote or incite racial discrimination." To the contrary, the University of Illinois deliberately promotes and incites racial discrimination against Native Americans by means of Illiniwak for the quite mercenary purpose of making money! Article 5 of the Racial Discrimination Convention expressly requires the United States government "to prohibit and to eliminate racial discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the right of everyone, without distinction as to race, colour, or national or ethnic origin, to equality before the law, notably in the enjoyment of the following rights..." (Emphasis added.) The conclusion is inexorable that Illiniwak contravenes Article 5 of the Racial Discrimination Convention. Furthermore, Illiniwak also contravenes Article 6 of the Racial Discrimination Convention: Article 6 States Parties shall assure to everyone within their jurisdiction effective protection and remedies through the competent national tribunals and other State institutions against any acts of racial discrimination which violate his human rights and fundamental freedoms contrary to this Convention, as well as the right to seek from such tribunals just and adequate reparation or satisfaction for any damage suffered as a result of such discrimination. Finally, Illiniwak contravenes Article 7 of the Racial Discrimination Convention: Article 7 States Parties undertake to adopt immediate and effective measures, particularly in the fields of teaching, education, culture and information, with a view to combating prejudices which lead to racial discrimination and to promoting understanding, tolerance and friendship among nations and racial or ethnical groups, as well as to propagating the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and this Convention. The conclusion is inexorable that to be in accordance with the terms of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination the University of Illinois--a Public Institution--must eliminate Illiniwak. As can be seen from the above analysis, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination expressly incorporates by reference the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). No point would be served here by detailing all the provisions of the UDHR that are currently being violated by Illiniwak. But in particular, I wish to draw to your attention UDHR Articles 1 and 2: Article 1 All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. Article 2 Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. (Emphasis added.) The United States government has been in the vanguard of the worldwide movement to establish that these fundamental provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, inter alia, constitute customary international law. Customary international law is part of the common law of the United States of America and the common law of all the States of the Union. Customary international law applies to and binds the State of Illinois and the University of Illinois. Clearly, by means of Illiniwak the University of Illinois refuses to act towards Native Americans "in a spirit of brotherhood" in violation of UDHR Article 1. Similarly, Illiniwak constitutes a "distinction" on the prohibited grounds of race, colour and religion, inter alia, in gross violation of UDHR Article 2. In other words, Illiniwak violates these most fundamental protections of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, inter alia, and thus violates customary international law and therefore the common law of both the United States and the State of Illinois. I wish to end this Memorandum by joining those eloquent and powerful words addressed to Trustee Susan Gravenhorst by Professor Mort Winston, Chair of the Board of Directors of Amnesty International, my fellow AIUSA Board Colleague and Comrade-in-Arms in the long but successful struggle against racism and apartheid in South Africa: In your present position as Chair of the Board of Trustees, you can steer university policy on this issue towards the greater good. I urge you to do so. UIUC's sport's fans and the marching band can find another mascot. Have a contest. Pick an animal or some culturally neutral symbol. Show some moral leadership so that perhaps the professional sports teams that also dishonor American Indians by debasing their cultural symbols will one day follow suit. But above all stop pretending that keeping "Chief Illiniwek" alive is somehow "honoring" the Native Americans who once roamed the plains where the University of Illinois now stands. In short, "Do the Right Thing -- Get Rid of the Chief!" F.A.B. 25 July 1997 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: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 20946 bytes Desc: image003.jpg URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jan 30 12:45:25 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 12:45:25 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] "The Economist: Humanity teeters on the brink of world war" Message-ID: The Economist: Humanity teeters on the brink of world war By James Cogan WSWS.ORG 30 January 2018 The Economist magazine, the influential London weekly described by Karl Marx over 150 years ago as the “European organ” of the “aristocracy of finance,” has devoted its latest issue to discussing “The Next War” and “The Growing Threat of Great Power Conflict.” Its lead editorial opens with a chilling warning: In the past 25 years war has claimed too many lives. Yet even as civil and religious strife have raged in Syria, central Africa, Afghanistan and Iraq, a devastating clash between the world’s great powers has remained almost unimaginable. No longer … powerful, long-term shifts in geopolitics and the proliferation of new technologies are eroding the extraordinary military dominance that America and its allies have enjoyed. Conflict on a scale and intensity not seen since the second world war is once again plausible. The world is not prepared. The Economist envisages a dystopian, violent future, with the American military deploying to intimidate or destroy purported challenges to its dominance everywhere. In the next 20 years, the Economist predicts that “climate change, population growth and sectarian or ethnic conflict” are likely to ensure that much of the world descends into “intrastate or civil wars.” Such conflicts will increasingly be fought in cities, ringed by “slums” and populated by millions of people, at “close quarters, block by block.” The future for large sections of humanity is the carnage that was witnessed during last year’s murderous battles over the Iraqi city of Mosul and the Syrian city of Aleppo. But more chilling are the series of scenarios it outlines for a major escalation in tensions between the United States and Russia and China, presented as its strategic adversaries, which at any moment threaten to spiral into nuclear holocaust. In July of 2016, Mehring Books published David North’s A Quarter Century of War, which noted: Beginning with the first Persian Gulf conflict of 1990-91, the United States has been at war continuously for a quarter century. While using propaganda catchphrases, such as defense of human rights and War on Terror, to conceal the real aims of its interventions in the Middle East, Central Asia, and Africa, as well as its confrontation with Russia and China, the United States has been engaged in a struggle for global hegemony. As the US seeks to counteract its economic weakness and worsening domestic social tensions, its relentless escalation of military operations threatens to erupt into a full-scale world war, between nuclear-armed states. Less than two years later, much of this assessment has been echoed by one of the most significant political organs of Anglo-American capitalism. But the conclusions drawn by the Economist, speaking as the unalloyed representative of financial and corporate oligarchs whose wealth is bound up with American imperialist global dominance, is the exact opposite of North’s stated aim of helping build a “new antiwar movement.” Rather, the Economist urges the United States to develop the “hard power” to defend itself against “determined and able challengers,” presenting the sociopathic argument that peace is best safeguarded by America’s ability to utterly destroy its adversaries. The premise of the special report is that urgent action must be taken by the United States to stem the decline of its hegemony. It asserts that if the Chinese and Russian ruling class are permitted to realise their ambition of dominant influence in their own regions, then the “plausible” consequence will be a “devastating clash between the world’s great powers”—a world war fought with nuclear weapons. China and Russia, its editorial in the January 27 edition declares, “are now revisionist states that want to challenge the status quo and look at their regions as spheres of influence to be dominated. For China, that means East Asia; for Russia, eastern Europe and Central Asia.” The conclusion advanced by the Economist is that America must end “20 years of strategic drift” under successive administrations, which has allegedly “played into the hands of Russia and China.” In a series of articles, its special report advocates that the US spends staggering sums on new nuclear weapons and conventional weapons systems, including robotic, artificial intelligence (AI) technology, to ensure that it retains the military superiority that has, until now, inspired “fear in its foes.” It warns: “The pressing danger is of war on the Korean peninsula, perhaps this year.… Tens of thousands of people would perish, many more if nukes were used.” The US military is ready to launch such a war. It has B-2 and B-52 nuclear-capable bombers forward deployed at Guam, and hundreds of jet fighters and an armada of warships in other Pacific bases. There is ample reason to believe that the confrontation Washington has provoked with North Korea, through its demand that Pyongyang give up its nuclear weapons’ program, is a massive rehearsal for a future nuclear stand-off with China. The Economist opines that “a war to stop Iran acquiring nuclear weapons seems a more speculative prospect for now, but could become more likely a few years hence.” It asserts that the US is threatened by the so-called “grey zone” in which China, Russia, Iran, and other countries are seeking to “exploit” American “vulnerabilities” in parts of the world without provoking an open conflict. It gives as examples Chinese territorial claims in the South China Sea, Russia’s annexation of Crimea, and Iran’s political influence in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. US imperialist meddling, however, is considered entirely legitimate by the Economist. In Syria, the US has waged seven years of intrigue for regime-change to overthrow the Russian and Iranian-backed government. Washington’s announcement this month that it intends to effectively occupy one third of the country and assemble a 30,000-strong proxy army from Kurdish and Islamist militias has created conditions for not only direct clashes with Iran or Russia, but also with its nominal NATO ally Turkey. Predictably, amid the frenzied moves in the US and internationally to impose state control and censorship over the Internet, the journal accuses Russia of seeking to “undermine faith in Western institutions and encourage populist movements by meddling in elections and using bots and trolls on social media to fan grievances and prejudice.” Technology companies, it insists, must be even more integrated with the military, while Internet corporations must work with the state apparatus to suppress access to oppositional views, on the fraudulent pretext of combatting “influence operations” and the “mass manipulation of public opinion.” It notes in passing that for the American government, which already runs annual budget deficits approaching $700 billion, “finding the money will be another problem.” The truth is that the subordination of every aspect of society to war preparations will be paid for by the ongoing destruction of the living standards and conditions of the American working class, combined with the elimination of its democratic rights and repression of opposition. In an unintended echo of George Orwell’s “Newspeak,” the Economistconcludes that “a strong America”—armed to the teeth and permanently threatening its rivals with obliteration—is the “best guarantor of world peace.” The most chilling aspect of the report, however, is that it is pessimistic of its own prognosis that US imperialism can intimidate its rivals into submission. The very development of an ever more aggressive military stance toward China and Russia raises, not lessens, the likelihood of war. “The greatest danger,” it states, “lies in miscalculation through a failure to understand an adversary’s intentions, leading to an unplanned escalation that runs out of control.” What is being referred to is escalation into a nuclear holocaust. The article quotes Tom Plant, an analyst at the RUSI thinktank: “For both Russia and the US, nukes have retained their primacy. You only have to look at how they are spending their money.” The US is upgrading its entire nuclear arsenal over the coming decades at a cost of $1.2 trillion. Russia is upgrading its nuclear capable missiles, bombers and submarines. China is rapidly expanding the size and capability of its far smaller nuclear forces, as is Britain and France. Discussions are underway in ruling circles in Germany, Japan and even Australia on acquiring nuclear weapons so they can “resist” the nuclear-armed states. The madness of a nuclear arms race in the 21st century arises inexorably from the contradictions of the capitalist system. The struggle among rival nation-states for global geostrategic and economic dominance is the inevitable outcome of its intractable crisis and the ferocious conflict for control over markets and resources. The epoch of world war, wrote the Marxist revolutionary Vladimir Lenin, is the epoch of world revolution. The overthrow of the capitalist system that gives rise to the war danger is an urgent necessity for the survival of human civilization. The International Committee of the Fourth International and its sections are fighting to build an international, anti-war socialist workers’ movement. The open discussion on the prospect of nuclear war in the pages of journals like the Economist should motivate all serious workers and young people to join our struggle. James Cogan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Tue Jan 30 13:23:25 2018 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 07:23:25 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?cp1255?q?Robert_Parry=92s_Legacy_and_the_Future?= =?cp1255?q?_of_Consortiumnews?= Message-ID: <007001d399cd$83182760$89487620$@comcast.net> Robert Parry’s Legacy and the Future of Consortiumnews January 28, 2018 Save Robert Parry, editor and publisher of Consortiumnews.com, died peacefully Saturday evening. In this tribute, his son Nat Parry describes Robert’s unwavering commitment to independent journalism. https://consortiumnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Robert-Parry-headshot- 2-232x300-232x300.jpg Robert Parry, 1949-2018 By Nat Parry ƒIt is with a heavy heart that we inform Consortiumnews readers that Editor Robert Parry has passed away. As regular readers know, Robert (or Bob, as he was known to friends and family) suffered a stroke in December, which – despite his own speculation that it may have been brought on by the stress of covering Washington politics – was the result of undiagnosed pancreatic cancer that he had been unknowingly living with for the past 4-5 years. He unfortunately suffered two more debilitating strokes in recent weeks and after the last one, was moved to hospice care on Tuesday. He passed away peacefully Saturday evening. He was 68. Those of us close to him wish to sincerely thank readers for the kind comments and words of support posted on recent articles regarding Bob’s health issues. We read aloud many of these comments to him during his final days to let him know how much his work has meant to so many people and how much concern there was for his well-being. I am sure that these kindnesses meant a lot to him. They also mean a lot to us as family members, as we all know how devoted he was to the mission of independent journalism and this website which has been publishing articles since the earliest days of the internet, launching all the way back in 1995. With my dad, professional work has always been deeply personal, and his career as a journalist was thoroughly intertwined with his family life. I can recall kitchen table conversations in my early childhood that focused on the U.S.-backed wars in Central America and complaints about how his editors at The Associated Press were too timid to run articles of his that – no matter how well-documented – cast the Reagan administration in a bad light. One of my earliest memories in fact was of my dad about to leave on assignment in the early 1980s to the war zones of El Salvador, Nicaragua and Guatemala, and the heartfelt good-bye that he wished to me and my siblings. He warned us that he was going to a very dangerous place and that there was a possibility that he might not come back. I remember asking him why he had to go, why he couldn’t just stay at home with us. He replied that it was important to go to these places and tell the truth about what was happening there. He mentioned that children my age were being killed in these wars and that somebody had to tell their stories. I remember asking, “Kids like me?” He replied, “Yes, kids just like you.” Bob was deeply impacted by the dirty wars of Central America in the 1980s and in many ways these conflicts – and the U.S. involvement in them – came to define the rest of his life and career. With grisly stories emerging from Nicaragua (thanks partly to journalists like him), Congress passed the Boland Amendments from 1982 to 1984, which placed limits on U.S. military assistance to the contras who were attempting to overthrow the Sandinista government through a variety of terrorist tactics. The Reagan administration immediately began exploring ways to circumvent those legal restrictions, which led to a scheme to send secret arms shipments to the revolutionary and vehemently anti-American government of Iran and divert the profits to the contras. In 1985, Bob wrote the first stories describing this operation, which later became known as the Iran-Contra Affair. Contra-Cocaine and October Surprise https://consortiumnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/contra_cocaine_0020-fo r-web-220x300.jpg Poster by street artist and friend of Bob, Robbie Conal Parallel to the illegal arms shipments to Iran during those days was a cocaine trafficking operation by the Nicaraguan contras and a willingness by the Reagan administration and the CIA to turn a blind eye to these activities. This, despite the fact that cocaine was flooding into the United States while Ronald Reagan was proclaiming a “war on drugs,” and a crack cocaine epidemic was devastating communities across the country. Bob and his colleague Brian Barger were the first journalists to report on this story in late 1985, which became known as the contra-cocaine scandal, and became the subject of a congressional investigation led by then-Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.) in 1986. Continuing to pursue leads relating to Iran-Contra during a period in the late 80s when most of Washington was moving on from the scandal, Bob discovered that there was more to the story than commonly understood. He learned that the roots of the illegal arm shipments to Iran stretched back further than previously known – all the way back to the 1980 presidential campaign. That electoral contest between incumbent Jimmy Carter and challenger Ronald Reagan had come to be largely dominated by the hostage crisis in Iran, with 52 Americans being held at the U.S. embassy in Tehran since the 1979 Iranian Revolution. The Iranian hostage crisis, along with the ailing economy, came to define a perception of an America in decline, with former Hollywood actor Ronald Reagan promising a new start for the country, a restoration of its status as a “shining city on a hill.” The hostages were released in Tehran moments after Reagan was sworn in as president in Washington on January 20, 1981. Despite suspicions for years that there had been some sort of quid pro quo between the Reagan campaign and the Iranians, it wasn’t until Bob uncovered a trove of documents in a House office building basement in 1994 that the evidence became overwhelming that the Reagan campaign had interfered with the Carter administration’s efforts to free the hostages prior to the 1980 election. Their release sooner – what Carter hoped would be his “October Surprise” – could have given him the boost needed to win. Examining these documents and being already well-versed on this story – having previously travelled three continents pursuing the investigation for a PBS Frontline documentary – Bob became increasingly convinced that the Reagan campaign had in fact sabotaged Carter’s hostage negotiations, possibly committing an act of treason in an effort to make sure that 52 American citizens continued to be held in a harrowing hostage situation until after Reagan secured the election. Needless to say, this was an inconvenient story at a time – in the mid-1990s – when the national media had long since moved on from the Reagan scandals and were obsessing over new scandals, mostly related to President Bill Clinton’s sex life and failed real estate deals. Washington also wasn’t particularly interested in challenging the Reagan legacy, which at that time was beginning to solidify into a kind of mythology, with campaigns underway to name buildings and airports after the former president. At times, Bob had doubts about his career decisions and the stories he was pursuing. As he wrote in Trick or Treason, a book outlining his investigation into the October Surprise Mystery, this search for historical truth can be painful and seemingly thankless. “Many times,” he wrote, “I had regretted accepting Frontline’s assignment in 1990. I faulted myself for risking my future in mainstream journalism. After all, that is where the decent-paying jobs are. I had jeopardized my ability to support my four children out of an old-fashioned sense of duty, a regard for an unwritten code that expects reporters to take almost any assignment.” Nevertheless, Bob continued his efforts to tell the full story behind both the Iran-Contra scandal and the origins of the Reagan-Bush era, ultimately leading to two things: him being pushed out of the mainstream media, and the launching of Consortiumnews.com. I remember when he started the website, together with my older brother Sam, back in 1995. At the time, in spite of talk we were all hearing about something called “the information superhighway” and “electronic mail,” I had never visited a website and didn’t even know how to get “on line.” My dad called me in Richmond, where I was a sophomore at Virginia Commonwealth University, and told me I should check out this new “Internet site” he and Sam had just launched. He explained over the phone how to open a browser and instructed me how to type in the URL, starting, he said, with “http,” then a colon and two forward slashes, then “www,” then “dot,” then this long address with one or two more forward slashes if I recall. (It wasn’t until years later that the website got its own domain and a simpler address.) I went to the computer lab at the university and asked for some assistance on how to get online, dutifully typed in the URL, and opened this website – the first one I had ever visited. It was interesting, but a bit hard to read on the computer screen, so I printed out some articles to read back in my dorm room. I quickly became a fan of “The Consortium,” as it was called back then, and continued reading articles on the October Surprise Mystery as Bob and Sam posted them on this new and exciting tool called “the Internet.” Sam had to learn HTML coding from scratch to launch this online news service, billed as “the Internet’s First Investigative ‘Zine.” For his efforts, Sam was honored with the Consortium for Independent Journalism’s first Gary Webb Freedom of the Press Award in 2015. X-Files and Contra-Crack At some point along the way, Bob decided that in addition to the website, where he was not only posting original articles but also providing the source documents that he had uncovered in the House office building basement, he would also take a stab at traditional publishing. He compiled the “October Surprise X-Files” into a booklet and self-published it in January 1996. https://consortiumnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/mug-225x300.jpg Original Consortium merchandise from 1996. He was also publishing a newsletter to complement the website, knowing that at that time, there were still plenty of people who didn’t know how to turn a computer on, much less navigate the World Wide Web. I transferred from Virginia Commonwealth University to George Mason University in the DC suburbs and started working part-time with my dad and Sam on the newsletter and website. We worked together on the content, editing and laying it out with graphics often culled from books at our local library. We built a subscriber base through networking and purchasing mailing lists from progressive magazines. Every two weeks we would get a thousand copies printed from Sir Speedy and would spend Friday evening collating these newsletters and sending them out to our subscribers. The launching of the website and newsletter, and later an even-more ambitious project called I.F. Magazine, happened to coincide with the publication in 1996 of Gary Webb’s “Dark Alliance” series at the San Jose Mercury-News. Webb’s series reopened the contra-cocaine controversy with a detailed examination of the drug trafficking networks in Nicaragua and Los Angeles that had helped to spread highly addictive crack cocaine across the United States. The African-American community, in particular, was rightly outraged over this story, which offered confirmation of many long-standing suspicions that the government was complicit in the drug trade devastating their communities. African Americans had been deeply and disproportionately affected by the crack epidemic, both in terms of the direct impact of the drug and the draconian drug laws and mandatory minimum sentences that came to define the government’s approach to “the war on drugs.” For a moment in the summer of 1996, it appeared that the renewed interest in the contra-cocaine story might offer an opportunity to revisit the crimes and misdeeds of the Reagan-Bush era, but those hopes were dashed when the “the Big Media” decided to double down on its earlier failures to cover this story properly. Big Papers Pile On The Los Angeles Times launched the attack on Gary Webb and his reporting at the San Jose Mercury-News, followed by equally dismissive stories at the Washington Post and New York Times. The piling on from these newspapers eventually led Mercury-News editor Jerry Ceppos to denounce Webb’s reporting and offer a mea culpa for publishing the articles. The onslaught of hostile reporting from the big papers failed to address the basic premises of Webb’s series and did not debunk the underlying allegations of contra-cocaine smuggling or the fact that much of this cocaine ended up on American streets in the form of crack. Instead, it raised doubts by poking holes in certain details and casting the story as a “conspiracy theory.” Some of the reporting attempted to debunk claims that Webb never actually made – such as the idea that the contra-cocaine trafficking was part of a government plot to intentionally decimate the African-American community. https://consortiumnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/gary-webb-209x300.jpg Gary Webb holds up a copy of the San Jose Mercury-News with his front-page story. Gary Webb and Bob were in close contact during those days. Bob offered him professional and personal support, having spent his time also on the receiving end of attacks by journalistic colleagues and editors who rejected certain stories – no matter how factual – as fanciful conspiracy theories. Articles at The Consortium website and newsletter, as well as I.F. Magazine, offered details on the historical context for the “Dark Alliance” series and pushed back against the mainstream media’s onslaught of hostile and disingenuous reporting. Bob also published the book Lost History which provided extensive details on the background for the “Dark Alliance” series, explaining that far from a baseless “conspiracy theory,” the facts and evidence strongly supported the conclusion that the Reagan-Bush administrations had colluded with drug traffickers to fund their illegal war against Nicaragua. But sadly, the damage to Gary Webb was done. With his professional and personal life in tatters because of his courageous reporting on the contra-cocaine story, he committed suicide in 2004 at the age of 49. Speaking about this suicide later on Democracy Now, Bob noted how painful it is to be ridiculed and unfairly criticized by colleagues, as his friend had experienced. “There’s a special pain when your colleagues in your profession turn on you, especially when you’ve done something that they should admire and should understand,” he said. “To do all that work and then have the New York Times and the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times attack you and try to destroy your life, there’s a special pain in that.” In consultation with his family, Bob and the Board of Directors for the Consortium for Independent Journalism launched the Gary Webb Freedom of the Press Award in 2015. The Disastrous Presidency of George W. Bush The presidency of George W. Bush was surreal for many of us, and no one more so than my dad. In covering Washington politics for decades, Bob had traced many stories to “Dubya’s” father, George H.W. Bush, who had been implicated in a variety of questionable activities, including the October Surprise Mystery and Iran-Contra. He had also launched a war against Iraq in 1991 that seemed to be motivated, at least in part, to help kick “the Vietnam Syndrome,” i.e. the reluctance that the American people had felt since the Vietnam War to support military action abroad. As Bob noted in his 1992 book Fooling America, after U.S. forces routed the Iraqi military in 1991, President Bush’s first public comment about the victory expressed his delight that it would finally put to rest the American reflex against committing troops to far-off conflicts. “By God, we’ve kicked the Vietnam Syndrome once and for all,” he exulted. The fact that Bush-41’s son could run for president largely on name recognition confirmed to Bob the failure of the mainstream media to cover important stories properly and the need to continue building an independent media infrastructure. This conviction solidified through Campaign 2000 and the election’s ultimate outcome, when Bush assumed the White House as the first popular-vote loser in more than a century. Despite the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court had halted the counting of votes in Florida, thus preventing an accurate determination of the rightful winner, most of the national media moved on from the story after Bush was sworn in on Jan. 20, 2001. Consortiumnews.com continued to examine the documentary record, however, and ultimately concluded that Al Gore would have been declared the winner of that election if all the legally cast ballots were counted. At Consortiumnews, there was an unwritten editorial policy that the title “President” should never precede George W. Bush’s name, based on our view that he was not legitimately elected. But beyond those editorial decisions, we also understood the gravity of the fact that had Election 2000 been allowed to play out with all votes counted, many of the disasters of the Bush years – notably the 9/11 tragedy and the Iraq War, as well as decisions to withdraw from international agreements on arms control and climate change – might have been averted. As all of us who lived through the post-9/11 era will recall, it was a challenging time all around, especially if you were someone critical of George W. Bush. The atmosphere in that period did not allow for much dissent. Those who stood up against the juggernaut for war – such as Phil Donahue at MSNBC, Chris Hedges at the New York Times, or even the Dixie Chicks – had their careers damaged and found themselves on the receiving end of death threats and hate mail. While Bob’s magazine and newsletter projects had been discontinued, the website was still publishing articles, providing a home for dissenting voices that questioned the case for invading Iraq in late 2002 and early 2003. Around this time, former CIA analyst Ray McGovern and some of his colleagues founded Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity and a long-running relationship with Consortiumnews was established. Several former intelligence veterans began contributing to the website, motivated by the same independent spirit of truth-telling that compelled Bob to invest so much in this project. At a time when almost the entire mainstream media was going along with the Bush administration’s dubious case for war, this and a few other like-minded websites pushed back with well-researched articles calling into question the rationale. Although at times it might have felt as though we were just voices in the wilderness, a major groundswell of opposition to war emerged in the country, with historic marches of hundreds of thousands taking place to reject Bush’s push for war. https://consortiumnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/neck-deep-book-200x300 .jpg Neck Deep was published by the Media Consortium in 2007. Of course, these antiwar voices were ultimately vindicated by the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and the fact that the war and occupation proved to be a far costlier and deadlier enterprise than we had been told that it would be. Earlier assurances that it would be a “cakewalk” proved as false as the WMD claims, but as had been so often the case in Washington, there was little to no accountability from the mainstream media, the think tanks or government officials for being so spectacularly wrong. In an effort to document the true history of that era, Bob, Sam and I co-wrote the book Neck Deep: The Disastrous Presidency of George W. Bush, which was published in late 2007. The book traced the work of Consortiumnews, juxtaposing it against the backdrop of mainstream media coverage during the Bush era, in an effort to not only correct the record, but also demonstrate that not all of us got things so wrong. We felt it was important to remind readers – as well as future historians – that some of us knew and reported in real time the mistakes that were being made on everything from withdrawing from the Kyoto Protocol to invading Iraq to implementing a policy of torture to bungling the response to Hurricane Katrina. Obama Era By the Obama presidency, Consortiumnews.com had become a home to a growing number of writers who brought new perspectives to the website’s content. While for years, the writing staff had been limited primarily to Bob, Sam and me, suddenly, Consortiumnews was receiving contributions from journalists, activists and former intelligence analysts who offered a wide range of expertise – on international law, economics, human rights, foreign policy, national security, and even religion and philosophy. One recurring theme of articles at the website during the Obama era was the enduring effect of unchallenged narratives, how they shaped national politics and dictated government policy. Bob observed that even a supposedly left-of-center president like Obama seemed beholden to the false narratives and national mythologies dating back to the Reagan era. He pointed out that this could be at least partially attributed to the failure to establish a strong foundation for independent journalism. In a 2010 piece called “Obama’s Fear of the Reagan Narrative,” Bob noted that Obama had defended his deal with Republicans on tax cuts for the rich because there was such a strong lingering effect of Reagan’s messaging from 30 years earlier. “He felt handcuffed by the Right’s ability to rally Americans on behalf of Reagan’s ‘government-is-the-problem’ message,” Bob wrote. He traced Obama’s complaints about his powerlessness in the face of this dynamic to the reluctance of American progressives to invest sufficiently in media and think tanks, as conservatives had been doing for decades in waging their “the war of ideas.” As he had been arguing since the early 1990s, Robert insisted that the limits that had been placed on Obama – whether real or perceived – continued to demonstrate the power of propaganda and the need for greater investment in alternative media. He also observed that much of the nuttiness surrounding the so-called Tea Party movement resulted from fundamental misunderstandings of American history and constitutional principles. “Democrats and progressives should be under no illusion about the new flood of know-nothingism that is about to inundate the United States in the guise of a return to ‘first principles’ and a deep respect for the U.S. Constitution,” Bob warned. He pointed out that despite the Tea Partiers’ claimed reverence for the Constitution, they actually had very little understanding of the document, as revealed by their ahistorical claims that federal taxes are unconstitutional. In fact, as Bob observed, the Constitution represented “a major power grab by the federal government, when compared to the loosely drawn Articles of Confederation, which lacked federal taxing authority and other national powers.” Motivated by a desire to correct falsified historical narratives spanning more than two centuries, Bob published his sixth and final book, America’s Stolen Narrative: From Washington and Madison to Nixon, Reagan and the Bushes to Obama, in 2012. Along with revenues from book sales, growing donations from readers enabled Bob to not only pay writers but also to hire an assistant, Chelsea Gilmour, who began working for Consortiumnews in 2014. In addition to providing invaluable administrative support, Chelsea also performed duties including research, writing and fact-checking. Political Realignment and the New McCarthyism Although at the beginning of the Obama era – and indeed since the 1980s – the name Robert Parry had been closely associated with exposing wrongdoing by Republicans, and hence had a strong following among Democratic Party loyalists, by the end of Obama’s presidency there seemed to be a realignment taking place among some of Consortiumnews.com’s readership, which reflected more generally the shifting politics of the country. In particular, the U.S. media’s approach to Russia and related issues, such as the violent ouster in 2014 of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, became “virtually 100 percent propaganda,” Bob said. He noted that the full story was never told when it came to issues such as the Sergei Magnitsky case, which led to the first round of U.S. sanctions against Russia, nor the inconvenient facts related to the Euromaidan protests that led to Yanukovych’s ouster – including the reality of strong neo-Nazi influence in those protests – nor the subsequent conflict in the Donbass region of Ukraine. Bob’s stories on Ukraine were widely cited and disseminated, and he became an important voice in presenting a fuller picture of the conflict than was possible by reading and watching only mainstream news outlets. Bob was featured prominently in Oliver Stone’s 2016 documentary “Ukraine on Fire,” where he explained how U.S.-funded political NGOs and media companies have worked with the CIA and foreign policy establishment since the 1980s to promote the U.S. geopolitical agenda. Bob regretted that, increasingly, “the American people and the West in general are carefully shielded from hearing the ‘other side of the story.’” Indeed, he said that to even suggest that there might be another side to the story is enough to get someone branded as an apologist for Vladimir Putin or a “Kremlin stooge.” https://consortiumnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/proponot_logo_200x200. png The PropOrNot logo This culminated in late 2016 in the blacklisting of Consortiumnews.com on a dubious website called “PropOrNot,” which was claiming to serve as a watchdog against undue “Russian influence” in the United States. The PropOrNot blacklist, including Consortiumnews and about 200 other websites deemed “Russian propaganda,” was elevated by the Washington Post as a credible source, despite the fact that the neo-McCarthyites who published the list hid behind a cloak of anonymity. “The Post’s article by Craig Timberg,” Bob wrote on Nov. 27, 2016, “described PropOrNot simply as ‘a nonpartisan collection of researchers with foreign policy, military and technology backgrounds [who] planned to release its own findings Friday showing the startling reach and effectiveness of Russian propaganda campaigns.’” As Bob explained in an article called “Washington Post’s Fake News Guilt,” the paper granted PropOrNot anonymity “to smear journalists who don’t march in lockstep with official pronouncements from the State Department or some other impeccable fount of never-to-be-questioned truth.” The Post even provided an unattributed quote from the head of the shadowy website. “The way that this propaganda apparatus supported [Donald] Trump was equivalent to some massive amount of a media buy,” the anonymous smear merchant said. The Post claimed that the PropOrNot “executive director” had spoken on the condition of anonymity “to avoid being targeted by Russia’s legions of skilled hackers.” To be clear, neither Consortiumnews nor Robert Parry ever “supported Trump,” as the above anonymous quote claims. Something interesting, however, did seem to be happening in terms of Consortiumnews’ readership in the early days of the Trump presidency, as could be gleaned from some of the comments left on articles and social media activity. It did appear for some time at least that a good number of Trump supporters were reading Consortiumnews, which could probably attributed to the fact that the website was one of the few outlets pushing back against both the “New Cold War” with Russia and the related story of “Russiagate,” which Bob didn’t even like referring to as a “scandal.” (As an editor, he preferred to use the word “controversy” on the website, because as far as he was concerned, the allegations against Trump and his supposed “collusion” with Russia did not rise to the level of actual scandals such as Watergate or Iran-Contra.) In his view, the perhaps understandable hatred of Trump felt by many Americans – both inside and outside the Beltway – had led to an abandonment of old-fashioned rules of journalism and standards of fairness, which should be applied even to someone like Donald Trump. “On a personal note, I faced harsh criticism even from friends of many years for refusing to enlist in the anti-Trump ‘Resistance,’” Bob wrote in his final article for Consortiumnews. “The argument was that Trump was such a unique threat to America and the world that I should join in finding any justification for his ouster,” he said. “Some people saw my insistence on the same journalistic standards that I had always employed somehow a betrayal.” He marveled that even senior editors in the mainstream media treated the unproven Russiagate allegations as flat fact. “No skepticism was tolerated and mentioning the obvious bias among the never-Trumpers inside the FBI, Justice Department and intelligence community was decried as an attack on the integrity of the U.S. government’s institutions,” Bob wrote. “Anti-Trump ‘progressives’ were posturing as the true patriots because of their now unquestioning acceptance of the evidence-free proclamations of the U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies.” An Untimely End and the Future of Consortiumnews My dad’s untimely passing has come as a shock to us all, especially since up until a month ago, there was no indication whatsoever that he was sick in any way. He took good care of himself, never smoked, got regular check-ups, exercised, and ate well. The unexpected health issues starting with a mild stroke Christmas Eve and culminating with his admission into hospice care several days ago offer a stark reminder that nothing should be taken for granted. And as many Consortiumnews readers have eloquently pointed out in comments left on recent articles regarding Bob’s health, it also reminds us that his brand of journalism is needed today more than ever. “We need free will thinkers like you who value the truth based on the evidence and look past the group think in Washington to report on the real reasons for our government’s and our media’s actions which attempt to deceive us all,” wrote, for example, “FreeThinker.” “Common sense and integrity are the hallmarks of Robert Parry’s journalism. May you get better soon for you are needed more now then ever before,” wrote “T.J.” “We need a new generation of reporters, journalists, writers, and someone always being tenacious to follow up on the story,” added “Tina.” As someone who has been involved with this website since its inception – as a writer, an editor and a reader – I concur with these sentiments. Readers should rest assured that despite my dad’s death, every effort will be made to ensure that the website will continue going strong. Indeed, I think that everyone involved with this project wants to uphold the same commitment to truth-telling without fear or favor that inspired Bob and his heroes like George Seldes, I.F. Stone, and Thomas Paine. That commitment can be seen in my dad’s pursuit of stories such as those mentioned above, but also so many others – including his investigations into the financial relationship of the influential Washington Times with the Unification Church cult of Rev. Sun Myung Moon, the truth behind the Nixon campaign’s alleged efforts to sabotage President Lyndon Johnson’s Paris peace talks with Vietnamese leaders in 1968, the reality of the chemical attack in Syria in 2013, and even detailed examinations of the evidence behind the so-called “Deflategate” controversy that he felt unfairly branded his favorite football team, the New England Patriots, as cheaters. Reviewing these journalistic achievements, it becomes clear that there are few stories that have slipped under Consortiumnews.com’s radar, and that the historical record is far more complete thanks to this website and Bob’s old-fashioned approach to journalism. But besides this deeply held commitment to independent journalism, it should also be recalled that, ultimately, Bob was motivated by a concern over the future of life on Earth. As someone who grew up at the height of the Cold War, he understood the dangers of allowing tensions and hysteria to spiral out of control, especially in a world such as ours with enough nuclear weapons to wipe out all life on the planet many times over. As the United States continues down the path of a New Cold War, my dad would be pleased to know that he has such committed contributors who will enable the site to remain the indispensable home for independent journalism that it has become, and continue to push back on false narratives that threaten our very survival. Thank you all for your support. In lieu of flowers, Bob’s family asks you to please consider making a tax-deductible donation to the Consortium for Independent Journalism. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 20745 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 20897 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 14261 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 13427 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 21612 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.png Type: image/png Size: 4573 bytes Desc: not available URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jan 30 13:50:18 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 13:50:18 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] UI Greenlights Chief Illiniwaks! Message-ID: >From today's News-Gazoo page A-6: "State Farm Center will be adopting a new security policy that will affect what can be brought inside the arena....it won't preclude fans from bringing in a costume if they want to dress up like the Chief... said spokeswoman Robin Kaler." So in other words, the University of Illinois has just given the Official Green Light for large numbers of bigots, racists and idiots to dress up like Chief Illiniwak in State Farm Center and presumably the same policy will be applied to football games in Memorial Stadium and elsewhere on campus in order to desecrate everything American Indians hold Dear and Sacred on University of Illinois Property with the official approval of the University of Illinois. Fab. 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 davegreen84 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 30 14:04:45 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 14:04:45 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Carl's letter from yesterday's N-G References: <455831953.3323870.1517321085852.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <455831953.3323870.1517321085852@mail.yahoo.com> Dems fail to seize on U.S. exploitation The congressional Democrats posturing around the “Dreamers” and government shutdown are running a zombie Hillary Clinton campaign. After 40 years of growing and accelerating inequality in America, the HRC campaign tried to build a majority by pretending that social distress was the result of discrimination. Trump, almost by accident, expressed the real cause: exploitation. He was the first major party presidential candidate to attack — however incoherently — the neoliberal (and neocon) policies that characterized all administrations from Carter’s on. How right he was is demonstrated by the furious reaction of the political establishment — which has had the effect of ensuring that the Trump administration continues the neolib and neocon policies of the previous administration (more war and more inequality) — not by defending those polices openly (which would court “populist” opposition), but by furiously attacking his character (to the extent of the Russiagate/“Putin’s puppet” fantasy). With the Dreamers, the Democrats have found a small aggrieved group whose (real) grievances they can champion, while they cooperate with the Republicans in support of widespread exploitative policies — flat wages and the lack of social supports (health care, education, etc.) taken for granted in other countries. C.G. ESTABROOK Champaign -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Tue Jan 30 14:34:05 2018 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 08:34:05 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The US Treasury's 'Kremlin List' References: <2018119230.279279281517321405283.JavaMail.app@rbg43.atlis1> Message-ID: <571836F6-65D2-4F4F-B2A1-B1F8C446E5FE@gmail.com> https://www.rt.com/news/417385-us-kremlin-list-russia/ Putin’s response: “The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on” (Along the BRI, as elsewhere…) > > If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view . > > January 30, 2018 > > Daily News Brief > > > TOP OF THE AGENDA > > Kremlin Condemns U.S. Roster of Russian Elite > > The Kremlin has condemned a list published by the U.S. Treasury of more than two hundred Russian businesspeople and officials whom the United States says benefit from their close relationships ( FT ) with the government of Russian President Vladimir Putin. > > The Treasury was required to compile the list, which was released late on Monday, after Congress passed legislation in August to impose sanctions on Iran, North Korea, and Russia. The individuals named in the report are not subject to new sanctions (BBC) , but the Treasury said it could use the report to decide on future sanctions. The move could further strain relations with Russia, which called the list a roster of "enemies" of the United States ( WSJ ) . > > ANALYSIS > > "The minimal sanctions applied thus far have failed to send a sufficiently strong message [to Moscow]," Robert D. Blackwill and Philip H. Gordon write for Foreign Affairs. > > "All in all, the report is disappointing in its lack of insight, reading as a 'who is who' of the Russian political and business establishment, without any attempt to establish whether any of them are actually involved in corruption or any activity detrimental to U.S. interests," writes Alina Ryzhonkova for the Moscow Times. > > "Russia's political war against the West has been going strong for decades and shows no signs of abating," Alina Polyakova writes for Axios. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jan 30 15:29:17 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 15:29:17 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] A plea to fellow Americans to please wake up Message-ID: [Go to the profile of Rich Whitney] Rich WhitneyFollow Rich Whitney is an attorney, actor, disk jockey, environmental and peace activist, and former Green Party candidate for Illinois governor — among other things. Jan 27 My Fellow Americans: Please Wake Up Day after day, year after year, your government murders people and sows terror and misery on the people of the Middle East and Africa — while most of you do nothing to stop it. [https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*DCGJN6jFJwBpEeW0S-SV2g.jpeg] Your Tax Dollars at Work: Civilian Casualties of Coalition Airstrike Near Village of Duaij, Syria, Nov. 11, 2017 On January 13, 2018, warplanes for the U.S.-led Coalition in Syria, fired missiles on Hajin city, in the eastern suburbs of Deir Ez-Zour of that devastated country, killing five civilians. According to the Syrian Network for Human Rights, their names were Matrouk al Saleh and his wife, Bashar al-Saleh, Yasser Shaker Al Ismail and Abdul Qadir Shaker Al Ismail. I’m guessing that most people reading this article had no idea that this occurred. For the next several days after this killing, Americans who try to follow the “news,” including many who identify with the Left, were mostly discussing other topics. The most prominent at that time? An anonymous woman’s description of a bad sexual encounter with comic actor Aziz Ansari. The issue of sexual assault, sexual harassment and other misogynistic and predatory behavior towards women is without question a serious matter, so I understand why this was a subject worthy of discussion, as people debated where his alleged acts fell on the spectrum of evil. But isn’t blowing people up with a missile kind of evil, too? When are we going to talk about that evil? Does it not deserve at least equal time? The fault for this state of affairs does not lie entirely with the broad public. The corporate media in this country still tend to set the agenda for what it annoyingly calls the “national conversation.” The talking heads discuss Aziz Ansari, so most of us decide that that is what we need to be discussing as well. Ever since the Vietnam War, the human toll of our government’s acts of war simply don’t get much media coverage. But while the fault does not rest entirely with the general public, the responsibility does. Ultimately, we are responsible for what the government of the United States does in our name. We have a civic responsibility to find outand monitor what it is doing, oppose it when it commits harmful acts, and vote into office people who will put a stop to such harmful acts. To say that the American people have been falling down on the job in that respect would be a colossal understatement. Even when the media do cover new developments in U.S. wars, it doesn’t seem to generate much discussion. For example, on January 17th, in a speech at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson announced that the United States military would continue to occupy Syrian territory for an indefinite period, strongly implying that it would remain there until Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was removed from office. A few weeks earlier, U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis casually announcedthat he expected to see a larger U.S. civilian presence in Syria, including contractors and diplomats, to join the at least 2,000 U.S. troops currently occupying a slice of that sovereign nation, despite the flagrant illegality of their presence there. In interviewing Mattis, National Public Radio played its now familiar role as a cheerleader for neoliberal interventionist policies while pretending to engage in objective reporting. It claimed with a straight face that the U.S. was busy “stabilizing Syria,” echoing Mattis’s assertion that the troops’ role would be to protect the diplomats and contractors, “not only from any Islamic State fighters but potentially from Syrian government forces.” It didn’t see fit to mention that the U.S. presence in Syria violated international law. Where were the expressions of outrage over this? Where was the public debate over whether trying to overthrow the government of Syria — and risking a wider, possible apocalyptic war with Russia — was in the best interest of the American people? Perhaps I missed something, but neither of these pronouncements appeared to draw a whimper of protest, or even much reaction, from a single one of our so-called “representatives” in Congress, and they received precious little reaction from the news media, commentators or the general public. If there was one campaign promise that President Trump made that actually deserved support from Americans across the political spectrum, it was his promise to “pursue a new foreign policy that finally learns from the mistakes of the past,” to “stop looking to topple regimes and overthrow governments.” What happened to that? Why aren’t Americans across the spectrum mad as hell about this betrayal — a betrayal that will end up costing American lives and American resources, as well as sow more murder, mayhem, misery — and create thousands of more refugees and future enemies of the United States? Granted, the mirror that the corporate media hold up to society is a distorted one. Some voices on the Left are calling attention to the utterly venal nature of the new Syrian land grab, as well as our foreign policy generally. Lack of mass discussion and mass action does not necessarily signify mass approval of our nation’s ongoing wars. There may be a lot more of us concerned about or opposed to war than we think there are. But there is no gainsaying the fact that not enough of us are talking about war, not enough of us are involved in the peace movement, not enough of us are demanding that our nation cease acting as the world’s number one murderous, criminal nation. Our nation has now been at war for over 16 straight years, and, counting the use of surrogate forces, we’ve been pretty close to a state of constant war since the Korean War. In 2016 alone, we dropped at least 26,171 bombs or other ordnance on seven Middle East and African nations — Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, and Syria. By some estimates, the number was over 30,000 — and the Trump administration had already eclipsed that figure, with sickening numbers of civilian casualties, by September of 2017. Year after year, Congress blithely writes the checks, funded by our current and future tax dollars, robbing us of the ability to meet pressing needs at home, while three different administrations repeatedly violated both international law and the Constitution in ordering military attacks in other countries. Yet it appears that there have been far more expressions of outrage over the Trump administration’s restrictions on refugees from Muslim countries entering the United States than over the acts of war committed by the prior administrations that created millions of refugees in the first place. One can justly describe this Ameri-centric myopia as “imperial privilege.” Too many of us sit in the relative comfort of the wealthiest nation on earth, waxing indignant about various domestic injustices and policy choices, while not giving a damn about the latest poor villager in Yemen, Iraq, Syria or Libya who just had his or her home and loved ones incinerated by a U.S. bomb or drone strike. It is the worst possible manifestation of “out of sight, out of mind.” This is unconscionable — and it has to end. The American people need to take heed of the criminal conduct of its government and stand up against it — and against the War Machine and ruling-class interests that benefit from, and perpetuate war. Accordingly, in the interest of poking as many of my fellow Americans as I possibly can in the posterior, with a pitchfork, I take this opportunity to remind my fellow Americans of the three “I”s: War is immoral, illegal and idiotic. At the conclusion, I will also provide some useful information about what you can do to put an end to war and the Warfare State. War is Immoral I should not have to dwell on this point, but it bears repeating: except in cases of actual self-defense, acts of war are intrinsically immoral. None of these nations — Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, and Syria — ever attacked the United States, or even threatened to attack the United States. It bears reminding people of the origins of our now 16-year war in Afghanistan — a war with no end in sight, a war that now has our nation supporting a military run by child sex abusers. Even assuming that Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda were responsible for the 9/11 attacks (not going to get into the whole 9/11 Truth debate here, just saying it is open to question), the nation of Afghanistan did not attack the United States, and it is debatable whether it was truly “harboring” bin Laden and Al Qaeda. It must be recalled that the Taliban offered to turn over bin Laden if the United States had simply provided some evidence of his responsibility for the 9/11 attacks. Yet the United States rejected those offers and instead carried out a plan to invade Afghanistan that had already been prepared prior to 9/11, invading an entire sovereign nation on the pretext that it was trying to capture one person and his followers. How can that possibly justify continuing to occupy and continue a war on behalf of a surrogate government in that country, years after bin Laden has died? None of these ongoing wars have been waged for the purpose of making the United States safer or more secure. They cannot possibly be justified as a war on “terrorism” or terrorists, since the net effect of these wars have been to create more terrorists who hate the United States. Indeed, sometimes the United States has intentionally funneled arms to terrorists in pursuit of its goals of “regime change” — in Libya and Syria, for example. While it is beyond the scope of the present article to offer comprehensive proof, it should be clear to anyone who seriously examines the question that the real motives underlying U.S. war-making are to control the petroleum, other mineral and other resources, labor and markets of other nations, and to attain strategic objectives related to that control. For example, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has made a convincing argument that the real motives underlying the U.S. war in Syria were to facilitate the construction of a natural gas pipeline from Qatar through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and Turkey — a plan rejected by the Assad government. In Libya, the U.S. and France, primarily, were after that country’s vast oil and gold reserves, and they wanted to thwart Muammar Qaddafi’s plans to establish a pan-African currency based on the Libyan golden Dinar, which threatened Western monetary interests. An equally important motive for war, of course, is to continue the monetary pipeline from American taxpayers to the behemoth military-industrial complex, whose major players invest millions of dollars in influence peddlingto keep billions flowing into their coffers. Whether one’s moral precepts come from a faith tradition or secular humanitarian principles, I submit that it is the height of immorality, to: · commit acts of war against other sovereign nations; · inflict terror from the sky and on land, killing well over 1.3 million people, many of them innocent civilians; · wound countless others, · create millions of refugees; · sacrifice the lives and mental or physical well-being of countless thousands of American service men and women in the process, and · do all of this for the purpose of enriching and empowering an already obscenely wealthy and powerful U.S. ruling class. War Is Illegal Every single one of these acts of war are in flagrant violation of well-established international law, and under the principles of non-intervention that our nation once championed in the Nuremberg Tribunals following World War II. Article VI, paragraph 2 of our Constitution makes treaties to which the United States is a signatory a part of the “Supreme law of the land.” In addition, section 18.22 of the Department of Defense Law of War Manual, like its predecessor, section 498 of the U.S. Army Field Manual 27–10, holds individuals, be they soldiers, civilians or officials, responsible and liable for violations of international law, even if domestic law does not specifically forbid their actions. As commander in chief of the armed forces, the president is as much subject to that proscription as any person required to carry out his orders. One landmark treaty that is part of the “Supreme law of the land” is the Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928 (46 Stat. 2343), which made war illegal, and to which the United States was, and still is, a party. The terms of the treaty were short and to the point, and essentially covered in two sentences, found in Articles I and II: “ARTICLE I “The High Contracting Parties solemnly declare in the names of their respective peoples that they condemn recourse to war for the solution of international controversies, and renounce it, as an instrument of national policy in their relations with one another. “ARTICLE II “The High Contracting Parties agree that the settlement or solution of all disputes or conflicts of whatever nature or of whatever origin they may be, which may arise among them, shall never be sought except by pacific means.” Although not all nations in the world have signed the Pact, Article I makes clear that it binds ratifying nations to reject war categorically, and not merely in their relations with other signatories. The Pact formed the basis for the concept of “crimes against peace,” upon which the prosecution of German and Japanese war criminals in Nuremberg and Tokyo were based. Shortly after the surrender of the Germans and Japanese, ending World War II, the U.S., France, Great Britain and the Soviet Union established an International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg for the purpose of prosecuting Nazi officials for crimes against peace and war crimes. In entering the agreement establishing the Tribunal, chief prosecutor and U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson declared: “We must make clear to the Germans that the wrong for which their fallen leaders are on trial is not that they lost the war, but that they started it. And we must not allow ourselves to be drawn into a trial of the causes of the war, for our position is that no grievances or policies will justify resort to aggressive war. It is utterly renounced and condemned as an instrument of policy.” According to the Tribunal’s Charter, Article 6, the Allies claimed jurisdiction to try the officials responsible for the war and how it was conducted for three categories of crimes: crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. It defined “crimes against peace” as “planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing.” These same principles were later recognized as international law by the International Law Commission of the United Nations in 1950. In his monumental opening statement to the Tribunal, Jackson noted that the Tribunal was “implementing the Kellogg-Briand Pact,” thus recognizing the Pact as one of the legal foundations for the Charter, still in force despite the rampant violations of its provisions that had just transpired. Jackson’s opening statement should be required reading for everyone who aspires to live in a civilized and peaceful world. In words that should send a chill down the spine of every American, he wrote: “Unfortunately, the nature of these crimes is such that both prosecution and judgment must be by victor nations over vanquished foes. . . . The former high station of these defendants, the notoriety of their acts, and the adaptability of their conduct to provoke retaliation make it hard to distinguish between the demand for a just and measured retribution, and the unthinking cry for vengeance which arises from the anguish of war. It is our task, so far as humanly possible, to draw the line between the two. We must never forget that the record on which we judge these defendants today is the record on which history will judge us tomorrow. To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well.” (Emphasis added.) He added: “[T]he ultimate step in avoiding periodic wars, which are inevitable in a system of international lawlessness, is to make statesmen responsible to law. And let me make clear that while this law is first applied against German aggressors, the law includes, and if it is to serve a useful purpose it must condemn aggression by any other nations, including those which sit here now in judgment. We are able to do away with domestic tyranny and violence and aggression by those in power against the rights of their own people only when we make all men answerable to the law. This trial represents mankind’s desperate effort to apply the discipline of the law to statesmen who have used their powers of state to attack the foundations of the world’s peace and to commit aggressions against the rights of their neighbors. “The usefulness of this effort to do justice is not to be measured by considering the law or your judgment in isolation. This trial is part of the great effort to make the peace more secure. One step in this direction is the United Nations organization, which may take joint political action to prevent war if possible, and joint military action to insure that any nation which starts a war will lose it. This Charter and this Trial, implementing the Kellogg-Briand Pact, constitute another step in the same direction and juridical action of a kind to ensure that those who start a war will pay for it personally.”(Emphasis added.) In its judgment on the original trial, rendered September 30, 1945 (at page 427), the Tribunal famously declared: “To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.” In 1945, the newly formed United Nations incorporated the principles of the Kellogg-Briand Pact into its Charter. Article II, section 3 declares that: “All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.” Section 4 adds that: “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.” Section 7 forbids the United Nations itself from intervening “in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state.” Importantly, Article 51 of the UN Charter departed a bit from the Kellogg-Briand Pact, in recognizing the inherent right of self-defense, stating: Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security. Note, however, that the right of self-defense is limited under Article 51 to circumstances in which “an armed attack occurs.” It does not allow preemptive strikes against perceived or presumed enemies, let alone attacks against other sovereign nations on the grounds, or pretexts, that they are in some way complicit with, or aren’t doing enough to oppose, non-state antagonists like ISIS, al-Qaeda, or the Taliban. The United Nations Charter was ratified by the United States on August 8, 1945, taking effect on October 31st of that year — thus becoming part of the binding law of our own country. Yet our government has been rampantly violating its provisions, along with those of the Kellogg-Briand Pact and the Nuremberg Charter, for over 16 consecutive years, without even acknowledging the brazenly illegal nature of its conduct. Once again: Afghanistan never attacked the United States. Therefore, the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan was, and remains, illegal under established international law and under treaties to which the United States is a party — thus making it unconstitutional. Saddam Hussein never attacked the United States. Therefore, the invasion and occupation of Iraq was, and remains, illegal and unconstitutional for the same reasons. Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Libya and Syria never attacked the United States. Therefore, the drone attacks and aerial bombardments in these countries were all illegal and unconstitutional. I do not claim to be an expert in international law, but I know how to read and interpret law, the plain language of these texts are clear, and in asserting that these acts of war violate international law, I have found that I am in very, verygood company. When an individual intentionally or knowingly kills another individual without legal justification, we have a word for it — murder. When a national government, composed of individuals, intentionally or knowingly kills people in other nations without legal justification, we call it war. War is nothing but systematic mass murder carried out by governments. And that is what our government has been doing and is continuing to do, as you read this. In the face of these clear and continuing violations of international law, the advocates and apologists for these military attacks have essentially had two responses: They either simply ignore the fact that these military operations are illegal, or they produce utterly spurious legal “rationales” for the attacks, often based on the trendy but easily manipulated international doctrine known as the “responsibility to protect.” In Libya, for example, the “responsibility to protect” doctrine provided the window dressing for U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973, authorizing the imposition of a “no-fly zone” in Libya, predicated on the baseless charge that it was needed to prevent a “bloodbath.” The United States and NATO immediately used the Resolution as an excuse to engage in an indiscriminate bombing campaign, going well beyond what the Resolution authorized. Then the goal seamlessly morphed, with nary a whimper from Congress, into a campaign for “regime change,” overthrowing the government of Muammar Qaddafi — with utterly disastrous consequences. We are now seeing the same disaster play out in Syria, as the “fight against ISIS” was transformed — both under Obama and now Trump — into a war and occupation aimed at overthrowing the sovereign government of Bashar al-Assad. A common objection to the legal case against war is that there is no international body to enforce international law. The argument goes something like this: “The United Nations is just a joke, so to cite to the Kellogg-Briand Pact, Nuremberg, the U.N. Charter, etc., is just being naïve, or quaint. The reality is that nations go to war when they need or want to. These laws have not been enforced and are a dead letter — so never mind about international law.” A somewhat related argument is the American exceptionalism argument — we are the only country with the military ability to impose order, so we have a responsibility to lead the free world, oppose bad dictators and terrorists, etc. None of these arguments hold water. The fact that international law has not been well enforced by the United Nations is largely a reflection of U.S. dominance of that institution. The other nations of the world are only willing to go so far in challenging U.S. hegemony, in the face of our nation’s intimidating nuclear capability and other military power. But the fact of U.S. bullying and the absence of international enforcement of international law is a problem to be overcome; it does not defeat the legal principle. Imagine if we applied the same argument to domestic criminal law: If a serial murderer got away with numerous murders, year after year, would anyone seriously make the argument that, because the law was not effectively enforced against that individual, murder should no longer be considered a crime? As to the American exceptionalism argument, that is mere self-serving nonsense, belied by the fact that the United States itself rains terror from the skies, creates some terrorists and supports others, and militarily supports nearly three-fourths of the world’s dictators. There is a way to enforce international law: We, the people of the United States, joining together with other peoples of the world, must demand it. This has been done before. The Kellogg-Briand Pact itself came about when working people in the U.S. and around the world, horrified by the devastation of World War I, gathered together into a powerful “outlawry” movement to demand that war be outlawed. Today, we can, and must, build a new “outlawry” movement to put a halt to our own nation’s violations of international law, and begin building an effective international system of justice that can enforce that law. War, and the Warfare State, Is Idiotic As if the moral and legal arguments against war were not compelling enough, war — at least from a working-class perspective — does not even make economic sense. Thus far, our nation has expended at least $2.1 trillion on the so-called “War on Terror,” in all of its manifestations, since 2001. That is in addition to the already whopping base budget (currently at $640 billion) for the misnamed Department of Defense, a sum greater than the military spending budgets of the next 8 most militarized nations — China, Saudi Arabia, Russia, United Kingdom, India, France, and Japan — combined. War is a losing economic proposition for the American worker. On April 16, 1953, years before he warned us of the dangers of the military-industrial complex, former President Dwight D. Eisenhower declaimed: “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.” Eisenhower’s common-sense warning notwithstanding, the military-industrial complex, with the active and ongoing assistance of both Democrats and Republicans in Congress, has become a firmly affixed parasite incessantly sucking the blood of the U.S. economy. Virtually, if not literally, every Congressional district derives some imagined benefit from having either a military base or military contractor or sub-contractor operating within its territory, providing employment. This allows members of Congress to posture as delivering the pork to their constituents every time they vote in favor of each year’s defense authorization bill — as all but 89 Representatives and 11 Senators did last year, in approving an expenditure substantially larger than what President Trump requested. (Even those who voted against the authorization bills, including senators Marco Rubio and Lindsey Graham, did not necessarily do so because they wanted to spend less money). I use the phrase “imagined benefit” advisedly — because while it is true that many Americans are employed by the military sector, either directly or indirectly, the same hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars, if expended on just about anything else, would create far more employment opportunities for Americans, while also allowing Americans to benefit from the improved infrastructure, education, health care, social services, etc., resulting from the shift in spending. This was demonstrated by University of Massachusetts economists Robert Pollin and Heidi Garrett-Peltier several years ago, in their analysis, The U.S. Employment Effects of Military and Domestic Spending Priorities: 2011 Update. As they summarize their findings: “[I]n terms of assessing the employment effects of military spending on the economy, the most important question is not the absolute number of jobs that are created by spending, for example, $1 billion. It is rather whether spending $1 billion on the military creates a greater or lesser number of jobs relative to spending the same $1 billion on alternative public purposes, such as education, health care or the green economy, or having consumers spend that amount of money in any way they choose. “As we show, . . . spending on the military is a relatively poor source of job creation. Indeed, our research finds that $1 billion in spending on the military will generate about 11,200 jobs. By contrast, the employment effects of spending in alternative areas will be 15,100 for household consumption, 16,800 for the green economy, 17,200 for health care, and 26,700 for education. That is, investments in the green economy, health care and education will produce between about 50–140 percent more jobs than if the same amount of money were spent by the Pentagon. “We do also find that jobs created by military spending provide relatively high average wages and benefits in comparison with these other sectors of the economy. . . . Nevertheless, because spending on clean energy, health care, and education produces substantially more jobs overall per $1 billion in spending, it also creates more good jobs. This includes jobs paying within a mid-range, which we define as between $32,000 — $64,000 per year, as well as high-paying jobs, i.e. those paying over $64,000.” Of course, the economic argument against the Warfare State is, at the same time, a profoundly moral one. As the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. maintained in his famous Beyond Vietnam address at the Riverside Church exactly one year before his death: “A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.” By that measure, our nation, spiritually speaking, must now be a decaying corpse. However, I’m certain that King would have agreed that a spiritual resurrection is always possible — if enough good people show the resolve and make the requisite effort to change course. War: It’s immoral, illegal and idiotic. It robs us of the monetary and human resources that could be utilized to provide gainful employment for all, quality health-care and education for all, restore health to the global eco-system, construct a first-class transportation system and other infrastructure, provide quality services for those unable to work, and provide quality retirement benefits for all. Its only beneficiaries are the war profiteers and the corporate elite who profit from the domination of other nations’ resources, labor and markets. It may not be the only obstacle to progress — a persuasive case can be made that capitalism itself is the progenitor of the warfare state, and therefore is the larger obstacle. But, whatever one’s views on that question, mobilizing working people, both nationally and internationally, to categorically oppose war and demand real enforcement of international law banning it, would be a tremendous step in the right direction. Get Involved! Take a Stand Against War! There are a lot of organizations doing great work to educate and mobilize working people into a real movement to do just that. Here are some of the leading organizations doing just that: • Green Party of the United States and its various state affiliates. Protesting against war and demanding its end is necessary but not sufficient. If we want to end war and transform our economy into one that will be geared to meeting human needs, we need to get control of our federal government, not just protest its actions after the fact. That means electing genuine peace candidates to Congress, and ultimately the presidency. A U.S. government actually devoted to peace and international law would be a tremendous stride toward the goal of ending war once and for all. The Green Party and its candidates do not accept money from corporations, and the party is founded on nonviolence, as one of its core principles of unity. In addition to running candidates for office, Green Party activists, including myself, are deeply involved in the peace movement. Some of us interact with the movement through the Green Party Peace Action Committee (Facebook page here.) • The United National Antiwar Coalition is, in my estimation, the most active and principled of the nationwide peace organizations currently operating in the United States. Some of the same organizations and leaders have also recently formed a companion coalition focusing on closing the nearly 1,000 military bases that the U.S. currently has operating in dozens of countries around the world. The two coalitions recently issued a call for a day of mass actions against war, with a target date of April 14th. Please check the UNAC and Coalition Against U.S. Foreign Military Bases websites periodically for updates! • World Beyond War unites peace advocates around the world, provides great resources and information, and has the potential to become the real international movement for peace that is so badly needed. • The most oppressed sections of the working class are those who suffer most from war and have the most to gain from peace. The Black Alliance for Peace, led by longtime human rights advocate Ajamu Baraka, is doing great work drawing that connection and providing useful information, for workers of all colors, on a regular basis. * U.S. Labor Against the War represents a growing body of organized workers who recognize that it is in workers’ material interest to win the struggle for peace. It played an instrumental role in winning the AFL-CIO to that position, a major breakthrough largely ignored by the corporate media. * CODEPINK is a women-led grassroots organization working to end U.S. wars and militarism, support peace and human rights initiatives, and redirect our tax dollars into healthcare, education, green jobs and other life-affirming programs. Join us! For other useful news and information, some good sources to check on a regular basis include: davidswanson.org, antiwar.com, Consortium News, Counterpunch, airwars.org, Alternet’s Grayzone Project, the Costs of War page of the National Priorities Project, Information Clearing House and A Closer Look at Syria. Getting engaged in the struggle for peace is a matter of self-interest and survival of our species. There are plenty of productive ways to get involved. Please join the many who are already committed to the cause and help us reach critical mass. A much better world is possible if enough of us make the effort to create it. Rich Whitney is an attorney, actor, disk jockey, political commentator, environmental and peace activist, Co-Chair of the Green Party Peace Action Committee, and former Green Party candidate for governor. He also supports democracy and would like to see its establishment in the United States. * Syria * War * Peace * Peacebuilding * Imperialism -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jan 30 15:51:42 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 15:51:42 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] First City in the Developing World to run out of water, and what that entails.... Message-ID: Cape Town, South Africa to become first city in the developed world to run out of water By Genevieve Leigh 29 January 2018 Authorities in South Africa’s drought stricken city of Cape Town are predicting that only 74 days are left until it becomes the first major city in the developed world to run out of water. The countdown to what is being called “Day Zero” is based on calculations for when the water supply in the dams will collectively drop below 13.5 percent, rendering the water system unusable. While the city has been in a severe drought for three years, the reality of the impending shutdown hit home on January 18 when the mayor announced in a press conference that, “We have reached a point of no return.” The water level currently stands at only 17 percent. Over the last year, increasingly drastic measures have been taken to delay the water shutoff. Collecting the water used during a shower—known as “grey” water—for reuse, for example, has become common practice. Western Cape Premier Helen Zille said in a statement last week, “No one should be showering more than twice a week at this stage. You need to save water as if your life depends on it because it does.” Dirty cars, and oily hair from limited showers, are now symbols of social responsibility. Signs litter the city reminding residents, “Every drop counts!” and the new slogan adopted for restroom use has become: “If it’s yellow let it mellow, if it’s brown flush it down.” A bucket and jug are essential items for completing every basic task that requires water, including the 90 second showers residents are discouraged from taking. Businesses which provide alternative water sources, such as borehole drilling and rainwater tank suppliers, have waiting lists running into months. The water scarcity has affected nearly every aspect of life. The burden of the crisis has been placed squarely on the backs of the working class, who are callously reprimanded on a regular basis by local authorities. The attitude of the local ruling class was best expressed at a recent press conference by Mayor Patricia de Lille. “Despite our urging for months, 60 percent of Capetonians are callously using more than 87 liters per day,” she stated, ominously adding, “We can no longer ask people to stop wasting water. We must force them.” As “Day Zero” approaches, efforts by local officials to avoid the shutdown have taken on a more frenzied and reckless character. At the height of these measures is the extraordinary move to make public the identities of all customers who paid admission-of-guilt fines or who appeared in court regarding contravention of water restrictions, which is planned for release today. This action can only be interpreted as a deliberate effort by the local government to turn workers against each other by inciting a lynch mob mentality under incredibly tense life and death conditions. The desperation produces more extreme measures with each passing day. As of February 1, Capetonians will be limited to 50 liters (about 13 gallons) of water per person a day. To put this in perspective, it is estimated that the average American uses 88 gallons of water per day at home. If a person were to take a 10-minute shower, it would use 100 liters of water—twice a person’s daily water allowance starting February 1. Meeting the city’s new limit of only 50 liters a day will require sacrificing not only basic amenities of modern life, but could also lead to a major public health crisis. The average day living on 50 liters of water would require individuals to limit themselves to one shower of no longer than 2 minutes, flushing the toilet only once per day, washing dishes or doing laundry in a sink only once a day, only washing their hands twice a day, and cooking only once. The experiences of workers in Flint, Michigan, who have been living with poisoned water for almost four years, have shown concretely the potentially devastating physical and mental consequences that come from living without access to water. Diseases and infections long thought eradicated from modern society reemerged as residents became frightened to wash their hands. Teachers began to notice the foul smell coming from children who were too scared or unable to shower because of the water quality at their homes. These potential health risks and more for workers and youth in Cape Town are immense, though very few if any official reports on the subject have surfaced. Thousands of workers living in the poorest areas of the city are already living with extremely limited access to water. In historically poor neighborhoods, such as Blue Downs on the Cape Flats, communal taps are used where people wash clothes outside and carry buckets of water to shack dwellings. How these communities, which are already on the edge of existence, will survive past “Day Zero” is yet to be determined. According to the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), if the city does go through with the disaster plan and shuts off the water, service will only be turned on again when the dams recover, which could take several months. Politicians have publicly bickered over alleged failures to offset the looming disaster. Most reports say the crisis was brought on by explosive population growth over the last two decades, coupled with the region’s most extreme drought in over a century. While the cause of the water crisis is being attributed to mostly “natural” causes, responsibility for the inept handling of the situation lies fully with the local and federal government. When the city arrives at “Day Zero” on April 12, the taps to residential supplies will be turned off, leaving about 4 million residents reliant on daily queues at collection points across the city. Each resident will then be allocated only 25 liters (just over 6 gallons) of water a day. Unconfirmed reports suggest that some central and downtown areas could be exempt from the cut-off for “the sake of tourism and business.” The ongoing water crisis has vastly intensified already explosive social relations in the city. More than half of South Africans are reported as living below the upper bound poverty line (UBPL) in 2015, with 55.5 percent of the population living on less than 992 rand (about $75) per person per month. The ruling class, acutely aware of the threat of massive social upheavals which the water crisis will undoubtedly set off, is busy preparing their police and military forces to crush any resistance from the working class under the well-worn guise of “maintaining order.” While plans for how water and other resources will be provided to the people after “Day Zero” are vague and hard to find, the plans for who will guard and dispense the resources have clearly been given much thought. Premier Zille announced last week that a strategy meeting was held between top generals and the cabinet on how the armed forces would keep the province “secured.” Zille’s spokesperson reported that the strategy plan included the deployment of forces at the 200 planned water distribution centers across the city, regular patrol units, and a 24-hour monitoring of crime hotspots. Once “Day Zero” arrives, all water reserves will travel with heavily armed guards. The impending conditions of life in Cape Town after “Day Zero” read like a post-apocalyptic novel. Imagine for a moment what the daily life of a worker will be like: He or she will line up for hours with jugs and bottles to collect water for the family to drink, wash, cook and clean, while armed men patrol their communities ready to violently suppress any sign of unrest or “disorder.” Modern society will be brought to a screeching halt as thousands if not millions of jobs are lost, and businesses and schools close their doors. Fire hydrants will be unusable in cases of emergency. Medical facilities, unable to clean their instruments or provide basic care that requires running water, will be thrown back nearly 100 years, if they are able to function at all. Access to the most basic necessity of life, clean safe water, is no longer a guarantee even in the most “advanced” capitalist society. In Martin County, Kentucky, workers have no water or only intermittent service because of the collapse of their aging water system. To add insult to injury, officials are demanding residents pay 49 percent more for water, which is laced with cancer-causing chemicals from coal mining and other industries. After nearly four years, residents in Flint continue to suffer the catastrophic consequences of lead contamination of their water, including a massive increase in fetal death rates, skin rashes, cancer, and even multiple deaths from legionnaires disease. In Puerto Rico, now four months after Hurricane María destroyed the island, half the population is surviving on bottled water and nearby creeks. Such is the state of the global capitalist system from Cape Town to Flint in the year 2018. Fight Google's censorship! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jan 30 19:14:40 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 19:14:40 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] My response to todays editorial related to the rally at the COL In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > The NG got it wrong in todays editorial related to the rally at the COL. They refer to those supporting Prof. Boyle and those protesting the Dean bringing Malcolm Stewart to speak at the COL, last week as “lemmings," and a “handful of naive and gullible students.” The majority were not only “not students,” they were those with years of involvement in political issues such as “immigrant rights,” “anti-war” and “support for labor.” > Many had years of experience teaching, or working within the system, many possessed Ph.D’s. Those who were students were clearly some of the best and brightest on campus, and all anyone had to do was listen to their speeches to know they were anything but “gullible or naive." > > There was no prevention of freedom of speech, no where was the “speaker” blocked, intimated or threatened. The protestors never entered the building, never blocked the pathway, and stayed in the courtyard away from the building. > > What the protestors insisted upon is their right to protest a speaker supporting an Administration focused on “banning immigrants, DACA, and Dreamers,” forcible round ups by ICE and ignoring sanctuary cities rights, with federal takeovers. As well as a ban on Muslims from those nations which the US is guilty of bombing and destroying. > We were opposing not just this episode, but previous episodes by the COL bringing speakers to influence students, who in another era, based upon US, law as well as International Law, would have been prosecuted as warmongers. I’m now referring to November 2016, one week before the election, Dean Amar bringing HRC’s drone advisor Harold Killer Koh, the “Killer” is his nickname within the beltway, because he supports drone killings. Promoting him as a “lawyer to emulate” while he promotes drone killings, is reprehensible. > > There is no such thing as “targeted killing” though the U of I COL would have one think so, based upon their program titled “The Legitimacy of Targeted Killing” in 2015, whereby Prof. Michael Moore, not only supported drone killing, but supported "torture,” based upon the fictional film “Zero Dark Thirty” as being an example of “sometimes its necessary, and it was effective when used by the KGB.” > . > Even the Pentagon does not support torture. See: the “Rules of Engagement” previous to those reconstructed in 2015. See: Andrew Cockburns: “Kill Chain” > > > > From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 30 22:05:27 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 22:05:27 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Freedom of Speech References: <417495937.3686419.1517349927218.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <417495937.3686419.1517349927218@mail.yahoo.com> >From the Angry Arab: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 I have said it before: Zionists are the biggest enemies of free speech in the US and Europe "The American Civil Liberties Union won an early victory today in its federal lawsuit arguing that a Kansas law requiring a public school educator to certify that she won’t boycott Israel violates her First Amendment rights. A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of the law while the case filed in October proceeds. It is the first ruling addressing a recent wave of laws nationwide aiming to punish people who boycott Israel. The law, which took effect on July 1, requires that any person or company that contracts with the state submit a written certification that they are “not currently engaged in a boycott of Israel.” The ACLU is also currently fighting a case filed in December against a similar law in Arizona." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 30 22:41:09 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 22:41:09 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Immigration, elitism, "reverse" racism References: <1590151654.3690722.1517352069245.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1590151654.3690722.1517352069245@mail.yahoo.com> If one reads David Brooks' column and scans the reader comments, it's clear that the relation between neoliberalism and immigration policy is poorly understood if at all, except in the case of relatively few commenters. It's also clear that "blaming the victim" has become increasingly applied to so-called red states and Trump voters, as if they could possibly have felt that Hillary Clinton was a preferable choice. Liberal classism/elitism is alive and well, justified by the fact that it is "white on white" racism or perhaps "immigrant on white" racism, and therefore apparently understood by its proponents as not racism at all, just urban vs. "rural." It's a big ideological mess, and hampers our thinking about how immigration policy has conformed to neoliberal dictates in a number of areas. Unfortunately, a Big Ten college town like this one is the last place that you would expect an honest and enlightened debate to occur, and it certainly has not, it is utterly taboo. This is personified, for example, by the exploitation of the Pakistani family who lost their son in Afghanistan by the Democratic Party. DG Opinion | The East Germans of the 21st Century | | | | | | | | | | | Opinion | The East Germans of the 21st Century David Brooks The ethnic model embraced by immigration restrictionists has been a failure. | | | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jan 30 23:59:40 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 23:59:40 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Freedom of Speech In-Reply-To: <417495937.3686419.1517349927218@mail.yahoo.com> References: <417495937.3686419.1517349927218.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <417495937.3686419.1517349927218@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I have said it before: Zionists are the biggest enemies of free speech in the US and Europe For sure. Look what the Champaign-Urbana Zionists did to Salaita, his wife and their baby. Fab. Francis 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-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of David Green via Peace-discuss Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 4:05 PM To: Peace-discuss List Subject: [Peace-discuss] Freedom of Speech From the Angry Arab: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 I have said it before: Zionists are the biggest enemies of free speech in the US and Europe "The American Civil Liberties Union won an early victory today in its federal lawsuit arguing that a Kansas law requiring a public school educator to certify that she won’t boycott Israel violates her First Amendment rights. A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of the law while the case filed in October proceeds. It is the first ruling addressing a recent wave of laws nationwide aiming to punish people who boycott Israel. The law, which took effect on July 1, requires that any person or company that contracts with the state submit a written certification that they are “not currently engaged in a boycott of Israel.” The ACLU is also currently fighting a case filed in December against a similar law in Arizona." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: ATT00001.txt URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jan 31 16:13:56 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 16:13:56 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Trumps State of the Union by Patrick Martin of the WSWS.ORG 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 » Trump’s State of the Union address: A spectacle of reaction and militarism By Patrick Martin 31 January 2018 US President Donald Trump’s first State of the Union address, delivered Tuesday night, was a festival of reaction and political filth. The speech dragged on for more than 80 minutes, interrupted by ovations from the assembled members of the Senate and House of Representatives. It was filled with paeans to the police and military (which won the particular support of Democrats), fascistic attacks on immigrants, and invocations of religion, patriotism and the American flag, culminating in howls of “USA! USA!” during the closing section of the address. The annual State of the Union speech has long since decayed into a hollow ritual, whose essential emptiness is an expression of the crisis and decay of American democracy, weighed down by militarism and rampant economic inequality. With Donald Trump, the real State of the Union is revealed, not by the endless torrent of lies fashioned by his speechwriters, or the people they exploited as human props, but in the persona of the president himself: the first billionaire to occupy the White House, preening over the signal accomplishment of his first year in office—trillions of dollars in tax breaks for corporations and the super-rich. In a speech that quickly received positive responses in the media, Trump cited the record-breaking rise in the stock market and the decision of major corporations to repatriate funds to the United States—since they can now do so virtually tax free—as though these would benefit American workers. However, Trump’s efforts to paint a portrait of a country on the rise, with living conditions improving, will not have fooled anyone. Only a few minutes after claiming that Americans have never had it so good, he noted that 64,000 people died of drug overdoses in America last year, a record number. This was one of his few concessions to social reality, which Trump used to demand increased police powers. Trump’s arrogant demeanor reflected something of the political conjuncture. The Democrats pretended to oppose the tax cut, but did nothing to stop it, because their most important social base, Wall Street, supported it enthusiastically. The Democrats pretended to fight for immigrant youth covered by the DACA program, but abandoned the effort after a two-day shutdown of the federal government. Trump has taken the measure of this toothless “opposition,” and feels strengthened accordingly. His State of the Union speech made no concessions whatsoever on immigration, with Trump elaborating on the plan released last week by the White House, which ties and onerous 12-year process of legalization for DACA-age immigrants to a raft of reactionary measures, including his wall along the US-Mexico border, a massive build-up of the Border Patrol and immigration police, and drastic cuts in legal immigration, limiting family reunification measures to spouses and minor children. Trump appealed to anti-immigrant prejudice with a grotesquely false depiction of immigrants as a threat to the jobs and even the lives of American workers, using the Salvadoran M-13 gang—a creation of the Los Angeles slums and the US prison system, not El Salvador—as the replacement for ISIS in US government scaremongering. Leading Democrats joined in the applause, especially when Trump praised the military, the police, the Border Patrol, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other repressive forces. This included a bipartisan standing ovation for Secretary of Defense James “Mad Dog” Mattis, who is preparing to execute Trump’s orders for nuclear war with North Korea. Only the intelligence agencies were left off the list, an omission that was the sole indication in Trump’s speech of the struggle raging within the American state between the White House and sections of the military-intelligence apparatus, which has taken the form of the Russia investigation. The Russia probe is the only issue which the congressional Democrats have fought on intransigently, voicing the demands of the CIA and Pentagon that there should be no change in the anti-Russian foreign policy stance adopted by the Obama administration during its second term. Last week the leading congressional Democrat, Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, called for incorporating into the new budget resolution, which must be passed by February 8 to prevent another federal shutdown, a provision to block Trump from firing special counsel Robert Mueller, who heads the Russia investigation. This came only days after Schumer dropped demands that the budget resolution include protection for DACA recipients. There is little point in attempting to provide a point-by-point rebuttal of the barefaced lies in Trump’s speech. He was describing America as it is seen by the billionaires, for whom, as he said, this seems the best of times, with stock prices and profits soaring, income and corporate taxes slashed, government regulations on business either not enforced or scrapped outright. On foreign policy, Trump said relatively little, but all of it was reactionary. He called for Congress to “fully fund our great military,” hailed US military operations in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, while announcing he had signed an executive order to keep open the US torture prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to house new prisoners seized in the “war on terror.” He insisted that alleged “terrorists” should be treated as “enemy combatants,” and made clear that the US would maintain and expand its network of detention and torture centers. He threatened Cuba, Venezuela and Iran, as well as the more than 100 countries that voted in the UN General Assembly to condemn the US recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. He cited North Korea as a nuclear threat to the United States and promised a further build-up of the US nuclear arsenal. The truly foul character of the speech, the media coverage, and the ceremony as a whole only testifies to the exclusion of any genuine opposition to the political and social agenda of corporate America. Official American politics consists of various gradations of far-right politics, from the pro-corporate, pro-CIA agenda of the Democratic Party to the fascistic ravings of sections of the Republican Party who view even Trump as too soft on immigrants. The official Democratic Party response, delivered by Massachusetts Representative Joseph Kennedy III, a grandson of Robert F. Kennedy, combined demagogic posturing, mostly along the lines of identity politics, but with some criticism of Wall Street profiteering thrown in, and scaremongering against Russia, which he described as “knee-deep in our democracy.” Even at his most demagogic, however, Kennedy could make no reference to the working class, or to any movement from below against the growth of economic inequality. That is because the Democratic Party is just as much an instrument of the corporate and financial aristocracy as the Republican Party. Whatever differences they have on secondary issues and matters of tactics are subordinated to a common defense of the profit system and the interests of Wall Street and American imperialism. The State of the Union showed an extremely degraded and reactionary president and an impotent and bankrupt “opposition.” The real opposition, to both Trump and the Democratic Party, must come from below, from an independent movement of the working class in opposition to the capitalist profit system. Fight Google's censorship! Google is blocking the World Socialist Web Sitefrom search results. To fight this blacklisting: Share this article with friends and coworkers -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jan 31 19:42:49 2018 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 19:42:49 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Health care Message-ID: * Print * Leaflet * Feedback * Share » Corporate giants announce partnership to cut employer health care costs By Barry Grey WSWS.ORG 31 January 2018 Three of the biggest corporations in the world—Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway and JPMorgan Chase—sent shockwaves through the US health care industry Tuesday with a joint announcement of plans to form a company dedicated to cutting employer health care costs. The press release issued by Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, Berkshire head Warren Buffett and JPMorgan Chief Executive Jamie Dimon provided few details beyond a general goal of utilizing advanced technology to slash the cost of providing health care for the firms’ combined US work force of over 1 million. However, Dimon, who heads America’s biggest bank, hinted that their ambitions went beyond their own employees when he said, “Our goal is to create solutions that benefit our US employees, their families and, potentially, all Americans.” The initiative heralds a further monopolization of health care by a handful of billionaire-run corporations and a further subordination of social needs to Wall Street. Health care in the US is a $3.3 trillion industry that accounts for 18 percent of the American economy. Whoever controls it stands to pocket untold billions in personal wealth. Despite the companies’ talk of improving the availability and quality of health care for workers, the initiative announced Tuesday signals a further rationing of care for the working class. Its overriding purpose is to cut business costs and increase profitability, and that means restricting further the access of workers to quality care. Even before Tuesday’s announcement, the monopolization of health care in the US was accelerating, encouraged by the market-based “reform” enacted by the Obama administration in the form of “Obamacare.” According to the Healthcare Financial Management Association, the pace of consolidation doubled between 2011 and 2015. Last year saw a wave of hospital mergers, the largest of which combined Dignity Health and Catholic Health Initiatives, uniting their 139 hospitals and 700 care sites across 28 states. A number of major mergers of health insurers and pharmacy companies were announced, topped off by the $69 billion purchase of insurance giant Aetna by the CVS drug store chain. But the sheer wealth, power and weight of the three firms involved in Tuesday’s announcement constitute a threat to the industry’s middlemen, from insurers and pharmacies to benefits managers. The new entity could eventually negotiate directly with drug makers, hospitals and doctors, undercutting the more traditional industry behemoths. As a result, the announcement triggered panic selling of shares of major health insurance and pharmacy firms, which in turn sparked a broader selloff on US markets on Tuesday. At the close of trading, CVS was down 4.11 percent, Walgreens had lost 5.16 percent and UnitedHealth Group suffered a drop of 4.35 percent. The Dow fell 362.6 points, or 1.4 percent, after falling 177.2 points on Monday, bringing its two-day loss to 540 points. This was the biggest two-day loss for the Dow since June 2016. The Standard & Poor’s 500 and Nasdaq indexes also declined sharply. The executives chosen by Bezos, Buffett and Dimon to head up the new venture underscore the dominant role of financial capital in the further private carve-up of the health care system. Amazon named Beth Gialetti, a senior vice president who had served as FedEx’s vice president for planning. Berkshire named investment banker Todd Combs, who was a hedge fund manager before joining Buffett’s firm. JPMorgan chose Marvelle Sullivan Berchtold, the global head of mergers and acquisitions at drug maker Novartis before joining JPMorgan last year. The sheer size of the three firms points to the increasing stranglehold of oligopolistic entities over society. Amazon has 542,000 employees around the world. Berkshire Hathaway employs 367,000 and JPMorgan Chase has more than 240,000 employees. These are corporations that have overseen massive attacks on working class living standards. Dimon was fully implicated in the criminal machinations on Wall Street that led to the financial crash of 2008 and has been named in a series of financial swindles since then. Bezos has made his fortune by running the world’s biggest sweatshop operation, subjecting workers in his distribution centers to backbreaking labor at poverty wages. The combined market capitalization of the three companies is $1.61 trillion, a sum larger than the gross domestic product of Spain ($1.2 trillion). Bezos, with a net worth of $115.6 billion, is the world’s richest person. Buffett, with $93.2 billion, ranks second. Dimon, despite an annual salary of $28 million, is a piker compared to his new partners, with net holdings of “only” $1.26 billion. The combined wealth of Bezos and Buffett alone ($210 billion) is almost twice the combined fiscal year 2018 budget levels proposed by the Trump administration for the departments of education, housing and labor. While the three CEOs in their joint press release said they had as yet no concrete policy proposals for their new company, some business commentators speculated as to the likely approach that would be taken. The New York Times spoke of a “wider use of telemedicine and virtual doctor visits,” and telemedicine companies saw a rise in their stock price. Bloomberg posted an opinion piece stating: “The one thing we can say, however, is that if it succeeds, its success may help usher in an era of even tighter employer control over employees’ lives… There are probably considerable savings to be had if employers use their power to guide employees toward better decisions about everything from ER use to smoking. “But one big reason that our health care system is such an expensive mess is that Americans hate being told what to do. They demand maximal, expensive freedom of choice about their health care. They rebel if they can’t get it. Worse still, if they are denied it, they call their legislators, who do things like telling insurers to stop denying so many claims for experimental treatments of dubious worth.” Another Bloomberg piece declared bluntly, “The most effective way to reduce health care costs is to restrict choice.” Trump economic adviser and former Goldman Sachs President Gary Cohn, who played a central role in drawing up Trump’s multi-trillion-dollar tax cut for the rich, endorsed the Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan plan on Tuesday. “We’re doing the same thing here at the White House,” he said. In his statement to the press, Buffett declared that growing health care costs “act as a hungry tapeworm on the American economy.” This is a completely false and self-serving presentation of the situation. The tapeworm is not an excess of money spent to provide health care for the population—although the existing corporate-dominated system is rife with corruption and profit-gouging. Rather, it is the financial oligarchy that rules over economic and political life under capitalism, of which the three CEOs are a part. The diversion of ever more obscene amounts of money and resources into the bank accounts of a parasitic elite, made possible by private ownership of the health care industry and all of the economic levers of society, makes any rational and humane approach to social needs, including health care, impossible. The essential step in solving the health care crisis and providing quality care for all is the expropriation of the fortunes of oligarchs like Bezos, Buffett and Dimon and the transformation of the banks and large corporations into publicly owned and democratically controlled utilities—that is, a struggle by the working class to put an end to capitalism and establish socialism. [http://www.wsws.org/en/media/photos/legacy/frontpage/amazon-newsletter490.png] Fight Google's censorship! Google is blocking the World Socialist Web Sitefrom search results. To fight this blacklisting: Share this article with friends and coworkers * Facebook * Twitter * E-Mail * Reddit Commenting Discussion Rules » -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 31 22:10:18 2018 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 22:10:18 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Health care In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1178967841.642567.1517436618207@mail.yahoo.com> Just in case it isn't clear, the oligarchs of non-healthcare corporations want to decrease the profits of healthcare corporations, shifting those profits into their own pockets; that is increasing their own profits by decreasing what they pay for their employees' healthcare. Some portion of the $3.3 trillion spent on healthcare nationally will become additional surplus value to be appropriated to Bezos, Buffett, Dimon, etc., thus increasing their wealth and the wealth of the 1% who own most of the remaining stock in these corporations. That saving will not go to better healthcare, and may indeed provide justification for Medicare/Medicaid cutbacks. On ‎Wednesday‎, ‎January‎ ‎31‎, ‎2018‎ ‎01‎:‎43‎:‎24‎ ‎PM‎ ‎CST, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: - Print - Leaflet - Feedback - Share » Corporate giants announce partnership to cut employer health care costs By Barry Grey  WSWS.ORG 31 January 2018 Three of the biggest corporations in the world—Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway and JPMorgan Chase—sent shockwaves through the US health care industry Tuesday with a joint announcement of plans to form a company dedicated to cutting employer health care costs. The press release issued by Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, Berkshire head Warren Buffett and JPMorgan Chief Executive Jamie Dimon provided few details beyond a general goal of utilizing advanced technology to slash the cost of providing health care for the firms’ combined US work force of over 1 million. However, Dimon, who heads America’s biggest bank, hinted that their ambitions went beyond their own employees when he said, “Our goal is to create solutions that benefit our US employees, their families and, potentially, all Americans.” The initiative heralds a further monopolization of health care by a handful of billionaire-run corporations and a further subordination of social needs to Wall Street. Health care in the US is a $3.3 trillion industry that accounts for 18 percent of the American economy. Whoever controls it stands to pocket untold billions in personal wealth. Despite the companies’ talk of improving the availability and quality of health care for workers, the initiative announced Tuesday signals a further rationing of care for the working class. Its overriding purpose is to cut business costs and increase profitability, and that means restricting further the access of workers to quality care. Even before Tuesday’s announcement, the monopolization of health care in the US was accelerating, encouraged by the market-based “reform” enacted by the Obama administration in the form of “Obamacare.” According to the Healthcare Financial Management Association, the pace of consolidation doubled between 2011 and 2015. Last year saw a wave of hospital mergers, the largest of which combined Dignity Health and Catholic Health Initiatives, uniting their 139 hospitals and 700 care sites across 28 states. A number of major mergers of health insurers and pharmacy companies were announced, topped off by the $69 billion purchase of insurance giant Aetna by the CVS drug store chain. But the sheer wealth, power and weight of the three firms involved in Tuesday’s announcement constitute a threat to the industry’s middlemen, from insurers and pharmacies to benefits managers. The new entity could eventually negotiate directly with drug makers, hospitals and doctors, undercutting the more traditional industry behemoths. As a result, the announcement triggered panic selling of shares of major health insurance and pharmacy firms, which in turn sparked a broader selloff on US markets on Tuesday. At the close of trading, CVS was down 4.11 percent, Walgreens had lost 5.16 percent and UnitedHealth Group suffered a drop of 4.35 percent. The Dow fell 362.6 points, or 1.4 percent, after falling 177.2 points on Monday, bringing its two-day loss to 540 points. This was the biggest two-day loss for the Dow since June 2016. The Standard & Poor’s 500 and Nasdaq indexes also declined sharply. The executives chosen by Bezos, Buffett and Dimon to head up the new venture underscore the dominant role of financial capital in the further private carve-up of the health care system. Amazon named Beth Gialetti, a senior vice president who had served as FedEx’s vice president for planning. Berkshire named investment banker Todd Combs, who was a hedge fund manager before joining Buffett’s firm. JPMorgan chose Marvelle Sullivan Berchtold, the global head of mergers and acquisitions at drug maker Novartis before joining JPMorgan last year. The sheer size of the three firms points to the increasing stranglehold of oligopolistic entities over society. Amazon has 542,000 employees around the world. Berkshire Hathaway employs 367,000 and JPMorgan Chase has more than 240,000 employees. These are corporations that have overseen massive attacks on working class living standards. Dimon was fully implicated in the criminal machinations on Wall Street that led to the financial crash of 2008 and has been named in a series of financial swindles since then. Bezos has made his fortune by running the world’s biggest sweatshop operation, subjecting workers in his distribution centers to backbreaking labor at poverty wages. The combined market capitalization of the three companies is $1.61 trillion, a sum larger than the gross domestic product of Spain ($1.2 trillion). Bezos, with a net worth of $115.6 billion, is the world’s richest person. Buffett, with $93.2 billion, ranks second. Dimon, despite an annual salary of $28 million, is a piker compared to his new partners, with net holdings of “only” $1.26 billion. The combined wealth of Bezos and Buffett alone ($210 billion) is almost twice the combined fiscal year 2018 budget levels proposed by the Trump administration for the departments of education, housing and labor. While the three CEOs in their joint press release said they had as yet no concrete policy proposals for their new company, some business commentators speculated as to the likely approach that would be taken. The New York Times spoke of a “wider use of telemedicine and virtual doctor visits,” and telemedicine companies saw a rise in their stock price. Bloomberg posted an opinion piece stating: “The one thing we can say, however, is that if it succeeds, its success may help usher in an era of even tighter employer control over employees’ lives… There are probably considerable savings to be had if employers use their power to guide employees toward better decisions about everything from ER use to smoking. “But one big reason that our health care system is such an expensive mess is that Americans hate being told what to do. They demand maximal, expensive freedom of choice about their health care. They rebel if they can’t get it. Worse still, if they are denied it, they call their legislators, who do things like telling insurers to stop denying so many claims for experimental treatments of dubious worth.” Another Bloomberg piece declared bluntly, “The most effective way to reduce health care costs is to restrict choice.” Trump economic adviser and former Goldman Sachs President Gary Cohn, who played a central role in drawing up Trump’s multi-trillion-dollar tax cut for the rich, endorsed the Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan plan on Tuesday. “We’re doing the same thing here at the White House,” he said. In his statement to the press, Buffett declared that growing health care costs “act as a hungry tapeworm on the American economy.” This is a completely false and self-serving presentation of the situation. The tapeworm is not an excess of money spent to provide health care for the population—although the existing corporate-dominated system is rife with corruption and profit-gouging. Rather, it is the financial oligarchy that rules over economic and political life under capitalism, of which the three CEOs are a part. The diversion of ever more obscene amounts of money and resources into the bank accounts of a parasitic elite, made possible by private ownership of the health care industry and all of the economic levers of society, makes any rational and humane approach to social needs, including health care, impossible. The essential step in solving the health care crisis and providing quality care for all is the expropriation of the fortunes of oligarchs like Bezos, Buffett and Dimon and the transformation of the banks and large corporations into publicly owned and democratically controlled utilities—that is, a struggle by the working class to put an end to capitalism and establish socialism. Fight Google's censorship! Google is blocking the World Socialist Web Sitefrom search results. To fight this blacklisting: Share this article with friends and coworkers - Facebook  -  Twitter  -  E-Mail  -  Reddit   Commenting Discussion Rules » _______________________________________________ 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 Wed Jan 31 22:29:41 2018 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 22:29:41 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: War Criminal Greenwood: SIck Joke And Demented Fraud: IL.post: January 31, 2018 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: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 4:04 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: War Criminal Greenwood: SIck Joke And Demented Fraud: IL.post: January 31, 2018 The fact that the American Society of Imperial Law would invite the War Criminal Greenwood to speak at their annual convention does not surprise me at all. Greenwood was the lawyer who advised Tony Blair that it would be “lawful” for Britain to go to war against Iraq in 2003. All the lawyers in Britain know that. Indeed, the entire world knows that. That is precisely why the United Nations General Assembly refused to re-elect Greenwood to a second term on the World Court, and Britain had to withdraw his name from further consideration—which, to the best of my knowledge, was unprecedented in the entire history of the World Court for a permanent member of the Security Council and today Britain does not have a Judge of British Nationality on the World Court—again, unprecedented for a Permanent Member in the History of the World Court. Greenwood is not good enough for the member states of the United Nations General Assembly. But obviously he is good enough for the American Society of Imperial law. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: ASIL [mailto:services at asil.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 3:32 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: IL.post: January 31, 2018 The American Society of International Law's ILpost - keeping ASIL members informed [IL.post from the American Society of International Law] January 31, 2018 ASIL INSIGHTS [https://www.asil.org/sites/default/files/styles/insights/public/20180122.jpg]The Special Criminal Court in the Central African Republic More Insights ASIL VIDEOS [https://i.ytimg.com/vi/04ZXdDFdP5E/hqdefault.jpg]Women in Arbitration Panel See More Videos MEMBERS IN THE NEWS [https://www.asil.org/sites/default/files/icons2/ASILMEMBERSINNEWS.jpg] To be featured on this page, members are invited to send accomplishments of their own and other members. Submit stories to communications at asil.org. INTEREST GROUPS NPIG Newsletter The New Professional Interest Group (NPIG) posted its most recent newsletter, the first for 2018, on January 19 and is available here. The January newsletter includes job and intern listings, calls for papers, upcoming events, and more. The newsletter was produced in cooperation with the Minorities in International Law Interest Group (MILIG). GAIG Dinner Event The Government Attorneys Interest Group (GAIG) will host the latest event in its International Law in Government Practice dinner series at 6:00 PM on Wednesday, February 7. The Director of the Department of Justice Office of Foreign Litigation Jeanne Davidson and several of her colleagues will discuss the role of international law in their practice. Space is limited. A $35 prix fixe dinner menu has been secured and registration is required. Register here. Call for Jus Gentium Award Nominations The International Legal Research Interest Group (ILRIG) is accepting nominations from members for its Jus Gentium award which recognizes "important contributions in the area of providing and enhancing legal information resources in international law" as well as efforts to make resources freely available that "enhance both scholarship and open access to legal information." Nominations must be submitted by February 9 and may be submitted through the ILRIG webpage. Call for Submissions: International Refugee Law Student Writing Competition The International Refugee Law Interest Group (ILRIG) announces its fourth annual student writing competition, co-sponsored by the Global Migration Centre at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva; the International Law Students Association (ILSA); the International Journal of Refugee Law; and ASIL. Authors must be current graduate or undergraduate students. Papers may address any topic related to international law and refugees, stateless persons, internally-displaced persons, and forced migrants. Submissions are due February 28. More information is available here. NEWS FROM OUR PARTNERS AND COLLEAGUES Call for Papers: Journal of Territorial & Maritime Studies The Journal of Territorial and Maritime Studies (JTMS) is soliciting submissions for its Summer/Fall 2018 issue. JTMS is offering authors of articles successfully passing peer review and selected for publication in the Summer/Fall 2018 issue an honorarium of $1000. The Journal covers the fields of history, international law, international relations, geography, peace studies, and any other relevant discipline as well as all continental areas across the world. Submissions for the Winter/Spring issue are due by February 15. For more information, click here. Complexity and Security: The Role of Law? The Center on Law, Ethics, and National Security at ASIL Academic Partner Duke University School of Law will host a conference on "Complexity and Security: The Role of the Law?" on February 23 and February 24. The conference will be keynoted by Brian Egan (ASIL Lawfirm Partner Steptoe & Johnson LLP). Registration is required. More information is available here. Call for Papers: Geography and Legal Culture on the International Branch The second conference in the Identity on the International Bench Series is taking place May 17-18 in The Hague, organized by the PluriCourts Centre of Excellence, Oslo University. This conference will analyze the causes and effects of geographic representation requirements, the prevalence of certain educational backgrounds and the professional expertise of adjudicators prior to their appointment, their average age, among other features, as well as the resulting implications for the legitimacy of the international adjudicatory institutions and the judicial decisions rendered. Abstracts must be submitted by February 28. The call for papers may be found here. Call for Applications: Bitner Research Fellowship The Cornell Law Library is now accepting applications for the Bitner Research Fellowship for foreign law librarians. The Fellowship offers a unique opportunity for visitors to experience American law librarianship, learn the American legal system, and network with professional librarians. Applicants must be current law librarians with an MLIS or equivalent graduate degree and a JD or equivalent degree and must have at least 3 years professional library experience. The Fellows are provided meals and lodging for the duration of the fellowship. Applications must be submitted by March 1. More information is available here. Call for Papers: Palestine Yearbook of International Law The Palestine Yearbook of International Law is now inviting submissions of scholarly articles for publication for its next volume, XXI (2018). The editors encourage the submission of scholarly pieces of relevance to public international law, including but not necessarily in relation to Palestine. Abstracts should include a working title, with a preliminary outline of the author's research and arguments. Prospective authors should submit an abstract or full manuscript (of under 750 words), along with a CV by March 15. For more information, see the call for submissions here. Call for Papers: International Investment Law and Non-Communicable Diseases Prevention The Law and Non-Communicable Diseases (NCD) Unit at the University of Liverpool is organizing a conference on "International Investment Law and NCD Prevention," May 10-11, 2018, at the University of Liverpool London Campus. The conference will use an interdisciplinary viewpoint and welcomes submissions by lawyers, public health experts, economists, and specialists in trade and development studies. Abstracts of no more than 500 words and a short biography may be submitted by March 15. For more information, click here. Call for Papers and Candidates: Association International du Droit de la Mer The Association International du Droit de la Mer (AssIDMer) has announced a call for papers for its Colloquium on "Les défis globales et le droit de la mer / The Global Challenges and the Law of the Sea," in Lisbon from September 20-21, 2018. The call for papers may be found here. Papers must be submitted by April 30. AssIDMer will also confer the Daniel Vigne Prize for the best article in a journal or collective work to disseminate knowledge of the law of the sea at its Ordinary Meeting. Applications must be submitted by April 15, and more information is available here. AMAZON SMILE Amazon shoppers can now shop online and donate to the Society at the same time using AmazonSmile, which donates a percentage of purchases to the charity of the shopper's choice at no cost to the shopper. To participate, simply go to AmazonSmile, sign in, and search for "American Society of International Law." After selecting the Society, shop through AmazonSmile to ensure that purchases benefit ASIL. AmazonSmile is the same Amazon you know. Same products, same prices, same service. [http://www.asil.org/sites/default/files/icon-facebook.png][http://www.asil.org/sites/default/files/icon-twitter.png][http://www.asil.org/sites/default/files/icon-youtube.png][http://www.asil.org/sites/default/files/icon-linkedin.png] SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENTS Annual Meeting [https://www.asil.org/sites/default/files/annualmeeting/email/2018speakers.jpg] Keynote speakers and honorees include the following: · Rosalie Silberman Abella, Supreme Court of Canada · Dapo Akande, Faculty of Law, University of Oxford · Joan E. Donoghue, International Court of Justice · Olufemi Elias, U.N. Assistant Secretary-General and Registrar, IRMCT · Christopher Greenwood, International Court of Justice · Meg Kinnear, International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes · Peter Trooboff, Covington & Burling LLP · more to be announced The 2018 ASIL Annual Meeting will be in Washington, DC, April 4-7, on the theme, "International Law in Practice." ASIL and the Annual Meeting Committee invite policymakers, practitioners, academics across the disciplinary spectrum, and students to reflect on the broad manifestations, sources, and implications of international legal practice. Session titles, descriptions, and speakers, including keynote speakers and the preliminary schedule, are being updated regularly and are now available at www.asil.org/am. Book Awards Announced [http://www.asil.org/sites/default/files/annualmeeting/email/2018bookawards.jpg] The ASIL Book Awards Committee has recommended and the Executive Council has approved the following three books to receive awards during the ASIL Assembly at this year's Annual Meeting, April 4-7 in Washington, DC. · In the category, "Preeminent Contribution to Creative Scholarship": Is International Law International? by Anthea Roberts, (Oxford, 2017) · In the category, "Specialized Area of International Law": International Climate Change Law, by Daniel Bodansky, Jutta Brunnée, and Lavanya Rajamani, (Oxford, 2017) · In the category, "High Technical Craftsmanship and Utility to Lawyers and Scholars": Encyclopedia of Private International Law by Jürgen Basedow, Giesela Rühl, Franco Ferrari, and Pedro de Miguel Asensio (Edward Elgar, 2017) The Society congratulates this year's winners and is pleased to make the Committee's full report to the Council available to members here. 2018 Honorees Announced [https://www.asil.org/sites/default/files/annualmeeting/images/speakers/awardees2018.jpg] The Executive Council has approved the nominations of the 2017-2018 Honors Committee for recipients of the Society's top awards at the 2018 Annual Meeting. The Manley O. Hudson Medal for pre-eminent scholarship and achievement in international law will be awarded to Peter Trooboff. The Goler T. Butcher Medal for outstanding contributions to human rights will be awarded to Rosalie Silberman Abella. Honorary Membership will be given to Olufemi Elias for his dedication and distinguished contributions to international law. Click here for full details, including a summary of the Honors Committee report and lists of prior awardees. Call for Applications: United Nations Official Observers ASIL members are invited to apply for the opportunity to serve as an official observer at the U.N. in New York, under the auspices of the Society's Consultative Status to the Economic and Social Council at two sessions. ASIL members may apply for the opportunity to serve as an official observer at the 30th session of UNCITRAL Working Group I (Micro, Small, and Medium-Sized Enterprises), to be held March 12-16. Applications are due on Wednesday, February 21 by 5:00 pm ET. Members selected to attend U.N. meetings under ASIL's Consultative Status must cover their own travel and accommodation expenses. Applicants do not have to be able to attend the entire session in order to be considered. To apply, members should review ASIL's Observer Guidelines then send a CV and a statement of interest to UNConferences at asil.org. JOB BOARD [https://www.asil.org/sites/default/files/JOBBOARD.jpg] The ASIL Job Board, part of ASIL Community, gives members the opportunity to post and search for jobs in the area of international law. Sign in here to post a job or internship or to view recent listings. [ASIL ILIB BLOG] International Law in Brief (ILIB) is a blog that provides updates on current developments in international law from the editors of ASIL's International Legal Materials. · European Court of Justice Holds States May Not Require Asylum Seeker to Undergo Test to Determine Sexual Orientation (January 25, 2018) · EU Fines Qualcomm €997 Million for Breaching Antitrust Rules (January 24, 2018) · Inter-American Court of Human Rights Recognizes Right of Same-Sex Marriage (January 10, 2018) · UN Security Council Passes Resolution Increasing Sanctions on North Korea (December 22, 2017) [ASIL UNBOUND BLOG] AJIL Unbound is an online forum that supplements the American Journal of International Law by publishing short, original essays of international legal scholarship. · Introduction to Symposium on Treaty Exit at the Interface of Domestic and International Law · Treaty Exit in the United States: Insights from the United Kingdom or South Africa? · Brexit, Miller, and the Regulation of Treaty Withdrawal: One Step Forward, Two Steps Back? · Brexit and Acquired Rights · The President's Power to Withdraw the United States from International Agreements at Present and in the Future · Domestic and International Limitations on Treaty Withdrawal: Lessons from South Africa's Attempted Departure from the International Criminal Court · Treaty Exit and Latin America's Constitutional Courts · Ending International Investment Agreements: Russia's Withdrawal from Participation in the Energy Charter Treaty View AJIL Unbound here. UPCOMING EVENTS International Law in Government Practice Dinner Series 02/07/2018 - 6:00pm to 8:00pm Washington, DC The 8th Annual "Live from L": Cyber Issues in International Law 02/15/2018 - 12:00pm to 1:30pm Washington, DC Is There a Future for International Criminal Justice? 02/15/2018 - 12:45pm to 2:00pm Berkeley, CA Necessary Evil: How to Fix Finance by Saving Human Rights, a Conversation with David Kinley 02/27/2018 - 3:00pm to 4:30pm Washington, DC Columbia Arbitration Day - Panel on Interstate Arbitration Co-Sponsored by ASIL DRIG 03/02/2018 - 2:00pm to 3:20pm New York, NY Preventing and Punishing Crimes against Humanity - Next Steps in Preventing and Punishing Crimes against Humanity: Reflections on the International Law Commission's Draft Articles 03/08/2018 - 6:00pm to 7:00pm London Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CIArb) Annual Event: Arbitrating Disputes with Foreign Sovereigns and State-Owned Entities 04/03/2018 - 9:00am to 8:00pm Washngton, DC 15th Annual ITA-ASIL Conference: Diversity and Inclusion in International Arbitration 04/04/2018 - 8:00am to 1:30pm Washington, DC ASIL 2018 Annual Meeting 04/04/2018 - 04/07/2018 Washington, DC 2018 Investment Arbitration & Trans-Pacific Transactions Conference 05/10/2018 - 8:30am to 05/11/2018 - 6:00pm Singapore ONLINE ACCESS [https://www.asil.org/sites/default/files/ILPOST/covers.jpg] ASIL Members now receive full online access—including all archived content—to ASIL's three flagship publications: the world renowned American Journal of International Law; the timely International Legal Materials; and the Society's Proceedings of the Annual Meeting . In addition, ASIL members receive a 20% discount on Cambridge University Press books (with the exception of reference titles). To obtain the discount code for books, members should go to www.cambridge.org/ASILBOOK. For information on discounted CUP journal subscriptions (also 20%), members should email lgrodsky at cambridge.org. Brill/Nijhoff also offers discounts on publications for ASIL members. Please contact lee at brill.com for details. Questions about electronic access or receipt of print copies should be directed to services at asil.org. DONATE [https://www.asil.org/sites/default/files/styles/home_rotator/public/monthly.jpg] ASIL welcomes and greatly appreciates the financial participation of its members, grantors, and sponsors in ASIL's Annual Fund. Many of the organization's activities are made possible through the generous gifts made by individuals. Your support truly matters to the mission of the Society. Click here to get started with either a one-time or monthly recurring gift. [https://online.asil.org/asilssa/ecmssamsganalytics.email_opened?p_mail_id=E115593A4678032B1] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: