| Home |
| About |
| Take action |
|
Newsletter > Nov/Dec 2006 |
| Events |
| Links |
| Join |
| Contact us |
Listen to Women for A CHANGENewsletter of WILPF Minnesota Metro Branch
What's Next for the Peace Movement? The Washington Post reported this morning that the Democratic Party's "foreign policy establishment sees a precipitous withdrawal [from Iraq] as potentially damaging to both the country's and the party's interests." The battle is on. The new speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, is saying that the Dems will govern "from the middle." Impeachment is not on the table she recently said. Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL), who led the effort on behalf of Democratic Party House candidates, is saying that they can't allow the party's liberal wing to dominate the agenda. The changes in Congress are largely due to huge opposition (62%) to the U.S. occupation of Iraq. Again, quoting today's Washington Post, "The passion of the antiwar movement helped propel party activists in this election year." How will the peace movement in America, that just turned itself nearly completely over to the Democratic Party, be rewarded for its loyalty? "Many Democratic lawmakers have signed on to a vague plan for a phased withdrawal from Iraq, but the party remains divided between a base eager to get out soon and a foreign policy establishment that sees a precipitous withdrawal as potentially damaging to both the country's and the party's interests," the Washington Post concludes. Pelosi is already pointing to a "Bi-partisan study group" on Iraq that is co-chaired by Texas oilman, and former Republican secretary of state, James Baker. Dont expect any surprises here. Most of the new Democratic Party gains in the House were conservative "Blue Dog" Democrats who do not support immediate withdrawal from Iraq. Instead these new Dems, controlled by Bill Clinton's Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), will steer the country on a basic status quo course. Their excuse will be - - hey we have a national election in two years and we want to take back the White House. So we have to go slow now so we don't alienate the public. My translation - the corporations will control the new Democratic Party Congress and we will see no real basic change. So what does the peace movement do now? We must continue to call for im-mediate withdrawal from Iraq. We must call for a 50% cut in military spending and conversion of the mil-itary industrial complex. We must call for an end to Star Wars research and development funding which now stands at about $10 billion a year. We must also call for investiga-tions of Bush-Cheney for impeach-able offenses. We must call for re-peal of the Patriot Act and the re-cent Military Commissions Act - the torture bill. We have to call out loudly and strongly for universal national health care and for new federal election laws that sets one national standard to ensure fair voting. There are many more things that must now be advanced by the peace, justice, environmental, la-bor, and women's movements. And we must be impatient with the Dem-ocrats. One last word here about liberal activists who supported the Dems fully knowing that many of them have been supporting the funding for the occupation of Iraq. I disa-greed with this strategy of knee-bending loyalty to a party that does not deserve such support. But it is done now. To these liberals and peace activists I say this. Don't sell us all out now by going easy on the Dems. Don't tell us to wait, give them a chance, give them two years, let them take back the White House before we demand too much from them. Don't sell yourself out. You have helped to create this new Demo-cratic Party control of Congress. Get off your knees and now demand that they do something. Force the Dems to respond to you. If you don't you will have let down the long-suffering Iraqi people who are dying at the hands of U.S. military power. Don't let the GIs down who have died or suffered serious injury in Iraq for a war that was illegal in the first place. We must keep fighting, harder than ever, to bring this mad war to an end. The battle has just begun. Where will you stand?
An Encounter with The Media I am currently one of the organizers of a weekly vigil in solidarity with the people of Palestine, which takes place on the corner of Summit and Snelling Avenues in St. Paul every Friday between 4:15 and 5:30 pm. I want to share a recent encounter I had with the press because it started out so badly and turned out so beautifully. On September 29 a reporter from the Macalester College newspaper came out to our vigil site and con-ducted interviews for a piece he was writing for the paper. The article appeared the following week (on October 6). It was full of distortions and lies. (I wont include it here because I hate to be associated with it but if people have computer access and curiosity it can be found at: http://www.themacweekly.com/articles/ 20061006/10738 ). When I read the article I was sickened. It seemed li-belous. It might have even put me in some danger. I talked to an activist with the National Lawyers Guild and he told me there was little I could do. I could ask for a retraction and apology but I probably wouldnt get it. And there was simply no way I could sue for libel. After several days I managed to reach the newspapers editor-i- chief. She was sorry, but said she had to stand by her reporter. She said the best she could do was offer me space to reply. The original report begged to be taken apart line by line, but I only had 600 words. Finally I decided to ignore the report entirely and just write about why we hold the vigil. On October 13 the opinion piece appeared. It is as follows:
When it appeared, the editors had changed only the title and removed the description of who I am. I started to feel better. The following week I brought copies of the paper to the vigil to share with my fellow vigilers who had suffered through this encounter with me. A regular attendee was very impressed with the article and for-warded it to many people. Among those who received it was a man in Palestine. He sent me a beautiful letter and forwarded the article on to his lists. Some of those recipients sent it on as well. I got only one response from a Macalester student. She was very kind and thanked me for my courage. But I did get letters from all over the world. My little opinion piece in a small college paper got responses from this country plus Canada, England, Palestine, Israel, and Australia. The internet is amazing! I'm including the response I got from Sam in Palestine, because it is so beautiful, gives me strength and reminds me why I do this work. We all need a reminder once in a while.
U.S. SECTION NEWS On October 12, 2006, the national office issued the following statement:
The U.S. Section of Womens International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) joins with WILPF International leadership in expressing outrage at the claimed nuclear weapons test conducted by the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK) on October 9, 2006. Please see www.wilpf.int.ch/statements/dprk_nuke_test.html to view the statement, with which WILPF U.S. agrees wholeheartedly. However, we also wish to point out the special responsibility of our own U.S. government, both in resolving the present crisis created by the DPRK, and in ensuring the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons and their necessary abolition. In the case of North Korea, the U.S. must enter into direct negotiations with that country. The present crisis has emerged out of the present Administrations rejection of the Agreed Framework signed by the DPRK and President Clinton in 1994. Labeling that country as belonging to an axis of evil and threatening a preemptive strike including the possible use of nuclear weapons against what was then a no n-nuclear nation only exacerbated the problems. North Korea is a weak and dangerously isolated country with severe economic, political and human rights problems which must be brought back into both the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and the community of nations. As for ensuring nuclear nonproliferation and moving toward abolition of nuclear weapons, the U.S. also bears special responsibility. As noted in the WILPF international statement, ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) is a necessary first step in that direction. Ratification by all 44 of the nations with nuclear weapons, or capability to envelop them, is the primary requirement for coming into force. By 2001, when President Bush declared the CTBT was not in the U.S. interests and refused to pursue ratification, 41 of those nations had already ratified or signaled their intent to do so. Only three (Israel, Pakistan and India) refused. the U.S. is the only power that can bring these three recalcitrant nations into both the CTBT and the NPT. Of course, at present the Administration is actually encouraging both India and Israel in their nuclear programs, hence risking a renewed nuclear arms race in Asia and further war and instability in the Middle East. We in U.S. WILPF will continue to work for a change in our own nations current misguided policies as part of our own efforts to ensure both peace and freedom (as per the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) for all humankind.
Kate Zaidan, Program Coordinator
Some Related Nuclear News The US and several other nuclear weapons states have expressed concern over the signing of a treaty creating a nuclear weapons free zone in Central Asia. On 8 September 2006, the five ex-Soviet nations of Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakh-stan and Uzbekistan pledged not to produce, buy or allow the deploy-ment of nuclear weapons on their soil. ... The United States is concerned that this treaty would prevent nu-clear-powered ships and aircraft from passing through these coun-tries. Also the US has forces in Kyrgyzstan.... Typically, nations with nuclear weapons are opposed to nuclear weapons free zones because such zones reduce the foreign influence that nuclear weapons often provide. Source: Associated Press, 9/8/06
Even as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice condemns North Korea for threatening to test a new missile that could theoretically deliver a nuclear weapon to the Western Aleutians, the Pentagon is poised to develop its own new generation of nuclear-capable long-range delivery systems. And while President Bush declares a nuclear-armed Iran would pose "a grave threat to the security of the world," the U.S. is modernizing every weap-on type in its vast nuclear arsenal.... Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory was founded in 1952 to compete with Los Alamos to devel-op a hydrogen bomb. Now, under the "Reliable Replacement War-head" (RRW) program, the labs are competing to design an entirely new warhead. Linton Brooks, head of the U.S. nuclear-weapons com-plex, has said that in 25 years our arsenal would largely consist of these replacement warheads, and "the weapons design community... revitalized by the RRW program" will be able to produce weapons with new military capabilities, "within three to four years of a decision." Source: San Francisco Chronicle, Op-Ed, 6/22/06
On September 19th the University of California Board of Regents discussed and voted on a proposal for the University to enjoin with the Bechtel Corporation to form a sec-ond for-profit, limited liability corpor-ation (LLC). This LLC partnership will now prepare a bid to manage the Lawrence Livermore National Labor-atory, a nuclear weapons research and design facility that is also estab-lishing large centers for bioweapons research in the Bay Area. Last year the University's Board of Regents formed a partnership with Bechtel and two other military-industrial-nuclear firms called Los Alamos National Security, LLC. This consortium successfully outbid a partnership between the University of Texas and Lockheed Martin to manage the Los Alamos National Laboratory (the largest weapons of mass destruction facility on the planet. This is a for-profit venture that nets LANS LLC partners $79 million per year. The September 19th vote prepares UC to go down the same path in order to retain its management of Livermore Lab. Source: Darwin Bond-Graham
BRANCH NEWS Dear Members: The U.S. Section of WILPF has decided that, as of January 2007, no branch may have its own 501(c)3 (federal nonprofit) status. Thus, as of January 1, 2007, contributions to MN Metro will not be tax deductible unless the check is made out to JAPA (Jane Addams Peace Association, the tax-exempt portion of national WILPF) and earmarked for MN Metro. Dues will not be tax deductible and should continue to be made out to MN Metro WILPF. Contributions to JAPA will be available for our use; dues will be banked in the Twin Cities, as usual. For those who have not yet renewed membership for 2007, dues will remain tax deductible if sent before January 1. We regret this change, but as part of a wonderful national and international organization we accept their ruling about this.
PeaceJam Speaker Featured at November Coffee With Program In September five youths from the Twin Cities, aided by donations from organizations including WILPF, attended the annual conference of PeaceJam, a leadership training program for teenagers to help them create pockets of peace in their communities. At our November program Shivani Bhatt talked about her experiences at PeaceJam -- meeting 10 Peace Prize recipients and 3,000 other teenagers to brainstorm ways to build peace locally. She and her group are offering a World AIDS Day Celebration on December 1, 6 to 8 pm, St. Paul Student Center Ballroom, 2017 Buford Ave. (UofM) in solidarity with the global battle against HIV and AIDS. Free and open to all. FFI 651-999-7361. Peace and Environment Committee Lisa Ledwidge of this committee, together with Darcy Rowe from the Minnesota Water Alliance, gave an interactive workshop entitled Is Bottled Water Better? at the Northland Bioneers Conference held October 21 at the Minneapolis Community and Technical College. Lisa and others from the committee, which finished the national WILPF water study program early this year, are available to give talks about the privatization of water now ongoing around the world. FFI call 651-458-7090.
Corporations V. Democracy Committee Members of the Corporations V. Democracy committee were recently involved in an exciting victory for democracy. Late this summer we joined a fight to save five or-ganic farms from a crude oil pipeline. On one side was an $80 billion privately held refining corporation, known for years as Koch Refining but recently had a name change to Flint Hills Resources. This corporation also seems to launch a new company to run each new pipeline it builds. But the Minnesota Pipeline Company seeking to bring crude oil from Canada to a refinery in Rosemount, MN, is still Koch Refining. Against this behemoth stood five organic farms, four of them too small to fight. Martin and Atina Diffley of Gardens of Eagan decided not to lose their farm without a fight. Twin Cities area co-ops, many of which sell produce from the Gardens of Eagan, joined the battle. So did Land Stewardship Project, the Organic Consumers Association, and our local committee. We saw the fight as important because corporations should not be able to build whatever they want wherever they want and externalize all of their costs. These costs with pipelines are always high, but in the case of an organic farm, they are total. It makes no sense to destroy our local, sustainable food supply so we can have more oil to transport toxic food even greater distances. Public hearings were to be held in each county the pipeline would travel through. By not asking to go through the Twin Cities, Koch managed to avoid hav-ing any local hearings. But we organized to get peti-tions signed, testimony written, and people to the clos-est hearing in Farmington. Before that hearing took place, however, the company, which had previously told Atina Diffley we are coming through your farm and there is nothing you can do to stop us, gave up the fight. Minnesota Pipeline signed an agreement that they will not cross the Gardens of Eagan! Amazingly the farmers who were too small to fight are part of this victory. The process resulted in the first organic mitigation plan ever in this country. The plan appears designed to make sure that a company putting a pipeline through an organic farm bears all the costs of protecting the farm from the pipelines consequences. If the company cant externalize its costs onto these farmers (making them absorb all the risk) it cant afford to build. And that is what we are seeing. The company has already asked for maps showing the locations of all the organic farms in Minnesota and Wisconsin (apparently to plan routes to avoid all organic farms). And Illinois and other states have expressed interest in providing similar mitigation plans to protect their organic farms!
Excerpts from The Source of Hopelessness: A Review of Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth
by Catherine Austin Fitts, Solari, Inc. , www.solari.com From The Wilderness Publications, July 24, 2006 Ed Note: "An Inconvenient Truth" hit the movie theaters this spring, and received rave reviews, one of which was reprinted in the March-April edition of this newsletter. The movie looked carefully at the responsibility of individuals for contributing to climate change, and suggested major changes in life style. The following review shows another side. Its author, Catherine Austin Fitts, was Assistant Secretary of Housing under George Bush I and past Managing Director of Dillon Read & Co.
... George Orwell once said that omission is the greatest form of lie. Gore's omissions in An Inconven-ient Truth are extraordinary. ... The fundamental lie that Gore is telling comes from defining our problem as environmental, whereas our envi-ronmental problems are but a symp-tom of the problem. Gore defines our problem as "what." He is silent on "who." For example, he does not ask or answer:
... By defining the problem as simply environmental damage, ... there is no need to correlate environmental deterioration with the growth of the global financial system and the resulting centralization of economic and political power. ... Understanding how the mechanics of the financial system and the accumulation of financial capital relate to environmental destruction is essential. If we integrate these deeper systems into an historical timeline, authentic solutions will begin to emerge. But Gore omits the deeper systems and the lessons of how we got here and in so doing closes the door on transformation.
For example, there is no place on Gores time line that shows: Understanding the fundamen-tal imbalance of the corporate model -- where enterprises have the rights of personhood, but not the finite existence of people or the legal responsibilities and liabilities -- and the corporate model's economic dependence on subsidy that drives up debt, economic warfare and the destruction of all living things is a critical piece to developing actions to reverse environmental damage. The documentary ends with a long list of things that we can do. Many of these items are on my list. We all need to come clean in the process of evolving towards sus-tainability. However, without a new investment model and the gover-nance changes that automatically follow, the result of An Inconvenient Truth is to teach us to be good con-sumers of global oil and consumer product corporations and banks.... What that means is that the real solution will be significant depopulation. The viewer is left to preserve a bit of the shrinking American bubble to protect us from having to face the depopulation solutions under way . ... ...Things are not hopeless. There is no need to waste time and money adoring and financing the people who are killing the planet, or counting on the politicians who protect them.
To get you started, let me recommend that you take the money and time that you would spend watching An Inconvenient Truth and invest it in reading or watching a few of many authentic leaders with useful maps and solutions that are leading to serious ecosystem healing and transformation: Can you imagine what would happen if all the money donated to Al Gore and candidates like him were invested in authentic leaders and our access to them? I can, and the truth and beauty of that future fill my life and work with hope
COMING UP Sat. Dec. 2, 7:30 - 9:30 pm: Steve Leeper, U.S. rep for Mayors for Peace, Hiroshima, Japan, with storytellers Larry Johnson & Elaine Wynne and musician Barb Tilsen. Dunn Brothers, 329 W. 15th St., Mpls. (south side of Loring Park); and Sun. Dec. 3, 2006, 2-4 pm: Steve Leeper, talk and dialogue. Black Dog Cafe, 308 Prince St. (corner 4th and Broadway), Lowertown St. Paul. Mon. Dec. 11, 4:30 pm: International Human Rights Day War protest. Mayday Plaza, 3rd St. and Cedar Ave., Minneapolis. Sponsored by Anti-War Committee. FFI 612-379-3899. Sat. Dec. 23, 1 pm: Protest Iraq war. Hennepin and Lagoon Ave., Minneapolis. Sponsored by Iraq Peace Action Coalition. Thurs. Dec. 28, 6:30 pm: Candlelight Service for the Children of Iraq, St. Joan of Arc Church, 4537 3rd Ave.. So., Minneapolis. FFI 612-522-1861. Sat. Jan. 13. 10 am-noon: WILPFs Coffee With program. See page 1. Tues. Jan. 30, 2007, 6:30 pm: An Evening with Cindy Sheehan. St. Joan of Arc Church, 4537 3rd Ave. So., Minneapolis. $10. Sponsored by Minnesota alliance of Peacemakers. FFI 612-522-1861.
ANOTHER DATE TO SAVE!
| |||||||