Articles » peoplesworld

Henry Winston centennial celebration to be held in New York

Joe Sims — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:03:00 -0500

NEW YORK - "There's been a huge response by folks to the upcoming event celebrating Henry Winston's 100th birthday," said CPUSA Executive Vice Chair Jarvis Tyner. "We expect a big turnout." Henry Winston was the long-time national chairman of the Communist Party USA.

The Winston centennial will be held on February 19 at the Winston Unity Center in New York City.

"People are just delighted that Angela Davis is coming," added Tyner. Angela Davis, along with Tyner, Charlene Mitchell and Vinnie Burrows, is a featured speaker at the event. Charlene Mitchell, at the time a CPUSA leader and also heading the National Alliance Against Racism and Political Repression, was one of the principal organizers in the fight to free Angela Davis in the 1970s. Mitchell now heads the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism.

Davis was framed by then-governor of California Ronald Reagan and the FBI and charged with murder in a shootout during the trial of Johnathan Jackson, a young Black Pather leader.

A national and international campaign won her release and acquittal. Winston played a key role in the campaign.

"Tributes have been coming in from around the country, heaping praise on the man and his exemplary life," said Gabe Falsetta, one of the event organizers. "Those who had the privilege of working with Henry Winston and learning from his broad understanding will be coming to celebrate his legacy."

Henry Winston, originally from Mississippi, became active in the unemployed struggles of the 1930s and soon became a leader in the Young Communist League. He worked with William L Patterson and others to help free the Scottsboro defendants, displaying extraordinary political and organizational skills.

He soon become a national leader of the Communist Party and served for many years as its organizational secretary. In the 1950s he served eight years in prison under the Smith Act, during which time he lost his sight because of medical neglect.

A campaign to win his release was waged in the U.S. and abroad. Writer Richard Wright headed a French/American committee to free him.

After his release from prison, Winston went on to become the Communist Party national chairman where he worked side-by-side with its general secretary, Gus Hall, until Winston's death in 1986.

"Winnie," as he was called by friends and co-workers, wrote extensively on civil rights, labor and international issues, authoring two books, "Strategy for a Black Agenda," and "Class, Race, and Black Liberation," as well as several pamphlets.

He played a signal role in the movement to develop comprehensive mandatory sanctions against South Africa's racist government and was well regarded by its liberation movement.

On learning of his death, African National Congress leader Alfred Nzo remarked, "We had come to regard Winston as one of our own."

The celebration will take place from 2:00 to 5:00 pm at 235 W 23rd St in Manhattan. Tickets are $10.

Chicago Teachers Union: Black teachers, students most affected by school closings

Teresa Albano — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:02:00 -0500

CHICAGO - Fed up with discrimination, the Chicago Teachers Union filed a complaint Feb. 9 with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission charging the Board of Education's mass teacher layoffs last year unfairly impacted African American teachers.

The union's attorney, Robin Potter, told the media that the school board "is illegally terminating and laying off African American teachers who are highly qualified and excellent teachers... It is a systematic effort to rid the Chicago Public Schools of tenured teachers who are African American."

Black teachers make up 29 percent of all CPS teachers, but were 43 percent of all those laid off last year, the union says. White teachers are 47 percent of the total but were 36 percent of the layoffs.

"To make it right they have to stop these layoffs, they have to step back and they have to put these good teachers back in the schools," Potter said.

The EEOC complaint comes at a time when the CPS and Mayor Rahm Emanuel are pushing through education policies that education historian Diane Ravitch calls "corporate school reform." The city and board are enacting mass school closings and privatizing them by bringing in well-connected charter school operators.

Today, the Chicago Teachers Union was at Cook County Courthouse filing for an injunction to stop the board's Feb. 22 approval to close or "turn around" 17 additional neighborhood schools.

Corporate school reform has a distinctive racist edge, the CTU charges. The Chicago Public Schools board is violating Illinois law because the "proposed actions disproportionately target African American student populations," the union said in filing for the injunction.

Powerful corporate forces are circling around the nation's third largest school district to implement their version of reform.

For example, the University of Chicago's Consortium on Chicago School Research released today preliminary findings that purportedly show a slight uptick in reading and math, after four years, among elementary schools that followed some "turnaround" model. There were no improvements among any high schools, the report said.

But even the progress proclaimed is open for debate since it was minimal.
"The Board of Ed needs to be responsible to understand these programs are not working," said Julie Woestehoff, executive director of Parents United for Responsible Education, reported the Chicago Tribune. "In order to do something devastating to the community, the results need to be clear and compelling. And these results are not."

According to the Sun Times, "Consortium researchers rushed the analysis into print, releasing only an 'overview of findings' and not the final report, because they said they wanted to inform the current debate over Chicago's turnarounds."

CPS jumped on the findings to promote a controversial charter school company, Academy for Urban School Leadership, which was part of the consortium's study, and is slated to get the majority of "turnaround" contracts if approved Feb. 22.

"I would say the report shows there's promising and encouraging data about our turnaround models in particular and about AUSL as an example,'' said CPS Chief Education Officer Noemi Donoso. Donoso is a former employee of AUSL.

AUSL is a national charter school operator started by Chicago venture capitalist Martin Koldyke. Besides Donoso, AUSL previously employed CPS CEO Jean-Claude Brizard.
The mayor, too, has a close relationship to AUSL including the fact that the principal of AUSL's Bethune School of Excellence was a co-chair of Emanuel's mayoral campaign.

Also in the corporate-political cabal is the Chicago Board of Trade, whose president, David Vitale, is the head of the Chicago Board of Education. Vitale had been on the board of directors of AUSL.

In addition to the battle around school reform, teachers and the board entered contract talks last month. The union's contract expires June 30.

Photo: Teachers, parents and students demonstrate for good schools and against mass closings on Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday, Jan. 16, 2012. (Chicago Teachers Union)

Congresswomen defend birth control for all

Blake Deppe — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:24:00 -0500

Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., and three other congresswomen attended a special news conference Feb. 8, reacting to Republican Speaker John Boehner's harsh attack on the Obama administration's birth control policy.

Boehner vowed to overturn the policy, complaining that it was a violation of religious freedom because its coverage includes schools and hospitals with religious affiliation. He threatened legislative action if Obama did not rescind the policy. Other Republicans saw this as a political opening, and argued that this was a sensitive issue of "religious liberty."

Schakowsky, along with Reps. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., Lois Capps, D-Calif., and Gwen Moore, D-Wis., said at the press conference they supported the president's policy, explaining that it strikes a balance between religious and individual freedom.

Schakowsky said the policy exempts churches from providing birth control benefits for their workers.

As for religiously-connected hospitals and schools, she explained, "If they want to be part of the business world, then they have to follow the same rules as other businesses."

Capps and DeLauro outlined some of the benefits of the birth control decision, noting that it was based on scientific evidence, decreased infant mortality and unintended pregnancy, and would reduce the long-standing gender discrimination issues that women in health care face.

Surveys show, moreover, that 99 percent of women and 98 percent of Catholic women have used birth control at one point in their lives.

And Boehner's assertion that "Americans of every faith and political persuasion" object to the policy is clearly untrue: Prior to this rule's approval, 28 states had passed their own version of the law.

Rep. Michael Quigley, D-Ill., said the ruling was a mainstream one, and that the Catholic Church ought to support it.

"The vast majority of Catholic women are on birth control, support birth control, and think it should be part of their health care plan. So, it just seems striking to me that someone would say this is a risky decision, because it's [actually] the right thing to do," Quigley said.

According to the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health, women who use birth control will save $600 a year once this policy goes into effect.

"The idea that birth control could be controversial in 2012 is outrageous," Schakowsky remarked. "Women's health care should not depend on who the boss is." Furthermore, she predicts a backlash among women if Republicans continue to attack this policy.

"It would be at their peril if they try to undo this," she concluded.

Photo: "U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky talks with Occupy Wall Street activists in Chicago." Jan Schakowsky official Flickr page

Missouri Republicans press slew of anti-immigrant bills

By Tony Pecinovsky — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:36:00 -0500

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. - The Republican-dominated Missouri Legislature is currently debating anti-immigrant bills targeting students, non-English-speaking drivers and the federal government.

Senate Bill 590 would require school administrators to report the immigration status of students and their parents, forcing local schools to assume the role of immigration control, a task of the federal government.

Vanessa Crawford, executive director of the Missouri Immigrant and Refugee Advocates (MIRA) coalition, said, "We can learn a lot about this type of legislation and its potential impact on Missouri residents by how it has impacted Alabama."

"Parents took their kids out of school. Thousands of kids just didn't show up the day after the law was passed in Alabama," Crawford said. "It's a very scary and confusing situation for immigrant families."

"Schools and families are supposed to work together to create a positive, welcoming environment for students," she added. "This type of legislation turns teachers into ICE agents."

Additionally, SB 590 would require local police to ask for proof of papers as a routine part of their jobs, and arrest anyone suspected of being undocumented. Any documented immigrant not carrying their immigration papers could also be charged with a Class C misdemeanor.

Opponents of the legislation warn that it will create a climate of fear and racism, encourage racial profiling, cost taxpayers millions of dollars in legal battles, have a chilling effect on enrollment of children in public schools, and force teachers and school administrators to single out students due to their perceived immigration status.

According to Crawford, this legislation will also make victims of abuse "much less likely to cooperate with the police."

For example, she said, "A victim of domestic violence may choose to not call the police, as the police will have to ascertain the victim's immigration status instead of addressing the domestic violence issue."

A second bill, HB 1186, would require the state of Missouri to only offer driver's license exams in English without an interpreter. Currently, Missouri offers driver's exams in a dozen languages, and allows applicants to pay for their own state-approved interpreter if they speak a language other than the 12 offered.

HB 1186 would only impact documented immigrants, as Missouri and federal law already prohibits undocumented immigrants from obtaining a driver's license.

Critics of this legislation argue that more than 150 countries, including the United States, recognize an International Driving Permit without fluency in the language of that country. This legislation would go against national and internationally agreed-upon standards, they say.

Other states with more ethnically diverse populations have rejected English-only driver's exams. A report by the California Department of Motor Vehicles concluded that "fluency in the English language sufficient to take and pass a written exam in English is not indicative of the applicant's ability to drive safely in the public roadways."

A third anti-immigrant bill in the Missouri Legislature, SB 473, would require the state auditor's office to determine the cost of illegal immigration to Missouri taxpayers and then sue the federal government for that money.

Crawford calls this legislation "especially problematic," saying it would promote "increased anti-immigrant sentiment based on a completely false assumption" that immigrants "don't pay in."

"Immigrants, like everybody else, pay property taxes, income taxes, sales taxes and contribute to our economy on a daily basis," Crawford said.

According to the Pew Research Center, in 2010 Missouri had between 35,000 and 75,000 undocumented immigrants. They make up less than 1 percent of Missouri's population of 6 million.

Similar laws passed in Alabama are costing that state nearly $11 billion annually. According to a University of Alabama study, an estimated 40,000 to 80,000 undocumented immigrants have left Alabama, resulting in a $2.3 billion to $10.8 billion reduction in Alabama's GDP. Additionally, the report found that Alabama will lose between $56.7 billion and 264.5 million in reduced state income and sales taxes, and lose between $20 million and $93.1 million in local sales taxes.

While the Missouri state government is still debating the wisdom of these laws, some local governments have already passed anti-immigrant, racist laws by popular vote.

For example, in Springfield, voters just passed Question 1, a law requiring local businesses to verify that new hires are legally eligible to work in the U.S. by checking their status in the controversial E-Verify database.

E-Verify is an Internet-based system that compares information from an employee's Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, to data from U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Social Security Administration records to confirm employment eligibility. But those records are filled with discrepancies

The Greene County Sheriff's Office (Springfield is in Greene County) says that of the 20,000 people who passed through police custody in 2011, only 49 people were held by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.

Opponents of the new law say it is an unenforceable, unfunded mandate, and its constitutionality will be tested in court, forcing Springfield taxpayers to to foot the bill for the extreme, anti-immigrant agenda.

A similar law has been introduced in the Missouri House.

"Regardless of the intent of these laws, we know that their impact will be racial," Crawford said.

Left on the bookshelf: "The John Carlos Story"

Joseph Zimmermann — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 11:27:00 -0500

Book Review
The John Carlos Story: The Sports Moment That Changed the World
By Dave Zirin and John Wesley Carlos, foreword by Cornel West
Haymarket Books, 2011, 220 pages, $22.95

The name John Carlos will forever be etched in American history. First, because of his stunning athletic ability which has created a legacy of record-setting titles in so many track and field categories on so many levels they are far too numerous to list in a review of succinct length. Secondly, he shall be remembered for an act of conscience as well as political and personal courage performed on a world stage that was captured in an iconic image that has inspired others for decades.

In The John Carlos Story, Carlos describes growing up in the Harlem of the 1950s where he learned hard lessons about life, race and landlords. He also met notables as disparate as Fred Astaire and Malcolm X. It is on these streets that he gradually discovered his talent and desire to test himself upon the fields of athletic competition. The pursuit of his athletic goals would take him from Texas to San Jose State University in California and finally to the medal stand at the 1968 Olympic Games in Mexico City. It is at these games of the XIX Olympiad, held in a maelstrom of student uprisings and pitiless repression, that he would be awarded a bronze medal and, along with gold medal winner Tommie Smith, he would raise his clenched, black gloved fist in a symbol of defiance in the face of oppression.

The retribution against him for this act, not just from the establishment in organized sports but from the ruling class itself, would be swift, deliberate, and terrible. The story of the act and its aftermath is a fascinating one and gives us valuable insight into the brutal practices of the American security apparatus from a personal perspective.

In the book's preface, sports columnist Dave Zirin refers to the gesture made by Smith and Carlos on the medal stand as "a watershed moment of resistance." This is indeed an apt description, and thankfully we now have this book that not only goes behind the scenes of how this enduring image came to be, but what came to shape the man behind it.

At a recent appearance by the author at the Wisconsin Book Festival he described some of the terrible effects the official harassment he underwent had on him and his loved ones. One audience member remarked, "You've had a sad life". "On the contrary," Carlos replied, "I've had a joyous life."

Jobless benefits and payroll tax cut in danger, SEIU warns

Mark Gruenberg, John Wojcik — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 11:24:00 -0500

With the clock ticking down on a Feb. 29 deadline for both extending extra federal jobless benefits and the "temporary" payroll tax cut for 160 million workers, the Service Employees are sounding the alarm that Republican lawmakers are plotting to allow the benefits to lapse.

In an emergency notice sent out to the membership and thousands of allies across the country the union is urging everyone to call, write or email their lawmakers to approve a measure containing provisions for both the benefits extension and continuation of the payroll tax cut for working people.

President Obama is campaigning for both the payroll tax cut and the longer jobless benefits.

The labor movement is backing the measures, saying that in addition to being a lifeline for struggling millions, they will provide an essential boost to the economy at a time when the recovery is still precarious.

Labor and its allies are warning, however, that the GOP and its tea party wing are working to sabotage the extensions due in less than three weeks.

"If they don't reach an agreement, 5 million workers risk losing their unemployment benefits," said Mary Kay Henry, SEIU's president. "We can't allow politicians to play games with this vital lifeline for hardworking families. Congress must extend unemployment insurance through 2012 - without adding difficult, new requirements for unemployed workers."

Republicans are tying up negotiations in Congress, according to news reports, by arguing about "how to pay" for the unemployment benefit extension, which will cost $160 billion through the end of the year.

They are pushing to make the extension as short as possible and, in addition, want to pay for it by attaching an amendment that would continue for another year a freeze in the pay of federal workers.

The Democratic negotiators oppose the continued pay freeze and want to pay for the extended benefits through a surtax on millionaires and billionaires, which the GOP rejects.

Some lawmakers, said Henry, "are threatening to use this critical deadline of Feb. 29 to cut unemployment insurance or impose difficult, new restrictions on jobless Americans who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own." Workers and their families, she said, "could lose benefits they've paid into and that their families depend on."

In exchange for backing the extension of President Obama's tax cut for working families Republicans are demanding at least $70 billion in cuts to programs that benefit those families. Approval of the GOP demands would result not just in a longer pay freeze for federal workers but higher Medicare premiums and smaller subsidies for the purchase of health insurance under the new health care law.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he will put forward his own bill, one that requires those earning over $1 million a year to contribute to the $200 billion cost of extending the payroll tax cut and the unemployment benefits.

Economists from all points along the political spectrum are urging Republicans to cease their obstruction.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and even Moody's Analytic chief economist Mark Zandi testified before Congress yesterday, telling lawmakers that they should extend the payroll tax cut so as not to undermine the fragile economic recovery.

Photo: At a "Vigil for the Unemployed" in Philadelphia. (Matt Rourke/AP)

Union leaders say ”right to work” will boomerang in Indiana

Mark Gruenberg — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 11:18:00 -0500

INDIANAPOLIS - Indiana, thanks to its GOP legislature and flip-flopping GOP Gov. Mitch Daniels, became the nation's 23rd "Right to Work" state - and the first in the North - on Feb. 1. Union leaders blasted the legislation, and predicted it'll boomerang at the ballot box this fall.

The law, jammed through the legislature on party-line votes, deprives unions of the right to mandate collection of dues, or even "fair share" fees in contracts with employers. That will let thousands of "free riders" take advantage of unions' services without paying one thin dime for them.

The practical effect is to rob unions of money needed to represent workers. But right-to-work laws have been a cause of the radical Right for more than 60 years - as a way to destroy unions and reduce their ability to gain better livelihoods for workers.

The radical right, its business backers, and its GOP handmaidens push right to work as part of their nationwide war on workers. Minnesota is also a right-to-work target.

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka led the unionists in saying right to work will hurt Indiana workers - who will remember in November.

Right to work "reflects an extreme partisan agenda that is all about payback to corporate donors, instead of creating good jobs for working families and fostering a middle-class economy," he said. "'Right to work' policies don't create jobs. Study after study has shown they reduce wages, benefits, and safety for all working people -- the last thing anyone needs in this economy.

"Working people are energized and will remember who stood with them and who stood with the one percent on Election Day," he concluded.

Indiana AFL-CIO President Nancy Guyott said her state tried right to work once before, from 1957-65 and "it was an utter failure." She predicted a repeat and added Hoosiers will exact retribution when they vote in November.

"I am reminded of the saying, 'Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,' and it seems especially fitting today," she said. "Hoosiers have been here before" and after the prior failure, voters "rose up, changed elected officials and repealed it. It appears we are headed there again.

"Sadly, passage not only means that workers' rights and ability to collectively bargain will be significantly weakened, it means strong-arm tactics, misinformation, and big money have won at the Indiana statehouse," Guyott added, reminding voters that Daniels and the GOP denied workers from testifying against it and barred people from the state capitol during passage.

Steelworkers District 7 Director Jim Robinson declared the out-of-state special interests pushing right-to-work won this fight, "but we'll win the war."

"The General Assembly set Indiana on a course that will lead to lower wages, less safety on the job and more -- and we need to ensure our locals are as strong as possible to ensure they don't get their way," added Robinson. "This is just one part of the larger attack on working families in our country. We didn't win this fight, but we'll win the war. Hoosiers won't settle for a government where corporate-backed lawmakers do the bidding of the one percent. Our state is better than that; our country is better than that. Our fight doesn't end here - not by a long shot."

"Let's be clear about the fundamental underpinnings of this issue," said AFL-CIO Building Trades Department President Mark Ayers. "Contrary to what right-to-work proponents would have the public believe, this was not about creating an inviting economic atmosphere that would attract businesses to Indiana. Rather, this effort -- just like recent efforts to limit collective bargaining rights in Wisconsin and Ohio -- was first and foremost about political power."

After citing an Indiana building trades report showing the negative impact of right-to-work laws elsewhere, Ayers said "misinformation and special interest money may have carried the day today, but the fight is far from over." Indiana workers and those elsewhere "will not be silenced. Indeed, the sleeping giant that is the American middle class has been awakened.

Teachers President Randi Weingarten added that right to work "will increase economic pain and uncertainty" for Indiana workers, at the wrong time, in a recession.

Daniels and the GOP lawmakers responded to "mean-spirited and irresponsible" corporate attacks on workers, Weingarten said.

"This debate crystallized who is on the side of working people. In the legislature, every Democratic senator and nine courageous Republican senators voted 'no,' plus the House Democrats earlier walked out in an attempt to stop this harmful bill." Those lawmakers "demonstrated their willingness to stand up against this corporate-backed attack" on workers, she concluded.

Protesters slam Kasich for “selling out Ohio”

Rick Nagin — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 09:38:00 -0500

STEUBENVILLE, Ohio - Hundreds demonstrated here Feb. 7 against Republican Gov. John Kasich's corporate agenda on the occasion of his State of the State speech. Actions were also held the previous day at state office buildings in Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati.

Protesters denounced huge tax giveaways to the rich and big business that the governor is paying for with cuts to education, mental health and city services as well as privatization of lucrative assets like the proposed sale of the Ohio Turnpike.

State Sen. Mike Skindell told the boisterous crowd outside Steubenville High School, where Kasich gave his speech, that the governor plans to fund Jobs Ohio, the privatized state Department of Economic Development, with a surcharge on electricity bills. Skindell said the entire operation of Jobs Ohio, now serving as a land office to sell state assets, is illegal and is the target of a lawsuit he has filed.

Skindell and State Rep. Bob Hagan, who stood with him in the bed of a pickup truck to address the crowd, have introduced legislation to delay Kasich's reckless promotion of fracking at least until the federal Environmental Protection Administration issues a report on the impact on water pollution of this new technique for oil and natural gas extraction. Kasich said in his speech that 36 fracking wells have already been drilled in the Steubenville area.

Hagan, who represents Youngstown, spoke of the series of earthquakes that hit his district recently as a result of high-pressure pumping of fracking wastewater into storage wells. Kasich was forced to halt the dumping of the oily water imported mostly from Pennsylvania and New York after the quakes.

"I've never been in an earthquake before," said Youngstown resident Mike Alexander. "The one that happened on New Year's Eve felt like a truck hit our house."

While claiming to being committed to protecting the environment, Kasich said in his State of the State address that fracking would continue without delay. He was interrupted by protesters in the audience shouting "Mic check" and "John Kasich, you're selling out Ohio." As the interruptions continued, about 10 people were escorted from the building by some of the large contingents of uniformed and plainclothes officers and State Highway Patrol officers that were present for the address.

While Kasich made no mention of his current 36 percent public approval rating or the enormous setback he suffered in last November's election with the referendum repeal of the union-busting Senate Bill 5, this was on the minds of many demonstrators.

"SB 5 was the battle," Chrissie Heineman of the Service Employees Union told the crowd outside. "but the war is still on."

Shane Hanley, a steelworker locked out by Cooper Tire in Findlay, illustrated the same point saying that his union after giving up massive concessions was continuing to be victimized by "unrestrained corporate greed."

In his lengthy, disjointed and rambling address, Kasich sought to claim credit for every new job created in the past year, although many resulted from federal stimulus funding and programs begun by Ted Strickland, his Democratic predecessor. The Plain Dealer described the speech as "vague" and "light on new ideas."

"The governor is in fantasy-land," House Democratic leader Armond Budish told the paper. "He took credit for everything under the sun and, given a few more minutes, he would've taken credit for the sun."

Despite the unprecedented contentiousness of his first year in office, Kasich claimed to be for bipartisanship, citing his support for Cleveland Democratic Mayor Frank Jackson's request for legislation to strip teachers of seniority rights and establish "merit pay."

Cleveland Teachers Union President David Quolke described this as "SB 5 lite."

Democratic State Rep. Mike Foley dismissed Kasich's posturing about bipartisanship as a fraud.

"We're kept out of everything," he said. "We have 10 speeches blasting them on the floor. They (the Republicans) hardly bother to answer. They just ram through whatever they want."

Standing behind a banner reading "Recall John Kasich," the demonstrators chanted, "Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, John Kasich's got to go."

Photo: Chrissie Heineman speaking. Rick Nagin/PW

City Council OKs community benefits for Oakland Army Base project

Marilyn Bechtel — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 09:30:00 -0500

OAKLAND, Calif. - A new chapter opened Feb. 7 in the long saga of efforts to redevelop the former Oakland Army Base, as the City Council approved guiding principles to assure Oakland residents priority for construction jobs and for the warehouse and goods movement jobs that are to follow.

The base is especially important to the city's economic life because it is next to the Port of Oakland, the nation's fifth busiest port, in a working-class area where unemployment is high.

Agreement on the provisions came after years of discussion, and a nine-month process that brought together labor, community members, environmentalists and the business community, with Councilmember Jane Brunner playing a major role. Participating in the discussions was the 30-organization Revive Oakland! coalition of clergy, workers, youth, and neighbors from West and East Oakland.

Besides construction jobs, the project is expected to create some 2,500 to 3,000 permanent jobs.

Among the agreed goals: Fifty percent of work hours are to go to Oakland residents, with first priority to residents in West Oakland and other areas of high unemployment. All new apprentices are to be Oakland residents, and a quarter of apprenticeships and later operations jobs are to go to disadvantaged (low income, formerly incarcerated, etc.) workers. Workers are to have the right to organize, free of employer interference.

Many speakers at the City Council meeting cited the importance of the "ban the box" provision, barring prospective employers from asking about an applicant's prior criminal record.

"I can ride around Oakland, and look at all the work I have done - the Uptown Apartments, the Fox Theater, Kaiser, the airport," said a young African American woman ironworker. "You've got to give people a chance, who have felonies or misdemeanors. I have one. Somebody gave me an opportunity to get a job, and I've been doing good for myself for the last eight, nine years. I want to see other people do good for themselves."

Journeyman electrician Rachel Bryan, who described herself as "a quadruple minority: woman, African American, under 35, disadvantaged worker," said the goals provide a prevailing wage, benefit the area, level the playing field for local workers, and create a "healthy pathway" for apprenticeships. Citing four Oakland projects she's worked on, Bryan said, "This has created a deeper appreciation for my city, a deeper level of self-confidence."

The role of well-paying jobs in lowering crime, in a city where shootings and homicides are a big problem, was also widely mentioned.

"Maybe this will help to stop some of the crime in Oakland," said longtime West Oakland resident Shirley Burnell. "People would have jobs and would be able to support themselves and their families and they won't be on the streets robbing people."

Outside City Hall before the council meeting, two high school students active with the Urban Peace Movement put it another way.

Italia Suarez called the jobs "a means of survival." Added Jessica Lopez, "Better jobs equal a better life. They're something to live for instead of becoming another statistic."

Meanwhile, the city and the developers are working to complete their negotiations in the coming months.

The Oakland Army Base was once a major employer in the area, and when it closed in 1999, it is estimated that as many as 7,000 well-paying jobs were lost.

Photo: Marilyn Bechtel/PW

Educators tell labor board: Restore our rights

Mark Gruenberg — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 08:55:00 -0500

NEW YORK - Some 1,800 graduate assistants and teaching assistants at New York University want their union rights - and their contract - back. And their delegation came to D.C., speaking for themselves and tens of thousands of other TAs nationwide, to demand that from the National Labor Relations Board.

Representatives of the students, members of UAW Local 2110, rode buses for 250 miles to the NLRB offices in Washington on Feb. 3, to deliver a letter asking the agency to quickly rule on the union's case for reinstatement at the institution.

"We have worked hard, been accountable to workplace procedures and rules, paid taxes on our earnings, and like other workers, supported our families and our communities," said delegation member Neil Myler, a Linguistics Department TA.

Because the NYU TAs work just like other workers, they should have the same rights to organize and bargain, added UAW Region 9A Director Julie Kushner, who led the delegation. "After almost two years, a decision should be put on the fast track so these workers can exercise their democratic right to form their union," she added.

The TAs and graduate assistants organized with the UAW more than a decade ago, won a recognition election and negotiated a first contract after that 2000 win, with the university. That pact expired in 2005. By then, an NLRB dominated by members named by anti-worker GOP President George W. Bush had ruled that TAs, graduate assistants, and research assistants were "students," and thus not covered by labor law. NYU, citing that ruling, refuses to recognize and bargain with the TAs and their union.

In May 2010, the students tried again, winning a ruling that at least they had the right to have their case heard on the local level. Last June, the agency's New York regional director said they had the right to organize and bargain, via their union, with NYU. But he delayed implementation of his ruling due to the Bush-era board's decision.

"We are asking the NLRB to give back what we should have by federal law: Democracy at work," said Rana Jaleel, a doctoral candidate in American Studies. "It has been a long road for us, and a decision is overdue."

"These academic workers are willing to get on a bus and deliver their message in person. That is what democracy looks like," said UAW President Bob King in a statement. "They represent an important part of our union membership and a vital movement infused with energy and determination. They deserve to have their fundamental rights restored."

Will Facebook get a ‘like’ in China?

Blake Deppe — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 16:09:00 -0500

Facebook wants to reach China's Internet population, looking to boost connectivity and growth potential. But critics and analysts are doubtful of its prospects there.

The social network giant, now approaching a billion members, is planning its stock market launch in May; $5 billion worth of shares will be sold. Facebook, however, is estimated to be worth somewhere between $75 and $100 billion, and is looking to justify that value by expanding its advertising sales worldwide.

China appears to be part of that intended growth campaign, with Facebook noting in its IPO filing, "There are more than two billion global Internet users, and we aim to connect them all." But China, which had previously blocked the website three years ago, may prove to be a tough market to crack.

"It's actually a bit late for Facebook," remarked Hong Kong-based analyst Elinor Leung. "It will be difficult for them to introduce something that will allow them to differentiate themselves" from the current 'major players' in China's social networking climate.

Those social networks include Renren (which is similar in style to Facebook), and the Twitter-like microblogging service, Sina Weibo, both of which have millions of users each.

Facebook thrives on user-generated content, which "is very tough in China," according to Rebecca MacKinnon, author of Consent of the Networked, a book which examines the nature of the modern Internet, juxtaposing it with issues like freedom and civil liberties. "Google attempted to run a search engine in China," she said, "and they ended up giving up."

Internet companies in China, she explained, are expected to delete content identified as objectionable by the government, have important blocking software in place, and typically moderate all activity, reporting anything questionable to the police. This poses the question of whether Facebook is willing to modify itself enough to measure up to China's requirements.

Facebook admitted having concerns about complying with China's laws. "We do not know if we will be able to find an approach to managing content and information that will be acceptable [both] to us and the Chinese government," they said in their IPO filing. (Some would view this as Facebook being worried that by complying with China's concerns, its profit levels might not be high enough.)

Essentially, this means that whether or not Facebook and China can come to a compromise is anyone's guess.

Joe Chen, Chief Executive of Renren, said that if Facebook were re-introduced into China, it would be entering "a much more competitive market with a significantly different culture, business environment, and other characteristics than what it had previously experienced in the global market."

What it comes down to, some feel, is that Facebook might do better to simply stick to its own U.S. user base, rather than try and plant itself solely in the middle of a landscape already populated by more localized, China-oriented websites.

"The Chinese have been social for years, and Facebook would only be one more option among many," said Sam Flemming, a Shanghai-based social media consultant.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Internet community is asking how much further Facebook could expand. The network's business grew 77.8 percent from 2007 to 2008, 185 percent in 2009, 154 percent in 2010, and 89 percent in 2011. Basically, its growth rate is receding. This calls into question who would consider Facebook's business worth owning, and just how relevant Facebook will be a few years from now.

And in the end, suggested Beijing-based Internet consultant Duncan Clark, China's content objections may be anathema to Facebook's expansion campaign, anyway. "Chinese consumers don't ever want to have some second-class or dumbed down offering," he said.

Photo: "The outside view of Facebook's headquarters in Menlo Park, Calif. Facebook may now be setting its sights on China's Internet base." Paul Sakuma/AP Photos

In a first, Haiti attends Latin American ALBA meeting

Emile Schepers — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:44:00 -0500

On February 5, the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of our America (ALBA) held its eleventh meeting Caracas, Venezuela, to decide on a joint economic program. ALBA welcomed two new guest members, and moves were made to include Haiti in the organization.

ALBA was founded in 2004 with just Cuba and Venezuela as members. It now includes a total of eight countries: Cuba, Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Antigua, Dominica, and St Vincent and the Grenadines. At last weekend's meeting, two more small states were brought in as guest members, a step toward their full integration into ALBA: St. Lucia and Surinam. Honduras had been part of ALBA, but after the 2009 overthrow of left-wing President Manuel Zalaya, withdrew from the organization.

ALBA's goal is to create enough regional integration to realize the dream of South American liberator Simon Bolivar that Latin America could thrive without dependence on, or interference from, the United States or Europe. It emphasizes trade agreements that, unlike the privatization and austerity policies promoted by the International Monetary Fund, encourage countries to increase their expenditures for education, housing and health care. Its ruling philosophy is solidarity among the peoples, not domination by multinational corporations and wealthy states.

Attending as an observer was Haitian President Michael Martelly, elected last year amid controversy. The most popular party in Haiti, former President Jean Bertrand Aristide's "Fanmi Lavalas", had not been allowed to run a candidate, and the candidate of the party of outgoing President Rene Preval, Jude Celestin, was pushed out of a runoff by heavy pressure from the United States and its allies. Martelly has had some dealings with people close to former U.S. supported dictators Francois "Papa Doc" and Jean Claude "Baby Doc" Duvalier. He had called for the restoration of the army which Aristide had abolished. So, many have seen him as a potentially dangerous right winger. For him to show up at the ALBA meeting, hinting strongly that Haiti might like to eventually become a full member, surprised many.

Martelly and Venezuela's left wing president, Hugo Chavez, announced new bilateral agreements to increase already high Venezuelan aid to Haiti. After the disastrous earthquake of January 2010, Venezuela cancelled Haiti's debts. In Caracas, Martelly made a point of praising Venezuelan and Cuban aid before and after the earthquake, and said he hoped that the United States would not be angry and would understand that Haiti is in no position to turn away any friend.

Was Martelly misjudged, or has he been transformed by a year in the presidency? Haiti is destitute and its infrastructure wrecked. The country depends excessively on handouts from international donors, administered by foreign non-governmental organizations. Although there was a great outpouring of offers of aid after the earthquake, some of it has never come through and much of it comes with strings attached.

Plans elaborated for Haiti's future development by the United States, Canada and other wealthy nations were based on the idea that the country would forever function as a source of cheap labor for transnational corporations. Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), especially in clothing and textile production, was to be the motor of "development." Companies would be attracted to Haiti by the cheap labor. This would create "jobs" for thousands of Haitians, many of whom had been displaced from the rural economy in the first place by a flood of taxpayer subsidized rice from the United States, dumped at prices with which Haitian rice farmers could not compete. The trouble is that FDI is only attracted as long as the conditions persist that made the country attractive in the first place. As soon as wages go up, foreign capital decamps to some even poorer place. So the FDI strategy is a recipe for perpetual poverty. Participating in ALBA provides alternative sources of economic support, especially Venezuelan oil sold on very favorable terms.

In March, ALBA will hold a meeting of foreign ministers in Jacmel, Haiti, focused on how the ALBA countries can better coordinate aid for Haiti's recovery.

The ALBA heads of state meeting in Caracas agreed on developing a joint program of economic development for the Caribbean, including Haiti. They also agreed to expand the use of the sucre, the ALBA-based virtual currency which is being developed as a means of trade within the group. They agreed that each country will set aside 1 percent of its international reserves for the purpose of creating a new area development and aid fund.

Finally, the meeting passed resolutions calling for freedom for the Cuban 5, for the liberation of Puerto Rico and for an end to outside interference in Syria. The participating countries also sharply denounced the unwillingness of the British government to reach a negotiated agreement with Argentina about the future of the Malvinas (Falkland) Islands.

Santorum rolls over the “inevitable” Romney

John Wojcik — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:07:00 -0500

The Republican establishment's narrative of Mitt Romney's "imevitability" as the party's presidential nominee unraveled Tuesday in just one night.

Rick Santorum's clean sweep of the contests in Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri was a major victory for him in that it boosted his drive to fashion himself as the main conservative opponent to Romney and it injected adrenalin into the argument that Romney doesn't appeal to the GOP's right-wing base.

Romney camp contentions that his losses were not too serious because there were no delegates involved are almost as irrelevant as the paltry number of delegates that have been awarded him thus far. The 83 delegates Romney does have mean almost nothing when stacked up against the 1,100 additional ones he, or anyone else, would need to get the nomination.

Colorado had to have been the biggest shock for Romney who won it in 2008 with more than 60 percent of the vote and where he was expected to roll up a big victory again this week. Right wing activists and evangelicals cast their lot with Santorum, however, giving him a 40 to 35 percent victory over Romney. After taking Colorado, Santorum leads "frontrunner" Romney in contests won, 4-3. He can also bask in the glory of three straight victories in the Midwest, a key region for the 2012 presidential race. The Midwest has many "swing" states and Romney has yet to win any of them.

The Santorum victory in Missouri was also impressive because he won every county and racked up 55 percent of the vote statewide, putting his total 30 points ahead of Romney's 25.

All that having been said and done, however, the Tuesday primary results were, in more ways than one, a disaster for the Republican Party, at least in the short term.

Clearly evident was an "enthusiasm gap" that simply has to be making a lot of GOP leaders worry. Turnout at the Republican events in the three states Tuesday, overall, was half what it was four years ago.

If Santorum becomes the new "frontrunner" he will join a literal host of other Republican candidates who have taken a turn or two as "front runner" or as "flavor of the month," if you will.

The revolving door for "front runners" has understandably put GOP leaders at great unease. They understand that a new "front runner" appearing every few weeks is far more a function of voter disgust with all the candidates than it is a function of positive interest in all of them.

The low Romney totals, specifically, reflect a number of problems that voters have with him - his history as a job killer, his record of taking almost every possible position on a number of issues, and his penchant for stashing tons of money in offshore tax havens - to mention only a few. The fact that his "program" to fix the economy is a rehash of all the things that caused the economy to crash in the first place doesn't help him either.

In Missouri, Romney's vote total was 110,000 below what he got in that state four years ago. His Colorado total was 90,000 fewer votes than what he received four years ago and his Minnesota total was short by 70,000. It's a sorry picture for someone who has been campaigning for president for years and for someone who has been the beneficiary of millions of dollars in Super PAC money.

The ball room Romney rented in Colorado, the state where he was supposed to have the biggest win, had less than 100 people in it on Tuesday night. Uncontested Obama caucuses in Minnesota and in Colorado were often packed with hundreds of voters.

When Santorum spoke Tuesday night he also offered little to nothing in terms of solutions to the nation's problems. He sounded as dull and out-of-touch with what concerns voters as did Romney himself.

Santorum showed just how out of touch he is when he said, in fact, that jobs were not the big issue of the day and that instead, the big issue was "what kind of country we are going to be - "one that is free or one that is managed by a big government." At that rate, it may not be too long before Republican voters add him to the reject pile that they have been steadily building.

The disaster for Republicans in terms of voter enthusiasm, however, is no reason for progressives to rest on their laurels. There is talk among some Republican circles that even if they may eventually have to concede the presidential race to Barack Obama, they can still mobilize their billionaires and Super PACs to strike where some of them feel they have the best chance this year: Smashing the 53-47 Democratic majority in the Senate.

The strategy would make sense. Democrats are defending 23 seats in 2012, compared to only 10 for the Republicans. To gain control of the Senate Republicans need a net gain of four seats if Obama is re-elected and only three if he is not.

The Senate, it must be remembered, is often the place where the right wing hunkers down to ride out storms, especially when there is a peoples' upsurge.

Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio warned about this four years ago when he talked with reporters at the Democratic National Convention. His warning, at that time, was that if Barack Obama won the 2008 November election, he expected Republicans would use the Senate to block almost every progressive program the president came forward with.

The senator also reminded everyone that the Senate, by its very nature, is the more undemocratic body in the U.S. Congress. Small rural Republican states are as strong in the Senate as large urban Democratic ones.

Knowing how the right wing operates, there can be no doubt in any reasonable mind that if the president is reelected the GOP intends to again use the Senate to cripple beyond recognition any and all of his programs. If they control the Senate outright they can be even more effective than they have been this year in stymieing progress. Preventing a GOP takeover of the Senate, then, should be high on everyone's agenda.

Photo: The "inevitability" of Mitt Romney is unraveled in one night after three Santorum victories. Chris Carlson/AP

Getting off capitalism’s treadmill

Sam Webb — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:44:00 -0500

Which is a better metaphor to describe the lives of U.S. working people under capitalism: an escalator or a treadmill?

At one time one could argue with some evidence that an ascending escalator was an apt description. Between 1945 and 1975, U.S. capitalism went through an exceptional - not normal - phase of development.

Employment, wages and benefits steadily climbed upward for substantial sections of the working class in tandem with economic growth rates and profits. It seemed as if capitalism's negative features - boom and bust, harsh exploitation, instability, class polarization, mass impoverishment, etc. - had permanently given way to steady growth and broadly shared prosperity. The American Dream for the first time seemed to be within everybody's reach.

But much to the surprise of many this "Golden Age" of capitalism didn't last. By the mid-1970s stagflation, rising unemployment and declining wages took hold and the preceding period of capitalist development became the stuff of nostalgia. Over the next three decades the circumstances for working people continued to deteriorate, thanks to neoliberal globalization, the takeover of the economy by nonproductive financial capital, and a right-wing-led ruling class offensive.

The "up" escalator began to morph into a fast moving treadmill for countless numbers of working people. And with the Great Recession of 2008 the metamorphosis was complete as working people in their vast majority not only found themselves on a treadmill, but also were unable to keep pace, with many falling far behind.

Meanwhile, the 1 percent not only made their way through the Great Recession, but also enriched themselves many times over.

What is the upshot of all this?

We are in a new era of capitalist development. The class struggle has intensified and widened.

Needed are new mass and militant forms of struggle (like the mass struggles in Wisconsin, Ohio, and Wall Street's Zuccotti Park) and new demands (massive public works jobs program with affirmative action, democratic takeover of the financial sector, etc.) that correspond to the scope of the crisis and the changing consciousness of the multiracial working class.

Old forms of struggle that didn't prioritize mass mobilization, and the old demands that were shaped by the immediate post-World-War-II capitalist economy, no longer fill the bill.

Of crucial importance in this new era is unity along racial and gender lines, which means a consistent and sustained struggle against racial and gender discrimination.

Finally, the road to slowing down and eventually stepping off the treadmill of capitalism in its new phase goes through the 2012 elections. More specifically, the decisive defeat of the right that dominates the Republican Party is imperative.

Its defeat will open a new terrain of struggle on which the working class in all its diversity and its many allies can project and win solutions to the new problems that this era of capitalist development presents.

Photo: Farhad sh // CC 2.0

Black atheists plan billboard campaign for African American History Month

Joe Sims — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:34:00 -0500

"Doubts about religion: You are one of many" is the banner inscribed on billboards in a Black History ad campaign launched by African American atheist groups.

Featured on the billboard are images of famous 19th and 20th century African American figures along with contemporary freethinkers.

The effort is designed to call attention to a long tradition of atheism and agnosticism in the black community.

Billboards will appear in New York City, Chicago, Atlanta, Dallas, Washington D.C., and Durham, N.C.

The campaign is sponsored by African Americans for Humanism and local groups like the DFW Coalition of Reason in Texas.

CBS News writes that in Los Angeles, "members of Black Skeptics Los Angeles are calling for local 'freethinkers' to participate in a national 'Day of Solidarity for Black Non-Believers' aimed at promoting 'community and solidarity among blacks in America who identify as non-believers'."

Plans to place billboards in Dallas have already sparked discussion, says a CBS News local affiliate. It reports that "Area pastors ... are upset the billboard will appear in south Oak Cliff, along Interstate 35 and Illinois Avenue, within a mile of about a dozen black churches. 'It's a direct confrontation to the church. Absolutely,' said Pastor Kyev Tatum."

Rev. Tatum and the local Coalition of Reason, however, came together on a recent Sunday afternoon and found unity in preparing food for the poor. "The group showed up at the pastor's church in south Fort Worth to help him out. With an iPhone, they shared footage of members picking turnip greens that will be donated to area food banks." the CBS station reports.

African Americans for Humanism's website explains the group's purpose: "African Americans may be the nation's most religious minority, but the churches and religious leaders don't speak for many of us.

"Today as in the past, many African Americans question religion and religious institutions. More and more of us stand for reason over faith. Freethought over authority. Critical thinking in place of superstition. Many of us are nonreligious; some are nontheistic."

Langston Hughes, Frederick Douglass, Zora Neale Hurston and W.E.B. Du Bois were all atheists. In an autobiography Du Bois tells a story about being asked about his faith at a religious gathering. He replied, "Quite frankly, madam, I am a heathen." The faithful responded with nervous laughter.

Photo: W.E.B. DuBois via Wikipedia

Egypt blocks National Endowment for Democracy

W. T. Whitney Jr. — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:00:00 -0500

Egypt's military government announced recently that 43 people, including 19 Americans and 14 Egyptians, face prosecution on charges of using foreign money to influence Egyptian politics. By February 6, only six of the Americans remained in Egypt. One of those charged is Sam LaHood, son of U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood.

Egyptian police earlier had raided nongovernmental organization offices where the accused worked. The U.S. Congress and President Obama have threatened to withhold $1.55 billion in mostly military aid for Egypt.

U.S. citizens facing trial work with the International Republican Institute (IRI), the National Democratic Institute (NDI), Freedom House, and a journalism organization. The first two are associated, respectively, with the Republican and Democratic parties. One has $22 million available to fund programs in Egypt, the other $18 million. The four U.S. groups operate under the aegis of the private, nonprofit National Endowment for Democracy (NED), established in 1983. Active in 70 countries, the NED is "dedicated to the growth and strengthening of democratic institutions around the world," according to its website.

Says the New York Times: "United States law bars both groups from partisan activity in countries where they operate." Yet Venezuela's government closed down offices of NED-associated groups in December 2010 on grounds of meddling. The vigor of the Egyptian response to alleged NED intrusion was unprecedented, the Times reported.

U.S. government monies flow from the State Department's United States Agency for International Development to the NED and thence to private U.S. agencies funding thousands of foreign organizations. The objective of this arrangement may be to avoid embarrassment for the U.S. government by keeping its interventions indirect. The same goes with utilizing private, domestic organizations seen as respectable.

The NED system was instituted after decades of U.S. improvisation as to methods for exerting overseas control. Schemes moved from crude to less crude. Assuming ownership of the Philippines, Puerto Rico and Guam came first, after 1898. Then, mini-invasions became the tool of choice, especially for setting up favorable arrangements in other countries, particularly financial. Sponsorship of friendly dictators was in vogue for a time. Resort to secret, often terrorist, U. S. agents came later.

Typically, NED funding for student groups, right-wing unions, U.S.-friendly media, and political parties has found use at election time. Such was the case especially in countries of the former Yugoslavia, in Bulgaria, Georgia, Ukraine, even France, Italy and Portugal. The NED has sponsored projects in Iran and China. Its record in U.S.-targeted Latin American countries is notorious.

Cuban journalist Jean Guy Allard and Venezuelan lawyer Eva Golinger, along with Wesibrot, have elucidated that story. Golinger has utilized Freedom of Information Act material. In Haiti in 2003-2004, the IRI fed money and guns to paramilitaries moving from the Dominican Republic to Haiti to precipitate the overthrow of elected President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. The Brazilian government in 2005 denounced the IRI for changing election laws and thus trying to weaken then President Lula da Silva's Workers' Party. In Honduras, the IRI took a lead role in promoting the 2009 military coup that removed elected President Manuel Zelaya. It worked to legitimize fraudulent elections the next year making Porfirio Lobo president. The IRI has long participated in U.S. efforts to undermine Cuba's revolutionary government. Its 2011 grant for such work totaled $693,069.

Since 2002, the NED and its acolytes have availed themselves of $100 million in U.S. funds to bolster opposition to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, especially during election cycles. The IRI took a prominent role in backing the failed coup against Chavez in 2002. In 2011, the Obama administration sought $5 million to support opposition groups in Venezuela.

Among those facing trial in Egypt are representatives of Freedom House, a U.S. organization with a worldwide reach receiving 80 percent of its funding through the NED. Allegations have repeatedly surfaced of Freedom House ties to the CIA and involvement with clandestine anti-government activities in foreign countries. Between 1997 and 2009, Freedom House gathered in $10.6 million for democracy-promotion work in Cuba.

Explaining NED activity in Egypt, commentator Mark Weisbrot suggests the U.S. government "is running an empire" involving "power and control over other people in distant lands." He adds, "These goals will generally conflict with many people's aspirations for democracy and national self-determination." At stake in the Middle East are "military bases and alliances."

Behind the scenes: the secret NATO report on Afghanistan

Thomas Riggins — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:01:00 -0500

"State of the Taliban 2012," the secret report commissioned by the U.S. and NATO, was never supposed to see the light of day. Unfortunately for those on the right who want to prolong the war in Afghanistan it was leaked to the press and the New York Times has published many of its observations and conclusions.

The report was based on information taken from 4,000 prisoners, Taliban and others, that have fallen into the hands of U.S. forces. To the surprise of the U.S., the prisoners are rather upbeat about the progress of the war and think they are actually winning it. The report says that while the U.S. thinks it is winning and is about to start winding down its own participation, the interviews of the captives shows "a Taliban insurgency that is far from vanquished or demoralized." The same issue of the Times reported the optimistic statement of Defense Secretary Panetta that the U.S. would set 2013, not 2014, as the date for ending U.S. combat in Afghanistan. This was later corrected by the ground commanders in Afghanistan - 2014 is the date - and we may still remain after that date for a long, long time.

They wish.

The report says the prisoners think that in areas where the U.S. forces withdraw and turn over control to the Afghan Army, that army begins to cooperate with the Taliban- as do the local Afghan government officials. "Many Afghans are already bracing themselves for an eventual return of the Taliban." The report also says that while the Afghan government says it will carry on the war after the US withdraws "many of its personnel have secretly reached out to insurgents, seeking long-term options in the event of a possible Taliban victory." Well of course, all options should be kept on the table.

The report gives the impression that the war is lost, and that the government can't deal with this reality. Lt. Col. Jimmie E. Cummings a U.S.-NATO spokesperson said, "This document aggregates the comments of Taliban detainees in a captive environment without considering the validity of or motivation behind their reflections. Any conclusions drawn from this would be questionable at best."

Wait a minute. We captured these people and interrogated them to get information about the enemy. We don't like the information we get, so then say that due to a "captive environment," the conclusions are "questionable." But all interrogations of prisoners take place in a "captive environment" and are therefore "questionable." So why bother? It appears that if the government likes the information it gets it's credible, otherwise it's "questionable."

This is completely intellectually dishonest and we should not believe a word we are told by the military, unless we have independent third-person verification.

What could be more comical than NATO spokespersons attempting to refute their own report once it became public. The State Department has also gotten into the act. The report mentions that the Taliban has strained relations with their "Pakistani patrons." But Pakistan is supposed to be a U.S. "ally." How foolish does the U.S. look when the money it lavishes on the Pakistanis is redirected to the Taliban and used to kill U.S. troops? How can you even dream of winning a war when you are all tied up in these contradictory circumstances? The State Department realizes how bad this looks and also played down the significance of the NATO report, saying it was "in no way designed to impact our ongoing efforts to be back on track with Pakistan." Were we ever "on track" with Pakistan, or just being used by the Pakistanis after they realized we didn't know what we were doing in Afghanistan? The U.S. government knows all this anyway and is still trying to sort out its relations with Pakistan in the hopes (probably vain hopes) that the Pakistanis will alter their behavior.

For example, the Pakistani government, according to the report, "is thoroughly aware of Taliban activities and the whereabouts of all senior Taliban personnel." And "there is a widespread assumption that Pakistan will never allow the Taliban the chance to become independent of ISI [the CIA/FBI of Pakistan - the Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate] control." Yes, lets get back on track: the U.S. is at "war" with the Taliban, the Taliban is controlled by Pakistan. Therefore... draw your own conclusions.

An important conclusion of the report, that NATO and the U.S. really don't want people to know about, is the following: "Taliban commanders, along with rank and file members, increasingly believe that their control of Afghanistan is inevitable. Though the Taliban suffered severely in 2011, its strength, motivation, funding and tactical proficiency remains intact."

Where does the funding come from? It comes from us! Money from the U.S. to Pakistan goes to the Taliban. Trucks and weapons we give to the Afghan Army are sold off at bargain basement rates, or "donated," to the Taliban by corrupt elements in the Karzai government. The Taliban's strength is intact - we are withdrawing. Their motivation is intact - we just want to get out as soon as possible (sooner). Their tactical proficiency is intact; we are turning operations over to the Afghan Army, many of whose troops would rather shoot us than the Taliban. Is it really too hard to see how all this is going to end? Oh, I forgot to add that besides the ISI, the report says, the Afghan intelligence agency also supplies the Taliban with information about where American troops are located so that they can be attacked.

So there you have it. We are spending $2 billion a week to support the war against the Taliban, and both our "ally" Pakistan and the Afghan government we set up and are "defending" are on the side of the Taliban. General Petraeus retired just in time. If he runs the CIA as well he did the war in Afghanistan, the decline of U.S. imperialism will be well underway.

Britain's Morning Star feels no joy on queen's anniversary

Morning Star — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:17:00 -0500

Is there to be no end to the pukefest laid on by our national broadcaster to convince the world that people in Britain are beside themselves with joy over the 60th anniversary of our unelected head of state?

From repeated trailers for programs featuring royal family members saying how wise and wonderful their relative is to breathless simpering TV reporters explaining why the utterly mundane is somehow magical, the BBC has lost all sense of proportion.

It even featured a "royal historian" who was given free rein to assert unchallenged that even those of a republican bent are delighted that Elizabeth Windsor has remained in post for so long.

At the risk of being accused of being part of a small resentful minority determined to spoil the joyous celebrations of a grateful people, the Morning Star says No.

We are not happy that, in the early part of the 21st century, an unelected person is designated head of state in Britain and remains so on the basis of hereditary right.

It is an outdated practice, which most of the world has rejected in favor of forms of democracy that allow every child to cherish the possibility, however unlikely, of becoming head of state rather than knowing that accommodation to privilege has established no higher destiny for us all than that of royal subject.

Defenders of the status quo assert that the monarchy is largely symbolic or even little more than a tourist attraction, but its residual powers are real, extensive and undemocratic.

The meshing of the royal prerogative with the office of the prime minister creates an executive power where the House of Commons is less authoritative and assertive than it should be.

Elected members of Parliament are excluded from the secret unminuted meetings between prime minister and monarch that take place on a weekly basis, which makes a mockery of parliamentary sovereignty.

Royal prerogative is also invoked to draw a veil over the constant intrusion by the Queen's eldest son in matters of state, interfering in government policy on a range of issues.

How much influence does he have? It would be reassuring to believe very little. However, it baffles belief that he would persist with his letter-writing campaigns to ministers if he was singularly unsuccessful.

But surely the most important aspect of Prince Charles's advocacy of pet projects is that he, as a member of the royal family without any particular talents or experience, has privileged access to ministers that is denied to the rest of us.

It serves as a reminder of the contradiction between democratic advances made in various fields as a result of popular struggles and the ever-present monarchical obstacle to full emancipation.

Arguments in favor of maintaining the monarchy stretch from fairytale sentimentality to assessments of the institution or the Queen personally as "a source of stability and security in a changing world," as Ed Miliband phrased it.

What a sad comment on the maturity of the people of Britain that, according to its politicians, we still need an anachronistic figurehead to see us through troubled times even though German, French, US and Russian citizens seem capable of managing without.

The Morning Star has no intention of surrendering to the tidal wave of officially approved and confected royal fervor.

Our goal is socialism, based on full democratic rights for all and a republican constitution.

This article originally appeared in the Morning Star newspaper.

Talk of military intervention in Syria recalls Iraq debacle

Susan Webb — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 16:30:00 -0500

Reports that the White House and European allies are considering military action to topple Syria's Bashar al-Assad regime carry disturbing echoes of the Iraq debacle.

The talk of covert action, "no fly zones," and military involvement via proxies has ratcheted up following the Russian and Chinese veto of a United Nations Security Council resolution that, the Russians said, opened the door to "regime change" intervention.

As with Iraq in the run-up to the 2003 invasion, the U.S. and its allies appear to be relying on an exile-based alliance that is pressing for foreign intervention to oust Assad - the Syrian National Council.

SNC leaders "have been out of the country for a long time and ... are very savvy at talking to the West," Syria scholar Joshua Landis of the University of Oklahoma told the Canadian Broadcasting Company. The SNC includes Muslim Brotherhood and secular figures. According to Dubai-based al-Arabiya, a majority of the council's members live outside of Syria.

It recalls the exile-based Iraqi National Congress, led by the smooth-talking Ahmad Chalabi, which together with other Iraqi groups deemed acceptable by the Bush administration, coordinated with the U.S. military invasion in 2002 and 2003. According to a Council on Foreign Relations report in April 2003, these groups "all wanted to oust Saddam Hussein. But they have a long history of disagreement over a range of issues, including the ethnic composition of a post-Saddam government and whether the country should be a secular or an Islamist state. With the fall of Saddam, the infighting is continuing."

A Feb. 1, 2012, CBC article says of the Syrian National Council, "They are in favor of removing Assad from power and against negotiating with the regime but agree on little else ... The SNC has no coherent economic plan or vision of Syria's future, and the internal bickering within the council and lack of a strong, unifying leader threatens to render the council impotent."

But the SNC and its associated Free Syria Army are not the only Syrian element opposing the repression of the Assad regime. Landis and others emphasize the diverse nature of the opposition.

The National Coordinating Body for Democratic Change is, according to the al-Arabiya report, "an umbrella group of Arab nationalist figures, socialists, independents, Marxists and also comprises members of Syria's minority Kurdish community. The coalition is staunchly opposed to any international military intervention." The CBC report says this coalition backs "a peaceful transition of power" and is "willing to negotiate with the Assad regime."

Numerous local grassroots groups are also involved in protests against the regime.

Yet despite the diversity of the Syrian protest movement and the unclarity of the goals of the SNC pro-foreign-intervention elements, these are the forces that seem to be getting U.S. policymakers' attention.

The Feb. 1 Canadian report says SNC leaders have been "vague on whether they would support a foreign military intervention, with some factions saying they would accept Arab forces but not Western troops, and others voicing support for actions short of intervention such as a no-fly zone."

In Washington, "the National Security Council is said to be preparing a 'presidential finding,' an executive order authorizing covert action, as a policy option, but it is not clear whether the White House would take the risky step of signing it," the UK Guardian reports.

Any outside involvement in Syria would have "an Arab face," a former British intelligence officer told the Guardian.

Turkey and Qatar are backing "some sort of limited military intervention," says the Guardian. Options being discussed include NATO operations to set up a "buffer zone" and "humanitarian corridor" within Syria.

Commentator Evelyn Aissa warns that "any such effort would first require international forces to launch a preemptive air campaign to neutralize the government's air-defense systems. This would require bombing key military installations in and around Damascus, Aleppo, and Lattakia - all densely populated areas."

Compared to Libya, which is a relative backwater with regard to regional and global political dynamics, Syria is central to the political and economic dynamics of the Middle East. The bloodshed and deadly sectarian division that continue to wrack Iraq nine years after the U.S. invasion offer a warning of the possible consequences of foreign intervention in Syria.

Moreover, in addition to the severe political repression practiced by the regimes of Hafiz al-Assad and his son Bashar, economic issues play a central role in the protests. The 2005 introduction of neoliberal "social market economy" policies by Bashar al-Assad "exacerbated existing structural disparities and social discontent," writes Bassam Haddad, director of the Middle East Studies Program at George Mason University.

"The increasing withdrawal of state subsidies and welfare, the gradual introduction of weak market institutions to replace corrupt but functioning institutions of the state, alongside continued notorious mismanagement of the economy, became a recipe for social unrest. The scant rainfall during the past decade further caused massive migration and a loss of jobs in the countryside." These added fuel to "the fire of social protest potential after 2010. All it took was a spark." The spark, Haddad says, was the self-immolation of the Tunisian street vendor a year ago.

Any resolution to Syria's crisis will have to address these issues along with democratization of the political structure.

Photo: Syrian flag flies over Damascus CC 2.0.

Marriage equality moves forward in California

Marilyn Bechtel — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:59:00 -0500

A federal appeals court ruled Feb. 7 that California's Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage, passed by voters in 2008, is unconstitutional, siding with former Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughan Walker's landmark 2010 ruling in the case.

The decision by a three-judge panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is certain to be appealed by backers of the same-sex marriage ban. They could first ask for a ruling by a larger Ninth Circuit Court panel, or go directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.

"Although the Constitution permits communities to enact most laws they believe to be desirable, it requires that there be at least a legitimate reason for the passage of a law that treats different classes of people differently. There was no such reason that Proposition 8 could have been enacted," the court said.

The ruling, which is limited to California, has been stayed pending appeal.

Rebecca Rolfe, executive director of the San Francisco LGBT Community Center, said in a statement that the ruling is "not only the right decision based on law, but it is the right decision to bring fairness and equality to thousands of same sex couples throughout the state of California." She added, "This is an important acknowledgement that Proposition 8 hurt individuals, couples and families, and laws based on intolerance, exclusion and hate will not be allowed to stand."

A struggle over same-sex marriage has been going on in California for years.

In May 2008, the state Supreme Court overturned an earlier ballot proposition that banned same-sex marriage. Opponents of same-sex marriage then placed Prop. 8, to amend the state constitution to specifically ban marriage between two people of the same sex, on the November 2008 ballot, and voters passed it with a 52 percent majority.

In 2009 the state Supreme Court upheld Prop. 8, though it let stand same-sex marriages that took place between May and November 2008.

The stage was set for the current court battles by a landmark marriage equality trial in San Francisco in January 2010, the first federal trial over same-sex marriage. Two same-sex couples, Kristin Perry and Sandy Stier of Berkeley and Paul Katami and Jeff Zarrillo of Burbank were plaintiffs in a non-jury trial before now-retired Judge Walker.

The couples asserted that Prop. 8 violates the U.S. Constitution because it discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation. They gave moving testimony about the effects of the ban on their families. Perry said the message to her was, "I'm not good enough to be married." Katami told the court, "I love kids. To think you have to protect some children from me, from Jeff, there's no recovering from that."

The plaintiffs offered a series of academic expert witnesses on marriage, civil rights and culture, overwhelming the testimony in favor of Prop. 8.

In the 2010 trial, the four plaintiffs were represented by an odd-couple of attorneys, who had been on opposite sides in the court struggle over the outcome of the 2000 election. At that time, Republican Theodore Olsen represented President Bush, while David Boies a Democrat, represented Al Gore.

In August 2010, Judge Walker ruled Prop. 8 unconstitutional .

When neither then-Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, nor then-Attorney General Jerry Brown, a Democrat, would appeal the ruling, the ban's supporters, ProtectMarriage.com, proceeded with the appeal.

Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, New York and the District of Columbia now allow same-sex couples to marry. Washington state's legislature is considering legislation to allow gay marriage there, too.

Photo: At a San Francisco demonstration at closing arguments in the trial, in June 2010. Marilyn Bechtel/PW