People Before Profit blog

Texas parties map out divergent views

Fri, 25 Jun 2004 02:58:00 +0000

DALLAS – The Texas ballot was legally set when the state’s Democrats completed their convention in Houston June 19. The Democrats in Houston and the Republicans in San Antonio two weeks earlier created greatly contrasting platforms.

The GOP, the party that spawned the Bush-Cheney regime, committed itself to a written program so brazenly anti-worker and anti-people that virtually all their state candidates jumped to distance themselves from it. It includes such things as repealing the state’s minimum wage and prevailing wage laws, embedding the anti-union “Right to Work” law in the state constitution, repealing “hate crimes” legislation, extending the use of the death penalty, privatizing Social Security, encouraging school vouchers to privatize education, criminalizing homosexuality, and banning all abortions without exception, even if it costs the woman’s life.

Texas Democratic Party leader Charles Soechting was widely quoted when he laughingly called the Texas Republican platform “the longest suicide note in history.”

The Democratic platform called for keeping Social Security and opposing privatization, fighting all forms of discrimination, repealing parts of the Patriot Act, and increasing the minimum wage. Their convention theme was “Fighting for Democracy” in a state where democracy was slashed by a GOP-led redistricting fight and very questionable campaign financing.

Near the end of the convention, presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich led the Democrats in a spirited chant of “End this war!” Kucinich’s supporters carried out an admirable floor-petitioning campaign to overcome the Resolutions Committee and get their peace resolution before the committee. It called for a United States Department of Peace, and the convention passed it by a big majority.

Senator John Edwards (D-N.C.) was the most popular speaker at the Democratic convention, while Texas Congressman Tom DeLay was the darling of the Republicans. Democrats have high hopes that legal proceedings against DeLay’s electoral methods may level the playing field in Texas before November.

Texas is a state with near-impossible petitioning requirements for ballot status for third parties, and the short petitioning period is over when the major parties hold their conventions. The Libertarians think the petitions they filed will be found sufficient, but Ralph Nader’s supporters cling only to the hope that they will overturn Texas rules in court.

The author can be reached at flittle7@yahoo.com.

We wont let Bush steal it again!

Fri, 18 Jun 2004 02:23:00 +0000

Florida voters sound alarm on voter purges

Florida Gov. Jeb Bush’s drive to purge 47,000 more voters from Florida’s voter rolls has touched off angry charges that he is scheming a replay of the 2000 election, when thousands of Florida voters were scrubbed from the rolls to put his brother in the White House.

Florida State Sen. Tony Hill, of Jacksonville, a former longshoreman and an organizer for the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), told the World by telephone, “I’m very concerned. An alarm went off inside me that this could be a repeat of 2000 all over again.”

The furor erupted when Florida Secretary of State Glenda Hood sent out a new list May 25 of 47,000 names to be purged from voter rolls. All the data was provided by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement under Gov. Bush’s command, Hill pointed out. County election supervisors meeting in Key West last week said they have found a 6-percent to 7-percent error rate in the list.

“The purge list is not specific enough,” Hill said. “If you happen to have the same name or a similar name as an ex-felon, you might be on that list and have your name expunged.”

Voting rights groups have filed “friend of the court” briefs in support of a lawsuit by CNN and Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) asking the courts to order release of the list. “I want access so I can inform every voter who is on it in Senate District One,” Hill said. “Why is this list secret? This is another attempt to suppress our vote.”

Beverly Neal, executive director of the Florida Conference of NAACP branches in Orlando, said access to the list “would give us an opportunity to monitor that list in light of what happened in 2000 when so many people were disenfranchised.”

“It is our responsibility to fight to see that the right to vote is protected,” she told the World. “Statewide, our branches have registered close to 10,000 new voters.”

In 2000, Hill and Kendrick Meek, both serving in the Florida Legislature at the time, spearheaded a voter registration drive that resulted in nearly 900,000 Black voters casting ballots in the 2000 election – 90 percent against Bush, 15 percent of the 5.9 million votes cast in Florida.

Hill said the labor and civil rights movement seeks to equal that turnout to defeat Bush in Florida this Nov. 2. ACORN has collected 800,000 signatures to put a question on the November ballot to establish a minimum wage in Florida. The Florida Supreme Court is expected to rule soon whether to grant it ballot status. “This initiative will be the ‘flavor of the year’ in giving people a reason to turn out and vote,” Hill said. “We’re trying to draw people out based on their needs. This election is not just about the president. It’s about the House and Senate. It’s about quality of life, civil rights, civil liberties.”

Neal decried the Bush record on issues vital to the people. “Health insurance is not available, prescription drugs are not affordable,” she said. The Bush-Cheney campaign “didn’t even bother to answer” a questionnaire the national NAACP sent to candidates, she noted. “That was a slap in the face not only to the NAACP but to everyone touched by the issues in that questionnaire.”

In 2000, then-Secretary of State Katherine Harris hired Database Technologies (DBT) to purge Florida’s voter rolls. At least 57,700 voters, disproportionately African American, were removed as “ex-felons.”

The NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund filed a lawsuit containing proof that 19,000 people were improperly purged. (The margin between Bush and Democrat Al Gore was less than 1,000 votes in the state.) Florida promised to restore these voters but only 800 voters have been reinstated so far.

Leon County Election Supervisor Ion Sancho said Harris sent him a list of 694 supposed felons in 2000 but his office was able to verify that only 34 actually had a criminal record. The new Secretary of State has sent him a purge list of 820 to check for criminal records.

Ralph Neas, president of People for the American Way, part of an “Election Protection” coalition in Florida, wrote to Hood June 1, calling it “simply outrageous that you would give county supervisors just seven working days to devise a timetable for a new purge of the voter rolls when in more than eight months you have taken absolutely no action to follow up on the restoration of voting rights of voters improperly purged from the rolls in 1999 and 2000.”

The author can be reached at greenerpastures21212@yahoo.com.click here for Spanish text

Same-sex marriage: Its time has come

Fri, 11 Jun 2004 04:07:00 +0000

The struggle for marriage equality saw its first major victory last month as Massachusetts began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. In the past year, through civil disobedience and court decisions, thousands of same-sex couples have been married across the country.

On May 17, the first day of marriage licenses being issued to same-sex couples in Massachusetts, thousands lined up at clerks’ offices across the state to get their licenses, the result of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s landmark November 2003 decision in the Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health case.

In the ruling, Chief Justice Margaret Marshall was aware of its controversial nature.

“We are mindful that our decision marks a change in the history of our marriage law. Many people hold deep-seated religious, moral, and ethical convictions that marriage should be limited to the union of one man and one woman, and that homosexual conduct is immoral. Many hold equally strong religious, moral, and ethical convictions that same-sex couples are entitled to be married, and that homosexual persons should be treated no differently than their heterosexual neighbors,” she wrote.

“Neither view answers the question before us. Our concern is with the Massachusetts Constitution as a charter of governance for every person properly within its reach.”

The opinion pointed out that stopping same-sex couples from marrying creates a tier of second-class citizens: “Barred access to the protections, benefits, and obligations of civil marriage, a person who enters into an intimate, exclusive union with another of the same sex is arbitrarily deprived of membership in one of our community’s most rewarding and cherished institutions. That exclusion is incompatible with the constitutional principles of respect for individual autonomy and equality under law.”

For many couples the decision was a legal confirmation of their relationship. For Jean McGuire and Barbara Herbert, the decision allowed them to take another step in their 14-year relationship.

Two of their three adult children, along with other friends and family, were on hand during the couple’s civil service ceremony on the lawn of Cambridge City Hall, May 17. (Their other daughter, who was working in London, was present via cell phone.)

They spoke of their community’s support of their relationship through the years. Their neighbors in Cambridge, they said, had treated them and their children as equal citizens, something they acknowledged not all same-sex couples enjoy.

“We’ve had the good fortune, even before this decision, to live in a place that recognizes our relationship, allowed us to go to parent-teacher meetings together, appreciated that we were a family,” McGuire said.

Herbert, who is an emergency room doctor and was due at work that afternoon, told reporters of the support she felt at work.

“There were lots of people who said to me very clearly that they have religious objections to us getting married but they want to see [what is] fair,” she said.

“And so they were thrilled at the idea that we were coming here to have a civil ceremony, even across those objections.”

The couple was in a unique situation since at the time of the original case McGuire was working in the Department of Public Health, which in addition to its many health programs is responsible for the issuance of marriage licenses.

While she no longer works there, she said that her sexual orientation had never been a problem in the office, but that it was difficult for her when the lawsuit was brought against the department.

Comparing Goodridge to another landmark decision, Brown v. Board of Education, which celebrated its 50th anniversary on the same day as the first licenses were issued, McGuire pointed to the looming political struggle in Massachusetts.

“If we had allowed people to vote on Brown v. Board of Education where would we be right now?” she asked.

“The notion that our marriages should be up to a public vote should be questioned. This is about equity and equality and opportunity, and it’s not about putting it out for the determination of the voting public.”

But marriages like McGuire’s and Herbert’s might be up to a public vote in the next few years. Several states are set to have votes on whether same-sex marriages should be legal.

In Massachusetts, voters may be faced with the decision to approve an amendment to the state constitution. While the Legislature failed to reach an agreement this year, and, therefore, the question won’t be put to voters yet, opponents of marriage equality have already said they will take up the issue again in the 2005 session.

While celebrating the victory in Massachusetts, many are preparing for the many battles to come. Even as they came out of city halls with marriage licenses in hand, some couples voiced their concerns.

“The way things are going in this counry we wanted to do this as quickly as possible,” said Norm Sanguay, who on May 17 applied for a marriage license with Stewart Azar, his partner of 15 years. They had their two young children in tow.

“You never know. The sooner we affirm our commitment the better.”

Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney made many attempts during the 180 days between the Goodridge decision and its institution to overturn the court’s ruling. He was aided in his challenges by a number of conservative groups from around the country.

The Arizona-based Alliance Defense Fund, which describes itself as “a legal alliance defending the right to hear and speak the Truth, through strategy, training, funding, and litigation,” has been a party to many of the anti-equality legal challenges across the country.

The group is currently involved in the California Supreme Court case against San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom for his issuing of marriage licenses to same-sex couples earlier in the year and was behind a last-minute attempt to stop Massachusetts from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear that case, but it is expected that it will not be the last time such an appeal will be brought before the court. Should the Supreme Court take up such a case, it would bring all three branches of the federal government into the debate.

In his State of the Union address in January, President George W. Bush called for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

In the face of what Bush has repeatedly called “activist judges,” he said, “The only alternative left to the people would be the constitutional process” if marriage were defined in a way that included same-sex couples.

Congress quickly took up Bush’s call. The Senate Judiciary Committee has been holding a series of hearings on the matter over the past few months.

In the current Senate, it is unlikely that opponents of same-sex marriage will be able to gather the required 67 votes. However, the Senate seats that are up for grabs in November could change this.

Debate over the Federal Marriage Amendment and the potential for getting the necessary votes has added to the urgency of the already hot-button election issue of same-sex marriage.

While the debate continues at the federal level, states are moving quickly to pass legislation as well. Under the 1996 federal Defense of Marriage Act, states are not required to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.

Because it was left as a states’ rights issue, the issue of a federal amendment was forestalled.

However, marriage equality opponents are now working furiously for such a federal ban in reaction to local and state actions, such as those in Massachusetts and San Francisco.

As the November elections near, the debate continues on both state and federal levels. Bush is set to use the issue in an attempt to solidify his conservative base. Several states are likely to present voters with initiatives to ban same-sex marriage.

However, while acknowledging the continuing struggle for full, national marriage equality, couples such as Herbert and McGuire and Azar and Sanguay are celebrating their new marriages.

For a helpful chart illustrating the different benefits of marriage, civil unions, or no marital status, visit the web site of the Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, www.glad.org.

The author can be reached at jbarnett@pww.org.

Bridging the gap on health care

Fri, 11 Jun 2004 03:48:00 +0000

Eight out of 10 of the 44 million people in the U.S. who lack health insurance come from working families. It’s a national problem that needs a national solution.

The Service Employees International Union (SEIU), along with its Americans for Health Care project, Jobs with Justice, and Rock the Vote, are sponsoring June 19 actions in some 35 cities across the country to “bridge the gap.”

“In the wealthiest country in the world, every man, woman and child should have access to quality, affordable health care, but instead, more and more working families cannot afford the health coverage they need,” said Andrew L. Stern, president of SEIU, the nation’s largest union of health care workers.

Under President Bush, 4 million more Americans lost their coverage, average health care costs have risen nearly 50 percent, and premiums have gone up more than three times faster than average wages.

June 19 events are being organized locally, with major actions across bridges in San Francisco, New York, Chicago, St. Louis, Seattle, Miami, Atlanta, Boston, Baltimore, Denver, Pittsburgh, Iowa City, and Providence, R.I., among others. For more information on these actions, visit www.BridgingTheGapForHealthCare.org.

Job report masks signs of trouble

Fri, 11 Jun 2004 03:40:00 +0000

While the Associated Press reports on “a job market steadily gaining steam ahead of November’s presidential election,” President Bush still has plenty to worry about from working-class voters concerned with the economy.

After nearly three years of steady job loss, there have now been three months of growth totaling 947,000 jobs, according to the latest report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). How good is this?

It’s about equal to the average rate of growth in the postwar era. Over the last 60 years, in half the months the economy added jobs at a higher rate than the last three months. But 30 months after the recession officially ended, we should be doing far better than average, in order to make up for millions of jobs lost. Even if the present pace continues, on Election Day there will be 2 million jobs fewer than Bush’s Council of Economic Advisors predicted would be created by the tax cuts for the wealthy, passed in June 2003.

Nonetheless, job growth at this pace will, eventually, result in a gradual drop in the unemployment rate. Will the economy continue to add jobs at this rate? Jared Bernstein at the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) – hardly a Bush supporter – said at a June 6 press conference that the economic recovery is self-sustaining at this point, and that job growth will continue, unless some external shock upsets the apple cart.

Unfortunately, there are a number of shocks just waiting for their moment. Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research warns that houses are being built “at a pace that exceeds demand by 400,000 units a year” and that “a decline in home prices and residential construction could lead to a sharp downturn in the economy.” He also warns that prices are increasing faster than wages, which “cannot support very rapid consumption growth unless consumers go even further into debt.”

Some big-business economists are also concerned. According to The New York Times, Paul Kasriel of the Northern Trust in Chicago predicts economic growth will slow later this year, and bigger difficulties are in store in 2005. “That’s when I think we could see the dollar go into a sharp decline, inflation spike up. … That’s when we ultimately pay the price for our excesses,” he is quoted as saying.

But George Bush is not worried about 2005. The last employment report before the election will be only four months from now. Alan Greenspan, who has practically turned the Federal Reserve into a branch of the Bush campaign committee, will likely wait until after the election to do anything that rocks the economic boat. And no matter how many or how few jobs are created in the next four months, the Bush campaign will likely claim they are all due to his policy of tax cuts for the rich.

But, at the EPI press conference, Jared Bernstein said that more jobs may be available, but the benefits are not being broadly shared. And no wonder: low-paying jobs are growing fastest, while the share of good jobs is shrinking, he said. The organization OMB Watch reports that corporate profits are at record highs, while labor compensation is at a 38-year low. As Molly Ivins put it in a recent column, “We work harder, they get the money.”

Working people know that the economy is not working for them. Bernstein pointed to a gap between the growing job figures and low consumer confidence, and cited opinion polls showing that working people are not feeling a recovery in their pocketbooks. People know that when their kids find jobs, they are lousy, and they know they don’t have any more money to spend after paying for gas and college tuition, he said.

As we have said in this column, recessions are built into the capitalist system, regardless of who is president. But Bush has used the recession to intensify a class war against working people, and his policies have contributed to the slowness of the recovery.

The same day the administration was crowing over the BLS employment figures, thousands of activists gathered at the “Take Back America” conference in Washington, while the “Inequality Matters” conference convened in New York. Given the level of working-class anger and mobilization, Bush should be very worried.

The author can be reached at economics@cpusa.org.

National Clips

Fri, 11 Jun 2004 03:10:00 +0000

BRUNSWICK, Ga.: Protesters ‘unwelcome’ G-8 Summit

Caravans of military Humvees patrolled the cobblestone streets in this coastal town starting June 5. Legions of Secret Service agents and an estimated 10,000-20,000 federal, state and local police roamed the area. The mechanical beat of helicopter blades drowned out the soothing surf. Concrete barriers, wire mesh fencing and military checkpoints replaced magnolias.

This was the state of emergency declared by Gov. ‘Sonny’ Perdue. This was the opening of the G-8 Summit, June 8, where George W. Bush met with leaders from seven other nations to discuss the world’s economy. The summit ended June 10.

Thousands of protesters from 32 organizations lined up June 8 behind “United for Peace and Justice” banners demanding an end to the occupation of Iraq, one of three permitted marches. The following day, marchers highlighted the devastation to the environment by corporations running the global economy. June 10 was devoted to calling for an end to the U.S.-backed occupation of Palestine.

The increasingly aggressive role of the Bush administration in world events brought P.J. D’Amico to Brunswick from Atlanta. “I am overwelmingly fatigued when I read the paper about this country and its shifts and the brutality at Abu Ghraib,” he said. “I just can’t be a spectator anymore.”

Demonstrations also occurred in Savannah, Ga., organized by the Labor and Action Research Project.

WASHINGTON: Gov’t workers fight for right to vote

The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) plans to ignore a letter from the Bush administration’s Office of Special Counsel (OSC) and continue to register federal workers on the job. In a May 28 statement, the union said it would sue any federal agency that denied workers the right to register to vote.

AFGE sued the Clinton administration 30 times to protect workers’ jobs from downsizing and other infringements on federal workers’ rights.

AFGE General Counsel Mark Roth blasted the OSC decision, saying, “This opinion is total nonsense. This agency should be ashamed.”

BUFFALO, N.Y.: Patriot Act sweeps up artists

University of Buffalo art professor Steve Kurtz is a member of the Critical Art Ensemble, which produces artwork to bring the politics of biotechnology to millions. Kurtz and fellow artists Beatriz da Costa and Steve Barnes face a federal grand jury, June 15, because the FBI, under expanded powers of the Patriot Act, claims the trio violated a section of the law prohibiting possession of “any biological agent, toxin or delivery system” without justification “of prophylactic, protective, bona fide research or other peaceful purpose.”

The CAE’s exhibits, which often resemble science projects, utilize bacteria and laboratory equipment commonly available to high school and college students.

“I have no idea why they’re continuing to investigate,” said da Costa, who is a professor at the University of California, Irvine. “It was shocking that this investigation was ever launched. That it is continuing is positively frightening and shows how vulnerable the Patriot Act has made freedom of speech in this country.”

A demonstration is planned on June 15, at 9:00 a.m. outside the courthouse.

AIKEN, S.C.: Cruel Bush trick imperils drinking water

Cleaning up Cold War-era nuclear bomb-making waste is expensive. In a supposed cost-cutting move, the U.S. Senate voted June 2 to ease the storage regulations of such toxic waste. Critics charge the new rules, if implemented, could destroy drinking water for millions.

The bill’s supporters claim that only the Savannah River facility is affected by the change, which allows 51 tanks containing 31 million gallons of weapons radioactive waste to remain in the ground here. The plan adopts a Bush administration proposal to cover the toxic waste with concrete. Strict regulations, supporters claim, would still apply to other nuclear weapons facilities, including Hanford in Washington state. Hanford’s 177 tanks hold 53 million gallons of weapons-generated waste, and tanks in Idaho Falls, Idaho, hold 900,000 gallons.

The action split South Carolina’s senators and drew sharp criticism from officials in Washington state and Idaho, and from environmental activists. South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham (R) tacked the provision on to the $447 billion defense spending bill, arguing that it would save $16 billion. But Sen. Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.) charged that the Bush Energy Department is rolling the dice on the region’s drinking water.

Karen Wayland, legislative director of the Natural Resources Defense Council, said, “It is a cruel trick that allows the Bush administration to leave a legacy of radioactive pollution that could endanger drinking water for millions of Americans.”

The bill now goes to a House-Senate conference committee.

National Clips are compiled by Denise Winebrenner Edwards (dwinebr696@aol.com). Julia Lutsky contributed to this week’s clips.

Activists death prompts call for U.S. probe

Fri, 11 Jun 2004 03:05:00 +0000

CHICAGO – Friends and relatives of community activist May Molina Ortiz are demanding that the U.S. Attorney for Northern Illinois, Patrick Fitzgerald, carry out a special investigation of her death in police custody May 25.

The wheelchair-bound Molina, 55, who had asthma, diabetes and other health problems, was a frequent participant at demonstrations against police brutality and abuses of the criminal justice system. She worked with Families of the Wrongfully Convicted and Comite Exijimos Justicia (the “We Demand Justice Committee”), which have for several years accused the Chicago police, particularly the homicide squad detectives at the Grand and Central police station on Chicago’s northwest side, of framing Latino and other young people. Molina was dedicated to this cause partly because her own son, Salvador Ortiz, is serving a 47-year sentence for a murder she and the committee said he did not commit.

On May 24 the police invaded Molina’s house, allegedly to search for drugs. They claim they found some heroin, and took Molina and her second son, Michael Ortiz, to the lockup at Belmont and Western avenues, also on the northwest side. While she was there, her relatives came to the police station to ask the police to provide her with the medication she needed. Her attorney also visited her and, seeing that she looked unwell, asked the police to take her to the hospital.

The medication was never provided, nor was Molina taken to a hospital, and she evidently went into a coma and died sometime during the night of the 25th.

Anguished relatives and furious friends and colleagues of Molina carried out several demonstrations, including one at the Police Board’s monthly meeting, demanding to know why she was denied medication and why she was not taken to the prisoner section of Cermak Hospital. The police have claimed, via leaked information, that she had ingested bags of heroin and that they did not give her the medication because she was a grown woman “of sound mind” and did not ask for it. This version was met with incredulity by Molina’s supporters.

The context of the incident makes Molina’s supporters even more unwilling to accept the police version. Chicago is in the throes of a never-ending struggle over police accountability. During the 1980s and early ’90s, commander Jon Burge and his colleagues at another police station, on the south side, are known to have tortured dozens of prisoners into giving false confessions, in some cases landing themselves on death row.

Though the police eventually fired Burge, he was never prosecuted for these abuses, and many of the police and prosecutors who were complicit with Burge are still on the payroll of the Chicago Police Department or the Cook County State’s Attorney’s office (though one of the worst is now a judge).

The scandal of police and prosecutorial abuses and frame-ups (involving manufactured evidence and concealment of exculpatory evidence as well as torture), eventually led former Gov. George Ryan to commute the sentences of everybody on death row in Illinois, and to free five of the victims of Burge’s torture shop. After years of protests, a special prosecutor is now looking into the Burge case.

One pardoned victim of Burge’s torture, Aaron Patterson, has joined in the demonstrations for justice for May Molina, and was among those recently arrested in a protest over her death.

Protesters reject the idea of leaving the investigation of Molina’s death in the hands of the toothless “Office of Professional Standards” of the Chicago police, whose tendency to whitewash police abuses is notorious. They say her death cannot just be swept under the rug, and hope that a federal investigation and continuing demonstrations will usher in new struggles to make the police and prosecutors answerable to the public.

White House put itself above the law

Fri, 11 Jun 2004 02:51:00 +0000

Staff Sgt. Camilo Mejia is sitting in an Army brig at Ft. Sill, Okla., because he rejected the torture and brutality carried out by U.S. occupation forces in Iraq. Mejia served eight years in the Army National Guard and eight months in Iraq before refusing to go back to his unit there. Now he is serving a one-year term for desertion. On June 3 Amnesty International “adopted” Mejia as a “prisoner of conscience,” and called for his immediate and unconditional release.

But a world apart, in the nation’s capital, top Bush administration officials had no problem with torture and abuse. In fact, newly leaked memos show, they said the president could authorize almost any kind of physical or psychological coercion, including torture, in the name of the “war on terror.” At the same time they compiled a cascade of legal arguments to block potential criminal prosecution of such actions.

In a series of documents stretching back to 2001, Justice and Defense Department officials and White House lawyers said that the president was not bound by long-established international laws or even U.S. law outlawing torture. Using the arguments presented in these documents, President Bush issued directives that took U.S. handling of detainees outside the bounds of established law and set the stage for what happened at Abu Ghraib.

University of Illinois law professor Francis Boyle called the documents evidence of “a conspiracy by the highest-level officials” to violate the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Convention Against Torture. “They knew full well that they were violating the law,” Boyle told the World. “This was simply an attempt to create a legal pretext” for the actions Bush and other top officials had decided on, he said. They were trying to set the stage for what is known as “plausible defense” – avoiding criminal prosecution by saying you were just following your lawyers’ advice, Boyle said.

A newly leaked March 6, 2003, Pentagon report devotes 56 pages to highly legalistic hair-splitting of the definitions of torture, dotted with citations and footnotes, in what amounts to a handbook on how to carry out torture while evading prosecution for war crimes. The report is filled with phrases such as “the defense of necessity could be raised,” or “a defendant could show that he acted in good faith by …”

Citing “the President’s complete authority over the conduct of war,” the report says the 1994 U.S. criminal statute against torture is “inapplicable to interrogations undertaken pursuant to his commander-in-chief authority.” The report directly links the president’s policies to on-the-ground torture practices, and even argues that those caught carrying out torture could claim they were simply following “superior orders.”

Tod Ensign, an attorney who is director of Citizen Soldier, which is supporting Mejia, said that argument was specifically rejected by the Nuremberg tribunal, which tried Nazi war criminals. “Nuremberg stands for the principle that there are certain basic acts that cannot be defended by the claim that they are part of national policy or come from a higher authority,” Ensign told the World.

An August 2002 Justice Department memo advised the White House that international law did not apply to the war on terror, and justified the use of torture “to prevent further attacks on the United States.” In contradiction to the internationally recognized Geneva Conventions, the DOJ presented a very narrow definition of what constitutes torture, claiming that inflicting moderate or fleeting pain is not necessarily torture. But the Geneva Conventions require that detainees must at all times be humanely treated, and prohibit any form of “physical or mental coercion.” Torture or inhuman treatment of prisoners of war or others detained in war are grave breaches of the Conventions, and are considered war crimes. A New York Times reporter noted the Justice Department’s “complex definitions of torture … seemed devised to allow interrogators to evade being charged with that offense.”

In a Jan. 25, 2002, memo to President Bush, White House counsel Alberto Gonzales said the “war against terrorism is a new kind of war … that renders obsolete Geneva’s strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions.” Supporting Bush’s directive that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to Al Qaeda and Taliban prisoners, Gonzales said this “substantially reduces” the “threat” that U.S. officials could be prosecuted under the War Crimes Act – a 1996 federal law that carries the death penalty.

Veteran CIA analyst Ray McGovern called the Gonzales memo “a very startling exposition of the new situation … that it’s OK to exempt folks from the law.” The memo essentially outlined a legal case for Bush to defend himself from criminal prosecution, McGovern noted. This suggests that Bush has a “very deep personal stake” in winning four more years in office – to prevent prosecution, McGovern told the World.

The author can be reached at suewebb@pww.org.

Acting on principle: John Randolphs life and legacy

Fri, 04 Jun 2004 04:11:00 +0000

HOLLYWOOD, Calif. – John Randolph, a great light of stage and screen, was laid to rest here Feb. 24 at age 88. Actor and activist, Randolph shined his light through the anti-Communist hysteria of the McCarthyite 1950s. He was systematically banned from film and TV for over a decade by the Hollywood blacklisting of those named as Communist, but made a triumphant 30-year comeback with his principles intact.

Young Randolph, of middle-class Jewish immigrant stock grew up in the Bronx in the 1930s. This was a hard time for anyone to find work, as the Great Depression still gripped the country in massive unemployment.

Randolph’s first stage work came via the New Deal’s Works Progress Administration (WPA), which created work projects for the unemployed in their field of skill.

“I was in the theater project part of the WPA and we did original works,” said Randolph. The Federal Theater Project (FTP), formed in August 1935, performed across the country. Its mission was to bring affordable theater productions to working class communities. Two-thirds of the FTP productions were free and the rest were cheap. Their Negro Theater Unit’s “Macbeth,” which electrified Harlem, for example, had a price scale from 15 to 40 cents, compared to a ticket price of $1 to $3 for a Broadway show then.

One of the FTP’s children’s plays was called “Revolt of the Beavers.” Randolph describes the 1937 production. “There were beavers stripping the bark. They made the food, but they were always hungry. And I was on the other side. I played a reactionary beaver. There was ‘Rough,’ ‘Tough’ and ‘Gruff.’ I was ‘Tough,’” said the smiling Randolph.

His first brush with stardom was also his first brush with anti-communism. We were “hounded by Boy Scout Troop 237 in the Bronx who said “Revolt of the Beavers” was a Communist play,” said Randolph. And the FTP would soon be engulfed in the gathering tempest of right-wing attack.

In 1938 Rep. Martin Dies of Texas established a committee in the House to investigate “un-American” activities, especially of the FTP that Dies claimed was “nothing but straight Communist propaganda.”

With corporate monopolies of 1938 facing a rising tide of union victories and progressive social changes, the right wing could not afford public arts programs that spread pro-worker politics. Dies’ hostile “red-baiting” attack on the FTP from his House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) led to the 1939 WPA appropriations bill to specify none of its funds “shall be available … for the operation of any Theatre Project.”

However, three other WPA arts projects – music, art and writing – held on to their embattled funding until 1941. It was in this context that Randolph gained political and union experience.

“I met all these wonderful people. Then I became the editor of the newspaper in the union that was formed in the City Projects Council. Unheard of. A union? The government giving you money and you formed a union?”

While HUAC continued to operate through World War II, Randolph served in the Army Air Force as a control tower operator and firefighter, never sent overseas due to health reasons – the same that had kept him from joining the Abraham Lincoln Brigades (ALB) fighting in Spain against Franco Fascism. In later years, he was made an honorary ALB veteran for his fundraising dedication.

Randolph was active in the early civil rights struggles and participated in efforts to open up the stage and screen to actors of all races. He said, “I’ve been with African American actors all my life. I was in ‘Native Son’ and we went all over the country.” In fact, he married his wife, actress Sarah Cunningham, in the break between two performances of “Native Son” in Chicago in 1945.

Soon after the Cold War was declared, the venomous Republican Joe McCarthy chaired the new Senate version of HUAC. McCarthy’s HUAC, formed in 1951, lived off hunting “reds” in high places of government power and Hollywood glamour.

“Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?” was the battering ram of the red scare. Hollywood studio bosses actively ran their part by sharing a list of accused Communists (the “blacklist”) with each other and the FBI.

Blacklisted actors, writers and directors could not work and could only “clear their name” by naming others for HUAC. Hollywood was poisoned by an atmosphere of fear and paranoia where thousands lost their work and some, their lives. In so doing, the studios gained power over the unions and their workers by muzzling the most outspoken and setting worker against worker.

As a known progressive unionist and activist and rising actor of the screen, Randolph was betrayed to the blacklist by another actor who was “under suspicion.” He and Cunningham were subpoenaed by HUAC in 1955. They both refused to answer any questions, pleading the 5th Amendment – the only way not to incriminate others nor get thrown in jail.

Randolph was a proud member of the Communist Party. His defiance of HUAC was based not on fear, but on principles plainly written by Randolph to the Committee prior to the hearing, “I may think what I want, and associate with whom I please, either in the union, on the stage, or in politics.”

Like before the blacklist, Randolph was a steady activist as he worked to overcome it. “I’ve been in every struggle in my day. I go back to the early days of the civil rights movement. … I picketed against war. I marched for peace. I was elected to union office. I loved what I was doing. I didn’t try to dodge it. So, I say, ‘Speak up, say how you feel. Don’t just sit in the back and let somebody else take it.’”

Randolph said he survived because “I grabbed any job I could and I fought the whole time against blacklisting and so did my wife.” By the 60s, TV commercials opened up to him when the TV union (AFTRA) stood against blacklisting.

Dozens of TV roles would follow, including in recent years as Roseanne’s father on the long-running sitcom “Roseanne.” In the 70s and on, after the Screen Actors Guild finally dropped its anti-Communist clause, he was back in film: King Kong (1976), Heaven Can Wait (1978), Prizzi’s Honor (1985), You’ve Got Mail (1998) and many others.

His long comeback was capped by a Tony Award in 1986 for his work in Neil Simon’s “Broadway Bound.”

Accepting the Tony, Randolph joked, “I didn’t get into acting to win awards; it’s just that I couldn’t do anything else.”

On March 21, 1999, the Academy Award for lifetime achievement was given to director Elia Kazan, who cooperated with HUAC in 1952 and destroyed the careers of friends and fellow workers by naming them.

That tense night at the Academy Awards set the stage for a vindicating encore by Randolph. With millions watching news of the Kazan controversy on TV, Randolph spoke at a press conference of protesting actors.

He said that by Kazan’s “choice and by his words, people’s careers were virtually eliminated and lives shattered. No amount of filmmaking can change the unpleasant uncomfortable truth. This was also part of his lifetime achievement.”

Kazan, without apology, saying few thanks, took the award and exited stage right. The deafening orchestra couldn’t mask the loud jeers and the cameras couldn’t avoid the many who stayed in their seats in protest. Randolph remembered that night, “To see so many people not applauding … was an example of the world not accepting rotten and stinking and hurtful people … When nobody’s afraid, that’s a good feeling.”

Looking back on his own career and life, Randolph said, “You know you can’t act if you’re afraid. So I became a better actor because of my politics. It was a tough fight, but there’s no answer to anything except you fight together. I have not given up my political convictions to this day and I didn’t give in to anybody, and neither did my wife.”

Looking forward to the tough road ahead, Randolph reminded us that German Communist playwright Berthold Brecht said, “When you see them rising up, the ones who hate the Jews, hate the Blacks, they are bringing back the lie and the lie will support them to a certain extent. And we have to fight against that lie. If you just talk and you don’t fight back, what good are you?”

If measured by fightback, Randolph was damned good. Throughout his life, he lent his name, energy, resources and love to the cause of workers, equality and socialism. In today’s atmosphere of fear and suspicion, of secret military tribunals, and corporate, right-wing media control and film censorship, we can help see our way through with light from Randolph’s smile and his example.

The author can be reached at noelnoel@cpusa.org.

*(more on this story below)

Voices from the LA memorial

Martha Randolph, daughter “Are you now, or have you ever been?... My parents refused in 1955 to answer HUAC, using the 5th Amendment, so as not to implicate others. It is my great privilege to answer tonight ...Yes, they were members of the Communist Party.”

Hal Randolph, son “Dad, thanks for your politics, the civil rights marches, the Vietnam War protests. You marched for or against just about everything. You took me with you, even if it was raining to remind me rain is only water and the causes and our voices are more important.”

Mike Farrell, actor, Screen Actors Guild VP “I think of myself as a craftsperson, but there are some artists among us, like John Randolph. He ‘filled the unforgiving minute with 60 seconds worth of distance run.’ He would holler at me if I referred to him as a saint, but wherever he went, John shed the light.”

Lee Grant, producer, director, actress “You never saw John fight without a smile, a smile which said, ‘Watch out, I’m gonna getcha.’ ... In this period of corruption, confusion, and danger, I hope John Randolph converts will continue to honor him, fighting for justice and a decent world.”

Actor Brock Peters reads condolence from Sydney Poitier. “You will be remembered for kindness and courage ... like the day you stood on the floor of our Actors Equity and fought for the rights of African American actors to job opportunities.”

– from Sydney Poitier

Jerry Stiller (“King of Queens”) and Anne Meara “John’s unwillingness to squeal to the Committee still sticks with me. He never was down. The smile was always there, and he was always steadfast.”

Roscoe Lee Brown, actor, reading poem for Randolph by Ruby Dee “Sarah and John. We think of them together. As it was, in the past so be it now. Sarah and John together. Struggle in human form, the living beating heart, the conscienmce of the cause ... Strength to fight and fall and rise to fight again. Against race hate and anti-Semitism and McCarthyism, and lynchings, and children hurt, and not enough bread on some working body’s table, and people with no names and no jobs ... Sarah and Sarah’s John. We think of them together. We always will. So, don’t break rank. Join hands. And keep the line moving.”

– from poem by Ruby Dee

The following is from an interview with daughter Martha Randolph.

Q: What did being in the Party mean to your parents?

They read a wide range of opinions and views, including the Daily World, on many subjects and shared their honest opinions without forcing it down anyone’s throat.

The CP is where they got their political education. The knowledge of how to cause political change was part of the instruction manual, if you will … and the concept of linking small steps to larger ones.

All of this is what the government called a conspiracy to overthrow the government. It certainly was a discussion for revolution, but not a violent one. It was a revolution of thinking. They did call for the uprising of the workers, but it wasn’t “rise up and make war.” It was “rise and demand your rights, go march and protest and strike.” All that definitely came from the Party.

Q: Is McCarthyism repeating itself?

McCarthyism was an all-out attack on one way of thinking. It’s more subtle today as right-wing thinking is respun to appear far more reasonable. I don’t know if we’ve been in such a dangerous time, in part because the majority of the media so actively supports the right-wing view.

- Noel Rabinowitz

Corporate greed creates crises

Fri, 04 Jun 2004 03:46:00 +0000

Two simple examples of the unrelenting attack on working people: drug prices and no paid sick time at work. Two examples of corporate greed: Bush’s use of taxpayer money to advertise his bogus Medicare legislation and the massive give-away to Medicare HMO profiteers. These examples emphasize the importance of replacing Republicans with pro-people candidates in the year 2004 election.

Drug prices are killing people

A front page story in the May 19 issue of the Wall Street Journal says it all: “Higher Co-pays May Take Toll on Health.” A joint study by the Harvard Medical School and Medco Health Solutions found that when co-payments were doubled for common prescription drugs, 31 percent of people with allergic rhinitis stopped taking their prescribed drugs. Arthritis sufferers dropped their drug use by 27 percent, and patients with diabetes dropped their drug use for that life threatening illness by 23 percent. An increase in co-pay from as little as $5 to $10 can make that life change.

No sick time for recovery

Another study, this one by the Institute for Women’s Policy Research has found that over 60 million workers cannot take paid time off if they are sick. Of course, those earning the lowest wages are also those with the least sick time. Low-wage workers also often end up with the most dangerous work, work that only attracts desperate unemployed or soon-to-be-unemployed workers. The attack on women, in this area of worker exploitation, is even more dramatic. The Institute found that women workers, especially those with family responsibilities, have higher rates of illness and absenteeism than men do, yet are less likely than men to be entitled to any paid time off.

Where’s the money?

The Bush administration and its corporate allies and media experts are quick to talk about the need for administrative cost effectiveness and productivity (“keep ‘em working”), but when it comes to feeding their corporate allies, the sky’s the limit. For example, the Government Accounting Office, one of the few remaining independent government agencies, has found that the Bush administration broke the law in using public monies to advertise its bogus Medicare Program. Now, you have to really be blatant to get this kind of ruling and in fact the Bush administration’s “info-mercials” were pure “Bush for President” propaganda. Millions of taxpayer dollars were spent on this partisan effort. That money would have been better spent in getting drugs into the hands of those in need.

Millions to privatize Medicare HMOs

Finally, in an excellent report, the Commonwealth Fund revealed that the federal government under the Bush administration paid an extra $2.75 billion in 2004 to the private, mostly for-profit HMOs to remain in the Medicare Program. This is over and above the money that these HMO insurance carriers routinely receive when a Medicare recipient leaves the federal program and joins a private Medicare HMO.

Dump Bush and change Congress

Facts from these reports are just a few more tools to use to explain to your co-workers, family and friends how important this year’s election is. The White House is certainly within reach as are both the House and Senate. Let’s get to work.

The author can be reached at pww@pww.org

State pension crisis

Fri, 04 Jun 2004 03:25:00 +0000

In the wake of numerous pension scandals and swindles since the 2000 market crash, it should come as no surprise that many U.S. state retirement plans are seriously under-funded. The breadth and depth of the refinancing efforts highlight speculative abuses and miscalculations by many pension fund managers in the 1990’s boom years.

The Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation reported large under-funding issues for both private and public defined benefit plans. Public plans are not subject to ERISA’s funding, vesting, disclosure and fiduciary rules, insufficient as they are. Public employees in many states will now have to struggle to protect their retirement systems from the same kind of disaster that hit private funds.

• California, Illinois, Kansas, New Jersey, Oregon, West Virginia and Wisconsin have authorized bonds, i.e. deficits, to address state or local unfunded liabilities.

• New York authorized local governments to bond for any contributions in excess of 7 percent of salaries for FY 2005.

• Connecticut, Florida, Kansas, Massachusetts, Missouri, Nebraska and Washington increased mandatory contribution rates by statute. Many states do not require legislation to increase contribution rates.

• Colorado, Missouri, New York and New Jersey limited the mandatory contributions of state agency employers and local governments in order to phase in substantial increases in contributions. (The Colorado legislation was vetoed.)

• Missouri and New Jersey prohibited benefit increases until pensions systems’ finances improve.

• Oregon completely reorganized the Public Employee Retirement System to address an unfunded accrued liability of $15 billion as of October 2002.

• Illinois cut contributions to five state pension plans by $3 billion through 2005 to avert a budget crisis. But this is expected to have a $20 billion tab down the road.

Instead of counting on another boom in the stock market to rescue them, the $8 billion Maine State Retirement System shifted the bulk of its $3 billion fixed-income allocation to Treasury inflation-protected securities (TIPS), which are adjusted to reflect inflation. This approach is tailored to more closely match the fund’s liabilities, lessening the opportunity for high-flying returns, but also substantially lessening risk of an underfunded plan.

Because public pension funds typically have assets in the billions of dollars, they are often a subject for unethical dealings and inappropriate behavior by public pension officials. The Securities and Exchange Commission documented “pay-to-play” allegations in 17 states and drafted a stringent rule as a result. “Pay-to-Play” is the pervasive practice of requiring municipal securities participants to make political contributions to municipal officials in order to be considered as an underwriter or advisor the municipality’s pension fund.

The proposed rule received so many “negative responses” from public fund officials and investment firms that the SEC backed off of the regulation.

The at-risk pension plans discussed here are all “defined benefit” pension plans. They put the burden of satisfying pension promises on the plan sponsor or employer. What’s “defined” is the benefit, not the contribution. Most workers do not have resources to risk in the stock market. Employers, and thus public pension plans, are clearly feeling the pain of a real social liability. They are charged with making contributions sufficient to satisfy fund liabilities.

Despite the growth of the economy at the end of the 1990s, public plans’ liabilities were increasing at a faster pace than the economy. Since 2000, matters have worsened. In the short term, managers passed expenses on to future generations by issuing Pension Obligation Bonds. These POBs allow the plans to engage in classic arbitrage, postponing a reckoning in the hope of being saved by another boom.

The Bush administration would like to relieve investors of the liability of actually paying pensions owed to workers. Forget “defined benefit” plans – they sound too much like an “entitlement.” Following Maine’s example would give them a headache thinking of all those forgone “huge returns.” Why not put everyone’s future in the IRAs and Keogh plans (the stock market). In fact, why not put Social Security there too. Do nothing about reforming ERISA to protect Enron workers, or steel workers, of course.

Bush to workers: Work till you’re dead, or nearly so. Then die on the steps of private “for profit” hospital begging for treatment. Well, it solves the impending pension crunch!

The author can be reached at jcase@steuber.com.

National Clips

Fri, 04 Jun 2004 02:59:00 +0000

NASHVILLE, Tenn.: Hundreds demand “Fire Bush”

While the grotesque amounts of money the Bush administration is spending on this campaign captures headlines, the grassroots movement to dump Bush is out at every stop, every photo-op and every day of the week. Nashville is no exception. Hundreds of hand-made signs saying “Bush Sold America Down the River to Halliburton and Saudi Arabia,” and “Out of Iraq Now” lined Bush’s motorcade route May 27.

“I’m 57 years old. I don’t want my grandsons to die in unprovoked war,” Joe B. Scott told reporters after police released him. Scott had refused to stay within the “protest pen” and had taken his “Fire Bush” sign to where it was more visible.

In a statement, Randy Button, chairman of the Tennessee Democratic Party slammed the visit. “George Bush hasn’t spent any time with the No. 1 crisis of skyrocketing gas prices,” he said. “Yet he has plenty of time to raise hundreds of millions of dollars at fund raisers.” Bush took $1.7 million out of Tennessee.

BIRMINGHAM, Ala.: Co. puts profit before public welfare

Looking for work is tough, but McWane Pipe, owned by one of Alabama’s richest families, is toxic. On May 25 a federal grand jury here handed down a 25-count indictment charging McWane with illegal dumping into this city’s drinking water and other environmental crimes. The indictment names four top executives in the $2-billion-a-year corporation.

“The big message is that these environmental laws are on the books for a purpose,” said Alice H. Martin, U.S. Attorney in Birmingham. “McWane put pipes and profits before the public welfare.”

The investigation into McWane started in 2003 following a series of articles in the New York Times that exposed more than 4,600 injuries among the corporation’s workers. According the indictment, McWane conspired to routinely dump thousands of gallons of wastewater, lied to investigators, intimidated workers and altered accident scenes.

JACKSON, Miss.: City Council votes to condemn Patriot Act

By a 4-1 vote May 25, the Jackson City Council became the first city in Mississippi to oppose the USA Patriot Act. “The vote by the City Council says that we need not sacrifice freedom to be secure,” said Nsombi Lambright, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Mississippi. “Mississippi’s history shows what happens when those in control have an expansive array of powers at their disposal.”

Jackson joins 319 other municipalities acting to protect the democratic rights and privacy of their residents. The movement to protect the Constitution from Bush and Ashcroft now represents over 51 million U.S. residents and is expanding.

SACRAMENTO: Californians unite to enact health care

A coalition of more than 100 labor, medical, consumer, religious and community organizations, Health Access California, on May 26 kicked off its campaign to enact Senate Bill 2, requiring companies with 200 or more workers to provide family medical coverage or pay into a state fund. If the campaign is successful in the November referendum, California would join Hawaii as the only states in the country where employer-based health coverage is the law.

“Everybody who works hard and plays by the rules deserves affordable health insurance,” said Anthony Wright, spokesman for the state-wide coalition. Wright pointed out that with the California Medical Association supporting the measure, this effort represents the first time medical providers and consumers are on the same side.

“At least a dozen states are considering this kind of legislation, so what happens in California, obviously, will be very relevant to the discussion at the state level,” said health benefits expert Patricia Butler.

Art Pulaski, president of the California AFL-CIO, added that the law will relieve overcrowding in hospital emergency rooms. “You and I are paying for that in the concept of cost-shifting.”

WASHINGTON: Vets advance rights of gays in military

Representatives on Capital Hill looked out into their waiting rooms to see dozens of gay and lesbian military veterans and supporters demanding an end to the ban on gays in the armed services.

The more than 60 people from 22 states included Patricia and Wally Kutteles, parents of slain Army private Barry Winchell, Brigadier Gen. Keith Kerr, Brigadier Gen. Virgil Richard and retired Rear Admiral Alan Steinman. According to a December 2003 Gallup poll, 79 percent of Americans support lifting the ban on gays in the military.

National Clips are compiled by Denise Winebrenner-Edwards (dwinebr696@aol.com). Gary Dotterman, Judith Le Blanc and Julia Lutsky contributed to this week’s clips.

Attorney released from Ashcroft hell

Fri, 04 Jun 2004 02:40:00 +0000

PORTLAND, Ore. – The FBI apologized to Portland attorney Brandon Mayfield on May 24 after he was released from two weeks in the Multnomah County Detention Center. While Mayfield was held without charges as a “material witness,” headlines insinuated he had been involved in the March 11 train bombings in Madrid.

Mayfield, an honorably discharged U.S. Army lieutenant, married and the father of three young children, told a news conference that as an American Muslim he had been singled out and discriminated against. “Notwithstanding the judge’s gag order, the government put out its theory and its facts while we were prevented from saying anything,” he said.

The U.S. government had maintained that Mayfield’s fingerprints were found on a plastic bag containing detonators, even after Spanish authorities questioned the FBI’s conclusion. Mayfield’s family, the Muslim community, and friends rallied to his defense. His mother angrily denounced the attempted frame-up, pointing out that her son had not left the U.S. in years.

Twenty-five percent of Mayfield’s practice involved representing Muslims in civil and immigration cases. A Muslim convert, he had been under FBI surveillance months before the Madrid train bombing in a clear case of “guilt by association.” His home and office were searched without warrants.

Then Spanish authorities linked the fingerprint to an Algerian. Mayfield’s attorney said, “But for the unusual circumstance of another national police agency conducting its own independent investigation, Mr. Mayfield would still be incarcerated.”

Mayfield pointed out that the FBI is holding a thousand or more detainees without criminal charges under the sweeping “material witness” clause of the Patriot Act, detainees who are as innocent as he is.

One of Mayfield’s clients in a civil family matter was Jeffrey Leon Battle, one of the “Portland Seven.” These young African American Muslims were charged in October. 2002 with conspiring to fight against U.S. troops in Afghanistan. None of the Portland Seven was ever in Afghanistan, and the FBI has provided no evidence that they ever contacted al Qaida or the Taliban. Nevertheless, last November, Battle and fellow defendant Patrice Lumumba Ford were sentenced to 18 years. Ford and Battle had accepted a plea agreement after their attorneys concluded that there was no way they could get a fair trial. Much of the evidence against them during their trial came from a paid informer who had goaded them into acts of adventurism.

The FBI used the Portland Seven case to whip up anti-Muslim hysteria, sending spies to infiltrate a Portland mosque. For months, police helicopters circled over the mosque to intimidate the congregation. The FBI charged that the Islamic Center of Portland (ICP) had raised funds for the Portland Seven – understandable, if true, since several of the defendants were members of the ICP.

The witchhunt was so intense that ICP President Alaa Abujinem last year became a co-plaintiff in an American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit against Attorney General John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller. The lawsuit asked the court to find the USA Patriot Act unconstitutional.

Saudi-born Abujinem, a U.S. citizen, told a news conference, “In America, the Bill of Rights does not allow the police and FBI to investigate me or other Muslim immigrants when we have done nothing wrong. Yet in recent months I have been treated as a suspicious person in my adopted country,” he said.

The FBI’s flimsy evidence against Mayfield raises questions about the evidence used in railroading the Portland Seven. Stanley Cohen, who has ably defended Muslims around the country, said Ford, his Portland Seven client, a graduate of Portland State University, fluent in Chinese, was forced to accept a plea in the face of a possible life sentence.

At their sentencing, Battle stated that the Seven were “victims of terrorism, not terrorists.”

The Portland cases bring to mind the attempted frame-up of Capt. James Yee, the Muslim chaplain from the Pentagon’s Guantanamo Bay Detention Center. Yee was arrested on suspicion of spying and finally released in December 2003, after three months in solitary confinement in a South Carolina Navy brig. All charges were dropped.

In an act of revenge, the Bush gang accused Yee of adultery and possession of pornography. “He was defamed and smeared and accused of being a spy,” said Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations. “Then all of a sudden, they’re not even sorry. They’re saying, ‘You can go now, and for good measure we’ll throw in a few charges to further damage your reputation.’ It’s a very suspicious scenario that developed.”

The author can be reached at pww@pww.org