People Before Profit blog

Letters

Fri, 26 Sep 2003 04:07:00 +0000

No alternative but to fight

Recently a story has been making the rounds about a fawning, pro-Hitler article from a 1930s British home and garden magazine. It’s shocking to realize that upper-class folks back then were not at all opposed to fascism, in fact they thought “that chap Hitler had some good ideas.” I remember when reading two Isabel Allende novels (House of the Spirits and Of Love and Shadows) that I was struck by how she conveyed the way fascism took hold in Chile at the time of the Pinochet’s coup in 1973.

In her novels, characters who were comfortably well-off did not want to be bothered hearing about what was happening to “those people” who were trade unionists or activists, how they were being tortured and murdered. I think that in the U.S. now if you were to confront members of the powers-that-be about their pro-fascist ways they would say, “What’s your point?” We can’t wait for the ruling class to be “converted” to more humane thought and action. They will never concede without a fight. Organizing for peace and justice at work, on the campus, and in the neighborhood has never been more important.

Barbara RussumChicago IL

Block grants shortchanging recipients

I’m writing because I enjoy your paper and because I doubt whether you ever received a letter on this subject.

The subject is “community block grants.” The food stamp program is distributed under block grants. I suspect from my own experiences with this program that states are being unfair and dispersing these grants at their own discretion.

Viva la revolucion!

John KarczewskiJersey City NJ

Another view on farm subsidies

Just a minute. In the article about the WTO in Cancun (PWW, 9/20-26), Marilyn Bechtel talks about “deeper cuts in wealthy nations’ subsidies to agribusiness.” It’s fine if the subsidies are cut out to agribusiness, but the subsidies also go to family farmers.

The National Farmers Union statement about this says, “To suggest we pull domestic supports out from under American producers without a proven plan to offset them is economic suicide for family agriculture producers and rural communities. The National Farmers Union has advocated reducing the need for domestic supports by establishing trade policies that allow farmers to receive a fair return from the marketplace.”

The problem is that agribusiness is getting too much of the subsidies, but they aren’t getting all of it.

I think we oppose income cuts for American family farmers as we do for American workers.

Pammela WrightVia e-mail

Anti-WTO protesters march in Sacramento

The Sacramento Coalition for Sustainable Agriculture, the core group that rallied against the Department of Agriculture’s international ministerial meeting in June, marched on Sept. 13 in solidarity with the protests against the World Trade Organization meeting in Cancun, Mexico.

Thirty people, including punkers, trade unionists, and grandmothers among others, chanting “This is what democracy looks like” and carrying anti-WTO signs, marched across historic Old Sacramento and into the Downtown Plaza shopping mall, where chants and signs are not allowed.

Many of the marchers wore or carried bandanas, defying an anti-free speech city ordinance passed a few days before the June 23 anti-ministerial march that outlaws possession of a mask or bandana at a demonstration or parade.

Saturday shoppers looked on as the demonstrators chanted, “Just say no to the WTO” and passed out leaflets.

Going back to the parking garage to get my car, I met up with two young men with punk haircuts and jewelry. “Were you in the protest in the mall?” they asked, seeing my “No WTO” button. They continued, “Keep up the good work. We’ll be at the antiwar demonstration in San Francisco next month.”

Gail RyallSacramento CA

Oil profits and war

Who profits when the price of oil goes up? If a White House run by oil interests goes to war and occupies a country with huge oil reserves, and the price of oil goes up, did they realize their goals?

Richard CurtisVia e-mail

Editorials

Fri, 26 Sep 2003 03:56:00 +0000

Another one-term Bush?

George W. Bush’s approval rating – 71 percent only six weeks ago – is now 50 percent, and headed down. The 2004 elections are only 15 months off and the drumbeat of bad news, on both the Iraq war front and the economic front, surely has caught Karl Rove’s attention.

Bush & Co. are desperate for some good news. Bush went to the United Nations hoping to get help for his Iraq debacle. He met with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and sought to bask in a photo-op session claiming differences with Germany are over. But Bush’s arrogant speech to the General Assembly, in which he defended his unilateral preemptive war doctrine, got a cold reception from the world community. French President Jacques Chirac followed with a strongly worded speech condemning the Bush administration’s unilateralism.

The White House would like to isolate France. New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman recently accused the French government of acting as an “enemy” of the United States, wanting the Bush administration to “fail” in Iraq. But France’s views on Iraq are shared by most of the world.

The “enemy” refrain is also directed at the opposition here at home, as the occupation of Iraq and Bush’s economic policies are exposed as a failure. Attorney General John Ashcroft, for example, routinely accuses critics of the administration of giving aid and comfort to “terrorists.”

When Sen. Edward Kennedy said the administration’s case for war was a “fraud … made up in Texas,” Bush complained that Kennedy was being “uncivil,” and House Majority Leader Tom DeLay labeled Kennedy’s remarks “hateful.” But Kennedy stood his ground, saying they were avoiding questions about Bush’s policies “by attacking the patriotism of those who question them.”

The efforts to silence opposition are falling flat. The frontrunners among the Democratic presidential contenders are those who hammer Bush the hardest on his anti-people policies. The elections are still more than a year off. But if current trends persist, Bush may suffer the same fate as his one-term dad.

* * * * * *

Grasso’s inglorious exit

Dick Grasso, the high-flying former chairman and CEO of the New York Stock Exchange, is gone. He was forced to resign after it emerged that he got a lump sum payment of $140 million from the Stock Exchange in “deferred compensation.” This was on top of his regular pay of up to $30 million per year.

Grasso’s excesses came to light while U.S. workers are facing the most devastating job losses since the Great Depression, brutal cuts in public education and social services, and growing homelessness and hunger. Against such a backdrop, this grotesque display of uninhibited greed was too blatant even for Wall Street. Grasso had to go.

Grasso now joins a rogues’ gallery of greedy corporate executives – including those from Enron, WorldCom, and Tyco – who have gotten caught with their fingers in the cookie jar. The big-business media would have us believe that these executives are just a few bad apples. But in fact they are all too typical of “business as usual” under capitalism.

CEO salaries are now at least 400 times what the average worker earns. Executive pay increased by 571 percent in the 1990s, while workers’ pay during those years increased by only 37 percent. Income inequality is growing by leaps and bounds. The rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer. Bill Gates’ net worth is now pegged at $46 billion. And the Bush administration’s policies have only accelerated this process.

U.S. society is saddled with a super-rich, criminal, parasitic class of exploiters that will stop at nothing to amass still greater wealth and power, by hook or by crook.

Big-business pundits have nervously remarked that, if left unchecked, blatant displays of greed like Grasso’s can undermine people’s confidence in the capitalist system as a whole. Their worries are justified. More and more workers are drawing radical conclusions about U.S. society, and growing numbers are recognizing that capitalism, itself, must go.

Labor mural unveiled

Fri, 26 Sep 2003 03:37:00 +0000

BREWER, Maine – On Labor Day about 150 enthusiastic union members and supporters gathered at the Labor Temple here to dedicate a mural large enough to cover three outside walls of the headquarters building of the Bangor Central Labor Council and several union locals. Its subject is the history of Maine labor, the strikes and struggles, beginning with the Knights of Labor in the late 19th century.

The unionists also issused a call to intensify efforts to block unfair trade agreements.

About 50 members of various unions and the Food and Medicine Project of the Labor Council had worked on the mural for almost a year under the direction of head artist Jesse Cross. Labor historian Charlie Scontras helped with research for the project.

Rep. Mike Michaud (D-Maine) was there, and after 28 years as a forklift operator at the Great Northern Mill in Millinocket, Me., he had a right to be. He reported that on arrival in Congress last year, he found that 306 of his colleagues were bankers, lawyers, or CEOs. The rest were “in business” except for himself and a handful of others.

Michaud held up a ballot sheet being circulated in Maine by the AFL-CIO. It calls for a “no” vote on the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) and a “yes” vote on the Maine Trade, Jobs, and Democracy Act. The latter is the title of proposed state legislation calling for the formation of a commission to evaluate the impact of “free trade” agreements that have been pushed by Washington.

According to Michaud, NAFTA and related trade agreements have caused the loss of 24,000 Maine jobs since 1994.

The main message of the day, however, was the importance of electing working people to political office. Right now there are not enough Mike Michauds in Congress. Who knows? As a pioneer, he may someday find himself in Brewer again, up on the wall mural there, rendered in paint.

The author can be reached at pww@pww.org

First, do no harm

Fri, 19 Sep 2003 06:27:00 +0000

Opinion

What if they gave a war and no one came? What if they (the same they, it seems) gave an execution and no doctor showed up? Maybe they would have to call off both.

Hippocrates gave the charge, “Primum non nocere – First, do no harm,” to his medical students almost 2,500 years ago. To this day, budding physicians start out on their medical careers holding up their right hand, swearing allegiance to the legendary Hippocratic oath.

There are codicils that, if not said verbatim, are certainly accepted by implication. One is the promise that they will uphold life and work to preserve it, to the best of their abilities. Controversies raged in recent years over the philosophy and actions of Dr. Jack Kevorkian, who became a standard-bearer for the practice of doctor-assisted suicide and is now serving prison time for this practice. Yet, the issue of physician involvement in the carrying out of the death penalty has never been tested in the courts.

State laws and regulations continue to mandate that medical professionals be directly involved in executions. Of the 36 states that now have death penalty statutes on their books, 23 require a physician in attendance at the execution to either “determine” or “pronounce” death.

The degree of doctor participation varies, from securing the prisoner on the gurney, locating the injection site for the tranquillizer and the fatal concoction, mixing the lethal potion in the desired strength, preparing the vein for the placement of the intravenous apparatus, to finally making the pronouncement of death. Physicians have also been hired to document the prisoner’s morphology or advise on the strength and tension of the noose in hangings, and sometimes are called on to decide if a further “jolt” is needed in an electrocution.

In 1992, the American Medical Association, the self-appointed watchdog over the ethical practices of American doctors, passed a resolution banning physicians from participating in any way in an execution of any sort, including offering advice and vicarious consultations as to method and dosing. In 10 death penalty states, state medical societies have written policies that ban doctors’ participation; others simply defer to the AMA guidelines.

No doubt prison officials are aware of the discomfort that has been simmering among practitioners. The doctors who participate in executions remain anonymous, certainly in part because of their own personal uneasiness with their role. Some have likened the whole process to the practice of the Nazi regime in Germany, which had its physicians administer anesthesia and perform mutilation surgeries on inmates for its grotesque “master race” purity schemes. Those many who refused were dealt with as harshly as might be expected.

Physicians are trained to be healers. Partaking in any form of a death procedure cannot be construed as anything other than destructive of life. Taking an ostensibly healthy person and assisting in his or her demise can only be a violation of the Hippocratic oath in essence and intent.

It is not clear what would happen to the death penalty were American physicians to abide strictly by the words of their oath and the dicta of their representatives. Perhaps legislatures would devise alternatives that would replace doctors with trained non-medical personnel. But that would be problematic, since many states require that only a licensed medical doctor can pronounce death.

The U.S. is the only developed nation with a state-authorized death penalty either on the books or in practice. In those countries that have not specifically outlawed the practice as excessive and barbaric, the death penalty has not been used in so many years it is assumed some sort of ban exists.

The death penalty, so controversial because of its religious, legal, moral and social issues, might not be able to withstand a united effort by our medical community against its practice.

It would certainly be worth a try.

Don Sloan is a retired physician and assistant editor of Political Affairs. He can be reached at donsloan@whereitis.com

Letters

Fri, 19 Sep 2003 05:49:00 +0000

‘Road map’ still a force

There were two references to the road map being “dead” in PWW of 9/13, one in the letters column and one in the news story about the intensifying Palestinian and Israeli conflict. References to the road map being dead are inaccurate and may give fuel to the forces against a peaceful, negotiated settlement.

Palestinian President Yasser Arafat said he was still committed to the road map after being inaccurately quoted by CNN as saying it was dead. I found this from the Palestine Media Center:

“The Palestine National Authority on Wednesday reconfirmed the Palestinian leadership’s commitment to the Quartet-adopted ‘road map,’ indicating that President Yasser Arafat’s statements to CNN on the peace plan were ‘inaccurately quoted,’ while the EU stressed that the plan ‘is alive’ and all parties will have ‘to maintain its life.’”

Mary LyonsVia e-mail

Peace message from Holland

I’ve lived for 20 years in Holland. I’m a Japanese supporter of the JCP and the Palestinian community in Holland.

As you know, this September there were international demonstrations all over the world. In the U.K./London was a big demonstration, and I know in the USA also. Upcoming Sept. 20 there is a big demonstration in Holland. Of course I will go.

Let’s make a peace movement with many international peoples!

Ken HiranoVia e-mail

Idolatry in courthouse

Idolatry (n): 1. the worship of a physical object as a god; 2. immoderate attachment or devotion to some thing; 3. confusing a piece of granite in Alabama with the divine.

Richard CurtisVia e-mail

Thurmond praise outrageous

Last December, Trent Lott was forced to resign as Senate majority leader after he praised the segregationist policies of North Carolina Sen. Strom Thurmond in the 1948 presidential elections. But there were no protests following Thurmond’s death this year, when the Republicans openly embraced South Carolina’s history of racism, along with the departed senator.

This summer, the national Republican website featured a speech by South Carolina Rep. Joe Wilson, calling Strom Thurmond the state’s “greatest statesman of the 20th century, just as John C. Calhoun was the most revered South Carolinian of the 19th century.” Thurmond’s racist and anti-worker record is well known, but what about Calhoun?

John C. Calhoun, senator from South Carolina and presidential contender, was a wealthy slave owner. He was the chief ideological spokesman for slavery in the U.S. As slavery’s strategic leader in the Senate, Calhoun formulated the laws and practices that increasingly forced the entire nation to support the “rights” of slaveholders, even in the North. Today, when the Republican Party embraces Calhoun, it embraces the legacy of slavery. Our outrage should be as great as if a German politician were to praise Nazi war criminal Hermann Goering as that country’s most beloved leader.

Art PerloNew Haven CT

All baby boomers to blame?

In a New York Times editorial “Home Alone” (Sept. 1), the editors assess the situation at home, saying: “Appalling behavior and appalling policies have become the norm among folks entrusted with the heaviest responsibilities in business and government. … And, of course, the baby boomers, the least responsible generation in memory, will soon begin retiring and collecting their Social Security and federal health benefits, leaving the mountains of unpaid bills for the hapless generations behind them.”

The Times editors are absolutely right. It is a pity that they did not mention – or write another editorial – what those “baby boomers” did all over the world. What they did at home is nothing in comparison what they did and are still doing, for example, to my country and my people, Yugoslavia (they made it “former”) in violation of the Charter of the UN and all principles of international law. The millions of their victims deserve at least to be mentioned in the Times, all the more so since the Times newspaper on innumerable occasions inspired and helped them to do what they did.

Dr. Milan TepavacBelgrade, Yugoslavia

Editorials

Fri, 19 Sep 2003 05:38:00 +0000

‘Street heat’ still key in recall fight

With each passing day, the Republican effort to recall California’s Gov. Gray Davis looks and smells like the GOP’s “bloodless coup” in Florida during the 2000 presidential election. There is even an echo in California of Florida’s fight over “dimples” and “dangling chads.”

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Oct. 7 recall election must be postponed because punch card ballots in six counties would disenfranchise 40,000 California voters, disproportionately African American, Latino, and other people of color. Denying 90,000 Blacks and Latinos their voting rights was at the heart of the “Battle of Florida.”

The California judges deftly used the language of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 5-4 Bush v. Gore decision – the ruling that put Bush in office – to uphold the principle that use of punch card ballots would violate the “equal protection” clause of the U.S. Constitution.

But it was also clear that the people learned some bitter lessons in Florida. Al Gore vetoed marches, rallies and other forms of “street heat” in the crucial days after the Nov. 7, 2000, election. He proclaimed his faith that legal tactics were enough, that the courts would order Florida to “count every vote.” Thousands marched anyway, but the turnout could have been a hundred times greater. It might have been enough to send George W. Bush back to the Texas Rangers.

Contrast that to California, where the AFL-CIO and the African American and Latino communities hailed the judges’ order, yet continue to mobilize overflow mass rallies against the recall. They are fully prepared for, even expect, the Supreme Court to reverse this historic ruling. At the same time, “street heat” is exerting pressure to let it stand. This reaffirms an old principle: it takes mass struggle to bring about democratic change.

People in the Golden State now sense victory in the air. If this recall is defeated, it will send a powerful message that we can “show Bush the door in 2004.”

* * * * * *

Seasonal thoughts

Sept. 23 marks the official start of fall – the autumn equinox, when day and night are of equal length. Already, we’re noticing the temperature getting cooler and the days getting shorter. For many of us, it’s now dark when we get up for work or school. For those who work days, the earlier darkness in the afternoon may make us feel like we’re spending our entire lives at work.

The cooler days and earlier sunsets highlight in their own way the natural beauty of our country – its varied richness of mountains, forests, deserts, plains and shores. And fall is a time to enjoy the new crop of crisp apples, golden pumpkins and other fall crops from our nation’s farms.

But the farm workers who pick our crops, small and family farmers here and around the world, and the wholesomeness of the food we eat are all under attack from powerful agribusiness corporations, whose best friend is George W. Bush. The New York Times reported this week that U.S. agribusiness, which profits from huge subsidies by American taxpayers, “has shifted its allegiance to the Republican Party.” The Times says, “Political contributions from agribusiness have jumped to $53 million in 2002 from $37 million in 1992, with the Republicans’ share rising to 72 percent from 56 percent.”

And the Bush administration is waging all-out war on our precious natural environment – including our national parks, forests and protected wilderness areas, the water we drink and the air we breathe. This summer, the League of Conservation Voters gave Bush an “F” for his administration’s record – the first time the group has given a president a failing grade. Said LCV President Deb Callahan, “Bush’s record is dominated by one clear and disturbing fact: On issue after issue, his administration has favored the narrow financial interests of large corporations and polluters over the public’s interest in a healthy environment.”

Fall is a good time to enjoy nature and the seasonal harvest. But we can’t take them for granted.

Letters

Fri, 12 Sep 2003 05:45:00 +0000

Big tobacco vs. N.Y. law

The fairest thing about New York State’s smoke-free workplace law is that it treats all workplaces (and all employees) equally. No business has a perceived or real advantage or disadvantage. All workplaces must be smoke free. The health of waitresses is treated with as much importance as the health of bankers. In most legislation, however, there is a waiver clause for special unforeseen circumstances that may arise after a law is passed. Unfortunately, this clause is now being used by tobacco interests to try to obtain waivers for restaurants and bars that do not want to comply with New York State’s smoke-free workplace. To send a letter to the New York State legislature urging them to continue to treat ALL workplaces and ALL workers EQUALLY, go to www.smokefree.net

Joseph W. Chernervia e-mail

Wants more on Direct Vote

As a first-year subscriber to the PWW/NM I’m informed weekly about world problems. Recently, I wrote to the paper asking about Direct Vote for the president, increasing House reps and term limits for offices including the Supreme Court. In order to rid the world of bad leaders like Bush our nation needs to rid itself of the Electoral College. The PWW/NM keeps running material about defeating Bush and his corporate barbarians but there is no mention of Direct Vote. Also, the House needs to increase its membership, for 435 can no longer represent 300 million people adequately. And remember the Supreme Court put Bush in office – most people voted for Al Gore. The PWW/NM needs to write more on these necessary changes.

Chris BannonGuilford CT

Road map was doomed

The “road map” or more appropriately the “road-kill document” was doomed from the beginning with or without Israel’s 14 reservations that the Bush administration allowed for Sharon. It was doomed partially because it neither mentions nor accepts the simple words called “human rights” and “international law” and partially because it was intended to “manage” the conflict rather than deal with its root causes.

Mazin B. Qumsiyehvia e-mail

Ashcroft, Bush & Calif. deficit

Apparently the main claim for the California governor’s recall is the large deficit. If I lived in California I would oppose the recall. However if the recall is adopted, then I would suggest the nation take it a step further by recalling Bush, Ashcroft, et al., for their deficits. I conclude my remarks with statements acceptable to Ashcroft/Bush: Recall Bush because ... (edited out) ... (not approved for print) ... (eliminated) ... (text too contrary to Bush/Ashcroft).

Rohn WebbMelba ID

Veteran of Weirton Steel & Kent State

Enclosed is payment for a one-year sub to the PWW/NM. After 30 years in Weirton Steel Co., Weirton, W.Va., and being involved in Kent State University antiwar demonstrations of May 1970, I finally realized the total disgust I have for the capitalist system. Majoring in history and political science at Kent State, I always was interested in social progress for the working class. I wish I were clear on the fundamental division of Marxism-Trotskyism (permanent revolution) vs. Stalinism (socialism in one country). Looking forward to reading PWW/NM. Thank you.

Jeff LahachSteubenville, OH

Peace actions in D.C.

In the past month we’ve told people about the 40th Anniversary Martin Luther King Jr. Rally, and some of us went. That evening, we went to the Fellowship of Reconciliation forum about King and the “beloved community.” On the panel was, among others, Sonia Dueno, who works in D.C. for the FOR in Vieques; she comes from Puerto Rico. We will have her talk about Vieques in a forthcoming meeting. Also coming up in September – the “Arms Bazaar,” i.e. the Air Force Association’s annual National Convention and Aerospace Technology Expo – we’ve been going for more than 20 years, and still hope to finally “shut it down” for good!

Bobbie & John StewartWashington DC

Editorials

Fri, 12 Sep 2003 05:19:00 +0000

Lessons from 9/11 and ‘Battle of Algiers’

Two years after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the people of the world are ever more aware of the need for peace, international cooperation, economic justice, and respect for human rights.

Not so at the Pentagon.

The “Battle of Algiers,” a film about the struggle for Algerian independence, is widely viewed as a cinematic masterpiece. But that isn’t why the Directorate for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict screened the film at the Pentagon recently. According to a Sept. 7 New York Times story, 40 military officers and civilian experts viewed the film and then engaged in a “lively” discussion on the film with its graphic depictions of torture of Algerian freedom fighters by French colonial occupation troops.

The Times’ Michael T. Kaufman reports that the Pentagon’s unnamed host urged the crowd to “consider and discuss the … problematic but alluring efficacy of brutal and repressive means of fighting clandestine terrorists in Algeria and Iraq … specifically, the advantages and costs of resorting to torture and intimidation.” Kaufman adds, “[T]he conditions that the French faced in Algeria are similar to those the United States is finding in Iraq.”

Like the French in Algeria, American soldiers in Iraq are being killed and wounded in a guerrilla war with no end in sight. With frustrations mounting, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and other top strategists are apparently weighing torture and other desperate tactics to get the crisis under control.

The French killed one million Algerians before they were finally ousted. Will the U.S. destroy a million Iraqis and countless Americans to impose neo-colonial rule on that oil-rich nation? And will they squander $500 billion in this “Bush-Cheney folly?” An Oct. 21, 2001, Washington Post article headlined, “FBI Weighs Torture Option,” reported that the FBI was considering “using drugs or pressure tactics” to “extract information” from suspects who refuse to cooperate.

The time to speak out against these Bush-Cheney Gestapo tactics whether at home or abroad is now!

* * * * * *

‘Salmon-gate’

The Wall Street Journal featured a revealing article July 30 on Republican Karl Rove’s strategy for using selective enforcement of government regulations to enhance the election prospects of Republican candidates.

The story concerned water from the Klamath River in southeast Oregon during a fierce drought last year. In January 2002, George W. Bush and Rove, his chief political strategist, made a much-publicized trip to Oregon, including a stop in Klamath Falls where they listened to the pleas of Republican agribusiness interests that more water be diverted from the river to irrigate 220,000 acres of cropland. But conservationists and the Klamath Indians, who depend on wild salmon for their livelihood, warned that the diversion would dry up the river and destroy the fish.

Upon Bush’s return to the capital, Rove convened a secret meeting of 50 officials of the Interior Department in West Virginia. In a slide show presentation Rove instructed the officials on how they were to manipulate federal regulations on allocation of scarce resources to help Republican candidates get elected in the 2002 election as well as in 2004. He used the Klamath River dispute as an example.

Three months later, Interior Secretary Gale Norton stood beside Oregon’s GOP Senate candidate Gordon Smith and opened the headgate, allowing Klamath water to gush into the irrigation ditches. Smith went on to win the 2002 election.

But all the warnings from commercial and sport fishermen, the Indian tribes and conservationists were borne out. The flow in the river was reduced to near zero and at least 33,000 salmon died in the worst fish kill on record. The riverbed was littered with the carcasses of the precious salmon. Nature-lovers have branded this crime “Salmon-gate.”

The Bush-Cheney gang is the worst enemy of the environment ever, the most craven servants of the petrochemical industry and other polluters. Rove’s readiness to manipulate regulatory powers even when it kills off endangered species reveals just how far they will go in their ruthless grab for power.

93,000 jobs lost in August

Fri, 12 Sep 2003 02:54:00 +0000

“The day after President George W. Bush announced the U.S. economy was ‘looking up’ and proposed making most of his millionaire tax cuts permanent, the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) confirmed that working families are enduring the worst job loss crisis since the Great Depression.”

So begins an AFL-CIO statement in response to the Sept. 5 BLS report that 93,000 non-farm workers lost their jobs in August. The report was bad news indeed for U.S. workers, and part of a worsening picture. Approximately 3.2 million jobs have been lost since Bush took office.

According to Bush’s vaunted “jobs and growth” plan, last month should have shown a net gain of 344,000 jobs. The BLS report instead puts Bush’s plan in the hole for 437,000 jobs. And things could get much worse.

Workers in manufacturing were particularly hard-hit. About 44,000 manufacturing jobs were lost last month, making it the 37th straight month of losses in this key sector of the economy. Apparel and textile workers sustained the heaviest losses. Workers in services, the information sector, telecommunications, and transportation also took it in the chin.

Unemployment among state and city workers also increased, reflecting the many layoffs associated with the fiscal crisis besetting local governments.

The jobless rates among African Americans and Latinos were particularly high, reflecting institutionalized racism in the U.S. economy.

The extent of the job slump is obscured by the BLS report’s claim that the unemployment rate declined slightly from July, from 6.2 percent to 6.1 percent. This figure masks, however, the sharp increase in the number of discouraged workers – workers who have given up hope of finding a job. In August this figure topped the 500,000 mark, about double the number of discouraged workers just three years ago. Only people who are actively seeking employment are counted as unemployed; “discouraged” workers are not counted.

The BLS report took many big-business economists by surprise. Extremely low interest rates, big rebates on vehicles, a mortgage refinancing boom, a huge surge in military spending, and Bush’s tax cuts to the rich were regarded as “economic stimuli” that would cause an uptick in employment. Not so. In fact, the August job loss was more than twice as bad as July’s loss of 44,000 jobs.

“We have been sitting on the bench waiting and waiting and waiting for some jobs to appear, and they are still nowhere in sight,” writes Joel L. Naroff, an economic forecaster.

The prospects aren’t very good, thanks to three continuing trends: U.S. companies relocating to low-wage areas overseas, relentless speed-up, and employer use of labor-saving technology. A recent report by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York says that, as a result, many of the recent job losses will be permanent.

Economists widely agree that U.S. economic activity, such as it is, has been sustained by consumer spending. But workers can only borrow so much.

“This year, the months to still to come could be the bleakest for U.S. workers,” the AFL-CIO statement says. “The nationally respected outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas Inc. predicted that, based on recent job trends, U.S. employers would announce an additional 399,000 new job cuts during the final four months of 2003.”

Unemployment affects workers who do have a job, too, by acting as a drag on their efforts to win wage gains. Wages have remained stagnant or have declined for most workers since 2001.

Many labor economists have advocated a domestic public works program that would increase spending on the nation’s crumbling infrastructure, schools, and health care system. Such a program would employ hundreds of thousands. Funding could come from closing corporate tax loopholes, sharply increasing taxes on the rich, and slashing the military budget.

In the meantime, working people’s anger is clearly rising. Zogby International, in a poll conducted Sept. 3-5, found that only 40 percent of respondents believed Bush deserves a second term, with 52 percent responding “it is time for someone new.”

The author can be reached at malmberg@pww.org

Israeli-Palestinian conflict explodes

Fri, 12 Sep 2003 02:44:00 +0000

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is escalating to a new crisis level, with unforeseen dangers, including full-scale war, which could engulf not only Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories, but the entire region as well.

On Sept. 5, an F-16 Israeli fighter jet dropped three 500-pound bombs on a building in Gaza City where the founder of the Hamas organization, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, was meeting with others. The assassination attempt failed, but he and four of his assistants (along with numerous bystanders, including children) were wounded.

Hamas said it would seek revenge. Two suicide bombings took place in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem a few days later, in which 15 persons were killed and many more were injured.

The occupied Palestinian territories are again sealed off and the Palestinian population is under curfew. In Israel, security on highways to the major cities, as well as within the towns, has been tightened.

Joe Groves, program coordinator for the Fellowship of Reconciliation’s Middle East Interfaith Peace Builders Program, told the World, “Targeted killings and war undercut any efforts at peace and perpetuate suicide bombings.”

Ahmed Korei, Palestinian President Yasser Arafat’s nominee to replace Mahmoud Abbas as prime minister, condemned the bombings. “We condemn all acts of killing that target innocents, whether they be Palestinians … or the Israelis who were victims of today’s explosion,” Korei said in a statement. “Such incidents confirm the necessity for both the Israeli and Palestinian leaderships to ... examine the most effective ways to put an end to the killing.”

The Bush administration is complicit in the escalation of violence. It has not pressed Israel to live up to its end of the road map, pressuring only the Palestinians to “crack down” on Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Israel has refused to remove the illegal settlements on Palestinian lands, which is part of the road map terms as well.

U.S. foreign policy issues remain at the center of the crisis in Israel and Palestine. The Bush administration is carrying out its strategic plans for U.S. domination of the region. The impact of the Iraq war and occupation goes far beyond the Iraqi borders.

Outlining his ideas about the basis for peace, Groves said, “There needs to be a recognition that any peace agreement must begin with dismantling the settlements and the apartheid wall.” He also said that for all practical purposes the road map is dead, but that a successful peace plan must be negotiated.

Israeli and Palestinian peace forces are strengthening their activities protesting the Israeli occupation. The peace movement argues that the occupation and the illegal assassinations of Palestinians by the Israeli army undermine any efforts for a negotiated settlement to the conflict.

Israeli women of the Coalition of Women for Peace, along with the Gush-Shalom peace bloc, the International Solidarity Movement, and women of the Tulkarem branch of the Palestinian People’s Party (formerly the Palestinian CP), organized a protest action against the Israeli Separation Wall near the Israeli crossing point into the West Bank town of Tulkarem.

In a statement to the press, Gila Svirsky, the chair of the Women Coalition, described how 500 Israeli women and other peace activists gathered on one side of the Israeli army checkpoint into Tulkarem, while on the Palestinian side an even larger contingent of Palestinian women gathered.

Svirsky described how the Israeli soldiers tried to stop the protest action by pushing the women and trying to snatch away the posters. Some soldiers tried to disperse the Palestinian women and fired some warning shots and tear gas at them. But the women would not yield.

After negotiation with the officer-in-command of the checkpoint, a group of the Israeli women were allowed to cross and join their Palestinian co-protesters, bringing them school textbooks and other school equipment, such as school bags filled with color pencils, pencil sharpeners and erasers. “We went there and were welcomed with embraces and kisses,” Svirsky stressed.

Judith Le Blanc can be reached at jleblanc@pww.org; Hans Lebrecht at pww@pww.org

Editorials

Fri, 05 Sep 2003 03:12:00 +0000

Sept. 11 – where are we headed?

On the second anniversary of the Sept. 11 tragedy, it’s appropriate to look back and also to see where our country is headed.

On Sept. 11, 2001, our country and the world were shaken by the enormity of terrorist acts using ordinary airplanes as weapons aimed at civilians.

Everyday working people responded heroically to the crisis with countless acts of humanitarianism.

The Bush administration responded to the Sept. 11 tragedy by going to war twice in two years, to the great benefit of its corporate cronies. The administration and its far right friends argued for war by manipulating the fears of the American people. They used fabricated evidence and lies about links between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. Today, they openly discuss the use of nuclear weapons.

Two years later, they have made the world an infinitely more dangerous place.

At home, this ultra-right administration used fear to force passage of legislation that turned back decades of advances in civil liberties and immigrant rights.

The shock waves of Sept. 11 sped up the economy’s tailspin. But Bush’s tax cuts for the rich are further aggravating the economic crisis. Over 2 million people have lost their jobs and another 3 million have dropped off the charts. Across the country, people worry about their economic security.

And yet, out of the ashes a new mood is growing. Millions here and around the world spoke out against preemptive war. Now, many Americans are questioning why we went to war. A drive to uncover the lies that led to war is under way on Capitol Hill. One hundred and forty local governments have passed resolutions rejecting the civil-liberties-bashing Patriot Act.

The struggle to take back the country from the stranglehold of the far-right politics of fear and war has begun.

The 2004 elections are becoming a rallying point for labor and the people’s movements to turn our country’s policies, foreign and domestic, towards sanity.

Remember Allende!

Thirty years ago, Sept. 11, 1973, the Chilean military under Gen. Augusto Pinochet stormed the Moneda Palace, murdering Chile’s elected president Salvador Allende. Overnight the nation was plunged into fascist terror. Thousands were rounded up and herded into Santiago’s soccer stadium, tortured and murdered by Pinochet’s henchmen. Hundreds more fled into exile. All democratic rights were terminated. Political parties were outlawed. Unions were stripped of their rights. DINA, the hated Chilean secret service, engaged in terrorism worldwide, even in Washington, D.C., where they bombed the car of Chilean patriot Orlando Letelier and his secretary, Ronni Moffitt, in 1976.

Just before the coup, Richard Nixon’s National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger told reporters, “The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves…I don’t see why we need to stand idly by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people.” The CIA orchestrated destabilization of Chile, pouring millions of dollars into El Mercurio and other mass media to propagandize against Allende’s program of nationalizing the copper industry, land reform, and milk for every Chilean child. They set the stage for the coup.

Much has changed. Pinochet is disgraced. Democracy has been partially restored in Chile. But Kissinger’s doctrine of intervention in the internal affairs of other nations lives on. Its evil offspring is George W. Bush’s doctrine of preemptive war on nations that have not attacked us. Both doctrines flagrantly violate the national sovereignty of targeted nations. Today, Bush claims the right to occupy Iraq with military force in defiance of the Iraqi people, the United Nations, and world public opinion.

Allende’s Popular Unity government was overthrown to make Latin America safe for U.S. transnational capital. Iraq is occupied to make the Middle East safe for Chevron, Exxon Mobil, Halliburton, Bechtel. We are paying a terrible price in blood and treasure. We, the people, have a duty to fight these doctrines that menace all humanity with war, repression, and corporate exploitation.

Soldier likes Military Families story

Fri, 05 Sep 2003 02:38:00 +0000

Sal, our soldier friend in Iraq, was encouraged when the new organization “Military Families Speak Out” (www.mfso.org) started holding public activities in Texas. He writes:

Dear Jim,

I forwarded information about the MFSO demo to my parents. It is a great thing that these people are doing. Please forward my thanks. Things here are pretty steady. I have guard duty a lot. I get a lot of time to spend with the Iraqi kids around. There are three in particular. Hassad, his little sister Nacuma (very cute), and Asam. I give them stuff that I have (water, food, sometimes dollars) and then we make faces at each other. I have fun trying to understand what they are saying. I am getting out soon. Lately I have been talking to a lot of other soldiers about Bush. The common voice is “I haven’t voted before, but I am definitely voting against him.” One of my sergeants said today that he thought the whole administration is bad. Very true. Very scary. If you are going to the MFSO protest, please carry me in your thoughts.

Sal of the Sand