Bulletin 216
Subject
: ON POLITICAL REPRESSION AT HOME AND ABROAD : FROM
THE
CENTER FOR THE ADVANCED STUDY OF AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS AND SOCIAL
MOVEMENTS,
Dear Colleagues and Friends of CEIMSA,
The grim news seemed to be multiplying these past few days. A growing
concern
that war criminals are no longer held accountable is now expressed at
every
level of American society.
Every institution in capitalist societies across the world is in danger
of
becoming a site for copycat behavior, by imitation of
the rich and powerful in higher circles of authority, where lawlessness
and the
abuse of power is exercised with impunity, and where criticism is met
routinely
by silence, if not by outright intimidation. This end to dialogue, this
contempt for democratic decision-making, at the local level and
at the national level, is a tactic that can lead only to a rise in violence. At the international level this practice will end in an escalation of violence to a degree
perilous
to humanity itself.
We must join the millions of citizens throughout the world who ask that
those
responsible for crimes against humanity be held accountable and that
the
victims, past and present, be awarded reparations in
acknowledgement
of the failures of our limited democracy and as a re-commitment to
democratic
values, such as tolerance, justice and equality.
Among the items below, are disturbing documents that any mature student
of
American society should examine as part of a serious effort to come to
terms
with the decay within American institutions today. We encourage our
readers to
contribute to the effort of putting an end to the imperialist violence
we now
witnessed day after day in the Middle East and to the repression that
tens of
thousands of Americans are suffering today for their stance against the
war in
Item A. below is a shocking
video clip
depicting what appears to be insane drive-by
killings by paramilitary personnel associated with the imperialist forces in
Item B. is an article by Noam
Chomsky in
which he warns that the war in Iraq might be nothing less than the
detonator of
something bigger, much bigger, and for this reason alone it must be
stopped
now.
[We invite readers read Newsletter N30 on the CEIMSA web site
which is
Professor Jean Bricmont's account of the French betrayal of its
heritage of
tolerance from the time of the Enlightenment. In the 18th Century,
Voltaire
became famous for his declared trust in human reason: "I may
disagree
with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right
to say
it." This proud and noble cry for humanity has been all but
silenced,
momentarily, as Professor Bricmont explains in our Newsletter N30.]
Item C. is part of the newly
released
documents made available by the National Security Archives in
Washington, D.C.,
which reveal for the first time the political process by which the
United
States government gave strategic support to the horrendous crimes
against
humanity perpetrated by the Indonesian invasion and occupation of East
Timor
that lasted for a quarter of a century, beginning in 1975.
Item D. is an article by
award-winning
investigative reporter, by Seymour Hersh. In this article, Where
is the
Iraq war headed next?, he attempts to describe the hysterical
escalation of the war in the Middle East which is now being conducted
by the
Bush II administration, and which includes the formation of a new
composite
American Special Forces team, known as an S.M.U. (special-mission unit)
that
has begun invading Syria.
Item E. is news from the home
front: Bill
Moyers reports in an
interview with John Eggerton on the right-wing "serial
abusers" who now control Public Broadcasting Service in
Item F. is a public invitation
from the Council
for the National Interest Foundation, in
Item G. is a message from
Presidential
Candidate, Ralph Nader, who again rallies support for a confrontation
with
pro-war political forces in the
Item H. is a petition
forwarded to us by
Professor Judith Ezekiel at the
Sincerely,
Francis McCollum Feeley
Professor of American Studies/
Director of Research
Universit頓tendhal
Grenoble, France
http://www.ceimsa.org/
_______________
A.
from Truthout :
28 November 2005
Video Allegedly Exposes Security Contractors
http :// www.truthout.org/multimedia.htm
A "trophy" video made by private security guards showing
them randomly shooting Iraqi civilians as they drive their car in
the
streets of Baghdad. The discovery of this film has sparked two
investigations
after it was posted on the internet. This video has renewed concern
that private
security companies, which are not subject to any form of regulation
either in
_______________
B.
from Noam Chomsky :
http://www.chomsky.info/
4 July 2005
It's Imperialism, Stupid
Noam Chomsky
Khaleej
Times, July 4, 2005
In his June 28 speech, President Bush
asserted that
the invasion of
Half-truths, misinformation and hidden agendas have characterized
official
pronouncements about
In 2002 the
The answer to the "single question" was given shortly after the
invasion, and reluctantly conceded: The WMD didn't exist. Scarcely
missing a
beat, the government and media doctrinal system concocted new pretexts
and
justifications for going to war.
"Americans do not like to think of themselves as aggressors, but raw
aggression is what took place in Iraq," national security and
intelligence
analyst John Prados concluded after his careful, extensive review of
the
documentary record in his 2004 book "Hoodwinked."
Prados describes the Bush "scheme to convince
The memo came from a meeting of Blair's war cabinet on July 23,
The memo also quotes British Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon as saying
that
"the
British journalist Michael Smith, who broke the story of the memo, has
elaborated on its context and contents in subsequent articles. The
"spikes
of activity" apparently included a coalition air campaign meant to
provoke
Warplanes began bombing in southern
"In other words, Bush and Blair began their war not in March 2003, as
everyone believed, but at the end of August 2002, six weeks before
Congress
approved military action against
The bombing was presented as defensive action to protect coalition
planes in
the no-fly zone.
Shortly after the invasion of
It is a rational calculation, on the assumption that human survival is
not
particularly significant in comparison with short-term power and
wealth. And
that is nothing new. These themes resonate through history. The
difference
today in this age of nuclear weapons is only that the stakes are
enormously
higher.
_______________
C.
from National Security Archives :
November 28, 2005
http://www.nsarchive.org
A Quarter Century
of
East Timor Truth
Commission
report uses declassified U.S. documents to reveal support for
Indonesian
invasion and occupation of East Timor from 1975 until U.N. sponsored
vote in
1999
National Security Archive provides more than 1000 documents to East
Timor Truth
Commission after Bush administration refuses cooperation
For more information contact:
Brad Simpson - 443/845-4462
http://www.nsarchive.org
"I'm assuming you're really going to keep your mouth shut on this
subject?"
- National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger to his staff in October
Washington D.C., November 28, 2005 - Today, East Timorese President
Xanana Gusm㯠transmits
to Parliament the final report of East Timor's Commission for
Reception, Truth
and Reconciliation (CAVR) on human rights violations committed in East
Timor
between 1974 and 1999, and the National Security Archive is making
available to
the public some of the more than 1,000 formerly classified U.S.
documents that
it provided to assist the work of the CAVR.
According to the CAVR, the timing of the release to the public of
either the
2,500 page report or its executive summary will now be determined by
"We expect the final report of the CAVR to demonstrate, as these
documents
do, that Indonesia's invasion and occupation of East Timor and the
resulting
crimes against humanity occurred in an international context in which
the
support of powerful nations, especially the United States, was
indispensable,"
said Brad Simpson, assistant professor of history at University of
Maryland,
Baltimore County and Director of the National Security Archive's
Indonesia and
East Timor Documentation Project. "These documents also point to the
need
for genuine international accountability for East Timor's suffering,
especially
as
The documents included in this briefing book were declassified in
response to
Freedom of Information Act requests filed by the Archive's
Among the revelations in these formerly secret documents:
* U.S. officials adopted a "policy of silence" and sought to suppress
news and discussion of East Timor, though they knew of Indonesian plans
to invade
nearly a year in advance;
* The Ford Administration knew that Indonesia had invaded East Timor
almost
entirely using U.S. equipment, knew the use of this equipment was
illegal, and
discussed circumventing any possible Congressional ban on military aid
to
Indonesia;
* In 1977, Carter Administration officials blocked declassification of
the
explosive cable transcribing President Ford and Secretary of State
Kissinger's
December 6, 1975 meeting with Indonesian President Suharto in which
they
explicitly approved of Indonesia's invasion of East Timor;
* Through the 1980s, U.S. officials continued to receive - and deny or
dismiss
- credible reports of Indonesian massacres of Timorese civilians;
* In 1993, the U.S. Ambassador in Jakarta concluded that the Suharto
regime's
effort to integrate East Timor into Indonesia had failed, and that "the
repressive and pervasive Indonesian military presence is the main
obstacle to
the government's goal of integration.";
* In September 1999 the CIA reported on Indonesian military and militia
violence following East Timor's vote for independence as a form of
terrorism,
reporting that "the military has supported or worked alongside the
militias."
_______________
D.
from ICH :
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/
28 November 2005
Where is the
By
11/28/05 " New Yorker" -- -- In recent weeks, there has been widespread speculation that
President
George W. Bush, confronted by diminishing approval ratings and dissent
within
his own party, will begin pulling American troops out of Iraq next
year. The
Administrations best-case scenario is that the parliamentary election
scheduled
for December 15th will produce a coalition government that will join
the
Administration in calling for a withdrawal to begin in the spring. By
then, the
White House hopes, the new government will be capable of handling the
insurgency.
In a speech on November 19th, Bush repeated the latest Administration
catchphrase: As Iraqis stand up, we will stand down. He added, When our commanders on the ground tell me that
Iraqi forces
can defend their freedom, our troops will come home with the honor they
have
earned. One sign of the political pressure on the Administration to
prepare for
a withdrawal came last week, when Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
told Fox
News that the current level of American troops would not have to be
maintained
for very much longer, because the Iraqis were getting better at
fighting the
insurgency.
A high-level Pentagon war planner told me, however, that he has seen
scant
indication that the President would authorize a significant pullout of
American
troops if he believed that it would impede the war against the
insurgency.
There are several proposals currently under review by the White House
and the
Pentagon; the most ambitious calls for American combat forces to be
reduced
from a hundred and fifty-five thousand troops to fewer than eighty
thousand by
next fall, with all American forces officially designated combat to be
pulled
out of the area by the summer of
A key element of the drawdown plans, not mentioned in the Presidents
public
statements, is that the departing American troops will be replaced by
American
airpower. Quick, deadly strikes by
Were not planning to diminish the war, Patrick
Clawson, the
deputy director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told
me. Clawsons views often mirror the thinking of the men and women around
Vice-President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. We
just want
to change the mix of the forces doing the fightingIraqi infantry with
American
support and greater use of airpower. The rule now is to commit Iraqi
forces
into combat only in places where they are sure to win. The pace of
commitment,
and withdrawal, depends on their success in the battlefield.
He continued, We want to draw down our
forces, but the
President is prepared to tough this one out. There is a very deep
feeling on
his part that the issue of
One Pentagon adviser told me, There are
always
contingency plans, but why withdraw and take a chance? I dont think the
President will go for ituntil the insurgency is broken. Hes
not going to back off. This is bigger than domestic politics.
Current and former military and intelligence officials have told me
that the
President remains convinced that it is his personal mission to bring
democracy
to
Bushs closest advisers have long been aware of the religious nature of
his
policy commitments. In recent interviews, one former senior official,
who
served in Bushs first term, spoke extensively about the connection
between the
Presidents religious faith and his view of the war in
The former senior official said that after the election he made a
lengthy
inspection visit to
I tried to tell him, the former senior official said. And he couldnt
hear it.
There are grave concerns within the military about the capability of
the U.S.
Army to sustain two or three more years of combat in
Many of the militarys most senior generals are deeply frustrated, but
they say
nothing in public, because they dont want to jeopardize their careers.
The
Administration has so terrified the generals that they know they wont go public, a former defense official said. A retired senior C.I.A.
officer
with knowledge of
One person with whom the Pentagons top commanders have shared their
private
views for decades is Representative John Murtha, of
Murthas call for a speedy American pullout only seemed to strengthen
the White
Houses resolve. Administration officials are beyond angry at him,
because he is
a serious threat to their policyboth on substance and politically, the
former
defense official said. Speaking at the Osan Air Force base, in
The President is more determined than ever to stay the course, the
former
defense official said. He doesnt feel any pain. Bush is a believer in
the adage
People may suffer and die, but the Church advances. He said that the
President
had become more detached, leaving more issues to Karl Rove and
Vice-President
Cheney. They keep him in the gray world of religious idealism, where he
wants
to be anyway, the former defense official said. Bushs public
appearances, for
example, are generally scheduled in front of friendly audiences, most
often at
military bases. Four decades ago, President Lyndon Johnson, who was
also
confronted with an increasingly unpopular war, was limited to similar
public
forums. Johnson knew he was a prisoner in the White House, the former
official
said, but Bush has no idea.
Within the military, the prospect of using airpower as a substitute for
American troops on the ground has caused great unease. For one thing,
Air Force
commanders, in particular, have deep-seated objections to the
possibility that
Iraqis eventually will be responsible for target selection. Will the
Iraqis
call in air strikes in order to snuff rivals, or other warlords, or to
snuff
members of your own sect and blame someone else? another senior military planner now on assignment in the Pentagon asked. Will
some
Iraqis be targeting on behalf of Al Qaeda, or the insurgency, or the
Iranians?
Its a serious business, retired Air Force
General
Charles Horner, who was in charge of allied bombing during the 1991
Gulf War,
said. The Air Force has always had concerns about people ordering air
strikes
who are not Air Force forward air controllers. We need people on active
duty to
think it out, and they will. There has to be training to be sure that
somebody
is not trying to get even with somebody else. (Asked for a comment, the
Pentagon spokesman said there were plans in place for such training. He
also
noted that
The American air war inside
In recent months, the tempo of American bombing seems to have
increased. Most
of the targets appear to be in the hostile, predominantly Sunni
provinces that
surround
The insurgency operates mainly in crowded urban areas, and Air Force
warplanes
rely on sophisticated, laser-guided bombs to avoid civilian casualties.
These
bombs home in on targets that must be painted, or illuminated, by laser
beams
directed by ground units. The pilot doesnt identify the target as seen
in the
pre-briefthe instructions provided before takeoffa former high-level
intelligence official told me. The guy with the laser is the targeteer.
Not the
pilot. Often you get a hot-read from a military unit on the groundand
you drop
your bombs with no communication with the guys on the ground. You dont
want to
break radio silence. The people on the ground are calling in targets
that the
pilots cant verify. He added, And were going to turn this process over to the Iraqis?
The second senior military planner told me that there are essentially
two types
of targeting now being used in
This military planner added that even today, with Americans doing the
targeting, there is no sense of an air campaign, or a strategic vision.
We are
just whacking targetsits a reversion to the Stone Age. Theres
no operational art. Thats what
happens when you
give targeting to the Armythey hit what the local commander wants to
hit.
One senior Pentagon consultant I spoke to said he was optimistic that
American
air will immediately make the Iraqi Army that much better. But he
acknowledged
that he, too, had concerns about Iraqi targeting. We have the most
expensive
eyes in the sky right now, the consultant said. But a lot of Iraqis
want to
settle old scores. Who is going to have authority to call in air
strikes?
Theres got to be a behavior-based rule.
General John Jumper, who retired last month after serving four years as
the Air
Force chief of staff, was in favor of certification of those Iraqis who
will be
allowed to call in strikes, the Pentagon consultant told me. I dont
know if it
will be approved. The regular Army generals were resisting it to the
last
breath, despite the fact that they would benefit the most from it.
A Pentagon consultant with close ties to the officials in the
Vice-Presidents
office and the Pentagon who advocated the war said that the Iraqi
penchant for
targeting tribal and personal enemies with artillery and mortar fire
had
created impatience and resentment inside the military. He believed that
the Air
Forces problems with Iraqi targeting might be addressed by the
formation of
U.S.-Iraqi transition teams, whose American members would be drawn
largely from
Special Forces troops. This consultant said that there were plans to
integrate
between two hundred and three hundred Special Forces members into Iraqi
units,
which was seen as a compromise aimed at
meeting the
Air Forces demand to vet Iraqis who were involved in targeting. But in
practice, the consultant added, it meant that the Special Ops people
will soon
allow Iraqis to begin calling in the targets.
Robert Pape, a political-science professor at the
Even American bombing on behalf of an improved, well-trained Iraqi Army
would
not necessarily be any more successful against the insurgency. Its not going to work, said Andrew Brookes, the
former
director of airpower studies at the Royal Air Forces advanced staff
college,
who is now at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, in
The Air Forces worries have been subordinated, so far, to the political
needs
of the White House. The Administrations immediate political goal after
the
December elections is to show that the day-to-day conduct of the war
can be
turned over to the newly trained and equipped Iraqi military. It has
already
planned heavily scripted change-of-command ceremonies, complete with
the
lowering of American flags at bases and the raising of Iraqi ones.
Some officials in the State Department, the C.I.A., and British Prime
Minister
Tony Blairs government have settled on their candidate of choice for
the
December electionsIyad Allawi, the secular Shiite who served until this
spring
as Iraqs interim Prime Minister. They believe that Allawi can gather
enough
votes in the election to emerge, after a round of political bargaining,
as
Prime Minister. A former senior British adviser told me that Blair was
convinced that Allawi is the best hope. The fear is that a government
dominated
by religious Shiites, many of whom are close to
Blair has assigned a small team of operatives to provide political help
to
Allawi, the former adviser told me. He also said that there was talk
late this
fall, with American concurrence, of urging Ahmad Chalabi, a secular
Shiite, to
join forces in a coalition with Allawi during the post-election
negotiations to
form a government. Chalabi, who is notorious for his role in promoting
flawed
intelligence on weapons of mass destruction before the war, is now a
deputy
Prime Minister. He and Allawi were bitter rivals while in exile.
A senior United Nations diplomat told me that he was puzzled by the
high
American and British hopes for Allawi. I know a lot of people want
Allawi, but
I think hes been a terrific disappointment, the diplomat said. He
doesnt seem
to be building a strong alliance, and at the moment it doesnt look like
he will
do very well in the election.
The second Pentagon consultant told me, If Allawi becomes Prime
Minister, we
can say, Theres a moderate, urban, educated leader now in power who
does not
want to deprive women of their rights. He would ask us to leave, but he
would
allow us to keep Special Forces operations inside Iraqto keep an
American
presence the right way.
A former high-level intelligence official cautioned that it was
probably too
late for any American withdrawal plan to work without further
bloodshed. The
constitution approved by Iraqi voters in October will be interpreted by
the
Kurds and the Shiites to proceed with their plans for autonomy, he
said. The
Sunnis will continue to believe that if they can get rid of the
Americans they
can still win. And there still is no credible way to establish security
for
American troops.
The fear is that a precipitous
Meanwhile, as the debate over troop reductions continues, the covert
war in
_______________
E.
from Bill Moyers :
http://www.lucidcafe.com/library/96jun/moyers.html
28 November 2005
Moyers Has His Say
By John Eggerton
Former NOW host on media bias and his feud with former CPB Chairman Ken Tomlinson.
Bill Moyers
became the central figure in absentia in the controversy surrounding former Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB)
Chairman
Kenneth Tomlinson. It was Tomlinson who pointed to Moyers' NOW newscast
on PBS
as a chief reason for his efforts to bring "balance" to public
broadcasting by adding conservative shows. Moyers has since left NOW
and is
currently president of the
You are the exemplar of liberal PBS bias, according
to Ken
Tomlinson. Was your show liberally biased?
Right-wing partisans like Tomlinson have always
attacked
aggressive reporting as liberal.
We were biased, all right - in favor of uncovering
the news
that powerful people wanted to keep hidden: conflicts of interest at
the
Department of Interior, secret meetings between Vice President Cheney
and the
oil industry, backdoor shenanigans by lobbyists at the FCC, corruption
in
Congress, neglect of wounded veterans returning from Iraq, Pentagon
cost
overruns, the manipulation of intelligence leading to the invasion of
Iraq.
We were way ahead of the news curve on these
stories, and
the administration turned its hit men loose on us.
Tomlinson actually told The Washington Post that he
was
irate over one of our documentary reports from a small town in
If reporting on what's happening to ordinary people
thrown
overboard by circumstances beyond their control and betrayed by
It is an old canard of right-wing ideologues like
Tomlinson
to equate tough journalism with liberalism. They hope to distract
people from
the message by trying to discredit the messenger.
NOW threw the fear of God into Tomlinson's crowd
because
they couldn't dispute the accuracy of our reporting.
And when we weren't reporting the truth behind the
news, we
were interviewing a wide variety of people: Ralph Reed and Ralph Nader;
Cal
Thomas and Molly Ivins; Robert Bartley, editor of the Wall Street
Journal;
Katrina Vandenheuval, editor of The Nation; The Conservative Union's
David
Keene; Dorothy Rabinowitz (also of the Wall Street Journal); Charles
Lewis of
the Center for Public Integrity; the Club for Growth's Stephen Moore;
historian
Howard Zinn; and Indian activist Arundhati Roy. And
on and
on.
Did you get any direct pressure from Tomlinson or
CPB to
change the content of your show?
The people at PBS told me they were getting
excruciating
pressure because of our reporting, including threats to de-fund public
television unless "Moyers is dealt with." They never identified the
source of that pressure.
We know now it was Tomlinson. [Tomlinson] even told
some
people [we have confirmed it with two people who were present] that
"Moyers is a coward because he doesn't want to talk to people who
disagree
with him."
Hello? See the above list of all the conservatives
who
appeared on the show.
What happened to the debate idea between you two?
I asked him repeatedly. He refused. He didn't even
respond.
But when all this started to unfold early last year, I asked three
times to
meet with the CPB board and try to find out what was going on.
I thought we could reason together and maybe agree
on how to
cooperate to protect Public Broadcasting's independence. I mean, I not
only read
the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, I helped to create it. CPB's job
was to be
a firewall between guys like them and the producers, journalists, and
content
of public broadcasting.
I thought at the time that I was dealing with people
who
cared about this institution. I didn't realize they had gone over to
the dark
side.
What prompted your departure from NOW?
I needed a break, and I also sensed that we were up
against
serial abusers and that I could fight back more effectively if I
weren't on the
air.
________________
F.
from Council for the National Interest Foundation :
http://www.cnionline.org/
November 29, 2005
CNI
Public Hearing
COMMON SENSE AND CLASHING
CIVILIZATIONS:
Exiting
Featuring Former Congressman Paul Findley (R-IL)
Room SC-4
(North side of the
Thursday, December 1st, 2005
2:30 to 4:30 PM
Paul Findley served in the U.S. Congress for 22 years, 1961 to 1983, on
the
House Foreign Affairs Committee. During his tenure on Capitol Hill, Mr.
Findley
was widely respected for his efforts to bring a fair and balanced
American
Middle East policy. He is the author of the bestselling book "They Dare
to
Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront
Joining him will be Prof. Lawrence Davidson and his wife Janet Amighi,
two
recent visitors to
Speakers include:
_________________
G.
from Ralph Nader :
29 November 2005
Dear Friend,
Lets keep this short and sweet.
The Democrats are now in a corner.
Many voted to authorize the war in
They have two choices.
They can either do as John Murtha and John Edwards did, admit they were
wrong,
and call for a pullout policy.
Or they can keep their heads in the sand a
If they go the Hillary route they lose again in 2006 and 2008 and
beyond.
If they follow the two Johns, they have a chance.
For the sake of the country, I hope they follow the two Johns.
But don't hold your breath.
Democrats and their supporters have a lot to answer for.
They have a lot on their minds and on their collective conscience.
Many Democrats in Congress voted to authorize this war that has cost
more than
2,000 young American deaths and tens of thousands of serious injuries.
Iraqi
civilian casualties are enormous.
You on the other hand our brave, and steadfast supporters you opposed
the war
when it was unfashionable to do so.
You opposed the war when the two Johns and Kerry and Clinton and the
rest were
giving Bush cover.
You opposed the war tickets of Bush/Cheney and Kerry/Edwards.
You stood tall with us, at the November 1st Cooper Union Speech in
You were abused, misused, and refused for standing tall.
And of course, so were we.
One last point:
John Edwards, in his November 13, 2005 op-ed piece in the Washington
Post,
leads with these three words:
I was wrong.
Yes.
As we pointed out during the 2004 campaign, at Cooper Union:
Kerry/Edwards was wrong about the war.
Bush/Cheney was wrong about the war.
And whats the flip side?
Nader/Camejo was right about the war.
You were right about the war.
We were right about the war.
Its important to set the record straight.
Armed with the truth, we will move together in the New Year with a
majority of
the American people to end this disaster.
And rebuild a new politics from the ground up.
Thank you for your steady support and bright horizons.
RN
H.
from Judith Ezekiel :
30 November 2005
Subject: Fwd:
http://www.worldcantwait.org
Dear Friend,
7 students at
Please read, forward, and join Howard ! Zinn, Michael Eric Dyson and others in adding your name
to the
enclosed statement defending these students.
To add your name, send an email to: youth_students@worldcantwait.org,
or sunsarasworld@yahoo.com.
Please
specify how you would like to be identified.
Sincerely,
Sunsara Taylor
Co-Initiator of the World Can't Wait - Drive Out the Bush Regime
worldcantwait.org
Drop the Charges and
Stop the
Harassment Against the
Students who act! to Drive Out the Bush
Regime,
especially when they remain firm in the face of police and
administrative
threats, are heroic. They must be defended. Their example
must be
followed.
Students at
On Friday, November 18th, 3 student organizers were issued summons
for a
hearing on over possible expulsion the following Monday morning,
giving
them no time during the working week to contact lawyers, parents, or
campus
administrators. After hundreds of phone-calls from around the
country to
the Dean⪙s Office, their hearing was postponed. Days later, 4
more students were issued summons and campus police shut down an
interview
being filmed by the local media, attempting to prevent their story from
getting
out.
The attacks on the student organizers at Hampton University, a
historically
black college with a mostly Republican administration, is an ugly
harbinger of
the ⪜dissent-free⪝ future the Bush regime is trying to lock into
place. These attacks are part of a pattern of repression against
high
school and college students nation-wide on November 2nd that
disproportionately
targeted black, Latino and other oppressed students.
A standard cannot be set where the President of the United States can
stay on
vacation as a major city⪙s poor and black people are left for five days
without food or water, where influential friends of this President are
allowed
to float out genocidal notions of aborting all black babies to bring
crime
rates down, and where the President⪙s policies of ⪜abstinence-only⪝
in the face of an international AIDS pandemic threaten millions of
lives, but
where students who dare to act to end this are silenced and expelled
from
school.
As it says in the Call for The World Can⪙t Wait ⪓ Drive Out! the Bush Regime, ⪜This will not be easy. If we
speak
the truth, they will try to silence us. If we act, they will to try to
stop us.
But we speak for the majority, here and around the world, and as we get
this
going we are going to reach out to the people who have been so badly
fooled by
Bush and we are NOT going to stop.⪝
We, the undersigned, demand that the Hampton University administration
to drop
all charges against, cease their political harassment of, and to
apologize to
these students. These students must not be expelled! We
also call
on students at campuses nation-wide to send statements of s! upport,
and to join, strengthen and support the movement to Drive Out the
Bush
Regime because the World Can⪙t Wait!
Rosalyn Baxandall, Distinguished Teaching Professor, SUNY Old
Westbury*
Edget Betru, Guantanamo Global Justice Initiative- Center for
Constitutional
Rights*
Eileen Boris, University of California, Santa Barbara*
Judith Ezekiel, Universite de Toulouse le Mirail*
Carl Dix, National Spokesperson, Revolutionary Communist Party
Bea Kreloff, director Art Workshop International*
Allen Lang, National Student Organizer, The World Can⪙t Wait
⪓ Drive Out the Bush Regime!
Efia Nwangaza, Executive Director, African American Institute for
Policy
Studies & Planning
Katha Pollitt, writer The Nation*
Sonia Jaffe Robins, freelance writer and editor
Sunsara Taylor, Co-Initiator of The World Can⪙t Wait ⪓
Drive Out the Bush Regime!
Barbara Winslow,
Laura X, Women⪙s History Library*
Howard Zinn, Historian and Author
*affiliations for identification purposes only
Demand that the 7 students facing expulsion be cleared of any
disciplinary
measures and that the intimidation and punishment for student protest
stop!
Call the Dean of Men (Woods! on Hopewell Jr.) at 757-727-5303, the Dean of Women at 757-727-5486.
*********************
Francis McCollum Feeley
Professor of American Studies/
Director of Research
Universit頤e
Grenoble-3
http://dimension.ucsd.edu/CEIMSA-IN-EXILE/