Thanks for sending this Green Party Platform information.
Given the choice of a violent revolution to rid the Working Class from
the oppressive Corporate Capitalism that is strangling us, and a
positive redesign of the political system, with a goal of phasing out
Corporate Capitalism, I definitely support the latter effort.
I'm not sure if the leaders in the Green Party would say that
eventually Corporate Capitalism must be removed from the face of the
Earth, but so long as they can effectively move in that direction,
life for the working class and lower classes will be improved. This
would be a great improvement over the, "go slow" proposed by Hillary
Clinton, or the, "return to our former greatness" proposed by Donald
Trump.
Of course this is all speculation because the Establishment will trash
any organization that it perceives as a threat to its total control.
Still, I think that if enough of us supported the Green Party, it
would enhance a process of collapse that is already underway.
Carl Jarvis
On 7/30/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
> I started looking through the material on the Green Party platform and I've
> copied some of it so you can get an idea of what the party stands for. I
> haven't found anything in there that supports socialism per se, which is
> interesting because Chris Hedges, who rights in positive terms about
> socialism all the time, is supporting Jill Stein and the Green Party. For
> those of us who aren't committed to a specific ideology, (I think of myself
> as an anarchist), there's a lot to like in this material, and I haven't
> copied the huge amount that is available in the platform link.
>
> Here are the 10 key principles of the Green Party.
>
> The Ten Key Values
> The Ten Key Values came about at a marathon session at the first Green
> meeting in 1984, facilitated by then Los Angeles-based and later Eugene,
> OR
> activist Jeff Land, with primary contributions by Charlene Spretnak and
> Murray Bookchin of the New England Institute for Social Ecology.
> According to Mark Satin, a journalist invited to cover the meeting, "About
> 50 of us were trying to think of a project that could help define us and
> put
> us on the political map. Everyone sensed that something important could
> come out of [the workshop designed to come up with the document]. A
> "collective brain" seemed to take hold, and we began working together as
> one."
>
> Eventually a committee of Spretnak, Satin and Eleanor LeCain (coordinator
> of
> the Peace and Environmental Coalition) were charged with writing a draft
> Values Statement from the notes, and reporting that back for approval.
>
> The eventual set of Ten Key Values they submitted was approved by consensus
> in late 1984, and became a foundational basis for U.S. Greens going
> forward.
>
> Yet it would not be long before the Left Green Network (LGN), formed in
> 1988, issued their own, this time with 14 Values. Over time, Greens in
> different states would adopt their own versions of the Ten Key Values, most
> often modifying Post-patriarchal Values into Feminism and/or Gender Equity;
> Personal and Social Responsibility as Social Justice, and Future Focus to
> include Sustainability.
> 1. Grassroots Democracy
> Every human being deserves a say in the decisions that affect his or her
> life and should not be subject to the will of another. Therefore, we will
> work to increase public participation at every level of government and to
> ensure that our public representatives are fully accountable to the people
> who elect them. We will also work to create new types of political
> organizations which expand the process of participatory democracy by
> directly including citizens in the decision-making process.
> 2. Social Justice and Equal Opportunity
> All persons should have the rights and opportunity to benefit equally from
> the resources afforded us by society and the environment. We must
> consciously confront in ourselves, our organizations, and society at large,
> barriers such as racism and class oppression, sexism and homophobia, ageism
> and disability, which act to deny fair treatment and equal justice under
> the
> law.
> 3. Ecological Wisdom
> Human societies must operate with the understanding that we are part of
> nature, not separate from nature. We must maintain an ecological balance
> and
> live within the ecological and resource limits of our communities and our
> planet. We support a sustainable society which utilizes resources in such a
> way that future generations will benefit and not suffer from the practices
> of our generation. To this end we must practice agriculture which
> replenishes the soil; move to an energy efficient economy; and live in ways
> that respect the integrity of natural systems.
> 4. Non-Violence
> It is essential that we develop effective alternatives to society's current
> patterns of violence. We will work to demilitarize, and eliminate weapons
> of
> mass destruction, without being naive about the intentions of other
> governments. We recognize the need for self-defense and the defense of
> others who are in help- less situations. We promote non-violent methods to
> oppose practices and policies with which we disagree, and will guide our
> actions toward lasting personal, community and global peace.
> 5. Decentralization
> Centralization of wealth and power contributes to social and economic
> injustice, environmental destruction, and militarization. Therefore, we
> support a restructuring of social, political and economic institutions away
> from a system which is controlled by and mostly benefits the powerful few,
> to a democratic, less bureaucratic system. Decision-making should, as much
> as possible, remain at the individual and local level, while assuring that
> civil rights are protected for all citizens.
> 6. Community Based Economics
> Redesign our work structures to encourage employee ownership and workplace
> democracy. Develop new economic activities and institutions that will allow
> us to use our new technologies in ways that are humane, freeing, ecological
> and accountable, and responsive to communities. Establish some form of
> basic
> economic security, open to all. Move beyond the narrow "job ethic" to new
> definitions of "work," jobs" and "income" that reflect the changing
> economy.
> Restructure our patterns of income distribution to reflect the wealth
> created by those outside the formal monetary economy: those who take
> responsibility for parenting, housekeeping, home gardens, community
> volunteer work, etc. Restrict the size and concentrated power of
> corporations with- out discouraging superior efficiency or technological
> innovation.
> 7. Feminism and Gender Equity
> We have inherited a social system based on male domination of politics and
> economics. We call for the replacement of the cultural ethics of domination
> and control with more cooperative ways of interacting that respect
> differences of opinion and gender. Human values such as equity between the
> sexes, interpersonal responsibility, and honesty must be developed with
> moral conscience. We should remember that the process that determines our
> decisions and actions is just as important as achieving the outcome we
> want.
> 8. Respect for Diversity
> We believe it is important to value cultural, ethnic, racial, sexual,
> religious and spiritual diversity, and to promote the development of
> respectful relationships across these lines. We believe that the many
> diverse elements of society should be reflected in our organizations and
> decision-making bodies, and we support the leadership of people who have
> been traditionally closed out of leadership roles. We acknowledge and
> encourage respect for other life forms than our own and the preservation of
> biodiversity.
> 9. Personal and Global Responsibility
> We encourage individuals to act to improve their personal well- being and,
> at the same time, to enhance ecological balance and social harmony. We seek
> to join with people and organizations around the world to foster peace,
> economic justice, and the health of the planet.
> 10. Future Focus And Sustainability
> Our actions and policies should be motivated by long-term goals. We seek to
> protect valuable natural resources, safely disposing of or "unmaking" all
> waste we create, while developing a sustainable economics that does not
> depend on continual expansion for survival. We must counterbalance the
> drive
> for short-term profits by assuring that economic development, new
> technologies, and fiscal policies are responsible to future generations who
> will inherit the results of our actions. Make the quality of life, rather
> than open-ended economic growth, the focus of future thinking.
> The wording of the Four Pillars has varied slightly as different local
> Green
> Parties have adapted them.
>
>
> GREEN SOLUTIONS
>
> 1. Electoral reform
> a.Enact proportional representation voting systems for legislative seats on
> municipal, county, state and federal levels. Proportional representation
> systems provide that people are represented in the proportion their views
> are held in society and are based on dividing seats proportionally within
> multi-seat districts, compared to the standard U.S. single-seat,
> winner-take
> all districts. Forms of proportional representation include choice voting
> (candidate-based), party list (party-based) and mixed member voting
> (combines proportional representation with district representation).
>
>
> b.Enact Instant Run-off Voting (IRV) for chief executive offices like
> mayor,
> governor and president and other single-seat elections. Under IRV, voters
> can rank candidates in their order of preference (1,2,3, etc.) IRV ensures
> that the eventual winner has majority support and allows voters to express
> their preferences knowing that supporting their favorite candidate will not
> inadvertently help their least favored candidate. IRV thus frees voters
> from
> being forced to choose between the lesser of two evils, and saves money by
> eliminating unnecessary run-off elections.
>
>
> c.Provide full public financing of federal, state and local elections,
> including free and equal radio and television time on the public airwaves
> for all ballot-qualified candidates and parties.
>
>
> d.Prohibit corporations from spending to influence elections, preferably by
> constitutional amendment abolishing corporate personhood, or as a condition
> of receipt of a corporate charter by federal chartering of corporations.
>
>
> e.Eliminate all ballot access laws and rules that discriminate against
> smaller parties and independents, and otherwise place undue burden on the
> right of citizens to run for office.
>
>
> f.Abolish the Electoral College and provide for the direct national
> election
> of the president by Instant Runoff Voting. As a step in that direction,
> support National Popular Vote legislation which would guarantee the
> Presidency to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular
> votes
> in all 50 states (and the District of Columbia), which would take effect
> only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of
> the
> electoral votes-that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270
> of
> 538).
>
>
> g.Create a new publicly-funded People's Commission on Presidential Debates,
> and open its presidential debates to all candidates who appear on at least
> as many ballots as would represent a majority of the Electoral College and
> who raise enough funds to otherwise qualify for general election public
> financing. Any candidate who refuses to participate in such debates would
> lose general election public financing for their candidacy. Amend federal
> law to remove the non-profit tax exemption status that allows corporations
> to fund the existing Commission on Presidential Debates and other such
> exclusive privately controlled debate entities.
>
>
> h.Amend the Federal Election Campaign Act to change the percentage of the
> presidential popular vote required for a new party's candidate to receive
> first time General Election public funding from 5% in the previous General
> Election to 1%; and change the percentage of the presidential popular vote
> required for a new party to receive public presidential convention funding
> from 5% for its candidate in the previous general election to 1%.
>
>
> i.Include the option to vote for a binding None of the Above (NOTA) on all
> party primary and general election ballots.
>
>
> j.Support the right to initiative, referendum and recall at all levels of
> government. Enact signature gathering standards that empower volunteer
> collection efforts and financial disclosure requirements that identify the
> sources of funding behind paid signature efforts.
>
>
> k.Enact a national "right to vote" law or constitutional amendment to
> guarantee universal, automatic, permanent voter registration, along with
> fail-safe voting procedures, so that eligible voters whose names are not on
> the voter rolls or whose information is out-of-date can correct the rolls
> and vote on the same day.
>
>
> l.Enact statehood for the District of Columbia. Ensure that residents of
> the
> District of Columbia have the same rights and representation as all other
> U.S. citizens.
>
>
> m.Restore full citizenship rights to felons upon completion of their
> sentence, including the right to vote and to run for elected office. Enable
> greater enfranchisement of overseas voters.
>
>
> n.Support strong enforcement of the Federal Voting Rights Act and, where
> applicable, state voting rights acts like the California Voting Rights Act.
>
>
> o.Make Election Day a national holiday and/or have weekend elections.
>
>
> p.Amend the U.S. Constitution to require that all vacancies in the U.S.
> Senate be filled by election rather than appointment.
>
> The Green Party strongly believes that quality of life is determined not
> only by material aspects that can be measured and counted, but also by
> elements that cannot be quantified. We firmly support the separation of
> church and state, but we also acknowledge the spiritual dimension of life,
> and we honor the cultivation of various types of spiritual experience in
> our
> diverse society.
>
> We believe that artistic expression and a thriving structure of art
> institutions are key to community well-being. We believe that a deep and
> broad embrace of nonviolence is the only effective way to stop cycles of
> violence, from the home to the streets to the international level. We
> advocate a diverse system of education that would introduce children early
> to the wonders of the Great School (Nature), and would cultivate the wisdom
> of eco-education, eco-economics, eco-politics, and eco-culture. We seek to
> protect our children from the corrosive effects of mass culture that trains
> them to regard themselves first and foremost as consumers.
>
> We support the shift in modern medicine to include healing through
> complementary therapies and engagement with the Great Hospital (Nature). We
> seek, in short, to facilitate the healthy unfolding of the person within
> the
> unfolding story of the family, community, bioregion, state, nation, and
> Earth community.
>
>
>
> A. Civil Rights and Equal Rights
>
> The foundation of any democratic society is the guarantee that each member
> of society has equal rights. Respect for our constitutionally protected
> rights is our best defense against discrimination and the abuse of power.
> Also, we recognize an intimate connection between our rights as individuals
> and our responsibilities to our neighbors and the planet. The Green Party
> shall strive to secure universal and effective recognition and observance
> of
> the principles and spirit expressed in the United National Universal
> Declaration of Human Rights as an international standard that all nations
> must meet.
>
> One of our key values is respect for diversity. We are committed to
> establishing relationships that honor diversity; that support the
> self-definition and self-determination of all people; and that consciously
> confront the barriers of racism, sexism, homophobia, class oppression,
> ageism, and the many ways our culture separates us from working together.
> We
> support affirmative action to remedy discrimination, to protect
> constitutional rights and to provide equal opportunity under the law.
>
> 1. Women's Rights
>
> Since the beginning of what we call civilization, when men's dominance over
> women was firmly established, until the present day, our history has been
> marred with oppression of and brutality to women. The Green Party deplores
> this system of male domination, known as patriarchy, in all its forms, both
> subtle and overt - from oppression, inequality, and discrimination to all
> forms of violence against women and girls including rape, trafficking,
> forced sex which is also rape, slavery, prostitution and violence against
> women within marriage and relationships and in all institutions. The change
> the world is crying for cannot occur unless women's voices are heard.
> Democracy cannot work without equality for women, which provides equal
> participation and representation. It took an extraordinary and ongoing
> fight
> over 72 years for women to win the right to vote. However, the Equal Rights
> Amendment, first introduced in 1923, has still not been ratified by 2012,
> representing a continuous struggle of 87 years with no victory in sight. We
> believe that equality should be a given, and that all Greens must work
> toward that end. We are committed to increasing participation of women in
> politics, government and leadership so they can change laws, make
> decisions,
> and create policy solutions that affect and will improve women's lives, and
> we are building our party so that Greens can be elected to office to do
> this. In July 2002 the National Women's Caucus of the Green Party of the
> United States was founded to carry out the Party's commitment to women.
>
> We also support, and call on others to support, the many existing and
> ongoing efforts for women:
>
> Social Equality
> a.We support the equal application of the Constitution of the United States
> of America to all citizens, and therefore call for passage of the Equal
> Rights Amendment (ERA). We urge accelerated ratification by three or more
> of
> the remaining 15 states that are required to pass ERA into law and into the
> Constitution. We urge renewed efforts and campaigns to ratify the ERA. We
> support the Equal Rights Amendment reintroduced in the U.S. Congress, and
> support using the precedent of a three-state strategy for ratification.
>
>
> b.We call for equal representation of women in Congress instead of the
> current 17% in 2012.
>
>
> c.The Green Party calls for U.S. passage of CEDAW, the Convention on the
> Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women, which was adopted
> in 1979 by the U.N. General Assembly and ratified by 173 countries. The
> U.S.
> is one of the very few countries, and the only industrialized nation, that
> have not ratified it.
>
>
> d.The Equal Employment Opportunities Commission should actively investigate
> and prosecute sexual harassment complaints. Women who file complaints must
> not be persecuted and should be protected under federal and state law. We
> must enshrine in law the basic principle that women have the same rights as
> men, and promote gender equality and fairness in the work force to ensure
> that women receive equal pay for jobs of equal worth.
>
>
> e.We support the inclusion of an equal number of women and men in peace
> talks and negotiations, not only because these efforts directly affect
> their
> lives and those of their husbands, children and families, but also because
> when women are involved, the negotiations are more successful.
>
>
>
> Reproductive Rights
>
> Women's rights must be protected and expanded to guarantee each woman's
> right as a full participant in society, free from sexual harassment, job
> discrimination or interference in the intensely personal choice about
> whether to have a child.
>
> Women's right to control their bodies is non-negotiable. It is essential
> that the option of a safe, legal abortion remains available. The
> "morning-after" pill must be affordable and easily accessible without a
> prescription, together with a government-sponsored public relations
> campaign
> to educate women about this form of con-
>
> traception. Clinics must be accessible and must offer advice on
> contraception and the means for contraception; consultation about abortion
> and the performance of abortions, and; abortion regardless of age or
> marital
> status.
>
> We endorse women's right to use contraception and, when they choose, to
> have
> an abortion. This right cannot be limited to women's age or marital status.
> Contraception and abortion must be included in all health insurance
> policies
> in the U.S., and any state government must be able to legally offer these
> services free of charge to women at the poverty level. Public health
> agencies operating abroad should be allowed to offer family planning,
> contraception, and abortion in all countries that ask for those services.
> We
> oppose our government's habit of cutting family planning funds when those
> funds go to agencies in foreign countries that give out contraceptive
> devices, offer advice on abortion, and perform abortions.
>
> We encourage women and men to prevent unwanted pregnancies. It is the
> inalienable right and duty of every woman to learn about her body and to be
> aware of the phases of her menstrual cycle, and it is the duty for every
> man
> to be aware of the functions and health of his and his partner's bodies.
> This information is necessary for self-determination, to make informed
> decisions, and to prevent unintended consequences. Unplanned conception
> takes control away from individuals and makes them subject to external
> controls. The "morning-after" pill and option of a safe and legal abortion
> need to remain available.
>
> Economic Equality
>
> Since, nationally, women earn only 77% of men's wages for equal work,
> despite outnumbering men in the workforce and despite the U.S. 1963 Equal
> Pay Act, we support intensified effort to see this unfair gap closed,
> including support for the Paycheck Fairness Act and similar legislation,
> and
> greater effort at enforcement.
>
> Single mothers are the largest and most severely impoverished group in the
> United States, which explains why 22% of the children in our country live
> below the poverty line. Welfare reform has forced mothers to abandon their
> children while they travel to work at minimum wage jobs. With the extreme
> pay inequity, single mothers cannot afford child care, nurture their
> children, and move out of poverty.
>
> The Green Party supports real reforms to end poverty and return dignity and
> opportunity to all mothers. We call for implementing innovative programs
> that work with the particular and special needs of motherhood. We also
> support other programs such as a universal
>
> basic income (known also as a guaranteed income or Citizen Dividend, as
> described in True Cost Pricing and Tax Fairness, IV. E.) that will provide
> for those who nurture the next generation - work that is of incalculable
> importance to our society.
>
> Violence and Oppression
>
> Language is often used as a weapon by those with power, and women have
> traditionally borne the brunt of inflicted injuries. Freedom of speech is
> vital to democracy. However, we believe that this freedom should not be
> used
> to perpetuate oppression and abuse.
>
> Violence against women is increasing nationwide. We must address the root
> cause of all violence even as we specifically address violence to women. We
> support stronger legislation, programs and enforcement. We also call for
> new
> dialog and re-thinking that can lead to better language, ideas and
> solutions. We urge that the term "domestic violence" be replaced by the
> term
> "violence," because "domestic violence" is not perceived as real violence,
> which leads to it not being treated legally and practically for the
> violence
> that it is. We urge that the term "sex work" not be used in relation to
> prostitution. With the increasing conflation of trafficking (the violent
> and
> illegal trafficking in women and girls for forced sex) with prostitution,
> it
> is impossible to know which is which, and what violence the term "sex work"
> is masking. No source in existence knows which forms of prostitution
> comprise forced sex and which comprise free will or choice prostitution.
> Forced sex is rape, and it is a crime. An increasing number of experts
> think
> the percentage of choice prostitution is very small, leaving the larger
> number of women exposed to serious and often fatal violence. Much of what
> is
> commonly called prostitution is actually sex trafficking by definition. The
> Green Party calls for a safer world for women and girls.
>
> The Green Party has zero tolerance for the illegal international
> trafficking
> in humans. Of the millions of humans trafficked worldwide, the large
> majority are women and children who are bought and sold as slaves. They are
> kept captive and in debt-bondage that can never be paid off. Most are sold
> over and over again for forced sex prostitution. Forced sex is rape and a
> serious crime. Some are forced to labor in agriculture, sweat shops,
> hotels,
> restaurants, domestic service and other forms of servitude. According to
> Human Rights Watch, in all cases coercive tactics - including deception,
> fraud, intimidation, isolation, threat and use of physical force, or debt
> bondage - are used to control women. Estimates of human trafficking in the
> U.S. vary greatly from 18,000 to 50,000 to over 100,000 with a worldwide
> estimate of 12.5 million, mostly women and children.
>
> The Green Party calls for new U.S. legislation relating to prostitution
> modeled on the Swedish law passed in 1999, now adopted by other countries
> and being considered by more, that has drastically reduced human
> trafficking
> and prostitution in Sweden. That law criminalizes the purchase of services
> from prostitutes, pimps and brothel keepers instead of criminalizing the
> prostitutes. The Green Party urges the U.S. to open dialogs and visit with
> Sweden as a step toward introducing legislation in the U.S. Congress to
> address the exploitation, violence and harm to women through prostitution.
>
> The Green Party supports all efforts to eradicate this extreme abuse of
> human rights, including but not limited to enforcement of existing laws and
> passage of tough new ones, punishing traffickers, aiding victims,
> increasing
> public awareness, reforming immigration laws, supporting existing programs
> and creating new ones.
>
> We support the State Department's annual Trafficking in Persons Report as
> an
> important document to begin to combat this abuse. We support and urge
> enforcement of the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act (HR
> 3244) signed into law on October 28, 2000. This Act authorizes funding for
> the prevention of trade in human beings and for protecting victims. It
> gives
> the State Department a historic opportunity to create an office with the
> exclusive responsibility of ending traffic in humans and protecting the
> victims of this worldwide trade. We urge committed political support to
> achieve the cooperation of all different levels of government.
>
> The Green Party urges a more thorough dialog and understanding of violence
> against women and girls, including from prostitution and trafficking, that
> causes health and injury damage that seriously degrades their lives, even
> to
> death or premature death including from HIV, syphilis and many other
> diseases, as well as causing severe economic hardships. We call for
> solutions to this enormous problem that can result in awareness and the
> introduction of legislation in the U.S. Congress to address it.
>
> 2. Racial Discrimination
> a.The development of the United States has been marked by conflict over
> questions of race. Our nation was formed only after Native Americans were
> displaced. The institution of slavery had as its underpinnings the belief
> in
> white supremacy, which we as Greens condemn. In slavery's aftermath, people
> of color have borne the brunt of violence and discrimination. The Green
> Party unequivocally condemns these evils, which continue to be a social
> problem of paramount significance.
>
>
> b.The community of people of African ancestry whose family members were
> held
> in chattel slavery in what is now the United States of America have
> legitimate claims to reparations including monetary compensation for
> centuries of human rights violations, including the Transatlantic slave
> trade now recognized by the United Nations as a "crime against humanity."
> As
> our Nation has done in the past with respect to the Choctaw, the Lakota,
> the
> Lambuth, and more recently for Japanese Americans and the European Jewish
> community, reparations are now due to address the debt still owed to
> descendants of enslaved Africans.
>
>
> c.We commit to full and complete reparations to the African American
> community of this nation for the past four hundred plus years of genocide,
> slavery, land-loss, destruction of original identity and the stark
> disparities which haunt the present evidenced in unemployment statistics,
> substandard and inadequate education, higher levels of mortality including
> infant and maternal mortality and the practice of mass incarceration. We
> recognize that reparations are a debt (not charity) that is owed by our own
> and other nations and by the corporate institutions chartered under our
> laws
> to a collective of people. We believe that the leadership on the question
> of
> what our nation owes to this process of right ought to come from the
> African
> American community, whose right to self-determination and autonomy to chart
> the path to healing we fully recognize.
>
>
> d.We understand that until significant steps are taken to reverse the
> ongoing abuses; to end the criminalization of the Black and Brown
> communities, to eradicate poverty, to invest in education, health care and
> the restoration and protection of human rights, that it will be impossible
> to repair the continuing damage wrought by the ideology of white supremacy
> which permeates the governing institutions of our nation.
>
>
> e.While consensus is still evolving on what would constitute full and
> complete reparations, we support the following initial steps: We support
> the
> creation of a claim of action and a right to recover inherited wealth and
> other profits accumulated from the slave trade for the benefit of a
> reparations trust fund. We will initiate the repeal of the slave clauses
> that survive today in the U.S. Constitution. We will work to restore lands
> stolen through a variety of tactics including: violence, terrorism and the
> discriminatory access to operating capital that together has robbed black
> farmers and the broader community of their lands. We support the release of
> all political prisoners held by the USA. It is time that the political
> frame-ups, the prosecutorial misconduct and the racist application of
> police
> power that pass for justice in our country be buried and those victimized
> by
> these abuses of state power be given their lives back. We will support
> existing Historically Black Colleges and Universities, as well as new and
> existing Education and Development Funds.
>
>
> f.We support efforts to overcome the effects of over 200 years of racial
> discrimination.
>
>
> g.We call for an end to official support for any remaining symbols of
> slavery and specifically call for the removal of the Confederate battle
> flag
> from all government buildings.
>
>
> h.We condemn the practice of racial profiling by law enforcement agencies,
> which are guilty of stopping m torists, harassing individuals, or using
> unwarranted violence against suspects with no other justification than race
> or ethnic background.
>
>
> i.We favor strong measures to combat official racism in the forms of police
> brutality directed against people of color.
>
>
> j.We support effective enforcement of the Voting Rights Act, including
> language access to voting.
>
>
> k.We oppose discriminatory English-only pressure groups. We call for a
> national language policy that would encourage all citizens to be fluent in
> at least two languages. [See section K. Immigration / Emigration in this
> chapter]
>
>
> l.We strongly support the vigorous enforcement of civil-rights laws, the
> aggressive prosecution of hate crimes, and the strengthening of legal
> services for the poor.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Sunday, July 31, 2016
Friday, July 29, 2016
Re: [blind-democracy] The mothers of the movement
Good Friday Morning, Miriam.
Of course your points are well taken. Looking at Clinton and Trump,
there is no contest as to which one will do America more harm. As for
International well being...well, it's a toss up in my book. Certainly
I hear the cry that Trump would set about unraveling the last bits of
democracy still clinging to our Constitution. So I hope that Clinton
wins. But it is no longer my nation. It is the American Corporate
Empire. And even with Hillary Clinton at the helm, it will not put
working class needs near the top of their list. Nor will women's
needs, nor person's of color, nor forgiving the debt we've allowed to
be placed on the backs of our youth. All of these issues will be
talked up, schmoozed, and then, with sad puppy dog faces, we'll be
told that they must wait until we have taken care of the Great Big
Terror trying to take away our freedom.
On Democracy Now this morning, Kshama Sawant gave a compelling
defense of the need to put our efforts into building a strong grass
roots independent movement. The woman who debated her, and I'm sorry
I have forgotten her name, gave an equally compelling argument for
supporting Clinton.
Personally, I feel that Kshama Sawant sees the fallacy of continuing
to attempt to reform a Party that has become a part of the problem.
Do I feel that I, and my family could survive a Trump presidency? Not
at all! We, Cathy and our children and grand children, are the very
people who would be crushed by the chaos that Trump would bring in.
But Clinton can only promise to, "go slow", with social programs.
This will mean that my family, along with so many others, will go down
slower than under Trump. We're really very much like the frog in the
boiling water. We are coming close to the boiling point, and it will
be so much easier if we don't know it until it's too late. But my
bottom line is that this contest is not one to be won by Working Men
and Women, or People of Color, or all the others we hear so much
about. There are only platitudes from both sides, at this time.
My heart is with working class folks, and I cannot participate in an
election that pits a crazy man against a War Hawk.
There are many good people competing for other offices, who deserve my
support. And there is that new Third Rail on the Road to Democracy, a
People's ground swell.
Carl Jarvis
On 7/29/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
> It was Bill O'Reilly, who said that the slaves who built the White House
> were well fed. Amy Goodman, during the program, quoted Abigail, who? , who
> said they were staarving and poorly clothed.
>
> Miriam
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carl Jarvis [mailto:carjar82@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 29, 2016 12:31 AM
> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org
> Cc: Miriam Vieni
> Subject: Re: [blind-democracy] The mothers of the movement
>
> Since this Democratic Convention was all about Hillary Clinton, everyone
> who
> climbed the podium and took the mike understood that they were promoting
> Hillary Clinton for president. In fact, I was deeply moved by the mother's
> stories of their murdered children. At the time I did not think of the
> purpose behind showcasing these three very moving accounts. Could it have
> been an effort to connect with the Black vote? Since I did not hear of any
> family members of the murdered police officers being featured, I can only
> assume it is the Democrats effort to smooth over the hard feelings of
> Hillary's past support of legislation that wound up expanding our private
> prisons, and filling them with Black and Brown slave labor.
> As an aside, I understand that the slave laborers who helped build the
> White
> House, were well fed and well housed, which, if true, is in stark contrast
> to the food and medical care our current prison slaves receive.
> But back to the convention. It's a showcase of all the imagined
> accomplishments of the Democrats, led by the fearless and well qualified
> leader, Hillary Clinton. Watching the acrobatics and manipulative antics
> was embarrassing. But even worse were some of the pandering speeches.
> Still, there were some very thoughtful discussions on democracy now, which
> is something that did not happen during the Trump Reality Show.
> I am still troubled by the numbers of political leaders who continue to
> make
> this a battle between Clinton and Trump, with no discussion about the
> failure of the two parties to meet the basic needs of the American People.
> I could agree with people saying that we need to support the
> Democrats...including Clinton, and build the Progressive Movement to a
> place
> where it can force the president to lean to the Left. But too many of them
> are doing exactly what they claim they are not doing, making this a
> negative, lessor of two evils. I have heard Trump described in such crazy
> terms that he comes up looking like Satan, with the red suit, horns,
> pitchfork and forked tail. Donald Trump is no more of a monster than is
> Hillary Clinton, a charge both sides are making of the other. In fact,
> these two ambitious people are struggling for the Brass Ring, for the sake
> of winning. If they truly loved their country, and if they wanted to raise
> the standard of living, and bring back that Great American Dream, a job, a
> home and a family, they would be discussing issues. They would be
> proposing
> community involvement. They would lay out plans to bring back jobs, to
> demand a living minimum wage, show us how they propose to lower medical
> costs and include All Americans. They would stop the blood suckers who are
> forcing our children into debt before they even have a college degree or a
> job. They would announce how they plan to fully fund our Veterans
> Hospitals.
> We know for a fact that Donald Trump has no plans. If he did, he would not
> need to repeat phrases like, "Trust me!", or, "I'm going to make America
> great again!"
> Great? Which year was that? Do you mean, Mister Trump, the 1880's to the
> 1920's? Those wonderful years, if you were White, Male and had a wealthy
> daddy. Working Class families never lived in that "Great America" you
> speak
> of, Mister Trump. Black families never lived in that America of Plenty.
> Indians, Chinese, Japanese, Mexicans, Jews, and so many of the starving
> immigrants from Ireland and Europe never enjoyed a minute of that Greatness
> you boast about.
> It's a bare faced lie. It's time we called it what it is, White Supremacy.
> Donald Trump represents a last mass effort for White men to hold onto
> power.
> And if Hillary Clinton really believed some of the progressive stuff she
> spouts, she would chew up Trump and spit him out.
>
> Carl Jarvis
>
>
>
> On 7/27/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
>> Now that I've listened to Democracy Now, and heard the mothers of
>> murdered young black people talk at the convention, my response is
>> that this was a cynical use of people who have endured unspeakable
>> tragedy, for Hillary's benefit. I remember hearing Sandra Bland's
>> mother on Democracy Now after Hillary had contacted her. Hillary
>> already knew she was running for the presidential nomination. Perhaps
>> her campaign had begun. I'm not sure. But it was obvious that she
>> cultivated a relationship with this grief stricken woman so that she
>> could use her in her campaign. These women were props in a well
>> planned show. Interestingly, I noted that many of the Sanders
>> delegates who were interviewed during the first hour of Democracy Now,
>> were African American. During the campaign, the mass media kept saying
>> that Bernie wasn't doing well with black people. But he sure had a lot
>> of black delegates that we never heard about.
>>
>> Miriam
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Of course your points are well taken. Looking at Clinton and Trump,
there is no contest as to which one will do America more harm. As for
International well being...well, it's a toss up in my book. Certainly
I hear the cry that Trump would set about unraveling the last bits of
democracy still clinging to our Constitution. So I hope that Clinton
wins. But it is no longer my nation. It is the American Corporate
Empire. And even with Hillary Clinton at the helm, it will not put
working class needs near the top of their list. Nor will women's
needs, nor person's of color, nor forgiving the debt we've allowed to
be placed on the backs of our youth. All of these issues will be
talked up, schmoozed, and then, with sad puppy dog faces, we'll be
told that they must wait until we have taken care of the Great Big
Terror trying to take away our freedom.
On Democracy Now this morning, Kshama Sawant gave a compelling
defense of the need to put our efforts into building a strong grass
roots independent movement. The woman who debated her, and I'm sorry
I have forgotten her name, gave an equally compelling argument for
supporting Clinton.
Personally, I feel that Kshama Sawant sees the fallacy of continuing
to attempt to reform a Party that has become a part of the problem.
Do I feel that I, and my family could survive a Trump presidency? Not
at all! We, Cathy and our children and grand children, are the very
people who would be crushed by the chaos that Trump would bring in.
But Clinton can only promise to, "go slow", with social programs.
This will mean that my family, along with so many others, will go down
slower than under Trump. We're really very much like the frog in the
boiling water. We are coming close to the boiling point, and it will
be so much easier if we don't know it until it's too late. But my
bottom line is that this contest is not one to be won by Working Men
and Women, or People of Color, or all the others we hear so much
about. There are only platitudes from both sides, at this time.
My heart is with working class folks, and I cannot participate in an
election that pits a crazy man against a War Hawk.
There are many good people competing for other offices, who deserve my
support. And there is that new Third Rail on the Road to Democracy, a
People's ground swell.
Carl Jarvis
On 7/29/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
> It was Bill O'Reilly, who said that the slaves who built the White House
> were well fed. Amy Goodman, during the program, quoted Abigail, who? , who
> said they were staarving and poorly clothed.
>
> Miriam
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carl Jarvis [mailto:carjar82@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 29, 2016 12:31 AM
> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org
> Cc: Miriam Vieni
> Subject: Re: [blind-democracy] The mothers of the movement
>
> Since this Democratic Convention was all about Hillary Clinton, everyone
> who
> climbed the podium and took the mike understood that they were promoting
> Hillary Clinton for president. In fact, I was deeply moved by the mother's
> stories of their murdered children. At the time I did not think of the
> purpose behind showcasing these three very moving accounts. Could it have
> been an effort to connect with the Black vote? Since I did not hear of any
> family members of the murdered police officers being featured, I can only
> assume it is the Democrats effort to smooth over the hard feelings of
> Hillary's past support of legislation that wound up expanding our private
> prisons, and filling them with Black and Brown slave labor.
> As an aside, I understand that the slave laborers who helped build the
> White
> House, were well fed and well housed, which, if true, is in stark contrast
> to the food and medical care our current prison slaves receive.
> But back to the convention. It's a showcase of all the imagined
> accomplishments of the Democrats, led by the fearless and well qualified
> leader, Hillary Clinton. Watching the acrobatics and manipulative antics
> was embarrassing. But even worse were some of the pandering speeches.
> Still, there were some very thoughtful discussions on democracy now, which
> is something that did not happen during the Trump Reality Show.
> I am still troubled by the numbers of political leaders who continue to
> make
> this a battle between Clinton and Trump, with no discussion about the
> failure of the two parties to meet the basic needs of the American People.
> I could agree with people saying that we need to support the
> Democrats...including Clinton, and build the Progressive Movement to a
> place
> where it can force the president to lean to the Left. But too many of them
> are doing exactly what they claim they are not doing, making this a
> negative, lessor of two evils. I have heard Trump described in such crazy
> terms that he comes up looking like Satan, with the red suit, horns,
> pitchfork and forked tail. Donald Trump is no more of a monster than is
> Hillary Clinton, a charge both sides are making of the other. In fact,
> these two ambitious people are struggling for the Brass Ring, for the sake
> of winning. If they truly loved their country, and if they wanted to raise
> the standard of living, and bring back that Great American Dream, a job, a
> home and a family, they would be discussing issues. They would be
> proposing
> community involvement. They would lay out plans to bring back jobs, to
> demand a living minimum wage, show us how they propose to lower medical
> costs and include All Americans. They would stop the blood suckers who are
> forcing our children into debt before they even have a college degree or a
> job. They would announce how they plan to fully fund our Veterans
> Hospitals.
> We know for a fact that Donald Trump has no plans. If he did, he would not
> need to repeat phrases like, "Trust me!", or, "I'm going to make America
> great again!"
> Great? Which year was that? Do you mean, Mister Trump, the 1880's to the
> 1920's? Those wonderful years, if you were White, Male and had a wealthy
> daddy. Working Class families never lived in that "Great America" you
> speak
> of, Mister Trump. Black families never lived in that America of Plenty.
> Indians, Chinese, Japanese, Mexicans, Jews, and so many of the starving
> immigrants from Ireland and Europe never enjoyed a minute of that Greatness
> you boast about.
> It's a bare faced lie. It's time we called it what it is, White Supremacy.
> Donald Trump represents a last mass effort for White men to hold onto
> power.
> And if Hillary Clinton really believed some of the progressive stuff she
> spouts, she would chew up Trump and spit him out.
>
> Carl Jarvis
>
>
>
> On 7/27/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
>> Now that I've listened to Democracy Now, and heard the mothers of
>> murdered young black people talk at the convention, my response is
>> that this was a cynical use of people who have endured unspeakable
>> tragedy, for Hillary's benefit. I remember hearing Sandra Bland's
>> mother on Democracy Now after Hillary had contacted her. Hillary
>> already knew she was running for the presidential nomination. Perhaps
>> her campaign had begun. I'm not sure. But it was obvious that she
>> cultivated a relationship with this grief stricken woman so that she
>> could use her in her campaign. These women were props in a well
>> planned show. Interestingly, I noted that many of the Sanders
>> delegates who were interviewed during the first hour of Democracy Now,
>> were African American. During the campaign, the mass media kept saying
>> that Bernie wasn't doing well with black people. But he sure had a lot
>> of black delegates that we never heard about.
>>
>> Miriam
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Thursday, July 28, 2016
Re: [blind-democracy] The mothers of the movement
Since this Democratic Convention was all about Hillary Clinton,
everyone who climbed the podium and took the mike understood that they
were promoting Hillary Clinton for president. In fact, I was deeply
moved by the mother's stories of their murdered children. At the time
I did not think of the purpose behind showcasing these three very
moving accounts. Could it have been an effort to connect with the
Black vote? Since I did not hear of any family members of the
murdered police officers being featured, I can only assume it is the
Democrats effort to smooth over the hard feelings of Hillary's past
support of legislation that wound up expanding our private prisons,
and filling them with Black and Brown slave labor.
As an aside, I understand that the slave laborers who helped build the
White House, were well fed and well housed, which, if true, is in
stark contrast to the food and medical care our current prison slaves
receive.
But back to the convention. It's a showcase of all the imagined
accomplishments of the Democrats, led by the fearless and well
qualified leader, Hillary Clinton. Watching the acrobatics and
manipulative antics was embarrassing. But even worse were some of the
pandering speeches. Still, there were some very thoughtful
discussions on democracy now, which is something that did not happen
during the Trump Reality Show.
I am still troubled by the numbers of political leaders who continue
to make this a battle between Clinton and Trump, with no discussion
about the failure of the two parties to meet the basic needs of the
American People. I could agree with people saying that we need to
support the Democrats...including Clinton, and build the Progressive
Movement to a place where it can force the president to lean to the
Left. But too many of them are doing exactly what they claim they are
not doing, making this a negative, lessor of two evils. I have heard
Trump described in such crazy terms that he comes up looking like
Satan, with the red suit, horns, pitchfork and forked tail. Donald
Trump is no more of a monster than is Hillary Clinton, a charge both
sides are making of the other. In fact, these two ambitious people
are struggling for the Brass Ring, for the sake of winning. If they
truly loved their country, and if they wanted to raise the standard of
living, and bring back that Great American Dream, a job, a home and a
family, they would be discussing issues. They would be proposing
community involvement. They would lay out plans to bring back jobs,
to demand a living minimum wage, show us how they propose to lower
medical costs and include All Americans. They would stop the blood
suckers who are forcing our children into debt before they even have a
college degree or a job. They would announce how they plan to fully
fund our Veterans Hospitals.
We know for a fact that Donald Trump has no plans. If he did, he
would not need to repeat phrases like, "Trust me!", or, "I'm going to
make America great again!"
Great? Which year was that? Do you mean, Mister Trump, the 1880's to
the 1920's? Those wonderful years, if you were White, Male and had a
wealthy daddy. Working Class families never lived in that "Great
America" you speak of, Mister Trump. Black families never lived in
that America of Plenty. Indians, Chinese, Japanese, Mexicans, Jews,
and so many of the starving immigrants from Ireland and Europe never
enjoyed a minute of that Greatness you boast about.
It's a bare faced lie. It's time we called it what it is, White
Supremacy. Donald Trump represents a last mass effort for White men
to hold onto power. And if Hillary Clinton really believed some of
the progressive stuff she spouts, she would chew up Trump and spit him
out.
Carl Jarvis
On 7/27/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
> Now that I've listened to Democracy Now, and heard the mothers of murdered
> young black people talk at the convention, my response is that this was a
> cynical use of people who have endured unspeakable tragedy, for Hillary's
> benefit. I remember hearing Sandra Bland's mother on Democracy Now after
> Hillary had contacted her. Hillary already knew she was running for the
> presidential nomination. Perhaps her campaign had begun. I'm not sure. But
> it was obvious that she cultivated a relationship with this grief stricken
> woman so that she could use her in her campaign. These women were props in
> a
> well planned show. Interestingly, I noted that many of the Sanders
> delegates who were interviewed during the first hour of Democracy Now, were
> African American. During the campaign, the mass media kept saying that
> Bernie wasn't doing well with black people. But he sure had a lot of black
> delegates that we never heard about.
>
> Miriam
>
>
>
everyone who climbed the podium and took the mike understood that they
were promoting Hillary Clinton for president. In fact, I was deeply
moved by the mother's stories of their murdered children. At the time
I did not think of the purpose behind showcasing these three very
moving accounts. Could it have been an effort to connect with the
Black vote? Since I did not hear of any family members of the
murdered police officers being featured, I can only assume it is the
Democrats effort to smooth over the hard feelings of Hillary's past
support of legislation that wound up expanding our private prisons,
and filling them with Black and Brown slave labor.
As an aside, I understand that the slave laborers who helped build the
White House, were well fed and well housed, which, if true, is in
stark contrast to the food and medical care our current prison slaves
receive.
But back to the convention. It's a showcase of all the imagined
accomplishments of the Democrats, led by the fearless and well
qualified leader, Hillary Clinton. Watching the acrobatics and
manipulative antics was embarrassing. But even worse were some of the
pandering speeches. Still, there were some very thoughtful
discussions on democracy now, which is something that did not happen
during the Trump Reality Show.
I am still troubled by the numbers of political leaders who continue
to make this a battle between Clinton and Trump, with no discussion
about the failure of the two parties to meet the basic needs of the
American People. I could agree with people saying that we need to
support the Democrats...including Clinton, and build the Progressive
Movement to a place where it can force the president to lean to the
Left. But too many of them are doing exactly what they claim they are
not doing, making this a negative, lessor of two evils. I have heard
Trump described in such crazy terms that he comes up looking like
Satan, with the red suit, horns, pitchfork and forked tail. Donald
Trump is no more of a monster than is Hillary Clinton, a charge both
sides are making of the other. In fact, these two ambitious people
are struggling for the Brass Ring, for the sake of winning. If they
truly loved their country, and if they wanted to raise the standard of
living, and bring back that Great American Dream, a job, a home and a
family, they would be discussing issues. They would be proposing
community involvement. They would lay out plans to bring back jobs,
to demand a living minimum wage, show us how they propose to lower
medical costs and include All Americans. They would stop the blood
suckers who are forcing our children into debt before they even have a
college degree or a job. They would announce how they plan to fully
fund our Veterans Hospitals.
We know for a fact that Donald Trump has no plans. If he did, he
would not need to repeat phrases like, "Trust me!", or, "I'm going to
make America great again!"
Great? Which year was that? Do you mean, Mister Trump, the 1880's to
the 1920's? Those wonderful years, if you were White, Male and had a
wealthy daddy. Working Class families never lived in that "Great
America" you speak of, Mister Trump. Black families never lived in
that America of Plenty. Indians, Chinese, Japanese, Mexicans, Jews,
and so many of the starving immigrants from Ireland and Europe never
enjoyed a minute of that Greatness you boast about.
It's a bare faced lie. It's time we called it what it is, White
Supremacy. Donald Trump represents a last mass effort for White men
to hold onto power. And if Hillary Clinton really believed some of
the progressive stuff she spouts, she would chew up Trump and spit him
out.
Carl Jarvis
On 7/27/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
> Now that I've listened to Democracy Now, and heard the mothers of murdered
> young black people talk at the convention, my response is that this was a
> cynical use of people who have endured unspeakable tragedy, for Hillary's
> benefit. I remember hearing Sandra Bland's mother on Democracy Now after
> Hillary had contacted her. Hillary already knew she was running for the
> presidential nomination. Perhaps her campaign had begun. I'm not sure. But
> it was obvious that she cultivated a relationship with this grief stricken
> woman so that she could use her in her campaign. These women were props in
> a
> well planned show. Interestingly, I noted that many of the Sanders
> delegates who were interviewed during the first hour of Democracy Now, were
> African American. During the campaign, the mass media kept saying that
> Bernie wasn't doing well with black people. But he sure had a lot of black
> delegates that we never heard about.
>
> Miriam
>
>
>
Wednesday, July 27, 2016
Re: [blind-democracy] Re: Remembering the 12 Gauge Police Eviction of a 67 Year Old Grandmother in the South Bronx
This post proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Justice is Blind.
And she's packing.
Remember that the Police are not protecting your and my safety.
Their first responsibility is toward the protection of Property.
Specifically, the Property of the Ruling Class.
So often folks feel that they can relate to the Ruling Class as being,
"just like the rest of us". Do not be fooled by their public front.
Just look at the people they hire to protect their law and defend
their property. The contempt the police have for the working class,
especially those of Color, is a reflection of their Masters, the
Ruling Class. The lower you are on the economic ladder, or if you are
both poor and aged, or if you look poor or aged, the greater is the
contempt heaped upon you. So the lesson is for you to try hard not to
become an old, poor, woman of color, with a disability.
Carl Jarvis
On 7/27/16, Frank Ventura <frank.ventura@littlebreezes.com> wrote:
> Hi all, I didn't know Elinor personally at the time but had friends who
> lived in that project and knew her by her good reputation. There are a few
> observations that can be made here regarding this article:
> a. Presumably the reason the author chose to cite these examples, among the
> thousands are that these are the ones that made the paper. When it comes to
> poor life in NYC, few if any, media actually visit the neighborhoods,
> especially in Brooklyn and the Bronx. Instead the rely on press releases
> usually from the cops.
> b. As I said in a previous message, take a look at what percentage of these
> killings happen in the Bronx and Brooklyn, especially in the Bronx. It is
> very disproportionate based on population.
> c. The reason for the above is that once cops get into trouble for bad
> behavior in Manhattan and Queens they get transferred to the boroughs that
> have the least media coverage, mostly into the South Bronx.
> d. The article calls the cops "special duty", this really downplays who they
> were. They were actually ESU (Emergency Services Unit). In case that doesn't
> raise your eyebrows, FYI NYC does not have a SWAT team. What most cities
> call their SWAT team is called ESYU in NYC. So effectively, there was the
> equivalent of a half dozen SWAT team members sent to deal with an overdue
> rent situation.
> e. In this overdue rent situation, it was a no knock, no announcement
> situation. The cops just kicked in the door in their ESU commando outfits,
> all black, with no identification.
> f. " Baez, Dec. 22, 1994: Mr. Baez, 29, a security guard, was
> playing football outside his mother's"
> My mother was good friends of Anthony's mother. Officer Livotti had a
> reputation for drinking on the job and then sleeping in his cruiser. After
> Anthony's football hit the car Livotti killed him. Livotti was already under
> investigation for assaulting a 13 year old kid. Although acquitted of murder
> he was convicted of civil rights charges. Sickenly, during a police rally
> someone who looked exactly like Livotti spoke anonymously. This is while
> Livotti was supposed to be in jail fueling speculation that Giuliani found a
> stooge to serve Livotti's time for him. Livotti bragged that he was offered
> a position with the PBA upon his release. No indication if that was true.
> g. "Diallo, Feb. 4, 1999: Mr. Diallo". This was the man who was shot 41
> times by four white cops. Initially one of the cops said he tripped and his
> gun went off and the other cops starting firing. He later recanted his
> statement. Three of the four went on to be promoted to high level
> supervisory positions. This inspired the Springsteen song "41 shots".
> h. " Bell, Nov. 25, 2006:". One of the detectives was implicated in a child
> pornography ring which lead to the downfall of all three.
> I. "Graham, Feb. 2, 2012: Mr. Graham" despite the fact that the cops
> acknowledged that the victim was not doing anything wrong and that he was
> targeted and chased down to build up their arrest numbers, the grand jury
> still let the killer off the hook.
> j. "Gurley, Nov. 20, 2014: Mr. G". The victim in this case was walking in a
> stairwell with his girlfriend. The PD said the shooting was accidental. So,
> the cop accidentally, drew his pistol, accidentally, chambered a round,
> accidentally took the safety off, and accidentally pulled the trigger
> multiple times. After the shooting the only thing the cop did was send a
> text message to his union rep. He did not call for medical help despite the
> begging of the victim's friend. He tried to walk away from the shooting but
> neighbors called for an ambulance but it was too late.
> k. In 1980 NY PD shot 85 year old Frank Sturchio to death in his own home.
> The more things change the more they stay the same.
> Frank
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
> [mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Miriam Vieni
> Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 9:06 PM
> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org
> Subject: [blind-democracy] Remembering the 12 Gauge Police Eviction of a 67
> Year Old Grandmother in the South Bronx
>
>
> Bernstein writes: "Thirty-two years ago, in 1984, I was teaching media
> activism in an alternative high school in the South Bronx with filmmaker
> Chela Blitt. We were getting ready to begin a documentary with the kids on
> the social, political, and economic reasons why their neighborhood looked
> more like Hiroshima after the war than a neighborhood in New York City. But
> instead, we changed gears and produced with the kids the documentary film
> '12-Gauge Eviction,' which chronicles the close-range gunning down of a
> 67-year-old, arthritic grandmother named Eleanor Bumpurs."
>
> Eleanor Bumpurs. (photo: unknown)
>
>
> Remembering the 12 Gauge Police Eviction of a 67 Year Old Grandmother in the
> South Bronx By Dennis J Bernstein, Reader Supported News
> 18 July 16
>
> Thirty-two years ago, in 1984, I was teaching media activism in an
> alternative high school in the South Bronx with filmmaker Chela Blitt. We
> were getting ready to begin a documentary with the kids on the social,
> political, and economic reasons why their neighborhood looked more like
> Hiroshima after the war than a neighborhood in New York City. But instead,
> we changed gears and produced with the kids the documentary film "12-Gauge
> Eviction," which chronicles the close-range gunning down of a 67-year-old,
> arthritic grandmother named Eleanor Bumpurs, in the Sedgwick housing project
> in the Highbridge Section of the South Bronx.
> And we got off to a swift start. One of my students had heard the shotgun
> blasts through the walls and halls of the high-rise. In no time, with our
> cameras and recording equipment in tow, we were filming through the broken
> keyhole into the murder scene, where Eleanor Bumpurs was snuffed out of this
> world for being late on her rent. She owed the city about $400 dollars back
> rent, which she claimed she was withholding until the city came in and did
> some necessary plumbing and heating repairs.
> Social Services called in the police, and what unfolded next was obscene,
> extremely brutal, but not all that uncommon. A half-dozen special duty New
> York City cops arrived at the front door of her small apartment, armed with
> mace, tear gas, shields, nets, clubs and side arms, but finally decided that
> nothing less than a 12-gauge pump shotgun fired at close range would do the
> trick. The first blast from the shotgun took Bumpurs' hand off. The final
> blast blew the back of her head off.
> The cops claimed they had no choice. They were facing mortal danger,
> claiming Eleanor Bumpurs, mother of seven and grandmother, was wielding a
> butcher knife. They claimed the shoot was clean. The local corporate press
> took it from there. Many press accounts, informed by the police of course,
> characterized Bumpurs as being "emotionally disturbed" and "deranged."
> My students jumped all over this. One student, a Junior named Douglas, who
> lived in the projects and had ear-witnessed the shots through the walls -
> led us to the crime scene. He guided us to the floor where Bumpurs had lived
> and died, and to the senior citizen center, the library, and other parts of
> the projects where the residents would congregate. And the kids started to
> ask questions and interview residents about the police killing of Mrs.
> Bumpurs.
> "If the lady was so mentally disturbed," pointed out one resident, "people
> wouldn't have asked her to babysit their kids." The resident knew of several
> parents who had entrusted Bumpurs to babysit their kids for them, until her
> arthritis became too severe to "chase the little ones around." One Housing
> Authority supervisor, Michael Pierson, told the kids, "She just seemed like
> a quiet individual to me."
> That evening, my students carried their cameras to an outdoor prayer vigil
> at the projects and interviewed friends and relatives of Bumpurs, as well as
> a few local politicians who had come to pay their respects to the slain
> grandmother. "It's amazing that any time a black or Hispanic is killed like
> this, it's police procedure," said the Rev. Wendell Foster, who was then a
> Bronx City councilman. Sound familiar? One resident told the student
> investigators, "A couple of weeks ago a dangerous animal escaped from the
> Bronx Zoo, and they captured it with a sleep dart and brought it safely back
> to its cage in the zoo. Around here" said the resident, who requested
> anonymity for fear of police retribution, "cops treat black folks worse than
> zoo animals. They'll risk their white skin to save an animal, but they'll
> murder us on the spot."
> I have to believe that it was the thorough and unrelenting investigative
> work of the students, along with a local independent newspaper, The City
> Sun, that forced the court's hand, making them deal with some of the real
> facts of the case, rather than let most of the local the racist corporate
> press marginalize Bumpurs as a community danger, a crazed black woman who
> was willing to kill a cop to avoid paying her back rent.
> After reviewing extensive testimony, a grand jury indeed voted for an
> indictment for second-degree manslaughter against Officer Stephen Sullivan,
> who cut down Bumpurs at close range with two quick blasts from his
> department issued pump-style shotgun. However, subsequently, a state judge
> dismissed the indictment against Sullivan, asserting the evidence was
> "legally insufficient" to indict Sullivan for manslaughter or any other
> offense.
> In an interview after the ruling, when asked if under similar circumstances
> he would do the same thing, Sullivan replied, "Yes, I would," according to
> The New York Times. And New York City cops have been killing people of color
> non-stop before and since. Here's a partial list published by The New York
> Times:
> . Jose (Kiko) Garcia, July 3, 1992: During a struggle with police
> officers in the lobby of an apartment building, Mr. Garcia, a 23-year-old
> Dominican immigrant who the police said was carrying a revolver, was shot
> twice by Officer Michael O'Keefe.
> What happened: Later that year, a grand jury cleared Officer O'Keefe,
> supporting the officer's assertion that Mr. Garcia reached for a gun before
> he was shot.
>
> . Ernest Sayon, April 29, 1994: Mr. Sayon, 22, was standing outside a
> Staten Island housing complex when police officers on an anti-drug patrol
> tried to arrest him. Mr. Sayon suffocated because of pressure on his back,
> chest and neck while he was handcuffed on the ground.
> What happened: A grand jury declined to file criminal charges against any of
> the three police officers involved, apparently concluding that the officers
> had used reasonable force in subduing Mr. Sayon.
>
> . Nicholas Heyward Jr., Sept. 27, 1994: Nicholas, 13, was playing cops
> and robbers with friends in a Gowanus Houses building stairwell when Officer
> Brian George, mistaking the teenager's toy rifle for a real gun, shot him to
> death.
> What happened: The Brooklyn district attorney decided not to present the
> case to a grand jury, saying the real culprit was an authentic-looking toy
> gun.
>
> . Anthony Baez, Dec. 22, 1994: Mr. Baez, 29, a security guard, was
> playing football outside his mother's Bronx home when a stray toss landed on
> a police car. Mr. Baez died after an officer applied a chokehold while
> trying to arrest him.
> What happened: Francis X. Livoti, who had been dismissed by the force for
> using an illegal chokehold, was convicted on federal civil rights charges
> and sentenced to seven and a half years in prison, two years after he won
> acquittal in a state trial.
>
> . Amadou Diallo, Feb. 4, 1999: Mr. Diallo, a 22-year-old immigrant
> from Guinea, was killed by four officers who fired 41 times in the vestibule
> of his apartment building in the Bronx. They said he seemed to have a gun,
> but he was unarmed.
> What happened: In February 2000, after a tense and racially charged trial,
> all four officers, who were white, were acquitted of second-degree murder
> and other charges, fueling protests. The city agreed to pay the family $3
> million.
>
> . Patrick Dorismond, March 16, 2000: Mr. Dorismond, 26, an unarmed
> black security guard, was shot dead by an undercover narcotics detective in
> a brawl in front of a bar in Midtown Manhattan, after Mr. Dorismond became
> offended when the detective asked him if he had any crack cocaine.
> What happened: By late July, a grand jury declined to file criminal charges
> against the detective, Anthony Vasquez, concluding that the shooting of Mr.
> Dorismond was not intentional. The city agreed to pay $2.25 million to his
> family.
>
> . Ousmane Zongo, May 23, 2003: Mr. Zongo, 43, an art restorer, was
> shot and killed by a police officer during a raid at a Chelsea warehouse
> that the police believed was the base of a CD counterfeiting operation.
> What happened: In 2005, Officer Bryan A. Conroy was convicted at the second
> of two trials and sentenced to probation. The judge placed the blame for the
> killing primarily on the poor training and supervision by the Police
> Department. The city agreed to pay the family $3 million.
>
> . Timothy Stansbury Jr., Jan. 24, 2004: Mr. Stansbury, 19, a high
> school student, was about to take a rooftop shortcut to a party when he was
> fatally shot by Officer Richard S. Neri Jr., who was patrolling the roof.
> What happened: A grand jury decided not to indict Officer Neri. In December
> 2006, he was suspended without pay for 30 days, permanently stripped of his
> gun, and reassigned to a property clerk's office. The city agreed to pay the
> Stansbury family $2 million.
>
> . Sean Bell, Nov. 25, 2006: Five detectives fired 50 times into a car
> occupied by Mr. Bell, 23, and two others after a confrontation outside a
> Queens club on Mr. Bell's wedding day. He was killed.
> What happened: After a heated seven-week nonjury trial in 2008, the judge
> found Detectives Gescard F. Isnora, Michael Oliver and Marc Cooper not
> guilty of all charges, which included manslaughter and assault. In 2012,
> Detective Isnora was fired, and Detectives Cooper and Oliver, along with a
> supervisor, were forced to resign. The city agreed to pay the family $3.25
> million.
>
> . Ramarley Graham, Feb. 2, 2012: Mr. Graham, 18, was shot and killed
> by Richard Haste, a police officer, in the bathroom of his Bronx apartment
> after being pursued into his home by a team of officers from a plainclothes
> street narcotics unit. Mr. Graham was unarmed.
> What happened: A grand jury voted to indict Officer Haste on charges of
> first- and second-degree manslaughter, but a judge dismissed the indictment
> a year later. Prosecutors sought a new indictment. In August 2013, a grand
> jury decided not to bring charges in the case. The city agreed to pay the
> family $3.9 million.
>
> . Eric Garner, July 17, 2014: Mr. Garner, 43, died after Officer
> Daniel Pantaleo restrained him using a chokehold, a maneuver that was banned
> by the New York Police Department more than 20 years ago. The officers were
> trying to arrest Mr. Garner, whose death was attributed in part to the
> chokehold, on charges of illegally selling cigarettes.
> What happened: A grand jury, impaneled in September by the Staten Island
> district attorney, voted not to bring charges against Officer Pantaleo. The
> city agreed to pay the family $5.9 million.
>
> . Akai Gurley, Nov. 20, 2014: Mr. Gurley, 28, was entering the
> stairwell of a Brooklyn housing project with his girlfriend when Officer
> Peter Liang, standing 14 steps above him, shot Mr. Gurley in the chest. The
> police described the fatal shooting of Mr. Gurley, who was unarmed, as an
> accident.
> What happened: Officer Liang was found guilty of second-degree manslaughter
> on Feb. 11, 2016. He was then fired from the department. The Brooklyn
> district attorney did not seek jail time.
>
> ________________________________________
> Dennis J. Bernstein is the executive producer of Flashpoints, syndicated on
> Pacifica Radio, and is the recipient of a 2015 Pillar Award for his work as
> a journalist whistleblower. He is most recently the author of Special Ed:
> Voices from a Hidden Classroom.
> Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission
> to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader
> Supported News.
> Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference not
> valid.
>
> Eleanor Bumpurs. (photo: unknown)
> http://readersupportednews.org/http://readersupportednews.org/
> Remembering the 12 Gauge Police Eviction of a 67 Year Old Grandmother in the
> South Bronx By Dennis J Bernstein, Reader Supported News
> 18 July 16
> hirty-two years ago, in 1984, I was teaching media activism in an
> alternative high school in the South Bronx with filmmaker Chela Blitt. We
> were getting ready to begin a documentary with the kids on the social,
> political, and economic reasons why their neighborhood looked more like
> Hiroshima after the war than a neighborhood in New York City. But instead,
> we changed gears and produced with the kids the documentary film "12-Gauge
> Eviction," which chronicles the close-range gunning down of a 67-year-old,
> arthritic grandmother named Eleanor Bumpurs, in the Sedgwick housing project
> in the Highbridge Section of the South Bronx.
> And we got off to a swift start. One of my students had heard the shotgun
> blasts through the walls and halls of the high-rise. In no time, with our
> cameras and recording equipment in tow, we were filming through the broken
> keyhole into the murder scene, where Eleanor Bumpurs was snuffed out of this
> world for being late on her rent. She owed the city about $400 dollars back
> rent, which she claimed she was withholding until the city came in and did
> some necessary plumbing and heating repairs.
> Social Services called in the police, and what unfolded next was obscene,
> extremely brutal, but not all that uncommon. A half-dozen special duty New
> York City cops arrived at the front door of her small apartment, armed with
> mace, tear gas, shields, nets, clubs and side arms, but finally decided that
> nothing less than a 12-gauge pump shotgun fired at close range would do the
> trick. The first blast from the shotgun took Bumpurs' hand off. The final
> blast blew the back of her head off.
> The cops claimed they had no choice. They were facing mortal danger,
> claiming Eleanor Bumpurs, mother of seven and grandmother, was wielding a
> butcher knife. They claimed the shoot was clean. The local corporate press
> took it from there. Many press accounts, informed by the police of course,
> characterized Bumpurs as being "emotionally disturbed" and "deranged."
> My students jumped all over this. One student, a Junior named Douglas, who
> lived in the projects and had ear-witnessed the shots through the walls -
> led us to the crime scene. He guided us to the floor where Bumpurs had lived
> and died, and to the senior citizen center, the library, and other parts of
> the projects where the residents would congregate. And the kids started to
> ask questions and interview residents about the police killing of Mrs.
> Bumpurs.
> "If the lady was so mentally disturbed," pointed out one resident, "people
> wouldn't have asked her to babysit their kids." The resident knew of several
> parents who had entrusted Bumpurs to babysit their kids for them, until her
> arthritis became too severe to "chase the little ones around." One Housing
> Authority supervisor, Michael Pierson, told the kids, "She just seemed like
> a quiet individual to me."
> That evening, my students carried their cameras to an outdoor prayer vigil
> at the projects and interviewed friends and relatives of Bumpurs, as well as
> a few local politicians who had come to pay their respects to the slain
> grandmother. "It's amazing that any time a black or Hispanic is killed like
> this, it's police procedure," said the Rev. Wendell Foster, who was then a
> Bronx City councilman. Sound familiar? One resident told the student
> investigators, "A couple of weeks ago a dangerous animal escaped from the
> Bronx Zoo, and they captured it with a sleep dart and brought it safely back
> to its cage in the zoo. Around here" said the resident, who requested
> anonymity for fear of police retribution, "cops treat black folks worse than
> zoo animals. They'll risk their white skin to save an animal, but they'll
> murder us on the spot."
> I have to believe that it was the thorough and unrelenting investigative
> work of the students, along with a local independent newspaper, The City
> Sun, that forced the court's hand, making them deal with some of the real
> facts of the case, rather than let most of the local the racist corporate
> press marginalize Bumpurs as a community danger, a crazed black woman who
> was willing to kill a cop to avoid paying her back rent.
> After reviewing extensive testimony, a grand jury indeed voted for an
> indictment for second-degree manslaughter against Officer Stephen Sullivan,
> who cut down Bumpurs at close range with two quick blasts from his
> department issued pump-style shotgun. However, subsequently, a state judge
> dismissed the indictment against Sullivan, asserting the evidence was
> "legally insufficient" to indict Sullivan for manslaughter or any other
> offense.
> In an interview after the ruling, when asked if under similar circumstances
> he would do the same thing, Sullivan replied, "Yes, I would," according to
> The New York Times. And New York City cops have been killing people of color
> non-stop before and since. Here's a partial list published by The New York
> Times:
> . Jose (Kiko) Garcia, July 3, 1992: During a struggle with police
> officers in the lobby of an apartment building, Mr. Garcia, a 23-year-old
> Dominican immigrant who the police said was carrying a revolver, was shot
> twice by Officer Michael O'Keefe.
> What happened: Later that year, a grand jury cleared Officer O'Keefe,
> supporting the officer's assertion that Mr. Garcia reached for a gun before
> he was shot.
> . Ernest Sayon, April 29, 1994: Mr. Sayon, 22, was standing outside a
> Staten Island housing complex when police officers on an anti-drug patrol
> tried to arrest him. Mr. Sayon suffocated because of pressure on his back,
> chest and neck while he was handcuffed on the ground.
> What happened: A grand jury declined to file criminal charges against any of
> the three police officers involved, apparently concluding that the officers
> had used reasonable force in subduing Mr. Sayon.
> . Nicholas Heyward Jr., Sept. 27, 1994: Nicholas, 13, was playing cops
> and robbers with friends in a Gowanus Houses building stairwell when Officer
> Brian George, mistaking the teenager's toy rifle for a real gun, shot him to
> death.
> What happened: The Brooklyn district attorney decided not to present the
> case to a grand jury, saying the real culprit was an authentic-looking toy
> gun.
> . Anthony Baez, Dec. 22, 1994: Mr. Baez, 29, a security guard, was
> playing football outside his mother's Bronx home when a stray toss landed on
> a police car. Mr. Baez died after an officer applied a chokehold while
> trying to arrest him.
> What happened: Francis X. Livoti, who had been dismissed by the force for
> using an illegal chokehold, was convicted on federal civil rights charges
> and sentenced to seven and a half years in prison, two years after he won
> acquittal in a state trial.
> . Amadou Diallo, Feb. 4, 1999: Mr. Diallo, a 22-year-old immigrant
> from Guinea, was killed by four officers who fired 41 times in the vestibule
> of his apartment building in the Bronx. They said he seemed to have a gun,
> but he was unarmed.
> What happened: In February 2000, after a tense and racially charged trial,
> all four officers, who were white, were acquitted of second-degree murder
> and other charges, fueling protests. The city agreed to pay the family $3
> million.
> . Patrick Dorismond, March 16, 2000: Mr. Dorismond, 26, an unarmed
> black security guard, was shot dead by an undercover narcotics detective in
> a brawl in front of a bar in Midtown Manhattan, after Mr. Dorismond became
> offended when the detective asked him if he had any crack cocaine.
> What happened: By late July, a grand jury declined to file criminal charges
> against the detective, Anthony Vasquez, concluding that the shooting of Mr.
> Dorismond was not intentional. The city agreed to pay $2.25 million to his
> family.
> . Ousmane Zongo, May 23, 2003: Mr. Zongo, 43, an art restorer, was
> shot and killed by a police officer during a raid at a Chelsea warehouse
> that the police believed was the base of a CD counterfeiting operation.
> What happened: In 2005, Officer Bryan A. Conroy was convicted at the second
> of two trials and sentenced to probation. The judge placed the blame for the
> killing primarily on the poor training and supervision by the Police
> Department. The city agreed to pay the family $3 million.
> . Timothy Stansbury Jr., Jan. 24, 2004: Mr. Stansbury, 19, a high
> school student, was about to take a rooftop shortcut to a party when he was
> fatally shot by Officer Richard S. Neri Jr., who was patrolling the roof.
> What happened: A grand jury decided not to indict Officer Neri. In December
> 2006, he was suspended without pay for 30 days, permanently stripped of his
> gun, and reassigned to a property clerk's office. The city agreed to pay the
> Stansbury family $2 million.
> . Sean Bell, Nov. 25, 2006: Five detectives fired 50 times into a car
> occupied by Mr. Bell, 23, and two others after a confrontation outside a
> Queens club on Mr. Bell's wedding day. He was killed.
> What happened: After a heated seven-week nonjury trial in 2008, the judge
> found Detectives Gescard F. Isnora, Michael Oliver and Marc Cooper not
> guilty of all charges, which included manslaughter and assault. In 2012,
> Detective Isnora was fired, and Detectives Cooper and Oliver, along with a
> supervisor, were forced to resign. The city agreed to pay the family $3.25
> million.
> . Ramarley Graham, Feb. 2, 2012: Mr. Graham, 18, was shot and killed
> by Richard Haste, a police officer, in the bathroom of his Bronx apartment
> after being pursued into his home by a team of officers from a plainclothes
> street narcotics unit. Mr. Graham was unarmed.
> What happened: A grand jury voted to indict Officer Haste on charges of
> first- and second-degree manslaughter, but a judge dismissed the indictment
> a year later. Prosecutors sought a new indictment. In August 2013, a grand
> jury decided not to bring charges in the case. The city agreed to pay the
> family $3.9 million.
> . Eric Garner, July 17, 2014: Mr. Garner, 43, died after Officer
> Daniel Pantaleo restrained him using a chokehold, a maneuver that was banned
> by the New York Police Department more than 20 years ago. The officers were
> trying to arrest Mr. Garner, whose death was attributed in part to the
> chokehold, on charges of illegally selling cigarettes.
> What happened: A grand jury, impaneled in September by the Staten Island
> district attorney, voted not to bring charges against Officer Pantaleo. The
> city agreed to pay the family $5.9 million.
> . Akai Gurley, Nov. 20, 2014: Mr. Gurley, 28, was entering the
> stairwell of a Brooklyn housing project with his girlfriend when Officer
> Peter Liang, standing 14 steps above him, shot Mr. Gurley in the chest. The
> police described the fatal shooting of Mr. Gurley, who was unarmed, as an
> accident.
> What happened: Officer Liang was found guilty of second-degree manslaughter
> on Feb. 11, 2016. He was then fired from the department. The Brooklyn
> district attorney did not seek jail time.
>
> Dennis J. Bernstein is the executive producer of Flashpoints, syndicated on
> Pacifica Radio, and is the recipient of a 2015 Pillar Award for his work as
> a journalist whistleblower. He is most recently the author of Special Ed:
> Voices from a Hidden Classroom.
> Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission
> to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader
> Supported News.
> http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
> http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
>
>
>
>
And she's packing.
Remember that the Police are not protecting your and my safety.
Their first responsibility is toward the protection of Property.
Specifically, the Property of the Ruling Class.
So often folks feel that they can relate to the Ruling Class as being,
"just like the rest of us". Do not be fooled by their public front.
Just look at the people they hire to protect their law and defend
their property. The contempt the police have for the working class,
especially those of Color, is a reflection of their Masters, the
Ruling Class. The lower you are on the economic ladder, or if you are
both poor and aged, or if you look poor or aged, the greater is the
contempt heaped upon you. So the lesson is for you to try hard not to
become an old, poor, woman of color, with a disability.
Carl Jarvis
On 7/27/16, Frank Ventura <frank.ventura@littlebreezes.com> wrote:
> Hi all, I didn't know Elinor personally at the time but had friends who
> lived in that project and knew her by her good reputation. There are a few
> observations that can be made here regarding this article:
> a. Presumably the reason the author chose to cite these examples, among the
> thousands are that these are the ones that made the paper. When it comes to
> poor life in NYC, few if any, media actually visit the neighborhoods,
> especially in Brooklyn and the Bronx. Instead the rely on press releases
> usually from the cops.
> b. As I said in a previous message, take a look at what percentage of these
> killings happen in the Bronx and Brooklyn, especially in the Bronx. It is
> very disproportionate based on population.
> c. The reason for the above is that once cops get into trouble for bad
> behavior in Manhattan and Queens they get transferred to the boroughs that
> have the least media coverage, mostly into the South Bronx.
> d. The article calls the cops "special duty", this really downplays who they
> were. They were actually ESU (Emergency Services Unit). In case that doesn't
> raise your eyebrows, FYI NYC does not have a SWAT team. What most cities
> call their SWAT team is called ESYU in NYC. So effectively, there was the
> equivalent of a half dozen SWAT team members sent to deal with an overdue
> rent situation.
> e. In this overdue rent situation, it was a no knock, no announcement
> situation. The cops just kicked in the door in their ESU commando outfits,
> all black, with no identification.
> f. " Baez, Dec. 22, 1994: Mr. Baez, 29, a security guard, was
> playing football outside his mother's"
> My mother was good friends of Anthony's mother. Officer Livotti had a
> reputation for drinking on the job and then sleeping in his cruiser. After
> Anthony's football hit the car Livotti killed him. Livotti was already under
> investigation for assaulting a 13 year old kid. Although acquitted of murder
> he was convicted of civil rights charges. Sickenly, during a police rally
> someone who looked exactly like Livotti spoke anonymously. This is while
> Livotti was supposed to be in jail fueling speculation that Giuliani found a
> stooge to serve Livotti's time for him. Livotti bragged that he was offered
> a position with the PBA upon his release. No indication if that was true.
> g. "Diallo, Feb. 4, 1999: Mr. Diallo". This was the man who was shot 41
> times by four white cops. Initially one of the cops said he tripped and his
> gun went off and the other cops starting firing. He later recanted his
> statement. Three of the four went on to be promoted to high level
> supervisory positions. This inspired the Springsteen song "41 shots".
> h. " Bell, Nov. 25, 2006:". One of the detectives was implicated in a child
> pornography ring which lead to the downfall of all three.
> I. "Graham, Feb. 2, 2012: Mr. Graham" despite the fact that the cops
> acknowledged that the victim was not doing anything wrong and that he was
> targeted and chased down to build up their arrest numbers, the grand jury
> still let the killer off the hook.
> j. "Gurley, Nov. 20, 2014: Mr. G". The victim in this case was walking in a
> stairwell with his girlfriend. The PD said the shooting was accidental. So,
> the cop accidentally, drew his pistol, accidentally, chambered a round,
> accidentally took the safety off, and accidentally pulled the trigger
> multiple times. After the shooting the only thing the cop did was send a
> text message to his union rep. He did not call for medical help despite the
> begging of the victim's friend. He tried to walk away from the shooting but
> neighbors called for an ambulance but it was too late.
> k. In 1980 NY PD shot 85 year old Frank Sturchio to death in his own home.
> The more things change the more they stay the same.
> Frank
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
> [mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Miriam Vieni
> Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 9:06 PM
> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org
> Subject: [blind-democracy] Remembering the 12 Gauge Police Eviction of a 67
> Year Old Grandmother in the South Bronx
>
>
> Bernstein writes: "Thirty-two years ago, in 1984, I was teaching media
> activism in an alternative high school in the South Bronx with filmmaker
> Chela Blitt. We were getting ready to begin a documentary with the kids on
> the social, political, and economic reasons why their neighborhood looked
> more like Hiroshima after the war than a neighborhood in New York City. But
> instead, we changed gears and produced with the kids the documentary film
> '12-Gauge Eviction,' which chronicles the close-range gunning down of a
> 67-year-old, arthritic grandmother named Eleanor Bumpurs."
>
> Eleanor Bumpurs. (photo: unknown)
>
>
> Remembering the 12 Gauge Police Eviction of a 67 Year Old Grandmother in the
> South Bronx By Dennis J Bernstein, Reader Supported News
> 18 July 16
>
> Thirty-two years ago, in 1984, I was teaching media activism in an
> alternative high school in the South Bronx with filmmaker Chela Blitt. We
> were getting ready to begin a documentary with the kids on the social,
> political, and economic reasons why their neighborhood looked more like
> Hiroshima after the war than a neighborhood in New York City. But instead,
> we changed gears and produced with the kids the documentary film "12-Gauge
> Eviction," which chronicles the close-range gunning down of a 67-year-old,
> arthritic grandmother named Eleanor Bumpurs, in the Sedgwick housing project
> in the Highbridge Section of the South Bronx.
> And we got off to a swift start. One of my students had heard the shotgun
> blasts through the walls and halls of the high-rise. In no time, with our
> cameras and recording equipment in tow, we were filming through the broken
> keyhole into the murder scene, where Eleanor Bumpurs was snuffed out of this
> world for being late on her rent. She owed the city about $400 dollars back
> rent, which she claimed she was withholding until the city came in and did
> some necessary plumbing and heating repairs.
> Social Services called in the police, and what unfolded next was obscene,
> extremely brutal, but not all that uncommon. A half-dozen special duty New
> York City cops arrived at the front door of her small apartment, armed with
> mace, tear gas, shields, nets, clubs and side arms, but finally decided that
> nothing less than a 12-gauge pump shotgun fired at close range would do the
> trick. The first blast from the shotgun took Bumpurs' hand off. The final
> blast blew the back of her head off.
> The cops claimed they had no choice. They were facing mortal danger,
> claiming Eleanor Bumpurs, mother of seven and grandmother, was wielding a
> butcher knife. They claimed the shoot was clean. The local corporate press
> took it from there. Many press accounts, informed by the police of course,
> characterized Bumpurs as being "emotionally disturbed" and "deranged."
> My students jumped all over this. One student, a Junior named Douglas, who
> lived in the projects and had ear-witnessed the shots through the walls -
> led us to the crime scene. He guided us to the floor where Bumpurs had lived
> and died, and to the senior citizen center, the library, and other parts of
> the projects where the residents would congregate. And the kids started to
> ask questions and interview residents about the police killing of Mrs.
> Bumpurs.
> "If the lady was so mentally disturbed," pointed out one resident, "people
> wouldn't have asked her to babysit their kids." The resident knew of several
> parents who had entrusted Bumpurs to babysit their kids for them, until her
> arthritis became too severe to "chase the little ones around." One Housing
> Authority supervisor, Michael Pierson, told the kids, "She just seemed like
> a quiet individual to me."
> That evening, my students carried their cameras to an outdoor prayer vigil
> at the projects and interviewed friends and relatives of Bumpurs, as well as
> a few local politicians who had come to pay their respects to the slain
> grandmother. "It's amazing that any time a black or Hispanic is killed like
> this, it's police procedure," said the Rev. Wendell Foster, who was then a
> Bronx City councilman. Sound familiar? One resident told the student
> investigators, "A couple of weeks ago a dangerous animal escaped from the
> Bronx Zoo, and they captured it with a sleep dart and brought it safely back
> to its cage in the zoo. Around here" said the resident, who requested
> anonymity for fear of police retribution, "cops treat black folks worse than
> zoo animals. They'll risk their white skin to save an animal, but they'll
> murder us on the spot."
> I have to believe that it was the thorough and unrelenting investigative
> work of the students, along with a local independent newspaper, The City
> Sun, that forced the court's hand, making them deal with some of the real
> facts of the case, rather than let most of the local the racist corporate
> press marginalize Bumpurs as a community danger, a crazed black woman who
> was willing to kill a cop to avoid paying her back rent.
> After reviewing extensive testimony, a grand jury indeed voted for an
> indictment for second-degree manslaughter against Officer Stephen Sullivan,
> who cut down Bumpurs at close range with two quick blasts from his
> department issued pump-style shotgun. However, subsequently, a state judge
> dismissed the indictment against Sullivan, asserting the evidence was
> "legally insufficient" to indict Sullivan for manslaughter or any other
> offense.
> In an interview after the ruling, when asked if under similar circumstances
> he would do the same thing, Sullivan replied, "Yes, I would," according to
> The New York Times. And New York City cops have been killing people of color
> non-stop before and since. Here's a partial list published by The New York
> Times:
> . Jose (Kiko) Garcia, July 3, 1992: During a struggle with police
> officers in the lobby of an apartment building, Mr. Garcia, a 23-year-old
> Dominican immigrant who the police said was carrying a revolver, was shot
> twice by Officer Michael O'Keefe.
> What happened: Later that year, a grand jury cleared Officer O'Keefe,
> supporting the officer's assertion that Mr. Garcia reached for a gun before
> he was shot.
>
> . Ernest Sayon, April 29, 1994: Mr. Sayon, 22, was standing outside a
> Staten Island housing complex when police officers on an anti-drug patrol
> tried to arrest him. Mr. Sayon suffocated because of pressure on his back,
> chest and neck while he was handcuffed on the ground.
> What happened: A grand jury declined to file criminal charges against any of
> the three police officers involved, apparently concluding that the officers
> had used reasonable force in subduing Mr. Sayon.
>
> . Nicholas Heyward Jr., Sept. 27, 1994: Nicholas, 13, was playing cops
> and robbers with friends in a Gowanus Houses building stairwell when Officer
> Brian George, mistaking the teenager's toy rifle for a real gun, shot him to
> death.
> What happened: The Brooklyn district attorney decided not to present the
> case to a grand jury, saying the real culprit was an authentic-looking toy
> gun.
>
> . Anthony Baez, Dec. 22, 1994: Mr. Baez, 29, a security guard, was
> playing football outside his mother's Bronx home when a stray toss landed on
> a police car. Mr. Baez died after an officer applied a chokehold while
> trying to arrest him.
> What happened: Francis X. Livoti, who had been dismissed by the force for
> using an illegal chokehold, was convicted on federal civil rights charges
> and sentenced to seven and a half years in prison, two years after he won
> acquittal in a state trial.
>
> . Amadou Diallo, Feb. 4, 1999: Mr. Diallo, a 22-year-old immigrant
> from Guinea, was killed by four officers who fired 41 times in the vestibule
> of his apartment building in the Bronx. They said he seemed to have a gun,
> but he was unarmed.
> What happened: In February 2000, after a tense and racially charged trial,
> all four officers, who were white, were acquitted of second-degree murder
> and other charges, fueling protests. The city agreed to pay the family $3
> million.
>
> . Patrick Dorismond, March 16, 2000: Mr. Dorismond, 26, an unarmed
> black security guard, was shot dead by an undercover narcotics detective in
> a brawl in front of a bar in Midtown Manhattan, after Mr. Dorismond became
> offended when the detective asked him if he had any crack cocaine.
> What happened: By late July, a grand jury declined to file criminal charges
> against the detective, Anthony Vasquez, concluding that the shooting of Mr.
> Dorismond was not intentional. The city agreed to pay $2.25 million to his
> family.
>
> . Ousmane Zongo, May 23, 2003: Mr. Zongo, 43, an art restorer, was
> shot and killed by a police officer during a raid at a Chelsea warehouse
> that the police believed was the base of a CD counterfeiting operation.
> What happened: In 2005, Officer Bryan A. Conroy was convicted at the second
> of two trials and sentenced to probation. The judge placed the blame for the
> killing primarily on the poor training and supervision by the Police
> Department. The city agreed to pay the family $3 million.
>
> . Timothy Stansbury Jr., Jan. 24, 2004: Mr. Stansbury, 19, a high
> school student, was about to take a rooftop shortcut to a party when he was
> fatally shot by Officer Richard S. Neri Jr., who was patrolling the roof.
> What happened: A grand jury decided not to indict Officer Neri. In December
> 2006, he was suspended without pay for 30 days, permanently stripped of his
> gun, and reassigned to a property clerk's office. The city agreed to pay the
> Stansbury family $2 million.
>
> . Sean Bell, Nov. 25, 2006: Five detectives fired 50 times into a car
> occupied by Mr. Bell, 23, and two others after a confrontation outside a
> Queens club on Mr. Bell's wedding day. He was killed.
> What happened: After a heated seven-week nonjury trial in 2008, the judge
> found Detectives Gescard F. Isnora, Michael Oliver and Marc Cooper not
> guilty of all charges, which included manslaughter and assault. In 2012,
> Detective Isnora was fired, and Detectives Cooper and Oliver, along with a
> supervisor, were forced to resign. The city agreed to pay the family $3.25
> million.
>
> . Ramarley Graham, Feb. 2, 2012: Mr. Graham, 18, was shot and killed
> by Richard Haste, a police officer, in the bathroom of his Bronx apartment
> after being pursued into his home by a team of officers from a plainclothes
> street narcotics unit. Mr. Graham was unarmed.
> What happened: A grand jury voted to indict Officer Haste on charges of
> first- and second-degree manslaughter, but a judge dismissed the indictment
> a year later. Prosecutors sought a new indictment. In August 2013, a grand
> jury decided not to bring charges in the case. The city agreed to pay the
> family $3.9 million.
>
> . Eric Garner, July 17, 2014: Mr. Garner, 43, died after Officer
> Daniel Pantaleo restrained him using a chokehold, a maneuver that was banned
> by the New York Police Department more than 20 years ago. The officers were
> trying to arrest Mr. Garner, whose death was attributed in part to the
> chokehold, on charges of illegally selling cigarettes.
> What happened: A grand jury, impaneled in September by the Staten Island
> district attorney, voted not to bring charges against Officer Pantaleo. The
> city agreed to pay the family $5.9 million.
>
> . Akai Gurley, Nov. 20, 2014: Mr. Gurley, 28, was entering the
> stairwell of a Brooklyn housing project with his girlfriend when Officer
> Peter Liang, standing 14 steps above him, shot Mr. Gurley in the chest. The
> police described the fatal shooting of Mr. Gurley, who was unarmed, as an
> accident.
> What happened: Officer Liang was found guilty of second-degree manslaughter
> on Feb. 11, 2016. He was then fired from the department. The Brooklyn
> district attorney did not seek jail time.
>
> ________________________________________
> Dennis J. Bernstein is the executive producer of Flashpoints, syndicated on
> Pacifica Radio, and is the recipient of a 2015 Pillar Award for his work as
> a journalist whistleblower. He is most recently the author of Special Ed:
> Voices from a Hidden Classroom.
> Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission
> to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader
> Supported News.
> Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference not
> valid.
>
> Eleanor Bumpurs. (photo: unknown)
> http://readersupportednews.org/http://readersupportednews.org/
> Remembering the 12 Gauge Police Eviction of a 67 Year Old Grandmother in the
> South Bronx By Dennis J Bernstein, Reader Supported News
> 18 July 16
> hirty-two years ago, in 1984, I was teaching media activism in an
> alternative high school in the South Bronx with filmmaker Chela Blitt. We
> were getting ready to begin a documentary with the kids on the social,
> political, and economic reasons why their neighborhood looked more like
> Hiroshima after the war than a neighborhood in New York City. But instead,
> we changed gears and produced with the kids the documentary film "12-Gauge
> Eviction," which chronicles the close-range gunning down of a 67-year-old,
> arthritic grandmother named Eleanor Bumpurs, in the Sedgwick housing project
> in the Highbridge Section of the South Bronx.
> And we got off to a swift start. One of my students had heard the shotgun
> blasts through the walls and halls of the high-rise. In no time, with our
> cameras and recording equipment in tow, we were filming through the broken
> keyhole into the murder scene, where Eleanor Bumpurs was snuffed out of this
> world for being late on her rent. She owed the city about $400 dollars back
> rent, which she claimed she was withholding until the city came in and did
> some necessary plumbing and heating repairs.
> Social Services called in the police, and what unfolded next was obscene,
> extremely brutal, but not all that uncommon. A half-dozen special duty New
> York City cops arrived at the front door of her small apartment, armed with
> mace, tear gas, shields, nets, clubs and side arms, but finally decided that
> nothing less than a 12-gauge pump shotgun fired at close range would do the
> trick. The first blast from the shotgun took Bumpurs' hand off. The final
> blast blew the back of her head off.
> The cops claimed they had no choice. They were facing mortal danger,
> claiming Eleanor Bumpurs, mother of seven and grandmother, was wielding a
> butcher knife. They claimed the shoot was clean. The local corporate press
> took it from there. Many press accounts, informed by the police of course,
> characterized Bumpurs as being "emotionally disturbed" and "deranged."
> My students jumped all over this. One student, a Junior named Douglas, who
> lived in the projects and had ear-witnessed the shots through the walls -
> led us to the crime scene. He guided us to the floor where Bumpurs had lived
> and died, and to the senior citizen center, the library, and other parts of
> the projects where the residents would congregate. And the kids started to
> ask questions and interview residents about the police killing of Mrs.
> Bumpurs.
> "If the lady was so mentally disturbed," pointed out one resident, "people
> wouldn't have asked her to babysit their kids." The resident knew of several
> parents who had entrusted Bumpurs to babysit their kids for them, until her
> arthritis became too severe to "chase the little ones around." One Housing
> Authority supervisor, Michael Pierson, told the kids, "She just seemed like
> a quiet individual to me."
> That evening, my students carried their cameras to an outdoor prayer vigil
> at the projects and interviewed friends and relatives of Bumpurs, as well as
> a few local politicians who had come to pay their respects to the slain
> grandmother. "It's amazing that any time a black or Hispanic is killed like
> this, it's police procedure," said the Rev. Wendell Foster, who was then a
> Bronx City councilman. Sound familiar? One resident told the student
> investigators, "A couple of weeks ago a dangerous animal escaped from the
> Bronx Zoo, and they captured it with a sleep dart and brought it safely back
> to its cage in the zoo. Around here" said the resident, who requested
> anonymity for fear of police retribution, "cops treat black folks worse than
> zoo animals. They'll risk their white skin to save an animal, but they'll
> murder us on the spot."
> I have to believe that it was the thorough and unrelenting investigative
> work of the students, along with a local independent newspaper, The City
> Sun, that forced the court's hand, making them deal with some of the real
> facts of the case, rather than let most of the local the racist corporate
> press marginalize Bumpurs as a community danger, a crazed black woman who
> was willing to kill a cop to avoid paying her back rent.
> After reviewing extensive testimony, a grand jury indeed voted for an
> indictment for second-degree manslaughter against Officer Stephen Sullivan,
> who cut down Bumpurs at close range with two quick blasts from his
> department issued pump-style shotgun. However, subsequently, a state judge
> dismissed the indictment against Sullivan, asserting the evidence was
> "legally insufficient" to indict Sullivan for manslaughter or any other
> offense.
> In an interview after the ruling, when asked if under similar circumstances
> he would do the same thing, Sullivan replied, "Yes, I would," according to
> The New York Times. And New York City cops have been killing people of color
> non-stop before and since. Here's a partial list published by The New York
> Times:
> . Jose (Kiko) Garcia, July 3, 1992: During a struggle with police
> officers in the lobby of an apartment building, Mr. Garcia, a 23-year-old
> Dominican immigrant who the police said was carrying a revolver, was shot
> twice by Officer Michael O'Keefe.
> What happened: Later that year, a grand jury cleared Officer O'Keefe,
> supporting the officer's assertion that Mr. Garcia reached for a gun before
> he was shot.
> . Ernest Sayon, April 29, 1994: Mr. Sayon, 22, was standing outside a
> Staten Island housing complex when police officers on an anti-drug patrol
> tried to arrest him. Mr. Sayon suffocated because of pressure on his back,
> chest and neck while he was handcuffed on the ground.
> What happened: A grand jury declined to file criminal charges against any of
> the three police officers involved, apparently concluding that the officers
> had used reasonable force in subduing Mr. Sayon.
> . Nicholas Heyward Jr., Sept. 27, 1994: Nicholas, 13, was playing cops
> and robbers with friends in a Gowanus Houses building stairwell when Officer
> Brian George, mistaking the teenager's toy rifle for a real gun, shot him to
> death.
> What happened: The Brooklyn district attorney decided not to present the
> case to a grand jury, saying the real culprit was an authentic-looking toy
> gun.
> . Anthony Baez, Dec. 22, 1994: Mr. Baez, 29, a security guard, was
> playing football outside his mother's Bronx home when a stray toss landed on
> a police car. Mr. Baez died after an officer applied a chokehold while
> trying to arrest him.
> What happened: Francis X. Livoti, who had been dismissed by the force for
> using an illegal chokehold, was convicted on federal civil rights charges
> and sentenced to seven and a half years in prison, two years after he won
> acquittal in a state trial.
> . Amadou Diallo, Feb. 4, 1999: Mr. Diallo, a 22-year-old immigrant
> from Guinea, was killed by four officers who fired 41 times in the vestibule
> of his apartment building in the Bronx. They said he seemed to have a gun,
> but he was unarmed.
> What happened: In February 2000, after a tense and racially charged trial,
> all four officers, who were white, were acquitted of second-degree murder
> and other charges, fueling protests. The city agreed to pay the family $3
> million.
> . Patrick Dorismond, March 16, 2000: Mr. Dorismond, 26, an unarmed
> black security guard, was shot dead by an undercover narcotics detective in
> a brawl in front of a bar in Midtown Manhattan, after Mr. Dorismond became
> offended when the detective asked him if he had any crack cocaine.
> What happened: By late July, a grand jury declined to file criminal charges
> against the detective, Anthony Vasquez, concluding that the shooting of Mr.
> Dorismond was not intentional. The city agreed to pay $2.25 million to his
> family.
> . Ousmane Zongo, May 23, 2003: Mr. Zongo, 43, an art restorer, was
> shot and killed by a police officer during a raid at a Chelsea warehouse
> that the police believed was the base of a CD counterfeiting operation.
> What happened: In 2005, Officer Bryan A. Conroy was convicted at the second
> of two trials and sentenced to probation. The judge placed the blame for the
> killing primarily on the poor training and supervision by the Police
> Department. The city agreed to pay the family $3 million.
> . Timothy Stansbury Jr., Jan. 24, 2004: Mr. Stansbury, 19, a high
> school student, was about to take a rooftop shortcut to a party when he was
> fatally shot by Officer Richard S. Neri Jr., who was patrolling the roof.
> What happened: A grand jury decided not to indict Officer Neri. In December
> 2006, he was suspended without pay for 30 days, permanently stripped of his
> gun, and reassigned to a property clerk's office. The city agreed to pay the
> Stansbury family $2 million.
> . Sean Bell, Nov. 25, 2006: Five detectives fired 50 times into a car
> occupied by Mr. Bell, 23, and two others after a confrontation outside a
> Queens club on Mr. Bell's wedding day. He was killed.
> What happened: After a heated seven-week nonjury trial in 2008, the judge
> found Detectives Gescard F. Isnora, Michael Oliver and Marc Cooper not
> guilty of all charges, which included manslaughter and assault. In 2012,
> Detective Isnora was fired, and Detectives Cooper and Oliver, along with a
> supervisor, were forced to resign. The city agreed to pay the family $3.25
> million.
> . Ramarley Graham, Feb. 2, 2012: Mr. Graham, 18, was shot and killed
> by Richard Haste, a police officer, in the bathroom of his Bronx apartment
> after being pursued into his home by a team of officers from a plainclothes
> street narcotics unit. Mr. Graham was unarmed.
> What happened: A grand jury voted to indict Officer Haste on charges of
> first- and second-degree manslaughter, but a judge dismissed the indictment
> a year later. Prosecutors sought a new indictment. In August 2013, a grand
> jury decided not to bring charges in the case. The city agreed to pay the
> family $3.9 million.
> . Eric Garner, July 17, 2014: Mr. Garner, 43, died after Officer
> Daniel Pantaleo restrained him using a chokehold, a maneuver that was banned
> by the New York Police Department more than 20 years ago. The officers were
> trying to arrest Mr. Garner, whose death was attributed in part to the
> chokehold, on charges of illegally selling cigarettes.
> What happened: A grand jury, impaneled in September by the Staten Island
> district attorney, voted not to bring charges against Officer Pantaleo. The
> city agreed to pay the family $5.9 million.
> . Akai Gurley, Nov. 20, 2014: Mr. Gurley, 28, was entering the
> stairwell of a Brooklyn housing project with his girlfriend when Officer
> Peter Liang, standing 14 steps above him, shot Mr. Gurley in the chest. The
> police described the fatal shooting of Mr. Gurley, who was unarmed, as an
> accident.
> What happened: Officer Liang was found guilty of second-degree manslaughter
> on Feb. 11, 2016. He was then fired from the department. The Brooklyn
> district attorney did not seek jail time.
>
> Dennis J. Bernstein is the executive producer of Flashpoints, syndicated on
> Pacifica Radio, and is the recipient of a 2015 Pillar Award for his work as
> a journalist whistleblower. He is most recently the author of Special Ed:
> Voices from a Hidden Classroom.
> Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission
> to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader
> Supported News.
> http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
> http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
>
>
>
>
Re: [blind-democracy] Re: Sanders Delegates and Protesters Make Their Frustrated Presence Known on Democratic Convention's Opening Day
Good morning Kevin and any others who are struggling with how best to
drive back the Evil Empire.
The Cleveland Comedy Week, turned macabre( involving death or violence
in a way that is strange, frightening, or unpleasant), turned into one
of the worst "reality" shows ever to appear on American Television.
Honestly, I could not do more than spot check the local channel,
waiting for Jeopardy to return. And again, in fairness, I did not
listen to Donald Trump's acceptance speech. I did get snippets on
Democracy Now. But this Philadelphia Story has caught my attention.
Not the Pomp and Ceremony, but the many thoughtful speakers, including
especially the mothers of murdered Black youth. On Democracy Now
there have been some very well thought out discussions that are well
worth the time to listen to.
www.democracynow.org
Over the next several months, while the Mass Media racks in the
millions of advertising dollars with their negative sound bites, we
can take the time to discuss thoughtfully the best course of action in
our continuing battle. There are compelling reasons to swallow our
hopes and dreams, and vote for Clinton. There are as many solid
reasons for us to continue to work toward a replacement of the
Corporate Capital Empire with an enlightened working class government.
While I supported Bernie Sanders, knowing that he was still working
within the perimeters set down by the Empire, I doubt I can vote for
Hillary Clinton, even if my vote were the one that would prevent Trump
from entering the White House.
If America is so closely divided between Clinton and Trump, as recent
polls indicate, then we are a very long way from establishing a
People's Government that is fair and equitable for all. The last
thing we need is to repeat the mistakes made by Egyptians, rising up
believing we would suddenly have the blessing and support of our
military. Nor do we need to set up a new government only to have
opportunists muscle in and corrupt it before it even tests its wings.
It has taken us long years to arrive at the place we find ourselves.
We cannot make the Evil go away until enough of us understand that
Evil really lurks among us. We are still in the seed planting phase.
To some degree we are moving toward the nurturing phase, watering and
weeding the soil around our little seeds. But we are a very long way
from the harvesting phase.
So which way is going to give our little seeds of reason and hope the
best chance for survival? Vote for Clinton, and continue working to
nurture our seeds? Or do we declare ourselves free of the bonds the
Empire is attempting to place upon us, and fight from outside the
Establishment's Two-Headed Monster, the Republican/Democratic Party?
Carl Jarvis
On 7/26/16, Kevin LaRose <kl1964@icloud.com> wrote:
> Carl:
> I suspect Bernie was subjected to some pretty intense strong-arm tactics, at
>
> this point I wouldn't put anything past the DNC. Having said that, I totally
>
> understand where you're coming from. In a way, both campaigns are strikingly
>
> similar. Trump says he alone can fix things. Hillary is saying she alone can
>
> stop he alone, and people are buying into it. For the second time this week,
>
> I started thinking I would just go ahead and bite the bullet and vote for
> Hillary, despite everything I know is true. And then this whole Donald Trump
>
> is a puppet of Russia came up. My gut tells me that's just overselling in a
>
> huge way. Next week it wouldn't really surprise me to see headlines
> indicating someone found evidence that Trump is actually the true spawn of
> Satan. It's just too much, and I really need to stick to my guns and not
> play the game, despite the pressures out there to do so. Jill Stein all the
>
> way.
> KL
>
>
>
drive back the Evil Empire.
The Cleveland Comedy Week, turned macabre( involving death or violence
in a way that is strange, frightening, or unpleasant), turned into one
of the worst "reality" shows ever to appear on American Television.
Honestly, I could not do more than spot check the local channel,
waiting for Jeopardy to return. And again, in fairness, I did not
listen to Donald Trump's acceptance speech. I did get snippets on
Democracy Now. But this Philadelphia Story has caught my attention.
Not the Pomp and Ceremony, but the many thoughtful speakers, including
especially the mothers of murdered Black youth. On Democracy Now
there have been some very well thought out discussions that are well
worth the time to listen to.
www.democracynow.org
Over the next several months, while the Mass Media racks in the
millions of advertising dollars with their negative sound bites, we
can take the time to discuss thoughtfully the best course of action in
our continuing battle. There are compelling reasons to swallow our
hopes and dreams, and vote for Clinton. There are as many solid
reasons for us to continue to work toward a replacement of the
Corporate Capital Empire with an enlightened working class government.
While I supported Bernie Sanders, knowing that he was still working
within the perimeters set down by the Empire, I doubt I can vote for
Hillary Clinton, even if my vote were the one that would prevent Trump
from entering the White House.
If America is so closely divided between Clinton and Trump, as recent
polls indicate, then we are a very long way from establishing a
People's Government that is fair and equitable for all. The last
thing we need is to repeat the mistakes made by Egyptians, rising up
believing we would suddenly have the blessing and support of our
military. Nor do we need to set up a new government only to have
opportunists muscle in and corrupt it before it even tests its wings.
It has taken us long years to arrive at the place we find ourselves.
We cannot make the Evil go away until enough of us understand that
Evil really lurks among us. We are still in the seed planting phase.
To some degree we are moving toward the nurturing phase, watering and
weeding the soil around our little seeds. But we are a very long way
from the harvesting phase.
So which way is going to give our little seeds of reason and hope the
best chance for survival? Vote for Clinton, and continue working to
nurture our seeds? Or do we declare ourselves free of the bonds the
Empire is attempting to place upon us, and fight from outside the
Establishment's Two-Headed Monster, the Republican/Democratic Party?
Carl Jarvis
On 7/26/16, Kevin LaRose <kl1964@icloud.com> wrote:
> Carl:
> I suspect Bernie was subjected to some pretty intense strong-arm tactics, at
>
> this point I wouldn't put anything past the DNC. Having said that, I totally
>
> understand where you're coming from. In a way, both campaigns are strikingly
>
> similar. Trump says he alone can fix things. Hillary is saying she alone can
>
> stop he alone, and people are buying into it. For the second time this week,
>
> I started thinking I would just go ahead and bite the bullet and vote for
> Hillary, despite everything I know is true. And then this whole Donald Trump
>
> is a puppet of Russia came up. My gut tells me that's just overselling in a
>
> huge way. Next week it wouldn't really surprise me to see headlines
> indicating someone found evidence that Trump is actually the true spawn of
> Satan. It's just too much, and I really need to stick to my guns and not
> play the game, despite the pressures out there to do so. Jill Stein all the
>
> way.
> KL
>
>
>
Tuesday, July 26, 2016
Re: [blind-democracy] Response to Carl's question about Democracy Now debate
You experienced the same frustration I felt, Miriam. Like Hedges, I
can go on and on, of course without being so articulate, regarding the
corruption of our Republic and its failing democratic process. But I
have only one solution, one that is not a solution I am ready to go
for.
Like a railroad train speeding down the track toward a washed out
bridge. Everyone sees the danger ahead, but how do we stop the train
when the engineer and the fireman have locked the engine room and are
both snoozing at the switch? And worse than that, even if we did
break into the engine room, we have no plan for stopping the train.
And that is exactly where we are regarding our former Republic, now
turned Corporate Empire.
Chris Hedges, one of our most thoughtful, blunt speaking, sharp
tongued American Prophets, has not set forth a plan of action or a
goal to reach toward. So I have decided that I can only speak for
myself. And what my self tells me is that the Working Class has no
political Party to turn to. I mean, we have no effective political
party to turn to. And that is because both major parties have been
conquered by Wall Street Bankers and the rest of the Ruling Class.
Corporate Capitalism, like a fast growing cancer, has taken over all
the vital organs of the Working Class. We have been schmoozed, lied
to, bullied, divided against ourselves, robbed, and treated like
worthless trash. We only have a small piece of the internet and a few
public channels through which to communicate with one another. In
boxing terms, we are about to receive the knockout punch. And what is
amazing is the fact that the Ruling Class is so greed driven that they
have lost all sense of reason. They have the lid down, and they are
piling on more bricks to keep the boiling pot from blowing its top.
But frustration and hopeless despair, like boiling water building up a
head of steam, have nowhere to go except to expand. And Greed will
make certain that we have nowhere to turn. But in good time the pot
will do exactly what we can expect it to do. It will blow in all
directions. Mindless explosion, sending pot fragments flying across
space, striking down all that is in its path, whether friend or foe.
And that is where we are headed. And that is why most thoughtful
people do not try to talk about solutions. They know beyond all doubt
that the solution is coming and the Ruling Class is not going to back
off until they suddenly realize that no matter how hard they press
down, the lid and the whole damn pot will explode. It is inevitable.
They have blocked all escape routes. They have denied us our self
respect. They have used us as they please. And they will all learn
too late that they could have survived by just giving a little. But
they will not.
Carl Jarvis
On 7/26/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
> Carl,
>
> I've just finished listening to Chris Hedges and Robert Reich on Democracy
> Now. You asked for thoughts on their debate. It was a frustrating
> experience, lisstening to them. On one level, I guess I felt like they were
> both correct. On another level, I thought that Chris Hedges has a much
> clearer picture of where we are and what is happening. However, He doesn't
> tell us what he thinks we can do, if anything, to improve things. It's all
> very well to talk about building a movement for the future. But Reich's
> point, and Ben Jellis' point, during the first hour, were about the
> consequences of one's actions in real time, immediately, right now. Does
> it
> make sense to ignore Trump, or any other Republican extremist who might
> actually win, because the Democratic Party is so corrupt? But Hedges was
> correct when he said that all this horrible stuff would happen, regardless
> of who becomes President. It's clear that the TPP will pass. And Sanders
> must know that. It isn't even in the platform, as meaningless as that is,
> because the fix is already in. Obama wants it. That means that it was
> decided a long time ago and all of this protesting it is just a pretense.
> And that means that, as Hedges said, our democracy is just a pretext. So
> it's a question of how many people will be hurt how badly if Trump becomes
> President or if Clinton becomes President. Do we even have control over
> that?
>
> Miriam
>
>
>
can go on and on, of course without being so articulate, regarding the
corruption of our Republic and its failing democratic process. But I
have only one solution, one that is not a solution I am ready to go
for.
Like a railroad train speeding down the track toward a washed out
bridge. Everyone sees the danger ahead, but how do we stop the train
when the engineer and the fireman have locked the engine room and are
both snoozing at the switch? And worse than that, even if we did
break into the engine room, we have no plan for stopping the train.
And that is exactly where we are regarding our former Republic, now
turned Corporate Empire.
Chris Hedges, one of our most thoughtful, blunt speaking, sharp
tongued American Prophets, has not set forth a plan of action or a
goal to reach toward. So I have decided that I can only speak for
myself. And what my self tells me is that the Working Class has no
political Party to turn to. I mean, we have no effective political
party to turn to. And that is because both major parties have been
conquered by Wall Street Bankers and the rest of the Ruling Class.
Corporate Capitalism, like a fast growing cancer, has taken over all
the vital organs of the Working Class. We have been schmoozed, lied
to, bullied, divided against ourselves, robbed, and treated like
worthless trash. We only have a small piece of the internet and a few
public channels through which to communicate with one another. In
boxing terms, we are about to receive the knockout punch. And what is
amazing is the fact that the Ruling Class is so greed driven that they
have lost all sense of reason. They have the lid down, and they are
piling on more bricks to keep the boiling pot from blowing its top.
But frustration and hopeless despair, like boiling water building up a
head of steam, have nowhere to go except to expand. And Greed will
make certain that we have nowhere to turn. But in good time the pot
will do exactly what we can expect it to do. It will blow in all
directions. Mindless explosion, sending pot fragments flying across
space, striking down all that is in its path, whether friend or foe.
And that is where we are headed. And that is why most thoughtful
people do not try to talk about solutions. They know beyond all doubt
that the solution is coming and the Ruling Class is not going to back
off until they suddenly realize that no matter how hard they press
down, the lid and the whole damn pot will explode. It is inevitable.
They have blocked all escape routes. They have denied us our self
respect. They have used us as they please. And they will all learn
too late that they could have survived by just giving a little. But
they will not.
Carl Jarvis
On 7/26/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
> Carl,
>
> I've just finished listening to Chris Hedges and Robert Reich on Democracy
> Now. You asked for thoughts on their debate. It was a frustrating
> experience, lisstening to them. On one level, I guess I felt like they were
> both correct. On another level, I thought that Chris Hedges has a much
> clearer picture of where we are and what is happening. However, He doesn't
> tell us what he thinks we can do, if anything, to improve things. It's all
> very well to talk about building a movement for the future. But Reich's
> point, and Ben Jellis' point, during the first hour, were about the
> consequences of one's actions in real time, immediately, right now. Does
> it
> make sense to ignore Trump, or any other Republican extremist who might
> actually win, because the Democratic Party is so corrupt? But Hedges was
> correct when he said that all this horrible stuff would happen, regardless
> of who becomes President. It's clear that the TPP will pass. And Sanders
> must know that. It isn't even in the platform, as meaningless as that is,
> because the fix is already in. Obama wants it. That means that it was
> decided a long time ago and all of this protesting it is just a pretense.
> And that means that, as Hedges said, our democracy is just a pretext. So
> it's a question of how many people will be hurt how badly if Trump becomes
> President or if Clinton becomes President. Do we even have control over
> that?
>
> Miriam
>
>
>
robert reich, chris hedges and jill stein featured on democracy now today:07/26/16)
Special coverage of the Democratic National Convention can be heard
over: www.democracynow.org
This 2 hour expanded broadcast is herd across the nation, but cannot
be picked up in many locations. But as long as we have the internet,
we can listen on-line.
Jill Stein of the Green Party is part of a debate in the first hour.
Her outline of the purpose of the Green Party is good information.
But for me, the highlight comes in Part II of the program. Chris
Hedges and Robert Reich take part in a debate that anyone wanting help
in deciding who to vote for this election, should listen to. That is,
assuming no one reading this note is planning to vote for Donald
Trump.
For a long period of time I have followed the writings and speeches of
both these men, approving of much of their thinking. And I fully
admit my greater respect for Hedges over Reich in many issues. But
both men have good arguments for why they support the person they do,
for president.
Without giving anything away, Reich has moved from supporting Sanders,
to endorsing Clinton, while Hedges has continued to stand behind Stein
and the Green Party.
It would be interesting to see some posts on this list, discussing
your thoughts. My biases, once again, lead me to support Hedges
rationale over Reich's.
But I'll leave it there, and wait to see if anyone wants to post
regarding these discussions or others from the Democratic Convention.
Carl Jarvis
over: www.democracynow.org
This 2 hour expanded broadcast is herd across the nation, but cannot
be picked up in many locations. But as long as we have the internet,
we can listen on-line.
Jill Stein of the Green Party is part of a debate in the first hour.
Her outline of the purpose of the Green Party is good information.
But for me, the highlight comes in Part II of the program. Chris
Hedges and Robert Reich take part in a debate that anyone wanting help
in deciding who to vote for this election, should listen to. That is,
assuming no one reading this note is planning to vote for Donald
Trump.
For a long period of time I have followed the writings and speeches of
both these men, approving of much of their thinking. And I fully
admit my greater respect for Hedges over Reich in many issues. But
both men have good arguments for why they support the person they do,
for president.
Without giving anything away, Reich has moved from supporting Sanders,
to endorsing Clinton, while Hedges has continued to stand behind Stein
and the Green Party.
It would be interesting to see some posts on this list, discussing
your thoughts. My biases, once again, lead me to support Hedges
rationale over Reich's.
But I'll leave it there, and wait to see if anyone wants to post
regarding these discussions or others from the Democratic Convention.
Carl Jarvis
Monday, July 25, 2016
Re: [blind-democracy] Northwest Tribes Band Together to Stop Oil-by-Rail
How blind are those who refuse to see? Or perhaps their blindness is
due to the shine off the piles of gold.
The best definition of Bully that I can think of is: One whose bottom
line is everything you have.
Capitalism, especially what is now Corporate Capitalism must be set
aside for a more equitable system.
Carl Jarvis
On 7/25/16, S. Kashdan <skashdan@scn.org> wrote:
> Northwest Tribes Band Together to Stop Oil-by-Rail
>
>
>
> By Ralph Schwartz
>
>
>
> YES! Magazine Sunday, July 24, 2016
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/36952-northwest-tribes-band-together-to-stop-oil-by-rail?tmpl=component&print=1
>
>
>
> There's no such thing as a good place for an oil-train derailment, but this
>
> year's June 3 spill outside Mosier, Oregon, could have been worse if the 16
>
> oil cars had derailed and caught fire even a few hundred feet in either
> direction. The derailment was just far enough away from populated areas,
> including a nearby school and mobile home park, that no injuries resulted,
> and the amount of oil that spilled into the river was limited. If it had
> happened another mile-and-a-half down the tracks, the damaged tank cars
> would have tumbled directly into the Columbia river during the peak of the
> spring Chinook salmon run.
>
>
>
> "This derailment right along the Columbia River is... a reminder that oil
> trains mean an ever-present risk of an oil spill into our waterways,
> threatening fisheries and livelihoods for Quinault Indian Nation members and
>
> our neighbors in Grays Harbor," Quinault Vice President Tyson Johnston
> said.
>
>
>
> There are massive oil train ports planned for Anacortes, Grays Harbor, and
> Vancouver in Washington state. They have not yet broken ground, but if they
>
> ever do get built, the indigenous tribes that need healthy salmon to sustain
>
> their communities got a preview of what could go wrong.
>
>
>
> The communities that live and fish along the Northwest's most important
> waterways have been working to bring these proposals to a screeching halt.
> "Proposed crude oil terminals in Grays Harbor are a threat to our treaty
> rights to fish in our usual and accustomed places," Johnston said. "Our
> safety, way of life, and economic future is on the line."
>
>
>
> The 96-car train that derailed in Mosier was headed to Tacoma from the
> Bakken oil fields. Bakken oil train traffic to the West Coast spiked from
> practically nothing in 2012 to almost 200,000 barrels a day at the start of
>
> 2015, according to the US Energy Information Administration.
>
>
>
> While production in the Bakken fields is off its late-2014 peak, terminal
> developers are betting on the long-term prospects of oil pumped from the
> Bakken region and from the tar sands of Alberta, Canada. If the proposed
> facilities for Anacortes, Grays Harbor, and Vancouver ever operate at full
> capacity, that 2014 peak for crude oil by rail will look like a drop in the
>
> bucket:
>
>
>
> * In Grays Harbor, Westway Terminal's proposed expansion would outfit the
> company's port to move crude oil from trains onto ships. The crude oil
> terminal could bring in nearly five trains per week to the harbor.
>
>
>
> * In Vancouver, the proposed Tesoro-Savage oil terminal would be the largest
>
> rail-to-vessel shipping facility in North America. It would bring in another
>
> 36 loaded trains per week, or about 360,000 barrels of oil.
>
>
>
> * In Anacortes, the Shell Refinery aims to build out a rail loop and
> additional unloading equipment in order to facilitate six more oil trains
> weekly than it already handles.
>
>
>
> Significantly, weeks before the Mosier derailment, the Lummi Nation in the
> coastal northwest corner of Washington won a years-long battle against a
> massive coal export terminal proposed for the tribe's shores.
>
>
>
> Gateway Pacific Terminal (GPT), a project of marine shipping corporation SSA
>
> Marine, would have been the largest coal export facility anywhere in North
> America, large enough to handle 48 million metric tons of coal annually. It
>
> had the backing of two major players in the Powder River Basin coal
> industry, Peabody Energy and Cloud Peak Energy, to build a 3,000-foot-long
> wharf extending into waters fished by generations of Lummis.
>
>
>
> Burning the coal proposed to ship through GPT would have produced 96 million
>
> metric tons per year of carbon pollution. Even the unburned coal at the
> terminal would have posed spill risks to the local aquatic ecosystem, an
> important economic, cultural, and spiritual resource for the Lummi Nation.
> An environmental impact analysis, begun in February 2014, had been
> slow-moving and its outcome uncertain.
>
>
>
> How did the Lummi stop Gateway Pacific? They took a bold and unusual stand
> in January 2015, when they asked the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to protect
>
> their right to fish their "usual and accustomed grounds and stations," as
> written in the 1855 Treaty of Point Elliott. Treaties are powerful legal
> instruments with the force of federal law and the potential to preempt
> inconsistent state laws. If successful, they would win a decisive,
> precedent-setting victory. A failure would open the door to weakening treaty
>
> protections.
>
>
>
> After 16 months of increasingly well-organized and visible public opposition
>
> to the project, the Corps decided the tribe was right: The coal port would
> impede tribal fishing practices. The Corps rejected SSA Marine's application
>
> to build the pier.
>
>
>
> The victory resounded throughout the region, increasing support and
> bolstering the resolve of other tribes embroiled in their own energy
> development battles.
>
>
>
> "Today was a victory not only for tribes but for everyone in the Salish Sea.
>
> I hope we are reversing a 100-year trend of a pollution-based economy, one
> victory at a time," Brian Cladoosby, chairman of the Swinomish Indian Tribal
>
> Community and president of the National Congress of American Indians, told
> the Seattle Times.
>
>
>
> "The Corps' decision is a victory for the Yakama Nation and all other treaty
>
> tribes," JoDe Goudy, chairman of the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the
> Yakama Nation, said in a written statement. "The fight, however, is not
> over. The threat of the coal movement remains, and the Yakama Nation will
> not abide these threats."
>
>
>
> Sure enough, the Yakama have joined with the Confederated Tribes of the
> Umatilla Indian Reservation and others to protest the massive Tesoro-Savage
>
> oil-by-rail terminal proposed for the banks of the Columbia River in
> Vancouver. In contrast to the Lummi, the Umatilla and Yakama are willing to
>
> let the environmental review process play out before taking overt action to
>
> protect their treaty rights.
>
>
>
> In 2014, both tribes asked that the environmental impact statement (EIS) for
>
> the Tesoro-Savage project consider impacts to treaty rights. However, as the
>
> Lummi fight illustrated, treaty rights may be considered separately from the
>
> EIS, which remains the centerpiece of any major environmental review and is
>
> intended to outline all the potential environmental problems and ways to
> handle them.
>
>
>
> Still, Yakama officials clearly rejected the notion that impacts to their
> land and treaty rights could be mitigated. "To be clear," wrote Chairman of
>
> the Yakama Nation Tribal Council Harry Smiskin in a 2014 comment to the
> Corps, "Yakama Nation will not negotiate nor agree to so-called mitigation
> for any violations or actions resulting in the diminishment or destruction
> of its treaty-reserved rights."
>
>
>
> Cladoosby, the Swinomish chairman, struck the same note in a statement to
> the media earlier this year about the GPT: "There is no mitigation. We have
>
> to make a stand before this very destructive poison they want to introduce
> into our backyards. We say no."
>
>
>
> In another tactic, the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community sued BNSF Railways
>
> in April last year for violating a contract between the tribe and the
> railroad that limited the length of trains that passed through the Swinomish
>
> reservation to 25 cars each and required the tribe be informed of changes in
>
> cargo. The Swinomish had learned from the media that BNSF was delivering
> crude oil on trains with 100 cars or more to the Shell and Tesoro refineries
>
> in Anacortes.
>
>
>
> The tribe won an early decision in the lawsuit when a federal judge denied a
>
> BNSF motion to bring the issue before the Surface Transportation Board. The
>
> case is properly heard in federal court, the tribe said in a September 2015
>
> statement, "The STB has no jurisdiction over tribal rights."
>
>
>
> It's worth noting the basis for the Corps' decision in the Lummi case. While
>
> the Lummi Nation was prompted to make its request to the Corps by a vessel
> traffic study that concluded the coal port would bring 487 more vessels
> through the tribe's fishing grounds, the Corps did not rely on busier
> vessel-traffic lanes through Lummi fishing territory to make its decision.
> Instead, it referred only to the disruption of fishing that would occur at
> the dock site itself--about 122 acres total.
>
>
>
> While the main area of concern for the Yakama and Umatilla is away from the
>
> proposed Vancouver oil terminal site--their main fishing grounds are the 150
>
> miles of the Columbia River between Bonneville Dam and McNary Dam--the
> Quinault Indian Nation fishes out of Grays Harbor, where it has notable
> success fishing where ships would dock at the Westway expansion.
>
>
>
> That fishing spot would be disrupted. The completed draft EIS for Westway
> describes how tribal fishers would need to either work around the increased
>
> number of vessels or fish elsewhere. But here's an important legal point: In
>
> the Lummi Nation's case, the Corps' Colonel Buck found that just going
> somewhere else to fish, as long as the tribe could hit its catch quota, was
>
> not an adequate protection of treaty rights.
>
>
>
> Tribes are not confronting fossil-fuel projects alone and in a vacuum. They
>
> have been sharing resources and lobbying together in Washington, D.C., to
> oppose the many fossil-fuel projects proposed for the Pacific Northwest.
> "Working with the Lummis and seeing what they've gone through with the Army
>
> Corps of Engineers was definitely helpful, because it sets a precedent,"
> said Johnston, the Quinault Indian Nation vice president.
>
>
>
> Unlike the Lummi, the Quinault approach has been to focus the fight at the
> state rather than the federal level. Even with the different approach, the
> Quinault tribe believes the Lummi decision "bolsters and strengthens the
> position we have," Johnston said.
>
>
>
> Could the Lummi Nation's assertion of treaty rights be a magic bullet other
>
> tribes could use to stop fossil-fuel projects?
>
>
>
> "There's no direct answer to the question, except--maybe," said Robert
> Anderson, director of the Native American Law Center at the University of
> Washington School of Law. "The Cherry Point decision rested on evidence of
> direct interference with Lummi fishing by increased shipping traffic (at the
>
> terminal). The less direct the connection between such interference and
> environmental harm, the more difficult any case will be."
>
>
>
> For the Lummi, fishing is such an integral part of their identity that they
>
> decided to sidestep the long, drawn-out EIS process and pull out all the
> stops to save their way of life. The Quinault, Umatilla, and Yakama appear
> willing to see the environmental reviews for Tesoro-Savage and Westway
> through to the end.
>
>
>
> If this approach seems more conservative, keep in mind the Lummi strategy
> was risky. If the decision had been appealed in federal court, a judge
> somewhere down the line could reverse the Corps' ruling and, by doing so,
> unravel some of the treaty protections the Lummi Nation and other tribes
> rely on for their survival.
>
>
>
> "I definitely think there should be concern from all tribal leadership
> because we don't know what the results would be if it went to a higher
> court," reflected Lummi council member Jeremiah "Jay" Julius a few days
> before the Corps released its decision.
>
>
>
> But even a setback for treaty rights through a decision by, say, a
> conservative U.S. Supreme Court wouldn't be daunting for the Lummi Nation,
> said Darrell Hillaire, a former tribal chairman. "You think that this one
> issue is going to extinguish that belief? No, it's going to strengthen us."
>
>
>
> Like other tribal members interviewed for this article, Hillaire takes a
> long view, both when looking forward and looking back. He pointed out that
> White settlers thought they might eradicate Lummi members after the
> introduction of alcohol and smallpox, or force them to assimilate after
> sending Lummi children to boarding schools where they couldn't learn their
> own language. Hillaire said Lummi believe they are survivors.
>
>
>
> The Lummi Nation showed remarkable unity in its opposition to the terminal,
>
> which helped members get through the long fight. Likewise, other tribes are
>
> united in opposition to fossil fuel projects across the region. Whatever the
>
> end game might be for tribes such as the Yakama and Swinomish, there's a
> sense that the tide is turning in their favor. Hillaire sees the current
> times as empowering for tribes.
>
>
>
> "What we have now is an emergence," he said. "Not just Lummi, but there are
>
> a lot of First Nations people--their culture and their social structures,
> their government itself... they're all emerging. I think they see that as a
>
> continuation of their sacred responsibility."
>
>
>
> RALPH SCHWARTZ worked for 13 years at newspapers in north-central and
> northwest Washington. He covered the Gateway Pacific Terminal proposal for
> The Bellingham Herald, which he left in November 2015. He now works as an
> environmental consultant and freelance writer, and lives in Bellingham.
>
>
>
> RELATED STORIES
>
>
>
> Oil on the Tracks: Pacific Northwest Rises for Rail Safety
>
>
>
> By Martha Baskin, Truthout | Report
>
>
>
> Oil Train Civil Disobedience Case Puts Climate Destruction on Trial, a First
>
> in the US
>
>
>
> By Martha Baskin, Truthout | Report
>
>
>
> Oil Train Regulations Fail to Address Known Risks
>
>
>
> By Justin Mikulka, DeSmogBlog | News Analysis
>
>
>
due to the shine off the piles of gold.
The best definition of Bully that I can think of is: One whose bottom
line is everything you have.
Capitalism, especially what is now Corporate Capitalism must be set
aside for a more equitable system.
Carl Jarvis
On 7/25/16, S. Kashdan <skashdan@scn.org> wrote:
> Northwest Tribes Band Together to Stop Oil-by-Rail
>
>
>
> By Ralph Schwartz
>
>
>
> YES! Magazine Sunday, July 24, 2016
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/36952-northwest-tribes-band-together-to-stop-oil-by-rail?tmpl=component&print=1
>
>
>
> There's no such thing as a good place for an oil-train derailment, but this
>
> year's June 3 spill outside Mosier, Oregon, could have been worse if the 16
>
> oil cars had derailed and caught fire even a few hundred feet in either
> direction. The derailment was just far enough away from populated areas,
> including a nearby school and mobile home park, that no injuries resulted,
> and the amount of oil that spilled into the river was limited. If it had
> happened another mile-and-a-half down the tracks, the damaged tank cars
> would have tumbled directly into the Columbia river during the peak of the
> spring Chinook salmon run.
>
>
>
> "This derailment right along the Columbia River is... a reminder that oil
> trains mean an ever-present risk of an oil spill into our waterways,
> threatening fisheries and livelihoods for Quinault Indian Nation members and
>
> our neighbors in Grays Harbor," Quinault Vice President Tyson Johnston
> said.
>
>
>
> There are massive oil train ports planned for Anacortes, Grays Harbor, and
> Vancouver in Washington state. They have not yet broken ground, but if they
>
> ever do get built, the indigenous tribes that need healthy salmon to sustain
>
> their communities got a preview of what could go wrong.
>
>
>
> The communities that live and fish along the Northwest's most important
> waterways have been working to bring these proposals to a screeching halt.
> "Proposed crude oil terminals in Grays Harbor are a threat to our treaty
> rights to fish in our usual and accustomed places," Johnston said. "Our
> safety, way of life, and economic future is on the line."
>
>
>
> The 96-car train that derailed in Mosier was headed to Tacoma from the
> Bakken oil fields. Bakken oil train traffic to the West Coast spiked from
> practically nothing in 2012 to almost 200,000 barrels a day at the start of
>
> 2015, according to the US Energy Information Administration.
>
>
>
> While production in the Bakken fields is off its late-2014 peak, terminal
> developers are betting on the long-term prospects of oil pumped from the
> Bakken region and from the tar sands of Alberta, Canada. If the proposed
> facilities for Anacortes, Grays Harbor, and Vancouver ever operate at full
> capacity, that 2014 peak for crude oil by rail will look like a drop in the
>
> bucket:
>
>
>
> * In Grays Harbor, Westway Terminal's proposed expansion would outfit the
> company's port to move crude oil from trains onto ships. The crude oil
> terminal could bring in nearly five trains per week to the harbor.
>
>
>
> * In Vancouver, the proposed Tesoro-Savage oil terminal would be the largest
>
> rail-to-vessel shipping facility in North America. It would bring in another
>
> 36 loaded trains per week, or about 360,000 barrels of oil.
>
>
>
> * In Anacortes, the Shell Refinery aims to build out a rail loop and
> additional unloading equipment in order to facilitate six more oil trains
> weekly than it already handles.
>
>
>
> Significantly, weeks before the Mosier derailment, the Lummi Nation in the
> coastal northwest corner of Washington won a years-long battle against a
> massive coal export terminal proposed for the tribe's shores.
>
>
>
> Gateway Pacific Terminal (GPT), a project of marine shipping corporation SSA
>
> Marine, would have been the largest coal export facility anywhere in North
> America, large enough to handle 48 million metric tons of coal annually. It
>
> had the backing of two major players in the Powder River Basin coal
> industry, Peabody Energy and Cloud Peak Energy, to build a 3,000-foot-long
> wharf extending into waters fished by generations of Lummis.
>
>
>
> Burning the coal proposed to ship through GPT would have produced 96 million
>
> metric tons per year of carbon pollution. Even the unburned coal at the
> terminal would have posed spill risks to the local aquatic ecosystem, an
> important economic, cultural, and spiritual resource for the Lummi Nation.
> An environmental impact analysis, begun in February 2014, had been
> slow-moving and its outcome uncertain.
>
>
>
> How did the Lummi stop Gateway Pacific? They took a bold and unusual stand
> in January 2015, when they asked the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to protect
>
> their right to fish their "usual and accustomed grounds and stations," as
> written in the 1855 Treaty of Point Elliott. Treaties are powerful legal
> instruments with the force of federal law and the potential to preempt
> inconsistent state laws. If successful, they would win a decisive,
> precedent-setting victory. A failure would open the door to weakening treaty
>
> protections.
>
>
>
> After 16 months of increasingly well-organized and visible public opposition
>
> to the project, the Corps decided the tribe was right: The coal port would
> impede tribal fishing practices. The Corps rejected SSA Marine's application
>
> to build the pier.
>
>
>
> The victory resounded throughout the region, increasing support and
> bolstering the resolve of other tribes embroiled in their own energy
> development battles.
>
>
>
> "Today was a victory not only for tribes but for everyone in the Salish Sea.
>
> I hope we are reversing a 100-year trend of a pollution-based economy, one
> victory at a time," Brian Cladoosby, chairman of the Swinomish Indian Tribal
>
> Community and president of the National Congress of American Indians, told
> the Seattle Times.
>
>
>
> "The Corps' decision is a victory for the Yakama Nation and all other treaty
>
> tribes," JoDe Goudy, chairman of the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the
> Yakama Nation, said in a written statement. "The fight, however, is not
> over. The threat of the coal movement remains, and the Yakama Nation will
> not abide these threats."
>
>
>
> Sure enough, the Yakama have joined with the Confederated Tribes of the
> Umatilla Indian Reservation and others to protest the massive Tesoro-Savage
>
> oil-by-rail terminal proposed for the banks of the Columbia River in
> Vancouver. In contrast to the Lummi, the Umatilla and Yakama are willing to
>
> let the environmental review process play out before taking overt action to
>
> protect their treaty rights.
>
>
>
> In 2014, both tribes asked that the environmental impact statement (EIS) for
>
> the Tesoro-Savage project consider impacts to treaty rights. However, as the
>
> Lummi fight illustrated, treaty rights may be considered separately from the
>
> EIS, which remains the centerpiece of any major environmental review and is
>
> intended to outline all the potential environmental problems and ways to
> handle them.
>
>
>
> Still, Yakama officials clearly rejected the notion that impacts to their
> land and treaty rights could be mitigated. "To be clear," wrote Chairman of
>
> the Yakama Nation Tribal Council Harry Smiskin in a 2014 comment to the
> Corps, "Yakama Nation will not negotiate nor agree to so-called mitigation
> for any violations or actions resulting in the diminishment or destruction
> of its treaty-reserved rights."
>
>
>
> Cladoosby, the Swinomish chairman, struck the same note in a statement to
> the media earlier this year about the GPT: "There is no mitigation. We have
>
> to make a stand before this very destructive poison they want to introduce
> into our backyards. We say no."
>
>
>
> In another tactic, the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community sued BNSF Railways
>
> in April last year for violating a contract between the tribe and the
> railroad that limited the length of trains that passed through the Swinomish
>
> reservation to 25 cars each and required the tribe be informed of changes in
>
> cargo. The Swinomish had learned from the media that BNSF was delivering
> crude oil on trains with 100 cars or more to the Shell and Tesoro refineries
>
> in Anacortes.
>
>
>
> The tribe won an early decision in the lawsuit when a federal judge denied a
>
> BNSF motion to bring the issue before the Surface Transportation Board. The
>
> case is properly heard in federal court, the tribe said in a September 2015
>
> statement, "The STB has no jurisdiction over tribal rights."
>
>
>
> It's worth noting the basis for the Corps' decision in the Lummi case. While
>
> the Lummi Nation was prompted to make its request to the Corps by a vessel
> traffic study that concluded the coal port would bring 487 more vessels
> through the tribe's fishing grounds, the Corps did not rely on busier
> vessel-traffic lanes through Lummi fishing territory to make its decision.
> Instead, it referred only to the disruption of fishing that would occur at
> the dock site itself--about 122 acres total.
>
>
>
> While the main area of concern for the Yakama and Umatilla is away from the
>
> proposed Vancouver oil terminal site--their main fishing grounds are the 150
>
> miles of the Columbia River between Bonneville Dam and McNary Dam--the
> Quinault Indian Nation fishes out of Grays Harbor, where it has notable
> success fishing where ships would dock at the Westway expansion.
>
>
>
> That fishing spot would be disrupted. The completed draft EIS for Westway
> describes how tribal fishers would need to either work around the increased
>
> number of vessels or fish elsewhere. But here's an important legal point: In
>
> the Lummi Nation's case, the Corps' Colonel Buck found that just going
> somewhere else to fish, as long as the tribe could hit its catch quota, was
>
> not an adequate protection of treaty rights.
>
>
>
> Tribes are not confronting fossil-fuel projects alone and in a vacuum. They
>
> have been sharing resources and lobbying together in Washington, D.C., to
> oppose the many fossil-fuel projects proposed for the Pacific Northwest.
> "Working with the Lummis and seeing what they've gone through with the Army
>
> Corps of Engineers was definitely helpful, because it sets a precedent,"
> said Johnston, the Quinault Indian Nation vice president.
>
>
>
> Unlike the Lummi, the Quinault approach has been to focus the fight at the
> state rather than the federal level. Even with the different approach, the
> Quinault tribe believes the Lummi decision "bolsters and strengthens the
> position we have," Johnston said.
>
>
>
> Could the Lummi Nation's assertion of treaty rights be a magic bullet other
>
> tribes could use to stop fossil-fuel projects?
>
>
>
> "There's no direct answer to the question, except--maybe," said Robert
> Anderson, director of the Native American Law Center at the University of
> Washington School of Law. "The Cherry Point decision rested on evidence of
> direct interference with Lummi fishing by increased shipping traffic (at the
>
> terminal). The less direct the connection between such interference and
> environmental harm, the more difficult any case will be."
>
>
>
> For the Lummi, fishing is such an integral part of their identity that they
>
> decided to sidestep the long, drawn-out EIS process and pull out all the
> stops to save their way of life. The Quinault, Umatilla, and Yakama appear
> willing to see the environmental reviews for Tesoro-Savage and Westway
> through to the end.
>
>
>
> If this approach seems more conservative, keep in mind the Lummi strategy
> was risky. If the decision had been appealed in federal court, a judge
> somewhere down the line could reverse the Corps' ruling and, by doing so,
> unravel some of the treaty protections the Lummi Nation and other tribes
> rely on for their survival.
>
>
>
> "I definitely think there should be concern from all tribal leadership
> because we don't know what the results would be if it went to a higher
> court," reflected Lummi council member Jeremiah "Jay" Julius a few days
> before the Corps released its decision.
>
>
>
> But even a setback for treaty rights through a decision by, say, a
> conservative U.S. Supreme Court wouldn't be daunting for the Lummi Nation,
> said Darrell Hillaire, a former tribal chairman. "You think that this one
> issue is going to extinguish that belief? No, it's going to strengthen us."
>
>
>
> Like other tribal members interviewed for this article, Hillaire takes a
> long view, both when looking forward and looking back. He pointed out that
> White settlers thought they might eradicate Lummi members after the
> introduction of alcohol and smallpox, or force them to assimilate after
> sending Lummi children to boarding schools where they couldn't learn their
> own language. Hillaire said Lummi believe they are survivors.
>
>
>
> The Lummi Nation showed remarkable unity in its opposition to the terminal,
>
> which helped members get through the long fight. Likewise, other tribes are
>
> united in opposition to fossil fuel projects across the region. Whatever the
>
> end game might be for tribes such as the Yakama and Swinomish, there's a
> sense that the tide is turning in their favor. Hillaire sees the current
> times as empowering for tribes.
>
>
>
> "What we have now is an emergence," he said. "Not just Lummi, but there are
>
> a lot of First Nations people--their culture and their social structures,
> their government itself... they're all emerging. I think they see that as a
>
> continuation of their sacred responsibility."
>
>
>
> RALPH SCHWARTZ worked for 13 years at newspapers in north-central and
> northwest Washington. He covered the Gateway Pacific Terminal proposal for
> The Bellingham Herald, which he left in November 2015. He now works as an
> environmental consultant and freelance writer, and lives in Bellingham.
>
>
>
> RELATED STORIES
>
>
>
> Oil on the Tracks: Pacific Northwest Rises for Rail Safety
>
>
>
> By Martha Baskin, Truthout | Report
>
>
>
> Oil Train Civil Disobedience Case Puts Climate Destruction on Trial, a First
>
> in the US
>
>
>
> By Martha Baskin, Truthout | Report
>
>
>
> Oil Train Regulations Fail to Address Known Risks
>
>
>
> By Justin Mikulka, DeSmogBlog | News Analysis
>
>
>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)