From greenpartyct at yahoo.com Thu Dec 1 06:45:24 2005 From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT) Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 03:45:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: {news} AP story on Cam Finance- Opting out means MORE money from one donor Message-ID: <20051201114524.95770.qmail@web81404.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Those who opt out of the public funding would not be able to accept any money from lobbyists and contractors. To make up for the revenue loss, they would be able to raise more from individuals, political action committees and the state parties. Gubernatorial candidates, for example, could receive $3,500 from an individual - $1,000 more than they can accept today. Legislature passes campaign finance reform bill By SUSAN HAIGH AP Political Writer HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) -- The state legislature approved what advocates billed as the most sweeping reforms of campaign finance laws in the country early Thursday, including restrictions on campaign contributions and a new publicly funded election system. Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell promised to sign the bill into law. But that doesn't mean the end to the campaign finance reform debate in Connecticut. After much discussion about loopholes in the legislation, lawmakers promised to return during the regular session in February to make further changes. "Frankly, the stars are aligned with this legislation," said Rep. Christopher Caruso, D-Bridgeport, co-chairman of the Government Administration and Elections Committee. "It's our opportunity to take advantage of this moment, to pass this legislation, to build a foundation and then make changes." tcdacmd="cc=lcn; dt";var SECTION_TPL='STATE'; var excVal = check_exc(); if( excVal == 1 ) { document.write('Advertisement '); document.write(''); document.write(''); document.write(''); document.write(''+''); } var bnum=new Number(Math.floor(99999999 * Math.random())+1); document.write(''); var excVal = check_exc(); if( excVal == 1 ) { document.write(' '); document.write(''); document.write(''); document.write(''); document.write(''+''); } The changes take effect on Dec. 31, 2006, after the next gubernatorial and legislative races. Both the Senate and the House debated the bill for about seven hours in separate sessions. The bill passed the Senate 27-8 and the House 82-65. The House vote came after several amendments were defeated. Advocates of the legislation called it a model for the nation, banning contributions from lobbyists and state contractors, ending campaign advertisement booklets and creating a voluntary, public financing system that affects all state races. But many Republicans argued the bill would not reduce the influence of special interests. "This bill before us ... does things that no other state in this union has done," said Sen. Donald DeFronzo, D-New Britain, co-chairman of the Government Administration and Elections Committee. Rell called the bill "truly historic" and said she was looking forward to signing it. She had been pushing lawmakers to pass a bill after they failed to reach a deal during the regular legislative session earlier this year. "The people of Connecticut want these reforms. They want to remove the corrosive, corrupting influence of special interest money in our elections, and we can finally reward them with this landmark legislation," Rell said. Nick Nyhart, executive director of Public Campaign, a national organization that supports public financing and campaign reform, said the Connecticut legislation could have a national ripple effect. "For the first time, a legislature has gone ahead and done this, not just for other seats but also done it for themselves," he said, calling the bill "the strongest piece of reform legislation in the country." Maine and Arizona have public financing systems created by ballot initiatives. Other states have created public financing for just a handful of positions, such as the governor and lieutenant governor in Vermont and top judges in North Carolina. Connecticut's legislation comes in the wake of a corruption scandal last year that sent former Gov. John G. Rowland to prison and led his former co-chief of staff and a major state contractor to plead guilty in federal court. Rell was lieutenant governor during Rowland's tenure. But many Republican legislators claimed the legislation was a sham and could lead to even more special interest influence on Connecticut's elections. They pointed to provisions that allow legislative leaders, state parties and unions to foot the bill for candidates' in-kind services, including polling and consultants. Others claimed the public financing system can be manipulated by candidates, and the money would be doled out with few restrictions. Many Republicans are particularly angry about using public funds to pay for political campaigns. Even some Democrats criticized the bill. Sen. Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford, who voted for it, said the legislation stifled free speech rights of lobbyists and predicted a court challenge. And in the House, a Democrat-proposed amendment that would have stripped the public financing provision died on a 79-66 vote. Rep. Paul Doyle, D-Wethersfield, who proposed the bill, said he came to realize that the money would be better spent on education and other programs. The bill calls for funding the new system each year with approximately $17 million worth of unclaimed property such as forgotten pay checks and bank accounts that now automatically flows into the state's general fund. "I think our forefathers would turn in their graves if they knew public funds were used this way," said Rep. Julia Wasserman, R-Newtown. Participating candidates must agree to campaign spending limits and must raise a certain amount of money, in small donations, to qualify for public funds for their campaigns. For example, a gubernatorial candidate opposed by a major party candidate without a primary would be limited to spending $3.25 million. Of that, the candidate would have to raise $250,000, with individual donations totaling no more than $100, to qualify. The state would then kick in $3 million. In the last gubernatorial race in 2002, Rowland raised more than $5 million and his Democratic opponent, Bill Curry, collected about $1.5 million. Those who opt out of the public funding would not be able to accept any money from lobbyists and contractors. To make up for the revenue loss, they would be able to raise more from individuals, political action committees and the state parties. Gubernatorial candidates, for example, could receive $3,500 from an individual - $1,000 more than they can accept today. ? 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy. =========================================================== THE GREEN PARTY OF CONNECTICUT is the third largest political party in CT. The Greens are also the third largest political party in the US, with 220 Greens officeholders in 27 states. Over 80 countries in world have Green Parties. Wangari Maathai, the 2004 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, is Kenya's assistant minister for environment and an elected Green Party member. =========================================================== National Committee member from Connecticut: Tim McKee (860) 324-1684 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From riverbend2 at earthlink.net Fri Dec 2 09:28:56 2005 From: riverbend2 at earthlink.net (John Battista) Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 09:28:56 -0500 Subject: {news} Mike DeRosa quoted on CT NPR news this am Message-ID: <000c01c5f74c$bae56c60$1102a8c0@newm2.ct.charter.com> I heard on the CT NPR news this am a quote from Mike DeRosa stating that the CT Green Party was considering suing the state of CT because the just passed campaign finance law made it more difficult for third parties to qualify for the ballot and receive matching funds. There was a further quote saying that the two major parties have joined together to make it more difficult for third parties to participate in the electoral process. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From apbrison at hotmail.com Fri Dec 2 10:49:45 2005 From: apbrison at hotmail.com (allan brison) Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 10:49:45 -0500 Subject: {news} New Haven municipal elections In-Reply-To: <20051201114524.95770.qmail@web81404.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From greenpartyct at yahoo.com Fri Dec 2 12:26:54 2005 From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT) Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 09:26:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: {news} Clean Money Bill passes In CT (Greens and ACLU may sue for anti-third party provisions) Message-ID: <20051202172654.76378.qmail@web81401.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Petitioning candidates must gather signatures from 20 percent of affected voters, nearly an impossible task, to qualify for the same public funds available to Democrats and Republicans. The Green Party is considering challenging the provision in court, said Michael DeRosa, the co-chairman of the party. The American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut is exploring a challenge on two grounds - the unequal treatment of major and minor candidates, and the violation of lobbyists' free speech rights. Courts have held that political contributions are a form of speech. --------------------------------- http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-campfin1202.artdec02,0,1435075.story?coll=hc-headlines-home Rell Exults After Vote GOP Legislators Parted With Governor ADVERTISERS --------------------------------- Advertise on ctnow -->By MARK PAZNIOKAS Courant Staff Writer December 2 2005 Gov. M. Jodi Rell celebrated the passage of far-reaching campaign finance reforms Thursday, even though fellow Republicans largely abandoned her on the issue and a court challenge is possible. "We have set the standard," Rell said. "We are now a role model for the rest of the nation. I think that Connecticut can be very proud of this bill." The Democratic-controlled Senate and House combined for nearly 14 hours of debate Wednesday night and Thursday morning, concluding at 2:44 a.m. with passage by the House on an 82-65 vote. Seven hours earlier, the Senate voted 27-8 to approve the legislation, which bans contributions from lobbyists and contractors and creates a voluntary system of publicly financing campaigns for state office. Only four Republicans in each chamber supported the bill, which was drafted by Democrats. House Minority Leader Robert M. Ward, R-North Branford, rebuffed overtures from Rell's senior staff and led a vigorous floor fight against a bill that he described as badly flawed. The political parties and legislative leadership's political action committees will be permitted to make unlimited expenditures, such as paying for direct mail appeals, on behalf of candidates who accept public financing. "I found that loophole to be so overwhelming I couldn't support the bill," Ward said. Rell said that she also was troubled by those provisions, but that bans on lobbyist and state contractor dollars, as well as public financing, go far to minimize what she called the corrosive influence of special interests in politics. "I believe we got 85 percent or more of what I had hoped we would be able to have in a bill at the end of June," said Rell, who intends to sign the bill in the next few days. The legislature had ended its regular session in June deadlocked over campaign finance reforms, an issue that Rell had made a priority soon after succeeding John G. Rowland as governor in 2004. Rell said that she would seek legislation in the 2006 regular session to correct flaws in the bill. She wants to limit party and leadership expenditures and lower the threshold that petitioning and minor-party candidates must meet to qualify for public funds. Petitioning candidates must gather signatures from 20 percent of affected voters, nearly an impossible task, to qualify for the same public funds available to Democrats and Republicans. The Green Party is considering challenging the provision in court, said Michael DeRosa, the co-chairman of the party. The American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut is exploring a challenge on two grounds - the unequal treatment of major and minor candidates, and the violation of lobbyists' free speech rights. Courts have held that political contributions are a form of speech. "We are obviously concerned about the constitutional issues raised by the law," said Roger C. Vann, executive director of the state's ACLU chapter. Vann said that he expected no decision on a lawsuit for weeks. "This kind of case potentially would go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. It would be potentially a long and difficult battle," he said. "We don't take these decisions lightly." Passage of the legislation was a personal victory for the Democratic legislative leaders, who had been repeatedly outmaneuvered by Rell on the issue, most recently by her calling legislators into special session to tackle reform after they had refused to do so on their own. House Speaker James A. Amann, D-Milford, and Senate President Pro Tem Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, delivered on a promise made Monday: If necessary, Democrats could have passed the measure without a single Republican vote. The strong Democratic votes gratified the two leaders, who had been long frustrated by the Republican governor's taking the lead on campaign reform and chiding Democrats for failing to act. Among the Senate's 24 Democrats, only Joan Hartley of Waterbury voted against the bill. The Democratic majority was joined in passing the bill by four Republicans: John A. Kissel of Enfield, Thomas J. Herlihy of Simsbury, Leonard A. Fasano of North Haven and Anthony Guglielmo of Stafford. Only four House Republicans voted for the measure, despite Rell's support: Al Adinolfi of Cheshire, Antonietta Boucher of Wilton, Raymond C. Kalinowski of Durham and Diana S. Urban of North Stonington. Amann belittled Rell's efforts on behalf of the bill. "She delivered four votes today," he said. "It's unfortunate we didn't get more Republican support." Democrats also needled Rell by including language banning any elected official from appearing in a state-funded ad one year before an election. Current law imposes a ban five months prior to the election. The immediate impact is to immediately take television commercials featuring Rell off the air. Rell shrugged off the provision. "I'm fine with it. Let it go," she said. Reform advocates praised Rell for keeping campaign finance reform alive beyond June by calling a special legislative session and Democratic leaders for delivering the votes for passage. They took no chances, however, on Wednesday. At one point, they called Stamford Mayor Dannel P. Malloy, a Democratic gubernatorial candidate and a supporter of public financing, and asked him to intercede with reluctant members of the Stamford delegation. Malloy was seen on the House floor, talking to his local delegation. Both Malloy and New Haven Mayor John DeStefano Jr., the other Democratic gubernatorial candidate, support public financing. After the vote, Rell's chief of staff, M. Lisa Moody, embraced Tom Swan, the executive director of the Connecticut Citizen Action Group. Swan was a strident critic of Rell's former running mate, Rowland. It was those unlikely alliances that made reform supporters say that a far-reaching public financing bill could not be rejected over even some significant loopholes. "To have the stars aligned on this piece of legislation after 15 years is a major step," said Rep. Christopher Caruso, D-Bridgeport, a leading reform proponent. "Those stars don't often align on campaign finance reform. Sometimes opportunity knocks once." Copyright 2005, Hartford Courant =========================================================== THE GREEN PARTY OF CONNECTICUT is the third largest political party in CT. The Greens are also the third largest political party in the US, with 220 Greens officeholders in 27 states. Over 80 countries in world have Green Parties. Wangari Maathai, the 2004 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, is Kenya's assistant minister for environment and an elected Green Party member. =========================================================== National Committee member from Connecticut: Tim McKee (860) 324-1684 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From justinemccabe at earthlink.net Sat Dec 3 09:18:32 2005 From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe) Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 09:18:32 -0500 Subject: {news} GREEN RELEASE: GREEN RELEASE: Board of Ed Greens in Maine lead on opt-out from school military recruiting Message-ID: <09c201c5f814$73868fc0$0402a8c0@JUSTINE> Portland Green Independent Elected Officials Ben Meiklejohn, School Board: 756-7684 Stephen Spring, School Board: 450-1435 Press Release For Immediate Release: November 28, 2005 Green Independent Party School Board Members Set Precedent for the State of Maine A policy authored by two Green Independent Party members on the Portland School Committee which allows high school students to opt out of unsolicited targeting by military recruiters may become a state law. Green Independent Party and Portland School Committee Members Stephen Spring and Ben Meiklejohn have been getting national recognition for championing a creative policy that gives Portland high school students and their families the option to opt out of having their private information shared with military recruiters without their permission. Their policy makes students and their families aware of this provision hidden deep within NCLB. Meiklejohn and Spring's policy, which was adopted by the Portland School Committee earlier this year, allows students and families the opportunity to opt-out by checking off a box that is now printed on high school emergency cards, which parents have to fill out and sign at the start of the school year. Now a bill has been introduced in the legislature that would make the Portland policy state law. "Everyone eventually agreed that simply adding a couple lines to the emergency card was the way to go. It turned out to be the easiest and most cost-efficient way to inform and empower students to make important decisions about their personal contact information," adds Meiklejohn. They seem to have struck upon an elegant solution as cities and towns around the country are beginning to adopt the policy. "As members of the Maine Green Independent Party, we hold transparency in government and privacy rights for students and families close to our core," says school board member, Stephen Spring, who worked with Ben Meiklejohn to co-author the emergency card provision that is now garnering state and national recognition. On opening day of the school year, Meiklejohn and Spring welcomed students outside Portland High School with huge blown up copies of the emergency card and handed out pencils they had made up with the inscription:" Welcome Back to School Portland High Bulldogs. Opt-Out or Opt-In. It's YOUR Decision!" They choose Portland High because it is more frequently targeted by recruiters likely due to the greater number of minority and low income students there. In the September 27th issue of School Board News, a leading industry publication that is sent to school board members from the littlest towns to the biggest cities across the country, recognized Spring and Meiklejohn for their precedent-setting boardsmanship in creatively dealing with this issue. A bill based on the Portland Schools policy has been introduced by Rep. David Farrington of Gorham and will be taken up when the legislature convenes in January. Spring is pleased that the policy has made it to the legislature. "I'm honored to see our work being taken up at the state level" said Spring. Early data is showing that students from Deering HS and Portland HS opted out at rates of 52% and 65%, respectively. http://www.maine.gov/tools/whatsnew/index.php?topic=HouseDems+News&id=9774&v=Article http://www.nsba.org/site/doc_sbn_issue.asp?TRACKID=&VID=55&CID=682&DID=36815 # # # Distributed by the Green Party of the United States http://www.gp.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From greenpartyct at yahoo.com Sat Dec 3 16:12:35 2005 From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT) Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 13:12:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: {news} Hartford Courant- 'Weicker Call Reform Unfair" Message-ID: <20051203211235.61243.qmail@web81405.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --------------------------------- http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-weicker1203.artdec03,0,3129823.story?coll=hc-headlines-home Weicker Calls Reform Unfair Vows Legal Fight, Saying 3rd Parties Hurt On Funding ADVERTISERS --------------------------------- Advertise on ctnow -->By MARK PAZNIOKAS Courant Staff Writer December 3 2005 Former Gov. Lowell P. Weicker Jr. said Friday he will ask a judge to strike down Connecticut's new system of publicly financing campaigns, saying it discriminates against minor parties. Weicker, who outflanked the two-party system in 1990 to win the governor's race as a third-party candidate, said that the bill passed Thursday virtually locks out minor candidates for statewide office. "It is entirely, in my opinion, illegal or unconstitutional to go ahead and in effect set the bar higher for third-party candidates," Weicker said. Weicker said he probably will offer himself as a plaintiff in a legal challenge he expects to be filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, but he would file his own lawsuit if necessary. "I'm not going to let this thing die, not by a long shot," Weicker said. The bill bans contributions from lobbyists and state contractors and creates a system of publicly financing campaigns, beginning in 2008 for legislative races and 2010 for governor and other state constitutional offices. Weicker, 74, who left office in January 1995 after a single term as governor, said he had no opinion on public financing. The only source of his ire was the bill's treatment of minor candidates. His old party, A Connecticut Party, is inactive, but Weicker remains an unaffiliated voter who sees minor parties as a necessary check on the majority parties. He and his wife, Claudia, recently endorsed an independent candidate for town council in West Hartford, where Claudia Weicker grew up. Gov. M. Jodi Rell said she was aware of Weicker's plans. "Gov. Weicker called me as a courtesy to share his concerns about the bill and to let me know about a possible legal challenge because of the constraints the new law will put on third-party candidates. I share his concerns. This is one of the troubling aspects of the bill that I intend to address," Rell said. The threat of litigation will not alter her plans to sign the legislation next week, Rell said. "The important thing is that the bill was passed, I plan to sign it into law and the much-needed reform of our election process is becoming a reality," she said. The ACLU of Connecticut is considering also challenging the constitutionality of the ban on contributions by lobbyists and contractors. Courts have equated donations with free speech. Under the bill, Democratic and Republican nominees will automatically qualify for public financing of $25,000 for a House race, $85,000 for a Senate contest and $3 million for a gubernatorial run if they meet private fundraising thresholds of $5,000 for a House campaign, $15,000 for a Senate race and $250,000 for governor. Minor-party and petitioning candidates must clear an additional hurdle of mounting a major petition drive. To obtain the same money given Democrats and Republicans, minor candidates would have to collect signatures from eligible voters equal to 20 percent of the turnout in the most recent election for the office. Based on a turnout of more than 1 million voters statewide in 2002, a minor party gubernatorial candidate would need more than 200,000 signatures to qualify for full funding. Candidates for legislative office would need anywhere from several hundred signatures for House races in low-turnout urban districts to several thousand for Senate seats in highly competitive suburban areas. Lesser public grants could be obtained by collecting signatures from 10 percent or 15 percent of voters - still a daunting a task, according to many politicians. Qualifying for the ballot requires only 1 percent. Legislative sponsors defended the requirements as necessary to keep frivolous candidates from obtaining public money. Tom Swan of the Connecticut Citizen Action Group said the state legislation is friendlier to minor candidates than the federal public financing law for presidential races. Sen. Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford, who reluctantly voted for the bill, said his colleagues rejected his idea for a uniform public financing system: For every dollar raised in small contributions from local voters, the state would provide $3 in matching funds. "It would have clearly treated all candidates for public office the same - and the grants would be directly correlated to the amount of work candidates put into it," McDonald said. He said Weicker's involvement will give great visibility to the complaints about the campaign-finance bill. "He is a great spokesman for the rights of minority parties, and he does well on the soap box," McDonald said. "He's got great credentials for advocating that position." Copyright 2005, Hartford Courant =========================================================== THE GREEN PARTY OF CONNECTICUT is the third largest political party in CT. The Greens are also the third largest political party in the US, with 220 Greens officeholders in 27 states. Over 80 countries in world have Green Parties. Wangari Maathai, the 2004 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, is Kenya's assistant minister for environment and an elected Green Party member. =========================================================== National Committee member from Connecticut: Tim McKee (860) 324-1684 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From capeconn at comcast.net Mon Dec 5 09:41:22 2005 From: capeconn at comcast.net (Tom Sevigny) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 09:41:22 -0500 Subject: {news} Resignation Message-ID: <017d01c5f9a9$f6362520$e58f0218@sevigny8wcbjrd> Folks, Effective immediately, I am resigning as delegate to the GPUS and ceasing all Green Party activities at the state and local level. The 1-888 # has been removed from my home number. Also, Aaron, please stop the volunteers who sign up on the CT GP web site from being forwarded to my e-mail. Thanks, Tom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From chapillsbury at igc.org Mon Dec 5 10:45:15 2005 From: chapillsbury at igc.org (Charlie Pillsbury) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 10:45:15 -0500 Subject: {news} Resignation References: <017d01c5f9a9$f6362520$e58f0218@sevigny8wcbjrd> Message-ID: <002c01c5f9b2$e37be650$7101a8c0@EXDIR04> Tom: I am curious about your resignation. Aaron and Kelly provided some reasons for their resignations. Do you care to offer any for yours? thanks, and thanks for all your service on behalf of the Green Party both locally and nationally. Charlie Pillsbury 247 Saint Ronan Street New Haven CT 06511 203-865-6575 chapillsbury at igc.org ----- Original Message ----- From: Tom Sevigny To: ctgp-news at ml.greens.org Cc: Aaron Gustafson Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 9:41 AM Subject: {news} Resignation ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Folks, Effective immediately, I am resigning as delegate to the GPUS and ceasing all Green Party activities at the state and local level. The 1-888 # has been removed from my home number. Also, Aaron, please stop the volunteers who sign up on the CT GP web site from being forwarded to my e-mail. Thanks, Tom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From justinemccabe at earthlink.net Mon Dec 5 11:24:00 2005 From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 11:24:00 -0500 Subject: {news} Fw: Sheehan at Storrs+Urgent Appeal to free CPT+ Call-in to stop the War Message-ID: <023e01c5f9b8$4f486390$0402a8c0@JUSTINE> ----- Original Message ----- From: Sadanand, Nanjundiah (Physics) Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 10:52 AM Subject: [AL-AWDA-Media] Sheehan at Storrs+Urgent Appeal to free CPT+ Call-in to stop the War Cindy Sheehan is coming to the quiet corner: She will be talking at the UCONN Student Union theater in Storrs, on this coming Monday night (Dec. 5th), at 7PM; doors open at 6:30PM; the public is warmly invited, and the event is admission-free. As a special perk, the group organizing the event, the New UCONN Free Press Gang, will provide free copies of their very first issue at the door. ____________________________________________________________________________ SIGN THE URGENT APPEAL: PLEASE RELEASE OUR FRIENDS IN IRAQ Arabic version at http://electroniciraq.net/news/2210.shtml Sign the petition at http://freethecpt.org Four members of Christian Peacemaker Teams were taken this past Saturday, November 26, in Baghdad, Iraq. They are not spies, nor do they work in the service of any government. They are people who have dedicated their lives to fighting against war and have clearly and publicly opposed the invasion and occupation of Iraq. They are people of faith, but they are not missionaries. They have deep respect for the Islamic faith and for the right of Iraqis to self-determination. C.P.T. first came to Iraq in October 2002 to oppose the US invasion, and it has remained in the country throughout the occupation in solidarity with the Iraqi people. The group has been invaluable in alerting the world to many of the horrors facing Iraqis detained in US-run prisons and detention centers. C.P.T. was among the first to document the torture occurring at the Abu Ghraib prison, long before the story broke in the mainstream press. Its members have spent countless hours interviewing Iraqis about abuse and torture suffered at the hands of US forces and have disseminated this information internationally. Each of the four C.P.T. members being held in Iraq has dedicated his life to resisting the darkness and misery of war and occupation. Convinced that it is not enough to oppose the war from the safety of their homes, they made the difficult decision to go to Iraq, knowing that the climate of mistrust created by foreign occupation meant that they could be mistaken for spies or missionaries. They went there with a simple purpose: to bear witness to injustice and to embody a different kind of relationship between cultures and faiths. Members of C.P.T. willingly undertook the risks of living among Iraqis, in a common neighborhood outside of the infamous Green Zone. They sought no protection from weapons or armed guards, trusting in, and benefiting from, the goodwill of the Iraqi people. Acts of kindness and hospitality from Iraqis were innumerable and ensured the C.P.T. members' safety and wellbeing. We believe that spirit will prevail in the current situation. _____________________________________________________________________ John Murtha says, "Bring the troops home", but Joe Lieberman says "Our Troops Must Stay" Lieberman says we must finish the "mission" Lieberman votes to overturn Supreme Court decision on Guantanamo prisoner rights Enough is Enough Picket Joe Lieberman Monday, December 5 4 p.m. corner Chapel St. and Alston Avenue (two blocks down from Chapel and Forest Rd. Bring banners and signs Joe Lieberman was a key player in getting Congress behind this war Lieberman is out of step with the American people and and out of step with international law Bring the troops home. End torture now! Initial sponsor Middle East Crisis Committee National Call-In Day on Iraq War - Tuesday, Dec. 6 On Tuesday, December 6, Congress will reconvene in Washington, D.C. -- and United for Peace and Justice, in conjunction with Win Without War, is calling for a massive national grassroots call-in day against the war. We have an extraordinary window of opportunity to press our position. The Bush Administration is on the political defensive as never before -- witness Bush's very weak speech today -- and every day calls for immediate withdrawal from Iraq are becoming more widespread. We're excited to be making this call together with Win Without War. As the two largest peace coalitions in the U.S., we have the potential to generate millions of calls to Congress. We need to flood every single Congressional office with phone calls, faxes and email messages urging an immediate end to the war! Senator Joseph Lieberman DC (202) 224-4041 Voice (202) 224-9750 Fax For TTY Call 711 Hartford (860) 549-8463 Voice (800) 225-5605 In CT (860) 549-8478 Fax http://lieberman.senate.gov/contact/ Senator Chris Dodd D.C. Tel. (202) 224-2823 Fax. (202) 228-1683 Wethersfield Tel. (800) 334-5341 (CT only) or (860) 258-6940 http://dodd.senate.gov/webmail/form-opinion.html Rep. John Larson (D-CT-1st) DC Phone: (202) 225-2265 Fax: (202) 225-1031 Hartford Phone: 860-278-8888 E-mail: john.larson at mail.house.gov Congressman Rob Simmons (R-CT-2nd) DC Phone: (202) 225-2076 Fax: (202) 225-4977 Norwich Phone: (860) 886-0139 Fax: (860) 886-2974 Enfield Phone: (860) 741-4053 Fax: (860) 741-4059 http://simmons.house.gov/Contact/ Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT-3rd) DC Phone: (202) 225-3661 Fax: (202) 225-4890 New Haven Phone: 203-562-3718 E-mail: delauro.ct03 at mail.house.gov http://www.house.gov/delauro/ Rep. Christopher Shays (R-CT 4th) DC Phone: 202-225-5541 DC Fax: 202-225-9629 Stamford Voice: 203-357-8277 FAX: 203-357-1050 Bridgeport Voice: 203-579-5870 FAX: 203-579-0771 Email Address: http://www.house.gov/shays/contact/index.htm WWW Homepage: http://www.house.gov/shays/ Rep. Nancy Johnson (R-CT-5th) DC Phone: (202) 225-4476 Fax: (202) 225-4488 New Britain Phone: 860-223-8412 Web: www.house.gov/nancyjohnson/ ================================================================= Have a look at our educational resources: http://al-awdacal.org/resources.html Become one of our donors! Go to: http://al-awda.org/donatenow/ ================================================================= Al-Awda's Website: http://www.al-awda.org ================================================================= Contact your representatives and elected officials: use http://congress.cfl-online.org/ ================================================================= Unless indicated otherwise, all statements posted represent the views of their authors and not necessarily those of Al-Awda, The Palestine Right to Return Coalition. ================================================================= SPONSORED LINKS Human rights Human rights watch Po box United nations Human rights abuses Universal declaration of human rights -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS a.. Visit your group "Al-Awda-Media" on the web. b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: Al-Awda-Media-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From justinemccabe at earthlink.net Mon Dec 5 11:32:13 2005 From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 11:32:13 -0500 Subject: {news} Fw: USGP-INT US pushes limits on ozone destroyer Message-ID: <025001c5f9b9$758fee00$0402a8c0@JUSTINE> >From USGP International Committee's David Schwartzman (DC Greens, on sabbatical in Pisa) Justine McCabe ---- Original Message ----- From: David Schwartzman To: usgp-int at gp-us.org ; Scott McLarty Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 4:33 AM Subject: USGP-INT US pushes limits on ozone destroyer And now for another example of how Imperial USA is contributing to the possibility of global catastrophe. A press release is in order? Ciao, David in rainy Pisa http://www.nature.com/news/2005/051128/full/051128-13.html News Published online: 2 December 2005; | doi:10.1038/news051128-13 US pushes limits on ozone destroyer It seems that methyl bromide cannot be phased out as a pesticide yet. Charlotte Schubert Methyl bromide is widely used as a pesticide on strawberries. ? Getty The United States is spearheading calls for the continued use of methyl bromide as a pesticide. Methyl bromide is the last ozone-depleting chemical remaining in widespread use and it was due to be phased out completely in developed countries this year. Under the terms of the 1987 Montreal Protocol, countries agreed to remove from use several chemicals that attack the ozone layer. But when parties to the treaty meet on 12 December in Dakar, Senegal, delegates will consider a US request to use more than 6,500 tonnes of methyl bromide during 2007. North America uses more of the substance than anywhere in the world, mostly as a pesticide on strawberries, tomatoes and other crops. Other countries, including Australia and Japan, have also asked for exemptions in the past, but the United States has led the pack: its requests for 2005 use are more than all others combined. Under pressure To some, such outsized requests reflect US capitulation to pressure from farming groups and methyl bromide manufacturers. It's the first serious effort to break out of the treaty. David Doniger policy director at the US Natural Resources Defense Council "It's the first serious effort to break out of the treaty," says David Doniger, a policy director at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) in Washington DC. Doniger is heading a lawsuit against the US Environmental Protection Agency for failing to comply with parts of the treaty. But representatives of the farming industry counter that the huge value of the crops, and the efficiency of methyl bromide as a pesticide, means that its continued use is reasonable. "There just are not perfect substitutes at this point," says James Elkins, an atmospheric physicist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in Boulder, Colorado. "But we could use the decrease to help the atmosphere recover and so it's kind of a tug of war." Clearing skies Methyl bromide is particularly damaging, says Elkins. In the stratosphere, it breaks down and releases bromine, which destroys ozone and allows the Sun's ultraviolet rays to penetrate the atmosphere more easily. Bromine is 45 times more damaging than chlorine, which is released from infamous ozone-depleting substances such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). But methyl bromide persists in the atmosphere for only a year, compared with 50-100 years for CFCs. Consumption of methyl bromide has been cut by more than half since 1991, the baseline year for the treaty, and Elkin says that these measures have already had a detectable effect on the atmosphere. Unfair claims This year, US exemption requests went down a few percentage points after negotiation, and they are decreasing overall. But the country is still riling others at the table. "We are very concerned that the playing field is not level between the United States and other parties," says Tom Batchelor, a policy officer at the European Commission in Brussels. He says the United States had requested permission to use more methyl bromide in 2005 than it consumed in 2003, "in effect a phase-in rather than a phase-out." Europe was given permission to use 4400 tonnes of methyl bromide in 2005, but according to Batchelor an internal review got the actual amount used to less than 3,000 tonnes. "We don't see the United States going through the same rigorous evaluation system." Claudia McMurray, the US deputy assistant environment secretary, admits there has been friction. "But the US is getting very good at making its technical case," she adds. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TDayan at aol.com Mon Dec 5 17:07:31 2005 From: TDayan at aol.com (TDayan at aol.com) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 17:07:31 EST Subject: {news} Resignation Message-ID: <2bf.9906a8.30c61423@aol.com> What in the world has happened??? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TDayan at aol.com Mon Dec 5 17:08:31 2005 From: TDayan at aol.com (TDayan at aol.com) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 17:08:31 EST Subject: {news} Resignation Message-ID: <2a0.11d26df.30c6145f@aol.com> Thanks for asking, Charlie - Tom hs been such a devoted GREEN all these years. What has happened to the CT Greens? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From justinemccabe at earthlink.net Wed Dec 7 16:35:05 2005 From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 16:35:05 -0500 Subject: {news} Fw: [CTpeace-activists] Reminder!! Labor Forum this Thursday!! Message-ID: <00da01c5fb76$19273600$0402a8c0@JUSTINE> ----- Original Message ----- From: Chris Gauvreau To: Mike Alewitz ; Emily ((Library)) Chasse ; MichaelK91 at excite.com ; qumsi001 at hotmail.com ; Stan H ; homefront1 at hotmail.com ; ctpeace-activists at yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2005 9:25 AM Subject: [CTpeace-activists] Reminder!! Labor Forum this Thursday!! The Crisis in the Labor Movement and What Can Be Done about It. A Talk by Bill Onasch of Labor Standard Thursday, December 8 7 PM Marcus White Building Living Room, 2nd Floor Central Connecticut State University (For campus map and directions, visit http://www.ccsu.edu) Auto has long been America's most important industry, the main engine of the world's richest economy. Autoworkers set the standard for wages and benefits that once enabled millions of blue-collar workers to pursue the "American Dream." Today auto workers are under attack. General Motors has exacted billions of dollars in concessions from the United Autoworkers. GM's largest parts manufacturer, Delphi, is slashing wages by as much as 50%. Ford and Daimler-Chrysler are expected to follow suit. What is happening in auto will soon embolden the corporations to demand even more from the entire North American workforce. The bosses are not going to be satisfied until the conditions of all North American workers are competitive with those endured by the super-exploited work force of the under-developed world. What will it take to rebuild a fighting, militant labor movement that is up to this challenge? Bill Onasch is a member of United Auto Workers Local 1981, the National Writers Union, as well as a retired member of Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1287. Onasch is the Midwest chapters representative to the Labor Party Interim National Council. He is also an executive board member of US Labor Against the War and the webmaster of Kansas City Labor, www.kclabor.org. [For a glimpse into the issues that will be raised in Bill's talk see www.kclabor.org/crisis_in_auto1.htm and click on analytical articles.] Sponsored by Connecticut Socialist Action, 860-478-5300. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From chapillsbury at igc.org Thu Dec 8 17:42:18 2005 From: chapillsbury at igc.org (Charlie Pillsbury) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2005 17:42:18 -0500 Subject: {news} Fw: JOE LIEBERMAN TO REPLACE RUMSFELD? Message-ID: <00a401c5fc48$a5b8be40$7101a8c0@EXDIR04> this is a fun rumor to spread. it certainly explains why Joe has been so public about his support for the man I like to call "Baghdad Bush" in honor of "Baghdad Bob" who also knew how to paint a rosy picture of the facts on the ground. ----- Original Message ----- From: Global Network To: Global Network Against Weapons Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 1:44 PM Subject: JOE LIEBERMAN TO REPLACE RUMSFELD? Rummy Exit Rumored; Lieberman Eyed for Job By Thomas M. DeFrank and Kenneth R. Bazinet The New York Daily News Thursday 08 December 2005 Washington - White House officials are telling associates they expect Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to quit early next year, once a new government is formed in Iraq, sources said yesterday. Rumsfeld's deputy, Gordon England, is the inside contender to replace him, but there's also speculation that Sen. Joe Lieberman - a Democrat who ran against Bush-Cheney in the 2000 election - might become top guy at the Pentagon. That's not as farfetched as it might first appear. The Daily News has learned that the White House considered Lieberman for the UN ambassador's job last year before giving the post to John Bolton, a Bush adviser said. "He thought about it for a week or so and finally said no," the adviser recalled. A source close to the White House said Rumsfeld wanted out a year ago, after Bush's reelection, but neither he nor President Bush wanted his departure to appear to have been forced. "They didn't want to give the critics the satisfaction that their piling on was what got rid of him," a Bush adviser said. Bush has told friends that Rumsfeld is a political liability, but the President has a history of sticking with his personnel baggage until an opportune moment. "Only Rumsfeld will make Rumsfeld leave," a White House source said. Rumors that Lieberman could replace Rumsfeld started flying early this week, and Bush and Vice President Cheney fanned the flames by quoting the former Democratic veep candidate's pro-war statements. The mention of Lieberman's name prompted some Democrats to whisper that he is lobbying for the job. "Lieberman seems to be coordinating his statements on the war with the White House," a Senate Democratic source said. The source pointed to a news conference this week where Lieberman urged his party not to undermine Bush. The timing of Lieberman's pitch, also this week, to form a bipartisan "war cabinet" to aid Bush was cited as well. But Lieberman and Team Bush dismissed the rumors. "The U.S. Senate is where Sen. Lieberman wants to be, which is why he is actively campaigning for reelection to his fourth term," the senator's spokeswoman, Casey Aden-Wansbury, said. Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space PO Box 652 Brunswick, ME 04011 (207) 729-0517 (207) 319-2017 (Cell phone) globalnet at mindspring.com http://www.space4peace.org http://space4peace.blogspot.com (Our blog) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com Thu Dec 8 18:17:03 2005 From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (David Bedell) Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 23:17:03 +0000 Subject: {news} Burton thanks Blumenthal for Millstone goat talk In-Reply-To: <21a.506f66d.30c9caa6@aol.com> Message-ID: ----Original Message Follows---- From: NancyBurtonEsq at aol.com To: attorney.general at po.state.ct.us CC: justin.kronholm at po.state.ct.us, joseph.rubin at po.state.ct.us,robert.snook at po.state.ct.us, kimberly.massicotte at po.state.ct.us,NancyBurtonEsq at aol.com Subject: Thank you Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2005 12:34:24 EST CONNECTICUT COALITION AGAINST MILLSTONE http://www.mothballmillstone.org December 8, 2005 Dear Mr. Blumenthal: On behalf of the Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone, may I extend a sincere expression of gratitude to you and your staff for meeting with us in your offices yesterday to share information about the high levels of strontium-90 found consistently in goat milk sampled by Millstone Nuclear Power Station agents at 120 Dayton Road in Waterford between the years 1988 and 2004. This information presents clear evidence of a public health emergency existing at 120 Dayton Road - and, surely, nearby locations as well. Nearby locations included homes with young children and the Cohanzie Elementary School at 48 Dayton Road. The public health consequences of the strontium-90 contamination - accompanied by cesium-137 and other deadly radioactive contaminants - are dire. The community surrounding Millstone is suffering from avoidable incidences of cancer and related diseases which are directly associated with Millstone?s routine and ?accidental? releases to the air and water. For children in our community to die because of exposures in utero or in early childhood to toxic radiation emissions from a nuclear power plant which has been permitted to operate for years recklessly and illegally is unconscionable. The Millstone Nuclear Power Station is, in our view, a criminal enterprise that must be stopped. We appeal to you to exercise your statutory authority to obtain judicial relief to stop the Millstone operations as a public nuisance pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes Section 3-125, which provides in pertinent part as follows: "The Attorney General shall have general supervision over all legal matters in which the state is an interested party, except those legal matters over which prosecuting officers have direction. He shall appear for the state, the Governor, the Lieutenant Governor, the Secretary, the Treasurer and the Comptroller, and for all heads of departments and state boards, commissioners, agents, inspectors, committees, auditors, chemists, directors, harbor masters, and institutions and for the State Librarian in all suits and other civil proceedings, except upon criminal recognizances and bail bonds, in which the state is a party or is interested, or in which the official acts and doings of said officers are called in question, and for all members of the state House of Representatives and the state Senate in all suits and other civil proceedings brought against them involving their official acts and doings in the discharge of their duties as legislators, in any court or other tribunal, as the duties of his office require; and all such suits shall be conducted by him or under his direction. "[Emphasis added.] Under this statute, you, as the holder of an elective political office, clearly are authorized to act for ?the state? as a plaintiff. We will be contacting Governor Rell and Commissioner Galvin to serve as prospective additional named plaintiffs. If you will take this necessary action, you will go a long way to make amends for numerous mistakes of the past which we believe are directly responsible for unnecessary and avoidable human pain, suffering and death in our community. These include, to name a few: (1) Your official silence during the ?public auction? of Millstone in proceedings before the Department of Public Utility Control, probably the biggest fraud ever perpetuated in Connecticut; (2) Your official silence during the recent Millstone relicensing proceedings; (3) Your successful ad seriatim motions to quash the subpoenas we issued for former DEP Commissioner Arthur J. Rocque, Jr. to appear to be questioned why he issued ?emergency authorizations? for Millstone pollution otherwise prohibited by a Clean Water Act permit, despite his written acknowledgment that he had no legal authority to do so; (4) Your successful efforts to quash a subpoena we issued to ex-Governor John G. Rowland to appear to be questioned about whether he or his office ?fixed? the recent Dominion application for dry cask storage which enabled Millstone Unit 2 to keep operating and to keep discharging poisons to the air and water; (5) Your partnering with Northeast Utilities to defeat the claims of Millstone whistleblower Clarence O. Reynolds under the state?s Nuclear Whistleblower Act; (6) Your official silence during a comment period before the NRC relieved Dominion?s corporate parent from its obligation as a surety in Millstone decommissioning; (7) Your decision to not participate in New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer's first lawsuit against Dominion to upgrade its global-warming-giant power plant in West Virginia, Mt. Storm. These acts, and others, are not easily forgiven or forgotten. You and your staff are now fully on notice of the public health emergency at 120 Dayton Road in Waterford. We are prepared to assist you and your staff in any way possible to shut down the state's most notorious menace, Millstone. Sincerely, Nancy Burton Please respond to: Nancy Burton 147 Cross Highway Redding Ridge CT 06876 Tel. 203-938-3952 From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com Thu Dec 8 18:19:40 2005 From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (David Bedell) Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 23:19:40 +0000 Subject: {news} Blumenthal Meets With Anti-nuke Coalition In-Reply-To: <99.6c14a957.30c981d6@aol.com> Message-ID: http://www.theday.com/eng/web/news/re.aspx?re=5DFABBF6-A061-46DE-A54D-D12A3F12544F Blumenthal Meets With Anti-nuke Coalition AG says he must consult with DEP before taking action By PATRICIA DADDONA Day Staff Writer, Waterford Published on 12/8/2005 Attorney General Richard Blumenthal and his staff met Wednesday with an anti-nuclear group about the group's concerns that Millstone Power Station is the source of high levels of radioactivity in Waterford. Last month, Gov. M. Jodi Rell asked the state Department of Environmental Protection to analyze data obtained by the Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone which the group believes confirms unhealthy levels of the radioactive isotope Strontium 90 at 120 Dayton Road. The reactor's owners have routinely tested goat's milk at the former farm there. Nancy Burton, the coalition leader, said she discussed legal strategies and a high incidence of cancer in the community with Blumenthal Wednesday, and asked him to sue Dominion Resources, the Millstone owner. Blumenthal would not comment on the substance of the private meeting and said he took no action, but has referred some material to the state Department of Public Health and DEP. DEP's analysis is not finished yet, a spokesman said. ?They presented some very informative data, views, opinions and insights about Millstone and potential contamination from Strontium 90,? Blumenthal said. ?We cannot commit to a lawsuit without discussion of the issues with DEP. We will make a decision when we have all the facts, including more information from this group.? Pete Hyde, spokesman for Dominion, said the company had no comment. ? The Day Publishing Co., 2005 From apbrison at hotmail.com Thu Dec 8 19:51:38 2005 From: apbrison at hotmail.com (allan brison) Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 19:51:38 -0500 Subject: {news} Fw: JOE LIEBERMAN TO REPLACE RUMSFELD? In-Reply-To: <00a401c5fc48$a5b8be40$7101a8c0@EXDIR04> Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kumfry at yahoo.com Thu Dec 8 20:21:43 2005 From: kumfry at yahoo.com (Kenneth Humphrey) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2005 17:21:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: {news} Fw: JOE LIEBERMAN TO REPLACE RUMSFELD? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051209012143.43320.qmail@web32813.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Well, look at it this way, Rumsfeld is a ruthless zilch and Jingo Joe wouldn't be any worse than Rumsfeld. And, here in Ct. we'd be rid of the creepy nonentity that Jingo Joe Lieberman is. We just might end up with a somewhat better senator in D.C. We might even get to hear less of his Elmer Fudd voice which would be a great thing. Ken Humphrey --- allan brison wrote: > Connecticut Green Party - Part of the GPUS > http://www.ctgreens.org/ - > http://www.greenpartyus.org/ > > to unsubscribe click here > mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org --------------------------------- This makes perfect sense. Leiberman is apparently persuing a career path as Secretary of Defense. Bush needs some new blood and to get a Dem would be a real feather in his cap. --------------------------------- From: "Charlie Pillsbury" To: CC: ctgp-news at ml.greens.org Subject: {news} Fw: JOE LIEBERMAN TO REPLACE RUMSFELD? Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2005 17:42:18 -0500 Connecticut Green Party - Part of the GPUS http://www.ctgreens.org/ - http://www.greenpartyus.org/ to unsubscribe click here mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org this is a fun rumor to spread. it certainly explains why Joe has been so public about his support for the man I like to call "Baghdad Bush" in honor of "Baghdad Bob" who also knew how to paint a rosy picture of the facts on the ground. ----- Original Message -----From: Global Network To: Global Network Against Weapons Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 1:44 PM Subject: JOE LIEBERMAN TO REPLACE RUMSFELD? Rummy Exit Rumored; Lieberman Eyed for Job By Thomas M. DeFrank and Kenneth R. Bazinet The New York Daily News Thursday 08 December 2005 Washington - White House officials are telling associates they expect Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to quit early next year, once a new government is formed in Iraq, sources said yesterday. Rumsfeld's deputy, Gordon England, is the inside contender to replace him, but there's also speculation that Sen. Joe Lieberman - a Democrat who ran against Bush-Cheney in the 2000 election - might become top guy at the Pentagon. That's not as farfetched as it might first appear. The Daily News has learned that the White House considered Lieberman for the UN ambassador's job last year before giving the post to John Bolton, a Bush adviser said. "He thought about it for a week or so and finally said no," the adviser recalled. A source close to the White House said Rumsfeld wanted out a year ago, after Bush's reelection, but neither he nor President Bush wanted his departure to appear to have been forced. "They didn't want to give the critics the satisfaction that their piling on was what got rid of him," a Bush adviser said. Bush has told friends that Rumsfeld is a political liability, but the President has a history of sticking with his personnel baggage until an opportune moment. "Only Rumsfeld will make Rumsfeld leave," a White House source said. Rumors that Lieberman could replace Rumsfeld started flying early this week, and Bush and Vice President Cheney fanned the flames by quoting the former Democratic veep candidate's pro-war statements. The mention of Lieberman's name prompted some Democrats to whisper that he is lobbying for the job. "Lieberman seems to be coordinating his statements on the war with the White House," a Senate Democratic source said. The source pointed to a news conference this week where Lieberman urged his party not to undermine Bush. The timing of Lieberman's pitch, also this week, to form a bipartisan "war cabinet" to aid Bush was cited as well. But Lieberman and Team Bush dismissed the rumors. "The U.S. Senate is where Sen. Lieberman wants to be, which is why he is actively campaigning for reelection to his fourth term," the senator's spokeswoman, Casey Aden-Wansbury, said. Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space PO Box 652 Brunswick, ME 04011 (207) 729-0517 (207) 319-2017 (Cell phone) globalnet at mindspring.com http://www.space4peace.org http://space4peace.blogspot.com (Our blog) To be removed please mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org _______________________________________________ CTGP-news mailing list CTGP-news at ml.greens.org http://ml.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/ctgp-news ATTENTION! The information in this transmission is privileged and confidential and intended only for the recipient listed above. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by email and delete the original message. The text of this email is similar to ordinary or face-to-face conversations and does not reflect the level of factual or legal inquiry or analysis which would be applied in the case of a formal legal opinion and does not constitute a representation of the opinions of the CT Green Party. The responsibility for any messages posted herein is solely that of the person who sent the message, and the CT Green Party hereby leaves this responsibility in the hands of it's members. NOTE: This is an inherently insecure forum, please do not post confidential messages and always realize that your address can be faked, and although a message may appear to be from a certain individual, it is always possible that it is fakemail. This is mail sent by a third party under an illegally assumed identity for purposes of coercion, misdirection, or general mischief. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shown. This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information. This information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is intended even if addressed incorrectly. Please delete it from your files if you are not the intended recipient. Thank you for your compliance. To be removed please mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org > To be removed please > mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org > _______________________________________________ > CTGP-news mailing list > CTGP-news at ml.greens.org > http://ml.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/ctgp-news > > ATTENTION! > The information in this transmission is privileged > and confidential and intended only for the recipient > listed above. If you have received this > transmission in error, please notify us immediately > by email and delete the original message. The text > of this email is similar to ordinary or face-to-face > conversations and does not reflect the level of > factual or legal inquiry or analysis which would be > applied in the case of a formal legal opinion and > does not constitute a representation of the opinions > of the CT Green Party. The responsibility for any > messages posted herein is solely that of the person > who sent the message, and the CT Green Party hereby > leaves this responsibility in the hands of it's > members. > > NOTE: This is an inherently insecure forum, please > do not post confidential messages and always realize > that your address can be faked, and although a > message may appear to be from a certain individual, > it is always possible that it is fakemail. This is > mail sent by a third party under an illegally > assumed identity for purposes of coercion, > misdirection, or general mischief. > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this > e-mail in error, please immediately notify the > sender by e-mail at the address shown. This e-mail > transmission may contain confidential information. > This information is intended only for the use of the > individual(s) or entity to whom it is intended even > if addressed incorrectly. Please delete it from > your files if you are not the intended recipient. > Thank you for your compliance. > > To be removed please mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From apbrison at hotmail.com Thu Dec 8 21:59:23 2005 From: apbrison at hotmail.com (allan brison) Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 21:59:23 -0500 Subject: {news} Fw: JOE LIEBERMAN TO REPLACE RUMSFELD? In-Reply-To: <20051209012143.43320.qmail@web32813.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From smderosa at cox.net Fri Dec 9 21:51:09 2005 From: smderosa at cox.net (smderosa) Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 21:51:09 -0500 Subject: {news} FW: C.O.R.D. : March for International Declaration & Community Rights Message-ID: <20051210024946.XFGI8508.eastrmmtao02.cox.net@userb649154f63> C.O.R.D. : March for International Declaration and Community Rights. See details below: Here is the information for the CORD March/Event on Tues. 12/13/05 in New Haven, CT. If you can't make the march, at 5pm, go directly to Cedar and York for the rally, from 6-6:30pm. -------------------------------------------------- 4:30 pm - Career High School cafeteria opens up for marchers to begin gathering 5:00 pm - 5:15 pm March starts 5:45 pm - 6:00 March arrives at hospital corner of Cedar and York 6:30 pm - Rally at Hospital ends Rally at Yale/New Haven Hospital corner of York and Cedar starting at 5:45 PM ending at 6:30 PM ---------------------------------------- The March Route will be: -Ward St to Sylvan -Left on Sylvan 2 blocks to Vernon -Right on Vernon 2 blocks to Congress -Left on Congress 2 blocks to Cedar -Left on Cedar to York --------------------------------------- People who are too infirm or can't make the march because of work commitments should head straight for the corner of Cedar and York. For more info call: Allan 782-6808 THE UNITED STATES SIGNED THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS ON DECEMBER 10, 1948. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights declares: "Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world." Article 23; "(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favorable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment. (2) Everyone, without discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work. (3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favorable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary by other means of social protection. (4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests." Make It Real For New Haven! ONE STRUGGLE: PEACE AND JUSTICE! SUPPORT THE RIGHT TO ORGANIZE! STOP THE WAR ON WORKING PEOPLE AT HOME AND ABROAD! Join The Workers Of New Haven RALLY, MARCH! Sponsored by Community Organized for Responsible Development (CORD) TUESDAY, DECEMBER 13TH 4:30 P.M. CAREER HIGH SCHOOL 140 Legion Avenue New Haven Peace AND Justice U.S. Peace Council ********************************** Greater New Haven Peace Council Information: Greater New Haven Peace Council 203-387-0370; HYPERLINK "mailto:grnhpeacecouncil at sbcglobal.net"grnhpeacecouncil at sbcglobal.net Rally at Yale/New Haven Hospital corner of York and Cedar starting at 5:45 PM endint at 6:30 PM WHAT IS CORD? SEE BELOW: Latest Campaigns: Community Organized for Responsible Development (CORD) HYPERLINK "http://www.ctneweconomy.org/CORD/CORD.jpg" [ HYPERLINK "http://www.ctneweconomy.org/CORD.html#who"What is Cord? | HYPERLINK "http://www.ctneweconomy.org/CORD.html#why"Why do we need CORD? | HYPERLINK "http://www.ctneweconomy.org/CORD.html#what"What can CORD do? | HYPERLINK "http://www.ctneweconomy.org/CORD.html#achievements"CORD Achievements | HYPERLINK "http://www.ctneweconomy.org/JoinCORD.php"Join CORD] What is CORD? Part of an exciting movement that is changing the face of development in many American cities, Community Organized for Responsible Development (CORD) is a city-wide organization of individuals and community groups focusing on the long-term needs of our communities and advocating fair and responsible economic development in the New Haven area. When new developments ? especially those that receive taxpayer subsidies or major land-use approvals ? are planned for our area, we are working to make sure those developments include tangible improvements for the people who live nearby ? improvements such as good jobs with benefits, affordable housing and vital neighborhood and educational services. CORD was founded by CCNE and includes hundreds of Hill residents as members, as well as 22 different local community groups, faith-based organizations and local unions. Why do we need an organization like CORD? Too often, only a few are reaping the benefits of 21st-century global change. Business, government and major institutions engage in a deadly race to the bottom, failing to meet their responsibilities to the broader community and lowering economic, environmental and health standards. Families are left to struggle with declining wages, longer work hours and mounting debt while a few accumulate unprecedented wealth. The growing poverty, homelessness, incarceration, disease and environmental destruction can overwhelm our communities. What can CORD do? No organization, no matter how powerful, is an island unto itself. We are all interconnected. As a coalition of groups ? community, labor, clergy ? working for the betterment of New Haven and its citizens, CORD can bring together the combined energies of its various constituents and focus them on those projects where the overlap between issues such as housing, healthcare, education and economic justice makes clear what is at stake. By focusing our efforts on the development process ? a process that usually excludes the people most affected by it ? CORD can help the people of our city determine their own destiny. One method of doing this is by negotiating HYPERLINK "http://www.ctneweconomy.org/CBA.html"Community Benefit Agreements ? project specific agreements between developers and local community groups and residents that make sure that any new development addresses the needs of the local community. Community benefits agreements have been used to great effect in Los Angeles, winning environmental protections, living wage jobs with the right to organize, creation of affordable housing, funding for parks and for schools, and many other provisions. Any project that must come to the public and ask for special treatment, such as zoning relief, public subsidies, use of public land, tax abatements, or tax-exempt financing is a candidate for a CBA. As new developers come into town, and as existing institutions expand into our neighborhoods, we can fight to insist that they sign such an agreement. By opening up the development process to direct public involvement, we will be able to assure that New Haven?s economic development policies are balanced and represent the interests of all of us. CORD Achievements June-July 2004 CCNE facilitated meetings of over 100 Hill residents to discuss and debate issues that should be included in a Community Benefits Agreement with Yale-New Haven Hospital. Beginning in July, neighborhood residents along with leaders from other neighborhoods, armed with new PDA technology, went door-to-door in the Hill to find out if other residents agree with the issues, how strongly they feel about the issues, and whether or not there are other issues that should be included in a CBA. Over 700 Hill residents have been interviewed. July 2004 In June, our allies on the New Haven Board of Aldermen introduced a resolution ?Encouraging Developers to Enter into Community Benefits Agreements in Order to Enhance the Economic Viability of New Haven.? Despite vigorous opposition by Yale and the New Haven Chamber of Commerce, the New Haven Board of Aldermen passed the resolution unanimously on July 6th. The first major development in the City since the passage of the Aldermanic resolution will be a multi-story Cancer Center at Yale-New Haven Hospital. Across the street, the City, in cooperation with the hospital, will build a parking garage. September 2004 On September 22, the City Plan Commission voted to delay the demolition of Yale-New Haven Hospital's Grace Building, a prerequisite for the development the hospital plans, until it had received approval from the Board of Aldermen. The hospital had attempted to circumvent the board by going to the City Plan Commission, anticipating that the Board of Aldermen will insist on a Community Benefits Agreement. Fall 2004 Residents from other New Haven neighborhoods ? Fair Haven, Dixwell, Newhallville, Westville, and East Rock - are joining CORD. Many have attended meetings and are actively supporting residents of the Hill in this effort to secure the City?s first Community Benefits Agreement. Already, CORD leaders in the Fair Haven neighborhood are discussing a Community Benefits Agreement in relation to a planned river-front development in the neighborhood. December 2005 On December 13, CORD members ratified a HYPERLINK "http://www.ctneweconomy.org/CORD.html"list of demands for a Community Benefits Agreement with Yale New Haven-Hospital over the development of the new Cancer Center. Issues included Affordable Housing, Public Health, Good Jobs, Parking and Traffic, Environment and Open Public Space, along with Youth and Recreation & Education. April 30 2005 CORD and the Urban Design League co-sponsor a Community Planning Workshop in the Hill neighborhood with John Reddick, President of the HYPERLINK "http://www.elizabethbarlowrogers.com/cityscape/cshome.html"Cityscape Institute. Mr. Reddick serves as Director of the Cityscape Program at the Central Park Conservancy and has worked to guide the organization in partnership with communities, government and design professionals in creating improved streetscapes and public space. HYPERLINK "http://www.ctneweconomy.org/CORD/PlanningWorkshop.jpg" -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.13.12/193 - Release Date: 12/6/2005 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.13.13/197 - Release Date: 12/9/2005 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CORD.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 47952 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PlanningWorkshop.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 44530 bytes Desc: not available URL: From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com Sat Dec 10 00:28:52 2005 From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (David Bedell) Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 05:28:52 +0000 Subject: {news} FW: Green candidates (from Audrey Cole) Message-ID: ----Original Message Follows---- From: audreycole at optonline.net Date: December 8, 2005 10:17:50 AM EST To: ctgp-news at ml.greens.org Subject: Green candidates The Connecticut Green Party should not circulate the names of potential candidates without first having a discussion with the persons named. This is especially true of non-Greens. A press release referencing a future discussion with Lowell Weicker as a candidate without speaking with him first is just such an example. Weicker is not Green (look up his positions) but is a strong and untiring advocate for third party candidates. Although I support a push to run a slate of candidates in the next election, I think Greens should focus on getting the state party administrative issues fixed immediately. We have had several important resignations ... and more may come. Candidate have had a difficult enough time with a run without confronting the interparty disputes and tensions and lack of support (which many did not expect.) It is an embarrassment. My suggestion is that we have an immediate election to fill vacant positions. I committed myself to completing an internal audit of the party books over a year ago, and I apologize to members for this having taken so long. We are working hard on it now, and I intend to fulfill that commitment. We have lost some truly wonderful and dedicated people, and now is the time to rebuild the party internally and get re-organized so it will attract those candidates we seek. Audrey Cole NW Chapter From smderosa at cox.net Sat Dec 10 03:28:10 2005 From: smderosa at cox.net (smderosa) Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 03:28:10 -0500 Subject: {news} THE PATRIOT ACT IS UNPATRIOTIC-HELP STOP THE PASSAGE OF THE "COMPROMISE BILL" Message-ID: <20051210082639.YWKM29285.eastrmmtao03.cox.net@userb649154f63> HYPERLINK "http://usbillofrights.org/db4/00307/usbillofrights.org/_uimages/dissentbutt on.jpg" THE PATRIOT ACT IS UNPATRIOTIC. HYPERLINK "mailto:ctgp-news at ml.greens.org" "COMPROMISE PATRIOT BILL" ABOUT TO BE PASSED IS A SELL OUT OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS. CALL YOUR SENATORS(AND OTHER SENATORS)AND DEMAND A FILIBUSTER IN THE SENATE. READ ARTICLES IN THIS E-MAIL FOR LATEST DETAILS. HYPERLINK "http://usbillofrights.org/db4/00307/usbillofrights.org/_uimages/dissentbutt on.jpg" Contact your own members of Congress (HYPERLINK "http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/"http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/), * BORDC updates its home page www.bordc.org, legislation page www.bordc.org/legislation.htm, and articles page www.bordc.org/articles.htm with new information on the progress of this bill. We thank the following organizations, portions of whose action alerts and resources we have used in this and other alerts. Please visit their web sites for more information: Rights Working Group, http://www.rightsworkinggroup.org Human Rights First, http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/ National Immigration Forum, HYPERLINK "http://www.immigrationforum.org/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=663"http://www.im migrationforum.org/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=663 READ THE LATEST NEWS ON THE "PATRIOT ACT": GOP Accepts Deal on Patriot Act Hill to Vote Next Week on Extending Provisions for 4 Years By Charles Babington and Dan Eggen Washington Post Staff Writers Friday, December 9, 2005; A04 Republican negotiators accepted a White House-brokered deal yesterday that clears the way for Congress to vote next week on whether to renew the USA Patriot Act's most controversial provisions for four years, in slightly modified forms. GOP leaders called the development a major breakthrough in a long and contentious debate over whether and how to renew the law, parts of which are set to expire Dec. 31. Since it took effect four years ago, after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the act has made it easier for federal agents to secretly tap phones, obtain library and bank records, and to search the offices or homes of suspected terrorists. But the agreement faces an uncertain future. No Democratic negotiators in the House or Senate embraced the bill that emerged from the conference committee, and a bipartisan group of senators complained that the proposed revisions do too little to protect the civil liberties of innocent Americans. Proponents had hoped for bipartisan support, but said they believe the bill can survive threatened efforts in the Senate to block it. Some warned, however, that the vote could be close. The White House intervened this week to coax House Republican leaders to accept a four-year extension of the law's most controversial provisions, rather than a seven- or 10-year extension, as they had indicated they preferred. The concession was enough to win the endorsement of Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), but not of the Democrats on his panel. Specter called the measure "not a perfect bill, but a good bill." But three Senate Democrats and three Republicans issued a statement saying they are "gravely disappointed" that Specter and others agreed during House-Senate negotiations to drop "modest protections for civil liberties" that were included in a version the Senate passed unanimously this year. They predicted the Senate will reject the compromise bill. The six were Republican Sens. Larry E. Craig (Idaho), John E. Sununu (N.H.) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), and Democrats Richard J. Durbin (Ill.), Ken Salazar (Colo.) and Russell Feingold (Wis.). Feingold vowed to launch a filibuster, which would scuttle extension of the Patriot Act unless 60 of the 100 senators oppose his effort. Some Republicans said Democrats would be foolhardy to block an "anti-terrorism" bill on the eve of an election year. Also criticizing the bill yesterday were Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.); Patrick J. Leahy (Vt.), the Judiciary Committee's ranking Democrat; and Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.). The compromise bill would slightly change the provisions that allow FBI to obtain people's business records, including library records. Investigators would have to provide a judge with a "statement of facts" showing "reasonable grounds" to believe the records are relevant to an anti-terrorism investigation. Another provision governs "national security letters," which are used by the FBI to demand customer records from businesses such as telephone companies, Internet providers and libraries. Recipients of such letters are required to keep the requests secret. The new legislation would explicitly give businesses that receive such letters the right to challenge them in court, but critics say the process is set up in such a way that the government will nearly always prevail. There is also no provision for notifying the individual whose records are being targeted. As part of the compromise, lawmakers dropped a provision that would have made it a crime punishable by a year in prison to disclose receipt of a national security letter. But the deal retains a five-year prison term if the disclosure is aimed at obstructing an investigation. Leahy and others strongly oppose provisions instructing judges to presume that federal agents should obtain records unless the targeted person can show that the government acted in bad faith. Kennedy called the targeted person's opportunity to challenge a search "arguably worse than nothing." The Washington Post reported last month that the FBI issues more than 30,000 national security letters a year, a hundred-fold increase over historic norms. The Justice Department disputed the report but has refused to provide its own tally. The revised law also would allow agents to surreptitiously search a person's home or business without telling the person for 30 days. The Senate bill called for a seven-day limit on such "sneak and peek" powers; the House version allowed 180 days. Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales called the compromise bill a "win for the American people." The American Civil Liberties Union condemned the agreement, arguing that it will continue to allow the FBI to obtain "a huge array of extremely private records of innocent Americans" with little oversight or limitation. ? 2005 The Washington Post Co ALSO THIS ARTICLE: Finally, Congress Stands Up By David Broder Sunday, December 4, 2005; WASHINGTON POST B07 When Lindsey Graham and John Sununu joined the ranks of Republican senators, the last thing the White House expected was that they would start challenging administration policies on national security. Graham, 50, came to the Senate in 2002 after a career as an Air Force officer and lawyer and as a member, for eight years, of the House, where his most notable service was on the team pressing impeachment charges against Bill Clinton. Sununu, who is 41, also won his first term in 2002, after six years in the House. An engineer by training, he learned politics from his father and namesake, who served as governor of New Hampshire and later as chief of staff to the first President Bush. Both of them had shown early streaks of independence. Graham led an abortive conservative rebellion against House Speaker Newt Gingrich and supported John McCain over George Bush in the 2000 South Carolina primary. Sununu challenged and defeated incumbent Republican Sen. Bob Smith in a hard-fought primary before beating Democratic Gov. Jeanne Shaheen in the general election. Graham and Sununu have been supportive of most Bush policies, but their current objections illustrate the way in which some of the president's anti-terrorism methods have caused grave concerns among libertarian conservatives. Sununu has taken the lead in a group of senators pressing for changes in the Patriot Act, the legislation expanding FBI powers that the administration rushed through Congress after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Many of the changes they wanted were made in the Senate bill, but administration objections have stymied their acceptance in a House-Senate conference. Sununu and the others, who range from senators as conservative as Larry Craig of Idaho to those as liberal as Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and Dick Durbin of Illinois, have threatened a filibuster to force further negotiations. What Graham, Sununu and their brethren are looking for is specific and significant: a requirement that the government convince a judge that a search of records has a direct connection, not just vague "relevance," to a suspected terrorist; a right of judicial appeal to challenge gag orders on such searches; a requirement that targets of "sneak-and-peek" searches be notified within seven days of their occurrence; and a four-year "sunset" clause for these special powers. Sununu and his allies have been discussing these points with the Justice Department and the White House for two years. What is frustrating, he told me in an interview, "is that they will not debate these specific changes; they respond only with sweeping generalizations that we need to reauthorize the Patriot Act. That's not good enough." For Graham, the issue is the treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay and other (still secret) overseas facilities. Like 89 other senators, he supported McCain's legislation barring the use of torture or the extreme measures publicized at Abu Ghraib. When Vice President Cheney lobbied the House to kill the McCain restriction, Graham jumped in to offer additional leverage to the administration's critics. He first framed an amendment -- welcomed by the White House -- to bar enemy combatants held at Guantanamo Bay from taking their cases into U.S. courts, then enlisted liberal Democratic Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan and conservative Republican Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona in a bipartisan resolution to provide automatic judicial review of all military trial sentences of at least 10 years. The resulting compromise gained 84 votes and, Graham told me, sends a strong message to the House that both the McCain language and this compromise must be included in the final legislation -- the White House notwithstanding. What came through most clearly to me, in talking with both senators, was their sense that Congress as an institution must assert itself and take responsibility for setting policy on these national security issues. For too long, they both said, it has been too easy to say -- or imply -- that it's the president's job alone to decide how to protect the nation's safety and vital interests. That complacent attitude may have been tolerable during the false lull after the end of the Cold War, but it cannot be accepted during a time of war and continuing terrorist threats. Last month the Senate asserted itself by passing a meaningful, bipartisan declaration that 2006 must be a "year of transition" in which Iraqis take over major responsibility for the security and stability of their own country. That younger senators such as Graham and Sununu are organizing bipartisan coalitions on such corollary national security issues as the Patriot Act and treatment of detainees is good news for the country. It is time for a similar effort in the House. davidbroder at washpost.com http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/02/AR2005120201 749.html ? 2005 The Washington Post Company ###As of December 2005: Resolutions have been passed in 399 communities in 43 states including seven state-wide resolutions. These communities represent approximately 62 million people who oppose sections of the USA PATRIOT Act. See the US map of communities at: http://action.aclu.org/reformthepatriotact/resolutions.html ######################################################### Citizens who dissent. It was revealed that the FBI has been collecting information on antiwar demonstrators. Its October 15, 2003 memo asks local law enforcement to report activities they consider "suspicious" to the FBI's counterterrorism units. The FBI's listing of what constitutes "suspicious" shows how subjective that word can be: rehearsing for demonstrations, raising money via the Internet, and acquiring gas masks in case tear gas is used. Police in some cities may consider the mere act of demonstrating against a war to be suspicious. Clearly the announcement that "the FBI is watching" is meant to discourage dissent, especially from noncitizens and the whole families, including families of the military, who have been participating in the demonstrations against the Iraq War. This Administration has used fear to increase its power. We must not let them use fear to silence dissent. Assure your community members of their First Amendment right to free speech and to petition the government for redress of grievances. Accuracy and Disinformation. The Patriot Act has been unjustly blamed for a multitude of transgressions. While it is understandable that the misnamed act would come in for substantial criticism, it is important that those of us who explain threats to civil liberties distinguish between the Patriot Act and the host of other regulations the government has been using. As the Department of Justice's policies and claims face increased scrutiny from throughout the political spectrum, the department increasingly tries to discredit its detractors by claiming that they are "spreading disinformation." Here is an example: Section 215 vs. national security letters. In July of 2002, the Justice Department claimed that it could not comply with the Section 215 requirement to provide the House and Senate Judiciary Committees a semi-annual report of the total number of times it had used Section 215 of the Patriot Act: That information was "classified." This fall, under pressure from librarians and booksellers, Attorney General Ashcroft reported that the number of times was "Zero," and that librarians were simply "hysterical." We know librarians are not hysterical, so what gives? To obtain records using Patriot Act Section 215, the FBI would need to obtain a warrant from a secret FISA court. The FBI has avoided this necessity by issuing "national security letters," which require neither a warrant nor a report to Congress. In fact, last week Congress expanded the types of businesses subject to national security letter searches. The list now includes casinos, travel agents, car dealers, the U.S. Post Office, and others. As is the case with Section 215, the FBI may impose a gag order on the person from whom it requests the information. Section 412 vs. immigration laws. Section 412 of the Patriot Act states that "the Attorney General shall place an alien detained under paragraph (1) in removal proceedings, or shall charge the alien with a criminal offense, not later than 7 days after the commencement of such detention. If the requirement of the preceding sentence is not satisfied, the Attorney General shall release the alien." To avoid the 7-day time limit, the Justice Department has used immigration law to detain and deport immigrants. Immigration law offers fewer protections from abuse than U.S. criminal law. Sorting out "doublespeak." It is in the Department of Justice's interest to prove that its laws and policies are working and that stronger laws would provide better protection from terrorism. But listen carefully to claims such as these, and be prepared to refute them: "The U.S. has deported 515 individuals linked to the September 11 investigation." (Attorney General John Ashcroft, June 5, 2003 prepared testimony presented to U.S. House Judiciary Committee) These individuals are surely among the thousands who were rounded up after September 11 on the basis of racial and ethnic profiling. Before they were deported or released, the Attorney General ensured they had no ties to terror. "In its 94-year history, the FBI has been the tireless protector of civil rights and civil liberties for all Americans." (Attorney General John Ashcroft, May 30, 2002) Between the organization's birth during the Palmer Raids and its current activities were the FBI's infamous COINTELPRO programs and its involvement in HUAC. "I would say the Patriot Act is effective because we have not had another attack this year." (Mark Corallo in Julia Scheeres, "How Changed Laws Changed U.S.," Wired News, September 11, 2002) If that is so, then what protected us from similar attacks previously? -- To help you counteract some of the Justice Department's misleading claims, CDT's Jim Dempsey and Lara Flynt have prepared a helpful analysis called Setting the Record Straight: An Analysis of the Justice Department's PATRIOT Act Website. HYPERLINK "http://usbillofrights.org/wsn/images/user/english/pl_template11/wood/break_ center.gif" HYPERLINK "http://usbillofrights.org/db4/00307/usbillofrights.org/_uimages/dissentbutt on.jpg" -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.13.13/197 - Release Date: 12/9/2005 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: dissentbutton.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 11269 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: break_center.gif Type: image/gif Size: 603 bytes Desc: not available URL: From smderosa at cox.net Sun Dec 11 02:57:42 2005 From: smderosa at cox.net (smderosa) Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 02:57:42 -0500 Subject: {news} EC Meeting Mon. 12/12/05 Greater Hartford Green Party office 7:15PM Message-ID: <20051211075518.GXUQ15471.eastrmmtao02.cox.net@userb649154f63> The Executive Committee Meeting of the Green Party of CT will take place on Monday, 12/12/05 at the Greater Hartford Green Party office(418A New Britain Ave. Hartford, CT HYPERLINK "http://www.mapquest.com"www.mapquest.com for Directions) from 7:15PM-9:15PM. We will be creating the agenda for Dec. meeting of the SCC and will discussing other matters related to this meeting. All are welcome. Sincerely, Mike DeRosa co-chair GPCT -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.13.13/197 - Release Date: 12/9/2005 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From greenpartyct at yahoo.com Sun Dec 11 14:35:35 2005 From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT) Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 11:35:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: {news} FW: Green candidates (from Audrey Cole) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051211193535.71732.qmail@web81411.mail.mud.yahoo.com> The rough draft press release about TALKING with weicker was never sent out and was to get input. Any true anit- war candidate who is an Independant MIGHT be worthy talking , and just mean talking to..not endorsing them he could win.. and that would be scary.. but doing what is best for the Greens is my goal. David Bedell wrote: Connecticut Green Party - Part of the GPUS http://www.ctgreens.org/ - http://www.greenpartyus.org/ to unsubscribe click here mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org ----Original Message Follows---- From: audreycole at optonline.net Date: December 8, 2005 10:17:50 AM EST To: ctgp-news at ml.greens.org Subject: Green candidates The Connecticut Green Party should not circulate the names of potential candidates without first having a discussion with the persons named. This is especially true of non-Greens. A press release referencing a future discussion with Lowell Weicker as a candidate without speaking with him first is just such an example. Weicker is not Green (look up his positions) but is a strong and untiring advocate for third party candidates. Although I support a push to run a slate of candidates in the next election, I think Greens should focus on getting the state party administrative issues fixed immediately. We have had several important resignations ... and more may come. Candidate have had a difficult enough time with a run without confronting the interparty disputes and tensions and lack of support (which many did not expect.) It is an embarrassment. My suggestion is that we have an immediate election to fill vacant positions. I committed myself to completing an internal audit of the party books over a year ago, and I apologize to members for this having taken so long. We are working hard on it now, and I intend to fulfill that commitment. We have lost some truly wonderful and dedicated people, and now is the time to rebuild the party internally and get re-organized so it will attract those candidates we seek. Audrey Cole NW Chapter To be removed please mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org _______________________________________________ CTGP-news mailing list CTGP-news at ml.greens.org http://ml.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/ctgp-news ATTENTION! The information in this transmission is privileged and confidential and intended only for the recipient listed above. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by email and delete the original message. The text of this email is similar to ordinary or face-to-face conversations and does not reflect the level of factual or legal inquiry or analysis which would be applied in the case of a formal legal opinion and does not constitute a representation of the opinions of the CT Green Party. The responsibility for any messages posted herein is solely that of the person who sent the message, and the CT Green Party hereby leaves this responsibility in the hands of it's members. NOTE: This is an inherently insecure forum, please do not post confidential messages and always realize that your address can be faked, and although a message may appear to be from a certain individual, it is always possible that it is fakemail. This is mail sent by a third party under an illegally assumed identity for purposes of coercion, misdirection, or general mischief. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shown. This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information. This information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is intended even if addressed incorrectly. Please delete it from your files if you are not the intended recipient. Thank you for your compliance. To be removed please mailto://ctgp-news-unsubscribe at ml.greens.org =========================================================== THE GREEN PARTY OF CONNECTICUT is the third largest political party in CT. The Greens are also the third largest political party in the US, with 220 Greens officeholders in 27 states. Over 80 countries in world have Green Parties. Wangari Maathai, the 2004 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, is Kenya's assistant minister for environment and an elected Green Party member. =========================================================== National Committee member from Connecticut: Tim McKee (860) 324-1684 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amderr01 at gmail.com Mon Dec 12 08:46:28 2005 From: amderr01 at gmail.com (Andy Derr) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 08:46:28 -0500 Subject: {news} New e-mail address Message-ID: Hello, folks. I have a new e-mail address- please change your address books, because the old one doesn't work any more. The new address is amderr01 at gmail.com Andy Derr, New London Greens -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From justinemccabe at earthlink.net Mon Dec 12 11:14:39 2005 From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 11:14:39 -0500 Subject: {news} LRB, Ilan Pappe, "The Disappointing Trajectory of Amir Peretz" Message-ID: <007e01c5ff37$292b12a0$0402a8c0@JUSTINE> Dear all, In this article about newly-elected Israeli Labor Party leader Amir Peretz, Jewish-Israeli historian Ilan Pappe continues to see no hope for I-P peace without international pressure in the form of a boycott/divestment movement. As you all know, the GPUS just passed a resolution in support of such a boycott/divestment strategy for peace. Justine McCabe ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.lrb.co.uk/v27/n24/print/papp01_.html LRB | Vol. 27 No. 24 dated 15 December 2005 | Ilan Pappe The Disappointing Trajectory of Amir Peretz Ilan Pappe In 1977 Menachem Begin, then head of the Likud, created a revolution and removed the Labour Party from power. Begin's was a social revolution, based on promises of social change and on giving the working class, which the Labour Party had alienated, a sense of belonging. Begin carried out a social revolution, but used the 'train ticket' he received from the people to travel to the Occupied Territories. I would like to be the Menachem Begin of the Labour Party, to give it back its social values and the support of the people. If the people give me the same 'train ticket' they once gave Begin, I intend to travel with it towards peace. Amir Peretz, interview with labourstart.org, November 2005 When you drive south from Tel Aviv towards the Negev, the landscape becomes progressively more arid, the human surroundings progressively more impoverished. There is some reasonable housing - isolated kibbutzim or other forms of collective settlement - and here and there a prosperous bit of suburbia; but mostly it is a depressing journey, not alleviated by the 'development towns', Israel's answer to Ebenezer Howard's 'garden cities': ugly, uniform buildings, five to ten storeys high, reminiscent of housing estates in the former Soviet bloc, put up in haste to accommodate the influx of Arab Jewish immigrants languishing in the Maabort, the unbearable transition camps which received them on their arrival in Israel. Some communities - the Iraqi Jews, for example - made it to more affluent areas, but the North Africans were not among the more fortunate and in the 1950s most of them settled in these towns. Life in the region was and still is very difficult. The main problem is the local economy, which is wholly dependent on a very few factories: sweatshops connected to the food and textile industries, sometimes to the military complex. This is where Israel's most underprivileged Jews work. Statistics for the mid-1990s show that half the local population earns the minimum wage, a third lives below the poverty line, and nearly 50 per cent of high-school leavers fail to matriculate. These were the people responsible for the Likud victory in 1977 and for the success of Shas, the ultra-Orthodox party, in the 1990s. Amir Peretz arrived in one such development town, Sderot, a few miles away from the Gaza Strip, as a young child from the town of Bojad in Morocco, where he was born Armand Peretz in 1952. Until 1983, when he was elected head of the local council, his story was fairly typical: he worked as an unskilled labourer in a nearby kibbutz, served in the army and was badly wounded in the 1973 war. Confined to a wheelchair for a time, he managed - with great difficulty - a farm in a nearby moshav, until he left the hard scrabble behind: first for university and then for politics. Most of his peers who chose politics as a way out of their predicament ended up in the Likud; he opted for Labour, and - what was extraordinary - Labour's left wing. He first came to public prominence in 1988, as a member of the Eight - a left-wing group within the Knesset, headed by Yossi Beilin, which advocated a full Israeli withdrawal from the Occupied Territories and a two-state solution. Peretz was a dream come true for the Ashkenazi-dominated Labour Party: to have within its highest ranks a 'Moroccan' who held such views was in those days almost unthinkable. Since then, Peretz, like the other members of the Eight, has become more 'pragmatic' - as we say in Israel - in an attempt to shift Israel's Zionist politics towards the centre. In the 1990s, he chose the trade union congress, the Histadrut, as his main political arena and route to the top. In 1995 he became its chairman and in that capacity did nothing to limit the organisation's extensive involvement in the occupation: in areas directly or indirectly controlled by Israel, the Histadrut granted the settlers union rights while denying them to Palestinians; as for Palestinian workers in industrial plants within the border zones (areas inside the Palestinian Territories under direct Israeli control), it ignored their situation entirely despite their having no basic human or workers' rights. Like the other members of the Eight, Peretz has tempered his early support for a two-state solution, preferring the narrow Israeli interpretation of the Oslo Accords and, later, the Camp David summit and the Geneva programme. This means consenting to a Palestinian state in control of the Gaza Strip and those parts of the West Bank where Jews are not densely settled (thereby allowing Israel to annex Greater Jerusalem and the large settlement blocs). The solution also negates the Palestinian right of return and any significant Palestinian presence in Jerusalem; it doesn't recognise the need to allow the Palestinians full sovereignty in economic, diplomatic and military affairs. It is a recipe for peace that even the fragile Arafat had to decline and one that is likely to be rejected by Abu Mazen. Still, a cool-headed assessment of Peretz's politics should not preclude the kind of hope that attended Yitzhak Rabin's second term as prime minister, when he joined the peace camp, despite his previously brutal policies in the Occupied Territories. Peretz's election as leader of the Labour Party on 10 November was certainly well received in neighbouring Arab countries, the Syrian government beating the others to be the first to welcome the new leader. But then Damascus is presently under such pressure that it may be a waste of time trying to assess how genuine this response is, or whether it was born of a real understanding of the Israeli political scene. It does, however, indicate what hopes attach to his election. Soon similarly positive noises were heard from other Arab capitals, the Palestinian Authority and Palestinian members of the Israeli parliament. Even if Peretz were to become prime minister, there is no overlooking the fact that his point of departure is the old Zionist programme. Unless we can be sure that the Palestinian struggle has come to an end, with the Palestinians conceding defeat, it is difficult to see how the posture he has adopted can produce results that differ in any way from those produced by previous similar initiatives. But Peretz is unlikely to be the next prime minister of Israel. The polls predict that Ariel Sharon's new venture, Kadima ('Forward'), will have many more seats than Peretz's Labour Party. The two could, and probably would, form a coalition government, if the centrist Shinui Party joined them and a few religious and several left-leaning and Palestinian groups gave them their tacit support. But no less likely is a scenario in which Sharon aligns himself with right-wing parties with whom he can agree on continuing a restricted evacuation of isolated settlements in the West Bank so as to keep Israel in the convenient position in which it now finds itself: prolonging an occupation that gets more oppressive by the day while pretending to be deeply engaged in a peace process. Peretz could be an asset in this context, but he isn't essential to it. In fact, the honeymoon may be over even sooner. In 2002 we were in a similar position. The Labour Party had elected Amram Mitzna as leader. He came from a different background: he was a German Jewish former general whom everyone had expected to hold peacenik views. But he ran and won on a platform similar to Peretz's: a train ticket out of the territories. He was eaten alive by senior party members one year into the second intifada, before he could even test his ability to challenge Ariel Sharon. Peretz, who has the Histadrut behind him and is a much more experienced politician, is in a stronger position. There is a chance he may survive the onslaught that has already begun. But will there be much of a Labour Party left to lead? It's too early to say. Some of its senior members are likely to join Sharon's party: Shimon Peres already has. Either way we shouldn't lose sight of the main picture. Between the unlikely, best-case scenario - a left-wing government ready to implement the Geneva Accord - and a likely worst-case scenario, another Sharon government, there is not much difference from the Palestinians' point of view. Or, indeed, from the point of view of anyone committed to peace and reconciliation in Israel and Palestine. I also doubt whether the people of Sderot have much ground for hope. Unemployment is rising, the factories have moved to Egypt and Jordan, the educational system is failing, and there is no protection from the Qassam missiles that Hamas in its wrath rains down on them. At best, Peretz will pepper his social and economic policies with welfare initiatives, or at least with a lot of politically correct jargon, while allowing the extreme free market economy to keep Sderot - along with many other Israelis, Palestinians and North African Jews - at the bottom of the local economy. Israel needs a greater revolution than the election of Amir Peretz. The peace initiatives - or at any rate their short-term goals - have not changed since Israel occupied the territories in 1967. What is new is the growing realisation among grass-roots organisations worldwide, led by the hundreds of NGOs which now constitute Palestinian civil society, that previous methods to bring peace have failed. Diplomatic efforts have led nowhere and have inadvertently allowed the Israelis to widen the occupation and introduce even more oppressive and cruel mechanisms of control, intimidation and dispossession. Palestinian armed struggle has also failed to produce any tangible results and its victims are not only Israelis but large sections of Palestinian society. Only one option remains: strong international pressure, of the kind that was directed against apartheid South Africa in the form of sanctions, boycotts and disinvestments. It is in illusionary moments like this - with Peretz portrayed as the bright new star - that committed people suddenly stop thinking, pinning their hopes once more on diplomacy and on the ability of Israeli Jewish society to provide the kind of change from within that might end the occupation. The illusion won't last: all those Israelis who, at great risk to their lives, protest against the apartheid wall, who monitor the roadblocks, who refuse to serve in the army of occupation but instead do everything they can to help the Palestinians living under the yoke of occupation, need a change more significant than any Amir Peretz will bring. And so do the Palestinians, who have not only endured one of the longest and harshest occupations of modern times but have suffered false promises of liberation whenever a leader supposedly committed to peace has emerged in Israel only to show himself committed to Zionism in such a way as to preclude any meaningful chance of solving the conflict. It is heartwarming to see a Moroccan Jew reach the higher echelons of power and commit himself to a 'train ticket' out of the territories. But Peretz's mention of Menachem Begin is not accidental. The aim is not justice or peace, but to rid Israel of the Occupied Territories. If this is the goal there is no need for peace. In order to sustain a Jewish majority and Jewish supremacy, there is no need for a continuing military occupation of most of the territories - as even Ariel Sharon recognises - since these areas will be cordoned off behind Israeli fences and walls. To talk about replacing direct occupation with a form of life imprisonment is not, after all, to talk about peace, even if the person doing the talking is a genuine representative of the underprivileged class of Arab Jews. Still, there may be something positive to come out of Peretz's election. He is the unlikely product of an education system that failed to provide school leavers with a chance of holding their own in the Israeli economy while implanting in their minds the need to de-Arabise: to forget - indeed, to wrench themselves from - their Arab roots. They learned that the way to integrate yourself into Israeli Jewish society was to adopt strong anti-Arab and, more particularly, anti-Palestinian positions. This is why towns like Sderot were built near the unstable and quite often violent borders of Israel. It is easier to feel hatred or animosity when you live in constant danger of being shelled or attacked. Amir Peretz has shown that you can make it from Sderot to the top by adopting leftist Zionist views. His prospective policies are not enough to change anything, but perhaps the next generation of Moroccan Jews will produce a leader capable of going one step further in liberating himself or herself from anti-Arab Orientalist ideologies of superiority - and, in so doing, influence the thinking of Israeli society as a whole. It ought to be possible for outlooks to change. After all, 99 per cent of the inhabitants of Sderot and places like it are not candidates for the premiership; nor are they likely to find jobs, proper housing or education, or peace of mind. They are victims of Zionism as much as the Palestinians are. Let us hope that a sense of shared victimhood will one day provide a joint leadership and a genuine road map or train ticket out of our misery here in Israel and in Palestine. 2 December Ilan Pappe's most recent books are A History of Modern Palestine and The Modern Middle East. He teaches at the University of Haifa. copyright ? LRB Ltd, 1997-2005 HOME | SUBSCRIBE | LOGIN | CONTACTS | SEARCH | SITE MAP 12 December 2005 terms and conditions | privacy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: spacer.gif Type: image/gif Size: 43 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: lrb_logo_mini.gif Type: image/gif Size: 1201 bytes Desc: not available URL: From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com Mon Dec 12 20:03:14 2005 From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (David Bedell) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 01:03:14 +0000 Subject: {news} DeStefano & Malloy on marriage equality In-Reply-To: <1134434634.40.86349.m27@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: Here's one less issue we need to fight them about! David --- In CTLavenderGreens at yahoogroups.com, "Ron" wrote: On Sunday, December 4, Democratic Gubernatorial candidates John DeStefano and Dan Malloy appeared on the public affairs television show, Face the State, and made public statements in support of marriage equality for same-sex couples. This important development in the campaign for the governor's office is a watershed moment for our movement. With both Democratic candidates supporting marriage equality, they have effectively made it a non-issue in their primary race. We anticipate their strong stand on the issue to transcend party lines and have more far-reaching effects within the legislature. Please take one moment to thank both candidates for their strong leadership. ALSO, please forward this email to your friends and family! http://www.lmfct.org/site/R?i=UuFombIf2zuDVixwkbT1Cg.. Here is a transcript of their interview on Face the State: Question: Would you be in favor of legalizing gay marriage? DeStefano: Yes, absolutely. Because in Connecticut our laws convey legal rights that are not otherwise available unless you are married. And it seems to me that you shouldn't deny rights to our citizens based on their gender, sexual preference, race, or anything else. Malloy: I said this long ago, that we need to treat all of our citizens equally and fairly... First step, civil unions. Ultimately allowing people to express themselves through marriage, if and when that passes the legislature. Let me assure you I will sign that legislation. I believe this is a civil rights movement. I believe that this state leads the rest of the nation in moving in that direction... I have fought side by side with advocates, I will continue to do that and I look forward to signing this bill. ***This is not an endorsement of a gubernatorial candidate on the part of Love Makes a Family. ======== Love Makes A Family (LMF) is a statewide coalition of organizations and individuals working for equal marriage rights for same-sex couples in Connecticut. We carry out our mission through community education, grassroots organizing, and legislative advocacy and lobbying. http://www.lmfct.org --- End forwarded message --- From greenpartyct at yahoo.com Tue Dec 13 07:51:06 2005 From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 04:51:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: {news} (Courant) a Furtive, Last Minute, Back Room Deal (Campaign Finance Reform) Message-ID: <20051213125106.34380.qmail@web81403.mail.mud.yahoo.com> A Furtive, Last-Minute, Backroom Deal ADVERTISERS --------------------------------- Advertise on ctnow -->Andrew W. Roraback December 13 2005 The campaign finance reform law falls far short of the mark. The legislation contains a cleverly drafted loophole that will enable special-interest money to flow unimpeded, even to those who avail themselves of public dollars to finance their campaigns. This loophole was added at the last minute by legislative leaders whose power will be greatly enhanced by it. When Senate Democratic leaders held a news conference Nov. 28 to announce what was described as the strongest campaign finance reforms in the nation, the bill had not even been drafted. But a document handed out at that news conference promised that the bill would allow political parties and legislative leaders to provide "limited in-kind services to participating candidates based upon the Maine and Arizona models." When I first saw the 120-page reform bill, I found that the "limited in-kind services" provision allowed political action committees controlled by legislative leaders to make unlimited expenditures - of special-interest dollars - to publicly financed candidates. This money can be spent for virtually any purpose, including radio and TV ads, political consultants and mailings. I was deeply disappointed to learn of this loophole - apparently a backroom deal. To compound the problem, when these expenditures are made for one "clean" candidate, there is no requirement that the opposing "clean" candidate be provided with a like amount to keep the process fair. Before voting on the bill, I telephoned the directors of both the Maine and Arizona clean-election programs. They said no such leadership PAC loophole existed in their states and for good reason. Such a provision would only protect incumbents and helps legislative leaders build and keep their dynasties - which would fuel cynicism, stifle dissent and erode confidence. Then there is the lobbyist problem. I have for many years promoted bills to prohibit campaign contributions from lobbyists, corporations and other special interests. All four of us Republicans and eight Democrats on the Campaign Finance Reform Working Group unanimously recommended banning lobbyist contributions immediately. Sadly, legislative leaders rejected this recommendation. Their bill will allow candidates to accept money from lobbyists until Dec. 31, 2006. So there will be a frenzied chase for special-interest dollars that will not end until two months after the 2006 election. I have for more than 10 years, as an elected official, been showered with contributions from lobbyists and business and labor organizations - without asking anything of them or from them. Nothing has convinced me more clearly that our system is broken than my receipt of nearly $10,000 from these special interests totally unsolicited. Many of the organizations offering these contributions were groups I had never even heard of. All of the checks have been returned to sender. Finally, it is ironic that a campaign finance reform bill will make it substantially more difficult for Green Party, Libertarian and other third-party candidates to access public funds readily available to major party candidates. Republicans and Democrats have, with this bill, protected their positions of power. The integrity of this system should know no compromise. I have already introduced legislation to correct the substantial flaws in this bill. Let's encourage legislative leadership to reconsider the furtive, last-minute backroom changes to the legislation that was supposed to make all in Connecticut proud. Sen. Andrew W. Roraback, R-Goshen, was a member of the bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Working Group convened this past summer by the General Assembly at the governor's behest. Copyright 2005, Hartford Courant =========================================================== THE GREEN PARTY OF CONNECTICUT is the third largest political party in CT. The Greens are also the third largest political party in the US, with 220 Greens officeholders in 27 states. Over 80 countries in world have Green Parties. Wangari Maathai, the 2004 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, is Kenya's assistant minister for environment and an elected Green Party member. =========================================================== National Committee member from Connecticut: Tim McKee (860) 324-1684 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From justinemccabe at earthlink.net Tue Dec 13 11:46:29 2005 From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 11:46:29 -0500 Subject: {news} Fw: USGP-INT Austrian Greens : "Strip Arnold's citizenship, rename stadium" Message-ID: <01ca01c60004$c78c7ce0$0402a8c0@JUSTINE> Austrian Greens : "Strip Arnold's citizenship, rename stad ----- Original Message ----- From: Tony Affigne To: usgp-int at gp-us.org Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 10:46 AM Subject: USGP-INT Austrian Greens : "Strip Arnold's citizenship, rename stadium" EUROPEANS OUTRAGED AT SCHWARZENEGGER Dec 13, 9:54 AM (ET) By VANESSA GERA VIENNA, Austria (AP) - California's execution of Stanley Tookie Williams on Tuesday outraged many in Europe who regard the practice as barbaric, and politicians in Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's native Austria called for his name to be removed from a sports stadium in his hometown. At the Vatican, Pope Benedict XVI's top official for justice matters denounced the death penalty for going against redemption and human dignity. "We know the death penalty doesn't resolve anything," Cardinal Renato Martino told AP Television News. "Even a criminal is worthy of respect because he is a human being. The death penalty is a negation of human dignity." Capital punishment is illegal throughout the European Union, and many Europeans consider state-sponsored executions to be barbaric. Those feelings were amplified in the case of Williams, due to the apparent remorse they believe the Crips gang co-founder showed by writing children's books about the dangers of gangs and violence. Leaders of Austria's pacifist Green Party went as far as to call for Schwarzenegger to be stripped of his Austrian citizenship - a demand that was quickly rejected by Chancellor Wolfgang Schuessel despite his government's opposition to the death penalty. "Whoever, out of political calculation, allows the death of a person rehabilitated in such an exemplary manner has rejected the basic values of Austrian society," said Peter Pilz, a Greens leader. In Schwarzenegger's hometown of Graz, local Greens said they would file a petition to remove his name from the southern city's sports stadium. A Christian political group went even further, suggesting it be renamed the "Stanley Tookie Williams Stadium." "Mr. Williams had converted, and unlike Mr. Schwarzenegger, opposed every form of violence," said Richard Schadauer, the chairman of the Association of Christianity and Social Democracy. Williams was executed early Tuesday at California's San Quentin State Prison after Schwarzenegger denied Williams' request for clemency. Schwarzenegger suggested that Williams' supposed change of heart was not genuine because he had not shown any real remorse for the killings committed by the Crips. Criticism came quickly from many quarters, including the Socialist Party in France, where the death penalty was abolished in 1981. "I am proud to be a Frenchman," party spokesman Julien Dray told RTL radio. "I am proud to live in France, in a country where we don't execute somebody 21 years later." "Schwarzenegger has a lot of muscles, but apparently not much heart," Dray said. In Italy, the country's chapter of Amnesty International called the execution "a cold-blooded murder." "His execution is a slap in the face to the principle of rehabilitation of inmates, an inhumane and inclement act toward a person who, with his exemplary behavior and his activity in favor of street kids, had become an important figure and a symbol of hope for many youths," the group said. In Germany, Volker Beck, a leading member of the opposition Greens party, expressed disappointment. "Schwarzenegger's decision is a cowardly decision," Beck told the Netzeitung online newspaper. >From London, Clive Stafford-Smith, a human rights attorney specializing in death penalty cases, called the execution "very sad." "He was twice as old as when they sentenced him to die, and he certainly wasn't the same person that he was when he was sentenced," Stafford-Smith said. Rome Mayor Walter Veltroni said the city would keep Williams in its memory the next time it celebrates a victory against the death penalty somewhere in the world. Rome's Colosseum, once the arena for deadly gladiator combat and executions, has become a symbol of Italy's anti-death penalty stance. Since 1999, the monument has been bathed in golden light every time a death sentence is commuted somewhere in the world or a country abolishes capital punishment. "I hope there will be such an occasion soon," Veltroni said in a statement. "When it happens, we will do it with a special thought for Tookie." --- Associated Press writers Ariel David in Rome, David Rising in Berlin and Angela Doland in Paris in London contributed to this report. http://apnews.excite.com/article/20051213/D8EFE1B00.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From justinemccabe at earthlink.net Wed Dec 14 09:06:43 2005 From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe) Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 09:06:43 -0500 Subject: {news} Fw: [GPUS-PAX] article about Pentagon spying quotes local greens Message-ID: <02d001c600b7$9f353f80$0402a8c0@JUSTINE> Marie Zwicker and Rich Hersh are Maine Greens > Is the Pentagon spying on Americans? > Secret database obtained by NBC News tracks 'suspicious' domestic groups > By Lisa Myers, Douglas Pasternak, Rich Gardella and the NBC Investigative > Unit > Updated: 7:51 p.m. ET Dec. 13, 2005 > > WASHINGTON - A year ago, at a Quaker Meeting House in Lake Worth, Fla., a > small group of activists met to plan a protest of military recruiting at > local high schools. What they didn't know was that their meeting had come > to the attention of the U.S. military. > > A secret 400-page Defense Department document obtained by NBC News lists > the Lake Worth meeting as a "threat" and one of more than 1,500 > "suspicious incidents" across the country over a recent 10-month period. > > "This peaceful, educationally oriented group being a threat is > incredible," says Evy Grachow, a member of the Florida group called The > Truth Project. > > "This is incredible," adds group member Rich Hersh. "It's an example of > paranoia by our government," he says. "We're not doing anything illegal." > > The Defense Department document is the first inside look at how the U.S. > military has stepped up intelligence collection inside this country since > 9/11, which now includes the monitoring of peaceful anti-war and > counter-military recruitment groups. > > "I think Americans should be concerned that the military, in fact, has > reached too far," says NBC News military analyst Bill Arkin. > > The Department of Defense declined repeated requests by NBC News for an > interview. A spokesman said that all domestic intelligence information is > "properly collected" and involves "protection of Defense Department > installations, interests and personnel." The military has always had a > legitimate "force protection" mission inside the U.S. to protect its > personnel and facilities from potential violence. But the Pentagon now > collects domestic intelligence that goes beyond legitimate concerns about > terrorism or protecting U.S. military installations, say critics. > > Four dozen anti-war meetings > The DOD database obtained by NBC News includes nearly four dozen anti-war > meetings or protests, including some that have taken place far from any > military installation, post or recruitment center. One "incident" included > in the database is a large anti-war protest at Hollywood and Vine in Los > Angeles last March that included effigies of President Bush and anti-war > protest banners. Another incident mentions a planned protest against > military recruiters last December in Boston and a planned protest last > April at McDonald's National Salute to America's Heroes - a military air > and sea show in Fort Lauderdale, Fla. > > The Fort Lauderdale protest was deemed not to be a credible threat and a > column in the database concludes: "US group exercising constitutional > rights." Two-hundred and forty-three other incidents in the database were > discounted because they had no connection to the Department of Defense - > yet they all remained in the database. > > The DOD has strict guidelines (.PDF link), adopted in December 1982, that > limit the extent to which they can collect and retain information on U.S. > citizens. > > Still, the DOD database includes at least 20 references to U.S. citizens > or U.S. persons. Other documents obtained by NBC News show that the > Defense Department is clearly increasing its domestic monitoring > activities. One DOD briefing document stamped "secret" concludes: "[W]e > have noted increased communication and encouragement between protest > groups using the [I]nternet," but no "significant connection" between > incidents, such as "reoccurring instigators at protests" or "vehicle > descriptions." > > The increased monitoring disturbs some military observers. > > "It means that they're actually collecting information about who's at > those protests, the descriptions of vehicles at those protests," says > Arkin. "On the domestic level, this is unprecedented," he says. "I think > it's the beginning of enormous problems and enormous mischief for the > military." > > Some former senior DOD intelligence officials share his concern. George > Lotz, a 30-year career DOD official and former U.S. Air Force colonel, > held the post of Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Intelligence > Oversight from 1998 until his retirement last May. Lotz, who recently > began a consulting business to help train and educate intelligence > agencies and improve oversight of their collection process, believes some > of the information the DOD has been collecting is not justified. > > Make sure they are not just going crazy > "Somebody needs to be monitoring to make sure they are just not going > crazy and reporting things on U.S. citizens without any kind of reasoning > or rationale," says Lotz. "I demonstrated with Martin Luther King in 1963 > in Washington," he says, "and I certainly didn't want anybody putting my > name on any kind of list. I wasn't any threat to the government," he adds. > > The military's penchant for collecting domestic intelligence is > disturbing - but familiar - to Christopher Pyle, a former Army > intelligence officer. > > "Some people never learn," he says. During the Vietnam War, Pyle blew the > whistle on the Defense Department for monitoring and infiltrating anti-war > and civil rights protests when he published an article in the Washington > Monthly in January 1970. > > The public was outraged and a lengthy congressional investigation followed > that revealed that the military had conducted investigations on at least > 100,000 American citizens. Pyle got more than 100 military agents to > testify that they had been ordered to spy on U.S. citizens - many of them > anti-war protestors and civil rights advocates. In the wake of the > investigations, Pyle helped Congress write a law placing new limits on > military spying inside the U.S. > > But Pyle, now a professor at Mt. Holyoke College in Massachusetts, says > some of the information in the database suggests the military may be > dangerously close to repeating its past mistakes. > > "The documents tell me that military intelligence is back conducting > investigations and maintaining records on civilian political activity. The > military made promises that it would not do this again," he says. > > Too much data? > Some Pentagon observers worry that in the effort to thwart the next 9/11, > the U.S. military is now collecting too much data, both undermining its > own analysis efforts by forcing analysts to wade through a mountain of > rubble in order to obtain potentially key nuggets of intelligence and > entangling U.S. citizens in the U.S. military's expanding and quiet > collection of domestic threat data. > > Two years ago, the Defense Department directed a little known agency, > Counterintelligence Field Activity, or CIFA, to establish and "maintain a > domestic law enforcement database that includes information related to > potential terrorist threats directed against the Department of Defense." > Then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz also established a new > reporting mechanism known as a TALON or Threat and Local Observation > Notice report. TALONs now provide "non-validated domestic threat > information" from military units throughout the United States that are > collected and retained in a CIFA database. The reports include details on > potential surveillance of military bases, stolen vehicles, bomb threats > and planned anti-war protests. In the program's first year, the agency > received more than 5,000 TALON reports. The database obtained by NBC News > is generated by Counterintelligence Field Activity. > > CIFA is becoming the superpower of data mining within the U.S. national > security community. Its "operational and analytical records" include > "reports of investigation, collection reports, statements of individuals, > affidavits, correspondence, and other documentation pertaining to > investigative or analytical efforts" by the DOD and other U.S. government > agencies to identify terrorist and other threats. Since March 2004, CIFA > has awarded at least $33 million in contracts to corporate giants Lockheed > Martin, Unisys Corporation, Computer Sciences Corporation and Northrop > Grumman to develop databases that comb through classified and unclassified > government data, commercial information and Internet chatter to help sniff > out terrorists, saboteurs and spies. > > One of the CIFA-funded database projects being developed by Northrop > Grumman and dubbed "Person Search," is designed "to provide comprehensive > information about people of interest." It will include the ability to > search government as well as commercial databases. Another project, "The > Insider Threat Initiative," intends to "develop systems able to detect, > mitigate and investigate insider threats," as well as the ability to > "identify and document normal and abnormal activities and 'behaviors,'" > according to the Computer Sciences Corp. contract. A separate CIFA > contract with a small Virginia-based defense contractor seeks to develop > methods "to track and monitor activities of suspect individuals." > > "The military has the right to protect its installations, and to protect > its recruiting services," says Pyle. "It does not have the right to > maintain extensive files on lawful protests of their recruiting > activities, or of their base activities," he argues. > > Lotz agrees. > > "The harm in my view is that these people ought to be allowed to > demonstrate, to hold a banner, to peacefully assemble whether they agree > or disagree with the government's policies," the former DOD intelligence > official says. > > 'Slippery slope' > Bert Tussing, director of Homeland Defense and Security Issues at the U.S. > Army War College and a former Marine, says "there is very little that > could justify the collection of domestic intelligence by the Unites States > military. If we start going down this slippery slope it would be too easy > to go back to a place we never want to see again," he says. > > Some of the targets of the U.S. military's recent collection efforts say > they have already gone too far. > > "It's absolute paranoia - at the highest levels of our government," says > Hersh of The Truth Project. > > "I mean, we're based here at the Quaker Meeting House," says Truth Project > member Marie Zwicker, "and several of us are Quakers." > > The Defense Department refused to comment on how it obtained information > on the Lake Worth meeting or why it considers a dozen or so anti-war > activists a "threat." > > ? 2005 MSNBC.com > > URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10454316/page/3/ > ---------------------------------- Pentagon may be spying on anti-war activists - NBC 1 hour, 34 minutes ago The Pentagon has a secret database that indicates the U.S. military may be collecting information on Americans who oppose the Iraq war and may be also monitoring peace demonstrations, NBC reported on Tuesday. The database, obtained by the network, lists 1,500 "suspicious incidents" across the United States over a 10-month period and includes four dozen anti-war meetings or protests, some aimed at military recruiting, NBC's Nightly News said. The network said the document was the first inside look at how the Pentagon has stepped up intelligence collection in the United States since the September 11, 2001, attacks. The report quoted what it said was a secret briefing document as concluding: "We have noted increased communication between protest groups using the Internet," but not a "significant connection" between incidents. Americans have been wary of any monitoring of anti-war activities since the Vietnam era when it was learned that the Pentagon spied on anti-war and civil rights groups and individuals. Congress held hearings in the 1970s and recommended strict limits on military spying inside the United States. A Pentagon spokesman declined to comment on the NBC report about the database. However, he said: "The Department of Defense uses counterintelligence and law enforcement information properly collected by law enforcement agencies. "The use of this information is subject to strict limitations, particularly the information must be related to missions relating to protection of DoD installations, interests and personnel," he added. The Pentagon has already acknowledged the existence of a counterintelligence program known as the "Threat and Local Observation Notice" (TALON) reporting system. This system, the Pentagon said, is designed to gather "non-validated threat information and security anomalies indicative of possible terrorist pre-attack activity." _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.gp-us.org http://lists.gp-us.org/mailman/listinfo/peace From justinemccabe at earthlink.net Wed Dec 14 13:05:51 2005 From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe) Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 13:05:51 -0500 Subject: {news} Fw: WI GREEN RELEASE Milwaukee, Madison, other towns likely to vote on antiwar ref. Message-ID: <03d301c600d9$08e73070$0402a8c0@JUSTINE> > Wisconsin Green Party > http://www.wisconsingreenparty.org > > For Immediate Release > Tuesday, December 12, 2005 > > Contacts: > Ruth Weill, Co-chair, Wisconsin Green Party, 414-562-6097, 414-350-2107 > (cell), spokespersons at wisconsingreenparty.org > Jeff Peterson, Coordinator, Bring the Troops Home Campaign, 715-472-2728 > > > Milwaukee, Madison and 12 other communities likely to vote on Bringing the > Troops Home > > > In April the Wisconsin Green Party membership voted to initiate an effort > to put a Bring the Troops Home question on ballots throughout Wisconsin. > Those efforts have been productive. Madison will have such a question on > the ballot in April, and Milwaukee is likely to in November. At least > twelve other communities in Wisconsin will have the question on their > April ballots as well. > > "This successful exercise in democracy is the result of a state > coalition - church groups, peace and justice organizations, veterans, and > concerned citizens have worked hard to bring this question to the voters," > said Jeff Peterson, coordinator of the Bring the Troops Home Coalition, > and a member of the Wisconsin Green Party. "The effort has really taken > off, as grassroots efforts do." > > On Tuesday, the Milwaukee Common Council voted to put this question on the > November ballot. "Shall the United States commence a humane, orderly, > rapid and comprehensive withdrawal of United States military personnel and > bases from Iraq?" Eight aldermen voted in favor, and 7 against, with 1 > abstention. A last-minute move by Alderman. Jim Bohl postponed the final > decision until the next Common Council meeting, scheduled for Jan. 18. > > "We are glad to see that the Milwaukee Common Council has voted to give > people a voice on the issue of Iraq," said Ruth Weill, Co-chair of the > Wisconsin Green Party and resident of Milwaukee. "The war in Iraq affects > our communities. Our loved ones are deployed there, and our taxes are > spent on the war, rather than on health care, education, and security at > home. We support giving people a say about the policies that affect them > so deeply. We hope that the vote on January 18th will again favor giving > Milwaukee voters a voice on this issue." > > Most local referendum efforts are utilizing a little-used state statute > (9.20) that provides a process by which citizens may petition to have a > resolution either adopted by their city council or put before voters in a > referendum. Petitioners in Algoma, Amery, Casco, Ephraim, Egg Harbor, > Evansville, Forestville, Kewaunee, LaCrosse, Luxemburg, Madison, > Shorewood, Sister Bay, and Sturgeon Bay have collected the required number > of signatures, and have turned their petitions in to their local Common > Councils. > > In Frederic and Monona, the required number of signatures has been > collected, but the petitions have not yet been turned in. Monona > petitioners will be turning their signatures in Wednesday morning. > > Activists in cities such as Green Bay and Milwaukee are asking their > Common Councils to allow voters to weigh in on this issue. > > Citizens in Manitowoc County asked the Manitowoc County Board to put the > question on the ballot countywide in April, but the Legislative Committee > of the Manitowoc County Board of Supervisors declined to act on the > proposal and the effort died. Citizens in the cities of Manitowoc and Two > Rivers are circulating petitions to put a Bring the Troops Home question > on the ballot in those two communities. > > "It strikes me as ironic that while United States troops are, according to > President Bush, fighting to bring democracy to Iraq, the recent decision > by the Manitowoc County Board of Supervisors Legislative Committee has > limited democracy in our county," wrote Mary Thiesen, a resident of > Manitowoc County, in a letter to the editor in the Herald Times Reporter, > a Manitowoc paper. > > More than 16 other communities are working to get an opportunity to vote > on bringing the troops home from Iraq. Oshkosh and Sawyer County are > among them. > > The Wisconsin Green Party stands on the four pillars of Ecological Wisdom, > Social Justice, Grassroots Democracy, and Nonviolence. For more > information, visit . The Green Party > of the United States' website is . > > For more information on the Bring the Troops Home campaign, visit > or > . > > > Distributed by the Green Party of the United States http://www.gp.org > > > From TDayan at aol.com Wed Dec 14 17:18:33 2005 From: TDayan at aol.com (TDayan at aol.com) Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 17:18:33 EST Subject: {news} (Courant) a Furtive, Last Minute, Back Room Deal (Campaign Finance... Message-ID: <24e.32a1c35.30d1f439@aol.com> We should have known - whenever I get a tiny bit hopeful, the real scam gets revealed. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From apbrison at hotmail.com Fri Dec 16 11:01:14 2005 From: apbrison at hotmail.com (allan brison) Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 11:01:14 -0500 Subject: {news} Tom Sevigny's resignation Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From greenpartyct at yahoo.com Fri Dec 16 11:51:39 2005 From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT) Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 08:51:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: {news} Ballot Access News- CT violates Helsinki Accords (On Political Parties) Message-ID: <20051216165139.6826.qmail@web81406.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Connecticut Violates Helsinki Accords December 2nd, 2005 On December 1, the Connecticut legislature passed Bill 2103, which provides public funding for candidates for state office. All candidates would need to raise considerable amounts of private money, in order to receive public funding. But members of parties which polled 20% for Governor in the last election would not need to do anything else to qualify, except to raise enough private donations. Independent candidates, and nominees of parties that had not polled 10% of the vote in the last election for that same office, would need to submit petitions. For full funding, they would need to submit a number of signatures equal to 20% of the last vote cast; for partial funding, 10%. Parties that had polled 10% for that office, but under 20%, would get one-third of the funding; if they had polled 15% at the last election, two-thirds. The amount of money that all candidates need to have raised privately is $250,000 for gubernatorial candidates; $75,000 for other statewide candidates; $15,000 for State Senate candidates; and $5,000 for State House candidates. Since these thresholds are quite severe, it seems obvious to unbiased observers that any candidate who reaches these thresholds should qualify. There is no need to add additional qualifiers for disfavored classes of candidates. The Helsinki Accords, which the U.S. signed, pledge all nations to ?respect the right of citizens to seek political or public office without discrimination? and to ?provide political parties and organizations with the necessary legal guarantees to enable them to compete with each other on a basis of equal treatment before the law.? =========================================================== THE GREEN PARTY OF CONNECTICUT is the third largest political party in CT. The Greens are also the third largest political party in the US, with 220 Greens officeholders in 27 states. Over 80 countries in world have Green Parties. Wangari Maathai, the 2004 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, is Kenya's assistant minister for environment and an elected Green Party member. =========================================================== National Committee member from Connecticut: Tim McKee (860) 324-1684 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From greenpartyct at yahoo.com Fri Dec 16 16:00:54 2005 From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT) Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 13:00:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: {news} Green to challenge Sen, Feinstein- PR--- Message-ID: <20051216210054.23047.qmail@web81411.mail.mud.yahoo.com> State Press Release Home | State Press | Print Green Party Anti-war Leader to Challenge Sen. Feinstein in California THE GREEN PARTY OF CALIFORNIA www.cagreens.org Todd Chretien for US Senate Released Thursday, December 15, 2005 Contact: Cres Vellucci, campaign press secretary, 916-996-9170 SF anti-war leader calls for 'referendum' on Iraq, will officially launch 'A Million Votes for Peace' campaign to unseat Dianne Feinstein SAN FRANCISCO - A former organizer for Ralph Nader's presidential campaign and co-author of the "College Not Combat" initiative on the San Francisco ballot last month will formally declare his candidacy for US Senate Thursday to unseat longtime Sen. Dianne Feinstein - and use the campaign as a referendum on the war and occupation in Iraq. Todd Chretien, 36, of Oakland, launched his "A Million Votes for Peace" campaign at news conference and major rally of his supporters on THURSDAY, 10 a.m. at Feinstein's office (1 Post Street in San Francisco). Mr. Chretien will be joined by anti-war activists from throughout California, including Green Party leaders Matt Gonzalez, Peter Camejo, Renee Saucedo and Aimee Allison, Richmond City Councilwoman Gayle McGlaughlin, National Council of Arab Americans representative Dr. Jess Ghannam and Mexican American Political Association (MAPA) president Nativo Lopez, among others. Mr. Chretien, who has said the current elections in Iraq will "solve nothing," will comment on results from the elections during his Thursday news conference. He will also comment on Feinstein's support for the USA Patriot Act, her opposition to immigrant drivers licenses, gay marriage and her support for the death penalty. The Green Party intends to run its most ambitious statewide race ever - because the Republican Party has not yet fielded a candidate against Sen. Feinstein, it raises the possibility of a two-person, Green v. Democrat race. =========================================================== THE GREEN PARTY OF CONNECTICUT is the third largest political party in CT. The Greens are also the third largest political party in the US, with 220 Greens officeholders in 27 states. Over 80 countries in world have Green Parties. Wangari Maathai, the 2004 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, is Kenya's assistant minister for environment and an elected Green Party member. =========================================================== National Committee member from Connecticut: Tim McKee (860) 324-1684 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From greenpartyct at yahoo.com Mon Dec 19 16:36:41 2005 From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 13:36:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: {news} Common Cause on Cam.Fin. Ref.--"Embrace" the bad parts?? Message-ID: <20051219213641.75501.qmail@web81407.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --------------------------------- http://www.courant.com/news/local/northeast/hc-3q1218.artdec18,0,6842370.story?coll=hc-northeast-top Curbing Money's Clout ADVERTISERS --------------------------------- Advertise on ctnow --> December 18 2005 3Q>> Andy Sauer, 38, executive director of the Connecticut chapter of Common Cause, spent weeks in the spotlight as the state legislature debated, and eventually passed, a comprehensive campaign finance reform bill. Sauer's group, Common Cause, is a national, non-profit lobbying group that says it promotes responsible, accountable government, and has long fought for campaign finance reform. A former journalist and public relations man, Sauer became the executive director in 2003. He spokes recently with Courant staff writer Katie Melone. Q1: Why do you feel so strongly about campaign finance reform? It's the reform of all reforms. All reforms, whether it's education, property tax, environmental reforms - all those reforms require debate. It requires a dialogue between all points of view to construct the best reform. Each reform is multi-faceted. The point is, get in a room, talk, and work it out. Money distorts the debate. Time and time again, every single reform that is discussed at the Capitol, money is distorting the debate. So someone who is interested in government, in improving the world around him, realizes that we need to do something about this problem of money and politics. There's not a constructive dialogue occurring anymore. It's a bidding war, and anyone who says otherwise is not being honest. Because there have been so many examples at the Capitol where money has trumped - end of story. Really, that's what drew me to campaign finance reform. That and I just saw that, year after year, the one with the most money was winning the elections. It occurred to me in the 2000 presidential election during the primaries. I was interested in John McCain, who is a huge campaign finance reformer, and the newspapers were already saying, "He's done, because Bush has raised more money than him." It was before he even came to Connecticut for the primaries, and I just said at that point, you know, something has to be done. This isn't what democracy is all about. Q2: Do you think this law will be the death of third parties because it will be hard for them to obtain public financing? No. Look, third parties, especially in Connecticut, are having a tough time of it. They need this reform. It's going to help them. I realize that the language of the bill - the way its written - it makes it more challenging for them to get the money than it does for Democrats or Republicans. And I advocated any sort of provisions placed on there really are unnecessary.However, to get reforms passed, you need to go through the legislative process. So you start out with the ideal and little by little have to back off from there, and then when the bill that comes forward, that leadership presents to you and says, "This is the bill that we can get passed..." Yeah, there are some parts you have to hold your nose at. Right now [before the bill's enactment] third parties have nothing. They have no shot. They are out of the process. Every time they throw a third party candidate in any election ... it's like throwing them to the wolves. They don't stand a chance in a system that's dominated by money. Here, we're offering them a shot at money. A shot that right now they have not had, whether they have to prove their party was a viable party in the previous election or whatever. You know what? That's better than the situation they have now. Instead of trashing this provision of this bill, they should embrace it, make the most of it. And you know what? It's something that can be improved down the road, when more third party candidates get elected. Q3: What do you think motivated the state legislature to pass this law when it did? Would it have been possible without the scandal surrounding the last administration? Yes, the scandal was an important part of this process for reform. It was a huge part, in so many ways; but it wasn't enough. There was the work of a lot of people. Had the scandal gone and ended and when Jodi Rell raised her right hand and swore the oath to be governor and didn't mention anything about campaign finance reform, that might have been the end of it. But no. In her inauguration speech she spoke about the need for campaign finance reform. You talk about the issue getting clout - that's when our issue suddenly got a lot of clout. One of the first things she did was meet with campaign finance reform advocates. I was there ... Tom Swan [of Connecticut Citizen Action Group], Karen Hobert Flynn as the chair of Common Cause was there, the League of Women Voters, CONNpirg ... We were the first, and to the best of my knowledge, the only registered lobbyists she has met with in the Capitol. So she made this issue very important. She put it on the radar screen for everyone. Copyright 2005, Hartford Courant =========================================================== THE GREEN PARTY OF CONNECTICUT is the third largest political party in CT. The Greens are also the third largest political party in the US, with 220 Greens officeholders in 27 states. Over 80 countries in world have Green Parties. Wangari Maathai, the 2004 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, is Kenya's assistant minister for environment and an elected Green Party member. =========================================================== National Committee member from Connecticut: Tim McKee (860) 324-1684 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From greenpartyct at yahoo.com Mon Dec 19 19:43:46 2005 From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 16:43:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: {news} (PRESS RELEASE) GREENS- CONGRESS MUST REJECT PATRIOT ACT, BAN WARRANTLESS SPYING Message-ID: <20051220004346.54779.qmail@web81407.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Press Release Congress Must Reject Patriot Act, Ban Warrantless Spying GREEN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES http://www.gp.org Monday, December 19, 2005 Contacts: Scott McLarty, Media Coordinator, 202-518-5624, mclarty at greens.org Starlene Rankin, Media Coordinator, 916-995-3805, starlene at greens.org GREENS TO CONGRESS: - MAINTAIN OPPOSITION TO THE USA PATRIOT ACT - HOLD BUSH ACCOUNTABLE FOR ILLEGAL DOMESTIC SPYING - SEEK A COMPREHENSIVE BAN AGAINST TORTURE WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Green Party leaders urged the U.S. Senate to continue resisting White House pressure for reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act, and called for legal action, including possible impeachment and criminal charges, after President Bush's admission that he had approved electronic eavesdropping without warrant on U.S. citizens by the National Security Agency (NSA). "If genuine evidence of a threat to domestic security exists, there's no reason the NSA can't obtain a warrant to begin surveillance," said [Marc Sanson, co-chair of the Green Party of the United States]. "The President says he has no intention of rescinding his secret NSA directive scrapping the Fourth Amendment. This is a grave violation of the President's oath to uphold the Constitution." Greens asserted that Mr. Bush's assurance, after his meeting last week with Sen. John McCain, that the U.S. would not tolerate torture allowed loopholes for future abuse of prisoners, including use of coerced evidence, denial of legal recourse, warrantless confinement of suspects in Guantanamo Bay and other detention centers, and license for intelligence officials to define what 'torture' means. Green Party leaders urged defeat of legislation introduced by Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and co-sponsored by Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) that would allow extra-legal detentions to continue, and called for a comprehensive ban on torture and all such detentions. Greens noted that the false claim of cooperation between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, one of several deceptive justifications for the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, was based on information extracted from Ibn Al Shaykh Al Libi by Egyptian interrogators through physical coercion after rendition by the U.S., and which he later recanted. A reauthorized USA Patriot Act would jeopardize numerous American freedoms, said Greens, and lead to widespread surveillance of U.S. citizens, especially those with dissenting political opinions, without court-authorized warrants based on probable cause. The Act expands on the 1996 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, signed by President Clinton, which limited habeas corpus. Especially dangerous are the Act's provisions allowing unwarranted roving wiretaps and seizure of library, hospital, and business records in order to 'fish' for evidence of conspiracy. Section 602 of the new version felonizes display of unauthorized signs at 'National Special Security Events', such as Democratic or Republican National Conventions and presidential and vice presidential appearances. "We thank the Senators who voted against cloture, and we urge all of Congress to stand with the nearly 400 towns and cities and the seven states [Alaska, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Maine, Montana, and Vermont] that have passed resolutions condemning the Patriot Act's assault on our freedoms," said Richard Scott, Online Fundraising and Outreach Coordinator for the Green Party. "The renewal and expansion of the USA Patriot Act is the latest in a series of governmental action which threaten our future as a democratic republic under the Constitution," said Rebecca Rotzler, co-chair of the Green Party and Deputy Mayor of New Paltz, New York, which passed a resolution against the USA Patriot Act. "Together with election manipulation, domestic spying without court warrant, military tactics by civilian police forces, and Administration lies concerning pre-9/11 intelligence and the false justifications for the invasion of Iraq, the Patriot Act is making our country less free and less democratic. Changing the Administration from one party -- the Republicans -- that introduced these intolerable changes to another party which approved them -- Democrats -- will not reverse our direction. We call for all Americans to stand with the Green Party in speaking out and protecting our rights and freedoms." MORE INFORMATION Green Party of the United States http://www.gp.org 1700 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 404 Washington, DC 20009. 202-319-7191, 866-41GREEN Fax 202-319-7193 Office: PO Box 57065 Washington, D.C. 20037 Email: office at gp.org 202-319-7191 or toll-free (US): 866-41GREEN =========================================================== THE GREEN PARTY OF CONNECTICUT is the third largest political party in CT. The Greens are also the third largest political party in the US, with 220 Greens officeholders in 27 states. Over 80 countries in world have Green Parties. Wangari Maathai, the 2004 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, is Kenya's assistant minister for environment and an elected Green Party member. =========================================================== National Committee member from Connecticut: Tim McKee (860) 324-1684 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From smderosa at cox.net Mon Dec 19 22:49:36 2005 From: smderosa at cox.net (smderosa) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 22:49:36 -0500 Subject: {news} COINTELPRO IS ALIVE AND WELL: ONLY THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG and EXCERPT FROM GOOD WILL HUNTING Message-ID: <20051220034648.KOOO15471.eastrmmtao02.cox.net@userb649154f63> HYPERLINK "http://www.bordc.org/images/Dissentbump.gif" Want to know how your member of Congress voted on the "Patriot Act"?: HYPERLINK "http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005/roll627.xml"http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005 /roll627.xml (HOUSE) HYPERLINK "http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cf m?congress=109&session=1&vote=00358"http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/ro ll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00358 (Senate) December 17, 2005 The New York Times and the NSA's Illegal Spying Operation Time-Delayed Journalism By ALEXANDER COCKBURN and JEFFREY ST. CLAIR HYPERLINK "http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn12172005.html"http://www.counterpunch.o rg/cockburn12172005.html And when it comes to zeal in protecting the Bill of Rights, between December 22, 1974 and December 16, 2005 it's been a steady run down hill for the New York Times. Thirty-one years ago, almost to the day, here's how Seymour Hersh's lead, on the front page of the NYT, began: "The Central Intelligence Agency, directly violating its charter, conducted a massive, illegal domestic intelligence operation during the Nixon Administration against the antiwar movement and other dissident groups in the United States, according to well-placed Government sources." And here's the lead paragraph of the NYT's page one story this Friday by James Risen and Eric Lichtblau: "Months after the September 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials." Government illegality is the sinew of Hersh's first sentence. He says that that what the CIA did was illegal and that it violated the CIA's charter. What the NSA has been doing is also illegal. Its warrantless domestic eavesdropping is in direct violation of the 1978 law which came about as a direct result of Hersh's expose and the congressional hearings that followed. The eavesdropping it also violates the NSA's charter, which gives the Agency no mandate to conduct domestic surveillance. Yet in Friday's story it wasn't UNTIL THE END OF THE THIRD PARAGRAPH that Risen and Lichtblau wrote timidly that "SOME OFFICIALS familiar with the continuing operation have questioned whether the surveillance has stretched, if not crossed, constitutional limits on legal searches." In the eighth paragraph of Risen and Lichtblau's story comes the shameful disclosure alluded to above: The White House asked the New York Times not to publish this article, arguing that it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be understand scrutiny. After meeting with senior administration officials, the newspaper delayed publication for a year to conduct additional reporting. Some information that administration officials argued could be useful to terrorists has been omitted. Hersh put the word "massive" in his first sentence, and drew undeserved fire for exaggerating the extent of surveillance, which a presidential panel finally admitted was "considerable large-scale substantial". Risen and Lichtblau shirk any direct estimate of how big the NSA's domestic spying has been, though one can deduce from the ninth paragraph of the story that probably many thousands of people had their phone conversations, and emails and faxes illegally spied upon by the NSA. The Times suggests that it held up the story for a year partly to do "additional reporting". This "additional reporting" seems to have yielded sparse results. Friday's story was extremely long, but pretty thin, once the basic fact of NSA eavesdropping had been presented. The year's work doesn't seem taken the reporters beyond what was urgently leaked to them in 2004 by twelve different government officials concerned about the illegality of what the NSA was doing and the lack of congressional oversight. Indeed, Friday's Washington Post had a much more compact story by Dan Eggan that not only stressed the illegality in its first paragraph but had material that Risen and Lichtblau missed, namely that the NSA had begun its illegal program right after 9/11, even before Bush signed the executive order okaying the surveillance, some time in 2002. It was Eggan who reported that faxes had also been spied upon by the NSA. And again, it was Eggan in the Post who put the NSA story in a larger context, namely the fact that in the past week the Pentagon has been forced to admit that military intelligence agencies such as the Defense Intelligence Agency have also been illegally surveilling US citizens within the US. In the TALON Program (Threat and Local Observation Notice) a Pentagon unit called Counter Intelligence Field Activity (CEFA) has been amassing thousands of files on potential threats to US military installations. Many of the subjects of these files have turned out to be antiwar groups and anti-recruiting activists. For example, when CIA director George Tenet visited campuses and encountered protests, the CEFA unit would immediately open files on the protesters. The unit was supposed to purge its files of all names and organizations caught in its drift nets that failed to meet the test of being any form of threat. But of course no such purge took place. Eggan also reported that "Teams of Defense Intelligence Agency personnel stationed in major US cities [have been] conducting the type of surveillance typically performed by the FBI: monitoring the movements and activities -- through high tech equipment of individuals and vehicles." The impression one gets from the Washington Post story is that the Bush administration had given the green light to a truly massive program of warrantless domestic surveillance by the NSA and military agencies. The New York Times reporters suggested no such context, setting the spying activities in a more forgiving light, as part of the war on terror. Whi designed this policy? Deep in the Times story hardy readers trudging through Risen and Lichtblau's leaden prose would have tripped over vice president Cheney's name in the twenty-fifth paragraph where he is described as bringing congressional leaders to his office to brief them on the program. Only at the very end of the story, in the forty-eighth paragraph do such readers as have survived the trek learn that the legal brief justifying this onslaught on the US Constitution was written by Professor John Yoo, at that time at the Department of Justice. Such readers would not have learned -- as they did from the Washington Post -- that Yoo had written the notorious memos justifying torture. The Times didn't make it clear that Cheney and Yoo were key players in the Administration's insistence that the Executive Branch has the inherent powers to sanction domestic spying without oversight from either of the other two branches of the government. In fact members of Congress, aside from Senator Jay Rockefeller, raised no demur. It was the judiciary, in the form of the judge, Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, presiding over the secret intelligence court established by FISA, who reprimanded Justice Department lawyers for trying to get legal warrants from her, using as "probable cause" data from the illegal surveillance, although not admitting this. In fact it's something of a puzzle why the Times finally did publish the story, after sitting the information leaked to it by the NSA officials worried that they might get prosecuted for illegal surveillance. It is true that Friday's publication came in the closing hours of the battle in the US Senate over reauthorization of the Patriot Act. And its probably true that the publication of the story pushed enough wavering senators into the ranks of those who on Friday successfully fought to get the bill shelved, in a major defeat for the White House. It's also true that all year Risen has been hard at work on a book about the conduct of US intelligence agencies in the "war on terror" after 9/11, slated for release next spring. The book's launch will no doubt be accompanied by some new disclosure by Risen, designed to give the book lift up the charts. Perhaps that too will be a story he's been keeping in the larder for months. This lamentable synergy featured in Bob Woodward's journalistic calculations and also in the promotional circumstances of the book written by Judith Miller, Stephen Engelberg and William Broad, Germs: Biological Weapons and America's Secret War., The Times front-paged her stories in the paper in a manner designed to push the book up into Bestseller status. It was a clear conflict of interest that earned the paper plenty of money. This was when Miller was sent that envelope of white powder that turned out not to be anthrax spores, which gave the book yet another boost. Risen, we should remind our readers, is one of the reporters who smeared the late Gary Webb with the charge that Webb had overhyped his 1996 San Jose Mercury News series on the CIA/contra/cocaine connexions. Webb didn't pace his disclosures to suit a book-writing schedule. He only wrote his book after he'd been forced out of his job. CounterPunch readers may also recall that Risen was one of the New York Times reporters, along with Jeff Gerth, who raced into print with baseless smears that cost Wen Ho Lee almost a year of his life in solitary confinement, being threatened with the death penalty by FBI interrogators. On that occasion Risen and Gerth didn't wait a year to do additional reporting and fact checking. They rushed to do the government's bidding (relaying the smears of an Energy Department official who had it in for Wen Ho Lee) just as Risen and the New York Times clicked their heels in the NSA case, sitting on an explosive story through the 2004 election and for months thereafter, and even then agreeing to withhold certain facts. Such submissiveness on the part of the Times harks back to self censorship by the paper in the early 1950s, covering up CIA plans for coups in Guatemala and Iran; also to the paper's behavior in 1966 when it had information about IA shenanigans in Singapore and through south-east Asia. The editors submitted the story for review by CIA director John McCone, who made editorial deletions. In its Friday story, the New York Times meekly agreed not to identify the "senior White House official" who successfully petitioned them to spike the story for a year. The fact that no one was specifically named allowed Bush to discount the entire story when he went the Lehrer News Hour on Friday evening. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------- Original Script by Matt Damon and Ben Affleck The following is an excerpt from Matt Damon and Ben Affleck's Award Winning Script for Good Will Hunting. It is what Matt Damon and Ben Affleck originally wrote on paper before the movie was made. Say I'm working at N.S.A. Somebody puts a code on my desk, something nobody else can break. So I take a shot at it and maybe I break it. And I'm real happy with myself, 'cause I did my job well. But maybe that code was the location of some rebel army in North Africa or the Middle East. Once they have that location, they bomb the village where the rebels were hiding and fifteen hundred people I never had a problem with get killed. (rapid fire) Now the politicians are sayin' "send in the Marines to secure the area" 'cause they don't give a shit. It won't be their kid over there, gettin' shot. Just like it wasn't them when their number got called, 'cause they were pullin' a tour in the National Guard. It'll be some guy from Southie takin' shrapnel in the ass. And he comes home to find that the plant he used to work at got exported to the country he just got back from. And the guy who put the shrapnel in his ass got his old job, 'cause he'll work for fifteen cents a day and no bathroom breaks. Meanwhile my buddy from Southie realizes the only reason he was over there was so we could install a government that would sell us oil at a good price. And of course the oil companies used the skirmish to scare up oil prices so they could turn a quick buck. A cute, little ancillary benefit for them but it ain't helping my buddy at two-fifty a gallon. And naturally they're takin' their sweet time bringin' the oil back and maybe even took the liberty of hiring an alcoholic skipper who likes to drink seven and sevens and play slalom with the icebergs and it ain't too long 'til he hits one, spills the oil, and kills all the sea-life in the North Atlantic. So my buddy's out of work and he can't afford to drive so he's got to walk to the job interviews which sucks 'cause the shrapnel in his ass is givin' him chronic hemorrhoids. And meanwhile he's starvin' 'cause every time he tries to get a bite to eat the only blue-plate special they're servin' is North Atlantic scrod with Quaker State. A beat. WILL (cont'd) So what'd I think? I'm holdin' out for somethin' better. I figure I'll eliminate the middle man. Why not just shoot my buddy, take his job and give it to his sworn enemy, hike up gas prices, bomb a village, club a baby seal, hit the hash pipe and join the National Guard? Christ, I could be elected President. 7/27/01: HYPERLINK "http://www.cafepress.com/content/global/img/spacer.gif" HYPERLINK "http://www.cafepress.com/content/global/img/spacer.gif" HYPERLINK "http://www.cafepress.com/content/global/img/spacer.gif" HYPERLINK "http://prodtn.cafepress.com/0/3924710_F_tn.jpg"EZ Dictatorship Postcards (8) HYPERLINK "http://www.cafepress.com/content/global/img/spacer.gif" HYPERLINK "http://www.cafepress.com/content/global/img/spacer.gif" HYPERLINK "http://www.cafepress.com/content/global/img/spacer.gif" HYPERLINK "http://www.cafepress.com/content/global/img/spacer.gif" -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.1/206 - Release Date: 12/16/2005 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Dissentbump.gif Type: image/gif Size: 12118 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: spacer.gif Type: image/gif Size: 49 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 3924710_F_tn.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 15261 bytes Desc: not available URL: From justinemccabe at earthlink.net Tue Dec 20 14:12:20 2005 From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 14:12:20 -0500 Subject: {news} Venezuela gives ExxonMobil ultimatum Message-ID: <011d01c60599$50c8a620$0402a8c0@JUSTINE> Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 1:18 PM Subject: [GPUS-PAX] Venezuela gives ExxonMobil ultimatum BBC NEWS | World | Americas | Venezuela gives Exxon ultimatum The world's largest oil firm, ExxonMobil, is told to agree a joint venture with Venezuela or risk losing oil concessions. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4544390.stm Venezuela gives Exxon ultimatum By Greg Morsbach BBC News, Caracas Venezuela has become a key global oil producer Venezuela has given the world's biggest oil company, ExxonMobil, until the end of this year to enter a joint venture with the state. Failure to do so will almost certainly result in Exxon losing its oil field concessions in the country. Venezuela's socialist government has now signed new agreements with almost all foreign petroleum companies. After months of pressure from left- wing leader Hugo Chavez most foreign oil firms working there have caved in. They have agreed to hand over a controlling stake of their oil interests to the Venezuelan state. This means that Venezuela, which has the world's largest petroleum reserves, now calls the shots in what the foreign guests can and cannot do. In addition, the companies which have signed the new contracts - such as Chevron, BP, Shell and Total - will in future be presented with much higher tax bills by the government. Foreign unease But Venezuela says it is only fair that the foreigners are made to pay up as they have got away lightly in the past. Much of the oil revenue in Venezuela goes into social projects in shanty towns and poor rural areas. But the US oil giant, ExxonMobil, is digging in its heels and is so far refusing to agree to the terms of the new deal. Exxon risks losing Venezuelan operations if it fails to comply. There is growing unease among foreign energy companies based Latin America that they may be forced to become junior partners by a string of left wing governments. In the case of Bolivia and the apparent shift to the left there following elections on Sunday, it is possible that the new government will decide to follow Venezuela's example and renegotiate oil and gas contracts with foreign investors. _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.gp-us.org http://lists.gp-us.org/mailman/listinfo/peace From roseberry3 at cox.net Tue Dec 20 22:01:26 2005 From: roseberry3 at cox.net (B Barry) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 22:01:26 -0500 Subject: {news} FW: agenda for 12-27-05 CTGP SCC meeting at Portland Public Library Message-ID: <20051221025944.HWCU29285.eastrmmtao03.cox.net@BarbaraBarry> Subject: agenda for 12-27-05 CTGP SCC meeting at Portland Public Library SCC Meeting 12-27-05 Place: Portland Public Library, Mary Flood Room, 20 Freestone Avenue, Portland, CT Phone: 860-342-6770 Time: 6:30PM to 7PM: social time. Bring your own munchies and beverages and share with everyone. 7PM to 8:45PM: meeting Facilitator: to be determined A. Preliminaries: 1. (2-3 minutes): Introductions of attendees and chapters. Recruit timekeeper. 2. (1 minute): Identify attendees who are NOT voting representatives. 3. (1 minute): Adopt ground rules. 4. (2-4 minutes): Approval of tonight's proposed agenda, additions and deletions. 5. (2-4 minutes): Comments and approval of 11-29-05 SCC minutes. 6. (5 minutes): 12-12-05 EC meeting presentation by Barbara Barry and approval. 7. (15 minutes): Presentation of Treasurer's October, November and December monthly reports. 8. (15 minutes): Presentation of Treasurer's third quarter report to Secretary of State's Office. B. Reports: 1. (5 minutes, each for): Chapter reports. 2. (15 minutes): Women's Caucus report. 3. (10 minutes): U.S. Green Party report by CTGP representative: Tim McKee. 4. (5 minutes): V.O.T.E.R. report from Mike DeRosa. 5. (15 minutes): discuss campaign finance election law reform and it's impact on CTGP: Mike DeRosa. 6. (15 minutes): Budget Committee suggestions/talking points from Bob Eaton, former treasurer. 7. (15 minutes): CTGP potential candidates for 2006 elections: David Bedell. B. Proposal 1: PRESENTER : Hamden Chapter CONTACT: Aaron Gustafson, 83 Treadwell St. Hamden, 230.9726, aaron at easy-designs.net SUBJECT: Adopting new organization structure and goals for the GP of CT BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE : After holding several state-wide planning sessions, we feel the proposed changes in our organizational structure and the inclusion of specific goals as outlined below and as further decided upon in Committees will benefit the GP of CT. PROPOSAL: The GP of CT should adopt a formal organizational structure (including goals, and allowing for occasional Committees that will not function as "standing," but will convene as the need arises) as follows: MEDIA COMMITTEE (MC): Aaron Gustafson, Co-chair Implement press release dissemination system Explore alternative media outlets Letters to the editor/op-ed team Develop & maintain newsletter, email lists, listservs, websites and blogs Work w/ ELC on candidate/campaign support Work w/ LC on legislation support LEGISLATION COMMITTEE (LC): Mike DeRosa, Co-chair Research three issues for candidates @ each level: local/state/federal Develop CTGP platform & position papers for candidates Educational campaign for 2005/06: IRV Research & support referendums Work w/ MC on current legislation activity Work w/ ELC on platform development ELECTIONS COMMITTEE (ELC): Kelly McCarthy, Co-chair Identify good races & groom candidates to achieve electoral goals Electoral Goals 2005: 10 Local candidates Electoral Goals 2006: 1 Statewide candidate; 5 State candidates (State Senate or Rep.); 2 U.S. Rep candidates; Candidate for Secretary of the State Keep track of deadlines for petitions and paperwork Develop sliding scale funding formula for endorsed candidates Research endorsements Organize candidate workshops Publish a state-wide resource directory for candidates by 2006 Work w/ LC on platform development Work w/ MC on candidate/campaign activities FUNDRAISING COMMITTEE (FC): Judy Herkimer, Treasurer Implement fund raising plan Research & produce merchandising (according to budget) Provide tabling kits for all chapters Implement endorsement funding for all candidates on sliding scale Work w/ ELC, LC, MC on fund raising activities & monitor goals INTERNAL COMMITTEE (IC): Barbara Barry DeRosa, Secretary Overhaul & maintain bylaws Develop & implement budget (w/ Treasurer & FC) Organize yearly internal elections Create & maintain approved proposal reference book for EC (include proposal & date, divided into procedural, endorsements, financial & other) Maintain SCC Reps' voting record Monitor registration goals w/ FC, ELC, LC, MC (increase Greens by 10%=250 people by end of 2006) Guidelines for Member Involvement Each individual should: 1. Assess personal strengths & interests 2. Estimate your weekly availability & time commitments 3. Choose the one Committee (Media/Legislation/Elections/ Fund raising/Internal) that suites you best 4. Commit to focusing on that Committee's tasks & goals 5. If your availability changes, inform your Committee as soon as possible, so that your duties may be reassigned. Proposal 2: September 1, 2005 PRESENTER: Hamden Chapter, Northwest Chapter CONTACT: Judy Herkimer? SUBJECT: Storage, cataloging and access to tape recordings of SCC meetings. BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We have established the ability for the Secretary to tape record SCC meetings to assist in accurate record keeping and transparency, but we have no procedure for storing, cataloging and accessing said tape recordings. PROPOSAL: 1.Tape recordings will be made at all regular SCC meetings, and will be announced at the start of each meeting. 2.These tapes will then be used by the Secretary to compose the meeting's minutes. 3.The Secretary will be responsible for copying the tapes to digital format and posting them to the archived minutes on the ctgreens.org website (when this feature becomes available) within 1 month of the meeting. 4.The Secretary will then label, catalog and store the original tape in the Hartford Chapter's office, or another designated location, so that they may be checked out to individual party members. This should occur within one month of the meeting. 5.The physical tapes and the dated catalog will be kept available for a period of two years, at which time they may be recycled or reused. 6.The digital files will be maintained on the GPCT server for a minimum period of 5 years, or until server space is needed, which ever comes first. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: ATT00057.txt URL: From greenpartyct at yahoo.com Fri Dec 23 18:33:35 2005 From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT) Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 15:33:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: {news} Illinois Greens have first Governor candidate Message-ID: <20051223233335.24124.qmail@web81402.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Attorney Rich Whitney makes bid for governor as Green Party nominee BY NICOLE SACK THE SOUTHERN CARBONDALE - He's lean. He's a Green, he's a gubernatorial machine. Rich Whitney, Carbondale civil-rights attorney, accepted the Illinois Green Party nomination as its candidate for governor during a brisk, outdoor press conference Thursday at the Carbondale Amtrak station. Whitney now has to collect 25,000 petition signatures statewide to get on the ballot for the general election in November, since the Greens are considered a new party. While the task is large, Whitney is determined to make a run for the state's top seat. "I am running to give the voters of Illinois a better choice," Whitney said. "They deserve a better choice than the corruption and bad judgment of George Ryan's gang and the corruption and bad judgment of Rod Blagojevich's gang. They deserve a better choice than a Republican leadership that is shameless and a Democratic leadership that is spineless." Whitney said Illinois needs to repair its state budget, rejuvenate public services and overhaul the school funding. He outlined the four essential initiatives that he said would separate his campaign from the incumbent governor and the Republican contenders. Whitney said he will fight to keep the Illinois National Guard at home and out of Iraq. He said under federal law governors can veto mobilization of guardsmen under certain circumstances. aAds = new Array(); aAds[0] = new Array(); aAds[0][0] = 'local+story_middle'; aAds[0][1] = '28169'; aAds[0][2] = 'gif'; aAds[0][3] = 'http://www.sih.net/'; aAds[0][4] = '1'; aAds[1] = new Array(); aAds[1][0] = 'local+story_middle'; aAds[1][1] = '26647'; aAds[1][2] = 'swf'; aAds[1][3] = '240'; aAds[1][4] = '400'; aAds[1][5] = 'http%3A%2F%2Fwww.firstsouthernbank.net%2F'; aAds[1][6] = 'local%2Bstory_middle'; aAds[2] = new Array(); aAds[2][0] = 'local+story_middle'; aAds[2][1] = '28743'; aAds[2][2] = 'swf'; aAds[2][3] = '240'; aAds[2][4] = '400'; aAds[2][5] = 'http%3A%2F%2Fwww.voglerford.com%2F'; aAds[2][6] = 'local%2Bstory_middle'; displayAd('http://adsys.townnews.com', 'thesouthern.com', aAds); "The war in Iraq is plainly illegal and immoral," Whitney said. "The National Guard, as the name implies, is supposed to be guarding the nation - not serving a deadly and illegal fool's errand in Iraq on behalf of the gang of corporate robber barons that is now dominating our government." Also on Whitney's list, and the reason for his chilly press conference at the train station, was to emphasize the need for a major state commitment to mass transit, including high-speed rail. "The present governor and legislature have not made the necessary commitment to build new, modern high-speed rail systems that the times demand," Whitney said. "A person should be able to get on a train in Carbondale and get to St. Louis in an hour, to Springfield or Memphis in an hour and a half, and Chicago in three hours. This is not pie in the sky, it is doable. It just takes political will." Budget, education and tax reform are also key points in Whitney's bid. He said he is aligned with the fiscal conservatives and has found that the state is suffering from a breed of politicians far worse than what the right wing calls "tax and spend liberals." They include "a 'borrow, steal and waste pseudo-conservative,' like our current president, or 'borrow, steal and waste pseudo-liberals' like our current governor, who has refused to implement necessary tax reforms, instead choosing to balance the budget by delving into dedicated state funds, cutting necessary programs and burdening future generations with more interest and bonds," Whitney said. The final pillar of Whitney's campaign is to bring universal single-payer health care to everyone in Illinois. Whitney said Gov. Blagojevich's All Kids program doesn't go far enough in addressing the skyrocketing costs of healthcare. He said refining the system would boost the economy because it would remove the tremendous burden from businesses that are struggling to provide health insurance. In general, Whitney said he would be an advocate for working and middle-class taxpayers, farmer, small business owners and the underprivileged. He said neither he, nor any other Green, would accept any corporate campaign contributions. "We are building a true party of the people because we want to restore government of, by and for the people, instead of government dominated by big money," he said. "This campaign will be true to that principle." Whitney is no stranger to the political process. His campaigns in 2002 and 2004 for state representative established the Green Party in the 115th District. This year Charlie Howe, also of Carbondale, will be running for the seat currently held by Rep. Mike Bost, R-Murphysboro. Howe said as he was gathering petitions, a woman asked him what his heart's desire was. After a few seconds, Howe responded, "To get rid of the bunch of hooligans that have taken over the White House and the federal government, bring back a government that helps people instead of corporations." =========================================================== THE GREEN PARTY OF CONNECTICUT is the third largest political party in CT. The Greens are also the third largest political party in the US, with 220 Greens officeholders in 27 states. Over 80 countries in world have Green Parties. Wangari Maathai, the 2004 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, is Kenya's assistant minister for environment and an elected Green Party member. =========================================================== National Committee member from Connecticut: Tim McKee (860) 324-1684 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From greenpartyct at yahoo.com Mon Dec 26 11:15:35 2005 From: greenpartyct at yahoo.com (Green Party-CT) Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 08:15:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: {news} (NADER) BUSH/CHENEY HAVE DISGRACED THIER OFFICE/THEY SHOULD RESIGN Message-ID: <20051226161535.95138.qmail@web81409.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Published on Saturday, December 24, 2005 by CommonDreams.org Bush/Cheney Have Disgraced Their Office; They Should Resign by Ralph Nader Richard Cohen, the finely-calibrated syndicated columnist for the Washington Post, wrote a column on October 28, 2004 which commenced with this straight talk: "I do not write the headlines for my columns. Someone else does. But if I were to write the headline for one, it would be 'Impeach George Bush'." Cohen stated the obvious then. Bush and Cheney had plunged the nation into war "under false pretenses." Exploiting the public trust in the Presidency, Bush had persuaded, over the uncritical mass media, day after day, before the war, a majority of the American people that Saddam Hussein possessed chemical, biological weapons and nuclear weapons programs, was connected to al-Qaeda and 9/11 and was a threat to the United States. These falsehoods, Cohen wrote, "are a direct consequence of the administration's repeated lies - lies of commission, such as Cheney's statements, and lies of omission." Fourteen months later, no widely syndicated columnist or major newspaper editorial has called for the impeachment of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. Not even Cohen again. Yet the case for impeachment is so strong that, recently, hardly a day goes by without more disclosures which strengthen any number of impeachable offenses that could form a Congressional action under our Constitution. An illegal war, to begin with, against our Constitution which says only Congress can declare war. An illegal war under domestic laws, and international law, and conducted illegally under international conventions to which the US belongs, should cause an outcry against this small clique of outlaws committing war crimes who have hijacked our national government. An illegal, criminal war means that every related U.S. death and injury, every related Iraqi civilian death and injury, every person tortured, every home and building destroyed become war crimes as a result - under established international law. There are those on talk radio or cable shows who scoff at international law. They rarely tell their audiences that the United States has played a key role in establishing these treaties, like the Geneva Conventions, and the United Nations Charter. When these treaties are agreed to by the U.S. government, they become as binding as our federal laws. By these legal standards and by the requirements of the U.S. Constitution (Article 1, Section 8, the war-declaring authority), George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are probably the most impeachable President and Vice President in American history. An illegal war based on lies, deceptions, cover-ups and their repetition even after being told by officials in their own administration - not to mention critical retired generals, diplomats and security specialists - of their falsity should have prodded the House of Representatives into initiating impeachment proceedings. But then, Bush did not lie under oath about sex. A majority of the American people have turned against this war-quagmire, against its intolerable human and economic costs, against the increased danger this war is bringing to our nation's interests. They want the soldiers to return safely home. In increasing numbers they sense what Bush's own CIA Director, Porter Goss, told the U.S. Senate last February. He noted, along with other officials since then, that U.S. soldiers in Iraq are like a magnet attracting and training more terrorists from more countries who will return to their nations and cause trouble. Many national security experts have said, in effect, you do not fight terrorists with policies that produce more terrorists. Now comes the most recent, blatant impeachable offense - Bush ordering the spying on Americans in our country by the National Security Agency. This disclosure stunned many N.S.A. staff who themselves view domestic surveillance as anathema, according to Matthew M. Aid, a current historian of the agency. Domestic eavesdropping on Americans by order of the President to the National Security Agency violates the 27-year-old Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act unless they obtain a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Court. This court meets in secret and has rejected only four out of 19,000 applications. So why did Bush violate this law and why does he defiantly say he will continue to order domestic spying as he has since 2002? Not because the FISA Court is slow. It acts in a matter of hours in the middle of the night if need be. The law actually permits surveillance in emergencies as long as warrants are requested within 72 hours or 15 days in times of war. Bush violated the law because of the arrogance of power. Ostensibly, he believes that a vague Congressional resolution after 9/11 to fight al-Qaeda overrides this explicit federal law and the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. Bush even claims he can unilaterally decide to domestically spy from the inherent powers of the Presidency to fight wars. (To him Congressionally-undeclared wars are still wars). Other than his legal flaks in the White House and Justice Department making such transparently specious arguments as "good soldiers", the overwhelming position of legal scholars is that Bush and Cheney have violated grave laws protecting the liberties of the American people. The crime, says Professor David Cole of Georgetown Law School, is "punishable by five years in prison." Professor Jonathan Turley of George Washington University Law School said that the President ordered such a crime and ordered US officials to commit it..this is a serious felony..what happened here is not just a violation of Federal law, it's a violation of the U.S. Constitution.an impeachable offense." It matters not that a Republican-dominated Congress has no present interest in moving to impeach Bush-Cheney. What matters is that impeachment in this case - based on the authority of Congress to charge the President and Vice President with "high crimes and misdemeanors" - is a patriotic cause rooted in the wisdom of our founding fathers who did not want another King George III in the guise of a President. As Senator Russell Feingold said a few days ago: The President is not a King, he is a President subject to the laws and Constitution of the land. Apparently, George W. Bush seems to believe and behave as if his unlimited inherited powers flow from King George III, given the way he has shoved aside both federal law and the nation's Constitution. Both George W. Bush and Dick Cheney should resign. They have disgraced their office and bled the nation. They have shattered the public trust in so many serious ways that will only become worse in the coming months. ### =========================================================== THE GREEN PARTY OF CONNECTICUT is the third largest political party in CT. The Greens are also the third largest political party in the US, with 220 Greens officeholders in 27 states. Over 80 countries in world have Green Parties. Wangari Maathai, the 2004 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, is Kenya's assistant minister for environment and an elected Green Party member. =========================================================== National Committee member from Connecticut: Tim McKee (860) 324-1684 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kelly.mccarthy at aya.yale.edu Mon Dec 5 21:26:56 2005 From: kelly.mccarthy at aya.yale.edu (Kelly Mccarthy) Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 02:26:56 -0000 Subject: {news} FW: Resignation from EC Message-ID: <200512060226.jB62QoU31182@easy-designs.net> Letter of resignation sent to EC 11/29/05. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------- Greens, Effective immediately, Aaron and I are resigning our positions as Co-Chairs of the GPCT. We can only say that we began our positions seven months ago with great intentions, new plans and high hopes for the party-all of these have been systematically crushed by the lack of member participation, petty infighting between the other members of the SCC & Executive Committee, and the perpetual and ridiculous inefficiencies of our organization. Aaron & I only volunteered to run as Co-Chairs to help the Greens move forward and actually work towards accomplishing some of the things that a political party is supposed to be doing, but we have been met with indifference at the best times, and rancor at the worst. We are truly appalled by the lack of maturity, reason and integrity that passes for party leadership. Finally, speaking as a recent candidate (who lost a winnable municipal race by a small margin), the lack of concern, preparation and support for viable candidates from this organization is downright shameful. If one-tenth of our energies were concentrated on the few feasible candidates we should be running and the things we should be doing, then we might actually become a respectable force for change-something we are no where near at the present time. We urge those who are interested in the common good to find some other outlet, lest you lose your will to participate in our government and communities. We are quitting the EC to do just that. Aaron will remain on as the web master for ctgreens.org and will continue working to improve the online communication tools available to the party. Cheers, Kelly McCarthy & Aaron Gustafson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: