From edubrule at sbcglobal.net Sun Mar 1 12:17:45 2009 From: edubrule at sbcglobal.net (edubrule) Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 12:17:45 -0500 Subject: {news} Fw: Upcoming Social Justice Events in Connecticut Message-ID: <91CCE4D82F7D49C58F104B9D40B73C4A@edgn2b574u14bi> 6-Story Newsletter Template + Images ----- Original Message ----- From: AFSC Connecticut To: edubrule at sbcglobal.net Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 4:54 PM Subject: Upcoming Social Justice Events in Connecticut American Friends Service Committee Connecticut In This Issue: February 24 2009 . March 1: THE COST OF THE IRAQ WAR TO GI'S, VETERANS and the U.S. TAXPAYER . March 5: Voices of Healing March for Universal Health Care . March 2: Turn out need for public hearing on the death penalty in Connecticut . March 27-29: New Strategies for the Obama Era - Are You Ready? . March 6: March in Hartford to Protect Our Homes and Families . Save the date: April 18 Sister Helen Prejean speaking on faith based organizing for abolition March 1: THE COST OF THE IRAQ WAR TO GI'S, VETERANS and the U.S. TAXPAYER THE COST OF THE IRAQ WAR TO GI'S, VETERANS and the AMERICAN TAXPAYER Hear disabled veterans, Iraq Veterans Against the War and an analysis of the situation on the ground in Iraq. Has Obama formed a new vision of our presence there? Learn the cost of the war and how it is affecting the troops and our veterans and the national budget. Short FILM: WINTER SOLDIER: Iraq & Afghanistan: A Primer Speakers: CEDRIC CANNON - Army Veteran; PAM TAYLOR - Army Medic, Veteran Gulf War ;JEFF BARTOS - Secr.- Conn. Chapter Iraq Veterans Against the War; MEG SCATA - Program Clerk, American Friends Service Committee, New England United Against the War in Iraq All Welcome. Join us in a panel presentation and discussion Sunday, March 1st, 2009, 1:30 pm Guilford Free Library Meeting Room 67 Park Street, Guilford For more information contact Lida Lantz at LindaLancz at aol.com March 2: Turn out need for public hearing on the death penalty in Connecticut Friends, This email comes from the Connecticut Network to Abolish the Death Penalty. AFSC-CT is a founding member and we urge you to attend Monday's public hearing. This is an important step in the quest to abolish the death penalty here in Connecticut. The judiciary committee will revisit the death penalty by having a public hearing on the issue. Please come to the Legislative Office Building in Hartford for the hearing, and send a clear message to legislators that the death penalty is a poor public policy that fails the people of Connecticut. This hearing is a crucial tool for educating legislators about the death penalty and for building momentum for the abolition movement in the state. WHERE: Legislative Office Building, 300 Capitol Ave., Room 1D, Hartford. WHEN: Monday, March 2, starting at 10 AM. The first hour will be dedicated to testimony by government officials and legislators. Then starting around 11 AM, members of the public will have an opportunity to speak. The hearing will be long, so even if you cannot make it until the afternoon, it should still be going on. BILLS DEBATED: The bill at the hearing will propose abolishing the death penalty and replacing it with life without possibility of release. Currently, there are four abolition bills in the judiciary committee (these will be posted on the CNADP's website, www.cnadp.org). We do not know yet the specific abolition bill that will be debated at the hearing, but will pass along that information once we know. Also, in addition to an abolition bill, there will be other bills, unrelated to the death penalty, debated at the March 2 hearing. PROCEDURE FOR GIVING TESTIMONY: Beginning at 9 AM, individuals who plan on testifying will be able to draw a number, which will determine the order in which they speak. Testimony will be timed and strictly limited to three minutes. For more information on testifying, please visit the following link: http://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/Content/YourVoice.asp. The CNADP's message at the hearing, as always, will be that the death penalty is a poor public policy that fails the people of Connecticut. The points we want to emphasize are: - The death penalty keeps alive the very real risk of executing an innocent individual. - The death penalty fails to help those impacted by violence, but only draws out the legal process and puts families through added, unnecessary pain. - The death penalty is capricious, arbitrary, and discriminatory. - The death penalty wastes valuable resources that could go toward preventing violence and meeting the needs of those affected by it. We appreciate the help of many of you already in getting the word out about this hearing. Keep sending this information on to friends and other panelists, so that we can fill the committee room with our supporters. Finally, if you are a Stamford or Brookfield resident able to provide a ride to a fellow CNADP member to and from the hearing, please contact ben.jones at cnadp.org. For more information contact Ben Jones 614-390-8417 http://cnadp.org March 6: March in Hartford to Protect Our Homes and Families MARCH TO PROTECT OUR HOMES AND FAMILIES! Join your neighbors from communities across Connecticut. WE DEMAND: . An immediate moratorium on all foreclosures and evictions. . An end to the system that bails out bankers and corporations while working people suffer. Friday, March 6, Hartford, CT, 4:00 PM . Assemble: At the Carousel in Bushnell Park (Near the Memorial Arch at Ford and Trinity Streets) . March: Announce Working-People's demands to Webster Bank and the Bank of America. . Rally: Demonstrate our SOLIDARITY at the Bank of America. People's Bailout Connecticut: www.peoplesbailoutct.wordpress.com March 5: Voices of Healing March for Universal Health Care The Interfaith Fellowship for Universal Health Care invites you to join us to launch "Voices of Healing" Meet on Thursday, March 5 at 11:30a.m. at the Muhammad Islamic Center, 155 Hungerford Street Hungerford Street begins across the street from the Legislative Office Building At Noon we will proceed together to the State Capitol Bring banners from your place of worship At 12:30 p.m. we will meet in the Old Appropriations Room on the 3rd Floor of the Capitol for a brief press conference. We will then visit Governor Rell to share our Voices of Healing. "Voices of Healing" is a collection of personal reflections from Christian, Jewish, Muslim and Unitarian leaders of Connecticut who participate in the Interfaith Fellowship for Universal Health Care. The collection captures the diversity and solidarity of people of faith about the moral imperative to make health care accessible to everyone. The Interfaith Fellowship for Universal Health Care is a multiracial and multicultural group of religious leaders of diverse faith traditions from throughout Connecticut who have come together to fight for quality, affordable health care for everyone. For more information contact: Renae Reese Connecticut Center for a New Economy 860 547 1979; Cell: 860 280 7320 renae at ctneweconomy.org http://www.ctneweconomy.org/ March 27-29: New Strategies for the Obama Era - Are You Ready? You are invited to join the New Strategies for the Obama Era - Are You Ready? Conference at Tufts University March 27 and 28, with a youth caucus on the 29th. It will be an exciting, and what we think will be a truly remarkable, gathering of New England peace, justice and environmental activists and organizers.. It is being organized by the American Friends Service Committee, Tufts University's Peace and Justice Studies Program, and a host of co-sponsoring and partner organizations. While we feel a sense of relief and achievement with Barack Obama's election and fledgling presidency, we also know with the economic crisis, the escalating war in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the ongoing war in Iraq and growing military budget, as well as the continuing dangers of global warming, there is a lot that our popular movements must do if we are to have the change we need. As you can see from our list of speakers and resource people below, we have assembled an extraordinary range of people to work with us in providing essential background information and charting strategies for peace, economic recovery and justice, and creation of a sustainable environment. A partial listing includes Bill Fletcher, Jr. and Noam Chomsky, Emily Kawano ,Arjun Makhajani, Zia Mian, Anna Galland and Tom Hayden. And that is just the beginning. It is also worth noting that this will be an inter-generational conference, bringing together students and young activists as well as those with years of experience. Detailed information about the conference, including the agenda and a registration form, can be found at http://www.afsc.org/newstrategies2009. For more information contact Genevie Gold at ggold at afsc.org or 617-661-6130 Ext 137 One last note: We are expecting a full house, and have over flow rooms booked for Friday night. So, please, register early. The first 250 people to register will get into the main hall for Noam Chomsky and Bill Fletcher. Those who register later will have the pleasure of seeing them on video in the next room. We do, however, expect to accommodate everyone in our (different) main hall on Saturday the 28th.Join us if you can. We have a lot to do! Plenary speakers include: ?Phyllis Bennis*, Noam Chomsky, Bill Fletcher Jr., Anna Galland, Tom Hayden, Raed Jarrar, Emily Kawano, Arjun Makhijani, Zia Mian, Bill Moomaw, Zia Mian, Workshop speakers & resource people include: Omar Baddar, Phyllis Bennis*, Tim Carpenter, Ruben Chandrasekar ,Jo Comerford, Sam Diener, Robert Dove, Shelagh Forman, Alex Fried, Lawrence Friedman, Anna Galland, Joseph Gerson, Jenneatte Huezo ,Raed Jarrar, James Jennings, Paul Joseph, Emily Kawano , Darlene Lambos, Nancy Lessin, Arjun Makhijani, Zia Mian, Patty Montes, Suren Moodliar, Bill Moomaw, Becky Pierce, Erin Placey, Mike Prokosh, Christian Ramirez ,Paul Shannon, Khalila Smalls,Mark Solomon, Greg Speeter ,Eduardo Suarez, Camilo Viveiros, Daryl Wright, Martha Yager, and represenatives of City Life,/Vida Urbana, Jobs with Justice, IVAW & MFSO http://www.afsc.org/newstrategies2009. Save the date: April 18 Sister Helen Prejean speaking on faith based organizing for abolition SAVE THE DATE: SATURDAY, APRIL 18, 2009, 9 a.m. until 2 p.m. The Connecticut Network to Abolish the Death Penalty (CNADP) presents it's first Religious Organizing Program on the Death Penalty Keynote Speaker - Sister Helen Prejean, Author of "Dead Man Walking," and "The Death of Innocents." Where: St. Joseph College, West Hartford Learn how the religious community in Connecticut can organize and work to abolish the death penalty. Grassroots organizing is the key to abolition, and your faith community can play an important part of this process. The goal of this program is to provide you with the tools you need to inform and mobilize your community so that you can support the work of the CNADP to educate and lobby at the Capitol. Our Keynote Speaker, Nobel Peace Prize nominee, Sister Helen Prejean, will talk about her own experiences working to end the death penalty and will share with you her own strategies for reaching out to people of faith. Following her talk, there will be a series of workshops organized by faith community to provide specific information and allow further discussion of the death penalty in Connecticut and what grassroots organizing looks like and what it can accomplish. Lunch will be provided and admission is free. Informational and organizing materials will be distributed to each participant. To insure that we have sufficient space and materials, please RSVP by April 1, 2009. For more information contact Ben Jones at ben.jones at cnadp.org or 614-390-8417 http://www.cnadp.org American Friends Service Committee Connecticut Area Office 56 Arbor Street, Suite 213 Hartford, CT 06106 Phone: 860.523.1534 Fax: 860.523.1705 Email: connecticut at afsc.org Visit AFSC CT Online Unsubscribe | Update Profile | Confirm | Forward -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From edubrule at sbcglobal.net Sun Mar 1 12:24:13 2009 From: edubrule at sbcglobal.net (edubrule) Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 12:24:13 -0500 Subject: {news} Fw: Take Action in Support of Immigrant and Workers Rights-1.ICE RAIDS; 2.EMPLOYEE FREE CHOICE ACT; 3.NYC MARCH Message-ID: 6-Story Newsletter Template + Images ----- Original Message ----- From: AFSC Connecticut To: edubrule at sbcglobal.net Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 7:53 PM Subject: Take Action in Support of Immigrant and Workers Rights American Friends Service Committee Connecticut In This Issue: Feb 25 2009 . URGENT ACTION: Call President Obama and Congress: Demand an End to ICE Raids & Abuses . Support Worker Justice - Join the Millions Strong for the Employee Free Choice Act! . March with UFPJ on Saturday, April 4th New York City: Beyond War, a New Economy is Possible URGENT ACTION: Call President Obama and Congress: Demand an End to ICE Raids & Abuses Please call President Obama and your Representative and two Senators to denounce the brutal ICE raid against immigrant workers that took place yesterday in Bellingham, Washington (see background information below). Raids hurt our businesses, our communities, all workers and immigrants. Raids victimize the very people that helped to bring change to the White House and elect President Barack Obama. Yesterday, 28 workers, incuding 3 mothers, were chained and arrested in a factory in Bellingham, WA as part of ICE enforcement operations. In this time of economic hardship it is completely unacceptable for the Obama administration to be executing raids on our workers, businesses and communities- it is time for him to hear from us. Call (202) 456-1414 and tell President Obama: * The ICE raid yesterday in Washington state violates the rights of immigrant workers, harms the economy and makes our communities vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. * You must end all raids and suspend all detentions and deportations. * Restore and protect our Constitutional rights * Please investigate ICE abuses and end the inhumane treatment immigrants are suffering in detention and deportation. * Support Secretary of Home Land Security Napolitano's call for oversight of the Bellingham raid and * Urge the Administration to stop the raids and pass humane immigration policy with Congress You can also send fax President Obama at: (202) 456-2461 Call (202) 224-3121 and ask to be connected to your Representative's and Senators' offices, tell them: * The ICE raid yesterday in Washington state violates the rights of immigrant workers, harms the economy and makes our communities vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. * End all raids and suspend all detentions and deportations. * Restore and protect our Constitutional rights * You must hold hearings to investigate ICE abuses and end the inhumane treatment immigrants are suffering in detention and deportation. You can also get full contact information for your Congressional delegation at: http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml BACKGROUND: ICE Raid & Immigrant Protest Brutal Treatment in Detention ICE Raid in Bellingham, WA Yesterday morning, the Department of Homeland Security sent some 75 agents from the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to the Yamato Engine Specialist plant in Bellingham Washington. With a typical overwhelming show of force, the ICE agents arrived in SUVs accompanied by buses and a hovering helicopter. The ICE agents, dressed in riot gear and heavily armed, invaded the plant and terrorized all. ICE agents interviewed all the workers and arrested 28 for immigration status. ICE agents handcuffed the immigrant workers and chained together at the ankles before boarding them on buses. The immigrant workers are now in detention. Immigrant Prisoners Rebel against Inhumane Treatment and Abuses Also, in January, immigrants serving sentences for being undocumented or deportable in the Reeves County Detention Facility Complex, in Pecos, Texas, began a protest after prison officials refused to take a gravely ill prisoner out of solitary confinement to the hospital. The protest began after a group of immigrant prisoners attempted to meet with the detention facility's authorities, demanding that a gravely ill detainee be released from solitary confinement and be taken immediately to a hospital. The prison authorities refused to listen and did not take action. The detainees responded by protesting after being ignored. After the detainees began a spontaneous protest, a melee ensued. A fire broke out during the protest and guards immediately left the premises, locking in the prisoners behind. Some prisoners broke windows to get to other detainees who were choking and fainting, overcome by the smoke. Then the guards got into SWAT vehicles (or some type of armored vehicle described as a "tortuga," a turtle, by an inmate) and began firing teargas and rubber bullets at the prisoners who had been abandoned in the facility that was on fire. Afterwards, the prison guards forced the immigrant inmates to stay outdoors in the prison facility yard on Saturday night. Since then, they have only been fed once a day; they have little or no water and have only three restroom facilities for almost 3,000 prisoners. The prison authorities only let the inmates back into the facilities after a week. But the prisoners are being forced back into a smoke-damaged building contaminated with carbon monoxide from the fire. The facility now has little or no ventilation since windows have been boarded up. The Geo Group already has more than 2,800 prisoners in a facility meant to hold 2,400 in Pecos. http://www.nnirr.org/ Support Worker Justice - Join the Millions Strong for the Employee Free Choice Act! Quality employment opportunities and paychecks are shrinking, the cost of fuel and health care continue to skyrocket, and working families are struggling to make ends meet. In these harsh economic times, workers and our communities need fair opportunities to get ahead. It's no coincidence that as union membership has declined, the gap between rich and poor has widened. Workers in unions earn 28% higher wages, and are 62 percent more likely to have employer-covered health coverage, and they are 386% more likely to have guaranteed pensions. Allowing more workers to freely join unions and bargain with their employers will help rebuild the middle class by expanding health care, improving retirement security, and raising the standard of living for all working families. Sign up to support the Employee Free Choice Act! http://www.freechoiceact.org/page/s/jwj?source=a In search of record profits, corporations and their high-paid CEOs often trample on the human rights of workers. While business executives demand high-dollar contracts to protect their pay and benefits, corporations routinely block employees' efforts to gain the same opportunity through a union. In fact, employers illegally fire workers in 25% of private-sector organizing campaigns; 78% require supervisors to deliver anti-union messages to the workers whose jobs and pay they control; and even after workers successfully form a union, they can't get a contract one third of the time. Workers deserve a fair chance to join a union. Passing the Employee Free Choice Act is the chance of our lifetime to change the rules of the game. The Employee Free Choice Act will make it easier for women and men to form or join a union when they choose to in their workplace. This labor law reform legislation would provide workers the choice of how they want to form their union (a choice that corporate employers have enjoyed since the 1970's), helps employees secure a contract with their employer in a reasonable period of time, and strengthens penalties against employers who violate their workers' rights. With a free choice to join unions, working people can bargain for better pay, health care and pensions and build a better life themselves and their families. There is no better time than now to hold decision makers accountable for staying true to the First Amendment which guarantees freedom of speech and association. We are the ones we've been waiting for! Help us reach the goal of one million petition signers in support of the Employee Free Choice Act! The actual URL for the petition is: http://www.freechoiceact.org/page/s/jwj?source=a For more information on the Employee Free Choice Act, and to endorse as an organization, visit: www.jwj.org or http://www.jwj.org/freechoice/index.html Thank you for helping us build justice and power for workers, their families and our communities! http://www.freechoiceact.org/page/s/jwj?source=a March with UFPJ on Saturday, April 4th New York City: Beyond War, a New Economy is Possible A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death." Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. April 4, 1967 AFSC-CT will be organizing to get Connecticut residents to this important mobilization in NYC on April 4th. Please contact us at Connecticut at afsc.org or 860-523-1534 to get more information on how you can participate March with UFPJ on Saturday, April 4th New York City It is Time to End the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan It is Time to Address the Economic Crisis by Cutting Military Spending On April 4, 1967, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered his historic speech against the war in Vietnam at NYC's Riverside Church. One year later, Dr. King was assassinated in Memphis while there to support striking sanitation workers. Dr. King's work linked the most pressing issues of his day; his life was about taking public action in the service of the struggles for equality, freedom, justice, and peace. Today, people from every walk of life and every corner of this country are both filled with the possibilities of hope and change and struggling under the worst financial crisis of this generation. This year, on Saturday, April 4, we call on all people to take up Dr. King's example of public action and join us in the streets of New York City's financial center as we renew our common commitment to move this country in a new direction. We will march on April 4 because the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan must be ended now! We will march on April 4 because a critical piece of addressing the economic crisis must be cutting military spending, starting with ending the flow of our tax dollars into these wars and occupations. We will march on April 4 because 'Beyond War, A New Economy Is Possible!' We will march on April 4 filled with hope. Now is the time that our movements for racial justice and economic equality; our movements against the wars and occupations in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and elsewhere; our movements for a new economy based on people's needs, green union jobs and sustainability will ALL come together to say YES WE CAN! Yes We Can move beyond war! Yes We Can build a new world of justice, equality and peace! Today, we ask you to join United for Peace and Justice as we prepare for this timely mobilization. Scores of organizations have already endorsed our call, and, in the coming weeks, many more will be signing on. Click here to read the full call for our April 4 mobilization. http://www.unitedforpeace.org/form.php?modin=159 Here's how you can help: Share this message far and wide, help get the word out that we are marching for peace and justice on April 4 in New York City. Make your plans now to join us in New York City on Saturday, April 4. In the coming days, we will have logistical details posted on the UFPJ website so be sure to look for that information. If you are part of a group that wants to add your name to growing list of endorsing organizations, please click here. Make the largest financial donation you can to help ensure the success of this mobilization! Over the past six years, we have counted on people like you to provide the money needed to organize our national mobilizations. Each time, you came through -- and now we hope we can count on you once again! In these next six weeks, United For Peace and Justice will pour our heart and souls into the April 4 mobilization. We hope you, too, see the importance of this effort and that you will contribute time and energy to helping us build for April 4th! http://www.unitedforpeace.org/article.php?id=4027 American Friends Service Committee Connecticut Area Office 56 Arbor Street, Suite 213 Hartford, CT 06106 Phone: 860.523.1534 Fax: 860.523.1705 Email: connecticut at afsc.org Visit AFSC CT Online Unsubscribe | Update Profile | Confirm | Forward -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From roseberry3 at cox.net Sun Mar 1 20:59:19 2009 From: roseberry3 at cox.net (B Barry) Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 20:59:19 -0500 Subject: {news} approved minutes from the 12-30-08 SCC meeting of the CTGP Message-ID: <20090302015920.LMWG3752.eastrmmtao104.cox.net@eastrmimpo03.cox.net> Approved minutes of the 7PM 12-30-08 SCC CTGP meeting: quorum met. Location: Portland Senior Center, 7 Waverly Avenue, Portland, CT 06480 Attendees per chapter: Fairfield: Paul Bassler and Richard Duffee; Greater Hartford: co-chairpersons: Steve Fournier and S. Michael DeRosa; Treasurer: Christopher Reilly; Secretary: Barbara Barry; New Haven: Patricia Kane and Jerry Martin; New London: Ronna Stuller; Tolland: Tim McKee= facilitator. A. Preliminaries: 1. Introductions of voting/non-voting attendees; chapters; quorum was met; no timekeeper; ground rules. 2. Approval of tonight?s proposed agenda; deletion=# C 8 due to time restraint; two additions: report from Steve Fournier; listserv money. 3. Review and approval of minutes of the 11-11-08 SCC meeting. 4. Review and acceptance of the 12-16-08 EC meeting minutes. 5. Treasurer?s report from Christopher Reilly: balance through today: $1583. B. Proposal: The 12-30-08 SCC attendees agreed by consensus (5 for; 1 against and 1 abstention) to made the below changes underlined in black italics. They were deemed not to be substantive changes so they would not need to return to chapters for approval. 1. The following proposal by Fairfield Chapters was approved, without changes, by consensus to be sent to Chapters for feedback at the 11-11-08 SCC. Consensus to the 11-11-08 SCC meeting proposed by Jerry Martin.: PROPOSAL from Fairfield County chapter CONTACT: David Bedell, 12 Ardsley Rd, Stamford, CT 06906, 203-581-3193, dbedellgreen(at)hotmail.com SUBJECT: Definition of party membership. BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: At its February 2008 meeting, the Fairfield chapter adopted a somewhat stricter definition of membership than that in the state bylaws. New Haven has also adopted a stricter definition. The purpose of this proposal is to make party membership contingent on a simple written declaration, just like membership in the major parties, instead of the current definition, which includes vague criteria such as what constitutes a volunteer activity or what is a "coalition partner." This proposal also addresses the contingency of losing minor party status, which happened in some towns during 2004-2006. Further comments can be read at HYPERLINK "http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldCountyGreens/message/839"http://grou ps.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldCountyGreens/message/839 PROPOSAL: In the CT Green Party bylaws (HYPERLINK "http://www.ctgreens.org/bylaws.shtml"http://www.ctgreens.org/bylaws.shtml ), the section under "Individual Membership" shall be revised to read: If the Green Party has minor party status in a town, then: A person enrolled on their town voter list as a Green Party member is a member of the Green Party for all purposes. If the Green Party does not have minor party status in a town, then a person may become a member of the Green Party under the following conditions: 1. The person must be an unaffiliated voter and must not have been registered with any other party affiliation during the past ninety (90) days. 2. The person shall fill out and sign a CT Voter Registration Form declaring enrollment in the Green Party and submit this to an officer of the local or state Green Party. 3. Upon submission of such declaration, the person's membership in the Green Party will be effective after ten business days. A person not yet old enough to vote under state law may become a member of the Green Party under the following conditions: 1. The person will turn 18 and be eligible to vote before the next General Election Day. 2. The person has applied to vote by filling out and signing a Voter Registration Form with declaration of enrollment in the Green Party and submitted this to their town hall or to an officer of the local or state Green Party. 3. If the voter registration form is submitted to a local or state Green Party officer, membership in the Green Party will be effective after ten business days. Party members shall receive announcements of State Party general meetings, and shall be entitled to vote when attending State Party general meetings. CTGP town committees may disallow members after questioning or vetting. DELETE: When an active Member of a Chapter, the member shall be entitled to vote at all general meetings of the Chapter. No member, however, shall be entitled to vote in more than one Chapter. Chapters may institute their own requirements for membership different from those for State Party membership. Not approved by consensus, proposal from Barbara Barry and S. Michael DeRosa: member definition must include that people agree with Green Party?s 10 Key Values. C. Reports: 1. (10 minutes): GPUS Presidential Candidate: Cynthia McKinney: write-in issues at polling places; Secretary of State apparently has not counted write-in votes from at least the following cities/towns: New Haven, Manchester, Wethersfield. Steve Fournier, co-chairperson of CTGP, wrote to the Secretary of State and to the state chapter of the League of Women Voters about this situation. SF: I wrote to Michael Kozik, Esquire of the Elections Office of the Secretary of State. His response to my 12-6-08 letter was that the various statues covering the stated concerns expired on 11-7-08, 11-12-08 and 11-18-08. Steve noted that the Secretary of State, Susan Bysiewicz has a right to request a review of any regulations. But she did not after Steve?s letter. Nor did she respond to Tim McKee?s earlier letter to her which fell within one of the statutory periods. Consensus: write-in candidates should be encouraged; better write-in instructions should be provided to the voters and to poll monitors e.g.: a) poll monitors should be better educated that they are allowed to provide to voters upon request, the names of write-in candidates; b) pens with thinner marking need to be provided to voters so the markings are not so thick and be larger than the provided write-in bubble; c) perhaps voters could be allowed to use stickers to apply to the write-in bubble; d) and independent audit of the Secretary of States audit of the 11-4-08 election was that it was a sham. Reason: very narrow selection of which candidates at a limited number of polling places would be audited. That is not all votes for all candidates would be audited at 5% of the polling places. In one polling place, the error rate was 50% for one candidate. e) these recommendations will be presented by CTGP representatives to the legislative election committee on 1-10-09, sometime between 10am and noon. CTGP members especially 11-4-08 CTGP candidates are invited to join the following people who have agreed to meet with the elections committee: Steve Fournier, S. Michael DeRosa and Tim McKee. Tim McKee is to scan the letter from Michael Kozik, Esq. for the CTGP website. Currently for a write-in candidate to be counted: a) the candidate must notify the election office that they are a ?serious? candidate; b) the voter must write-in the candidates name within the provided box and c) the voter must fill the additional bubble which indicates this is a write in vote d) currently, provisional votes are not counted by registrars of voters or the secretary of state.. 2. GPUS reports from: CTGP representatives: Tim McKee: will advise the GPUS website that Steve Fournier is a GPUS representative from CT. Tim will also send emails to CTGP GPUS representatives, that they need to provide monthly reports to CTGP SCC either in person or via email. National Committee Members: neither Steve Fournier nor Richard Duffee had anything to report. S. Michael DeRosa of the GPUS Ballot Access Committee: a) the litigation subcommittee of the GPUS Ballot Access Committee is currently reviewing ballot access rules and regulations especially in the states of past problems. The litigation subcommittee consists of the co-chairpersons of the Green Parties of New Jersey and Pennsylvania and CT (S. Michael DeRosa). b) goal of the litigation subcommittee: to have every state involved in ballot access litigation. c) we need transparency regarding the incoming and outgoing monies in the GPUS treasury. We currently have a GPUS debt of $34,000 mostly due to the Chicago Presidential Convention, about $2000 for national ballot access and other expenditures. A recent proposal in support of transparency, failed because it did not garner 2/3 support from the GPUS National Committee. Question: Are GPUS committee members on committees for life? Answer: that is left to the individual members if they want to stay for life or members may be withdrawn by state chapters. Question: Who pays for the travel expenses of committee members e.g. international committee members? Answer: People who are on the international committee tend to be people who have the willingness and time to travel and the willingness to pay for their own travel expenses. Typically, the GPUS does not provide any reimbursement to the international committee members. Question: Will the GPUS in the future, be more willing to provide some money for GPUS travel? Answer: No known plan to do so due to limited funds. Absent: Cliff Thornton, co-chairperson of GPUS and Charlie Pillsbury, CTGP representative to GPUS. 3. CTGP literature: Consensus: agreed to allow $50 for SMD to print literature and it will be provided to website. The following will independently print literature for their chapters: Jerry Martin of New Haven and Ronna Stuller of New London (100 copies). 4. Fundraising for CTGP: EC proposes that a fundraising dinner be held on Sunday, 1-18-09 at a Hartford location. Dinner theme will be our response to continuing the work for human and civil rights in 2009 which was a primary concern of the late Rev. Martin Luther King. Other activities at this dinner: trivia quiz and door prizes. 5. Chapter mailing list and state mailing list: a) SMD: each congressional district is encouraged to contact each registrar of voters in their district for the list of registered Green Party voters. b) RS: the CTGP should consider acquiring, yearly, the state-wide list of registered Green Party voters. c) CR: CTGP should consider not using the old lists of CTGP members. 6. ACLU lawsuit update. SMD: a) The ACLU wants to meet with myself and the 11-4-08 CTGP candidates on 1-10-08. b) the judge has determined that the provision about the lobbyists and their immediate family members is constitutional. c) the State of CT continues to advise the judge that they are compiling campaign finance information from the 11-4-08 election; d) the State of CT had indicated that they believe candidates will give campaign money back to the State of CT. e) the State of CT has about 20 lawyers working on this lawsuit inclusive of the Brennan Center for Justice. 7. CTGP potential goals for 2009: development of CTGP Legislative Agenda for 2009; e.g. Fight the Hike and repeal of real ID; universal health care; election reforms; hearing meetings to go to; information about meetings; concerns about the 20-30% tuition increase at state universities and colleges. 8. deferred due to time: Website: Steve Fournier, co-chairperson, to update and maintain database on website inclusive of information which prior candidates needed to provide organizations during campaigns; candidate position papers. 9. Green Party of CT Road Show. First Road Show to be in Willimantic, Wednesday at 7pm on 1-28-09: Speakers: Jean deSmet, 1st selectperson of Willimantic and G. Scott Deshefy. Voter Registration forms may be provided. All are encouraged to attend. Other Road Shows will follow at other site throughout the state. 10. Chapter reports: 11. Any additions a) consensus: $50 is to be sent to the Portland Senior Center due to their generosity in allowing the CTGP to use their facility; b) consensus: $50 for continued use of the listserv c) place and date of the CTGP Annual Meeting: to be determined. 12. 1-27-09, Tuesday SCC meeting at Portland Senior Center. Date, place and time of 1-09 EC meeting to be determined. Green Party Key Values: non-violence, respect for diversity, grassroots democracy, social justice and equal opportunity, ecological wisdom, decentralization, community-based economics and economic justice, future focus and sustainability, personal and global responsibility, feminism and No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.5/1978 - Release Date: 3/1/2009 7:04 AM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From roseberry3 at cox.net Sun Mar 1 21:05:56 2009 From: roseberry3 at cox.net (B Barry) Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 21:05:56 -0500 Subject: {news} approved minutes from the 1-27-09 SCC meeting of CTGP Message-ID: <20090302020557.FIUN18213.eastrmmtao106.cox.net@eastrmimpo03.cox.net> No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.5/1978 - Release Date: 3/1/2009 7:04 AM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Approved minutes from the 1-27-09 SCC meeting.doc Type: application/msword Size: 43008 bytes Desc: not available URL: From roseberry3 at cox.net Sun Mar 1 21:10:08 2009 From: roseberry3 at cox.net (B Barry) Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 21:10:08 -0500 Subject: {news} accepted minutes from the 1-19-09 EC meeting Message-ID: <20090302021009.YRUH4139.eastrmmtao105.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net> No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.5/1978 - Release Date: 3/1/2009 7:04 AM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Minutes from the 8PM 1-19-09 EC meeting of CTGP.doc Type: application/msword Size: 30720 bytes Desc: not available URL: From roseberry3 at cox.net Sun Mar 1 21:12:05 2009 From: roseberry3 at cox.net (B Barry) Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 21:12:05 -0500 Subject: {news} accepted minutes from the 2-17-09 EC meeting Message-ID: <20090302021206.DPDM11476.eastrmmtao103.cox.net@eastrmimpo03.cox.net> No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.5/1978 - Release Date: 3/1/2009 7:04 AM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: EC meeting minutes of 2-17-09.doc Type: application/msword Size: 35840 bytes Desc: not available URL: From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com Mon Mar 2 23:09:16 2009 From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (David Bedell) Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 23:09:16 -0500 Subject: {news} Ban CT Leghold Traps (+ other animal cruelty legislation) Message-ID: The Humane Society of the US is lobbying to End Cruel Trapping in Connecticut. Follow this link to take action on CT S.B. 994, AN ACT CONCERNING LEGHOLD TRAPS: https://community.hsus.org/campaign/CT_2009_trapping For other CT legislation to combat violence against animals, see the website of a new organization, "Connecticut Votes for Animals": http://www.ctvotesforanimals.org Greens should support these campaigns in some cases because they are good for the environment, but mainly because they promote nonviolence. Gandhi: "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated." David Bedell From phoebe.godfrey at uconn.edu Tue Mar 3 11:35:23 2009 From: phoebe.godfrey at uconn.edu (Godfrey, Phoebe) Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 11:35:23 -0500 Subject: {news} FW: windham House Message-ID: Hi all - if any greens live in the Windham area and are free tonight pls. come support for save windham house. Thanks phoebe From: Jean deSmet [mailto:jdesmet at windhamct.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 9:25 AM To: Godfrey, Phoebe; Steve Dahlberg Subject: windham House I put this letter on the agenda for the BOS meeting tonight, but haven't gotten any positive feedback from the BOS. So far, Tom DeVivo and Jerry Iazzetta have both said clearly that they want "those people" off Main Street. Tom says no other development can happen until "they" are gone. Tom's mother, Mary Lou DeVivo, said much the same thing at the last meeting. This is like reliving the "redevelopment" of 30 years ago. Lynne Ide could be OK on this. Dan Lein feels the residents are being used as pawns. Can you rally some support to come to the BOS meeting tonight? Citizens and Delegations is at the beginning of the meeting. The vote on the letter is at the end, however. The BOS is very influenced by public opinion, so a good crowd in the beginning and some people who stay 'til the end would be great. Even letters would help. Help? Jean M. de Smet First Selectwoman Town of Windham 979 Main Street Willimantic, CT 06226 860 465-3004 jdesmet at windhamct.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: windham house.doc Type: application/msword Size: 196096 bytes Desc: windham house.doc URL: From justinemccabe at earthlink.net Tue Mar 3 20:01:18 2009 From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe) Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 20:01:18 -0500 Subject: {news} GP RELEASE Green Talking Points: Obama's plans for carbon emissions trading, US troops in Iraq & Afghanistan Message-ID: <531A536E5806432BBE04133587238CF9@JUSTINE> GREEN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES http://www.gp.org For Immediate Release: Tuesday, March 3, 2009 Contacts: Scott McLarty, Media Coordinator, 202-518-5624, cell 202-904-7614, mclarty at greens.org Starlene Rankin, Media Coordinator, 916-995-3805, starlene at gp.org Green Talking Points: Greens speak out on Obama's plans for carbon emissions trading, US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan . "The First 100 Days: What Would a Green Administration Look Like?" (video and text) http://www.gp.org/first100 WASHINGTON, DC -- Green Party leaders today offered critical comments on President Obama's recently announced plans for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, and escalation of troop levels in Afghanistan. . CAP-AND-TRADE ENERGY PLAN After the Clinton and Bush administrations refused to take minimal steps to confront climate change, at least the Obama administration has offered modest plans and intends to seek a new post-Kyoto international treaty. However, given scientists' recent warnings of accelerated warming, Greens oppose carbon emissions trading schemes such as the one proposed by President Obama, asserting that permits for polluting companies to trade emission permits are ineffective at curbing global climate change. "The failure of emissions trading in Europe over the past three years proves cap-and-trade plans are full of loopholes, are vulnerable to widespread abuse, and threaten the air quality in communities near industries that buy credits. The solution must involve drastic cuts in greenhouse gases, reduction of fossil fuel consumption (especially car traffic), carbon taxes, energy conservation, and new jobs in conservation, retrofitting, and cultivation of safe, clean energy sources. There is no way to solve the global warming crisis without profound changes to our economy and way of life," said Budd Dickinson, energy engineer and co-chair of the Green Party of the United States. The Green Party has offered a set of 'First 100 Days' action for the new administration (http://www.gp.org/committees/ecoaction/documents/First_100_Days.pdf). Green Parties throughout the world have urged developed countries to commit to domestic reductions of at least 30% by 2020 and 80% by 2050, in comparison with 1990 emission levels, and support conversion to a "low or zero carbon society." ("Global Greens, representing 70 Green Parties and Green groups, issue declaration on reduction of greenhouse gases," Green Party press release, December 7, 2007, http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2007_12_07.shtml). See also: "Britain's big polluters accused of abusing EU's carbon trading scheme," The Guardian, 27 January 2009 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jan/27/industry-abusing-ets-carbon-trading), and "Smoke alarm: EU shows carbon trading is not cutting emissions," The Guardian, April 3, 2007 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/apr/03/carbonemissions.environment). . TROOP WITHDRAWAL FROM IRAQ The Green Party called Mr. Obama's plan to call home many (not all) US troops from Iraq by August 31, 2010 a minimal and probably ineffectual step towards ending the war. "President Obama's intention to leave a residual force of between 35,000 and 50,000 troops and permanent US bases in Iraq indicates that the occupation won't really end, and that the Obama White House, like the last administration, wants to protect US corporate interests in Iraq, namely oil," said Mark Dunlea, former chair of the Green Party of New York State. "The illegal US invasion of Iraq, based on a litany of deceptions, has resulted in the destruction of the country and deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians, as well as over 4,000 US troops. The only acceptable order from President Obama is one calling home all US military personnel and contractors immediately, to give the Iraqi people the chance to rebuild without interference," added Jody Grage, founder of Seattle's Nonviolent Peacekeeper Pool and treasurer of the Green Party of the United States. Green Party leaders said that a quick withdrawal of US troops, combined with a reduction in military funding, would also free up hundreds of billions of dollars in funding that could help jumpstart the suffering US economy. . MORE TROOPS IN AFGHANISTAN The Green Party opposes President Obama's plan to send 17,000 more US troops to Afghanistan and his request for increased military spending. The results of the US invasion and occupation of Afghanistan have so far been widespread civilian casualties from air attacks, massive physical destruction, the fracturing of the country under different ethnic and religious leaders, and the reemergence of the Taliban. Greens said that the troop escalation would very likely lead to greater anti-American sentiment and less chance for security and a better life for the Afghan people. Green Party leaders said that regional problems were more likely to be resolved through diplomacy and international cooperation, and that the 9/11 attacks required international investigation and prosecution, given numerous unanswered questions about the attacks (http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2006_09_11.shtml). See also "Greens call for US troop withdrawal on the sixth anniversary of the invasion of Afghanistan," press release, October 15, 2007 (http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2007_10_15.shtml). MORE INFORMATION Green Party of the United States http://www.gp.org 202-319-7191, 866-41GREEN Fax 202-319-7193 . Tally of Green election victories http://www.gp.org/2008-elections/election-results.html . Green candidate news http://www.gp.org/2008-elections/candidate-news.php . Green candidate database for 2008 and other campaign information: http://www.gp.org/elections.shtml . Green Party News Center http://www.gp.org/newscenter.shtml . Green Party Speakers Bureau http://www.gp.org/speakers . Green Party ballot access page http://www.gp.org/2008-elections Green Pages, Vol. 13, No. 1 The official publication of record of the Green Party of the United States http://gp.org/greenpages-blog ~ END ~ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mrdweezel at yahoo.com Wed Mar 4 03:57:13 2009 From: mrdweezel at yahoo.com (MaryAnne Davis) Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 00:57:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: {news} Great article on a City going Green Message-ID: <234155.4403.qm@web65407.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> courant.com/news/nationworld/chi-sweden-carbonfree_goeringmar03,0,3402661.story Courant.com Going green: Entire Swedish city switches to biofuels to become environmentally friendly Industrial community makes change with a minimum of cost, pain By Laurie Goering Tribune correspondent March 3, 2009 KALMAR, Sweden ? Though a fraction of Chicago's size, this industrial city in southeast Sweden has plenty of similarities with it, including a long, snowy winter and a football team the town's crazy about. One thing is dramatically different about Kalmar, however: It is on the verge of eliminating the use of fossil fuels, for good, and with minimal effect on its standard of living. The city of 60,000?and its surrounding 12-town region, with a quarter-million people?has traded in most of its oil, gas and electric furnaces for community "district heat," produced at plants that burn sawdust and wood waste left by timber companies. Hydropower, nuclear power and windmills now provide more than 90 percent of the region's electricity. Kalmar's publicly owned cars and buses?and a growing share of its private and business vehicles?run on biogas made from waste wood and chicken manure, or an 85 percent ethanol blend from Brazil. From apbrison at hotmail.com Wed Mar 4 11:49:17 2009 From: apbrison at hotmail.com (allan brison) Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 11:49:17 -0500 Subject: {news} RE: [newhavengreens] Re: Article on City going Green In-Reply-To: <257649.15025.qm@web65408.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <257649.15025.qm@web65408.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I don't think there is much to get excited about if most of this conversion is to nuclear power and "85% ethanol from Brazil". The one is a major disaster waiting to happen especially if enough nukes are built to serve more countries than just Sweden. The second pits the needs of western car addicts against 3rd world food needs, and is already having dire consequences as a result, as seen by food riots throughout the 3rd world. Allan To: newhavengreens at yahoogroups.com From: mrdweezel at yahoo.com Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 01:49:00 -0800 Subject: [newhavengreens] Re: Article on City going Green courant.com/news/nationworld/chi-sweden-carbonfree_goeringmar03,0,3402661.story (whole article) Going green: Entire Swedish city switches to biofuels to become environmentally friendly Industrial community makes change with a minimum of cost, pain By Laurie Goering March 3, 2009 KALMAR, Sweden ? Though a fraction of Chicago's size, this industrial city in southeast Sweden has plenty of similarities with it, including a long, snowy winter and a football team the town's crazy about. One thing is dramatically different about Kalmar, however: It is on the verge of eliminating the use of fossil fuels, for good, and with minimal effect on its standard of living. The city of 60,000?and its surrounding 12-town region, with a quarter-million people?has traded in most of its oil, gas and electric furnaces for community "district heat," produced at plants that burn sawdust and wood waste left by timber companies. Hydropower, nuclear power and windmills now provide more than 90 percent of the region's electricity. Kalmar's publicly owned cars and buses?and a growing share of its private and business vehicles?run on biogas made from waste wood and chicken manure, or an 85 percent ethanol blend from Brazil. Just as important, the switch from oil and gas is helping slash fuel bills and preserve jobs in a worldwide economic downturn. And despite dramatic drops in fossil fuel consumption, residents say nobody has been forced to give up the car or huddle around the dining table wearing three sweaters to stay warm. "We are not eco-freaks," said Carolina Gunnarsson, a sustainability officer with the Kalmar County regional council, as her teenage daughter, wearing a tank top, lounged on their living room sofa on a snowy February afternoon. "We're just making it easy to change, giving people the tools." As President Barack Obama looks for ways to revive the sagging U.S. economy, create jobs, trim the country's dependence on foreign oil and cut greenhouse gas emissions, Kalmar's example?achieved through a combination of political will and creativity?may prove useful for Chicago and the rest of the nation. "The technological part is possible. The bigger task is the cultural change, taking on the way of thinking," said Jonas Lohnn, a pastor and Kalmar city commissioner. Sweden has been looking for ways to decrease its dependence on fossil fuels since the oil price shocks of the 1970s. Today climate change concerns are driving the changeover. Kalmar, located in a thinly populated county heavily dependent on private cars for transport, is leading the way. The forested region, which has incomes lower than the national average, now gets more than 65 percent of its energy from renewable sources, a rate more than double that of Sweden as a whole. By 2030, Kalmar plans to have no net use of fossil fuels, with any remnant use of gas, diesel or oil offset by exports of excess power generation from renewable sources, officials say. "Politicians laughed at this idea at the beginning, when it was first presented," said Hakan Brynielsson, head of the Kalmar regional council. "Now 95 percent of politicians are convinced of the necessity of doing these things." The region, which depends on forest-related industry for a third of its jobs, has managed the dramatic cutbacks in fossil fuel use without slowing economic growth. Thanks to lower fuel bills, government tax incentives for clean energy and a focus on turning Kalmar into a center for energy technology, business is booming, particularly for clean-technology industries. Euronom, a traditional Kalmar oil boiler manufacturer, for instance, has transformed itself into a builder of high-efficiency renewable energy furnaces and heat pumps. This January its sales were double those a year ago. Obama "is 200 percent right" about making money on energy efficiency and green retooling of industry, said Ake Hjort, Euronom's managing director. If the company were still building oil boilers, "we'd be bankrupt," he said. Kalmar's push to reduce fossil fuels is evident everywhere. A local trucking firm, which employs nearly 450 people, has taught its operators fuel-efficient eco-driving?moderate speed, no fast starts and stops?and installed computers that track fuel efficiency and have cut diesel use by 10 percent, paying off the cost of the devices in just a year. Now the company is looking to fuel its future fleet with biodiesel. A big wood pulp plant has figured out how to harness the steam and hot water it once released as waste to provide heating, through below-ground pipes, for a nearby town of 13,000, plus generate enough electricity to power its own operations and 20,000 homes. Bicycle lanes have sprung up throughout towns, and cars line up at Kalmar city's public biogas pump. Building codes now require efficient insulation and windows for new construction or retrofits. Street lights sport low-energy sodium bulbs, and car dealers promote fuel-efficient and hybrid vehicles. Residents say cutting back on fossil fuels has taken some getting used to, but it hasn't made life miserable?and it's saving them money. Nicklas and Sara Svensson, municipal workers who have a 3-year-old daughter, joined on a year ago as one of 12 Kalmar "climate pilot" families experimenting with ways to cut fossil fuel use. Becoming vegetarian (meat takes more energy to produce than grains and vegetables) didn't go down so well?"we really didn't make it [the transition]," Nicklas Svensson said. And they couldn't afford to trade their cars for hybrids, though he has taken to biking to work. But the pair, who have a high-efficiency refrigerator and heat pump and do without a clothes dryer, have learned some new tricks, including buying more locally produced food. "We wanted to do something so we could look [our daughter] in the eye in 20 years' time and say, 'We tried,' " Sara Svensson said. Bosse Lindholm, Kalmar city's environment and sustainability development manager, says most of Kalmar's ideas could be adopted anywhere. "It's important to have small victories, to go the right direction even at low speed rather than the wrong direction at high speed," Lindholm said. lgoering at tribune.com Copyright ? 2009, Chicago Tribune __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar MARKETPLACE >From kitchen basics to easy recipes - join the Group from Kraft Foods Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity Visit Your Group Yahoo! News Fashion News What's the word on fashion and style? Yahoo! Groups Dog Zone Connect w/others who love dogs. Weight Loss Group on Yahoo! Groups Get support and make friends online. . __,_._,___ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com Mon Mar 2 23:19:14 2009 From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (David Bedell) Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 23:19:14 -0500 Subject: {news} Re: Ban CT Leghold Traps (+ other animal cruelty legislation) Message-ID: I should add that Wayne Pacelle, President & CEO of the Humane Society of the US, was a Green Party candidate for New Haven Board of Alders way back in 1987. David Bedell From justinemccabe at earthlink.net Thu Mar 5 10:10:21 2009 From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe) Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 10:10:21 -0500 Subject: {news} GP ADVISORY Greens support protest of Obama's barring of single-payer advocates from March 5 health summit at White House Message-ID: GREEN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES http://www.gp.org For Immediate Release: Wednesday, March 4, 2009 Contacts: Scott McLarty, Media Coordinator, 202-518-5624, cell 202-904-7614, mclarty at greens.org Starlene Rankin, Media Coordinator, 916-995-3805, starlene at gp.org Greens urge widespread protest over President Obama's exclusion of Single-Payer/Medicare For All advocates from the March 5 health care reform summit at the White House . Two protests scheduled: (1) in front of the White House on Thursday, March 5, organized by Physicians for a National Health Program and other single-payer groups; (2) "Burn Your Health Insurance Bill Day" outside of a health insurance lobby meeting in Washington, DC, on Wednesday, March 11 . "The First 100 Days: What Would a Green Administration Look Like?" (video and text) http://www.gp.org/first100 WASHINGTON, DC -- Green Party leaders said today that Americans should be furious over President Obama's barring of advocates for single-payer (also called Medicare For All) from his March 5 health care summit. Greens urged widespread protest, including rallies and phone calls to the White House and to Congress members, over the exclusion. Polls have demonstrated consistent popular support for a national health care program that guarantees universal coverage (http://www.wpasinglepayer.org/PollResults.html). The 120 guests invited to the White House meeting include lobbyists for the for-profit insurance industry, as well as members of Congress, including Senate Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus, who has declared the single-payer "off the table." The Center for Responsive Politics has documented the campaign money that the insurance industry has given to Democrats and Republicans for their leverage over health care and other policies (http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=F09), with a total of $46,002,881 in insurance lobby contributions in 2008. Green Party leaders encouraged support for and attendance at two protest actions in Washington, DC over President Obama's exclusion of single-payer voices from the summit: . Physicians for a National Health Program (http://www.pnhp.org) and other members of the Leadership Conference for Guaranteed Health Care and the National Single Payer Alliance, will demonstrate on Thursday, March 5 from noon to 1:00 pm at Lafayette Square in front of the White House. Health care providers are encouraged to bring their white coats. More information: Danielle Alexander, 202-662-0614, danielle at pnhp.org . Single-payer supporters will hold a "Burn Your Health Insurance Bill Day" demonstration (http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/03/03) on Wednesday, March 11, 10 am in front of the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in downtown Washington, DC. The address is 1150 22nd Street, NW, near the Dupont Circle and GWU/Foggy Bottom Metro stations. Inside the Ritz-Carlton, America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), the main Washington lobbying group for health insurance corporations, will meet to discuss plans to derail single-payer (http://www.ahip.org/links/policy2009/). "President Obama, along with most Democrats and Republicans in Congress, has chosen the demands of the for-profit health insurance industry over America's need for universal health care. The Green Party supports the single-payer national health plan, which covers all Americans and would rescue those who now face financial ruin because they lack insurance or have inadequate coverage," said David Doonan, Village Mayor of Greenwich, New York and a member of the Green Party. "Single-payer will cut national health care costs by as much as a third, significantly reduce what working Americans pay for health coverage, and provide everyone with guaranteed quality care regardless of ability to pay, income, age, or prior medical condition. Furthermore, single-payer will give everyone full choice of health care provider and drastically cut the paperwork that plagues physicians and other health professionals," added Jody Grage, treasurer of the Green Party of the United States. Greens note that enactment of a Single-Payer program would boost the ailing US economy and provide relief for businesses large and small, since it would cancel the high expense and administrative burden of employer-based health care benefits (http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=158). Rep. John Conyers' (D-Mich.) bill for Single-Payer (HR 676, http://thomas.loc.gov/home/gpoxmlc110/h676_ih.xml) has strong Green Party support. Read "An International Perspective on Health Care Reform" by Connecticut Green Party member John R. Battista, MD (http://www.gp.org/first100/?p=119), published on the Green Party's web site as part of "The First 100 Days: What Would a Green Administration Look Like?" (http://www.gp.org/first100) For a comparison of mandate plans and Single-Payer , see "Talking Points: Why the mandate plans won't work, and why Single-Payer 'Medicare for All' is what we need" by Len Rodberg, PhD, published by Physicians for a National Health Program (http://www.pnhp.org/news/2008/december/talking_points_why_.php). See also: Green Party information page on Single-Payer: http://www.gp.org/organize/sicko.html "President Obama can either work to enact health care for all Americans or he can support insurance and HMO industry profits, say Greens" Green Party press release, January 29, 2009 http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=174 Video clips: 2008 Green presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney speaks on Single-Player health care and racial health care disparities http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEHd4lRVUuU More on health care: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEHd4lRVUuU Health, the environment, and the economy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVNTOa8owQQ MORE INFORMATION Green Party of the United States http://www.gp.org 202-319-7191, 866-41GREEN Fax 202-319-7193 . Tally of Green election victories http://www.gp.org/2008-elections/election-results.html . Green candidate news http://www.gp.org/2008-elections/candidate-news.php . Green candidate database for 2008 and other campaign information: http://www.gp.org/elections.shtml . Green Party News Center http://www.gp.org/newscenter.shtml . Green Party Speakers Bureau http://www.gp.org/speakers . Green Party ballot access page http://www.gp.org/2008-elections Green Pages, Vol. 13, No. 1 The official publication of record of the Green Party of the United States http://gp.org/greenpages-blog ~ END ~ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From timmckee22 at yahoo.com Thu Mar 5 16:49:49 2009 From: timmckee22 at yahoo.com (Tim McKee) Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 13:49:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: {news} GUN controversy at CCSU Message-ID: <190122.4246.qm@web111203.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Professor Takes Heat for Calling Cops on Student Who Discussed Guns in Class Wednesday, March 04, 2009 By Maxim Lott ? A professor in Connecticut reported one of her students to the police after he gave a class presentation on why students and teachers should be allowed to carry concealed weapons on campus. Now, free speech activists say the professor?s actions are what really need to be investigated. Last October, John Wahlberg and two classmates at Central Connecticut State University gave an oral presentation for a communications class taught by Professor Paula Anderson. The assignment was to discuss a ?relevant issue in the media,? and the students presented their view that the death toll in the April 2007 Virginia Tech shooting massacre would have been lower if professors and students had been carrying guns. That night, police called Wahlberg, a 23-year-old senior, and asked him to come to the station. When he arrived, they they read off a list of firearms that were registered in his name and asked where he kept them. Guns are strictly prohibited on the CCSU campus and residence halls, but Wahlberg says he lives 20 miles off-campus and keeps his gun collection locked up in a safe. No further action was taken by police or administrators. ?I don?t think that Professor Anderson was justified in calling the CCSU police over a clearly non-threatening matter,? Wahlberg told The Recorder, the CCSU student newspaper that first reported the story. ?Although the topic of discussion may have made a few individuals uncomfortable, there was no need to label me as a threat.? var adsonar_placementId="1425767",adsonar_pid="144757",adsonar_ps="-1",adsonar_zw=224;adsonar_zh=93,adsonar_jv="ads.adsonar.com"; qas_writeAd(); Wahlberg declined to comment further to FOXNews.com, saying he did not want more media attention. According to The Recorder, Anderson cited safety as her reason for calling the police. ?It is also my responsibility as a teacher to protect the well-being of our students, and the campus community at all times,? she told The Recorder. ?As such, when deemed necessary because of any perceived risks, I seek guidance and consultation from the Chair of my Department, the Dean and any relevant University officials.? Anderson did not respond to calls from FOXNews.com. Campus police forwarded requests to university spokesman Mark McLaughlin, who declined to comment, citing Wahlberg?s privacy. Robert Shibley, vice president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), said Anderson's actions appeared to be out of line. ?If all he did was discuss reasons for allowing guns on campus, it seems a bit much to call the police and grill him about it,? Shibley said. ?If you go after students for just discussing an idea, that goes against everything a university is supposed to stand for.? Shibley said FIRE has seen many more cases of hair-trigger responses by administrators over anything gun-related since the Virginia Tech shooting. In 2007, Shibley noted, a student at Hamline University in Minnesota was suspended after writing a letter to an administrator arguing that carrying concealed weapons on campus may help prevent tragedies like the one at Virginia Tech. The student was allowed to return only after undergoing a psychological evaluation, he said. Shibley also cited an incident at Colorado College last year in which campus administrators denounced a flyer as "threatening and demeaning content" because it mentioned guns. He said the students who produced the flyer were found guilty of violating the school?s violence policy, which was added to their school records. ?It is, of course, important that administrators identify real threats to students,? Shibley said. ?But they need to use logic to discern whether a threat is real.? But Jerold Duquette, an associate professor of political science at CCSU who sits on the Faculty Senate Committee on Academic Freedom, say the Wahlberg case is not so clear-cut. ?This is a situation where both sides can come up with a reasonable explanation,? Duquette said. ?[Wahlberg] certainly has a reason to complain, since he didn?t do anything directly threatening. But I wouldn?t say the administration has a reason to sanction or punish the professor or the police..... I don?t know if I would have done anything differently in the situation.? Katie Kasprzak, a spokeswoman for the group Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, suggested that the professor called the police because she disagreed with Wahlberg?s political views. "Critics of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus argue that colleges and universities are dedicated to the free flow of ideas,? she said. ?Yet when a student gives a class presentation on a relevant issue in the media, it is acceptable to label the student as a threat? The only threat posed was a threat to the professor?s personal beliefs.? Duquette said there was no evidence to support that. ?I think a lot of people see this as a liberal professor going after a student because he likes guns. I don?t know if that?s the case,? Duquette said, adding that more would need to be known about the incident. See Next Story in U.S. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vogel at ct.metrocast.net Fri Mar 6 17:07:56 2009 From: vogel at ct.metrocast.net (Robert Vogel) Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 17:07:56 -0500 Subject: {news} Media Blackout of Single Payer Message-ID: <6039A23C9DDE4299884A4A54650EA82A@JUNKNAME> Here's an eye-opening letter to the editor of The Economist, Jan 22, 2009 issue: "SIR - Michael Moore's claim that Cuba has a better health-care system than the United States is not as "ridiculous" as you think ("Health screen", January 10th). The United States was ranked 37th in the latest report on health care from the World Health Organization, whereas Cuba ranked 39th. I suspect there is little difference between being placed 37th and 39th. However, when productivity is factored in Cuba's health-care system does indeed seem to be more effective than America's. America spends 15% of GDP on health care (which works out at $6,700 per person in 2006 dollars) while Cuba spends 8% ($360 per person). Most businesses would consider themselves better than their competitors if they delivered an equivalent product or service at one-twentieth the cost. Kenneth McLeod, Chair, Department of bioengineering, Binghamton University" http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12970732 People here in the US don't hear such things because there is a media blackout on Single Payer Healthcare. See Media Blackout on Single-Payer Healthcare (3/6/2009) More than 60 lawmakers have co-sponsored H.R. 676, the single-payer bill in Congress, but media never talks about it. Given the high level of popular support the policy enjoys, that's all the more reason it should be front and center in the public debate about the future of healthcare. Bob Vogel (Consider sending this on to your newspaper. ) http://www.seconnecticut.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rstuller at snet.net Sat Mar 7 19:43:13 2009 From: rstuller at snet.net (Ronna Stuller) Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 19:43:13 -0500 Subject: {news} Proposed agenda for the 7PM 2-24-09 SCC CTGP meeting at Portland Senior Center In-Reply-To: <20090222040713.PELS15713.eastrmmtao101.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net> References: <20090222040713.PELS15713.eastrmmtao101.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net> Message-ID: Hi all, With our state convention planned for next month, I was wondering if the free offer of the state-wide list has come through. (It'd be great if it has!) Whether or not it can be gotten at no cost, I think it's essential that we obtain the list of registered Greens ASAP, before we send out ballots for SCC elections (and particularly before the convention itself), so we know who's eligible to vote. If it looks as though the process will be delayed, I will call the SOTS and find out how I can purchase the entire voter database. (It's a huge file, and last time it came on several disks, I believe.) While we primarily need the Greens list for internal elections, we will need to have the entire state voter database to support the campaigns of Green candidates in the November elections. Ronna On Feb 21, 2009, at 11:07 PM, B Barry wrote: > 7. (5 minutes): Authorization of money to get the state-wide list of > registered Green Party voters. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From smderosa at cox.net Sat Mar 7 21:18:31 2009 From: smderosa at cox.net (Mike DeRosa) Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 21:18:31 -0500 Subject: {news} Proposed agenda for the 7PM 2-24-09 SCC CTGP meeting at Portland Senior Center In-Reply-To: References: <20090222040713.PELS15713.eastrmmtao101.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net> Message-ID: <001501c99f94$2d71f8f0$8855ead0$@net> Ronna: Have not heard back from the CT SOTS. I will call the lawyer I spoke with on Monday to find out the status so we can move forward. Thanks for looking into the database. Sincerely, Mike DeRosa From: ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org [mailto:ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org] On Behalf Of Ronna Stuller Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 7:43 PM To: CT Greens News Cc: Phoebe Godfrey Subject: Re: {news} Proposed agenda for the 7PM 2-24-09 SCC CTGP meeting at Portland Senior Center Hi all, With our state convention planned for next month, I was wondering if the free offer of the state-wide list has come through. (It'd be great if it has!) Whether or not it can be gotten at no cost, I think it's essential that we obtain the list of registered Greens ASAP, before we send out ballots for SCC elections (and particularly before the convention itself), so we know who's eligible to vote. If it looks as though the process will be delayed, I will call the SOTS and find out how I can purchase the entire voter database. (It's a huge file, and last time it came on several disks, I believe.) While we primarily need the Greens list for internal elections, we will need to have the entire state voter database to support the campaigns of Green candidates in the November elections. Ronna On Feb 21, 2009, at 11:07 PM, B Barry wrote: 7. (5 minutes): Authorization of money to get the state-wide list of registered Green Party voters. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From smderosa at cox.net Tue Mar 10 01:52:11 2009 From: smderosa at cox.net (Mike DeRosa) Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 01:52:11 -0400 Subject: {news} FINAL ARGUMENTS ON CAMPAIGN FINANCE CASE THIS WED AND THURS BRIDGEPORT FEDERAL COURT Message-ID: <001801c9a144$5c5ac370$15104a50$@net> http://bajan.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/update.jpg GREENS: PLEASE CONSIDER ATTENDING THIS IMPORTANT HEARING: WHAT: THE LAST HEARING ON OUR CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWSUIT. OUR ACLU LAWYERS WILL BE PRESENTING OUR LAST ARGUMENTS TO FEDERAL JUDGE UNDERHILL THIS WED. THE STATE OF CT ET AL WILL PRESENT THEIR FINAL ARGUMENT ON THIS THURS. (info: 860-919-4042) WHEN: THIS WED 3/11/09 AND THURS 3/11/09 STARTING AT 9AM WHERE: FEDERAL COURT IN BRIDGEPORT CT (SEE DIRECTIONS BELOW): BRIEN McMAHON FEDERAL BUILDING 915 Lafayette Boulevard Bridgeport, CT 06604 Federal Judge Underhill's Court WHY: SEE HISTORY IN THE MAKING. SEE ATTACHMENT FOR INFORMATION ON WHY OUR LEGAL POSITION IS STRONG. AND WHY THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING OF OUR JOURNEY TO JUSTICE. http://www.ctd.uscourts.gov/assets/bpt3.jpg http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3461/3240539674_ac1545925c.jpghttp://ventureb eat.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/bill-of-rights-01gif-gif-image-975x821-pi xels-scaled-78.png http://www.armeniadiaspora.com/images/D45_070215osce.jpghttp://farm4.static. flickr.com/3461/3240539674_ac1545925c.jpg http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3461/3240539674_ac1545925c.jpg Directions to United States District Court 9 1 5 L a f a y e t t e B o u l e v a r d B r i d g e p o r t, C T 0 6 6 04 ( 2 0 3 ) 5 7 9 - 5 8 6 1 North Follow Interstate 95 south to Exit 27 (Lafayette Blvd), bear right onto Lafayette Boulevard, proceed to the third traffic light. The Courthouse is on your left. Take a right onto State Street and immediately get into the left lane. The parking garage is the first parking garage on your left (diagonally across from the Courthouse). South Follow Interstate 95 north to Exit 27 (Lafayette Blvd), proceed straight to the third traffic light. Take a left onto Lafayette Boulevard, go to the fourth traffic light. The Courthouse is on your left. Take a right onto State Street and immediately get into the left lane. The parking garage is the first parking garage on your left (diagonally across from the Courthouse). Coming South on Route 25/8 Follow Route 25/8 to Exit 2 (Fairfield Avenue), proceed straight to the third traffic light. You are now facing the side of the Courthouse. Take a left onto State Street, proceed past the first traffic light. The parking garage is the first parking garage on your left (diagonally across from the Courthouse). Coming from the Merritt Parkway Northbound - Exit 49S, follow Route 25/8 directions above. Southbound - Exit 52, follow Route 25/8 directions above. PAID FOR BY GREEN PARTY OF CT ; FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTED DOCUMENT. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image010.png Type: image/png Size: 598 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 8264 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 6099 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 2693 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image011.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 5735 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image016.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 7823 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: WHAT YOUR NOT SUPPOSE TO KNOW ABOUT THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAW OF CT.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 14015 bytes Desc: not available URL: From timmckee at mail.com Tue Mar 10 19:54:49 2009 From: timmckee at mail.com (Tim McKee) Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 18:54:49 -0500 Subject: {news} Fw: [usgp-dx] 'Burn Your Health Insurance Bill Day' demo for Single-Payer health care: Wed., March 11 in DC Message-ID: <20090310235452.933871BF28D@ws1-10.us4.outblaze.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott McLarty" To: natlcomaffairs at green.gpus.org Subject: [usgp-dx] 'Burn Your Health Insurance Bill Day' demo for Single-Payer health care: Wed., March 11 in DC Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 16:55:47 +0000 (Please forward this announcement widely) Burn Your Health Insurance Bill Day Demonstration in support of Single-Payer national health care (called Medicare For All) and against the power of private health insurance corporations WHEN: Wednesday, March 11, 10 am WHERE: In front of the Ritz-Carlton Hotel, 1150 22nd Street, NW, in downtown Washington, DC near the Dupont Circle and GWU/Foggy Bottom Metro stations Inside the Ritz-Carlton, America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), the main Washington lobbying group for health insurance corporations, will meet to discuss plans to derail Single-Payer (http://www.ahip.org/links/policy2009/). Make health care a human right, not a cash cow for the for-profit insurance industry! Read "March 11: Burn Your Health Insurance Bill Day" by Russell Mokhiber (editor of Corporate Crime Reporter, http://www.corporatecrimereporter.com) on the Common Dreams web site (http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/03/03). The Obama Administration, following the lead of mainstream Democrats & Republicans (who take millions in private insurance industry contributions), is trying to brush aside the demand for Single-Payer. Let's send President Obama and Congress a message: Single-Payer is the only solution to America's health care crisis! If you can, bring a recent health insurance bill to the demonstration and burn it! WHAT EVERYONE SHOULD KNOW about Single-Payer/Medicare For All.... See also the Green Party's information page on Single-Payer (http://www.gp.org/organize/sicko.html) and "Single-Payer FAQ" at the Physicians for a National Health Program web site (http://www.pnhp.org/facts/singlepayer_faq.php). How Single-payer works: ? Everybody in, nobody out: Single-payer covers every American regardless of employment, income, ability to pay, age, and prior medical condition. Right now, about 48 million Americans have no health coverage at all and millions more have inadequate coverage. Under Single-payer, they will all enjoy guaranteed quality health care, including prescriptions. ? In a Single-payer system, no American will face financial ruin because of illness or injury. Private HMOs and health insurance companies raise their profit margin by denying treatment to people with medical emergencies and by denying coverage to those they consider 'high-risk' because of existing health problems, age, low income, etc. In other words, private health insurance is designed to fail people who need health care the most. ? Single-payer will allow Americans to choose which physician, health care provider, and health care facility will treat them. ? Single-payer will cut national health care costs by as much as a third and reduce what working Americans pay for health coverage. Single-payer will be funded at the federal level and administered at the state level. Americans will pay for Single-payer the way we now pay for Social Security, but the amount working Americans will pay will be far less than for private health coverage, because Single-payer eliminates the profit-making insurance and HMO 'middle-men.' ? Single-payer reduces paperwork for physicians and other health professionals, one reason why thousands of MDs, other people working in the health care industry, and medical students have endorsed Single-payer. ? Under Single-payer, physicians, hospitals, and other health care providers would compete to serve the public, raising the quality of health care. Single-payer is a health insurance payment mechanism, not a health care delivery system. ? Health care rationing? All health care plans ration care to some extent. Under private insurance programs, treatment is rationed according to ability to pay for coverage. Under Single-payer, the insurance company profit motive is removed and health care is rationed according to need, with medical emergencies and serious illnesses receiving top priority. Single-payer and the economy: ? Single-payer makes economic sense. At 3% administrative cost, Medicare (which would be made universal under Single-payer) is highly efficient compared to the 15-30% administrative costs of for-profit insurance. ? Single-payer will boost the ailing US economy and provide relief for businesses large and small, since it will cancel the high expense and administrative burden of employer-based health care benefits (http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=158). ? Single-payer will relieve municipalities and school boards from having to bear the cost of providing health insurance to employees, allowing responsible officials to reduce their budgets and lower local property taxes. ? Single-payer gives government (and therefore taxpayers) a stake in preventive medicine and promotion of good health habits to keep costs down. The politics of Single-payer: ? Polls have demonstrated popular support for a national health care program that guarantees universal coverage (http://www.wpasinglepayer.org/PollResults.html). In 2008, the US Conference of Mayors endorsed Single-payer (http://www.usmayors.org/resolutions/76th_conference/chhs_03.asp). ? The US is the only industrial democracy that does not guarantee every citizen health care. Compared to other nations, America has the best medical technology but poor access to medical treatment. Single-payer will correct this scandal. ? The Center for Responsive Politics has documented the millions in campaign money that the insurance industry has given to Democrats and Republicans to maintain their control over health care (http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=F09), with a total of $46,002,881 in insurance lobby contributions in 2008. ? The Green Party endorses Single-payer in its national platform. The Democratic Party endorsed national health insurance in 1948, but removed it from the Democratic platform during the Clinton Administration. The Democratic and Republican parties continue to embrace failed 'market solutions.' ? Barack Obama, before he launched his bid for president, supported Single-payer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpAyan1fXCE&feature=player_embedded). Al Gore opposed Single-payer when he ran for president in 2000, but admitted two years later that Single-payer is the best plan (http://www.pnhp.org/news/2002/november/gore_favors_single.php). Dennis Kucinich was the only Democratic presidential candidate in 2008 to support Single-payer. ? "Single-payer health care is socialism!" By the same standard, so are public streets, sidewalks, parks, schools, libraries, fire departments, police forces, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and bailouts for ailing Wall Street firms. The principle behind Single-payer is that health care should be a human right, not a commodity that allows powerful corporations that don't actually provide health care (HMOs and insurance companies) to make money. MORE INFORMATION on Single-Payer: Green Party press releases on Single-Payer health care and the Green challenge to the insurance industry's control over US health care policy: http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=189 http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=188 http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=174 Video clips: 2008 Green presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney speaks on Single-Player health care and racial health care disparities http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEHd4lRVUuU More on health care: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEHd4lRVUuU Health, the environment, and the economy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVNTOa8owQQ Rep. John Conyers' bill for Single-Payer (HR 676) http://thomas.loc.gov/home/gpoxmlc110/h676_ih.xml Physicians for a National Health Program http://www.pnhp.org * * * The DC Statehood Green Party http://www.dcstatehoodgreen.org Join the DC Statehood Green discussion & news list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dcsgp Join the list to receive press releases and important party announcements: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dcstatehoodgreennews _________________________________________________________________ Windows Live? Groups: Create an online spot for your favorite groups to meet. http://windowslive.com/online/groups?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_groups_032009 _______________________________________________ Natlcomaffairs mailing list To send a message to the list, write to: Natlcomaffairs at green.gpus.org To unsubscribe or change your list options, go to: http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/natlcomaffairs You must know your password to do this. If you can't figure out how to unsubscribe, as a last resort only, send a message OFF LIST to steveh at olypen.com If your state delegation changes, please see: http://gp.org/committees/nc/documents/delegate_change.html To report violations of listserv protocol, write to forummanagers at lists.gp-us.org For other information about the National Committee, see: http://gp.org/committees/nc/ ****************************************** Tim McKee, Manchester CT, main number cell-860-778-1304, 860-643-2282 National Committee member of the Green Party of the United States and is a spokesperson for the Green Party of CT. BLOG-http://thebiggreenpicture.blogspot.com -- Be Yourself @ mail.com! Choose From 200+ Email Addresses Get a Free Account at www.mail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From timmckee at mail.com Tue Mar 10 19:57:17 2009 From: timmckee at mail.com (Tim McKee) Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 18:57:17 -0500 Subject: {news} Fw: [usgp-dx] Take the Single-Payer Pledge Message-ID: <20090310235717.6A508BE407D@ws1-9.us4.outblaze.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marnie Glickman" To: "USGP Discussion" Subject: [usgp-dx] Take the Single-Payer Pledge Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 14:39:50 -0700 Dear Green friends, Most Americans want single-payer "Medicare for all" health insurance. But neither President Obama nor any congressional leaders are actively supporting it. Take the Single-Payer Pledge: that you won't vote for any Member of Congress who doesn't co-sponsor a single-payer health plan. http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/1488/t/689/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=2595 On March 5th, President Obama's spokesman, Robert Gibbs, responded to the question: "Why is the President against single-payer?" with the answer that "The President doesn't believe that's the best way to achieve the goal of cutting costs and increasing access." (1) In the Senate, no single-payer bill has been introduced. (2) In the House, no Democratic or Republican leader is a co-sponsor of the main single-payer bill. (3) This lack of support among our elected officials is astonishing, given the overwhelming support for single-payer. For example, in a January 2009 poll, 64% of Americans said that they support a single-payer "Medicare for all" plan. (4) It's time to tell our elected officials just how important single- payer is to us. Take the Single-Payer Pledge. Tell your Members of Congress that this is a bottom-line issue for you. No compromise. http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/1488/t/689/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=2595 Peace, Marnie at Green Change (1) http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Briefing-by-White-House-Press-Secretary-Robert-Gibbs-3-5-09/ (2) Perhaps the two most important Senators on this issue are Max Baucus and Ted Kennedy. Baucus has declared single payer is "off the table." Kennedy is holding secret meetings with lobbyists where they are formulating legislation to compel Americans to subsidize the insurance industry. http://www.greenchange.org/article.php?id=4102 http://www.greenchange.org/article.php?id=4036 (3) http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:HR00676:@@@P (4) http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/resources/PollMemo.pdf - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Marnie Glickman Executive Director Green Change www.greenchange.org 503.313.7919 w 707.313.7919 f skype: marnieglickman My Green Change page: http://network.greenchange.org/people/marnie Green Change is a community of people with Green values: justice, grassroots democracy, sustainability and non-violence. We work together to share Green art, politics and culture. _______________________________________________ Natlcomaffairs mailing list To send a message to the list, write to: Natlcomaffairs at green.gpus.org To unsubscribe or change your list options, go to: http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/natlcomaffairs You must know your password to do this. If you can't figure out how to unsubscribe, as a last resort only, send a message OFF LIST to steveh at olypen.com If your state delegation changes, please see: http://gp.org/committees/nc/documents/delegate_change.html To report violations of listserv protocol, write to forummanagers at lists.gp-us.org For other information about the National Committee, see: http://gp.org/committees/nc/ ****************************************** Tim McKee, Manchester CT, main number cell-860-778-1304, 860-643-2282 National Committee member of the Green Party of the United States and is a spokesperson for the Green Party of CT. BLOG-http://thebiggreenpicture.blogspot.com -- Be Yourself @ mail.com! Choose From 200+ Email Addresses Get a Free Account at www.mail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From smderosa at cox.net Tue Mar 10 22:25:15 2009 From: smderosa at cox.net (Mike DeRosa) Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 22:25:15 -0400 Subject: {news} REMINDER: FINAL ARGUMENTS ON CAMPAIGN FINANCE CASE THIS WED AND THURS BRIDGEPORT FEDERAL COURT Message-ID: <000901c9a1f0$9d1630f0$d74292d0$@net> http://bajan.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/update.jpg GREENS: PLEASE CONSIDER ATTENDING THIS IMPORTANT HEARING: WHAT: THE LAST HEARING ON OUR CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWSUIT. OUR ACLU LAWYERS WILL BE PRESENTING OUR LAST ARGUMENTS TO FEDERAL JUDGE UNDERHILL THIS WED. THE STATE OF CT ET AL WILL PRESENT THEIR FINAL ARGUMENT ON THIS THURS. (info: 860-919-4042) WHEN: THIS WED 3/11/09 AND THURS 3/11/09 STARTING AT 9AM WHERE: FEDERAL COURT IN BRIDGEPORT CT (SEE DIRECTIONS BELOW): BRIEN McMAHON FEDERAL BUILDING 915 Lafayette Boulevard Bridgeport, CT 06604 Federal Judge Underhill's Court WHY: SEE HISTORY IN THE MAKING. SEE ATTACHMENT FOR INFORMATION ON WHY OUR LEGAL POSITION IS STRONG. AND WHY THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING OF OUR JOURNEY TO JUSTICE. http://www.ctd.uscourts.gov/assets/bpt3.jpg http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3461/3240539674_ac1545925c.jpghttp://ventureb eat.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/bill-of-rights-01gif-gif-image-975x821-pi xels-scaled-78.png http://www.armeniadiaspora.com/images/D45_070215osce.jpghttp://farm4.static. flickr.com/3461/3240539674_ac1545925c.jpg http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3461/3240539674_ac1545925c.jpg Directions to United States District Court 9 1 5 L a f a y e t t e B o u l e v a r d B r i d g e p o r t, C T 0 6 6 04 ( 2 0 3 ) 5 7 9 - 5 8 6 1 North Follow Interstate 95 south to Exit 27 (Lafayette Blvd), bear right onto Lafayette Boulevard, proceed to the third traffic light. The Courthouse is on your left. Take a right onto State Street and immediately get into the left lane. The parking garage is the first parking garage on your left (diagonally across from the Courthouse). South Follow Interstate 95 north to Exit 27 (Lafayette Blvd), proceed straight to the third traffic light. Take a left onto Lafayette Boulevard, go to the fourth traffic light. The Courthouse is on your left. Take a right onto State Street and immediately get into the left lane. The parking garage is the first parking garage on your left (diagonally across from the Courthouse). Coming South on Route 25/8 Follow Route 25/8 to Exit 2 (Fairfield Avenue), proceed straight to the third traffic light. You are now facing the side of the Courthouse. Take a left onto State Street, proceed past the first traffic light. The parking garage is the first parking garage on your left (diagonally across from the Courthouse). Coming from the Merritt Parkway Northbound - Exit 49S, follow Route 25/8 directions above. Southbound - Exit 52, follow Route 25/8 directions above. PAID FOR BY GREEN PARTY OF CT ; FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTED DOCUMENT. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 8264 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 598 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 6099 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 2693 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 5735 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 7823 bytes Desc: not available URL: From timmckee at mail.com Wed Mar 11 17:59:03 2009 From: timmckee at mail.com (Tim McKee) Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:59:03 -0500 Subject: {news} Fw: [usgp-dx] 2009 Candidate Recruitment Update - Revised Message-ID: <20090311215903.9F566606861@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brent McMillan" To: "national comm affairs" Subject: [usgp-dx] 2009 Candidate Recruitment Update - Revised Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 11:44:57 -0400 Dear NC Delegate: Since I sent this message out minutes ago I have been made aware of two more candidates... One month ago I sent an update to the list about how candidate recruitment is going. At that time we had 74 candidates. Currently we have 96 + 2 = 98. How does that compare to a comparable point in the election cycle four years ago? On March 14, 2005 we had 35 candidates. Other years for comparison: On March 13, 2006 we had 193 candidates. On March 11, 2007 we had 44 candidates. On March 9, 2008 we had 145 candidates. Our next big election day is April 7 with races in Illinois and Wisconsin. Currently there are 30 candidates running that day, more than half of those are partisan races. In service: Brent McMillan, Executive Director Green Party of the United States 202-319-7191 brent at gp.org _______________________________________________ Natlcomaffairs mailing list To send a message to the list, write to: Natlcomaffairs at green.gpus.org To unsubscribe or change your list options, go to: http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/natlcomaffairs You must know your password to do this. If you can't figure out how to unsubscribe, as a last resort only, send a message OFF LIST to steveh at olypen.com If your state delegation changes, please see: http://gp.org/committees/nc/documents/delegate_change.html To report violations of listserv protocol, write to forummanagers at lists.gp-us.org For other information about the National Committee, see: http://gp.org/committees/nc/ ****************************************** Tim McKee, Manchester CT, main number cell-860-778-1304, 860-643-2282 National Committee member of the Green Party of the United States and is a spokesperson for the Green Party of CT. BLOG-http://thebiggreenpicture.blogspot.com -- Be Yourself @ mail.com! Choose From 200+ Email Addresses Get a Free Account at www.mail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com Thu Mar 12 01:41:52 2009 From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (David Bedell) Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 00:41:52 -0500 Subject: {news} Proposed agenda - voter list Message-ID: I spoke with Pearl Williams a couple weeks ago. I thought a declared statewide candidate might be able to get the voter list for free, but she assured me that everyone has to pay, $300 for the CD(s). If we know someone who already has a recent version, they might be willing to copy it for us. Or maybe we could split the cost with someone like the Libertarians or the Independent Party. Once we get the list for the annual mailing, we need to make copies for each of our chapters and our candidates (last year, not all our candidates got a list of Greens in their district). I hereby volunteer for the task of copying and distribution. David Bedell ----------Original message---------------- Ronna: Have not heard back from the CT SOTS. I will call the lawyer I spoke with on Monday to find out the status so we can move forward. Thanks for looking into the database. Sincerely, Mike DeRosa From: ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org [mailto:ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org] On Behalf Of Ronna Stuller Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 7:43 PM To: CT Greens News Cc: Phoebe Godfrey Subject: Re: {news} Proposed agenda for the 7PM 2-24-09 SCC CTGP meeting at Portland Senior Center Hi all, With our state convention planned for next month, I was wondering if the free offer of the state-wide list has come through. (It'd be great if it has!) Whether or not it can be gotten at no cost, I think it's essential that we obtain the list of registered Greens ASAP, before we send out ballots for SCC elections (and particularly before the convention itself), so we know who's eligible to vote. If it looks as though the process will be delayed, I will call the SOTS and find out how I can purchase the entire voter database. (It's a huge file, and last time it came on several disks, I believe.) While we primarily need the Greens list for internal elections, we will need to have the entire state voter database to support the campaigns of Green candidates in the November elections. Ronna On Feb 21, 2009, at 11:07 PM, B Barry wrote: 7. (5 minutes): Authorization of money to get the state-wide list of registered Green Party voters. From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com Fri Mar 13 12:34:59 2009 From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (David Bedell) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 11:34:59 -0500 Subject: {news} CTGP flyers Message-ID: I've uploaded better pdf versions of the flyers at http://www.ctgreens.org/platform.shtml * The Green Party of Connecticut * Ten Key Values * Universal Healthcare: Single Payer Is the Only Answer * Be Counted for the Environment * Nuclear Power: Neither Clean nor Green * Reducing Global Warming Requires Leadership Coming soon: flyers on Instant Runoff Voting and Drug Policy Reform, thanks to Jerry Martin and the New Haven Green Party. David Bedell ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Bedell" To: Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 2:48 AM Subject: Re: {news} Proposed agenda for the 7PM 2-24-09 SCC CTGP meeting at Portland Senior Center With regard to: #5. (5-10minutes): CTGP literature. I can't be at the 2/24 meeting, but I'd like to announce that I've adapted the five outreach flyers created by the New Haven chapter and posted them on the Platform page of the website: http://www.ctgreens.org/platform.shtml They are in PDF format and can be downloaded and printed. If others would like to create similar flyers, I can share the MS Publisher template for these. I could also use some technical assistance, since the result of my conversion from Publisher to PDF leaves something to be desired. David Bedell From smderosa at cox.net Fri Mar 13 23:53:17 2009 From: smderosa at cox.net (Mike DeRosa) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 23:53:17 -0400 Subject: {news} Proposed agenda - voter list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001b01c9a458$68fe66b0$3afb3410$@net> I spoke with Atty Bromley at CT SOTS. He says he will have a list of all CT Green registered voters for us on this coming Monday. He will be extracting them from the master list and there will be no charge for this. Sincerely, Mike DeRosa -----Original Message----- From: ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org [mailto:ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org] On Behalf Of David Bedell Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 1:42 AM To: ctgp-news at ml.greens.org Subject: {news} Proposed agenda - voter list 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 I spoke with Pearl Williams a couple weeks ago. I thought a declared statewide candidate might be able to get the voter list for free, but she assured me that everyone has to pay, $300 for the CD(s). If we know someone who already has a recent version, they might be willing to copy it for us. Or maybe we could split the cost with someone like the Libertarians or the Independent Party. Once we get the list for the annual mailing, we need to make copies for each of our chapters and our candidates (last year, not all our candidates got a list of Greens in their district). I hereby volunteer for the task of copying and distribution. David Bedell ----------Original message---------------- Ronna: Have not heard back from the CT SOTS. I will call the lawyer I spoke with on Monday to find out the status so we can move forward. Thanks for looking into the database. Sincerely, Mike DeRosa From: ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org [mailto:ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org] On Behalf Of Ronna Stuller Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 7:43 PM To: CT Greens News Cc: Phoebe Godfrey Subject: Re: {news} Proposed agenda for the 7PM 2-24-09 SCC CTGP meeting at Portland Senior Center Hi all, With our state convention planned for next month, I was wondering if the free offer of the state-wide list has come through. (It'd be great if it has!) Whether or not it can be gotten at no cost, I think it's essential that we obtain the list of registered Greens ASAP, before we send out ballots for SCC elections (and particularly before the convention itself), so we know who's eligible to vote. If it looks as though the process will be delayed, I will call the SOTS and find out how I can purchase the entire voter database. (It's a huge file, and last time it came on several disks, I believe.) While we primarily need the Greens list for internal elections, we will need to have the entire state voter database to support the campaigns of Green candidates in the November elections. Ronna On Feb 21, 2009, at 11:07 PM, B Barry wrote: 7. (5 minutes): Authorization of money to get the state-wide list of registered Green Party voters. 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 From vogel at ct.metrocast.net Sat Mar 14 11:05:08 2009 From: vogel at ct.metrocast.net (Robert Vogel) Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2009 11:05:08 -0400 Subject: {news} Proposed agenda - voter list References: <001b01c9a458$68fe66b0$3afb3410$@net> Message-ID: <19702B85CD8F44A285E3DD537E78B178@JUNKNAME> If you are allowed to copy it, why don't you resell it at a more reasonable fee. About $20.00 should cover the cost of copying a DVD and leave a small profit. I bet you could sell a few. Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike DeRosa" To: "'David Bedell'" ; Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 11:53 PM Subject: RE: {news} Proposed agenda - voter list > 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 > I spoke with Atty Bromley at CT SOTS. He says he will have a list of all > CT > Green registered voters for us on this coming Monday. > He will be extracting them from the master list and there will be no > charge > for this. > Sincerely, > Mike DeRosa > > -----Original Message----- > From: ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org > [mailto:ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org] On Behalf Of David Bedell > Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 1:42 AM > To: ctgp-news at ml.greens.org > Subject: {news} Proposed agenda - voter list > > 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 > I spoke with Pearl Williams a couple weeks ago. I thought a declared > statewide candidate might be able to get the voter list for free, but she > assured me that everyone has to pay, $300 for the CD(s). If we know > someone > who already has a recent version, they might be willing to copy it for us. > Or maybe we could split the cost with someone like the Libertarians or the > Independent Party. > > Once we get the list for the annual mailing, we need to make copies for > each > of our chapters and our candidates (last year, not all our candidates got > a > list of Greens in their district). I hereby volunteer for the task of > copying and distribution. > > David Bedell > > ----------Original message---------------- > Ronna: > > Have not heard back from the CT SOTS. I will call the lawyer I spoke with > on Monday to find out the status so we can move forward. > > Thanks for looking into the database. > > Sincerely, > > Mike DeRosa > > > > From: ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org > [mailto:ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org] On Behalf Of Ronna Stuller > Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 7:43 PM > To: CT Greens News > Cc: Phoebe Godfrey > Subject: Re: {news} Proposed agenda for the 7PM 2-24-09 SCC CTGP meeting > at > Portland Senior Center > > > > Hi all, > > > > With our state convention planned for next month, I was wondering if the > free offer of the state-wide list has come through. (It'd be great if it > has!) > > > > Whether or not it can be gotten at no cost, I think it's essential that we > obtain the list of registered Greens ASAP, before we send out ballots for > SCC elections (and particularly before the convention itself), so we know > who's eligible to vote. > > > > If it looks as though the process will be delayed, I will call the SOTS > and > find out how I can purchase the entire voter database. (It's a huge file, > and last time it came on several disks, I believe.) While we primarily > need > the Greens list for internal elections, we will need to have the entire > state voter database to support the campaigns of Green candidates in the > November elections. > > > > Ronna > > > > > > On Feb 21, 2009, at 11:07 PM, B Barry wrote: > > > > 7. (5 minutes): Authorization of money to get the state-wide list of > registered Green Party voters. > > > 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 From smderosa at cox.net Sat Mar 14 23:22:06 2009 From: smderosa at cox.net (Mike DeRosa) Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2009 23:22:06 -0400 Subject: {news} Registered Green List: Humpty Dumpty, Question # 9 , The CEP, and the CT SOTS In-Reply-To: <19702B85CD8F44A285E3DD537E78B178@JUNKNAME> References: <001b01c9a458$68fe66b0$3afb3410$@net> <19702B85CD8F44A285E3DD537E78B178@JUNKNAME> Message-ID: <001501c9a51d$386cd160$a9467420$@net> Robert and Fellow Greens: This is an interesting turn of events. Until recently the CT SOTS position has been that we have to pay $300 for a list of all registered voters in CT and then we have to extract the Green Party registered names from the CT SOTS computer program. Think about the absurdity of this position. The state of CT is obstructing the legitimate representatives of the CT Green Party access to the names of the voters who are registered Greens Party members. Our taxpayer money goes to an agency that gets paid to compile lists of registered voters in CT but then that agency charges the legitimate representatives of these political organizations $300 to gain access to something that is public record. I don't know if CT SOTS charges the Democrats or Republicans for such lists, but that is moot because in every town and city in CT Democratic and Republican "registrar of voters" freely share those lists with their respective political parties. I guess we can conclude from this that: All political parties in CT are equal, but some political parties are more equal than others. Let's see if they actually hand these names over to us on Monday. We believe we have a right to be treated fairly by gaining access to basic resources (i.e. voter lists) that we pay for as taxpayers. We are on strong legal ground here. For example the judicial decision in "Socialist Workers Party vs Rockefeller." This 1970 decision says if a state gives the list of registered voters to the qualified parties, it must also give it to the unqualified parties that are trying to get on the ballot. The U.S. Supreme Court summarily affirmed this 3-judge U.S. District Court ruling from New York. Most recently, there is the decision Green Party of Michigan vs Land, no. 2:08-cv-10149 (Mar. 26, 2008). This decision overturned the law that said that the list of voters who vote in the Republican presidential primary and the Democratic presidential primary should be given to ONLY those Parties, but no one else. But getting the list is not enough. We need to work the lists, and rework the lists. That means calling everybody on the list and giving them information about what we are doing and how they might assist, help, or join us. This of course is a lot of work, but that is one of the ways you could build a political party. I also raised with Atty Bromely of SOTS the fact that question #9 on the CT voter registration form (see attachment) asks the voter to indicate a preference for one of the following choices: 1. Join The Republican Party or 2. Join The Democratic Party or 3. Join another "Other" party______ or 4. "I don't wish to register in a party at this time". Bromely says that a bill was passed a few years ago that requires this exact language. I think we should make an issue that the "Other" party choice (Post-Modernists would have a field day with this one) is discriminatory because the name of the Democratic party and the Republicans party appear but the legal names of legitimate third parties are absent from question 9 except for the word "other". The SOTS keeps pushing forward the fictions that there are so many minor parties in CT that they can't list them all or this recently passed law requires them to only list the two major parties. The inconvenient facts are that there are really only 3 or 4 parties that actually have a minor party following in CT. The CT SOTS's office could have a lot influence if they sponsored a bill that would require this change or they could just require it based on simple constitutional grounds. I have searched the CT SOTS for a press release that was posted in late 2008 giving the latest numbers of registered minor party members. It does not seem to be there (maybe somebody could help me find it). It incorrectly stated that the CT Green Party had over 19,000 registered voters instead of the 1,900 (or so) that was the actual number if someone at the CT SOTS had added all the figures correctly. I pointed this mistake out to them by phone and since then the press release has disappeared (but maybe it's still hidden there somewhere or maybe it is somewhere still in virtual space). This is nothing new for the CT SOTS since they could not correctly in 2008 count our legal write-in presidential candidate's (Cynthia McKinney) votes. According to an article in the CT Post of 10/08/08 by Ken Dixon, the CT SOTS is quoted as saying that the CT Green Party has 2.151 registered voters in CT and the CT Libertarian Party has 1,147 registered voters. The Independent Party of Waterbury has around 3,000 registered voters (based on the disappeared press release) and the CT Working Families Party has less than 100 registered voters (last time I saw the figure in late 2008 it was around 57). All the other minor parties in CT are either no longer in existence or have less than 50 members. In reality there are only three minor parties that are breathing and actually running legislative and federal candidates in CT. The other "third" party (WFP) is probably a caucus in the Democratic party disguised as a third party based on their low registration numbers and lack of independent candidacies. They theoretically could be included based on their one independent candidate race against two major party candidates in 2008 (Debra Noble) and their cross endorsement of Cicero's Booker's minor party Independent Party senatorial race in Waterbury in 2008. Perhaps their cross endorsement of around 94% of incumbent legislative Democrats and some other local election wins give them some kind of official halo of legitimacy. They theoretically could be accepted as a legitimate third party and be listed in the question number 9 box if their party registration numbers increased. You don't have to be a political scientist or a social psychologist to figure out that if people are NOT given a fair and obvious opportunity to choose which political party most matches their political views on CT's official voter registration form they are probably going to answer question # 9 with the response:"I don't wish to register in a party at this time." Since 44% of the voters respond in this way, why is there no one representing the unaffiliated or independent point of view? By the way, 35% of the voters are registered Democrats and 20% are Republicans. Does this mean that that the Republican party is really a third party in CT? It is my belief that if people saw and could check off the option "Green Party" as a response to question 9 on the voter registration form that many more would register as Greens. I can't actually prove that at this time but I think it is quite likely that this is the case. So it is my opinion that after we get through winning our lawsuit against campaign finance deform, that we demand the CT SOTS create some minimum registration requirement for the status called "minor party" and I suggest 1000 registered voters as a minimum number of registered voters to obtain that designation. This minimum would only be applicable for the purposes of being specifically listed as a party using the minor party's legal name on the CT voter registration form as an addition choice to question 9. I also think the various "modicum of support" arguments for ballot access requirements are unconstitutional. If the 1% valid signature petition requirement is such an accurate and fair measure for political legitimacy in CT why doesn't the state of CT apply these requirements to the major party candidates every time they run for office or allow minor parties a fair mechanism to gain permanent ballot access? This especially comes sharply into focus when you look at the 20% valid signature petitioning requirement for getting a grant under CT's Citizen Election Program. The CEP and the law that created it essentially says that if you are not a major party you can only get a full grant under CEP in future elections (i.e. get equal treatment) under the law by proving that you can get 20% or more of the votes in an a previous election. Under CEP if you are a minor party you can alternately get a full immediate grant by getting the valid signatures of 20% of the people who voted in the last election in the district you are running in (that is, prove your are really a major party)(Note under CEP: No petitioning requirement for major parties in CT). But what happens to this CEP requirement when you find out that in 14 legislative races in 2008 the major party candidate got less that 20% of the final vote. Why would you give a future CEP grant to a major party candidate in 2010 who got less than 20% of the vote in 2008 when you deny a future grant to a minor party candidate who got less than 20% of the vote in the same election in 2008? Does this imply that the designation "Major Party" confers a special and protected legal status under CT campaign finance law? It reminds me of what Lewis Carroll wrote in Though The Looking Glass: " 'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, ' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.' 'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.' 'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.' ". Of course, we all know what ultimately happened to Humpty Dumpty. Regards, Mike DeRosa __________________ -----Original Message----- From: Robert Vogel [mailto:vogel at ct.metrocast.net] Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2009 11:05 AM To: Mike DeRosa; 'David Bedell'; ctgp-news at ml.greens.org Subject: Re: {news} Proposed agenda - voter list If you are allowed to copy it, why don't you resell it at a more reasonable fee. About $20.00 should cover the cost of copying a DVD and leave a small profit. I bet you could sell a few. Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike DeRosa" To: "'David Bedell'" ; Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 11:53 PM Subject: RE: {news} Proposed agenda - voter list > 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 > I spoke with Atty Bromley at CT SOTS. He says he will have a list of all > CT > Green registered voters for us on this coming Monday. > He will be extracting them from the master list and there will be no > charge > for this. > Sincerely, > Mike DeRosa > > -----Original Message----- > From: ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org > [mailto:ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org] On Behalf Of David Bedell > Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 1:42 AM > To: ctgp-news at ml.greens.org > Subject: {news} Proposed agenda - voter list > > 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 > I spoke with Pearl Williams a couple weeks ago. I thought a declared > statewide candidate might be able to get the voter list for free, but she > assured me that everyone has to pay, $300 for the CD(s). If we know > someone > who already has a recent version, they might be willing to copy it for us. > Or maybe we could split the cost with someone like the Libertarians or the > Independent Party. > > Once we get the list for the annual mailing, we need to make copies for > each > of our chapters and our candidates (last year, not all our candidates got > a > list of Greens in their district). I hereby volunteer for the task of > copying and distribution. > > David Bedell > > ----------Original message---------------- > Ronna: > > Have not heard back from the CT SOTS. I will call the lawyer I spoke with > on Monday to find out the status so we can move forward. > > Thanks for looking into the database. > > Sincerely, > > Mike DeRosa > > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: winmail.dat Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 434070 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rstuller at snet.net Sun Mar 15 16:23:13 2009 From: rstuller at snet.net (Ronna Stuller) Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 16:23:13 -0400 Subject: {news} Proposed agenda - voter list In-Reply-To: <001b01c9a458$68fe66b0$3afb3410$@net> References: <001b01c9a458$68fe66b0$3afb3410$@net> Message-ID: Thanks for following up on this, Mike. I hope you get the list of registered Greens tomorrow for free. That is what we need urgently for our annual meeting/election. I believe that for election support it is worthwhile to spend the $300, if necessary, for the entire voter database. That's not quite as urgent, though. As I stated before, I am willing put up the $300, but unfortunately have had a crazy week and didn't get to call the SOTS office. Ronna On Mar 13, 2009, at 11:53 PM, Mike DeRosa wrote: > I spoke with Atty Bromley at CT SOTS. He says he will have a list > of all CT > Green registered voters for us on this coming Monday. > He will be extracting them from the master list and there will be no > charge > for this. > Sincerely, > Mike DeRosa > From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com Mon Mar 16 01:09:26 2009 From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (David Bedell) Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 00:09:26 -0500 Subject: {news} Re: Registered Green List: Humpty Dumpty, Question # 9 , The CEP, and the CT SOTS References: <001b01c9a458$68fe66b0$3afb3410$@net> <19702B85CD8F44A285E3DD537E78B178@JUNKNAME> <001501c9a51d$386cd160$a9467420$@net> Message-ID: For party enrollment statistics, check here: http://www.sots.ct.gov/sots/cwp/view.asp?a=3179&q=401492&SOTSNav_GID=1846 The SOTS issues statistics every year in late October. Up through Oct 2007, this included enrollment figures for each minor party (Greens were 2151 then, Working Families were 56). Funny thing is, the stats for Oct 2008 don't give this breakdown,but just list total minor party enrollment as 8059 (vs. 7758 in 2007). The erroneous press release stating there are 19,706 CT Greens is still available here: http://www.sots.ct.gov/sots/lib/sots/releases/2008/11.3.08_record_voter_registration.pdf David Bedell ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike DeRosa" To: "'Robert Vogel'" ; "'David Bedell'" ; ; "'2a-CTgreensForum'" ; Cc: "'Mark Lopez'" ; "'Mark Ladov'" ; "'Michael Westerfield'" ; "'Jean de Smet'" Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2009 10:22 PM Subject: Registered Green List: Humpty Dumpty, Question # 9 , The CEP, and the CT SOTS Robert and Fellow Greens: This is an interesting turn of events. Until recently the CT SOTS position has been that we have to pay $300 for a list of all registered voters in CT and then we have to extract the Green Party registered names from the CT SOTS computer program. Think about the absurdity of this position. The state of CT is obstructing the legitimate representatives of the CT Green Party access to the names of the voters who are registered Greens Party members. Our taxpayer money goes to an agency that gets paid to compile lists of registered voters in CT but then that agency charges the legitimate representatives of these political organizations $300 to gain access to something that is public record. I don't know if CT SOTS charges the Democrats or Republicans for such lists, but that is moot because in every town and city in CT Democratic and Republican "registrar of voters" freely share those lists with their respective political parties. I guess we can conclude from this that: All political parties in CT are equal, but some political parties are more equal than others. Let's see if they actually hand these names over to us on Monday. We believe we have a right to be treated fairly by gaining access to basic resources (i.e. voter lists) that we pay for as taxpayers. We are on strong legal ground here. For example the judicial decision in "Socialist Workers Party vs Rockefeller." This 1970 decision says if a state gives the list of registered voters to the qualified parties, it must also give it to the unqualified parties that are trying to get on the ballot. The U.S. Supreme Court summarily affirmed this 3-judge U.S. District Court ruling from New York. Most recently, there is the decision Green Party of Michigan vs Land, no. 2:08-cv-10149 (Mar. 26, 2008). This decision overturned the law that said that the list of voters who vote in the Republican presidential primary and the Democratic presidential primary should be given to ONLY those Parties, but no one else. But getting the list is not enough. We need to work the lists, and rework the lists. That means calling everybody on the list and giving them information about what we are doing and how they might assist, help, or join us. This of course is a lot of work, but that is one of the ways you could build a political party. I also raised with Atty Bromely of SOTS the fact that question #9 on the CT voter registration form (see attachment) asks the voter to indicate a preference for one of the following choices: 1. Join The Republican Party or 2. Join The Democratic Party or 3. Join another "Other" party______ or 4. "I don't wish to register in a party at this time". Bromely says that a bill was passed a few years ago that requires this exact language. I think we should make an issue that the "Other" party choice (Post-Modernists would have a field day with this one) is discriminatory because the name of the Democratic party and the Republicans party appear but the legal names of legitimate third parties are absent from question 9 except for the word "other". The SOTS keeps pushing forward the fictions that there are so many minor parties in CT that they can't list them all or this recently passed law requires them to only list the two major parties. The inconvenient facts are that there are really only 3 or 4 parties that actually have a minor party following in CT. The CT SOTS's office could have a lot influence if they sponsored a bill that would require this change or they could just require it based on simple constitutional grounds. I have searched the CT SOTS for a press release that was posted in late 2008 giving the latest numbers of registered minor party members. It does not seem to be there (maybe somebody could help me find it). It incorrectly stated that the CT Green Party had over 19,000 registered voters instead of the 1,900 (or so) that was the actual number if someone at the CT SOTS had added all the figures correctly. I pointed this mistake out to them by phone and since then the press release has disappeared (but maybe it's still hidden there somewhere or maybe it is somewhere still in virtual space). This is nothing new for the CT SOTS since they could not correctly in 2008 count our legal write-in presidential candidate's (Cynthia McKinney) votes. According to an article in the CT Post of 10/08/08 by Ken Dixon, the CT SOTS is quoted as saying that the CT Green Party has 2.151 registered voters in CT and the CT Libertarian Party has 1,147 registered voters. The Independent Party of Waterbury has around 3,000 registered voters (based on the disappeared press release) and the CT Working Families Party has less than 100 registered voters (last time I saw the figure in late 2008 it was around 57). All the other minor parties in CT are either no longer in existence or have less than 50 members. In reality there are only three minor parties that are breathing and actually running legislative and federal candidates in CT. The other "third" party (WFP) is probably a caucus in the Democratic party disguised as a third party based on their low registration numbers and lack of independent candidacies. They theoretically could be included based on their one independent candidate race against two major party candidates in 2008 (Debra Noble) and their cross endorsement of Cicero's Booker's minor party Independent Party senatorial race in Waterbury in 2008. Perhaps their cross endorsement of around 94% of incumbent legislative Democrats and some other local election wins give them some kind of official halo of legitimacy. They theoretically could be accepted as a legitimate third party and be listed in the question number 9 box if their party registration numbers increased. You don't have to be a political scientist or a social psychologist to figure out that if people are NOT given a fair and obvious opportunity to choose which political party most matches their political views on CT's official voter registration form they are probably going to answer question # 9 with the response:"I don't wish to register in a party at this time." Since 44% of the voters respond in this way, why is there no one representing the unaffiliated or independent point of view? By the way, 35% of the voters are registered Democrats and 20% are Republicans. Does this mean that that the Republican party is really a third party in CT? It is my belief that if people saw and could check off the option "Green Party" as a response to question 9 on the voter registration form that many more would register as Greens. I can't actually prove that at this time but I think it is quite likely that this is the case. So it is my opinion that after we get through winning our lawsuit against campaign finance deform, that we demand the CT SOTS create some minimum registration requirement for the status called "minor party" and I suggest 1000 registered voters as a minimum number of registered voters to obtain that designation. This minimum would only be applicable for the purposes of being specifically listed as a party using the minor party's legal name on the CT voter registration form as an addition choice to question 9. I also think the various "modicum of support" arguments for ballot access requirements are unconstitutional. If the 1% valid signature petition requirement is such an accurate and fair measure for political legitimacy in CT why doesn't the state of CT apply these requirements to the major party candidates every time they run for office or allow minor parties a fair mechanism to gain permanent ballot access? This especially comes sharply into focus when you look at the 20% valid signature petitioning requirement for getting a grant under CT's Citizen Election Program. The CEP and the law that created it essentially says that if you are not a major party you can only get a full grant under CEP in future elections (i.e. get equal treatment) under the law by proving that you can get 20% or more of the votes in an a previous election. Under CEP if you are a minor party you can alternately get a full immediate grant by getting the valid signatures of 20% of the people who voted in the last election in the district you are running in (that is, prove your are really a major party)(Note under CEP: No petitioning requirement for major parties in CT). But what happens to this CEP requirement when you find out that in 14 legislative races in 2008 the major party candidate got less that 20% of the final vote. Why would you give a future CEP grant to a major party candidate in 2010 who got less than 20% of the vote in 2008 when you deny a future grant to a minor party candidate who got less than 20% of the vote in the same election in 2008? Does this imply that the designation "Major Party" confers a special and protected legal status under CT campaign finance law? It reminds me of what Lewis Carroll wrote in Though The Looking Glass: " 'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, ' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.' 'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.' 'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.' ". Of course, we all know what ultimately happened to Humpty Dumpty. Regards, Mike DeRosa __________________ -----Original Message----- From: Robert Vogel [mailto:vogel at ct.metrocast.net] Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2009 11:05 AM To: Mike DeRosa; 'David Bedell'; ctgp-news at ml.greens.org Subject: Re: {news} Proposed agenda - voter list If you are allowed to copy it, why don't you resell it at a more reasonable fee. About $20.00 should cover the cost of copying a DVD and leave a small profit. I bet you could sell a few. Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike DeRosa" To: "'David Bedell'" ; Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 11:53 PM Subject: RE: {news} Proposed agenda - voter list > 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 > I spoke with Atty Bromley at CT SOTS. He says he will have a list of all > CT > Green registered voters for us on this coming Monday. > He will be extracting them from the master list and there will be no > charge > for this. > Sincerely, > Mike DeRosa > > -----Original Message----- > From: ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org > [mailto:ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org] On Behalf Of David Bedell > Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 1:42 AM > To: ctgp-news at ml.greens.org > Subject: {news} Proposed agenda - voter list > > 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 > I spoke with Pearl Williams a couple weeks ago. I thought a declared > statewide candidate might be able to get the voter list for free, but she > assured me that everyone has to pay, $300 for the CD(s). If we know > someone > who already has a recent version, they might be willing to copy it for us. > Or maybe we could split the cost with someone like the Libertarians or the > Independent Party. > > Once we get the list for the annual mailing, we need to make copies for > each > of our chapters and our candidates (last year, not all our candidates got > a > list of Greens in their district). I hereby volunteer for the task of > copying and distribution. > > David Bedell > > ----------Original message---------------- > Ronna: > > Have not heard back from the CT SOTS. I will call the lawyer I spoke with > on Monday to find out the status so we can move forward. > > Thanks for looking into the database. > > Sincerely, > > Mike DeRosa > > > From smderosa at cox.net Mon Mar 16 02:16:34 2009 From: smderosa at cox.net (Mike DeRosa) Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 02:16:34 -0400 Subject: {news} RE: Registered Green List: Humpty Dumpty, Question # 9 , The CEP, and the CT SOTS In-Reply-To: References: <001b01c9a458$68fe66b0$3afb3410$@net> <19702B85CD8F44A285E3DD537E78B178@JUNKNAME> <001501c9a51d$386cd160$a9467420$@net> Message-ID: <002a01c9a5fe$c23b6b40$46b241c0$@net> David: Thanks, Mike DeRosa -----Original Message----- From: David Bedell [mailto:dbedellgreen at hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 1:09 AM To: Mike DeRosa; 'Robert Vogel'; ctgp-news at ml.greens.org; '2a-CTgreensForum'; newhavengreens at yahoogroups.com Cc: 'Mark Lopez'; 'Mark Ladov'; 'Michael Westerfield'; 'Jean de Smet' Subject: Re: Registered Green List: Humpty Dumpty, Question # 9 , The CEP, and the CT SOTS For party enrollment statistics, check here: http://www.sots.ct.gov/sots/cwp/view.asp?a=3179&q=401492&SOTSNav_GID=1846 The SOTS issues statistics every year in late October. Up through Oct 2007, this included enrollment figures for each minor party (Greens were 2151 then, Working Families were 56). Funny thing is, the stats for Oct 2008 don't give this breakdown,but just list total minor party enrollment as 8059 (vs. 7758 in 2007). The erroneous press release stating there are 19,706 CT Greens is still available here: http://www.sots.ct.gov/sots/lib/sots/releases/2008/11.3.08_record_voter_regi stration.pdf David Bedell ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike DeRosa" To: "'Robert Vogel'" ; "'David Bedell'" ; ; "'2a-CTgreensForum'" ; Cc: "'Mark Lopez'" ; "'Mark Ladov'" ; "'Michael Westerfield'" ; "'Jean de Smet'" Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2009 10:22 PM Subject: Registered Green List: Humpty Dumpty, Question # 9 , The CEP, and the CT SOTS Robert and Fellow Greens: This is an interesting turn of events. Until recently the CT SOTS position has been that we have to pay $300 for a list of all registered voters in CT and then we have to extract the Green Party registered names from the CT SOTS computer program. Think about the absurdity of this position. The state of CT is obstructing the legitimate representatives of the CT Green Party access to the names of the voters who are registered Greens Party members. Our taxpayer money goes to an agency that gets paid to compile lists of registered voters in CT but then that agency charges the legitimate representatives of these political organizations $300 to gain access to something that is public record. I don't know if CT SOTS charges the Democrats or Republicans for such lists, but that is moot because in every town and city in CT Democratic and Republican "registrar of voters" freely share those lists with their respective political parties. I guess we can conclude from this that: All political parties in CT are equal, but some political parties are more equal than others. Let's see if they actually hand these names over to us on Monday. We believe we have a right to be treated fairly by gaining access to basic resources (i.e. voter lists) that we pay for as taxpayers. We are on strong legal ground here. For example the judicial decision in "Socialist Workers Party vs Rockefeller." This 1970 decision says if a state gives the list of registered voters to the qualified parties, it must also give it to the unqualified parties that are trying to get on the ballot. The U.S. Supreme Court summarily affirmed this 3-judge U.S. District Court ruling from New York. Most recently, there is the decision Green Party of Michigan vs Land, no. 2:08-cv-10149 (Mar. 26, 2008). This decision overturned the law that said that the list of voters who vote in the Republican presidential primary and the Democratic presidential primary should be given to ONLY those Parties, but no one else. But getting the list is not enough. We need to work the lists, and rework the lists. That means calling everybody on the list and giving them information about what we are doing and how they might assist, help, or join us. This of course is a lot of work, but that is one of the ways you could build a political party. I also raised with Atty Bromely of SOTS the fact that question #9 on the CT voter registration form (see attachment) asks the voter to indicate a preference for one of the following choices: 1. Join The Republican Party or 2. Join The Democratic Party or 3. Join another "Other" party______ or 4. "I don't wish to register in a party at this time". Bromely says that a bill was passed a few years ago that requires this exact language. I think we should make an issue that the "Other" party choice (Post-Modernists would have a field day with this one) is discriminatory because the name of the Democratic party and the Republicans party appear but the legal names of legitimate third parties are absent from question 9 except for the word "other". The SOTS keeps pushing forward the fictions that there are so many minor parties in CT that they can't list them all or this recently passed law requires them to only list the two major parties. The inconvenient facts are that there are really only 3 or 4 parties that actually have a minor party following in CT. The CT SOTS's office could have a lot influence if they sponsored a bill that would require this change or they could just require it based on simple constitutional grounds. I have searched the CT SOTS for a press release that was posted in late 2008 giving the latest numbers of registered minor party members. It does not seem to be there (maybe somebody could help me find it). It incorrectly stated that the CT Green Party had over 19,000 registered voters instead of the 1,900 (or so) that was the actual number if someone at the CT SOTS had added all the figures correctly. I pointed this mistake out to them by phone and since then the press release has disappeared (but maybe it's still hidden there somewhere or maybe it is somewhere still in virtual space). This is nothing new for the CT SOTS since they could not correctly in 2008 count our legal write-in presidential candidate's (Cynthia McKinney) votes. According to an article in the CT Post of 10/08/08 by Ken Dixon, the CT SOTS is quoted as saying that the CT Green Party has 2.151 registered voters in CT and the CT Libertarian Party has 1,147 registered voters. The Independent Party of Waterbury has around 3,000 registered voters (based on the disappeared press release) and the CT Working Families Party has less than 100 registered voters (last time I saw the figure in late 2008 it was around 57). All the other minor parties in CT are either no longer in existence or have less than 50 members. In reality there are only three minor parties that are breathing and actually running legislative and federal candidates in CT. The other "third" party (WFP) is probably a caucus in the Democratic party disguised as a third party based on their low registration numbers and lack of independent candidacies. They theoretically could be included based on their one independent candidate race against two major party candidates in 2008 (Debra Noble) and their cross endorsement of Cicero's Booker's minor party Independent Party senatorial race in Waterbury in 2008. Perhaps their cross endorsement of around 94% of incumbent legislative Democrats and some other local election wins give them some kind of official halo of legitimacy. They theoretically could be accepted as a legitimate third party and be listed in the question number 9 box if their party registration numbers increased. You don't have to be a political scientist or a social psychologist to figure out that if people are NOT given a fair and obvious opportunity to choose which political party most matches their political views on CT's official voter registration form they are probably going to answer question # 9 with the response:"I don't wish to register in a party at this time." Since 44% of the voters respond in this way, why is there no one representing the unaffiliated or independent point of view? By the way, 35% of the voters are registered Democrats and 20% are Republicans. Does this mean that that the Republican party is really a third party in CT? It is my belief that if people saw and could check off the option "Green Party" as a response to question 9 on the voter registration form that many more would register as Greens. I can't actually prove that at this time but I think it is quite likely that this is the case. So it is my opinion that after we get through winning our lawsuit against campaign finance deform, that we demand the CT SOTS create some minimum registration requirement for the status called "minor party" and I suggest 1000 registered voters as a minimum number of registered voters to obtain that designation. This minimum would only be applicable for the purposes of being specifically listed as a party using the minor party's legal name on the CT voter registration form as an addition choice to question 9. I also think the various "modicum of support" arguments for ballot access requirements are unconstitutional. If the 1% valid signature petition requirement is such an accurate and fair measure for political legitimacy in CT why doesn't the state of CT apply these requirements to the major party candidates every time they run for office or allow minor parties a fair mechanism to gain permanent ballot access? This especially comes sharply into focus when you look at the 20% valid signature petitioning requirement for getting a grant under CT's Citizen Election Program. The CEP and the law that created it essentially says that if you are not a major party you can only get a full grant under CEP in future elections (i.e. get equal treatment) under the law by proving that you can get 20% or more of the votes in an a previous election. Under CEP if you are a minor party you can alternately get a full immediate grant by getting the valid signatures of 20% of the people who voted in the last election in the district you are running in (that is, prove your are really a major party)(Note under CEP: No petitioning requirement for major parties in CT). But what happens to this CEP requirement when you find out that in 14 legislative races in 2008 the major party candidate got less that 20% of the final vote. Why would you give a future CEP grant to a major party candidate in 2010 who got less than 20% of the vote in 2008 when you deny a future grant to a minor party candidate who got less than 20% of the vote in the same election in 2008? Does this imply that the designation "Major Party" confers a special and protected legal status under CT campaign finance law? It reminds me of what Lewis Carroll wrote in Though The Looking Glass: " 'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, ' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.' 'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.' 'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.' ". Of course, we all know what ultimately happened to Humpty Dumpty. Regards, Mike DeRosa __________________ -----Original Message----- From: Robert Vogel [mailto:vogel at ct.metrocast.net] Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2009 11:05 AM To: Mike DeRosa; 'David Bedell'; ctgp-news at ml.greens.org Subject: Re: {news} Proposed agenda - voter list If you are allowed to copy it, why don't you resell it at a more reasonable fee. About $20.00 should cover the cost of copying a DVD and leave a small profit. I bet you could sell a few. Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike DeRosa" To: "'David Bedell'" ; Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 11:53 PM Subject: RE: {news} Proposed agenda - voter list > 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 > I spoke with Atty Bromley at CT SOTS. He says he will have a list of all > CT > Green registered voters for us on this coming Monday. > He will be extracting them from the master list and there will be no > charge > for this. > Sincerely, > Mike DeRosa > > -----Original Message----- > From: ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org > [mailto:ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org] On Behalf Of David Bedell > Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 1:42 AM > To: ctgp-news at ml.greens.org > Subject: {news} Proposed agenda - voter list > > 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 > I spoke with Pearl Williams a couple weeks ago. I thought a declared > statewide candidate might be able to get the voter list for free, but she > assured me that everyone has to pay, $300 for the CD(s). If we know > someone > who already has a recent version, they might be willing to copy it for us. > Or maybe we could split the cost with someone like the Libertarians or the > Independent Party. > > Once we get the list for the annual mailing, we need to make copies for > each > of our chapters and our candidates (last year, not all our candidates got > a > list of Greens in their district). I hereby volunteer for the task of > copying and distribution. > > David Bedell > > ----------Original message---------------- > Ronna: > > Have not heard back from the CT SOTS. I will call the lawyer I spoke with > on Monday to find out the status so we can move forward. > > Thanks for looking into the database. > > Sincerely, > > Mike DeRosa > > > From roseberry3 at cox.net Mon Mar 16 23:26:36 2009 From: roseberry3 at cox.net (B Barry) Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 23:26:36 -0400 Subject: {news} proposed agenda for the 3-18-09 EC meeting at 7pm at 74 Tremont Street, Hartford, CT Message-ID: <20090317032641.IQLU12725.eastrmmtao104.cox.net@eastrmimpo03.cox.net> **EC meeting is at the home of Stephen Fournier. Discuss potential short and long term goals of the Green Party of CT Develop the agenda for the 3-31-09 SCC meeting as indicated below: Proposed agenda for the 7PM 3-31-09 SCC CTGP meeting at Portland Senior Center Location: Portland Senior Center, 7 Waverly Avenue, Portland, CT 06480 Facilitator: To Be Determined A. Preliminaries: 1. (1 minute): Introductions of voting/non-voting attendees; chapters; if quorum was met; timekeeper; ground rules. 2. (2-4 minutes): Approval of tonight?s proposed agenda, any deletions or additions. 3. (2-4 minutes): Review and approval of minutes of 2-24-09 SCC meeting. 4. (2 minutes): Review and acceptance of the minutes of the 3-18-09 EC meeting. 5. (2-4 minutes): Treasurer?s report from treasurer: Christopher Reilly. B. Any proposals/referendums by chapters, committee. C. Reports: 1. (10-15 minutes): GPUS reports from: a) Cliff Thornton, National Co-chairperson of the GPUS; b) CTGP representatives: Tim McKee and Charlie Pillsbury; c) National Committee Members: Steve Fournier, Richard Duffee and S. Michael DeRosa. 2. (20 minutes): Report about our lawsuit against the State of CT regarding the 2005 State of CT Campaign Finance Reform Laws. 3. (15-20 minutes): a) Internal Election Committee: discussion of date, site, agenda and any additional volunteers for the 4-09 CTGP Annual Convention. b) Convention Committee: monitors for attendees; literature, merchandise, volunteers. 4. (15 minutes): CT. Secretary of State list of registered Green Party members in CT to be used for the 4-09 CTGP Annual Convention. 5. (5-10minutes): CTGP literature. 6. (5-10 minutes): CTGP potential goals for 2009: a) legislative goals for petitioning; b) electric rates; c) universal health care. 7. (2-5 minutes, each): Chapter reports. 8. (2-5 minutes): any future CTGP Road Shows? 9. Date and place of the next SCC meeting: to be determined.. Date, place and time of next EC meeting: to be determined. 10. Any additions Green Party Key Values: non-violence, respect for diversity, grassroots democracy, social justice and equal opportunity, ecological wisdom, decentralization, community-based economics and economic justice, future focus and sustainability, personal and global responsibility, feminism and gender No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.16/2005 - Release Date: 3/16/2009 7:01 PM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From roseberry3 at cox.net Mon Mar 16 23:46:52 2009 From: roseberry3 at cox.net (B Barry) Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 23:46:52 -0400 Subject: {news} Lights Out for Climate Change is March 28, 2009 from 8:30pm to 9:30pm Message-ID: <20090317034652.JAGS12725.eastrmmtao104.cox.net@eastrmimpo02.cox.net> Dear All, I thought some of you might be interested in this, if you have not heard of it already. More than 1,000 cities in 80 countries are expected to participate in Earth Hour on March 28, 2009 from 8:30pm to 9:30pm. World Wildlife Fund, the event?s sponsor, is asking individuals, businesses, governments, and organizations to turn off their lights for one hour to make a global statement of concern about climate change and to demonstrate commitment to finding solutions. ?We are asking people to vote with their light switch?, said Dan Forman, a spokesman for World Wildlife Fund. ?For every light they turn off, it is in effect a vote for action on climate change.? Other participating US cities include Washington, D.C., New York, Los Angles, Las Vegas, Chicago, Atlanta, Miami and Dallas. Universities, including Harvard, have signed up to campaign for the cause. Two million people participated in the first Earth Hour in 2007, which began in Sydney. Last year the event went global, with more than 400 cities around the world participating. Lights on structures including the Golden Gate Bridge, Sydney Opera House, and the Empire State Building also went dark last year, as well as the Google homepage, Fifty million people around the world---36 million in the United States?shut off their lights to raise awareness last year. To a better life and world! Barbara Barry No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.16/2005 - Release Date: 3/16/2009 7:01 PM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From timmckee22 at yahoo.com Tue Mar 17 10:03:15 2009 From: timmckee22 at yahoo.com (Tim McKee) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 07:03:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: {news} As Dodd loses in polls- Time to draft a GREEN candidate for Senate in 2010?? Message-ID: <231569.25376.qm@web111201.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> please forward to all Green Party lists! ? ? ? Dear Greens, ? Dodd is losing to Republicans in the polls. He is tainted with several scandals and conflicts of interests. Most people can trace the financial meltdown to his BIG money donations and looking the other way as the crooks made off with our money. ? We have NOTHING to lose by running a candidate for U S Senate- we can't spoil this race at all! Odds are the republicans will WIN this seat! ? Let us begin to discuss the race. I have one BIG TIME?candidate in mind as a draft, and i want to win the race,, let;s begin dicussing this race on the FORUM list serve. ? Tim McKee (860) 778-1304? ? ? ? ? courant.com/news/politics/hc-simmons0317.artmar17,0,1206332.story Courant.com SENATE RACE 2010 Democrats Go On Offensive Against Simmons By DANIELA ALTIMARI and CHRISTOPHER KEATING The Hartford Courant March 17, 2009 document.write(''); createAndAttachAd("127_0_0_1_89038127_1237298082", "http://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/cm.hartfordcourant/c_polit;net=cm;u=127_0_0_1_89038127_1237298082,1100f1b775806ae,polit,;;ord1=586233;sz=300x250;contx=polit;btg=;ord=4286158?","300","250"); Rob Simmons' Senate candidacy wasn't even a full day old and Democrats were already on the offensive Monday, portraying the former congressman from Stonington as little more than a clone of George W. Bush. Simmons is actually known as a fiscally conservative Republican who has broken with his party on several issues, including abortion, gay rights and drilling in the Arctic wildlife refuge. But that wasn't the message that the Democrats were offering up on Monday. "Rob Simmons is no moderate," Eric Schultz, a spokesman for the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee, said in a press release. "He was a staunch supporter of George Bush's failed economic policies, and this race will be an opportunity to hold him accountable for that record." It's an argument that worked in 2006 ? Simmons lost his re-election bid by 83 votes, largely due to his support of an unpopular war championed by an unpopular president. But this time around, with Simmons taking on U.S. Sen. Christopher Dodd, Democrats will have to come up with a fresh approach, said Ken Dautrich, a political scientist at the University of Connecticut. "They don't have George W. Bush to kick around anymore," Dautrich said. By November 2010, when the Senate race will be decided, Bush is "not even going to be a blip on the screen," Dautrich said. "This election is going to be about the Democrats and it's going to be about Chris Dodd." Even though it's early in the election cycle, Republicans offered a glimpse Monday of a campaign strategy that promises to focus heavily on the economy. "People are losing their homes, losing their jobs," Simmons said in an interview. "We need to look to the future, not the past." Later Monday, during an evening appearance before the Barkhamsted Republican Town Committee, Simmons made it clear that he did not intend to run a polite campaign. He excoriated Dodd for taking out a "sweetheart mortgage" with a bank he regulated, moving out of state to run for president and for owning a vacation cottage in Ireland. At his talk at the Barkhamsted Senior Center, Simmons used a pile of newspaper and magazine clips as a visual aid, saying they showed how much he relied on political contributions from banks that he regulated as the powerful chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking. "I am troubled by what I read [about Dodd], but I am also troubled by what I read about the financial services sector," Simmons told the audience of about 30 Republicans. "The person principally charged with overseeing these matters as the banking system was entering trouble was out in Iowa running for president, missing in action, only to return to blame the crisis on someone else." GOP state Chairman Christopher Healy, who ran Simmons' 2006 re-election bid, issued a press release Monday demanding that Dodd return ? or donate to charity ? $175,000 in campaign contributions from employees of American International Group, which is currently under fire for executive bonuses. Dodd could not be reached for comment. But Nancy DiNardo, the state Democratic chairwoman, said that it was Simmons who helped create the current economic crisis. "Rob Simmons supported every failed Republican policy that was voted out in 2006 and 2008," DiNardo said in a statement. "The last thing the citizens of Connecticut need is someone who will spend his time trying to resurrect these failed policies and undermine President [Barack] Obama's agenda to get the economy back on track." Simmons launched his campaign over the weekend after consulting with his family and minister. He doesn't have a website, a headquarters or a phone number. "We haven't even filed our paperwork yet," Simmons said. But he said he felt that it was important to announce his decision quickly, especially in light of a recent Quinnipiac University poll showing Simmons and Dodd in a statistical dead heat in a possible race. Republicans believe they have their best chance in decades to defeat Dodd ? a household name in Connecticut who has grown accustomed to winning re-election by blowout margins. Dodd has come under heavy criticism regarding his refinancing of two mortgages through Countrywide. He was part of a VIP program, but has said repeatedly that he never sought any preferential treatment as a U.S. senator on the Senate banking committee. Connecticut voters were also stung by his decision to move his family to Iowa to run in the 2008 presidential race. But Dodd is a nimble and experienced politician. No one is counting him out yet. "The odds are that he will get re-elected," said Thomas Mann of the Brookings Institution. "Being in a Democratic state with a very popular Democratic president and having years of experience, I'm guessing his prospects will improve as time goes on. Obviously, if the markets fail to stabilize, all bets are off." Mann agrees with other national analysts that Dodd ranks among the most vulnerable Democrats in the Senate. "Dodd knows he's really up against it," Mann said. Courant staff writer Rinker Buck contributed to this story. Copyright ? 2009, The Hartford Courant DM_addEncToLoc("Site", (s.server)); DM_addEncToLoc("channel", (s.channel)); DM_addEncToLoc("keyword", (s.prop3)); DM_cat(s.hier1); DM_tag(); Tim McKee, New Britian, CT (860)778-1304 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From chapillsbury at gmail.com Tue Mar 17 22:54:47 2009 From: chapillsbury at gmail.com (Charlie Pillsbury) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 22:54:47 -0400 Subject: {news} Fwd: Voting Has Begun on GP-US Proposal: ID 380 Message-ID: <10859a090903171954l1332c634n646cff2175cb5657@mail.gmail.com> Does anyone see any reason not to support this proposal? If you do, please let me know by this Friday, and I will take your concerns into consideration when I vote. Reasons to vote for this proposal, which is how I am leaning, are welcome, too. thanks, charlie ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Date: Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 12:05 AM Subject: [usgp-nc] Voting Has Begun on GP-US Proposal: ID 380 - *Protecting water is a priority for the Green Party at the national, state and local levels* To: natlcomvotes at green.gpus.org Proposal ID: 380 *Proposal: Protecting water is a priority for the Green Party at the national, state and local levels* Floor Manager: Holly Hart, secretary at gp.org Voting Dates: 03/16/2009 - 03/22/2009 Voting ends at Midnight Pacific Time Background: Water is the source of life. El agua es vida. The Green Party seeks to safeguard the well-being of future generations and restore ecological systems. Clean and available water is a critical priority which government can and must secure for all people. The threats to our waters are many, from depleted aquifers, to the pollution of surface waters, to the degradation of oceanic waters that have been treated as international waste dumps. There is no time, and no water, to waste. In response to these growing threats, arising from both climate change and failed governmental policies, the Green Party needs to establish clear policy positions and establish a framework for action to secure the implementation of those policies. This proposal provides the clarifications and action approvals required by Resolution 195 that established the EcoAction Committee. Proposal: The National Committee of the Green Party of the United States (1) provides the principles listed below as guidelines to Green Party candidates and organizers to increase the visibility of water issues in Green campaigns and increase our ecological focus in electoral and political activities and (2) expresses its approval for the series of actions defined herein that the EcoAction Committee will take to implement these guidelines. I. Principles for water policy: Greens and Green Party Organizations should: ? work together with our neighbors in making decisions on water issues that recognize the stake that future generations have in those decisions; (Future Focus) ? recognize our dependence on a finite supply of fresh water, the importance of oceanic waters and the aquatic life that provide oxygen and food for the planet; and to respect the integrity of ecosystems and the natural patterns of water; (Ecological Wisdom) ? support the rights of indigenous peoples and other nations to maintain clean, affordable water resources; (Personal and Global Responsibility, Social Justice) ? assure that elected officials who make decisions on water use, pricing and quality represent the community of varied users, water specialists and the environment; (Grassroots Democracy) ? acknowledge the diversity of plant and animal life dependent on long-enduring ecosystems and to recognize the necessity of water systems to all life; (Respect for Diversity) ? prevent the usurpation of public rights through privatization of the water resource by multi-national corporations; (Decentralization) ? prioritize affordable drinking water over industrial uses, recognizing that access to water is a basic human right; and to consider the impact of all water policy decisions on poor people, impoverished neighborhoods, rural communities and family farmers; (Social Justice) ? support local municipal growth policies in the context of existing water supplies, and to maintain a working relationship between urban economic development and local rural agriculture. (Community-based Economics and Economic Justice) 2. EcoAction Committee Tasks. The Green National Committee concurs with the the following series of actions that the EcoAction Committee will pursue to take action upon those guidelines. Regarding water policies, EcoAction Committee will: ? provide policy proposals on water and watershed issues in support of Green candidates and to increase the visibility of water issues in political campaigns. ? support the development of local, renewable energy sources that minimize consumptive water use, destruction of watersheds and water pollution. ? support legislation that promotes urban conservation, efficient agricultural use and the integration of land use with water supply. ? support enforcement of indigenous treaties, paramount water rights for indigenous nations and the Treaty of Guadelupe-Hidalgo regarding land and water rights. ? participate in regional and state water plans and urban development plans to balance growth with renewable supplies. ? help all party members to work with public interest groups on developing bills in state legislatures and in Congress that increase the responsible use of water. ? support legislation in Congress to fund public water planning and investments in upgrading and improving water infrastructure, levees and hazardous waste dumps. ? raise public awareness on water and water pricing issues and educate the public about the water crisis that is already affecting our nation and the world, and to make brochures, handout, and other educational materials on water issues available to Green candidates and other Greens. ? advocate for an increased environmental responsibility in all municipalities such as the Environmental Advisory Commission of the Pasadena, CA municipal government. Regarding Green electoral opportunities, EcoAction Committee will: ? provide policy analysis and proposals for Green Candidates. ? review and publicize Green candidates for water authorities, arroyo flood control entities and other local offices. Regarding outreach to Greens and other organizations, EcoAction committee will: ? provide a hub for the exchange of views and summarizing of ongoing work on water with other individuals, organizations and public officials. ? reach out to groups already working to link the Resolution on their websites through the Committee?s GPUS website. ? develop brochures for use at public events, conferences, public planning input meetings and develop forums as appropriate addressing water issues. Regarding legislative advocacy the EcoAction Committee will:: ? will increase access to legislative proposals addressing water issues at the Federal and state levels. ? assist with analysis and recommendations pertaining to proposed legislation on water issues. 3. Recommended supporting actions. The Green National Committee and EcoAction recommend that the following supporting actions be considered throughout the party, connecting Greens at all levels with the support structure the EcoAction is putting in place. I Notification to Greens and state parties and discussions of Resolution ? National Committee Delegates should report this resolution to their state organizations and review how it can be integrated with local actions. ? State Green organizations are urged to make the resolution and associated implementation plans available to all local Greens. ? Local Green organizations should connect candidates and activists to EcoAction's efforts where appropriate. A. Individual Greens working in advocacy groups can present the EcoAction Committee brochures at public events, conferences, public planning input meetings and develop forums as appropriate addressing water issues. B. Individual Greens can contact individuals and organizations that represent significant stakeholders- family farmers, land grants, urban planners, hydrologists, environmental groups, local groups addressing water pricing and other infrastructure issues, indigenous organizations focused on environmental issues, local city councilors, state legislators, community organizations and neighborhood associations. C. Local Greens can recruit candidates for local positions on water boards and other governmental entities dealing with water management. D. State parties can develop periodic reviews of the progress and problems of activities and prioritize activities based on their resources available and evaluate local political forces and their positions and their potential role in the accomplishment of concrete goals and policies support to individuals and groups working on water issues. TIMELINE Work on implementation will commence immediately on approval of this proposal and is seen as an ongoing task. A Green Party Water Connection (hub) will be established within 60 days of approval. Resources: Contact: Martin Zehr, 415-337-5773, m_zehr at hotmail.com TThe primary GPUS resource will be the EcoAction Committee. However, success depends on mutual cooperation from all Green Party entities with water issues. This implementation will also require that a web presence be established on a GPUS owned system and accessible to the public, the content to be maintained by EcoAction Committee in accordance with the current Green Party platform and the principles in this document. References: Water Planning: Middle Rio Grande Water Assembly http://www.waterassembly.org Commodification of Water: Blue Covenant: The Global Water Crisis and the Fight for the Right to Water ? Maude Barlow Freshwater: The World's Water 2008-2009: The Biennial Report on Freshwater Resources by Peter H. Gleick Please log in to vote at: http://gp.org/cgi-bin/vote/vote Thank you and have a wonderful day! --The GP-US Voting Admin _______________________________________________ Natlcomvotes mailing list To send a message to the list, write to: Natlcomvotes at green.gpus.org To unsubscribe or change your list options, go to: http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/natlcomvotes If your state delegation changes, please see: http://gp.org/committees/nc/documents/delegate_change.html To report violations of listserv protocol, write to forummanagers at lists.gp-us.org For other information about the Coordinating Committee, see: http://gp.org/committees/nc/ -- Charlie Pillsbury, CTGP -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From justinemccabe at earthlink.net Wed Mar 18 17:37:55 2009 From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe) Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:37:55 -0400 Subject: {news} Fw: USGP-INT Fwd: Stunning Victory for Czech Anti-Radar Campaigners! Message-ID: <83CA8B87E65F41ABBCAFF6E4A6FBC040@JUSTINE> From: "Joanne Landy" Date: March 18, 2009 3:08:11 PM EDT To: julia.willebrand at verizon.net Subject: Stunning Victory for Czech Anti-Radar Campaigners! For immediate release Contact: Joanne Landy, Campaign for Peace and Democracy, jlandy at igc.org STUNNING VICTORY FOR CZECH OPPONENTS OF U.S. RADAR BASE NEW YORK, March 18, 2009 ? In a major setback for Pentagon plans to install a U.S. military radar base in the Czech Republic, the Czech government yesterday withdrew, at least for now (and possibly for good), its proposal to ratify an agreement on the base. Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek halted the ratification process when it appeared that the Chamber of Deputies was likely to vote to reject the agreement. According to Jana Glivicka, a leader of the grassroots ?No Bases Initiative? that has been active in opposing the radar for more than two years, this was a very significant retreat, since the radar has been promoted as one of the key accomplishments of the current government. Two thirds of Czechs have consistently opposed the radar ever since it was first proposed in 2006. Anti-radar activists have repeatedly called for a referendum on the issue, but have been rebuffed. Meanwhile, in 2008 the Czech government signed the agreement with the United States to proceed with the installation of the radar, and the Czech Senate approved the accord. However the agreement could not be implemented until the Czech Chamber of Deputies ratified it. Thanks to the tireless activities of anti radar groups in the country, the No Bases Initiative and the Nonviolence Movement, popular opinion remained strongly mobilized against the radar. This public opposition culminated in a likely ?no? vote in the Chamber. The anti-radar movement has drawn support from around the world from people alarmed by the dangerous military escalation of the proposed European ?missile defense? program of the Czech radar and its companion Interceptor missiles in Poland. In the United States, the Campaign for Peace and Democracy has since November 2007 supported the movement with public statements, letters published in The New York Times and The New York Review of Books, visits to the Czech Mission to the United Nations, demonstrations, a hunger strike, and, over the past weekend, an open letter to members of the Czech Chamber of Deputies signed by more than 550 people in less than 48 hours. The CPD open letter was sent on Monday March 16 to all 200 members of the Chamber of Deputies. A member of the Chamber planned to read the letter aloud from the floor of the Chamber if the ratification had come up for a vote, Signers included public figures such as Noam Chomsky and Ariel Dorfman, and leaders of many major U.S. peace organizations. Most signatories were from the U.S., but there were some international signers including the Polish intellectual Adam Chmielewski, Iranian human rights activists, and a number of individuals from the United Kingdom, Japan and other countries. The text of the letter and list of signers are available at the CPD website, www.cpdweb.org Czech Prime Minister Topolanek said that the government has not abandoned its plan for the radar. "This does not mean we would give up on the ratification process," Topolanek said in a live television address. "We will return to this issue after talks with the U.S. administration and after the NATO summit in Strasbourg and Kehl." (This information is from a Reuters story. Up until now there has been no significant U.S. media coverage of the withdrawal of the Czech government proposal.) It is by no means clear that the government will in fact reintroduce the radar for a vote after the NATO summit in early April. In any event, anti-radar activists in the Czech Republic and their international supporters are committed to continuing their campaign until such time as the proposal to install the radar is decisively and permanently withdrawn. THE CAMPAIGN FOR PEACE AND DEMOCRACY (CPD) advocates a new, progressive and non-militaristic U.S. foreign policy -- one that encourages democracy, justice and social change. Founded in 1982, the Campaign opposed the Cold War by promoting "detente from below." It engaged Western peace activists in the defense of the rights of democratic dissidents in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, and enlisted East-bloc human rights activists against anti-democratic U.S. policies in countries like Nicaragua and Chile. The Campaign sees movements for peace, social justice and democratic rights, taken together, as the embryo of an alternative to great power politics and to the domination of society by privileged elites. Other current CPD campaigns are an open letter to Iranian officials in defense of human rights leader Shirin Ebadi, published by the New York Review of Books athttp://www.nybooks.com/articles/22511, and a statement on Gaza entitled ?No More Blank Check for Israel!,? available at the CPD website. Campaign for Peace and Democracy, 2790 Broadway, #12, NY, NY 10025. Email: cpd at igc.org Web: www.cpdweb.org To unsubscribe/change profile: click here. To subscribe: click here. Campaign for Peace and Democracy 2790 Broadway, #12 New York, New York 10025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Email list management powered by http://MailerMailer.com Julia Willebrand, Ed.D 255 West 84th St. NY, NY 10024 212 877-5088 'Democracy is more than two wolves and a lamb deciding on what's for dinner." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ usgp-int mailing list usgp-int at gp-us.org http://forum.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/usgp-int -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.13 - Release Date: 3/13/2009 12:00 AM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com Thu Mar 19 00:17:14 2009 From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (David Bedell) Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 23:17:14 -0500 Subject: {news} Allan Brison and challenger profiled in New Haven Independent Message-ID: This includes a list of Allan's accomplishments during his first term as Alder. But he's going to need help to get re-elected. Title: Lone Green Alderman Faces Challenge Link: http://www.newhavenindependent.org/archives/2009/03/contender_emerg.php David Bedell From timmckee at mail.com Thu Mar 19 17:14:23 2009 From: timmckee at mail.com (Tim McKee) Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 16:14:23 -0500 Subject: {news} Fw: [usgp-dx] New NY Green Mayor Message-ID: <20090319211423.DE6871BF28D@ws1-10.us4.outblaze.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Roger Snyder" To: "USGP-Dx" Subject: [usgp-dx] New NY Green Mayor Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 09:37:20 -0400 Jim Sullivan, registered Green, has been elected Mayor of Victory, NY! Article on the campaign: http://timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=775963&category=REGION Results are here: http://wnyt.com/article/stories/S839070.shtml?cat=300 -- Roger Snyder, GPNY _______________________________________________ Natlcomaffairs mailing list To send a message to the list, write to: Natlcomaffairs at green.gpus.org To unsubscribe or change your list options, go to: http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/natlcomaffairs You must know your password to do this. If you can't figure out how to unsubscribe, as a last resort only, send a message OFF LIST to steveh at olypen.com If your state delegation changes, please see: http://gp.org/committees/nc/documents/delegate_change.html To report violations of listserv protocol, write to forummanagers at lists.gp-us.org For other information about the National Committee, see: http://gp.org/committees/nc/ ****************************************** Tim McKee, Manchester CT, main number cell-860-778-1304, 860-643-2282 National Committee member of the Green Party of the United States and is a spokesperson for the Green Party of CT. BLOG-http://thebiggreenpicture.blogspot.com -- Be Yourself @ mail.com! Choose From 200+ Email Addresses Get a Free Account at www.mail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From roseberry3 at cox.net Sat Mar 21 01:16:20 2009 From: roseberry3 at cox.net (B Barry) Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 01:16:20 -0400 Subject: {news} Reminder: candidates need to submit their names for CTGP officers and GPUS representatives by 9PM 3-31-09 to CTGP secreatary Message-ID: <20090321051614.XEKG11273.eastrmmtao107.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net> Dear All, This is a reminder that any registered Green Party voters may submit their names CTGP officers and GPUS representatives by 9PM 3-31-09 to this CTGP secretary in order to be accepted as candidates. Candidates also need to summit a 100 word or less statement of why they want to be considered by voters. (This deadline is needed due to need for this information to sent to the printer the following morning.) NOTE: The annual CTGP Convention will (likely) be on Saturday, 4-25-09, from noon to 4pm at the New Haven Labor Union Hall. The following vacancies will need to be filled for a one-year duration: For CTGP officers: a) Three (3) co-chairpersons for CTGP: one needs to be female; b) One for secretary; c) One for treasurer. GPUS (Green Party of United States): a) Two (2) representatives from CTGP to represent the state party as a whole to the GPUS and to report to the CTGP SCC in a timely fashion; b) Representatives to the following GPUS Permanent Committees: * Accreditation Committee (AC) * Annual National Meeting Committee (ANMC) regarding the GPUS annual meeting 6-25-09 through 6-28-09 meeting in Durham, NC * Ballot Access Committee (BA); * Bylaws, Rules, Policies, Procedures Committee (BRPP); * Coordination Campaign Committee (CCC); * Credentials Committee (CC); * Dispute Resolution Committee (DRC); * Diversity Committee (DC); * Eco committee (EC); * Finance Committee (FC); * Fundraising (FRC); * Green Party internet news (formerly a newspaper); * International Committee (IC); * Media Committee (MC); * Merchandizing Committee (MERCH); * Outreach Committee (OC); * Peace Committee (GPAX); * Platform Committee (PC); * Presidential Campaign Support Committee (PCSC); * Steering Committee (SC). Additional GPUS information may also be obtained via HYPERLINK "http://www.gpus.org/"www.GPUS.org No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.22/2015 - Release Date: 3/20/2009 7:01 PM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From justinemccabe at earthlink.net Sat Mar 21 07:00:37 2009 From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe) Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 07:00:37 -0400 Subject: {news} Fw: Green Forum in NYC on Gaza, Kovel, etc Message-ID: <9BA903F1357846CCAB7DC4473D13DC9F@JUSTINE> FYI CT Greens, Justine ----- Original Message ----- From: Justine McCabe To: USGP International Committee Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2009 12:12 PM Subject: Green Forum in NYC on Gaza, Kovel, etc Dear all, Last week I moderated a forum in NYC on Gaza organized by Tom Siracuse and the Westside Greens. Perhaps for the first time in over 30 years of working on this issue, I felt truly hopeful; that because of the horrific Gaza massacre, a critical mass of opposition to Israel's tyranny may have been reached. The assembly hall at Judson Church was packed (over 100 people, mostly non-Greens) with folks highly supportive of Palestinian human rights, the one state solution, and the BDS movement Amazingly, after I introduced the speakers, a lone dissenter rose to ask where were the panelists who would speak for Israel. Spontaneously, the audience yelled out something like, "We hear from Israel everyday--in the media, from our government. We don't need to hear any more!" We began with footage of the Gaza assault/aftermath, followed by a panel of speakers. A few high notes: * Dorothy Zellner ("Jews Say No") spoke of how Jewish-Americans were at last recognizing Israel's corrupting influence on Jewish ethics/value on justice, and tradition of solidarity with oppressed peoples (other than Palestinians). She humorously took potshots at the idea of Israel as a safe haven for Jews, "Really, I'm going to leave NY to get on a plane and go to Israel?" *Joel Kovel, former GPNY Senate Candidate, gave an excellent presentation on how Israel is disintegrating from within due its deadening Zionist policies, and about the central role of US in supporting Israeli aggression. Kovel, a professor at Bard College for 21 years, recently was told his contract would not be renewed because of his outspoken opposition to Zionism/Israel's human rights violations (Green Party Calls Upon Bard College Not to Terminate Dr. Joel Kovel ) I urge people to read his book Overcoming Zionism. Also, see interview with Kovel before the Forum talking about the situation at Bard, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGkV1s7T1eA and check out his website, the Committee for the Open Discussion of Zionism http://www.codz.org/ There you'll find info about writing to Bard in support of him. *Palestinian-American Riham Barghouti of Adalah, NY gave an inspiring update on the BDS movement's successes, highlighting their efforts in NYC, where they've protesting the opening of the Madison Ave.store of diamond/real estate mogul Lev Leviev whose company (Africa-Israel) builds Jews-only settlements in West Bank. In less than 2 years, they've succeeded in getting UNICEF and Oxfam to denounce Leviev, and the UK government recently announced a boycott of his company. http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article10370.shtml Finally, as Global BDS Day approaches, MARCH 30th ( http://bdsmovement.net/files/JOINtheBDSactionDAY-en-final_0.pdf) Riham offered a good example to Greens who want to implement GP's support for this movement: Greens, Calling for Palestinian Rights, Urge Divestment from Israel -- 11.28.2005: Each state party could launch a campaign against one American company or university doing business with Israel and doggedly go after them. Peace, Justine .----------------------------------------------------------- West Side Green Party Forum on The Israeli attack on Gaza: What is needed for a just solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict? Israel's three-week-long attack on Gaza in December and January left over 1,300 Palestinians and 13 Israelis killed and thousands of Palestinians wounded. Israel's bombardment left the infrastructure in Gaza in a shambles, with schools, hospitals, mosques destroyed, while Israel continues to blockade needed supplies of food, electricity and water. Come to a forum and discussion: Saturday, March 7, 2009, 3:00-6:00 PM Judson Memorial Church, Assembly Hall 239 Thompson St. (1/2 block south of Washington Square Park, A, C, D, E or F to West 4th St., #1 to Christopher St./Sheridan Sq., N or R to 8th St., or #6 to Astor Pl.) Panelists: Riham Barghouti, Adalah-NY, Coalition for Justice in the Middle East Nellie Hester Bailey, Harlem Anti-War Coalition Joel Kovel, Committee for an Open Discussion of Zionism & Author of "Overcoming Zionism" Dorothy Zellner, civil rights activist & member of "Jews Say No" Steve Bloom, Activist Poets' Roundtable Moderator: Justine McCabe, Co-Chair, Green Party U.S. International Committee The forum will begin promptly at 3:00 PM with a short video on the Israeli attack on Gaza. We are encouraging discussion of different viewpoints and perspectives. Please come and bring your thoughts and comments. For more information, contact: westsidegreens at hotmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: clip_image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 14029 bytes Desc: not available URL: From justinemccabe at earthlink.net Sat Mar 21 07:03:43 2009 From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe) Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 07:03:43 -0400 Subject: {news} Fw: PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Gaza; DISCUSSION period begins Message-ID: Dear CT Greens, This proposal is being discussed on the International Committee. We'd appreciate any comments from you. Justine McCabe ----- Original Message ----- From: Justine McCabe To: USGP International Committee Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 8:59 AM Subject: PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Gaza; DISCUSSION period begins Dear IC, Last month, in response to the Gaza massacre, the IC considered a draft statement on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict The wording of that statement culminated in a call to our sister Green Parties to join GPUS in endorsing the Palestinian civil society call for Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel. We took a straw poll that resulted in majority support: 21 yes votes, 8 no, 1 abstention, with 70% of IC members participating. Since then, former IC co-chair Julia Willebrand and I were away, and we had an election for co-chairs that consumed much time and effort. So, it's time to return to that statement. As the straw poll ended, there was a difference of opinion as to whether a formal proposal seeking consensus--and vote if necessary--were in order. Given that this statement would be used to lobby international Greens to support BDS in compliance with the directive to the IC contained in GPUS Prop 190 of 2005, newly-elected co-chair Steve Herrick and I thought that formally proposing this would be best. And, assuming that consensus is reached on such a proposal, we would then notify the SC of this IC action, and begin to use it to lobby Green parties worldwide. The proposal is below. According to our bylaws, we have a discussion period first in order to refine the language, etc. Since we have already discussed this at length, we propose that one-week should be sufficient.. At the end of that time, we'll test for consensus. PLEASE NOTE: 1) We will be considering the statement WITHOUT the Background information, though it still appears below the statement itself as the "references" part of the proposal format. Unless there is strong support to the contrary, it seems that this Background section is too long to include for a statement that will be circulated. Instead, Justine plans to rewrite this as a "White Paper" to submit to the IC later as we did with the Right of Return paper on our website. 2) There are 2 differences in this draft from the one voted on last month: a) "A Call for Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions Against Israel" appears in the title of the statement unlike in the original b) Given that ecological wisdom/sustainability is a central Green Party pillar, there was an omission in the original statement about the impact of the conflict on the environment. In the revised statement, the following is included: "Recognizing that this conflict continues to have a devastating ecological impact on Israel/Palestine, especially water sources, thereby decreasing security for the whole region;" We look forward to comments from everyone. Peace, Justine McCabe and Steve Herrick Co-chairs, International Committee, GPUS ----------------------------------------------------- PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict for endorsement by International Green Parties PRESENTER: International Committee, GPUS CONTACT: Justine McCabe justinemccabe at earthink.net SUBJECT: DRAFT Green Party Statement on Gaza Crisis and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Call for Boycott, Divestment Sanctions Against Israel BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Implementation of the GPUS International Committee's mission as directed by GPUS Prop 190 of November 21, 2005, "The GPUS National Committee directs the International Committee to work with our sister Green parties around the world in implementing an international boycott." http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2005_11_28.shtml In keeping with Prop 190, and in response to the three-week Israeli assault on Gaza beginning in December 2008, the International Committee considered a draft statement to be circulated among international Green Parties urging them to join our party in endorsing the Boycott, Divestment Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel. That statement was discussed at length among IC members and a straw poll revealed majority support for it. This proposal is an opportunity for the IC to formally endorse the statement with the intention of then circulating it among international Green Parties for endorsement of the BDS campaign as directed by GPUS Prop 190. FULL PROPOSAL: Draft statement is below TIME LINE: Five-day discussion period, beginning Friday, March 20, 2009 ending Friday, March 27 at 10 pm PDT RESOURCES: Lobbying efforts by members of GPUS International Committee REFERENCES: "Background" section that appears below the statement ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ DRAFT Green Party Statement On Gaza Crisis and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Call for Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions Against Israel Although Green Parties represent different countries and regions of the world, we share common principles essential to understanding and resolving this conflict. Among these principles are non-violence, including consistent enforcement of international law; ecological wisdom and sustainability, including reducing the negative impact of humankind on the natural environment; and social justice, thereby rejecting discrimination based on gender, class or ethnicity. These principles guide our response to the recent crisis in Gaza that began on December 27, 2008 in which we condemn the killing of civilians, condemn the excessive and disproportionate force used by Israel, the Occupying Power in Gaza, call for a full and continuing ceasefire between Israel and the Hamas government in Gaza, and a complete withdrawal of all Israeli forces with the opening of all border crossings in Gaza As of January 18, the Gaza crisis resulted in displacement of thousands of Palestine, the injury of more than 5,300, and the killing of over 1,300, mostly civilians. It has also caused the destruction of Gaza's infrastructure, including demolition of hundreds of homes and attacks on UN schools and on the UNRWA warehouse, which is the source of basic necessities, such as food, fuel and medicines. According to a 1/15/09 UN press release: "One in every 250 people in Gaza is either now dead or significantly injured . . . This number is comparable to 33,000 people in New York City or 1.2 million people in the United States." http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/47d4e277b48d9d3685256ddc00612265/b974aca8e8fe201d85257540004ffedc!OpenDocument Contrast this with the Hamas rocket attacks, which during the same period killed 3 Israelis civilians and 10 Israeli soldiers. http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1232171510978&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout Furthermore, we are greatly distressed by the continuing decoupling of these recent hostilities from their historic context, which encourages, inter alia, the following obstacles to peace: . Demonization of Palestinians as inherently anti-Semitic, hateful terrorists; . Delegitimization of lawful resistance by Palestinians to Israeli violations of their human and legal rights; . Propounding the myth of balance between the two peoples despite the patently disproportionate military and political power between them: an occupying power, Israel - nuclear-armed with the fourth largest military in the world, backed by a superpower - and Palestinians, an effectively disarmed, impoverished and occupied people; . Jettisoning of international law in favor of bilateral negotiations between two actors of such grossly unequal power, a course begun with the Madrid /Oslo process; . Distortions of human security needs of Israelis in favor of Israeli state security and regional domination; . Conflation of criticism of Israeli policies with anti-Semitism, which promotes regressive elements on both sides for political gain, trivializes the historic prejudice against Jews, and inhibits the expression of sympathy Palestinians do have for Jewish suffering, especially the Nazi holocaust. As a consequence we call for a redirection of international attention to the root causes of past and ongoing hostilities between Israelis and Palestinians, i.e., Palestinian dispossession and ethnic cleansing by Israel since 1948, and the establishment of an apartheid-like system in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) that discriminates against non-Jews.* THEREFORE: Recalling the historic examples of apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany that a just, enduring peace, and reconciliation between Palestinians and Israelis depend on acknowledgement of wrongdoing and restitution and; Recalling that Europeans, not Palestinians, were responsible for the Nazi holocaust; we believe that individual European Green Parties, especially those with elected representatives in their governments, and in the EU parliament in their capacity to influence the European Union's relation to Israel, have a special duty to ensure that Palestinians no longer bear the blame for historic European transgressions against Jews; and Recalling that the Green Party of the United States has a particular obligation in relation to this conflict as the US government is Israel's closest ally: . That Israel receives more than $5 billion annually in military and financial aid; that as current hostilities in Gaza illustrate, Israel's use of this military aid often violates American laws in that the Arms Export Control Act stipulates that US-supplied weapons be used only for "legitimate self-defense" and that the US Foreign Assistance Act prohibits military assistance to any country "which engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights" and that the Proxmire Amendment bans military assistance to any government that refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to allow inspection of its nuclear facilities, as Israel refuses to do; . That the United States government, including both its major parties, has not been an impartial peace broker in this conflict but continues to provide political cover and protection to Israel internationally, particularly at the United Nations, where it has vetoed scores of Security Council Resolutions opposing Israel's violations of Palestinian human rights and international law, thereby undermining the central purpose of the UN Charter to maintain international peace and security; . That US support for Israeli violations against the Palestinian people is a main source of antipathy to the US and the West among the world's formerly colonized peoples who identify with Palestinians; that this US support not only decreases US/Western national security, but also contributes to Middle East and international instability; and http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=41982?http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/world/14clash.html?http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/65b122b6-e8c0-11dd-a4d0-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1 Recognizing that this conflict continues to have a devastating ecological impact on Israel/Palestine, especially water sources, thereby decreasing security for the whole region; and Recognizing that despite 61 years of continuous diplomatic attempts by the international community, it has failed to bring about Israel's compliance with international law or respect for basic Palestinian human rights; and Recognizing that, despite abundant condemnation of Israel's policies by the UN, International Court of Justice, and all relevant international conventions, the international community of nations has failed to stop violations by Israel of Palestinian human rights in Israel and the OPT, while Israeli crimes continue with impunity, as the recent assault on Gaza illustrates; and Recalling that ending institutionalized racism (apartheid) in South Africa demanded an unusual, cooperative action by the entire international community in the form of a boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaign against apartheid South Africa, and that BDS can become the most effective nonviolent means for achieving justice and genuine peace between Palestinians and Israelis, and in the region, through concerted international pressure as applied to apartheid South Africa; and Recognizing that Palestinian resistance to ongoing dispossession has mainly been nonviolent, including its most basic form - remaining in their homes, on their land; and that while Palestinian armed resistance is legitimate under international law when directed at non-civilian targets, we believe that only nonviolent resistance will maintain the humanity of Palestinian society, elicit the greatest solidarity from others, and maximize the chance for future reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians; and Recognizing, however, that our appeal to Palestinians to continue to resist nonviolently in the face of ongoing existential threats from Israel is hypocritical unless accompanied by substantial acts of international support; and Recalling that in 2005, Palestinian Civil Society appealed to the international community to support a BDS campaign against Israel; and Recalling that in response, at least two Green Parties have passed resolutions supporting this BDS campaign: Green Party of the United States in 2005 http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2005_11_28.shtml Green Party of England and Wales in 2008 http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=1733; We, international Green parties: Call publicly for the implementation of boycott and divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era; and Agree to pressure our respective governments to impose embargoes and sanctions against Israel; and Support maintaining these nonviolent punitive measures until Israel meets its obligation to recognize the Palestinian people's inalienable right to self-determination and fully complies with the precepts of international law by: 1. Ending its occupation and colonization of all Palestinian lands and dismantling the Wall in the West Bank; 2. Recognizing the fundamental rights of Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and 3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194. [Statement ends here] ------------------------------------------------- * Background . There is international consensus among scholars, including Israeli Jews (David Hirst, Benny Morris, Ilan Pappe, Tom Segev) that in 1948, Israel ethnically cleansed at least 80% of the native Palestinian Christians and Muslims - the majority population - from their lands and homes because they were not Jews, an act of genocide under international law. (See Professor Francis A. Boyle, who successfully argued before the World Court that ethnic cleansing is a form of genocide http://www.mediamonitors.net/francis1.html.) In 1948, Palestinian Christians and Muslims owned 93% of the land. . Since 1948, Israel has prevented Palestinian refugees from returning to their homes in Israel, while allowing non-native Jews to immigrate there. This constitutes a violation of several bodies of international law (law of nationality, customary human rights law / refugee law, humanitarian law) and international conventions, such as The Universal Declaration of Human rights (Article 13(2), 1948), The Fourth Geneva convention, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1951), all embodied in UN General Assembly Resolution 194 (reaffirmed annually since 1948), and Security Council Resolution 237. Moreover, for those refugees who wish to return, feasible plans have been proposed that would have meant minimal displacement of the current population, given that about 80% of Israeli Jews live in only 15% of the country, and that the vast majority of refugees could return to areas from which they came, as they are vacant or under populated. http://english.aljazeera.net/archive/2005/05/200849162924283293.html http://www.arts.mcgill.ca/MEPP/prrn/papers/abusitta.html . In the 1967 war, Israel seized control and has maintained a military occupation of the Syrian Golan Heights, Palestinian West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza (OPT), in violation of international law, which emphasizes the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war no matter how the conflict began or how long it endures. During the war, another 300,000 Palestinians became refugees, some for the second time. . As the Occupying Power, Israel continues to violate its responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention for the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, by the following practices: - ongoing settlement of Jewish-only colonies on West Bank / East Jerusalem land, of which 40% is privately owned by Palestinians, that contain between 480,000 and 550,0000 Israelis - more than half settling during the Oslo Peace Process; and since the beginning of 2009, 73,300 new Jewish-only settlements have been planned for the West Bank/ East Jerusalem, along with the planned destruction of homes to 1500 Palestinians in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Silwan - denial of freedom of movement by over 500 checkpoints and roadblocks - collective punishment, including curfews and closures, prevention of medical treatment, demolition of over 10,000 homes, of which, according to UN figures, only 6% involved any security suspects - targeted assassinations - detention without charge - torture in detention - denial of the right to peaceful assembly - the uprooting, since 2000 alone, of nearly 2 million trees, and razing thousands of acres of agricultural land. In sum, Israel has taken control of more than 50% of West Bank land (the whole West Bank represents only 22% of historic Palestine) to establish the settlements and reserve land for their expansion; Israel controls 100% of West Bank water, diverting 80% for Israeli use, leaving only 20% for Palestinians - insufficient for Palestinian life and agriculture. http://www.btselem.org/English/Publications/Summaries/200205_Land_Grab.asp http://www.btselem.org/english/water/2008070_acute_water_shortage_in_the_west_bank.asp http://www.imemc.org/article/48308 http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/natres/water/2007/0523arabisrael.htm http://stopthewall.org/latestnews/1883.shtml http://apjp.org/israel-planning-73300-new-home/ According to Israel's human rights group B'Tselem, since September 2008, Israel has escalated its policy of separating the West Bank from Gaza and forcibly transferring - ethnic cleansing - West Bank Palestinians to Gaza, a policy supported by Israel's supreme court. http://www.btselem.org/english/press_releases/20080910.asp "Ethnic cleansing by Stealth," by Seth Freedman, Guardian News, September 4, 2008 http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/sep/04/israelandthepalestinians.humanrights Regarding US support of Israeli "benign" ethnic cleansing, see "Ethic Cleansing: Constructive, Benign, and Nefarious." ZMagazine, August 09, 2006 By Edward S. Herman and Grace Kwinjeh http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/3419 . In 2002, Israel began building a 790 km-long (494 mile) "apartheid wall" in the occupied West Bank, confiscating huge swaths of Palestinian agricultural land and water sources along a route that deviates from the 1967 "Green Line." In 2004, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled the barrier to be illegal under international law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention, that it must be dismantled and reparations paid to Palestinians for losses incurred, and that "all States are under obligation not to recognize the illegal situation resulting form the construction of the wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory . . . They are also under obligation not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by such construction." http://www.icj- cij.org/docket/files/131/1677.pdf Similarly, a detailed investigation by B'Tselem confirmed that, "under the guise of security," Israel's routing of the separation barrier was primarily to enable the expansion of illegal settlements and protect the economic interests of Israeli real estate developers, all in violation of Palestinian human rights, especially self-determination. http://www.btselem.org/Download/200512_Under_the_Guise_of_Security_Eng.doc Thus far, Israel has refused to comply with the ICJ ruling, and continues to build the wall. .Israel maintains an apartheid-like system in the West Bank, where a concrete barrier, two different legal systems and a "matrix of control" separate Israeli-Jewish settlers and Palestinians, and relegate the latter to a no man's land of statelessness. For example, former US President Jimmy Carter (Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid) and B'Tselem describe the institutionalized system of discrimination in the OPT as "apartheid." Similarly, citing the planned system of Jewish-only roads and settlements, and two different legal systems, B'Tselem reported in 2002: Israel has created in the Occupied Territories a regime of separation based on discrimination, applying two separate systems of law in the same area and basing the rights of individuals on their nationality. This regime is the only one of its kind in the world, and is reminiscent of distasteful regimes from the past, such as the Apartheid regime in South Africa. http://www.btselem.org/English/Press_Releases/20040616.asp Again, in their 2004 report, "Discrimination-based separation - An Apartheid Practice": The roads regime, which is based on separation through discrimination, bears clear similarities to the racist apartheid regime that existed in South Africa until 1994. An individual's national origin determines their right to use various roads. This policy is based on a racist premise: that all Palestinians are security risks, and it is therefore justifiable to restrict their movement. Thus the policy indiscriminately harms the entire Palestinian population, in violation of their human rights and of international law. http://www.btselem.org/English/Publications/Summaries/200408_Forbidden_Roads.asp On November 25, 2008, UN General Assembly President Miguel D'Escoto Brockmann also likened Israel's policies toward the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza to South Africa's treatment of blacks under apartheid. http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1226404827209 . Even before the current hostilities, Gaza was an immense open-air prison for 1.5 million people - two-thirds of whom are refugees from 1948 and 1967 - squeezed into 140 square miles and hemmed in on all sides by 25-foot-high walls separated by a vast expanse of bulldozed earth. (See "The Gaza Strip: A Humanitarian Implosion," March 2008, http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/2008/images/03/06/gaza.implosion.pdf.) In late 2005, Israel unilaterally withdrew its soldiers and 8,000 settlers but continued to control Gaza from the air and sea, and monitor all exits and entries of persons and supplies. A blockade began after January 2006 when Hamas won parliamentary elections in the OPT, a result not accepted by Israel, the US and the EU, which withdrew aid from Gaza despite the facts that the election was regarded as fair and democratic, with a huge voter turnout (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1181813074587), and that Hamas had rescinded its call for Israel's destruction and offered of a long-term truce in exchange for Israeli withdrawal from all the OPT. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/12/israel. The US then covertly armed Hamas' political rival, Fatah, to provoke a Palestinian civil war and overthrow Hamas. After intense fighting, Hamas gained full control of Gaza in June 2007. http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/04/gaza200804?printable=true¤tPage=all Since then, Israel has defined Gaza as an "enemy entity" and maintained a siege that intensified on November 5, 2008. http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n02/sieg01_.html. By December 2008, according to UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights for the OPT, Richard Falk, Gaza had a malnutrition rate of 75%, and healthcare and economic systems on the verge of collapse with 95% of factories closed and the highest unemployment rate in the world. http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N08/489/88/PDF/N0848988.pdf?OpenElement http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-falk/understanding-the-gaza-ca_b_154777.html In November 2008 Israel denied entry of humanitarian aid to Gaza as UN food aid was running out. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7726943.stm. On 12/30/08 Israel rammed and severely damaged the SS Dignity in international waters. It was carrying medical supplies to Gaza with a delegation of physicians and human rights activists, including former US congresswoman and US Green Party's 2008 presidential candidate, Cynthia McKinney. http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=162 http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/12/30/gaza.aid.boat/?iref=hpmostpop#cnnSTCText In sum, these are violations of international law under which Israel remains the Occupying Power charged with the protection of Palestinians in OPT, including Gaza. ("Israel prepares for war crimes over Gaza" http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout&cid=1232171555977&utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss) According to UN Special Rapporteur Falk's 8/25/08 report to the UN General Assembly: The whole approach taken toward Gaza by Israel and by the United States of America, and the European Union, since the Hamas electoral victory in January 2006, involves a massive and unlawful systematic violation of article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which unconditionally prohibits collective punishment. . Israel also maintains an apartheid-like system in Israel (within the 1967 "Green Line") that systematically discriminates against its non-Jewish citizens, especially the 20% of its population who are Palestinian-Israelis. Unlike South African institutionalized racism (apartheid), the non-Jewish citizens of Israel can vote in elections for members of parliament (Knesset) where they can have representation, though they have never been part of a governing coalition. Yet, the presence of these rights obscures Israel's unacknowledged history of ethnic cleansing of the non-Jewish majority inhabitants of historic Palestine (1947-49; 1967) and their continuing dispossession, and masks the fundamental structures of the Israeli state that preclude equality and discriminate against non-Jewish citizens on an ethnic basis. Indeed, not all rights are citizenship rights. In Israel, other rights, defined as "nationality" rights, are reserved for Jews only: exclusive use of land, privileged access to private and public employment, special educational loans, home mortgages, preferences for admission to universities, among others. From its official beginning, the Declaration of Independence, Israel established itself as a Jewish state, with a Jewish character, principles on which its Basic Laws are anchored. While Israel has no constitution, this Declaration and its Basic Laws are viewed as the equivalents of constitutional law. For example, the 1985 amendment to Section 7a of the Basic Law (ironically, the "Anti-Racist Law") bars any political party from participating in elections that explicitly or implicitly denies the Jewish and democratic character of the State of Israel; and the 1992 Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, which reiterates the Jewish and democratic characters of the state (Section 1a): "The purpose of the basic law is to protect human dignity and liberty, in order to establish in a Basic Law the values of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state." Indeed, in the midst of the Gaza crisis, several violations of human rights and democracy occurred against Palestinian Israelis: the Israeli Elections Committee banned the participation of two Palestinian-Israeli parties (50% of Arab parties, representing 160,000 people) in the February 2009 elections (as had occurred in 2003) because they opposed the assault on Gaza and called for Israel to become a state of all its citizens rather than a Jewish state. These positions were seen as violations of Israel's Basic Law 7A forbidding candidates from calling for the destruction of the state of Israel as a democratic and Jewish state; incitement of racism; or support of a terrorist organization or an enemy state during a conflict, including visiting an enemy country in the seven years prior to their candidacy. [In response to a petition from a Palestinian human rights organization (Adalah), the Israeli Supreme Court did reinstate some of the candidates. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054867.html; http://news.antiwar.com/2009/01/12/israel-bans-arab-parties-from-election/ ] Similarly, during the Gaza assault, Palestinian-Israelis were banned from non-violently protesting the Israel's actions. According to legal scholars Sharon Weill and Valentina Azarov ("Israel's Authoritarian Transformation," February 26, 2008 http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2009/02/26/israel-s-authoritarian-transformation): [D]uring 230 such demonstrations, 801 protestors were arrested, 277 of them children and juveniles; arrests were made for "disturbing the peace," waving Palestinian flags, and "hurting the nation's morale." As of 7 February 2009, 255 people were still under arrest, including 89 children and juveniles; 114 indictments were submitted to the courts. Others were called in for interrogation by the security services, and were warned not to take part in any demonstration; some were put under house arrest and were prohibited from entering certain cities. In sum, Israel's self-definition defies logic: Israel cannot simultaneously be a Jewish state and democratic - which would require defining itself as the state of all its citizens. Instead, by law and unlike any other country in the world, Israel defines itself as the state of all the Jews in the world, to whom privilege over (even native) non-Jewish citizens is given. This exclusivity contrasts sharply with the alternative of designating the country as the "homeland" for the Jewish people, an inclusive designation that could be applied to the other people for whom the country is also homeland, the Palestinians. In analyzing Israel's Basic Laws, Palestinian-Israeli Nadim Rouhana (Henry Hart Rice Professor of Conflict Resolution, George Mason University and Director of the Arab Center for Applied Social Research in Haifa) underscores the inherent contradiction between Israel's self-identity as Jewish and democratic (Palestinian Citizens in an Ethnic Jewish State, 1997), p. 46: According to Kretzmer (1990), simply by introducing the 1985 amendment to Section 7a of the Basic Law . . . the Israeli Knesset demonstrated that the 'recognition of Israel as the state of the Jewish people has indeed become an incontrovertible constitutional fact.' But again, how can this definition of the state of Israel align with the essence of democracy: having the state as an equally accessible tool of all of its citizens? It simply precludes all non-Jewish citizens from claiming the state as equally theirs. If the state is the apparatus that concentrates power, determines the distribution of resources, rights and duties, benefits and national priorities, determines the criteria for significant national goals, and promulgates laws and regulations to achieve these goals, then by defining itself as the state of only one group of its citizens (and some who are not its citizens), the state cannot avoid violating the principles of democracy. As the international community shunned apartheid South Africa in the late 20th century, the growing international opposition to Israel's attempt to legitimize Jewish ethnic dominance reflects 21st century world consciousness and consensus that such institutionalized dominance is archaic and undemocratic. Professor Virginia Tilley concludes (The One-State Solution, pp. 181-182): [S]elf-styled as the 'only democracy in the Middle East,' Israel remains the only ethnic democracy claiming membership in the Euro-American international community. That claim is becoming an intolerable embarrassment, as the model is long obsolete elsewhere. For instance, the "White Australia" project sustained a racial democracy in the early twentieth century, banning Asian immigration and excluding Aborigines on the belief that only racial homogeneity could permit whites to freely enjoy a democratic practice brought from Europe. Southern states in the United States used a host of methods, official and unofficial, to exclude black voting and secure white dominion well into the 1960's. But the civil movements that challenged and defeated these systems carried with them more than local or national change; they campaigned for and consolidated an international normative discourse that rejected ethnoracial supremacy as an inherent source of injustice, dehumanization, and human suffering. The shift rose to catch South Africa and quickly discredited apartheid; Milosevic's Serbian ambitions also came too late and hit the cresting wave. The lessons from World War II had at last come to fruition: ethnic nationalism generates unacceptable discourses of ethnic supremacy and inferiority, grant moral authority to ethnic cleansing, and precludes equal rights before the law, which is the foundational principle of Western democracies. If a state is to be truly democratic - with all its citizens held equal before the law - it cannot be based on ethnic dominion. Whatever Israel claims based on the past sins of Europe or on its own mythologized past of peaceful resistance to ferocious Arabs, if the Jewish state claims membership in the Western club, it cannot expect to be held exempt from these principles. Similarly, Jewish-American Professor Joel Kovel (former NY Green Party nominee for Senate) attributes Israel's fatal flaw to its structurally racist nature as a Jewish state (Overcoming Zionism, p.165): [I]f you sign on to the idea of a Jewish state, you are taking the particularism that is the potential bane of any state, mixing it with the exceptionalism that is the actual bane of Judaism, and giving racism an objective, enduring, institutionalized, and obdurate character. You accept, in that one moment, a state that systematically denies basic human rights to a fraction of its people and systematically grants another set of people superior right over them. Thus racism is set into motion, and remains so, grounded in an exclusion based not on what the Other does but entirely on what the Other is, or to be more exact, is not, namely Jewish. By this one gesture, no matter how one rationalized a Jewish state as owed the Jews by virtue of their sufferings, or ethical superiority, or promises made to ancestors, or generations of landlessness, or a Covenant with God, or cultural genius, or just because it feels good to have a state for one's own kind-one violates the whole law by which humanity has risen above the much of narrow self-interest and cyclical vengeance. And you cannot overcome that violation unless you undo the compact that locks it into place. Thus, Israel's institutionalized racist policies toward non-Jews, meet the criteria of the "crime of apartheid," which are described in Article II, International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (1973): http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/11.htm For the purpose of the present Convention, the term 'the crime of apartheid', which shall include similar policies and practices of racial segregation and discrimination as practised in southern Africa, shall apply to the following inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them: (c) Any legislative measures and other measures calculated to prevent a racial group or groups from participation in the political, social, economic and cultural life of the country and the deliberate creation of conditions preventing the full development of such a group or groups . . . (d) Any measures, including legislative measures, designed to divide the population along racial lines by the creation of separate reserves and ghettos for the members of a racial group or groups, the prohibition of mixed marriages among members of various racial groups, the expropriation of landed property belonging to a racial group or groups or to members thereof; See also For a side-by-side comparison of the convention's definition of "apartheid" with examples of Israel's human rights record within Israel as well as in the Occupied Territories, see report by Israeli Uri Strauss, "Defining Apartheid: Israel's Record" http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article689.shtml "Israel's 'Ethnocracy' and the Demographic Threat: Dr. As'ad Ghanem on Israel's Palestinian Citizens, October 21, 2009. http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/ht/d/ContentDetails/i/2359/pid/223 "Neither two states nor one: Disengagement and 'creeping apartheid' in Israel/Palestine" by Prof. Oren Yiftachel, The Arab World Geographer, Vol.8, No. 3, 2005, http://www.geog.bgu.ac.il/members/yiftachel/new_papers_eng/Yiftachel%20in%20Arab%20World%20Geographer.pdf; "Democracy or Ethnocracy: Territory and Settler Politics in Israel/Palestine" by Oren Yiftachel, http://www.merip.org/mer/mer207/yift.htm (Summer, 1998) "Apartheid In the Holy Land" Paper Prepared Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed for the United Nations Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, 31st August-7th September, 2001 South Africa, http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq11.html Some of the Israel laws discriminating against Israel's non-Jewish citizens Exclusive citizenship/immigration laws: . Law of Return (1950) and the Citizenship Law (1952) . Population Registry Law (1965) . Citizenship and Entry into Israel law (July 2003) Exclusive use of state land by Jews As a consequence of the laws listed below, non-Jews- "non-nationals" - who had succeeded in remaining in their native land, were dispossessed of their property at Israel's founding in 1948, internally displaced and excluded by law from leasing, purchasing, building, or farming 93% of the land of Israel within the Green Line - land that is regarded by Israel as the inalienable patrimony of the Jewish people wherever they live, and is owned by the Jewish National Fund and the state and regulated by the Israel Land Authority. Jewish-Israeli Uri Davis describes the process by which these quasi-governmental agencies maintain Israel's racist land policies (Apartheid Israel, p. 48): In other words, in the critical areas of immigration, settlement and land development the Israeli sovereign, the Knesset, which is formally accountable to all its citizens, Jews and non-Jews alike, has formulated and passed legislation ceding state sovereignty (including taxation) and entered into Covenants vesting its responsibilities with organization such as the WZO [World Zionist Organization], the JA [Jewish Agency], and the JNF [Jewish National Fund] which are constitutionally committed to serving and promoting the interests of Jews and Jews alone. It is through this procedure of legal duplicity, the ceding of state sovereignty and vesting its responsibilities . . . with Zionist organizations constitutionally committed to the exclusive principle of 'only for Jews', that legal apartheid is regulated in Israel. It is through this mechanism of legal duplicity that the State of Israel has successfully veiled the reality of Zionist apartheid in the guise of legal democracy since the establishment of the State of Israel to date. Such land control mechanisms perpetuate a legally enforced system of territorial separation, by which Palestinian-Israelis (20+% of the population) now own only 3% of the land. This situation is actually worse than apartheid South Africa's policy of "influx control" restricting the residence and land available to black South Africans citizens - 13% - while the remaining 87% was reserved for "white South Africa." 1949: Emergency Regulations (Cultivation of Waste Lands) Ordinance 1950: Absentee Property Law 1952: World Zionist Organization -Jewish Agency for the Land of Israel (Status) Law 1953: Land Acquisition Law; Law for Confiscating Land for Public Interests; Jewish National Fund Law 1954: Covenant between the Government of Israel and the Zionist Executive / Executive for the Jewish Agency for the Land of Israel 1960: Basic Law; Israel Lands; Israel Lands Law; Israeli Lands Administration Law 1961: Covenant between the State of Israel and the Jewish National Fund 1980: Land Acquisition Law (Peace Treaty with Egypt): seizes thousands of dunams of Palestinian land to expand Jewish communities in the Negev Discrimination and ethnic cleansing continues for Palestinian-Israelis: Unrecognized Arab villages in Israel: At least eighty thousand Palestinian Bedouin-Israelis live in about 45 "unrecognized" villages in the Negev desert in the south of Israel. Following the adoption of the Planning and Construction Law of 1965, the villages did not appear on any Israeli map and were not recognized by any official government and ignored by all government planning projects. These Bedouin are citizens of Israel and have the right to vote in national elections and are expected to pay taxes. Yet their villages are deprived of basic services, like housing, water, electricity, education and health care. According to a report by anti-apartheid peace activists Bangani Ngeleza and Adri Nieuwhof: There are disturbing similarities in living conditions between unrecognised villages and informal settlements under apartheid. These include lack of access to adequate potable water, lack of proper sanitation facilities, absence of proper road infrastructure, the lack of educational facilities, houses built of corrugated iron sheets (in some cases of black plastics and cardboard) etc. The similarities are striking between racially based policies that lay behind the creation of white settlements under the apartheid regime in South Africa then and the establishment of Jewish settlements by the Israeli government. "Unrecognised villages in the Negev expose Israel's apartheid policies" Bangani Ngeleza and Adri Nieuwhof, The Electronic Intifada, 21 December 2005 http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article4358.shtml; "Bedouin ask UN to help fight systemic discrimination in Israel" http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=734096 For an update on rising Israeli support for "transferring" out their fellow Palestinian citizens, see "Ethnic cleansing and Israel," by Conn Hallinan, Counterpunch, March 3, 2009 http://www.counterpunch.org/hallinan03032009.html Continuing efforts to "Judaize" Arab-Israeli areas like the Galilee, Negev and East Jerusalem Israel continues policies to constrain Palestinian-Israeli life while privileging that of Jewish-Israelis. See "A Campaign to Challenge Israeli Apartheid" March 31, 2005 by Kole Kilibarda http://www.caiaweb.org/files/kilibarda.jamjoum-JNFcampaign.pdf Isabelle Humphries, a British researcher on Palestinian internal refugees, attests to institutionalized Israeli discrimination towards Palestinian-Israelis displaced from their homes in the Galilee in 1948 but not expelled: While Israel continues to claim that it is a democracy, it finds ways to discriminate and implement an apartheid system - and no more so than in the allocation of land and town planning. While the state and high court system maintain the pretense of keeping opportunities open to all, independent private organizations have no obligation to do so. Thus the state delegates and coordinates its work with Zionist establishments technically able to act as quasi-state institutions, despite the fact that their mandates openly state their aim of serving one ethnic group alone. The latest development plan for the Galilee and Negev is in full cooperation with the World Zionist Organization (WZO), the Jewish Agency (JA) and the Jewish National Fund (JNF) - non-state actors with an open Zionist and racist agenda. http://www.wrmea.com/archives/Sept_Oct_2005/0509012.html See also: "Policy of Settlement and 'spacial' Judaization in the Naqab" by Hana Hamdan, Adalah's Newsletter, Vol 11, October, 2005 http://www.adalah.org/newsletter/eng/mar05/ar2.pdf "Case Studies in Ethnic Cleansing" complied by the Applied Research Institute-Jerusalem's (ARIJ) http://www.poica.org/editor/case_studies/index.php?Y=2009 Segregated education systems until university According to a 2006 Human Rights Watch report, The Israeli government operates two separate school systems for its 1.8 million school children: a Jewish system and an Arab system. The students in the latter are Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel, nearly one quarter of all Israeli school children. Under international law, states may offer children separate educational systems for linguistic or religious reasons, but they may not discriminate in doing so . . . despite small advances in recent years, the discriminatory practices against Palestinian Arab school children that are institutionalized in its education system place Israel in violation of its international legal obligations. http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2006/01/02/discrimination-against-palestinian-arab-children-israeli-education-system Also see "Discrimination Against Palestinian Arab Children in the Israeli Education System" by Zama Coursen-Neff in the New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, January 2, 2006. While Israeli education is integrated at the university level, discrimination persists. Beyond the fact that the system advantages Jewish-Israelis in competing for university places, in 2003 Israel universities stopped an experimental admission procedure when it became clear that the main beneficiaries were Palestinian-Israelis rather than those intended - Jewish-Israeli students from low-income development towns. According to Ha'aretz's Relly Sa'ar ("Universities return to aptitude exams to keep Arabs out"): There's no politically correct spin to put on it, and the facts speak for themselves: As soon as Israel's top university administrators noticed that the big winners from admissions policy changes were not Jewish youngsters from low-income towns, but rather Arabs, they reverted back to the old admissions system. http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=365572 Environmental Degradation in Israel/Palestine as a Result of the Conflict The often violent implementation of Zionist policies toward Palestinians--populating Israel/Palestine with Jews while ridding the territory of Palestinians--and Palestinian resistance to these policies have resulted in severe environmental degradation. Professor Joel Kovel (The Enemy of Nature), describes the state of ecological damage in Israel in his book Overcoming Zionism (2007, pp.110-111): Israel, or to take into account the entity that Zionism now controls, Israel/Palestine, is an environmental nightmare, all the more so in relation to its ideals, wealth, and technological expertise. . . .All of Israel's rivers are seriously polluted except for the Upper Jordan, and some have been polluted to literally lethal levels; . .88 percent of Tel Aviv's wells contain persistent organic pollutants; as for the air, a quadrupling of nitrous oxide emissions has been observed since 1980; asthma rates among children have gone from 5.6 percent in 1980 to 11.2 percent in 1989 and 17 percent in 2002; Israel has one of the highest breast cancer incidences in the world, with a 32 percent increase in the 1990's; in the 1970s the breast milk of Israeli women contained some 800 times the concentration of benzene hexachloride as American women. Kovel specifies certain factors "intrinsic to Zionism" that continue to harm the tiny environment of Israel/Palestine. These factors include: "Zionism's incessant pressure to fill Israel with Jews in order to keep a step ahead of the Palestinians," leading to the ecologically disastrous combination of a sixfold population increase within half a century, rapid industrialization and conspicuous consumption of resources; and since 1967, the literally earth-shattering effects of settling over 500,000 Jews in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and Gaza, accompanied by destructive efforts to constrain Palestinian life such as razing millions of trees and fields, imposition of over 500 checkpoints, roads, military zones; building of a nearly 800 km-long apartheid Wall whose construction has destroyed hundreds of acres of farm land along the Wall's route and caused severe flooding from dammed up water, resulting in pervasive destruction of crops, greenhouses and other agricultural infrastructure; and pollution like that described by Nora Barrows-Friedman across the West Bank where "villagers watch as crops and orchards become poisoned and contaminated from raw sewage being actively pumped into their land from the sewage treatment facilities inside Israeli settlements." Similarly, Palestinian-American Green Party member Professor Mazin Qumsiyeh, (Mammals of the Holy Land; Sharing the Land of Canaan) recently returned to his native West Bank where he teaches at Bethlehem University. He describes the ecological damage he has witnessed over the years due to Zionist settlement policies (February 27, 2009 http://www.qumsiyeh.org/rightsblog2009/: But it is not just humans that are the victims of Zionist master plans. Nature is also. With a huge network of military bases, industrial zones, new infrastructure (for Jewish settlers so as not to use or improve Palestinian roads), massive apartheid walls, and disregard for environmental protection, the West Bank has become an environmental disaster area. The loss of village lands (to land confiscation, walls, etc.) around Bethlehem area for example made many villagers come live in Bethlehem which makes it a very crowded area and there are few open areas (some of which receive sewage and trash from Jewish settlements). The extent of the environmental damage is more noticeable to me as a biologist. I know this since I studied animals here for three decades and places that I used to be able to catch and study many animals representing many species now yield nothing or at best one or two lonely animals of once ubiquitous species. The toads in the valley near my house are all gone (an early spring sound and image that remains only in my memory). Water security has probably been most negatively impacted by the conflict. Since 1967, Israel has not only arrogated regional water supplies and diverted over 80% of West Bank water for Israeli use, but the whole area now faces an absolute shortage of water because of over consumption and development. Meanwhile, (Mediterranean Sea) salt water is seeping into Gaza's water as its water table falls; and USAID is expected to fund an Israeli plan to retain West Bank water sources in exchange for a desalination plant providing (privatized) water to the Territories. According to New Scientist http://www.wilpf.org/jane/israel_lays_claim, this "would leave independent Palestine more dependent on desalination than almost any other nation in the world. " and, writes Stephen Lendman, "given the cost of desalinated water, it will be out of reach for the great majority of impoverished Palestinians." http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/natres/water/2008/0718westbank.htm) Not a recipe for peace and security. All in all, the conflict has become a zero-sum game antithetical to the human cooperation required for ecological security and sustainability. As Joel Kovel (Overcoming Zionism, pp.115-116) concludes, this situation cannot change as long as Zionism informs Israeli policies toward the Palestinians: This has led to an ecological situation unique to history, and one that precipitously hurtles toward environmental ruin. Human communities are ecosystems, too, and their capacity to fit into the great regulatory patterns of nature depends upon their internal integrity, manifest in mutual recognition and coherent communication. Estrangement or alienation, is the human form taken by ecological breakdown; it is a failure of recognition between human agents, which makes cooperative action impossible and splits humanity from nature as well as itself. It follows that the most severely estranged society will also be the most subject to eco-disintegration. This more or less describes the State of Israel, and certainly its Occupied Territories, which comprise one of the most bizarre social formations ever planted upon this earth. Here, on a tiny plot of ground, dwell two people with two radically different legal and social systems, one the beneficiary of a powerful state and living in comfort while it works to terrorize and strangle the other, who is stateless and bent upon surviving; the two are therefore radically denied any cooperative arrangement as can be imagined, and primed to be an eco-destructive accelerant to the State of Israel as a whole. See also In Photos: Flooding in Qalqilya and Tulkarm March 12th, 2009 http://stopthewall.org/photos/1885.shtml "When the Occupation Gets Really Filthy" August 21, 2007 by Nora Barrows-Friedman, Internet Press Service http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=38964 "Drought and Israeli Policy Threaten West Bank Water Security," by Stephen Lendman, July 18, 2008, http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/natres/water/2008/0718westbank.htm "Israel lays claim to Palestine's water " May 29, 2004 by Fred Pearce, Jerusalem New Scientist http://www.wilpf.org/jane/israel_lays_claim "The Water Crisis in Gaza" by Alice Gray by Alice Gray, February, 2007, International Viewpoint Online http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?page=print_article&id_article=1211 "Water crisis looms over Palestinians as Israel withholds water resources" July 30.2007 http://www.almubadara.org/new/edetails.php?id=3267 "The effects of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict on Water Reserves in the Jordan River Basin" by Eugenia Ferragina, Global Environment (2), 2008 http://www.globalenvironment.it/ferragina.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kumfry at hotmail.com Sat Mar 21 09:54:58 2009 From: kumfry at hotmail.com (Ken Humphrey) Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 13:54:58 +0000 Subject: {news} Fw: PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Gaza; DISCUSSION period begins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I strongly support the proposal. The Gaza and occupational policies of disastrous proportions demand a long over-due taking a stand. Both corporate American parties acquiesce completely to fascist-type brutalities and wanton destruction and killings of innocent civilians, including young children, giving Israel their unquestioning endorsement.In the U.S. the Greens are the only alternative party that is extant to condemn Israel's policies. The Greens should not succumb to pressure to water down our humanitarian and moral reactions to the increasingly ruthless policies of the rightwing Israeli regime. We must speak up for the innocents that have been killed and their culture wantonly destroyed. Peace in the Middle East, and even the security of Israel itself calls for American pressure on Israel since we furnish the very weaponry Israel used against the Palestinians and in 2006 against the Lebanese. America shares the blame with Israel in the eyes of the world. Ken Humphrey From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net To: gpcwc at lists.riseup.net; ctgp-news at ml.greens.org Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 07:03:43 -0400 CC: Subject: {news} Fw: PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Gaza; DISCUSSION period begins Dear CT Greens, This proposal is being discussed on the International Committee. We'd appreciate any comments from you. Justine McCabe ----- Original Message ----- From: Justine McCabe To: USGP International Committee Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 8:59 AM Subject: PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Gaza; DISCUSSION period begins Dear IC, Last month, in response to the Gaza massacre, the IC considered a draft statement on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict The wording of that statement culminated in a call to our sister Green Parties to join GPUS in endorsing the Palestinian civil society call for Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel. We took a straw poll that resulted in majority support: 21 yes votes, 8 no, 1 abstention, with 70% of IC members participating. Since then, former IC co-chair Julia Willebrand and I were away, and we had an election for co-chairs that consumed much time and effort. So, it's time to return to that statement. As the straw poll ended, there was a difference of opinion as to whether a formal proposal seeking consensus--and vote if necessary--were in order. Given that this statement would be used to lobby international Greens to support BDS in compliance with the directive to the IC contained in GPUS Prop 190 of 2005, newly-elected co-chair Steve Herrick and I thought that formally proposing this would be best. And, assuming that consensus is reached on such a proposal, we would then notify the SC of this IC action, and begin to use it to lobby Green parties worldwide. The proposal is below. According to our bylaws, we have a discussion period first in order to refine the language, etc. Since we have already discussed this at length, we propose that one-week should be sufficient.. At the end of that time, we'll test for consensus. PLEASE NOTE: 1) We will be considering the statement WITHOUT the Background information, though it still appears below the statement itself as the "references" part of the proposal format. Unless there is strong support to the contrary, it seems that this Background section is too long to include for a statement that will be circulated. Instead, Justine plans to rewrite this as a "White Paper" to submit to the IC later as we did with the Right of Return paper on our website. 2) There are 2 differences in this draft from the one voted on last month: a) "A Call for Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions Against Israel" appears in the title of the statement unlike in the original b) Given that ecological wisdom/sustainability is a central Green Party pillar, there was an omission in the original statement about the impact of the conflict on the environment. In the revised statement, the following is included: "Recognizing that this conflict continues to have a devastating ecological impact on Israel/Palestine, especially water sources, thereby decreasing security for the whole region;" We look forward to comments from everyone. Peace, Justine McCabe and Steve Herrick Co-chairs, International Committee, GPUS ----------------------------------------------------- PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict for endorsement by International Green Parties PRESENTER: International Committee, GPUS CONTACT: Justine McCabe justinemccabe at earthink.net SUBJECT: DRAFT Green Party Statement on Gaza Crisis and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Call for Boycott, Divestment Sanctions Against Israel BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Implementation of the GPUS International Committee?s mission as directed by GPUS Prop 190 of November 21, 2005, ?The GPUS National Committee directs the International Committee to work with our sister Green parties around the world in implementing an international boycott.? http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2005_11_28.shtml In keeping with Prop 190, and in response to the three-week Israeli assault on Gaza beginning in December 2008, the International Committee considered a draft statement to be circulated among international Green Parties urging them to join our party in endorsing the Boycott, Divestment Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel. That statement was discussed at length among IC members and a straw poll revealed majority support for it. This proposal is an opportunity for the IC to formally endorse the statement with the intention of then circulating it among international Green Parties for endorsement of the BDS campaign as directed by GPUS Prop 190. FULL PROPOSAL: Draft statement is below TIME LINE: Five-day discussion period, beginning Friday, March 20, 2009 ending Friday, March 27 at 10 pm PDT RESOURCES: Lobbying efforts by members of GPUS International Committee REFERENCES: "Background" section that appears below the statement ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ DRAFT Green Party Statement On Gaza Crisis and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Call for Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions Against Israel Although Green Parties represent different countries and regions of the world, we share common principles essential to understanding and resolving this conflict. Among these principles are non-violence, including consistent enforcement of international law; ecological wisdom and sustainability, including reducing the negative impact of humankind on the natural environment; and social justice, thereby rejecting discrimination based on gender, class or ethnicity. These principles guide our response to the recent crisis in Gaza that began on December 27, 2008 in which we condemn the killing of civilians, condemn the excessive and disproportionate force used by Israel, the Occupying Power in Gaza, call for a full and continuing ceasefire between Israel and the Hamas government in Gaza, and a complete withdrawal of all Israeli forces with the opening of all border crossings in Gaza As of January 18, the Gaza crisis resulted in displacement of thousands of Palestine, the injury of more than 5,300, and the killing of over 1,300, mostly civilians. It has also caused the destruction of Gaza?s infrastructure, including demolition of hundreds of homes and attacks on UN schools and on the UNRWA warehouse, which is the source of basic necessities, such as food, fuel and medicines. According to a 1/15/09 UN press release: ?One in every 250 people in Gaza is either now dead or significantly injured . . . This number is comparable to 33,000 people in New York City or 1.2 million people in the United States.? http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/47d4e277b48d9d3685256ddc00612265/b974aca8e8fe201d85257540004ffedc!OpenDocument Contrast this with the Hamas rocket attacks, which during the same period killed 3 Israelis civilians and 10 Israeli soldiers. http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1232171510978&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout Furthermore, we are greatly distressed by the continuing decoupling of these recent hostilities from their historic context, which encourages, inter alia, the following obstacles to peace: ? Demonization of Palestinians as inherently anti-Semitic, hateful terrorists; ? Delegitimization of lawful resistance by Palestinians to Israeli violations of their human and legal rights; ? Propounding the myth of balance between the two peoples despite the patently disproportionate military and political power between them: an occupying power, Israel ? nuclear-armed with the fourth largest military in the world, backed by a superpower ? and Palestinians, an effectively disarmed, impoverished and occupied people; ? Jettisoning of international law in favor of bilateral negotiations between two actors of such grossly unequal power, a course begun with the Madrid /Oslo process; ? Distortions of human security needs of Israelis in favor of Israeli state security and regional domination; ? Conflation of criticism of Israeli policies with anti-Semitism, which promotes regressive elements on both sides for political gain, trivializes the historic prejudice against Jews, and inhibits the expression of sympathy Palestinians do have for Jewish suffering, especially the Nazi holocaust. As a consequence we call for a redirection of international attention to the root causes of past and ongoing hostilities between Israelis and Palestinians, i.e., Palestinian dispossession and ethnic cleansing by Israel since 1948, and the establishment of an apartheid-like system in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) that discriminates against non-Jews.* THEREFORE: Recalling the historic examples of apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany that a just, enduring peace, and reconciliation between Palestinians and Israelis depend on acknowledgement of wrongdoing and restitution and; Recalling that Europeans, not Palestinians, were responsible for the Nazi holocaust; we believe that individual European Green Parties, especially those with elected representatives in their governments, and in the EU parliament in their capacity to influence the European Union?s relation to Israel, have a special duty to ensure that Palestinians no longer bear the blame for historic European transgressions against Jews; and Recalling that the Green Party of the United States has a particular obligation in relation to this conflict as the US government is Israel?s closest ally: ? That Israel receives more than $5 billion annually in military and financial aid; that as current hostilities in Gaza illustrate, Israel?s use of this military aid often violates American laws in that the Arms Export Control Act stipulates that US-supplied weapons be used only for ?legitimate self-defense? and that the US Foreign Assistance Act prohibits military assistance to any country ?which engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights? and that the Proxmire Amendment bans military assistance to any government that refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to allow inspection of its nuclear facilities, as Israel refuses to do; ? That the United States government, including both its major parties, has not been an impartial peace broker in this conflict but continues to provide political cover and protection to Israel internationally, particularly at the United Nations, where it has vetoed scores of Security Council Resolutions opposing Israel?s violations of Palestinian human rights and international law, thereby undermining the central purpose of the UN Charter to maintain international peace and security; ? That US support for Israeli violations against the Palestinian people is a main source of antipathy to the US and the West among the world?s formerly colonized peoples who identify with Palestinians; that this US support not only decreases US/Western national security, but also contributes to Middle East and international instability; and http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=41982 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/world/14clash.html http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/65b122b6-e8c0-11dd-a4d0-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1 Recognizing that this conflict continues to have a devastating ecological impact on Israel/Palestine, especially water sources, thereby decreasing security for the whole region; and Recognizing that despite 61 years of continuous diplomatic attempts by the international community, it has failed to bring about Israel?s compliance with international law or respect for basic Palestinian human rights; and Recognizing that, despite abundant condemnation of Israel?s policies by the UN, International Court of Justice, and all relevant international conventions, the international community of nations has failed to stop violations by Israel of Palestinian human rights in Israel and the OPT, while Israeli crimes continue with impunity, as the recent assault on Gaza illustrates; and Recalling that ending institutionalized racism (apartheid) in South Africa demanded an unusual, cooperative action by the entire international community in the form of a boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaign against apartheid South Africa, and that BDS can become the most effective nonviolent means for achieving justice and genuine peace between Palestinians and Israelis, and in the region, through concerted international pressure as applied to apartheid South Africa; and Recognizing that Palestinian resistance to ongoing dispossession has mainly been nonviolent, including its most basic form ? remaining in their homes, on their land; and that while Palestinian armed resistance is legitimate under international law when directed at non-civilian targets, we believe that only nonviolent resistance will maintain the humanity of Palestinian society, elicit the greatest solidarity from others, and maximize the chance for future reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians; and Recognizing, however, that our appeal to Palestinians to continue to resist nonviolently in the face of ongoing existential threats from Israel is hypocritical unless accompanied by substantial acts of international support; and Recalling that in 2005, Palestinian Civil Society appealed to the international community to support a BDS campaign against Israel; and Recalling that in response, at least two Green Parties have passed resolutions supporting this BDS campaign: Green Party of the United States in 2005 http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2005_11_28.shtml Green Party of England and Wales in 2008 http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=1733; We, international Green parties: Call publicly for the implementation of boycott and divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era; and Agree to pressure our respective governments to impose embargoes and sanctions against Israel; and Support maintaining these nonviolent punitive measures until Israel meets its obligation to recognize the Palestinian people?s inalienable right to self-determination and fully complies with the precepts of international law by: 1. Ending its occupation and colonization of all Palestinian lands and dismantling the Wall in the West Bank; 2. Recognizing the fundamental rights of Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and 3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194. [Statement ends here] ------------------------------------------------- * Background ? There is international consensus among scholars, including Israeli Jews (David Hirst, Benny Morris, Ilan Pappe, Tom Segev) that in 1948, Israel ethnically cleansed at least 80% of the native Palestinian Christians and Muslims ? the majority population ? from their lands and homes because they were not Jews, an act of genocide under international law. (See Professor Francis A. Boyle, who successfully argued before the World Court that ethnic cleansing is a form of genocide http://www.mediamonitors.net/francis1.html.) In 1948, Palestinian Christians and Muslims owned 93% of the land. ? Since 1948, Israel has prevented Palestinian refugees from returning to their homes in Israel, while allowing non-native Jews to immigrate there. This constitutes a violation of several bodies of international law (law of nationality, customary human rights law / refugee law, humanitarian law) and international conventions, such as The Universal Declaration of Human rights (Article 13(2), 1948), The Fourth Geneva convention, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1951), all embodied in UN General Assembly Resolution 194 (reaffirmed annually since 1948), and Security Council Resolution 237. Moreover, for those refugees who wish to return, feasible plans have been proposed that would have meant minimal displacement of the current population, given that about 80% of Israeli Jews live in only 15% of the country, and that the vast majority of refugees could return to areas from which they came, as they are vacant or under populated. http://english.aljazeera.net/archive/2005/05/200849162924283293.html http://www.arts.mcgill.ca/MEPP/prrn/papers/abusitta.html ? In the 1967 war, Israel seized control and has maintained a military occupation of the Syrian Golan Heights, Palestinian West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza (OPT), in violation of international law, which emphasizes the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war no matter how the conflict began or how long it endures. During the war, another 300,000 Palestinians became refugees, some for the second time. ? As the Occupying Power, Israel continues to violate its responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention for the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, by the following practices: ? ongoing settlement of Jewish-only colonies on West Bank / East Jerusalem land, of which 40% is privately owned by Palestinians, that contain between 480,000 and 550,0000 Israelis ? more than half settling during the Oslo Peace Process; and since the beginning of 2009, 73,300 new Jewish-only settlements have been planned for the West Bank/ East Jerusalem, along with the planned destruction of homes to 1500 Palestinians in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Silwan - denial of freedom of movement by over 500 checkpoints and roadblocks ? collective punishment, including curfews and closures, prevention of medical treatment, demolition of over 10,000 homes, of which, according to UN figures, only 6% involved any security suspects ? targeted assassinations ? detention without charge ? torture in detention ? denial of the right to peaceful assembly ? the uprooting, since 2000 alone, of nearly 2 million trees, and razing thousands of acres of agricultural land. In sum, Israel has taken control of more than 50% of West Bank land (the whole West Bank represents only 22% of historic Palestine) to establish the settlements and reserve land for their expansion; Israel controls 100% of West Bank water, diverting 80% for Israeli use, leaving only 20% for Palestinians ? insufficient for Palestinian life and agriculture. http://www.btselem.org/English/Publications/Summaries/200205_Land_Grab.asp http://www.btselem.org/english/water/2008070_acute_water_shortage_in_the_west_bank.asp http://www.imemc.org/article/48308 http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/natres/water/2007/0523arabisrael.htm http://stopthewall.org/latestnews/1883.shtml http://apjp.org/israel-planning-73300-new-home/ According to Israel?s human rights group B?Tselem, since September 2008, Israel has escalated its policy of separating the West Bank from Gaza and forcibly transferring ? ethnic cleansing ? West Bank Palestinians to Gaza, a policy supported by Israel?s supreme court. http://www.btselem.org/english/press_releases/20080910.asp ?Ethnic cleansing by Stealth,? by Seth Freedman, Guardian News, September 4, 2008 http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/sep/04/israelandthepalestinians.humanrights Regarding US support of Israeli ?benign? ethnic cleansing, see ?Ethic Cleansing: Constructive, Benign, and Nefarious.? ZMagazine, August 09, 2006 By Edward S. Herman and Grace Kwinjeh http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/3419 ? In 2002, Israel began building a 790 km-long (494 mile) ?apartheid wall? in the occupied West Bank, confiscating huge swaths of Palestinian agricultural land and water sources along a route that deviates from the 1967 ?Green Line.? In 2004, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled the barrier to be illegal under international law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention, that it must be dismantled and reparations paid to Palestinians for losses incurred, and that ?all States are under obligation not to recognize the illegal situation resulting form the construction of the wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory . . . They are also under obligation not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by such construction.? http://www.icj- cij.org/docket/files/131/1677.pdf Similarly, a detailed investigation by B?Tselem confirmed that, ?under the guise of security,? Israel?s routing of the separation barrier was primarily to enable the expansion of illegal settlements and protect the economic interests of Israeli real estate developers, all in violation of Palestinian human rights, especially self-determination. http://www.btselem.org/Download/200512_Under_the_Guise_of_Security_Eng.doc Thus far, Israel has refused to comply with the ICJ ruling, and continues to build the wall. ?Israel maintains an apartheid-like system in the West Bank, where a concrete barrier, two different legal systems and a ?matrix of control? separate Israeli-Jewish settlers and Palestinians, and relegate the latter to a no man?s land of statelessness. For example, former US President Jimmy Carter (Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid) and B?Tselem describe the institutionalized system of discrimination in the OPT as ?apartheid.? Similarly, citing the planned system of Jewish-only roads and settlements, and two different legal systems, B?Tselem reported in 2002: Israel has created in the Occupied Territories a regime of separation based on discrimination, applying two separate systems of law in the same area and basing the rights of individuals on their nationality. This regime is the only one of its kind in the world, and is reminiscent of distasteful regimes from the past, such as the Apartheid regime in South Africa. http://www.btselem.org/English/Press_Releases/20040616.asp Again, in their 2004 report, ?Discrimination-based separation ? An Apartheid Practice?: The roads regime, which is based on separation through discrimination, bears clear similarities to the racist apartheid regime that existed in South Africa until 1994. An individual?s national origin determines their right to use various roads. This policy is based on a racist premise: that all Palestinians are security risks, and it is therefore justifiable to restrict their movement. Thus the policy indiscriminately harms the entire Palestinian population, in violation of their human rights and of international law. http://www.btselem.org/English/Publications/Summaries/200408_Forbidden_Roads.asp On November 25, 2008, UN General Assembly President Miguel D?Escoto Brockmann also likened Israel?s policies toward the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza to South Africa?s treatment of blacks under apartheid. http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1226404827209 ? Even before the current hostilities, Gaza was an immense open-air prison for 1.5 million people ? two-thirds of whom are refugees from 1948 and 1967 ? squeezed into 140 square miles and hemmed in on all sides by 25-foot-high walls separated by a vast expanse of bulldozed earth. (See ?The Gaza Strip: A Humanitarian Implosion,? March 2008, http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/2008/images/03/06/gaza.implosion.pdf.) In late 2005, Israel unilaterally withdrew its soldiers and 8,000 settlers but continued to control Gaza from the air and sea, and monitor all exits and entries of persons and supplies. A blockade began after January 2006 when Hamas won parliamentary elections in the OPT, a result not accepted by Israel, the US and the EU, which withdrew aid from Gaza despite the facts that the election was regarded as fair and democratic, with a huge voter turnout (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1181813074587), and that Hamas had rescinded its call for Israel?s destruction and offered of a long-term truce in exchange for Israeli withdrawal from all the OPT. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/12/israel. The US then covertly armed Hamas? political rival, Fatah, to provoke a Palestinian civil war and overthrow Hamas. After intense fighting, Hamas gained full control of Gaza in June 2007. http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/04/gaza200804?printable=true¤tPage=all Since then, Israel has defined Gaza as an ?enemy entity? and maintained a siege that intensified on November 5, 2008. http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n02/sieg01_.html. By December 2008, according to UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights for the OPT, Richard Falk, Gaza had a malnutrition rate of 75%, and healthcare and economic systems on the verge of collapse with 95% of factories closed and the highest unemployment rate in the world. http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N08/489/88/PDF/N0848988.pdf?OpenElement http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-falk/understanding-the-gaza-ca_b_154777.html In November 2008 Israel denied entry of humanitarian aid to Gaza as UN food aid was running out. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7726943.stm. On 12/30/08 Israel rammed and severely damaged the SS Dignity in international waters. It was carrying medical supplies to Gaza with a delegation of physicians and human rights activists, including former US congresswoman and US Green Party?s 2008 presidential candidate, Cynthia McKinney. http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=162 http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/12/30/gaza.aid.boat/?iref=hpmostpop#cnnSTCText In sum, these are violations of international law under which Israel remains the Occupying Power charged with the protection of Palestinians in OPT, including Gaza. (?Israel prepares for war crimes over Gaza? http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout&cid=1232171555977&utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss) According to UN Special Rapporteur Falk?s 8/25/08 report to the UN General Assembly: The whole approach taken toward Gaza by Israel and by the United States of America, and the European Union, since the Hamas electoral victory in January 2006, involves a massive and unlawful systematic violation of article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which unconditionally prohibits collective punishment. ? Israel also maintains an apartheid-like system in Israel (within the 1967 ?Green Line?) that systematically discriminates against its non-Jewish citizens, especially the 20% of its population who are Palestinian-Israelis. Unlike South African institutionalized racism (apartheid), the non-Jewish citizens of Israel can vote in elections for members of parliament (Knesset) where they can have representation, though they have never been part of a governing coalition. Yet, the presence of these rights obscures Israel?s unacknowledged history of ethnic cleansing of the non-Jewish majority inhabitants of historic Palestine (1947?49; 1967) and their continuing dispossession, and masks the fundamental structures of the Israeli state that preclude equality and discriminate against non-Jewish citizens on an ethnic basis. Indeed, not all rights are citizenship rights. In Israel, other rights, defined as ?nationality? rights, are reserved for Jews only: exclusive use of land, privileged access to private and public employment, special educational loans, home mortgages, preferences for admission to universities, among others. From its official beginning, the Declaration of Independence, Israel established itself as a Jewish state, with a Jewish character, principles on which its Basic Laws are anchored. While Israel has no constitution, this Declaration and its Basic Laws are viewed as the equivalents of constitutional law. For example, the 1985 amendment to Section 7a of the Basic Law (ironically, the ?Anti-Racist Law?) bars any political party from participating in elections that explicitly or implicitly denies the Jewish and democratic character of the State of Israel; and the 1992 Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, which reiterates the Jewish and democratic characters of the state (Section 1a): ?The purpose of the basic law is to protect human dignity and liberty, in order to establish in a Basic Law the values of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state.? Indeed, in the midst of the Gaza crisis, several violations of human rights and democracy occurred against Palestinian Israelis: the Israeli Elections Committee banned the participation of two Palestinian-Israeli parties (50% of Arab parties, representing 160,000 people) in the February 2009 elections (as had occurred in 2003) because they opposed the assault on Gaza and called for Israel to become a state of all its citizens rather than a Jewish state. These positions were seen as violations of Israel?s Basic Law 7A forbidding candidates from calling for the destruction of the state of Israel as a democratic and Jewish state; incitement of racism; or support of a terrorist organization or an enemy state during a conflict, including visiting an enemy country in the seven years prior to their candidacy. [In response to a petition from a Palestinian human rights organization (Adalah), the Israeli Supreme Court did reinstate some of the candidates. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054867.html; http://news.antiwar.com/2009/01/12/israel-bans-arab-parties-from-election/ ] Similarly, during the Gaza assault, Palestinian-Israelis were banned from non-violently protesting the Israel?s actions. According to legal scholars Sharon Weill and Valentina Azarov (?Israel?s Authoritarian Transformation,? February 26, 2008 http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2009/02/26/israel-s-authoritarian-transformation): [D]uring 230 such demonstrations, 801 protestors were arrested, 277 of them children and juveniles; arrests were made for "disturbing the peace," waving Palestinian flags, and "hurting the nation's morale." As of 7 February 2009, 255 people were still under arrest, including 89 children and juveniles; 114 indictments were submitted to the courts. Others were called in for interrogation by the security services, and were warned not to take part in any demonstration; some were put under house arrest and were prohibited from entering certain cities. In sum, Israel?s self-definition defies logic: Israel cannot simultaneously be a Jewish state and democratic ? which would require defining itself as the state of all its citizens. Instead, by law and unlike any other country in the world, Israel defines itself as the state of all the Jews in the world, to whom privilege over (even native) non-Jewish citizens is given. This exclusivity contrasts sharply with the alternative of designating the country as the ?homeland? for the Jewish people, an inclusive designation that could be applied to the other people for whom the country is also homeland, the Palestinians. In analyzing Israel?s Basic Laws, Palestinian-Israeli Nadim Rouhana (Henry Hart Rice Professor of Conflict Resolution, George Mason University and Director of the Arab Center for Applied Social Research in Haifa) underscores the inherent contradiction between Israel?s self-identity as Jewish and democratic (Palestinian Citizens in an Ethnic Jewish State, 1997), p. 46: According to Kretzmer (1990), simply by introducing the 1985 amendment to Section 7a of the Basic Law . . . the Israeli Knesset demonstrated that the ?recognition of Israel as the state of the Jewish people has indeed become an incontrovertible constitutional fact.? But again, how can this definition of the state of Israel align with the essence of democracy: having the state as an equally accessible tool of all of its citizens? It simply precludes all non-Jewish citizens from claiming the state as equally theirs. If the state is the apparatus that concentrates power, determines the distribution of resources, rights and duties, benefits and national priorities, determines the criteria for significant national goals, and promulgates laws and regulations to achieve these goals, then by defining itself as the state of only one group of its citizens (and some who are not its citizens), the state cannot avoid violating the principles of democracy. As the international community shunned apartheid South Africa in the late 20th century, the growing international opposition to Israel?s attempt to legitimize Jewish ethnic dominance reflects 21st century world consciousness and consensus that such institutionalized dominance is archaic and undemocratic. Professor Virginia Tilley concludes (The One-State Solution, pp. 181?182): [S]elf-styled as the ?only democracy in the Middle East,? Israel remains the only ethnic democracy claiming membership in the Euro-American international community. That claim is becoming an intolerable embarrassment, as the model is long obsolete elsewhere. For instance, the ?White Australia? project sustained a racial democracy in the early twentieth century, banning Asian immigration and excluding Aborigines on the belief that only racial homogeneity could permit whites to freely enjoy a democratic practice brought from Europe. Southern states in the United States used a host of methods, official and unofficial, to exclude black voting and secure white dominion well into the 1960?s. But the civil movements that challenged and defeated these systems carried with them more than local or national change; they campaigned for and consolidated an international normative discourse that rejected ethnoracial supremacy as an inherent source of injustice, dehumanization, and human suffering. The shift rose to catch South Africa and quickly discredited apartheid; Milosevic?s Serbian ambitions also came too late and hit the cresting wave. The lessons from World War II had at last come to fruition: ethnic nationalism generates unacceptable discourses of ethnic supremacy and inferiority, grant moral authority to ethnic cleansing, and precludes equal rights before the law, which is the foundational principle of Western democracies. If a state is to be truly democratic ? with all its citizens held equal before the law ? it cannot be based on ethnic dominion. Whatever Israel claims based on the past sins of Europe or on its own mythologized past of peaceful resistance to ferocious Arabs, if the Jewish state claims membership in the Western club, it cannot expect to be held exempt from these principles. Similarly, Jewish-American Professor Joel Kovel (former NY Green Party nominee for Senate) attributes Israel?s fatal flaw to its structurally racist nature as a Jewish state (Overcoming Zionism, p.165): [I]f you sign on to the idea of a Jewish state, you are taking the particularism that is the potential bane of any state, mixing it with the exceptionalism that is the actual bane of Judaism, and giving racism an objective, enduring, institutionalized, and obdurate character. You accept, in that one moment, a state that systematically denies basic human rights to a fraction of its people and systematically grants another set of people superior right over them. Thus racism is set into motion, and remains so, grounded in an exclusion based not on what the Other does but entirely on what the Other is, or to be more exact, is not, namely Jewish. By this one gesture, no matter how one rationalized a Jewish state as owed the Jews by virtue of their sufferings, or ethical superiority, or promises made to ancestors, or generations of landlessness, or a Covenant with God, or cultural genius, or just because it feels good to have a state for one?s own kind?one violates the whole law by which humanity has risen above the much of narrow self-interest and cyclical vengeance. And you cannot overcome that violation unless you undo the compact that locks it into place. Thus, Israel?s institutionalized racist policies toward non-Jews, meet the criteria of the ?crime of apartheid,? which are described in Article II, International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (1973): http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/11.htm For the purpose of the present Convention, the term ?the crime of apartheid?, which shall include similar policies and practices of racial segregation and discrimination as practised in southern Africa, shall apply to the following inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them: (c) Any legislative measures and other measures calculated to prevent a racial group or groups from participation in the political, social, economic and cultural life of the country and the deliberate creation of conditions preventing the full development of such a group or groups . . . (d) Any measures, including legislative measures, designed to divide the population along racial lines by the creation of separate reserves and ghettos for the members of a racial group or groups, the prohibition of mixed marriages among members of various racial groups, the expropriation of landed property belonging to a racial group or groups or to members thereof; See also For a side-by-side comparison of the convention?s definition of ?apartheid? with examples of Israel?s human rights record within Israel as well as in the Occupied Territories, see report by Israeli Uri Strauss, ?Defining Apartheid: Israel?s Record? http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article689.shtml "Israel's 'Ethnocracy' and the Demographic Threat: Dr. As'ad Ghanem on Israel's Palestinian Citizens, October 21, 2009. http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/ht/d/ContentDetails/i/2359/pid/223 ?Neither two states nor one: Disengagement and ?creeping apartheid? in Israel/Palestine? by Prof. Oren Yiftachel, The Arab World Geographer, Vol.8, No. 3, 2005, http://www.geog.bgu.ac.il/members/yiftachel/new_papers_eng/Yiftachel%20in%20Arab%20World%20Geographer.pdf; ?Democracy or Ethnocracy: Territory and Settler Politics in Israel/Palestine? by Oren Yiftachel, http://www.merip.org/mer/mer207/yift.htm (Summer, 1998) ?Apartheid In the Holy Land? Paper Prepared Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed for the United Nations Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, 31st August?7th September, 2001 South Africa, http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq11.html Some of the Israel laws discriminating against Israel?s non-Jewish citizens Exclusive citizenship/immigration laws: ? Law of Return (1950) and the Citizenship Law (1952) ? Population Registry Law (1965) ? Citizenship and Entry into Israel law (July 2003) Exclusive use of state land by Jews As a consequence of the laws listed below, non-Jews? ?non-nationals? ? who had succeeded in remaining in their native land, were dispossessed of their property at Israel?s founding in 1948, internally displaced and excluded by law from leasing, purchasing, building, or farming 93% of the land of Israel within the Green Line ? land that is regarded by Israel as the inalienable patrimony of the Jewish people wherever they live, and is owned by the Jewish National Fund and the state and regulated by the Israel Land Authority. Jewish-Israeli Uri Davis describes the process by which these quasi-governmental agencies maintain Israel?s racist land policies (Apartheid Israel, p. 48): In other words, in the critical areas of immigration, settlement and land development the Israeli sovereign, the Knesset, which is formally accountable to all its citizens, Jews and non-Jews alike, has formulated and passed legislation ceding state sovereignty (including taxation) and entered into Covenants vesting its responsibilities with organization such as the WZO [World Zionist Organization], the JA [Jewish Agency], and the JNF [Jewish National Fund] which are constitutionally committed to serving and promoting the interests of Jews and Jews alone. It is through this procedure of legal duplicity, the ceding of state sovereignty and vesting its responsibilities . . . with Zionist organizations constitutionally committed to the exclusive principle of ?only for Jews?, that legal apartheid is regulated in Israel. It is through this mechanism of legal duplicity that the State of Israel has successfully veiled the reality of Zionist apartheid in the guise of legal democracy since the establishment of the State of Israel to date. Such land control mechanisms perpetuate a legally enforced system of territorial separation, by which Palestinian-Israelis (20+% of the population) now own only 3% of the land. This situation is actually worse than apartheid South Africa?s policy of ?influx control? restricting the residence and land available to black South Africans citizens ? 13% ? while the remaining 87% was reserved for ?white South Africa.? 1949: Emergency Regulations (Cultivation of Waste Lands) Ordinance 1950: Absentee Property Law 1952: World Zionist Organization ?Jewish Agency for the Land of Israel (Status) Law 1953: Land Acquisition Law; Law for Confiscating Land for Public Interests; Jewish National Fund Law 1954: Covenant between the Government of Israel and the Zionist Executive / Executive for the Jewish Agency for the Land of Israel 1960: Basic Law; Israel Lands; Israel Lands Law; Israeli Lands Administration Law 1961: Covenant between the State of Israel and the Jewish National Fund 1980: Land Acquisition Law (Peace Treaty with Egypt): seizes thousands of dunams of Palestinian land to expand Jewish communities in the Negev Discrimination and ethnic cleansing continues for Palestinian?Israelis: Unrecognized Arab villages in Israel: At least eighty thousand Palestinian Bedouin?Israelis live in about 45 ?unrecognized? villages in the Negev desert in the south of Israel. Following the adoption of the Planning and Construction Law of 1965, the villages did not appear on any Israeli map and were not recognized by any official government and ignored by all government planning projects. These Bedouin are citizens of Israel and have the right to vote in national elections and are expected to pay taxes. Yet their villages are deprived of basic services, like housing, water, electricity, education and health care. According to a report by anti-apartheid peace activists Bangani Ngeleza and Adri Nieuwhof: There are disturbing similarities in living conditions between unrecognised villages and informal settlements under apartheid. These include lack of access to adequate potable water, lack of proper sanitation facilities, absence of proper road infrastructure, the lack of educational facilities, houses built of corrugated iron sheets (in some cases of black plastics and cardboard) etc. The similarities are striking between racially based policies that lay behind the creation of white settlements under the apartheid regime in South Africa then and the establishment of Jewish settlements by the Israeli government. ?Unrecognised villages in the Negev expose Israel?s apartheid policies? Bangani Ngeleza and Adri Nieuwhof, The Electronic Intifada, 21 December 2005 http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article4358.shtml; ?Bedouin ask UN to help fight systemic discrimination in Israel? http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=734096 For an update on rising Israeli support for ?transferring? out their fellow Palestinian citizens, see ?Ethnic cleansing and Israel,? by Conn Hallinan, Counterpunch, March 3, 2009 http://www.counterpunch.org/hallinan03032009.html Continuing efforts to ?Judaize? Arab?Israeli areas like the Galilee, Negev and East Jerusalem Israel continues policies to constrain Palestinian?Israeli life while privileging that of Jewish?Israelis. See ?A Campaign to Challenge Israeli Apartheid? March 31, 2005 by Kole Kilibarda http://www.caiaweb.org/files/kilibarda.jamjoum-JNFcampaign.pdf Isabelle Humphries, a British researcher on Palestinian internal refugees, attests to institutionalized Israeli discrimination towards Palestinian?Israelis displaced from their homes in the Galilee in 1948 but not expelled: While Israel continues to claim that it is a democracy, it finds ways to discriminate and implement an apartheid system ? and no more so than in the allocation of land and town planning. While the state and high court system maintain the pretense of keeping opportunities open to all, independent private organizations have no obligation to do so. Thus the state delegates and coordinates its work with Zionist establishments technically able to act as quasi-state institutions, despite the fact that their mandates openly state their aim of serving one ethnic group alone. The latest development plan for the Galilee and Negev is in full cooperation with the World Zionist Organization (WZO), the Jewish Agency (JA) and the Jewish National Fund (JNF) ? non-state actors with an open Zionist and racist agenda. http://www.wrmea.com/archives/Sept_Oct_2005/0509012.html See also: ?Policy of Settlement and ?spacial? Judaization in the Naqab? by Hana Hamdan, Adalah?s Newsletter, Vol 11, October, 2005 http://www.adalah.org/newsletter/eng/mar05/ar2.pdf ?Case Studies in Ethnic Cleansing? complied by the Applied Research Institute-Jerusalem?s (ARIJ) http://www.poica.org/editor/case_studies/index.php?Y=2009 Segregated education systems until university According to a 2006 Human Rights Watch report, The Israeli government operates two separate school systems for its 1.8 million school children: a Jewish system and an Arab system. The students in the latter are Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel, nearly one quarter of all Israeli school children. Under international law, states may offer children separate educational systems for linguistic or religious reasons, but they may not discriminate in doing so . . . despite small advances in recent years, the discriminatory practices against Palestinian Arab school children that are institutionalized in its education system place Israel in violation of its international legal obligations. http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2006/01/02/discrimination-against-palestinian-arab-children-israeli-education-system Also see ?Discrimination Against Palestinian Arab Children in the Israeli Education System? by Zama Coursen-Neff in the New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, January 2, 2006. While Israeli education is integrated at the university level, discrimination persists. Beyond the fact that the system advantages Jewish?Israelis in competing for university places, in 2003 Israel universities stopped an experimental admission procedure when it became clear that the main beneficiaries were Palestinian?Israelis rather than those intended ? Jewish?Israeli students from low-income development towns. According to Ha?aretz?s Relly Sa?ar (?Universities return to aptitude exams to keep Arabs out?): There?s no politically correct spin to put on it, and the facts speak for themselves: As soon as Israel?s top university administrators noticed that the big winners from admissions policy changes were not Jewish youngsters from low-income towns, but rather Arabs, they reverted back to the old admissions system. http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=365572 Environmental Degradation in Israel/Palestine as a Result of the Conflict The often violent implementation of Zionist policies toward Palestinians--populating Israel/Palestine with Jews while ridding the territory of Palestinians--and Palestinian resistance to these policies have resulted in severe environmental degradation. Professor Joel Kovel (The Enemy of Nature), describes the state of ecological damage in Israel in his book Overcoming Zionism (2007, pp.110-111): Israel, or to take into account the entity that Zionism now controls, Israel/Palestine, is an environmental nightmare, all the more so in relation to its ideals, wealth, and technological expertise. . . .All of Israel?s rivers are seriously polluted except for the Upper Jordan, and some have been polluted to literally lethal levels; . .88 percent of Tel Aviv?s wells contain persistent organic pollutants; as for the air, a quadrupling of nitrous oxide emissions has been observed since 1980; asthma rates among children have gone from 5.6 percent in 1980 to 11.2 percent in 1989 and 17 percent in 2002; Israel has one of the highest breast cancer incidences in the world, with a 32 percent increase in the 1990?s; in the 1970s the breast milk of Israeli women contained some 800 times the concentration of benzene hexachloride as American women. Kovel specifies certain factors ?intrinsic to Zionism? that continue to harm the tiny environment of Israel/Palestine. These factors include: ?Zionism?s incessant pressure to fill Israel with Jews in order to keep a step ahead of the Palestinians,? leading to the ecologically disastrous combination of a sixfold population increase within half a century, rapid industrialization and conspicuous consumption of resources; and since 1967, the literally earth-shattering effects of settling over 500,000 Jews in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and Gaza, accompanied by destructive efforts to constrain Palestinian life such as razing millions of trees and fields, imposition of over 500 checkpoints, roads, military zones; building of a nearly 800 km-long apartheid Wall whose construction has destroyed hundreds of acres of farm land along the Wall?s route and caused severe flooding from dammed up water, resulting in pervasive destruction of crops, greenhouses and other agricultural infrastructure; and pollution like that described by Nora Barrows-Friedman across the West Bank where ?villagers watch as crops and orchards become poisoned and contaminated from raw sewage being actively pumped into their land from the sewage treatment facilities inside Israeli settlements.? Similarly, Palestinian-American Green Party member Professor Mazin Qumsiyeh, (Mammals of the Holy Land; Sharing the Land of Canaan) recently returned to his native West Bank where he teaches at Bethlehem University. He describes the ecological damage he has witnessed over the years due to Zionist settlement policies (February 27, 2009 http://www.qumsiyeh.org/rightsblog2009/: But it is not just humans that are the victims of Zionist master plans. Nature is also. With a huge network of military bases, industrial zones, new infrastructure (for Jewish settlers so as not to use or improve Palestinian roads), massive apartheid walls, and disregard for environmental protection, the West Bank has become an environmental disaster area. The loss of village lands (to land confiscation, walls, etc.) around Bethlehem area for example made many villagers come live in Bethlehem which makes it a very crowded area and there are few open areas (some of which receive sewage and trash from Jewish settlements). The extent of the environmental damage is more noticeable to me as a biologist. I know this since I studied animals here for three decades and places that I used to be able to catch and study many animals representing many species now yield nothing or at best one or two lonely animals of once ubiquitous species. The toads in the valley near my house are all gone (an early spring sound and image that remains only in my memory). Water security has probably been most negatively impacted by the conflict. Since 1967, Israel has not only arrogated regional water supplies and diverted over 80% of West Bank water for Israeli use, but the whole area now faces an absolute shortage of water because of over consumption and development. Meanwhile, (Mediterranean Sea) salt water is seeping into Gaza?s water as its water table falls; and USAID is expected to fund an Israeli plan to retain West Bank water sources in exchange for a desalination plant providing (privatized) water to the Territories. According to New Scientist http://www.wilpf.org/jane/israel_lays_claim, this ?would leave independent Palestine more dependent on desalination than almost any other nation in the world. ? and, writes Stephen Lendman, ?given the cost of desalinated water, it will be out of reach for the great majority of impoverished Palestinians.? http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/natres/water/2008/0718westbank.htm) Not a recipe for peace and security. All in all, the conflict has become a zero-sum game antithetical to the human cooperation required for ecological security and sustainability. As Joel Kovel (Overcoming Zionism, pp.115-116) concludes, this situation cannot change as long as Zionism informs Israeli policies toward the Palestinians: This has led to an ecological situation unique to history, and one that precipitously hurtles toward environmental ruin. Human communities are ecosystems, too, and their capacity to fit into the great regulatory patterns of nature depends upon their internal integrity, manifest in mutual recognition and coherent communication. Estrangement or alienation, is the human form taken by ecological breakdown; it is a failure of recognition between human agents, which makes cooperative action impossible and splits humanity from nature as well as itself. It follows that the most severely estranged society will also be the most subject to eco-disintegration. This more or less describes the State of Israel, and certainly its Occupied Territories, which comprise one of the most bizarre social formations ever planted upon this earth. Here, on a tiny plot of ground, dwell two people with two radically different legal and social systems, one the beneficiary of a powerful state and living in comfort while it works to terrorize and strangle the other, who is stateless and bent upon surviving; the two are therefore radically denied any cooperative arrangement as can be imagined, and primed to be an eco-destructive accelerant to the State of Israel as a whole. See also In Photos: Flooding in Qalqilya and Tulkarm March 12th, 2009 http://stopthewall.org/photos/1885.shtml ?When the Occupation Gets Really Filthy? August 21, 2007 by Nora Barrows-Friedman, Internet Press Service http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=38964 ?Drought and Israeli Policy Threaten West Bank Water Security,? by Stephen Lendman, July 18, 2008, http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/natres/water/2008/0718westbank.htm ?Israel lays claim to Palestine's water ? May 29, 2004 by Fred Pearce, Jerusalem New Scientist http://www.wilpf.org/jane/israel_lays_claim ?The Water Crisis in Gaza? by Alice Gray by Alice Gray, February, 2007, International Viewpoint Online http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?page=print_article&id_article=1211 ?Water crisis looms over Palestinians as Israel withholds water resources? July 30.2007 http://www.almubadara.org/new/edetails.php?id=3267 ?The effects of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict on Water Reserves in the Jordan River Basin? by Eugenia Ferragina, Global Environment (2), 2008 http://www.globalenvironment.it/ferragina.pdf _________________________________________________________________ Express your personality in color! Preview and select themes for Hotmail?. http://www.windowslive-hotmail.com/LearnMore/personalize.aspx?ocid=TXT_MSGTX_WL_HM_express_032009#colortheme -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com Sat Mar 21 18:19:28 2009 From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (David Bedell) Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 22:19:28 +0000 Subject: {news} FADGE fest 4/18 in Hartford In-Reply-To: <212bb6a40903200643o7d578fceh7247df1afbe43a5a@mail.gmail.com> References: <212bb6a40903200643o7d578fceh7247df1afbe43a5a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: This covers a few of the Green Party's 10 Key Values: FEMINISM, AUTONOMY, DIVERSITY, AND GENDER EXPRESSION= F.A.D.G.E. FEST 2009 Do you consider yourself a feminist? What about an artist? Do you enjoy a good political debate, or maybe some relaxed time spent crafting? Maybe you like to listen to live music, or maybe you just like free food. Well if any of this sounds good to you, then you should join us on Saturday, April 18th for the second annual FADGE fest in Hartford, CT at the Charter Oak Cultural Center, 21 Charter Oak Avenue. http://www.charteroakcenter.org FADGE Fest is a female-positive day of workshops, art, and music. This year's festival focuses on the female as a whole, body and mind, and the impact of consensual and non-consensual events on ourselves. Doors will open at 10:30 and workshops will begin at 11am. Between workshops there will be vendors, crafts, informational booths, and live music. At 7pm a free, vegetarian dinner will be provided. From 8pm-12am enjoy a live show of CT synth-pop, punk, and indie bands. Workshops include: -Abortion: a discussion. On this panel we will have 2 people talk about their personal experiences, and a discussion of reproductive rights vs. reproductive freedom. Also, a woman from Planned Parenthood will join the discussion providing facts about abortion and access to such. -Radical Parenting: A discussion with parents who are eager to share their experiences with how their anti-authoritarian politics inform their parenting methods. The discussion will be based around how treating children as equals rather than as inferiors can lead towards a more peaceful world for children, parents and the world at large. Expanding on last year's Rad Parenting workshop, this year's will also include a discussion on keeping parents (and children!) included in the radical community. -Domestic Abuse and Immigration: This panel will be co-facilitated by a local immigration lawyer and her partner, an art therapist. The two of them worked on a case where a woman risked deportation by coming forward to report abuse. We will hear her story, more information on how laws protect (or fail to protect) battered immigrants, and how to watch for signs and patterns of abuse in our own relationships. -Art Therapy: This workshop will venture into how art and creation can help heal. This workshop will tie in with the event as a whole as participants explore creating, setting, and in some cases, taking down boundaries. -A photographic exploration of body image: A local artist will present a new series of photographs of the naked/partially naked female body. This discussion will include her own journey to body acceptance and participants will also get to do some form drawing. -Bike Repair: This workshop is based around revolutionary bike repair for a healthy future for ourselves and the planet. Learning bike maintenance is also another way for women to acheive independence and self-sustainability. Experiences of the Sex Industrial Complex: A workshop led by the Boston-based group Not For Sale: Survivors in Revolt, a group of ex-sex workers. Facilitators will share their experiences and views about sex-for-money. Also included will be a discussion on the sex industry and the facts and myths circulating in feminist and radical community. Responsible childcare will be provided throughout the day. Your $10 donation will go towards combating domestic abuse in CT. For more information please visit http://www.myspace.com/fadgefest or write to ctcntfest@ gmail.com Thanks for your time and we hope to be seeing you soon! _________________________________________________________________ Get quick access to your favorite MSN content with Internet Explorer 8. http://ie8.msn.com/microsoft/internet-explorer-8/en-us/ie8.aspx?ocid=B037MSN55C0701A -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From edubrule at sbcglobal.net Sat Mar 21 20:02:28 2009 From: edubrule at sbcglobal.net (edubrule) Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 20:02:28 -0400 Subject: {news} Fw: Upcoming Actions for Peace and Social Justice in Connecticut Message-ID: <1236A0E14A5D4D15BB9F1B838DD8D6BC@edgn2b574u14bi> 6-Story Newsletter Template + Images ----- Original Message ----- From: AFSC Connecticut To: edubrule at sbcglobal.net Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 4:13 PM Subject: Upcoming Actions for Peace and Social Justice in Connecticut American Friends Service Committee Connecticut In This Issue: March 20 2009 . March 27-29: "New Strategies for the Obama Era: Are You Ready?" . April 18: Sister Helen Prejean on Religious Organizing Program and the Death Penalty . April 4: Take a Bus or Train to Beyond War, a New Economy is Possible . April 16:From Bracero to Guest-Worker? A public forum on the struggle for immigrant rights. March 27-29: "New Strategies for the Obama Era: Are You Ready?" "New Strategies for the Obama Era: Are You Ready?" A New England Wide Conference that brings together Young People with Older Activists concerned about Peace, the Climate Crisis, the Economic Crisis and Social Justice March 27-28 @ Tufts University Featured Speakers Include: Noam Chomsky, Bill Fletcher Jr., Phyllis Bennis, Emily Kawano, Arjun Makhijani, Raed Jarrar, Anna Galland, William Moomaw and Tom Hayden You are invited to an exciting, and what we think will be a truly remarkable, New England-wide peace, social justice and environmental sustainability conference. It is being organized by the American Friends Service Committee and Tufts University's Peace and Justice Studies Program, and is co-sponsored by Mass. Global Action, United for a Fair Economy, City Life/Vida Urbana, Teen Empowerment, United for Justice with Peace, Mass. Jobs with Justice, The Unitarian Universalist Service Committee, Womens International League for Peace and Freedom and Mass. Peace Action. It will be held at Tufts University, Friday March 27 and Saturday the 28th, with a youth caucus continuing into Sunday the 29th. Please note: For the Bill Fletcher and Noam Chomsky plenary session on Friday evening at 6pm, the first 250 people to register will get into the main hall with Bill and Noam. Those who register later will have the pleasure of seeing them on video in the next room. On Saturday we have a bigger hall so we will all be together with the speakers. While we feel a sense of relief and achievement with Barack Obama's election and fledgling presidency, we also know with the economic crisis, the escalating war in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the ongoing war in Iraq and growing military budget, as well as the rapidly increasing dangers of global warming, there is a lot that our popular movements must do if we are to have the change we need. As you can see from our list of speakers and resource people, we have assembled an extraordinary range of people to work with us in providing essential background information and charting strategies for peace, economic recovery and justice, and creation of a sustainable environment. Friday evening discussion sessions and a wide range of Saturday focused workshops (see below) will complement in depth plenary sessions Friday evening, Saturday morning and Saturday afternoon. It is also worth noting that this will be an inter-generational conference, bringing together students and young activists as well as those with years of experience. Detailed information about the conference, including a registration form, can be found at http://www.afsc.org/newstrategies2009 Workshop speakers & resource people include: The Majority Agenda: From Concept to Action- Mark Solomon, Suren Moodliar and Paul Shannon Building a Youth and Student Movement for the Obama Years -Anna Galland Counter Recruiting- Sam Diener, Robert Dove & Alex Fried Economic Crisis 101: Background for Understanding the Causes, Consequences and opportunities of the U.S. and Global Economic Crisis- Emily Kawano Foreign & Domestic Policies for Real Security: Alternatives to the "War on Terror" and 21st Century Imperialism-Joseph Gerson & Zia Mian Funding the New New Deal: From the Pentagon Budget to the People's Budget-Greg Speeter and Jo Comerford Introduction to the Peace Movement 101: History, Overview, and Effectiveness- Paul Joseph Introduction to the Environmental Movement 101: History and Overview-Dale Bryan Labor's Agenda for the Obama Years-Russ Davis No Nukes: The Dangers of Nuclear Power Plans, Alternatives and Popular Movements-Erin Placey, Others TBA Is It Plausible to Reclaim Our Communities Within the Framework of a Green Economy?-Eduardo Suarez, Darlene Lambos, Kalila Barnett, Jon Weissman Bridging the Gaps: Models for Inter-Racial, Multi-Class Organizing for Justice and Peace-Mike Prokosch Daryl Wright, Becky Pierce For a Non-Nuclear, Non-CO2 Future- Arjun Makhijani G.I. Organizing and Resistance-IVAW & MFSO Israel, Palestine & the Arab World - Background, Alternatives and Advocacy-Phyllis Bennis, Martha Yager & Omar Baddar Is a Humane & Just Immigration Reform Possible During the Economic Crisis? Immigrant Organizers Speak Out. Panel & Discussion-Patty Montes, Jenneatte Huezo, Gabriel Camacho Influencing Beltway Politicians & the Democratic Party-Tim Carpenter, Shelagh Foreman Fighting Foreclosures: Keeping families in their home-James Brooks, Melanie Griffiths Lessons for Today from the New Deal-Larry Friedman New Technologies for Peace & Justice Organizing-Anna Galland and Suren Moodliar Obama and the Bomb: 21st Century Nuclear Weapons Dangers and the Promise of Abolition-Joseph Gerson From Activism to Organizing: How to Build Youth Power- Camilo Viveiros Understanding and Resisting the Continuing Iraq War-Raed Jarrar, Nancy Lessin and Paul Shannon http://www.afsc.org/newstrategies2009 April 4: Take a Bus or Train to Beyond War, a New Economy is Possible "A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death." - Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. April 4, 1967 Yes We Can! End War! National Mobilization to End War and Build a New Economy. Sponsored by United for Peace and Justice, The American Friends Service Committee and Connecticut Opposes the War Saturday, April 4 New York City Assemble in NYC at 11:00 AM Assembly Location: Leonard, Franklin and White Streets, between Broadway and Lafayette St. Information on Hartford area bus to NYC Bus leaves at 8:00am from Conard High School 110 Beachwood Rd West Hartford, CT Tickets for union members and their families are $10/person Tickets for community members are $30/person Tickets may be purchased on-line at www.stepfour.com/peacebus Or by sending a check and a note for how many tickets to: Flo Woodiel 65 Linbrook Road West Hartford, Ct. 06107 Please make check payable to "Connecticut Opposes the War" For more information contact: David Amdur American Friends Service Committee connecticut at afsc.org 860.523.1534 Peace Train Information New Haven to NYC: 8:55 am NYC to New Haven: 5:07 pm RT Adult: $25 RT 18 or under: $12 Paid before April 1 Limited scholarships avail. Online: www.stepfour.com/peacetrain or check to Greater New Haven Peace Council PO Box 3105 . New Haven, CT 06515-0205 info: Henry Lowendorf grnhpeacecouncil at gmail.com 203.389.9547 Beyond War, A New Economy Is Possible for Connecticut and the Nation: Yes We Can! From Iraq, to Afghanistan, to Gaza, to our own cities We need peace to repair the damage done by the collapse of the financial industry. We need to reverse massive layoffs, wage cuts, missing healthcare, evictions and home foreclosures, fallen retirement funds, and unaffordable college tuition. What could our families, our cities, our country do with these GREENBACKS...? $2 Billion per day and more spent to prop up the military industrial complex $664 Billion per year for Cold War weapons and bases, equal to the rest of the world combined $864 Billion since 9/11 on Iraq & Afghanistan alone, more than the economic recovery package Yes We Can Stop Spending $2-4 Trillion on another 3 years of occupation of Iraq & indefinite occupation of Afghanistan. Yes We Have funds to address people's needs. They're in the $1 Trillion annual military budget. March April 4th to end the wars, cut the military budget and fund people's needs. We are reminded of Dr. Martin Luther King's courage and wisdom in connecting the issues of poverty, racism and war. In honor of his legacy, United For Peace and Justice has launched the BEYOND WAR, A NEW ECONOMY IS POSSIBLE: YES WE CAN! Campaign that will culminate its first phase on April 4th with a massive mobilization in New York City. April 4th is the anniversary of Dr. King's "Beyond Vietnam" speech in 1967 and, sadly, the anniversary of his death one year later. Our urgent call to end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will be linked to our call to help solve the current economic crisis by dramatically cutting military spending and, instead, investing in our communities Our campaign is a call for a new set of national priorities rooted in the vision and values of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. - a world without racism, poverty, or war, working across race, class, and gender lines to build a massive people's movement to help make sure the Obama administration and the U.S. Congress are in alignment with the will of the people. www.ctcow.org www.unitedforpeace.org/ www.unitedforpeace.org April 16:From Bracero to Guest-Worker? A public forum on the struggle for immigrant rights. From Bracero to Guest-Worker? A public forum on the struggle for immigrant rights. Thursday, April 16 7 PM McCook Auditorium Trinity College, Hartford CT Felipe Mu?oz Pav?n was one of 4.6 million Mexican laborers imported to the U.S. in the Bracero Program from 1941-64. Felipe worked as a bracero in 1944, 1945 and 1963 and is co-founder of the National Assembly of Ex-Braceros. He will speak about the relevance of the Bracero program to the current immigration debate. He lives in Tlaxcala, Mexico. Jorge Mujica is a principal organizer of the national immigrant rights movement and spokesman for the March 10th Coalition of Chicago, which drew more than 1 million people into the streets on May 1, 2006 marching to defeat a punitive immigration bill in Congress. A former journalist and union organizer, Mujica has worked for La Raza, Univision, and Telemundo. Sponsored by Stop the Raids of Trinity College, American Friends Service Cmte, Hispanic Studies Dept, Office of Multicultural Affairs, International Studies Dept, Center for Latin American and Caribbean Studies at UConn, Trinity Center for Urban and Global Studies, American Studies Dept, Trinfo Caf?, La Voz Latina, Asian American Student Association. For information: Sandra.Gonzalez at trincoll.edu or860-538-3920. April 18: Sister Helen Prejean on Religious Organizing Program and the Death Penalty Religious Organizing Program on the Death Penalty Keynote Speaker - Sister Helen Prejean, Author of "Dead Man Walking," and "The Death of Innocents." Where: St. Joseph College, West Hartford Learn how the religious community in Connecticut can organize and work to abolish the death penalty. Grassroots organizing is the key to abolition, and your faith community can play an important part of this process. The goal of this program is to provide you with the tools you need to inform and mobilize your community so that you can support the work of the CNADP to educate and lobby at the Capitol. Our Keynote Speaker, Nobel Peace Prize nominee, Sister Helen Prejean, will talk about her own experiences working to end the death penalty and will share with you her own strategies for reaching out to people of faith. Following her talk, there will be a series of workshops organized by faith community to provide specific information and allow further discussion of the death penalty in Connecticut and what grassroots organizing looks like and what it can accomplish. Lunch will be provided and admission is free. Informational and organizing materials will be distributed to each participant. To insure that we have sufficient space and materials, please RSVP by April 1, 2009. For more information, please contact: Robert Nave - robertnave at cnadp.org or call him at 203.206.9854. www.cnadp.org American Friends Service Committee Connecticut Area Office 56 Arbor Street, Suite 213 Hartford, CT 06106 Phone: 860.523.1534 Fax: 860.523.1705 Email: connecticut at afsc.org Visit AFSC CT Online Unsubscribe | Update Profile | Confirm | Forward -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From chapillsbury at igc.org Sun Mar 22 16:04:54 2009 From: chapillsbury at igc.org (Charlie Pillsbury) Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 16:04:54 -0400 Subject: {news} Reminder: candidates need to submit their names for CTGP officers and GPUS representatives by 9PM 3-31-09 to CTGP secreatary In-Reply-To: <20090321051614.XEKG11273.eastrmmtao107.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net> References: <20090321051614.XEKG11273.eastrmmtao107.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net> Message-ID: <003701c9ab29$79144470$6b3ccd50$@org> Barbara's timely reminder (thank you, Barbara) noted below that: "Two (2) representatives from CTGP to represent the state party as a whole to the GPUS and to report to the CTGP SCC in a timely fashion.." Under the 2008 reapportionment, the CTGP is entitled to five (5) representatives to the GPUS National Committee (NC). Mike DeRosa, Richard Duffee, Tim McKee, Cliff Thornton and I are the 5 current CTGP NC voting reps. Note: IMO, it would be great if there were more gender balance in our 5-person delegation to the NC. This year's Annual Meeting will be held in July in Durham, North Carolina. See info below my signature. Charlie Pillsbury 247 Saint Ronan Street New Haven CT 06511 203-640-3889 chapillsbury at igc.org "The North Carolina Green Party and the regional local, the Triangle Green Party, would like to offer its services and support to host the 2009 Annual Meeting of the national Green Party, in Durham, North Carolina. Over the past three months, the Annual National Meeting Committee has worked with the NCGP (the only state to formally express interest in hosting the meeting) to produce a formal proposal. The proposed meeting will take place either on July 23-26 or July 16-19, 2009, at North Carolina Central University." From: ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org [mailto:ctgp-news-bounces at ml.greens.org] On Behalf Of B Barry Sent: Saturday, March 21, 2009 1:16 AM To: ctgp-news at ml.greens.org Cc: CTGP-internal-elections at yahoogroups.com Subject: {news} Reminder: candidates need to submit their names for CTGP officers and GPUS representatives by 9PM 3-31-09 to CTGP secreatary Dear All, This is a reminder that any registered Green Party voters may submit their names CTGP officers and GPUS representatives by 9PM 3-31-09 to this CTGP secretary in order to be accepted as candidates. Candidates also need to summit a 100 word or less statement of why they want to be considered by voters. (This deadline is needed due to need for this information to sent to the printer the following morning.) NOTE: The annual CTGP Convention will (likely) be on Saturday, 4-25-09, from noon to 4pm at the New Haven Labor Union Hall. The following vacancies will need to be filled for a one-year duration: For CTGP officers: a) Three (3) co-chairpersons for CTGP: one needs to be female; b) One for secretary; c) One for treasurer. GPUS (Green Party of United States): a) Two (2) representatives from CTGP to represent the state party as a whole to the GPUS and to report to the CTGP SCC in a timely fashion; b) Representatives to the following GPUS Permanent Committees: n Accreditation Committee (AC) n Annual National Meeting Committee (ANMC) regarding the GPUS annual meeting 6-25-09 through 6-28-09 meeting in Durham, NC n Ballot Access Committee (BA); n Bylaws, Rules, Policies, Procedures Committee (BRPP); n Coordination Campaign Committee (CCC); n Credentials Committee (CC); n Dispute Resolution Committee (DRC); n Diversity Committee (DC); n Eco committee (EC); n Finance Committee (FC); n Fundraising (FRC); n Green Party internet news (formerly a newspaper); n International Committee (IC); n Media Committee (MC); n Merchandizing Committee (MERCH); n Outreach Committee (OC); n Peace Committee (GPAX); n Platform Committee (PC); n Presidential Campaign Support Committee (PCSC); n Steering Committee (SC). Additional GPUS information may also be obtained via www.GPUS.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amyvasnunes at hotmail.com Sun Mar 22 19:57:36 2009 From: amyvasnunes at hotmail.com (Amy Vas Nunes) Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 19:57:36 -0400 Subject: {news} FW: [nectcoalition] One More Time - It's Not Over yey by a Long Shot In-Reply-To: =?US-ASCII?B?PHN5bXBhLjEyMzc3NTQ4MDMuMjQ1MzcuOTk4QGxpc3RzLnJp?= =?US-ASCII?B?c2V1cC5uZXQ+AA==?= References: =?US-ASCII?B?PHN5bXBhLjEyMzc3NTQ4MDMuMjQ1MzcuOTk4QGxpc3RzLnJp?= =?US-ASCII?B?c2V1cC5uZXQ+AA==?= Message-ID: > To: nectcoalition at lists.riseup.net > From: westerfield at sysmatrix.net > Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 15:29:37 -0700 > Subject: [nectcoalition] One More Time - It's Not Over yey by a Long Shot > > The Northeast Connecticut Coalition for Peace and Justice has chartered a bus > to go to NYC on April 4th to join United for Peace and Justice to March against > war in Iraq and Afghanistan and for Economic Justice at home. We have a 55 > seat bus. As of today, only 30 people have signed up to go with us. There was > a peace rally in D.C. yesterday where there were only 10,000 people, according > to the organizers. This is crazy. The wars are NOT over and we need to keep > the pressure on! NECCP&J have filled buses to rallies in NYC, DC, and Boston > every year since 2001. We don't want to cancel our trip to NYC, but we can't > go with a full half bus. If you any interest in joining us, we need to know > now. Contact Chris and Max at wentworthmax at sbcglobal.net or call 456-1804 > today. Please spread the word! > > Donation: $30.00, but no one turned away for lack of funds. > > Or, if you can't make it yourself, consider donating something towards a > "scholarship" seat. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amyvasnunes at hotmail.com Sun Mar 22 20:24:28 2009 From: amyvasnunes at hotmail.com (Amy Vas Nunes) Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 20:24:28 -0400 Subject: {news} Fw: PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Gaza; DISCUSSION period begins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From: amyvasnunes at hotmail.com To: justinemccabe at earthlink.net Subject: RE: {news} Fw: PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Gaza; DISCUSSION period begins Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 18:13:48 -0400 FYI CTGP ,The USGP Policies and Procedures committte is investigating a resolution to disolve the IC as a Rouge committee that has no real bylaws and held an illegal coch elections, hearing was held last night. I will keep you posted. Motion was put in by Calif reps . I will be voting NO on this below proposal because it makes Isreal out to be the only "enemy" . Please see remarks per section below in caps Amy From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net To: gpcwc at lists.riseup.net; ctgp-news at ml.greens.org Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 07:03:43 -0400 CC: Subject: {news} Fw: PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Gaza; DISCUSSION period begins Dear CT Greens, This proposal is being discussed on the International Committee. We'd appreciate any comments from you. Justine McCabe ----- Original Message ----- From: Justine McCabe To: USGP International Committee Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 8:59 AM Subject: PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Gaza; DISCUSSION period begins Dear IC, Last month, in response to the Gaza massacre, the IC considered a draft statement on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict The wording of that statement culminated in a call to our sister Green Parties to join GPUS in endorsing the Palestinian civil society call for Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel. We took a straw poll that resulted in majority support: 21 yes votes, 8 no, 1 abstention, with 70% of IC members participating. Since then, former IC co-chair Julia Willebrand and I were away, and we had an election for co-chairs that consumed much time and effort. So, it's time to return to that statement. As the straw poll ended, there was a difference of opinion as to whether a formal proposal seeking consensus--and vote if necessary--were in order. Given that this statement would be used to lobby international Greens to support BDS in compliance with the directive to the IC contained in GPUS Prop 190 of 2005, newly-elected co-chair Steve Herrick and I thought that formally proposing this would be best. And, assuming that consensus is reached on such a proposal, we would then notify the SC of this IC action, and begin to use it to lobby Green parties worldwide. The proposal is below. According to our bylaws, we have a discussion period first in order to refine the language, etc. Since we have already discussed this at length, we propose that one-week should be sufficient.. At the end of that time, we'll test for consensus. PLEASE NOTE: 1) We will be considering the statement WITHOUT the Background information, though it still appears below the statement itself as the "references" part of the proposal format. Unless there is strong support to the contrary, it seems that this Background section is too long to include for a statement that will be circulated. Instead, Justine plans to rewrite this as a "White Paper" to submit to the IC later as we did with the Right of Return paper on our website. 2) There are 2 differences in this draft from the one voted on last month: a) "A Call for Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions Against Israel" appears in the title of the statement unlike in the original b) Given that ecological wisdom/sustainability is a central Green Party pillar, there was an omission in the original statement about the impact of the conflict on the environment. In the revised statement, the following is included: "Recognizing that this conflict continues to have a devastating ecological impact on Israel/Palestine, especially water sources, thereby decreasing security for the whole region;" I AGREE We look forward to comments from everyone. Peace, Justine McCabe and Steve Herrick Co-chairs, International Committee, GPUS ----------------------------------------------------- PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict for endorsement by International Green Parties PRESENTER: International Committee, GPUS CONTACT: Justine McCabe justinemccabe at earthink.net SUBJECT: DRAFT Green Party Statement on Gaza Crisis and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Call for Boycott, Divestment Sanctions Against Israel BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Implementation of the GPUS International Committee?s mission as directed by GPUS Prop 190 of November 21, 2005, ?The GPUS National Committee directs the International Committee to work with our sister Green parties around the world in implementing an international boycott.? http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2005_11_28.shtml In keeping with Prop 190, and in response to the three-week Israeli assault on Gaza beginning in December 2008, the International Committee considered a draft statement to be circulated among international Green Parties urging them to join our party in endorsing the Boycott, Divestment Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel. That statement was discussed at length among IC members and a straw poll revealed majority support for it. This proposal is an opportunity for the IC to formally endorse the statement with the intention of then circulating it among international Green Parties for endorsement of the BDS campaign as directed by GPUS Prop 190. FULL PROPOSAL: Draft statement is below TIME LINE: Five-day discussion period, beginning Friday, March 20, 2009 ending Friday, March 27 at 10 pm PDT RESOURCES: Lobbying efforts by members of GPUS International Committee REFERENCES: "Background" section that appears below the statement ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ DRAFT Green Party Statement On Gaza Crisis and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Call for Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions Against Israel Although Green Parties represent different countries and regions of the world, we share common principles essential to understanding and resolving this conflict. Among these principles are non-violence, including consistent enforcement of international law; ecological wisdom and sustainability, including reducing the negative impact of humankind on the natural environment; and social justice, thereby rejecting discrimination based on gender, class or ethnicity. These principles guide our response to the recent crisis in Gaza that began on December 27, 2008 in which we condemn the killing of civilians, condemn the excessive and disproportionate force used by Israel, the Occupying Power in Gaza, call for a full and continuing ceasefire between Israel and the Hamas governmentHAMAS ALSO KILLS ISREALIS NOT ONLY WITH ROCKETSAS BUT WITH SUICIDE BOMBS INCLUDING WOMEN AND CHILDREN. MURDER IS MURDER in Gaza, and a complete withdrawal of all Israeli forces with the opening of all border crossings in Gaza ALSO BASED ON HAMAS STOPPING ALL MURDER AND DESTROYING ALL TUNNELS As of January 18, the Gaza crisis resulted in displacement of thousands of Palestine, the injury of more than 5,300, and the killing of over 1,300, mostly civilians. It has also caused the destruction of Gaza?s infrastructure, including demolition of hundreds of homes and attacks on UN schools and on the UNRWA warehouse, which is the source of basic necessities, such as food, fuel and medicines. According to a 1/15/09 UN press release: ?One in every 250 people in Gaza is either now dead or significantly injured . . . MANY DEATHS WERE ALSO CAUSED B7Y HAMAS USE OF HUMAN SHIELS IN MOSQUES , SCJOOLS AND HOSPITIALS This number is comparable to 33,000 people in New York City or 1.2 million people in the United States.? http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/47d4e277b48d9d3685256ddc00612265/b974aca8e8fe201d85257540004ffedc!OpenDocument Contrast this with the Hamas rocket attacks, which during the same period killed 3 Israelis civilians and 10 Israeli soldiers. MURDER IS MURDER http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1232171510978&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout Furthermore, we are greatly distressed by the continuing decoupling of these recent hostilities from their historic context, which encourages, inter alia, the following obstacles to peace: ? Demonization of Palestinians as inherently anti-Semitic, hateful terrorists; ? Delegitimization of lawful resistance by Palestinians to Israeli violations of their human and legal rights; ? Propounding the myth of balance between the two peoples despite the patently disproportionate military and political power between them: an occupying power, Israel ? nuclear-armed with the fourth largest military in the world, backed by a superpower ? and Palestinians, an effectively disarmed, impoverished and occupied people; ? Jettisoning of international law in favor of bilateral negotiations between two actors of such grossly unequal power, a course begun with the Madrid /Oslo process; ? Distortions of human security needs of Israelis in favor of Israeli state security and regional domination; ? Conflation of criticism of Israeli policies with anti-Semitism, which promotes regressive elements on both sides for political gain, trivializes the historic prejudice against Jews, and inhibits the expression of sympathy Palestinians do have for Jewish suffering, especially the Nazi holocaust. As a consequence we call for a redirection of international attention to the root causes of past and ongoing hostilities between Israelis and Palestinians, i.e., Palestinian dispossession and ethnic cleansing by Israel since 1948, and the establishment of an apartheid-like system in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT)THAT LANGUAGE IS FULL OF HATE EVOKING WORDS USED TO BAIT that discriminates against non-Jews.* THEREFORE: Recalling the historic examples of apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany that a just, enduring peace, and reconciliation between Palestinians and Israelis depend on acknowledgement of wrongdoing and restitution and ISREAL IS NOT NAZI ETHNIC CLEANSERS OR S AFRICAN APARTIED THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE FOR PEACE AND WAR RESISTERS Recalling that Europeans, not Palestinians, were responsible for the Nazi holocaust; we believe that individual European Green Parties, especially those with elected representatives in their governments, and in the EU parliament in their capacity to influence the European Union?s relation to Israel, have a special duty to ensure that Palestinians no longer bear the blame for historic European transgressions against Jews; and Recalling that the Green Party of the United States has a particular obligation in relation to this conflict as the US government is Israel?s closest ally: ? That Israel receives more than $5 billion annually in military and financial aid; that as current hostilities in Gaza illustrate, Israel?s use of this military aid often violates American laws in that the Arms Export Control Act stipulates that US-supplied weapons be used only for ?legitimate self-defense? and that the US Foreign Assistance Act prohibits military assistance to any country ?which engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights? and that the Proxmire Amendment bans military assistance to any government that refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to allow inspection of its nuclear facilities, as Israel refuses to do ALL TRUE; ? That the United States government, including both its major parties, has not been an impartial peace broker in this conflict but continues to provide political cover and protection to Israel internationally, particularly at the United Nations, where it has vetoed scores of Security Council Resolutions opposing Israel?s violations of Palestinian human rights and international law, thereby undermining the central purpose of the UN Charter to maintain international peace and security; ? That US support for Israeli violations against the Palestinian people is a main source of antipathy to the US and the West among the world?s formerly colonized peoples who identify with Palestinians; that this US support not only decreases US/Western national security, but also contributes to Middle East and international instability; and http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=41982 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/world/14clash.html http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/65b122b6-e8c0-11dd-a4d0-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1 Recognizing that this conflict continues to have a devastating ecological impact on Israel/Palestine, especially water sources, thereby decreasing security for the whole region; and Recognizing that despite 61 years of continuous diplomatic attempts by the international community, it has failed to bring about Israel?s compliance with international law or respect for basic Palestinian human rights; and Recognizing that, despite abundant condemnation of Israel?s policies by the UN, International Court of Justice, and all relevant international conventions, the international community of nations has failed to stop violations by Israel of Palestinian human rights in Israel and the OPT, while Israeli crimes continue with impunity, as the recent assault on Gaza illustrates; SO HAS HAMAS and Recalling that ending institutionalized racism (apartheid) in South Africa demanded an unusual, cooperative action by the entire international community in the form of a boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaign against apartheid South Africa, and that BDS can become the most effective nonviolent means for achieving justice and genuine peace between Palestinians and Israelis, and in the region, through concerted international pressure as applied to apartheid South Africa; and Recognizing that Palestinian resistance to ongoing dispossession has mainly been nonviolent, including its most basic form ? remaining in their homes, on their land; and that while Palestinian armed resistance is legitimate under international law when directed at non-civilian targets, we believe that only nonviolent resistance will maintain the humanity of Palestinian society,HAMAS MURDER? elicit the greatest solidarity from others, and maximize the chance for future reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians; and Recognizing, however, that our appeal to Palestinians to continue to resist nonviolentlyHAMAS MURDERS? in the face of ongoing existential threats from Israel is hypocritical unless accompanied by substantial acts of international support; and Recalling that in 2005, Palestinian Civil Society appealed to the international community to support a BDS campaign against Israel; and Recalling that in response, at least two Green Parties have passed resolutions supporting this BDS campaign NOT ALL ISREALIS OR THEIR VARIOUS PARTIES BACK CURRENT ISREALI GAZA ACTIONS. I BELIVE MILLITARY AND FINANCIAL AIDE FROM USA SHOULD BE CUT OFF. BUT NOTCOMMERCIAL COMMERACE AND TRADE DIVESTMENT. ISREAL IS NOT THE SAME PYRIA AS APARTIED S AFRICA OR NAZI GERMANY: Green Party of the United States in 2005 http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2005_11_28.shtml Green Party of England and Wales in 2008 http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=1733; We, international Green parties: Call publicly for the implementation of boycott and divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era; and Agree to pressure our respective governments to impose embargoes and sanctions against Israel; and Support maintaining these nonviolent punitive measures until Israel meets its obligation to recognize the Palestinian people?s inalienable right to self-determination and fully complies with the precepts of international law by: 1. Ending its occupation and colonization of all Palestinian lands and dismantling the Wall in the West Bank; 2. Recognizing the fundamental rights of Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and 3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194I BELIVE IN A 2 STATE SOLUTION WITH REPAIRATIOONS. [Statement ends here] ------------------------------------------------- * Background ? I AM NOT BOTHERING WITH THIS AS IT IS ALL ONE SIDED PROPAGANDAThere is international consensus among scholars, including Israeli Jews (David Hirst, Benny Morris, Ilan Pappe, Tom Segev) that in 1948, Israel ethnically cleansed at least 80% of the native Palestinian Christians and Muslims ? the majority population ? from their lands and homes because they were not Jews, an act of genocide under international law. (See Professor Francis A. Boyle, who successfully argued before the World Court that ethnic cleansing is a form of genocide http://www.mediamonitors.net/francis1.html.) In 1948, Palestinian Christians and Muslims owned 93% of the land. ? Since 1948, Israel has prevented Palestinian refugees from returning to their homes in Israel, while allowing non-native Jews to immigrate there. This constitutes a violation of several bodies of international law (law of nationality, customary human rights law / refugee law, humanitarian law) and international conventions, such as The Universal Declaration of Human rights (Article 13(2), 1948), The Fourth Geneva convention, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1951), all embodied in UN General Assembly Resolution 194 (reaffirmed annually since 1948), and Security Council Resolution 237. Moreover, for those refugees who wish to return, feasible plans have been proposed that would have meant minimal displacement of the current population, given that about 80% of Israeli Jews live in only 15% of the country, and that the vast majority of refugees could return to areas from which they came, as they are vacant or under populated. http://english.aljazeera.net/archive/2005/05/200849162924283293.html http://www.arts.mcgill.ca/MEPP/prrn/papers/abusitta.html ? In the 1967 war, Israel seized control and has maintained a military occupation of the Syrian Golan Heights, Palestinian West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza (OPT), in violation of international law, which emphasizes the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war no matter how the conflict began or how long it endures. During the war, another 300,000 Palestinians became refugees, some for the second time. ? As the Occupying Power, Israel continues to violate its responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention for the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, by the following practices: ? ongoing settlement of Jewish-only colonies on West Bank / East Jerusalem land, of which 40% is privately owned by Palestinians, that contain between 480,000 and 550,0000 Israelis ? more than half settling during the Oslo Peace Process; and since the beginning of 2009, 73,300 new Jewish-only settlements have been planned for the West Bank/ East Jerusalem, along with the planned destruction of homes to 1500 Palestinians in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Silwan - denial of freedom of movement by over 500 checkpoints and roadblocks ? collective punishment, including curfews and closures, prevention of medical treatment, demolition of over 10,000 homes, of which, according to UN figures, only 6% involved any security suspects ? targeted assassinations ? detention without charge ? torture in detention ? denial of the right to peaceful assembly ? the uprooting, since 2000 alone, of nearly 2 million trees, and razing thousands of acres of agricultural land. In sum, Israel has taken control of more than 50% of West Bank land (the whole West Bank represents only 22% of historic Palestine) to establish the settlements and reserve land for their expansion; Israel controls 100% of West Bank water, diverting 80% for Israeli use, leaving only 20% for Palestinians ? insufficient for Palestinian life and agriculture. http://www.btselem.org/English/Publications/Summaries/200205_Land_Grab.asp http://www.btselem.org/english/water/2008070_acute_water_shortage_in_the_west_bank.asp http://www.imemc.org/article/48308 http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/natres/water/2007/0523arabisrael.htm http://stopthewall.org/latestnews/1883.shtml http://apjp.org/israel-planning-73300-new-home/ According to Israel?s human rights group B?Tselem, since September 2008, Israel has escalated its policy of separating the West Bank from Gaza and forcibly transferring ? ethnic cleansing ? West Bank Palestinians to Gaza, a policy supported by Israel?s supreme court. http://www.btselem.org/english/press_releases/20080910.asp ?Ethnic cleansing by Stealth,? by Seth Freedman, Guardian News, September 4, 2008 http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/sep/04/israelandthepalestinians.humanrights Regarding US support of Israeli ?benign? ethnic cleansing, see ?Ethic Cleansing: Constructive, Benign, and Nefarious.? ZMagazine, August 09, 2006 By Edward S. Herman and Grace Kwinjeh http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/3419 ? In 2002, Israel began building a 790 km-long (494 mile) ?apartheid wall? in the occupied West Bank, confiscating huge swaths of Palestinian agricultural land and water sources along a route that deviates from the 1967 ?Green Line.? In 2004, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled the barrier to be illegal under international law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention, that it must be dismantled and reparations paid to Palestinians for losses incurred, and that ?all States are under obligation not to recognize the illegal situation resulting form the construction of the wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory . . . They are also under obligation not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by such construction.? http://www.icj- cij.org/docket/files/131/1677.pdf Similarly, a detailed investigation by B?Tselem confirmed that, ?under the guise of security,? Israel?s routing of the separation barrier was primarily to enable the expansion of illegal settlements and protect the economic interests of Israeli real estate developers, all in violation of Palestinian human rights, especially self-determination. http://www.btselem.org/Download/200512_Under_the_Guise_of_Security_Eng.doc Thus far, Israel has refused to comply with the ICJ ruling, and continues to build the wall. ?Israel maintains an apartheid-like system in the West Bank, where a concrete barrier, two different legal systems and a ?matrix of control? separate Israeli-Jewish settlers and Palestinians, and relegate the latter to a no man?s land of statelessness. For example, former US President Jimmy Carter (Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid) and B?Tselem describe the institutionalized system of discrimination in the OPT as ?apartheid.? Similarly, citing the planned system of Jewish-only roads and settlements, and two different legal systems, B?Tselem reported in 2002: Israel has created in the Occupied Territories a regime of separation based on discrimination, applying two separate systems of law in the same area and basing the rights of individuals on their nationality. This regime is the only one of its kind in the world, and is reminiscent of distasteful regimes from the past, such as the Apartheid regime in South Africa. http://www.btselem.org/English/Press_Releases/20040616.asp Again, in their 2004 report, ?Discrimination-based separation ? An Apartheid Practice?: The roads regime, which is based on separation through discrimination, bears clear similarities to the racist apartheid regime that existed in South Africa until 1994. An individual?s national origin determines their right to use various roads. This policy is based on a racist premise: that all Palestinians are security risks, and it is therefore justifiable to restrict their movement. Thus the policy indiscriminately harms the entire Palestinian population, in violation of their human rights and of international law. http://www.btselem.org/English/Publications/Summaries/200408_Forbidden_Roads.asp On November 25, 2008, UN General Assembly President Miguel D?Escoto Brockmann also likened Israel?s policies toward the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza to South Africa?s treatment of blacks under apartheid. http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1226404827209 ? Even before the current hostilities, Gaza was an immense open-air prison for 1.5 million people ? two-thirds of whom are refugees from 1948 and 1967 ? squeezed into 140 square miles and hemmed in on all sides by 25-foot-high walls separated by a vast expanse of bulldozed earth. (See ?The Gaza Strip: A Humanitarian Implosion,? March 2008, http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/2008/images/03/06/gaza.implosion.pdf.) In late 2005, Israel unilaterally withdrew its soldiers and 8,000 settlers but continued to control Gaza from the air and sea, and monitor all exits and entries of persons and supplies. A blockade began after January 2006 when Hamas won parliamentary elections in the OPT, a result not accepted by Israel, the US and the EU, which withdrew aid from Gaza despite the facts that the election was regarded as fair and democratic, with a huge voter turnout (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1181813074587), and that Hamas had rescinded its call for Israel?s destruction and offered of a long-term truce in exchange for Israeli withdrawal from all the OPT. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/12/israel. The US then covertly armed Hamas? political rival, Fatah, to provoke a Palestinian civil war and overthrow Hamas. After intense fighting, Hamas gained full control of Gaza in June 2007. http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/04/gaza200804?printable=true¤tPage=all Since then, Israel has defined Gaza as an ?enemy entity? and maintained a siege that intensified on November 5, 2008. http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n02/sieg01_.html. By December 2008, according to UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights for the OPT, Richard Falk, Gaza had a malnutrition rate of 75%, and healthcare and economic systems on the verge of collapse with 95% of factories closed and the highest unemployment rate in the world. http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N08/489/88/PDF/N0848988.pdf?OpenElement http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-falk/understanding-the-gaza-ca_b_154777.html In November 2008 Israel denied entry of humanitarian aid to Gaza as UN food aid was running out. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7726943.stm. On 12/30/08 Israel rammed and severely damaged the SS Dignity in international waters. It was carrying medical supplies to Gaza with a delegation of physicians and human rights activists, including former US congresswoman and US Green Party?s 2008 presidential candidate, Cynthia McKinney. http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=162 http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/12/30/gaza.aid.boat/?iref=hpmostpop#cnnSTCText In sum, these are violations of international law under which Israel remains the Occupying Power charged with the protection of Palestinians in OPT, including Gaza. (?Israel prepares for war crimes over Gaza? http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout&cid=1232171555977&utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss) According to UN Special Rapporteur Falk?s 8/25/08 report to the UN General Assembly: The whole approach taken toward Gaza by Israel and by the United States of America, and the European Union, since the Hamas electoral victory in January 2006, involves a massive and unlawful systematic violation of article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which unconditionally prohibits collective punishment. ? Israel also maintains an apartheid-like system in Israel (within the 1967 ?Green Line?) that systematically discriminates against its non-Jewish citizens, especially the 20% of its population who are Palestinian-Israelis. Unlike South African institutionalized racism (apartheid), the non-Jewish citizens of Israel can vote in elections for members of parliament (Knesset) where they can have representation, though they have never been part of a governing coalition. Yet, the presence of these rights obscures Israel?s unacknowledged history of ethnic cleansing of the non-Jewish majority inhabitants of historic Palestine (1947?49; 1967) and their continuing dispossession, and masks the fundamental structures of the Israeli state that preclude equality and discriminate against non-Jewish citizens on an ethnic basis. Indeed, not all rights are citizenship rights. In Israel, other rights, defined as ?nationality? rights, are reserved for Jews only: exclusive use of land, privileged access to private and public employment, special educational loans, home mortgages, preferences for admission to universities, among others. From its official beginning, the Declaration of Independence, Israel established itself as a Jewish state, with a Jewish character, principles on which its Basic Laws are anchored. While Israel has no constitution, this Declaration and its Basic Laws are viewed as the equivalents of constitutional law. For example, the 1985 amendment to Section 7a of the Basic Law (ironically, the ?Anti-Racist Law?) bars any political party from participating in elections that explicitly or implicitly denies the Jewish and democratic character of the State of Israel; and the 1992 Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, which reiterates the Jewish and democratic characters of the state (Section 1a): ?The purpose of the basic law is to protect human dignity and liberty, in order to establish in a Basic Law the values of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state.? Indeed, in the midst of the Gaza crisis, several violations of human rights and democracy occurred against Palestinian Israelis: the Israeli Elections Committee banned the participation of two Palestinian-Israeli parties (50% of Arab parties, representing 160,000 people) in the February 2009 elections (as had occurred in 2003) because they opposed the assault on Gaza and called for Israel to become a state of all its citizens rather than a Jewish state. These positions were seen as violations of Israel?s Basic Law 7A forbidding candidates from calling for the destruction of the state of Israel as a democratic and Jewish state; incitement of racism; or support of a terrorist organization or an enemy state during a conflict, including visiting an enemy country in the seven years prior to their candidacy. [In response to a petition from a Palestinian human rights organization (Adalah), the Israeli Supreme Court did reinstate some of the candidates. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054867.html; http://news.antiwar.com/2009/01/12/israel-bans-arab-parties-from-election/ ] Similarly, during the Gaza assault, Palestinian-Israelis were banned from non-violently protesting the Israel?s actions. According to legal scholars Sharon Weill and Valentina Azarov (?Israel?s Authoritarian Transformation,? February 26, 2008 http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2009/02/26/israel-s-authoritarian-transformation): [D]uring 230 such demonstrations, 801 protestors were arrested, 277 of them children and juveniles; arrests were made for "disturbing the peace," waving Palestinian flags, and "hurting the nation's morale." As of 7 February 2009, 255 people were still under arrest, including 89 children and juveniles; 114 indictments were submitted to the courts. Others were called in for interrogation by the security services, and were warned not to take part in any demonstration; some were put under house arrest and were prohibited from entering certain cities. In sum, Israel?s self-definition defies logic: Israel cannot simultaneously be a Jewish state and democratic ? which would require defining itself as the state of all its citizens. Instead, by law and unlike any other country in the world, Israel defines itself as the state of all the Jews in the world, to whom privilege over (even native) non-Jewish citizens is given. This exclusivity contrasts sharply with the alternative of designating the country as the ?homeland? for the Jewish people, an inclusive designation that could be applied to the other people for whom the country is also homeland, the Palestinians. In analyzing Israel?s Basic Laws, Palestinian-Israeli Nadim Rouhana (Henry Hart Rice Professor of Conflict Resolution, George Mason University and Director of the Arab Center for Applied Social Research in Haifa) underscores the inherent contradiction between Israel?s self-identity as Jewish and democratic (Palestinian Citizens in an Ethnic Jewish State, 1997), p. 46: According to Kretzmer (1990), simply by introducing the 1985 amendment to Section 7a of the Basic Law . . . the Israeli Knesset demonstrated that the ?recognition of Israel as the state of the Jewish people has indeed become an incontrovertible constitutional fact.? But again, how can this definition of the state of Israel align with the essence of democracy: having the state as an equally accessible tool of all of its citizens? It simply precludes all non-Jewish citizens from claiming the state as equally theirs. If the state is the apparatus that concentrates power, determines the distribution of resources, rights and duties, benefits and national priorities, determines the criteria for significant national goals, and promulgates laws and regulations to achieve these goals, then by defining itself as the state of only one group of its citizens (and some who are not its citizens), the state cannot avoid violating the principles of democracy. As the international community shunned apartheid South Africa in the late 20th century, the growing international opposition to Israel?s attempt to legitimize Jewish ethnic dominance reflects 21st century world consciousness and consensus that such institutionalized dominance is archaic and undemocratic. Professor Virginia Tilley concludes (The One-State Solution, pp. 181?182): [S]elf-styled as the ?only democracy in the Middle East,? Israel remains the only ethnic democracy claiming membership in the Euro-American international community. That claim is becoming an intolerable embarrassment, as the model is long obsolete elsewhere. For instance, the ?White Australia? project sustained a racial democracy in the early twentieth century, banning Asian immigration and excluding Aborigines on the belief that only racial homogeneity could permit whites to freely enjoy a democratic practice brought from Europe. Southern states in the United States used a host of methods, official and unofficial, to exclude black voting and secure white dominion well into the 1960?s. But the civil movements that challenged and defeated these systems carried with them more than local or national change; they campaigned for and consolidated an international normative discourse that rejected ethnoracial supremacy as an inherent source of injustice, dehumanization, and human suffering. The shift rose to catch South Africa and quickly discredited apartheid; Milosevic?s Serbian ambitions also came too late and hit the cresting wave. The lessons from World War II had at last come to fruition: ethnic nationalism generates unacceptable discourses of ethnic supremacy and inferiority, grant moral authority to ethnic cleansing, and precludes equal rights before the law, which is the foundational principle of Western democracies. If a state is to be truly democratic ? with all its citizens held equal before the law ? it cannot be based on ethnic dominion. Whatever Israel claims based on the past sins of Europe or on its own mythologized past of peaceful resistance to ferocious Arabs, if the Jewish state claims membership in the Western club, it cannot expect to be held exempt from these principles. Similarly, Jewish-American Professor Joel Kovel (former NY Green Party nominee for Senate) attributes Israel?s fatal flaw to its structurally racist nature as a Jewish state (Overcoming Zionism, p.165): [I]f you sign on to the idea of a Jewish state, you are taking the particularism that is the potential bane of any state, mixing it with the exceptionalism that is the actual bane of Judaism, and giving racism an objective, enduring, institutionalized, and obdurate character. You accept, in that one moment, a state that systematically denies basic human rights to a fraction of its people and systematically grants another set of people superior right over them. Thus racism is set into motion, and remains so, grounded in an exclusion based not on what the Other does but entirely on what the Other is, or to be more exact, is not, namely Jewish. By this one gesture, no matter how one rationalized a Jewish state as owed the Jews by virtue of their sufferings, or ethical superiority, or promises made to ancestors, or generations of landlessness, or a Covenant with God, or cultural genius, or just because it feels good to have a state for one?s own kind?one violates the whole law by which humanity has risen above the much of narrow self-interest and cyclical vengeance. And you cannot overcome that violation unless you undo the compact that locks it into place. Thus, Israel?s institutionalized racist policies toward non-Jews, meet the criteria of the ?crime of apartheid,? which are described in Article II, International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (1973): http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/11.htm For the purpose of the present Convention, the term ?the crime of apartheid?, which shall include similar policies and practices of racial segregation and discrimination as practised in southern Africa, shall apply to the following inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them: (c) Any legislative measures and other measures calculated to prevent a racial group or groups from participation in the political, social, economic and cultural life of the country and the deliberate creation of conditions preventing the full development of such a group or groups . . . (d) Any measures, including legislative measures, designed to divide the population along racial lines by the creation of separate reserves and ghettos for the members of a racial group or groups, the prohibition of mixed marriages among members of various racial groups, the expropriation of landed property belonging to a racial group or groups or to members thereof; See also For a side-by-side comparison of the convention?s definition of ?apartheid? with examples of Israel?s human rights record within Israel as well as in the Occupied Territories, see report by Israeli Uri Strauss, ?Defining Apartheid: Israel?s Record? http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article689.shtml "Israel's 'Ethnocracy' and the Demographic Threat: Dr. As'ad Ghanem on Israel's Palestinian Citizens, October 21, 2009. http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/ht/d/ContentDetails/i/2359/pid/223 ?Neither two states nor one: Disengagement and ?creeping apartheid? in Israel/Palestine? by Prof. Oren Yiftachel, The Arab World Geographer, Vol.8, No. 3, 2005, http://www.geog.bgu.ac.il/members/yiftachel/new_papers_eng/Yiftachel%20in%20Arab%20World%20Geographer.pdf; ?Democracy or Ethnocracy: Territory and Settler Politics in Israel/Palestine? by Oren Yiftachel, http://www.merip.org/mer/mer207/yift.htm (Summer, 1998) ?Apartheid In the Holy Land? Paper Prepared Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed for the United Nations Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, 31st August?7th September, 2001 South Africa, http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq11.html Some of the Israel laws discriminating against Israel?s non-Jewish citizens Exclusive citizenship/immigration laws: ? Law of Return (1950) and the Citizenship Law (1952) ? Population Registry Law (1965) ? Citizenship and Entry into Israel law (July 2003) Exclusive use of state land by Jews As a consequence of the laws listed below, non-Jews? ?non-nationals? ? who had succeeded in remaining in their native land, were dispossessed of their property at Israel?s founding in 1948, internally displaced and excluded by law from leasing, purchasing, building, or farming 93% of the land of Israel within the Green Line ? land that is regarded by Israel as the inalienable patrimony of the Jewish people wherever they live, and is owned by the Jewish National Fund and the state and regulated by the Israel Land Authority. Jewish-Israeli Uri Davis describes the process by which these quasi-governmental agencies maintain Israel?s racist land policies (Apartheid Israel, p. 48): In other words, in the critical areas of immigration, settlement and land development the Israeli sovereign, the Knesset, which is formally accountable to all its citizens, Jews and non-Jews alike, has formulated and passed legislation ceding state sovereignty (including taxation) and entered into Covenants vesting its responsibilities with organization such as the WZO [World Zionist Organization], the JA [Jewish Agency], and the JNF [Jewish National Fund] which are constitutionally committed to serving and promoting the interests of Jews and Jews alone. It is through this procedure of legal duplicity, the ceding of state sovereignty and vesting its responsibilities . . . with Zionist organizations constitutionally committed to the exclusive principle of ?only for Jews?, that legal apartheid is regulated in Israel. It is through this mechanism of legal duplicity that the State of Israel has successfully veiled the reality of Zionist apartheid in the guise of legal democracy since the establishment of the State of Israel to date. Such land control mechanisms perpetuate a legally enforced system of territorial separation, by which Palestinian-Israelis (20+% of the population) now own only 3% of the land. This situation is actually worse than apartheid South Africa?s policy of ?influx control? restricting the residence and land available to black South Africans citizens ? 13% ? while the remaining 87% was reserved for ?white South Africa.? 1949: Emergency Regulations (Cultivation of Waste Lands) Ordinance 1950: Absentee Property Law 1952: World Zionist Organization ?Jewish Agency for the Land of Israel (Status) Law 1953: Land Acquisition Law; Law for Confiscating Land for Public Interests; Jewish National Fund Law 1954: Covenant between the Government of Israel and the Zionist Executive / Executive for the Jewish Agency for the Land of Israel 1960: Basic Law; Israel Lands; Israel Lands Law; Israeli Lands Administration Law 1961: Covenant between the State of Israel and the Jewish National Fund 1980: Land Acquisition Law (Peace Treaty with Egypt): seizes thousands of dunams of Palestinian land to expand Jewish communities in the Negev Discrimination and ethnic cleansing continues for Palestinian?Israelis: Unrecognized Arab villages in Israel: At least eighty thousand Palestinian Bedouin?Israelis live in about 45 ?unrecognized? villages in the Negev desert in the south of Israel. Following the adoption of the Planning and Construction Law of 1965, the villages did not appear on any Israeli map and were not recognized by any official government and ignored by all government planning projects. These Bedouin are citizens of Israel and have the right to vote in national elections and are expected to pay taxes. Yet their villages are deprived of basic services, like housing, water, electricity, education and health care. According to a report by anti-apartheid peace activists Bangani Ngeleza and Adri Nieuwhof: There are disturbing similarities in living conditions between unrecognised villages and informal settlements under apartheid. These include lack of access to adequate potable water, lack of proper sanitation facilities, absence of proper road infrastructure, the lack of educational facilities, houses built of corrugated iron sheets (in some cases of black plastics and cardboard) etc. The similarities are striking between racially based policies that lay behind the creation of white settlements under the apartheid regime in South Africa then and the establishment of Jewish settlements by the Israeli government. ?Unrecognised villages in the Negev expose Israel?s apartheid policies? Bangani Ngeleza and Adri Nieuwhof, The Electronic Intifada, 21 December 2005 http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article4358.shtml; ?Bedouin ask UN to help fight systemic discrimination in Israel? http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=734096 For an update on rising Israeli support for ?transferring? out their fellow Palestinian citizens, see ?Ethnic cleansing and Israel,? by Conn Hallinan, Counterpunch, March 3, 2009 http://www.counterpunch.org/hallinan03032009.html Continuing efforts to ?Judaize? Arab?Israeli areas like the Galilee, Negev and East Jerusalem Israel continues policies to constrain Palestinian?Israeli life while privileging that of Jewish?Israelis. See ?A Campaign to Challenge Israeli Apartheid? March 31, 2005 by Kole Kilibarda http://www.caiaweb.org/files/kilibarda.jamjoum-JNFcampaign.pdf Isabelle Humphries, a British researcher on Palestinian internal refugees, attests to institutionalized Israeli discrimination towards Palestinian?Israelis displaced from their homes in the Galilee in 1948 but not expelled: While Israel continues to claim that it is a democracy, it finds ways to discriminate and implement an apartheid system ? and no more so than in the allocation of land and town planning. While the state and high court system maintain the pretense of keeping opportunities open to all, independent private organizations have no obligation to do so. Thus the state delegates and coordinates its work with Zionist establishments technically able to act as quasi-state institutions, despite the fact that their mandates openly state their aim of serving one ethnic group alone. The latest development plan for the Galilee and Negev is in full cooperation with the World Zionist Organization (WZO), the Jewish Agency (JA) and the Jewish National Fund (JNF) ? non-state actors with an open Zionist and racist agenda. http://www.wrmea.com/archives/Sept_Oct_2005/0509012.html See also: ?Policy of Settlement and ?spacial? Judaization in the Naqab? by Hana Hamdan, Adalah?s Newsletter, Vol 11, October, 2005 http://www.adalah.org/newsletter/eng/mar05/ar2.pdf ?Case Studies in Ethnic Cleansing? complied by the Applied Research Institute-Jerusalem?s (ARIJ) http://www.poica.org/editor/case_studies/index.php?Y=2009 Segregated education systems until university According to a 2006 Human Rights Watch report, The Israeli government operates two separate school systems for its 1.8 million school children: a Jewish system and an Arab system. The students in the latter are Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel, nearly one quarter of all Israeli school children. Under international law, states may offer children separate educational systems for linguistic or religious reasons, but they may not discriminate in doing so . . . despite small advances in recent years, the discriminatory practices against Palestinian Arab school children that are institutionalized in its education system place Israel in violation of its international legal obligations. http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2006/01/02/discrimination-against-palestinian-arab-children-israeli-education-system Also see ?Discrimination Against Palestinian Arab Children in the Israeli Education System? by Zama Coursen-Neff in the New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, January 2, 2006. While Israeli education is integrated at the university level, discrimination persists. Beyond the fact that the system advantages Jewish?Israelis in competing for university places, in 2003 Israel universities stopped an experimental admission procedure when it became clear that the main beneficiaries were Palestinian?Israelis rather than those intended ? Jewish?Israeli students from low-income development towns. According to Ha?aretz?s Relly Sa?ar (?Universities return to aptitude exams to keep Arabs out?): There?s no politically correct spin to put on it, and the facts speak for themselves: As soon as Israel?s top university administrators noticed that the big winners from admissions policy changes were not Jewish youngsters from low-income towns, but rather Arabs, they reverted back to the old admissions system. http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=365572 Environmental Degradation in Israel/Palestine as a Result of the Conflict The often violent implementation of Zionist policies toward Palestinians--populating Israel/Palestine with Jews while ridding the territory of Palestinians--and Palestinian resistance to these policies have resulted in severe environmental degradation. Professor Joel Kovel (The Enemy of Nature), describes the state of ecological damage in Israel in his book Overcoming Zionism (2007, pp.110-111): Israel, or to take into account the entity that Zionism now controls, Israel/Palestine, is an environmental nightmare, all the more so in relation to its ideals, wealth, and technological expertise. . . .All of Israel?s rivers are seriously polluted except for the Upper Jordan, and some have been polluted to literally lethal levels; . .88 percent of Tel Aviv?s wells contain persistent organic pollutants; as for the air, a quadrupling of nitrous oxide emissions has been observed since 1980; asthma rates among children have gone from 5.6 percent in 1980 to 11.2 percent in 1989 and 17 percent in 2002; Israel has one of the highest breast cancer incidences in the world, with a 32 percent increase in the 1990?s; in the 1970s the breast milk of Israeli women contained some 800 times the concentration of benzene hexachloride as American women. Kovel specifies certain factors ?intrinsic to Zionism? that continue to harm the tiny environment of Israel/Palestine. These factors include: ?Zionism?s incessant pressure to fill Israel with Jews in order to keep a step ahead of the Palestinians,? leading to the ecologically disastrous combination of a sixfold population increase within half a century, rapid industrialization and conspicuous consumption of resources; and since 1967, the literally earth-shattering effects of settling over 500,000 Jews in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and Gaza, accompanied by destructive efforts to constrain Palestinian life such as razing millions of trees and fields, imposition of over 500 checkpoints, roads, military zones; building of a nearly 800 km-long apartheid Wall whose construction has destroyed hundreds of acres of farm land along the Wall?s route and caused severe flooding from dammed up water, resulting in pervasive destruction of crops, greenhouses and other agricultural infrastructure; and pollution like that described by Nora Barrows-Friedman across the West Bank where ?villagers watch as crops and orchards become poisoned and contaminated from raw sewage being actively pumped into their land from the sewage treatment facilities inside Israeli settlements.? Similarly, Palestinian-American Green Party member Professor Mazin Qumsiyeh, (Mammals of the Holy Land; Sharing the Land of Canaan) recently returned to his native West Bank where he teaches at Bethlehem University. He describes the ecological damage he has witnessed over the years due to Zionist settlement policies (February 27, 2009 http://www.qumsiyeh.org/rightsblog2009/: But it is not just humans that are the victims of Zionist master plans. Nature is also. With a huge network of military bases, industrial zones, new infrastructure (for Jewish settlers so as not to use or improve Palestinian roads), massive apartheid walls, and disregard for environmental protection, the West Bank has become an environmental disaster area. The loss of village lands (to land confiscation, walls, etc.) around Bethlehem area for example made many villagers come live in Bethlehem which makes it a very crowded area and there are few open areas (some of which receive sewage and trash from Jewish settlements). The extent of the environmental damage is more noticeable to me as a biologist. I know this since I studied animals here for three decades and places that I used to be able to catch and study many animals representing many species now yield nothing or at best one or two lonely animals of once ubiquitous species. The toads in the valley near my house are all gone (an early spring sound and image that remains only in my memory). Water security has probably been most negatively impacted by the conflict. Since 1967, Israel has not only arrogated regional water supplies and diverted over 80% of West Bank water for Israeli use, but the whole area now faces an absolute shortage of water because of over consumption and development. Meanwhile, (Mediterranean Sea) salt water is seeping into Gaza?s water as its water table falls; and USAID is expected to fund an Israeli plan to retain West Bank water sources in exchange for a desalination plant providing (privatized) water to the Territories. According to New Scientist http://www.wilpf.org/jane/israel_lays_claim, this ?would leave independent Palestine more dependent on desalination than almost any other nation in the world. ? and, writes Stephen Lendman, ?given the cost of desalinated water, it will be out of reach for the great majority of impoverished Palestinians.? http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/natres/water/2008/0718westbank.htm) Not a recipe for peace and security. All in all, the conflict has become a zero-sum game antithetical to the human cooperation required for ecological security and sustainability. As Joel Kovel (Overcoming Zionism, pp.115-116) concludes, this situation cannot change as long as Zionism informs Israeli policies toward the Palestinians: This has led to an ecological situation unique to history, and one that precipitously hurtles toward environmental ruin. Human communities are ecosystems, too, and their capacity to fit into the great regulatory patterns of nature depends upon their internal integrity, manifest in mutual recognition and coherent communication. Estrangement or alienation, is the human form taken by ecological breakdown; it is a failure of recognition between human agents, which makes cooperative action impossible and splits humanity from nature as well as itself. It follows that the most severely estranged society will also be the most subject to eco-disintegration. This more or less describes the State of Israel, and certainly its Occupied Territories, which comprise one of the most bizarre social formations ever planted upon this earth. Here, on a tiny plot of ground, dwell two people with two radically different legal and social systems, one the beneficiary of a powerful state and living in comfort while it works to terrorize and strangle the other, who is stateless and bent upon surviving; the two are therefore radically denied any cooperative arrangement as can be imagined, and primed to be an eco-destructive accelerant to the State of Israel as a whole. See also In Photos: Flooding in Qalqilya and Tulkarm March 12th, 2009 http://stopthewall.org/photos/1885.shtml ?When the Occupation Gets Really Filthy? August 21, 2007 by Nora Barrows-Friedman, Internet Press Service http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=38964 ?Drought and Israeli Policy Threaten West Bank Water Security,? by Stephen Lendman, July 18, 2008, http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/natres/water/2008/0718westbank.htm ?Israel lays claim to Palestine's water ? May 29, 2004 by Fred Pearce, Jerusalem New Scientist http://www.wilpf.org/jane/israel_lays_claim ?The Water Crisis in Gaza? by Alice Gray by Alice Gray, February, 2007, International Viewpoint Online http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?page=print_article&id_article=1211 ?Water crisis looms over Palestinians as Israel withholds water resources? July 30.2007 http://www.almubadara.org/new/edetails.php?id=3267 ?The effects of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict on Water Reserves in the Jordan River Basin? by Eugenia Ferragina, Global Environment (2), 2008 http://www.globalenvironment.it/ferragina.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dbedellgreen at hotmail.com Mon Mar 23 14:08:30 2009 From: dbedellgreen at hotmail.com (David Bedell) Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 18:08:30 +0000 Subject: {news} FW: CTGP seeks officers and committee reps Message-ID: Thanks, Barbara, for the notice, and thanks, Charlie, for the correction about 5 reps to the GPUS. Just to be a stickler for accuracy, I want to point out that our bylaws require gender balance in the co-chairs; I don't want anyone to get the impression that we give females an advantage not given to males. So the announcement should include the following addition in brackets: > a) Three (3) co-chairpersons for CTGP: one needs to be female [and one needs to be male]; In practice, we usually have more male candidates than female, but the gender balance rule could also work the other way. David Bedell > > > ------------------Original message---------------------------- > Subject: {news} Reminder: candidates need to submit their names for CTGP officers and GPUS representatives by 9PM 3-31-09 to CTGP secreatary > From: B Barry > Date: Fri Mar 20 22:16:20 PDT 2009 > > > Dear All, > > > > This is a reminder that any registered Green Party voters may submit their > names CTGP officers and GPUS representatives by 9PM 3-31-09 to this CTGP > secretary in order to be accepted as candidates. Candidates also need to summit a 100 word or less statement of why they want to be considered by voters. (This deadline is needed due to need for this information to sent to the printer the following morning.) > > NOTE: The annual CTGP Convention will (likely) be on Saturday, 4-25-09, from > noon to 4pm at the New Haven Labor Union Hall. > > > > The following vacancies will need to be filled for a one-year duration: > > > > For CTGP officers: > > a) Three (3) co-chairpersons for CTGP: one needs to be female; > > b) One for secretary; > > c) One for treasurer. > > > > GPUS (Green Party of United States): > > a) Two (2) representatives from CTGP to represent the state party as a whole > to the GPUS and to report to the CTGP SCC in a timely fashion; > > b) Representatives to the following GPUS Permanent Committees: > > * Accreditation Committee (AC) > > * Annual National Meeting Committee (ANMC) regarding the GPUS annual > meeting 6-25-09 through 6-28-09 meeting in Durham, NC > > * Ballot Access Committee (BA); > > * Bylaws, Rules, Policies, Procedures Committee (BRPP); > > * Coordination Campaign Committee (CCC); > > * Credentials Committee (CC); > > * Dispute Resolution Committee (DRC); > > * Diversity Committee (DC); > > * Eco committee (EC); > > * Finance Committee (FC); > > * Fundraising (FRC); > > * Green Party internet news (formerly a newspaper); > > * International Committee (IC); > > * Media Committee (MC); > > * Merchandizing Committee (MERCH); > > * Outreach Committee (OC); > > * Peace Committee (GPAX); > > * Platform Committee (PC); > > * Presidential Campaign Support Committee (PCSC); > > * Steering Committee (SC). > > > > > > Additional GPUS information may also be obtained via HYPERLINK > "http://www.gpus.org/"www.GPUS.org > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Windows Live? SkyDrive: Get 25 GB of free online storage. > http://windowslive.com/online/skydrive?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_skydrive_032009 _________________________________________________________________ Internet Explorer 8 ? Now Available. Faster, safer, easier. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/141323790/direct/01/ From justinemccabe at earthlink.net Mon Mar 23 15:48:27 2009 From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe) Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 15:48:27 -0400 Subject: {news} Fw: Single Payer Action Alert - Calls Needed Message-ID: Physicians for a National Health ProgramCT Greens, Please follow directives below from PNHP in pushing CT congresspersons to support single payer national health insurance, which CTGP and GPUS support. Thanks, Justine ----- Original Message ----- From: Physicians for a National Health Program To: justinemccabe at earthlink.net Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 3:28 PM Subject: Single Payer Action Alert - Calls Needed March 23, 2009 Dear PNHP Colleagues, We need your help to keep single-payer national health insurance "on the table" in Washington. One of us (Dr. Robert Zarr) is a pediatrician in a community health center and chair of PNHP's D.C. chapter, and the other (Danielle Alexander) is a PNHP fellow on Capitol Hill this year. With your help, we recently succeeded in getting PNHP President Dr. Oliver Fein invited to Obama's White House summit on health reform. PNHP has also been invited to participate in a second health reform meeting at the White House this Wednesday, March 25. But we need to keep up the pressure. 1.. Please invite your member of Congress (sample script below) and their staff to attend an April 1 forum in D.C. hosted by PNHP and our single-payer alliance, the Leadership Conference for Guaranteed Health Care. 2.. We also encourage you to visit your congressperson during his or her in-district spring work period, April 6-17, urging him or her to support H.R. 676, the U.S. National Health Care Act, sponsored by Rep. John Conyers Jr. Background: Part of our drive to get Congress to support single payer is our involvement in a series of congressional briefings or forums on Capitol Hill organized by the Leadership Conference on Guaranteed Health Care. The last forum of this type (which was on the Massachusetts plan) drew a standing-room-only crowd. We need your help to make sure this forum is also a success. The next forum, titled "National Lessons for Health Reform: An Examination of U.S. Health Insurance," will be held on Wednesday, April 1, from 2 p.m. - 4 p.m., at 2226 Rayburn House Office Building. Witnesses will include the following PNHPers: a.. Dr. Louis Balizet, oncologist, Pueblo, Colo. b.. Leonard Rodberg, Ph.D., Metro New York PNHP, professor and chair of urban studies, Queens College c.. Dr. David L. Rabin, professor of community medicine, Georgetown University Medical Center The panel will address topics highly relevant to the debate over national health reform, such as: a.. How well does U.S. health insurance work for doctors, nurses, and their patients? b.. What problems do those with insurance have in accessing care? c.. Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan: is it a model for national reform? Act today: 1.. Call the Capitol Switchboard (202-224-3121) and ask to be connected with the scheduler or chief of staff of your U.S. representative. Here's a suggested script: "Hello, my name is Dr. ________. I am a constituent calling on behalf of Physicians for a National Health Program. I'm calling to invite congressman/woman ______ to attend an important health care reform forum in Washington on Wednesday, April 1, called "National Lessons for Health Reform: U.S. Health Insurance Examined." The April 1 forum, which starts at 2 p.m., will be held at 2226 Rayburn House Office Building. It will examine various health insurance mechanisms that will be increasingly debated as national models for health reform. I hope the congressman/woman and his/her staff will attend." 2.. Call the district office of your U.S. representative and ask for the scheduler, indicating you would like to meet with the congressman/woman during the spring work period to talk about H.R. 676, the U.S. National Health Care Act. To look up your representative's phone number, visit www.house.gov and enter in your zip code. Over 60 members of the House are currently co-sponsors; we need many more. Thank you for your continued advocacy for single payer! Incidentally, following a recent meeting between PNHP leaders and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the latter announced he will soon introduce a single-payer bill on the Senate side. As your PNHP representatives "inside the beltway" we encourage you to call on us for help contacting or following-up on visits with member of Congress. Please contact us at Danielle at pnhp.org. Sincerely, Robert Zarr, MD Chair, D.C. Chapter National Board of Directors, PNHP Danielle Alexander D.C. Fellow P.S. There are many useful materials (slides, fact sheets, op-eds, and more) at www.pnhp.org/change. The new password for the slides is fein. Physicians for a National Health Program 29 E Madison Suite 602, Chicago, IL 60602 Phone (312) 782-6006 | Fax: (312) 782-6007 www.pnhp.org | info at pnhp.org ? PNHP 2009 If you no longer wish to receive alerts from PNHP, please email us -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.13 - Release Date: 3/13/2009 12:00 AM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amyvasnunes at hotmail.com Tue Mar 24 21:48:21 2009 From: amyvasnunes at hotmail.com (Amy Vas Nunes) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 21:48:21 -0400 Subject: {news} FW: USGP-INT Draft IC rules under consideration by BRPP In-Reply-To: <49C86624.1000503@feinstein.org> References: <49C86624.1000503@feinstein.org> Message-ID: > Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 21:48:36 -0700 > From: mfeinstein at feinstein.org > To: usgp-int at gp-us.org > Subject: USGP-INT Draft IC rules under consideration by BRPP > > Dear all > > As follow up to Friday's BRPP-sponsored conference call, this is the > current draft of IC draft rules under consideration by the BRPP, as of > 9:30pm on Monday, March 23rd. Please note that it is easy to review at > this link, where formatting and bold text provide helpful contrast: > > http://brpp.campaignfoundations.com/index.php?title=International_Committee > > > > The Rules, Policies and Procedures of the International Committee of the > Green Party of the United States > > ARTICLE 1 INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE > > Section 1-1 Mission > > 1-1.1 The mission of the Committee shall be to foster collaboration and > exchange with Green parties around the world; to facilitate official > GPUS representation on the international and global level; to facilitate > GPUS issue and policy development on the international and global level; > and to network with green organizations and movements working on the > international and global level. > > Section 1-2 Duties and Responsibilities > > The International Committee shall have the duty and responsibility to: > > 1-2.1 Network with Green Parties around the world. > > 1-2.2 Propose nominees for approval by National Committee, for GPUS > delegates to the Federaci?n de Partidos Verdes de las Americas (FPVA) > and to the Global Green Congress (GGC). > > 1-2.3 Propose nominees for approval by the National Committee, for GPUS > representatives to the Global Green Network (GGN). > > 1-2.4 Facilitate the selection of official GPUS representatives and > observers to international meetings and events. > > 1-2.5 Develop resolutions and official position statements on > international and global aspects of Green Party policy for consideration > by the National Committee. > > 1-2.6 Develop proposals on international and global aspects of Green > Party policy for inclusion in the GPUS Platform. > > 1-2.7 Advise the Media Committee on international and global aspects of > Green Party policy for inclusion in press releases and other public > outreach. > > 1-2.8 Network with organizations and movements working for green > approaches on the international and global level, including global > peace, social justice, human rights, and environmentally sustainable > communities. > > 1-2.9 Inform U.S. Greens about international and global issues. > > ARTICLE II STRUCTURE > > Section 2-1 Membership > > 2-1.1 The Committee shall consist of Green Party members according to > the process for Committee Membership defined in GPUS Bylaws and Rules > and Procedures. > > 2-1.2 No state party or caucus shall have more than three members on the > Committee. > > 2-1.3 Experience > > The following criteria are recommended to be taken into account by state > parties and caucuses when selecting members: > > 2-1.3(a) Familiarity with the Global Green Charter and the GPUS Platform > > 2-1.3(b) Expertise in a topic or region of relevance to international > and/or global and and/or foreign policy issues > > 2-1.3(c) Foreign language skills > > 2-1.3(d) Experience in international diplomacy > > 2-1.3(e) Familiarity with GPUS and state Green Party procedures > > 2-1.3(f) Commitment to Green process > > 2-1.3(g) Organizational skills. > > 2-1.4 Term Length > > 2-1.4(a) The length of term of membership shall be two years, effective > once reported to the Co-Chairs and the GPUS Secretary. > > 2-1.5 Biography > > 2-1.5(a) A short biography along with contact information shall be > provided for each new member by the member, or by state party or caucus > from which the member comes. > > 2-1.6 Duties and Responsibilities > > 2-1.6(a) Monitor and participate in the Committee email list > > 2-1.6(b) Participate in Committee conference calls and in-person meetings > > 2-1.6(c) Volunteer for Committee tasks > > 2-1.6(d) Join and participate in a Committee sub-committee > > 2-1.6(e) Report back to the member's appointing state party or caucus on > the work of the Committee. Work with the international committee of the > state party or caucus, if there is one. If not, help organize one. > Organize state party and/or caucus members to help with Committee work. > > 2-1.6(f) Serve as an information liaison for a certain region, nation or > country of the world and submit regular briefings to the Committee. > > 2.2 Advisers and Observers > > 2-2.1 The Committee may select advisers according to the process > described in GPUS Bylaws and Rules and Procedures. > > 2-2.2 Advisers shall be selected on the basis that their experience and > expertise may aid the Committee in its work. > > 2-3 Co-Chairs > > 2-3.1 There shall be two Co-Chairs, elected to staggered two years > terms. A Co-Chair may serve two consecutive terms, after they must wait > two years before they can run again. If they have filled a vacancy and > served less than one year, they are eligible to serve two consecutive > terms. If they have filled a vacancy and served more than one year, they > may only serve one term before waiting two years to run again. > > 2-3.2 Nomination Process > > 2-3.2(a) The nomination period shall be for one week and shall begin on > a Monday and end on a Sunday. Only Committee members may be nominated. > Members may nominate themselves for the position. Nominations do not > need to be seconded. > > 2-3.2(b) After nominations close, there shall immediately follow a > two-week discussion period. > > 2-3.2(c) Nominees may submit candidate statements to the Committee email > list. It is strongly recommended that such statements be submitted as > early as possible during the discussion period. Candidate statements > shall include the candidate?s relevant experience and express what the > candidate would hope to accomplish as Co-Chair, including specifically > addressing the duties and responsibilities of the Co-Chair as defined in > this Article. > > 2-3.2(d) Committee members are encouraged to ask questions on the > Committee email list and candidates are encouraged to answer those > questions about what the nominees would do if elected. > > 2-3.3 Election Process > > 2-3.3(a) Elections shall be conducted on the Committee voting page using > Instant Runoff Voting (IRV), with None of the Above and No Other > Candidate as an option. > > 2-3.3(b) Elections shall commence immediately a the close of the > discussion period and shall last for one week. > > 2-3.4 Duties and Responsibilities > > The duties and responsibilities of the Co-Chairs are to: > > 2-3.4(a) Facilitate the work of the committee, including to accomplish > the duties, responsibilities, goals and objectives of the Committee and > its members as defined in 1-2 and 2-1.6 > > 2-3.4(b) Communicate on behalf of the Committee with the National > Committee and Steering Committee > > 2-3.4(c) Communicate on behalf of the Committee with Green Parties > around the world and other international and global Green movement > organizations > > 2-3.4(d) Submit annual reports to the National Committee detailing > Committee activities > > 2-3.4(e) Ensure that accurate minutes are produced of Committee and > Sub-Committee meetings. > > 2-3.5 Vacancy > > 2-3.5(a) A vacancy shall exist upon the resignation or recall of a > Co-Chair, or upon the ending of the term of their Committee membership. > > 2-3.5(b) The other Co-Chair shall publish the vacancy to the Committee > email list no later than seven days after the vacancy occured, except in > the case of the ending of the term of Committee membership, where if the > Member is not seeking another term, the Co-Chair shall declare the > vacancy at least six weeks before the ending of the term. > > 2-3.5(c) Vacancies shall cause an election for a replacement Co-Chair. > Such election would fill the remainder of the term and shall be > conducted by the process described in 2-3.3. > > 2-4 Subcommittees > > The following are the sub-committees of the Committee. Each > sub-committee coordinator(s) reports to the Co-chairs and to other > bodies as necessary: > > 2-4.1 Global Greens > > 2-4.1(a) The Co-Coordinators shall be the Delegates to Global Green Network. > > 2-4.1(b) The Members shall include present and past Delegates and > Alternates to the Global Green Network, Global Green Congress and any > GPUS member who is or has been a member of the Global Green > Coordination; and may include any other Committee members and advisers > with specific expertise in issues and/or language and/or diplomatic > skills that would substantially further the Sub-Committees work. > > 2-4.1(c) The functions shall be to support the work of the Delegates to > the Global Greens Network, Global Green Congress and any GPUS member who > is a member of the Global Green Coordination; alert the Committee and > National Committee about Global Green campaigns; help organize Global > Greens campaigns in the GPUS; provide information about the GPUS to the > Global Greens web site; communicate information about the Global Greens > to the Committee Website Sub-Committee; and circulate international > resolutions. > > 2-4.2 Federaci?n de Partidos Verdes de las Americas (FPVA) > > 2-4.2(a) The Co-Coordinators shall be the Delegates to the FPVA. > > 2-4.2(b) The Members shall include present and past Delegates and > Alternates to the FPVA and may include any other Committee members and > advisers with specific expertise in issues and/or language and > diplomatic skills that would substantially further the Sub-Committees work > > 2-4.2(c) The functions shall be to support the work of the Delegates to > the FPVA, alert the Committee and National Committee about FPVA > campaigns; help organize FPVA campaigns in the GPUS; provide information > about the GPUS to the FPVA web site; communicate information about the > FPVA to the Committee Website Sub-Committee; work with specific national > parties in the Americas; appoint information liaisons for a certain > region, nation or country in the Americas and submit regular briefings > to the Committee; prepare inter-American resolutions, fundraise for the > FPVA; and participate in FPVA email lists. > > 2-4.3 Foreign Policy > > 2-4.3(a) The Co-Coordinators shall be appointed by the Co-Chairs > > 2-4.3(b) The functions shall be to coordinate with foreign policy > aspects of the GPUS Platform, produce 'green' papers, link with > international green policy groups, develop channels to green think tanks > and do background research for the Committee on specific topics. > > 2-4.4 International Hosting and Exchange > > 2-4.4(a) The Co-Coordinators shall be appointed by the Co-Chairs > > 2-4.4(b) The functions shall be to prepare invitations to GPUS events, > coordinate visits of international greens to connect with grassroots and > local greens, build database of Green hosts in the US and prepare > greetings, congratulations, and condolences. > > 2-4.5 Budget/Fundraising > > 2-4.5(a) The Co-Coordinators shall be appointed by the Co-Chairs > > 2-4.5(b) The functions shall be to draft a yearly Committee budget and > facilitate fundraising for the Committee. > > 2-4.6 Translation > > 2-4.6(a) The Co-Coordinators shall be appointed by the Co-Chairs > > 2-4.6(b) The functions shall be to arrange for translation of key documents. > > 2-4.7 Website > > 2-4.7(a) The Co-Coordinators shall be appointed by the Co-Chairs > > 2-4.7(b) The functions shall be to maintain and develop the Committee > website > > 2-4.8 Email lists > > 2-4.8(a) The Co-Coordinators shall be appointed by the Co-Chairs > > 2-4.8(b) The functions shall be to manage the Committee email list(s) > according to Article V. > > ARTICLE III INTERNATIONAL REPRESENTATION > > Section 3-1 Delegates to the Federaci?n de Partidos Verdes de las > Americas (FPVA) and the Global Green Congress (GGC) > > 3-1.1 The Committee shall nominate for approval by the National > Committee, Delegates to the FPVA and the GGC. Only Committee members may > be Delegates. Only Committee members may be Representatives. FPVA > Delegates may not also be a Representative to the GGN, but may be a > Delegate to the GGC. > > 3-1.2 The number of Delegates to each body shall be the number as > defined by the FPVA and the Global Greens respectively. > > 3-1.3 Unless otherwise not permitted by the FPVA and the Global Greens > respectively, the Committee shall also nominate one Alternate per > Delegate for approval by the National Committee. > > 3-1.4 Terms of FPVA Delegates and Alternates shall be staggered, > two-year terms, unless otherwise specified by the FPVA and Global > Greens, respectively. Delegates may serve two consecutive terms, after > they must wait two years before they can run again. If they have filled > a vacancy and served less than one year, they are eligible to serve two > consecutive terms. If they have filled a vacancy and served more than > one year, they may only serve one term before waiting two years to run > again. > > 3-1.5 Terms for GGC Delegates and Alternates shall be through the > duration of each Congress. > > 3-1.6 Nomination Process > > 3-1.6(a) The nomination period shall be for one week and begin on a > Monday morning and end on Sunday evening. Only Committee members may be > nominated. Members may nominate themselves for the position. Nominations > do not need to be seconded > > 3-1.6(b) After nominations close, there shall immediately commence a > two-week discussion period > > 3-1.6(c) Nominees may submit candidate statements to the Committee email > list. It is strongly recommended that such statements be submitted as > early as possible during the discussion period. Nominee's statements > shall include information on the nominee?s relevant experience and > express what the nomineess would hope to accomplish as Delegate or > Alternate, including specifically addressing the duties and > responsibilities of the Delegate or Alternate as defined in this Article > > 3-1.6(d) Committee members are encouraged to ask questions on the > Committee email list and candidates are encouraged to answer those > questions about what the candidates would do if elected. > > 3-1.7 Election Process > > 3-1.7(a) Elections shall be conducted on the Committee voting page. FPVA > Delegates shall be elected by Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) for GGC > Delegates by Choice Voting (STV), in both cases with None of the Above > and No Other Candidate as an option > > 3-1.7(b) Elections shall commence immediately a the close of the > discussion period and shall last for one-week. > > 3-1.8 Duties and Responsibilities > > The duties and responsibilities of the Delegates and Alternates are to: > > 3-1.8(a) Perform all duties and responsibilities as defined by FPVA and > the Global Greens, respectively > > 3-1.8(b) Promptly forward all agendas, minutes and planning and policy > documents of each body to the Committee and to the National Committee > > 3-1.8(c) Represent the positions of the GPUS > > 3-1.8(d) Represent the positions of the Committee > > 3-1.8(e) Where necessary, distinguish the positions of the GPUS and the > Committee from the personal opinions of the delegate. > > 3-1.8(f) Provide a written report to the Committee and the National > Committee explaining votes by the Delegate or Alternate at FPVA meetings > and GGC Congresses > > 3-1.9 Vacancy > > 3-1.9(a) A vacancy shall exist upon the resignation or recall of a > Delegate or Alternate, or upon the ending of the term of their Committee > membership. > > 3-1.9(b) The Co-Chair shall publish the vacancy to the Committee email > list no later than seven days after the vacancy occured, except in the > case of the ending of the term of Committee membership, where if the > Member is not seeking another term, the Co-Chairs shall declare the > vacancy at least six weeks before the ending of the term. > > 3-1.9(c) Vacancies shall cause an election for a replacement Delegate or > Alternate. Such election would fill the remainder of the term and shall > be conducted by the process described in 3-1.7. > > Section 3-2 Representatives to the Global Green Network > > 3-2.1 The Committee shall nominate Representatives to the Global Green > Network (GGN) for approval by the National Committee. Only Committee > members may be Representatives. Representatives may not also be a > Delegate to the FPVA, but may be a Delegate to the GGC. > > 3-2.2 The number of Representatives shall be the number as defined by > the Global Greens. > > 3-2.3 Terms for Representatives shall be for two years, unless otherwise > specified by the Global Greens. Representative may serve three > consecutive terms, after they must wait two years before they can run > again. If they have filled a vacancy and served less than one year, they > are eligible to serve three consecutive terms. If they have filled a > vacancy and served more than one year, they may only serve two terms > before waiting two years to run again. > > 3-2.4 Nomination Process > > 3-2.4(a) The nomination period shall be for one week and begin on a > Monday morning and end on Sunday evening. Only Committee members may be > nominated. Members may nominate themselves for the position. Nominations > do not need to be seconded. > > 3-2.4(b) After nominations close, there shall immediately follow a > two-week discussion period. > > 3-2.4(c) Nominees may submit candidate statements to the Committee email > list. It is strongly recommended that such statements be submitted as > early as possible during the discussion period. Candidate statements > shall include information on the candidate?s relevant experience and > express what the candidate would hope to accomplish as Representative. > > 3-2.4(d) Committee members are encouraged to ask questions on the > Committee email list and candidates are encouraged to answer those > questions about what the candidates would do if elected. > > 3-2.5 Election Process > > 3-2.5(a) Elections shall be conducted on the Committee voting page using > Instant Runoff Voting (IRV), with None of the Above and No Other > Candidate as an option. > > 3-2.5(b) Elections shall commence immediately at the close of the > discussion period and shall last for one-week. > > 3-2.6 Duties and Responsibilities > > The duties and responsibilities of the Representatives are to: > > 3-2.6(a) Perform all duties and responsibilities as defined by the > Global Greens > > 3-2.6(b) Notify the Committee of information on the GGN email list that > is relevant to accomplishing the duties, responsibilities, goals and > objectives of the Committee and its members as defined in 1-2 and 2-1.6. > > 3-2.7 Vacancy > > 3-2.7(a) A vacancy shall exist upon the resignation or recall of a > Delegate or Alternate, or upon the ending of the term of their Committee > membership. > > 3-2.7(a) The Co-Chair shall publish the vacancy to the Committee email > list no later than seven days after the vacancy occured, except in the > case of the ending of the term of Committee membership, where if the > Member is not seeking another term, the Co-Chairs shall declare the > vacancy at least six weeks before the ending of the term. > > 3-2.7(c) Vacancies shall cause an election for a replacement Delegate or > Alternate. Such election would fill the remainder of the term and shall > be conducted by the process described in 3-2.5. > > Section 3-3 Other International Representation > > 3-3.1 The Committee may nominate representatives to other international > meetings in which the GPUS will play a decision-making role for approval > by the National Committee. Any member of a state party may be such a > representative. > > 3-3.2 Duties and Responsibilities > > 3-3.2(a) Promptly forwarding all agendas and minutes of the body or > meeting to the Committee and to the National Committee > > 3-3.2(b) Representing the positions of the GPUS > > 3-3.2(c) Representing the positions of the Committee > > 3-3.2(d) Where necessary, distinguishing between the personal opinions > of the representative and the position of the GPUS and/or the Committee. > > 3-3.2(e) Provide a written report to the Committee and the National > Committee explaining votes by the Delegate or Alternate > > 3-3.3 The Co-Chairs may appoint GPUS representatives to speak on behalf > of the GPUS at international rallies, marches, forums and other such > events where a GPUS speaker may be featured. > > 3-3.4 The Co-Chairs may appoint GPUS observers to international meetings > or events in a non-decision-making capacity. > > ARTICLE IV PROPOSALS > > Section 4-1 Applicability of this Article > > 4-1.1 This Article and the accompanying steps shall apply to > resolutions, declarations, and foreign policy positions being prepared > for National Committee approval. > > 4-1.2 Other procedures may apply to nominations and appointments, > budgetary decisions, and internal process matters. > > Section 4-2 Submitting Proposals > > 4-2.1 Any member may bring a proposal forward to the Committee at any > time. Any proposal made and seconded by at least two other Committee > members, representing at least two states or caucuses among the three > co-sponsors, shall be considered forwarded to the Co-Chairs for > consideration under 4-2.6. > > 4-2.2 The format for submitting proposals shall follow that of the > format for proposals submitted to the National Committee and shall > include title, sponsor, background, proposal, resources and attachments. > > 4-3.1 Assessing Proposals > > The Co-chairs shall assess proposals for: > > 4-3.1(a) Priority > > 4-3.1(b) Compliance with proposal format, clarity of what is being > proposed and/or adequacy of background and supporting materials > > 4-3.1(c) Appropriateness for Committee consideration under these RP&Ps. > > 4-4.1 Forwarding Proposals for Discussion/Voting > > 4-4.1(a) If a proposal has met the conditions in 4-2.6 and has been > received by the Co-Chairs no later than midnight Pacific Time on the > Tuesday before the Monday of the regular discussion period, the > Co-Chairs shall place the proposal into the voting queue on that Monday, > unless otherwise agreed to by the sponsors under 4-2.7(c). > > 4-4.1(b) If a proposal has met the conditions in 4-2.6, but was received > by the Co-Chairs after midnight Pacific Time on the Tuesday before the > Monday of the regular discussion period, the Co-Chairs may either place > the proposal into the discussion/voting queue on that Monday or place > the proposal into the voting queue the following Monday. > > 4-4.1(c) If a proposal has met the conditions in 4-2.6, but if there are > either other proposals in the discussion/voting period and/or the > Co-Chairs otherwise feel that alternative timing would benefit the > Committee, the Co-Chairs may consult with the sponsors about scheduling > the proposal at a later date. If the sponsors agree, the Co-Chairs shall > schedule the proposal at the agreed upon date. If the sponsors do not > agree, the proposal shall be scheduled as per 4-2.7(a) or 4-2.7(b), as > applicable. > > 4-4.1(d) If a proposal has met the conditions in 4-2.6, but if in > keeping with 4-2.4, the Co-Chairs conclude that a discussion period of > different length than the regular length would benefit the Committee, > the Co-Chairs may consult with the sponsors about scheduling the > proposal with a different length. If the sponsors agree, the Co-Chairs > shall schedule the proposal with the agreed upon length of discussion > period. > > 4-5.1 Resubmitting Proposals to the Co-Chairs > > 4-5.1(a) If the Co-Chairs have concluded that a proposal has not met the > conditions in 4-3.1, they shall request the sponsors to provide > additional information as regards 4-3.1. In so doing, the Co-Chairs must > make clear what specific information is needed and/or how the proposal > can be brought into compliance with the proposal format and/or how the > proposal could be modified to be appropriate for consideration under > these RP&Ps. > > 4-6.1 Floor Manager > > 4-6.1(a) For proposals advancing under 4-4.1, the co-chairs shall > appoint a committee member to serve as Floor Manager for the proposal. > > 4-6.1(b) The Floor Manager?s primary responsibility is to shepherd the > proposal through the consensus-seeking decision making process > > 4-6.1(c) The Floor Manager introduces the proposal to members for > consideration, specifying the amount of time for discussion, the listing > of and responding to concerns, proposing and accepting amendments and > going to a vote, as well as the number of Members needed to vote for > quorum and the approval threshold for the proposal. > > 4-6.1(d) Committee members shall then confer with state party and caucus > members regarding the proposal and develop feedback to be shared with > the Committee > > 4-6.1(d) When the discussion period expires and before the voting period > begins, the Floor Manager shall present the proposal to the Committee > again, including with any revisions if amended. > > Section 4-7 Discussion and Voting Period > > 4-7.1 The regular discussion period for all proposals shall begin on a > Monday and end on a Sunday and last for three weeks. The regular voting > period for all proposals shall commence immediately after the close of > the discussion period and last for one week. > > 4-7.2 [This sub-paragraph reserved for defining expedited/extended > discussion/voting periods] > > Section 4-8 Amending Committee Proposals before the National Committee > > 4-8.1 When any proposal endorsed by the Committee is under consideration > by the National Committee, a motion, supported by a second, to amend the > Committee's previous position and submit a substitute for the National > Committee shall be in order when the explicit form of such amendment had > been published to the listserv of the Committee. > > 4-8.2 Discussion on any such motion shall be in order for no fewer than > three days, and the question shall be put by either or both Co-Chairs in > consultation with, but requiring no further motion from the author of > the proposed amendment. Any such amendment may be scheduled for a vote > to be opened either for two or five days, as time permits for its > consideration without causing delays by the National Committee in its > resolution of the underlying question. > > Section 4-9 Quorum and Approval Threshold > > 4-9.1 Quorum shall be reached when at least a majority of all Members > vote 'yes', 'no' or 'abstain' and a Member casts a vote from at least a > majority of the states and caucuses with Members on the Committee. > > 4-9.2 A proposal shall be considered approved when at least 2/3 of all > those voting 'yes' or 'no' vote 'yes'. > > Section 4-10 Reporting Committee Decisions > > 4-10.1 All committee decisions undertaken under this Article shall be > reported by the Co-Chairs to the Steering Committee and the National > Committee, whether approved or not approved by the Committee, and shall > include the number of votes for, against and abstentions and a link to > the results on the Committee voting page. > > ARTICLE V Committee Email List > > Section 5-1 Participation > > 5-1.1 The Committee email list shall include all Committee members, > advisers and observers. When a new member joins the Committee and/or a > new adviser or observer is selected, they shall be added to the > Committee email list. When the term ends of a member, adviser or > observer, they shall be removed from the committee email list. > > 5-1.2 The Committee email list exists for the purpose of furthering the > mission and the duties and responsibilities of the Committee and > postings shall be specific to that purpose. > > 5-1.3 Committee members are encouraged to conduct Committee business on > the email list in a respectful manner in keeping with the Ten Key Values > and to foster the practice of diplomatic discourse. Members are > encouraged to state their views, inform one another and discuss issues > in depth in an atmosphere of trust and mutual respect. > > 5-1.4 Committee members shall refrain from: > > 5-1.4(a) Ad hominem attacks and repeated off topic postings > > 5-1.4(b) Misrepresentation of the Committee's or a Member's work > > 5-1.4(c) Personal attacks and/or verbal threats > > 5-1.4(d) Prejudicial, biased, or offensive language with respect to > race, gender, ethnicity, physical ability, spirituality, sexuality, or age > > 5-1.4(e) Harassment > > 5-1.4(f) Other unethical or illegal activities related to committee > business or function. > > Section 5-2 Addressing Disruptive and/or Unethical Behavior > > 5-2.1 Individuals that violate 5-1.4 and/or disrupt the Committee work > on the email list may otherwise violates list standards will receive a > private warning from the listserve moderator or the Co-Chairs. All > warnings shall list specifically what list standard under 5-1.4 was > violated and how it was violated. Disagreement between members is an > expected part of Committee discourse, and is not to be considered a > disruption or impediment. > > 5-2.2 If the initial, private warning is not heeded, and the individual > continues to violate list standards, actions will be taken in this order: > > 5-2.2(a) The member will receive a public (onlist) warning from a > Co-Chair or the listserve moderator. If the member continues to post > messages which violate listserve guidelines > > 5-2.2(b) A second public (onlist) warning will be posted, by the > listserve moderator or a Co-Chair, indicating that should there be a > third infraction, the member will face immediate suspension > > 5-2.2(c) Upon a third infraction, the listserve moderator shall suspend > the offending member by unsubscribing that member from the listserve, > notifying the Co-Chairs immediately of the suspension. > > 5-2.3 A Co-Chair will within 24 hours report the suspension to the > Committee, giving the membership an opportunity to reverse the > suspension, approve conditions of reinstatement, or make the suspension > permanent. > > 5-2.4 Prior to conclusion of the Committee's discussion, the suspended > member will be given an opportunity to submit a response to the > suspension report, via a Co-Chair or the listserve moderator, but during > the period of suspension will not be entitled to post any messages to > the list. Other members shall also not circumvent the suspension by > submitting messages from member under suspension. > > 5-2.5 The suspension report will clearly state the reasons for > suspension and recommend appropriate options; the committee's subsequent > discussion and consensus-seeking will proceed as with other committee > actions. If the committee reaches consensus on a course of action, then > the Committee proceeds to 5-2.6. If the committee fails to reach > consensus, a vote will be taken. A two-thirds vote (of all those voting, > with at least 50% of the committee members casting votes) in favor of a > course of action will initiate 5-2.6. Voting will occur on the Committee > voting page. > > 5-2.6 The member will be notified within 24 hours of the committee's > action. Should the suspension be overturned, the member shall > immediately be reinstated; should the suspension be made permanent, the > suspended member's state party will be notified of this suspension, and > the reasons for it, with a copy of these RP&Ps. Should the committee > decide to reinstate the member's listserve privileges, but with > conditions, these shall ordinarily include the member's acknowledgment > that he/she has been impeding the listserve work, and agrees to curtail > the disruptive behavior, as prerequisites for reinstatement. > > 5-2.7 If the offending behavior is resumed, or a different disrupting > behavior is initiated by the same member, the member will be suspended > from the email list for six months, and can apply for reinstatement > after six months. The member's state will again be notified. The > re-application shall include all verification requirements. > > _______________________________________________ > usgp-int mailing list > usgp-int at gp-us.org > http://forum.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/usgp-int -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amyvasnunes at hotmail.com Tue Mar 24 21:50:03 2009 From: amyvasnunes at hotmail.com (Amy Vas Nunes) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 21:50:03 -0400 Subject: {news} FW: USGP-INT Fwd: [usgp-nc] Steering Committee Statement on committees to the National Committee In-Reply-To: <128795d10903241035s5fa4a76by3d070b0b3c42dfc2@mail.gmail.com> References: <20090324093314.bh5k41jf6scg008w@webmail.itol.com> <128795d10903241035s5fa4a76by3d070b0b3c42dfc2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: I would like to know how Cliff Thorton voted and what his opinion is of this? Amy IC rep > Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 12:35:58 -0500 > From: estebandido at gmail.com > To: usgp-int at gp-us.org > Subject: USGP-INT Fwd: [usgp-nc] Steering Committee Statement on committees to the National Committee > > With this, I consider the proposal to the BRPP null, void, and all > around, a non-starter. > > That brings us full circle, and the IC can now begin discussing its > own P&Ps. Notwithstanding the circumstances of its origin, I suggest > we take what Mike has written as a starting point. He's identified a > number of weaknesses in the current P&Ps. I haven't had time to read > his draft closely, but I plan to find time to do so later today, and I > hope everyone else will, too. > > Steve > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: > Date: Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 9:33 AM > Subject: [usgp-nc] Steering Committee Statement on committees to the > National Committee > To: natlcomvotes at green.gpus.org > > > > > Dear National Committee, > > The Steering Committee voted to affirm this statement on our call > Sunday night. > > Jill Bussiere, co-chair, GPUS > > Article III of the GPUS Bylaws reads, in part, that "All Committees > shall develop written rules, policies and procedure (RP&P) documents > which must be approved by the National Committee." Consistent with > the Key Value of Decentralization, this bylaw speaks to the idea that > committees will develop their own internal processes. > > Separately in Article III, "The Steering Committee shall be > responsible for oversight for all committees and ensure that the NC is > kept informed about the work of the committees." Similarly, Chapter > 1, Section 6 of GPUS Rules empowers the Steering Committee to "make > task assignments to committees." Read in conjunction with the > language on committee P&P documents, the SC powers and > responsibilities should be taken to mean that the Steering Committee > is expected to coordinate the work of the various committees, but that > those committees generally retain prerogatives of internal > self-governance. If a committee becomes non-functional for whatever > reason, it follows from the above language that the Steering Committee > should take the lead in making such a committee functional. > > Article III also directs that the various committees shall > "participate in a biannual review of committee RP&Ps conducted by the > BRPP [Bylaws, Rules, Policies & Procedures Committee], which shall > report to the NC on each committee's procedures." BRPP's own P&P > document, in turn, describes the committee's mission as including > "periodic review of the GPUS bylaws, rules, policies and procedures; > assist[ing] in the development and documentation of the structure and > functioning of all GPUS committees...; [and] research, analysis, > writing and proposing of bylaws, rules, policies and procedures at the > request of the SC, CC [NC], and committees of the GPUS." > > As part of its role in overseeing and tasking committees, the Steering > Committee should ensure that a committee is not conducting business > which is outside the scope of its charge. The Ballot Access Committee > should not be writing proposals on water policy, for example. > > When there is a situation where there is concern about the internal > functioning of a particular committee, and it does not seem that that > concern can be resolved within the committee itself, and if the > services of the Dispute Resolution Committee are deemed not > appropriate for handling the concern, the most prudent course of > action is to bring the matter up with the Steering Committee, as it is > charged with oversight and tasking of committees. If in the context > of its regular "periodic review" BRPP finds that particular committee > P&Ps are lacking for any reason, then the appropriate course of action > is to present such findings to the Steering Committee (and/or the > National Committee) and potentially request authorization to "write > and propose bylaws, rules, policies and procedures at the request of > the SC [or NC]." But BRPP is not empowered, either under GPUS Bylaws, > or under its own approved P&Ps, to unilaterally work on P&Ps for > another committee, when there has been no request from that committee, > from the Steering Committee, or from the National Committee. > > As such, it is inappropriate for BRPP to currently be working on a > proposed set of P&Ps for the International Committee, since there has > been no such request to do so from the International Committee, from > the Steering Committee, or from the National Committee. It should be > stressed that the Steering Committee has already instructed the > International Committee to submit proposed new P&Ps to the National > Committee in the near future. It should further be stressed that the > Steering Committee has instructed BRPP to work on its own P&Ps before > proceeding with any other work because of numerous concerns which have > been raised with the disposition of BRPP P&Ps. > > The Steering Committee expects that both the International Committee > and BRPP will submit proposals for their respective P&Ps within the > next two months, and is hopeful that in so doing many of the concerns > which have been raised regarding each committee will be resolved in > short order. > > _______________________________________________ > Natlcomvotes mailing list > To send a message to the list, write to: > Natlcomvotes at green.gpus.org > To unsubscribe or change your list options, go to: > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/natlcomvotes > > If your state delegation changes, please see: > http://gp.org/committees/nc/documents/delegate_change.html > > To report violations of listserv protocol, write to > forummanagers at lists.gp-us.org > > For other information about the Coordinating Committee, see: > http://gp.org/committees/nc/ > > > > -- > Steve Herrick > > Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. > - Hobbes the tiger > _______________________________________________ > usgp-int mailing list > usgp-int at gp-us.org > http://forum.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/usgp-int -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amyvasnunes at hotmail.com Fri Mar 27 21:23:13 2009 From: amyvasnunes at hotmail.com (Amy Vas Nunes) Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 21:23:13 -0400 Subject: {news} FW: USGP-INT Reminder: Discussion period ENDS tonight on IC Proposal: Draft Statement on Gaza/I-P Conflict In-Reply-To: <20090327182340.bdz1n7yj967ko04w@webmail.itol.com> References: <59e38a0d0903271553u754212d7o34ea69b2bb82e938@mail.gmail.com> <20090327182340.bdz1n7yj967ko04w@webmail.itol.com> Message-ID: Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 18:23:40 -0500 From: jdt at itol.com To: usgp-int at gp-us.org Subject: Re: USGP-INT Reminder: Discussion period ENDS tonight on IC Proposal: Draft Statement on Gaza/I-P Conflict Hi Michael, An SC subcommittee and staff are working on just such a uniform format and procedure for position papers. We have had several meetings upon it already. We even used statements that have come out of the IC to help us figure stuff out, but we have a ways to go yet. On our last call we decided that we need a proposal to put before the NC asking delegates what they think the threshold should be, and giving them several choices. We haven't written the proposal yet - it is just in discussion phase, but we do want the decision to be that of the NC for threshold - there are varying opinions about what it should be, and it should bring forth a great discussion. There were two proposals that Mike Feinstein wanted to go before the NC about the IC - they were a sort of coordinated effort. Mike did write up some P&P's, and the put a proposal before BRPP that they vote to put them before the NC, after holding a hearing to which we were all invited, but just 2 of us participated - Mike and Amy Van Nunes. I don't know what the vote of the BRPP committee was - whether they voted to put it before the NC or not, or whether the vote was scheduled to happen after the SC statement, and then was dropped. The SC has made a statement that BRPP cannot write P&P's "for" a committee, so we are all good with that. The California proposal was written by Mike Feinstein, and put before CA to vote upon and CA passed it. An individual cannot submit a proposal before the NC - he/she must get a sponsor for it. It will come up for discussion this next Monday. I will pass it on when it is time for it to go to the NC for discussion. I hope that all members of the IC who are on the national committee will participate in that discussion, as it should be quite lively! We will want more than one view represented in that discussion, and your diverse views will be welcomed. I hear you about the emails! Jill Bussiere, co-chair, GPUS Quoting Michael Canney : > *I support the draft as a policy statement to be circulated by the IC. * > > I have some concerns about the process issues that have been raised, that > are (or should be) separate from any consideration of the content of this > particular statement. > > One is the question of how any document developed by the IC or any other > committee is vetted for release as a GPUS position paper. This is a valid > concern that must be addressed, and a policy must be clearly defined that > applies to ALL position papers developed by ALL committees. > > The other concern is the proposal to treat the IC as a "rogue committee" and > render it inactive until another committee writes new P&P's for the IC and > has them approved by the GNC. I view this as a hostile and unnecessary > proposal that should be soundly defeated and replaced with an offer by the > BRPP to assist the IC in developing the committee's new P&P's in a friendly > and cooperative manner. > > I have a question about the proposal to impose P&P's on the IC: Was it > approved by the California delegation and submitted as a proposal by the > state party, or was it submitted by an individual delegate? I'm sorry for > asking what might me a dumb question, but I have a hard time keeping up with > all the emails. > > Michael Canney / FL > > > 2009/3/27 Justine McCabe > >> Dear all, >> >> A reminder: Our one-week discussion period on the Draft Statement on >> Gaza/Israeli-Palestinian conflict ends today, Friday, March 27 at 10 pm >> PDT. The proposal is pasted below. >> >> Note Well: The proposal under consideration does NOT include the >> Background section which is only there as reference for the statement's >> positions. >> >> Again, such proposals are a big part of the work of our committee. >> >> So please comment--affirmations, opposition, friendly amendments, etc. In >> accordance with our bylaws (pasted here) at the end of this discussion >> period (tomorrow) we will call for consensus, and move to a majority vote if >> necessary: >> >> ?7. CONSENSUS. Ideally, at the conclusion of the >> discussion period we will ask for, and usually >> achieve, consensus. This call for consensus gives >> members a "final" opportunity to express >> concerns, which we handle in a flexible way, >> depending on circumstances. We (the Co-Chairs) >> may consult privately with the proponents, or >> those with concerns, suggesting ways to resolve >> the impasse; the proponents may suggest changes >> to the proposal to meet concerns; or (and this is >> the ideal case) those with concerns may suggest >> specific wording changes which preserve the >> spirit of the original while correcting any >> deficiencies they perceive. >> >> 8. VOTING. If it turns out that any member simply >> can't support the wording which emerges from the >> discussion and early-consensus period, and >> expresses a "blocking concern," the procedures of >> the IC call for moving immediately to a majority >> vote. Not every Green party uses this kind of >> impasse-breaking vote, but we have found over the >> years that it works best for us, and this is our >> Committee's official procedure. After the >> extended discussion which precedes any vote, and >> the typical revisions each proposal experiences, >> we have found that a strong majority for or >> against the proposal has by this point been >> crafted; the impasse-breaking vote allows us to >> demonstrate existing support, and take action, >> without returning again and again to brokering >> and bartering. It allows us to move on, if and >> when a proposal has achieved majority support.? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Justine >> ======================================================= >> PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict for endorsement >> by International Green Parties >> >> PRESENTER: International Committee, GPUS >> >> CONTACT: Justine McCabe justinemccabe at earthink.net >> >> SUBJECT: DRAFT Green Party Statement on Gaza Crisis and the >> Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Call for Boycott, Divestment Sanctions >> Against Israel >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: ATT00000 URL: From justinemccabe at earthlink.net Sun Mar 29 14:34:29 2009 From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe) Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2009 14:34:29 -0400 Subject: {news} Fw: USGP-INT From Cynthia McKinney: In London for a Forum on Palestine Message-ID: <15DE30594CEA431FBECC1A9DE2188CA4@JUSTINE> FYI, Justine ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott McLarty" To: ; ; Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2009 2:26 PM Subject: USGP-INT From Cynthia McKinney: In London for a Forum on Palestine > >>From Cynthia McKinney, March 28, 2009.... > > Hello! I'm currently in London, invited by the Kuala Lumpur Foundation to > Criminalise War, to participate in a Forum for Palestine sponsored by the > Malaysian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The event is taking place at the > Marriott Grosvenor Hotel on March 31, 2009. This one-day Forum will > feature the Malaysian Foreign Minister Dato Serri Rais Yatim giving the > opening address and former Malaysian Prime Minister Tun Mahathir > presenting the keynote address. I will speak for about 20 minutes on the > Genocide in Palestine and, of course, what happened to me in international > waters while on a boat carrying medical supplies, attempting to reach the > beseiged people of Gaza. > > Of course, it is right here in London that George Galloway's triumph must > be marked of reaching Gaza by land in a convoy of vehicles. Even in > triumph, M.P. Galloway acknowledged that they still had to ask Israel's > permission for some of the vehicles to enter Gaza. Nonetheless, what > Galloway did was absolutely phenomenal and those of us who tried to reach > Gaza by sea, through the territorial waters of the Gaza remained committed > to that goal. However, we must deal with the issue of impunity. Right > now, we see that justice is blind--meaning that those most in need of > justice are the ones to whom the system of justice constructed in our > country and internationally, is blind. We must change that. > > For those of you who are, or who have friends who are in London, please > pass this message along. It would be great if we could have a > better-than-expected turnout of our Power to the People friends who are > "across the pond." > > I am in the process of putting a message together on the current economic > morass into which Obama's economic team, following Bush's, is leading us. > In short, what Washington, D.C. is doing is devoid of all sense, unless > the objective is to aid and abet those who want to rob the taxpayer. > During our Power to the People campaign, we put forward some principles > that would ensure that the economy of the United States was one that > worked for the people. In the time since then, I've met some wonderful > "people's economists" who point the way with practical policy > recommendations that are being ignored. Heck, even David Walker, the US > former Comptroller, is still being ignored. It's not rocket > science--although those in charge would want you to believe it is. And > the it's not being done because those in charge don't want us to be the > arbiters of our economic destiny. More on that later. In the meantime, > enjoy this Bendib cartoon: > (http://www.bendib.com/newones/2009/march/small/3-14-Madoff-in-Jail.jpg) > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > usgp-int mailing list > usgp-int at gp-us.org > http://forum.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/usgp-int > > > -- > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. > Checked by AVG. > Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.13 - Release Date: 3/13/2009 > 12:00 AM > > From roseberry3 at cox.net Mon Mar 30 00:05:08 2009 From: roseberry3 at cox.net (B Barry) Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 00:05:08 -0400 Subject: {news} FYI: candidates need to submit their names for CTGP officers and GPUS representatives by 9PM 3-31-09 to CTGP secreatary Message-ID: <20090330040450.OOSF21373.eastrmmtao103.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net> Any currently registered CT voters who are interested in being candidates for any of the below offices need to present their interest to this secretary by 9PM 3-31-09 to be included in the ballot for our CTGP 4-25-09 Annual Convention, at the Greater New Haven Labor Council Building, 267 Chapel Street, New Haven. Time: noon to 4pm. (Social time and sign-in begins at 11AM.) Please note the bolded information: it was corrected to indicate our ability to send five (5) GPUS reps to represent CT to the GPUS. Barbara Barry, secretary of CTGP HYPERLINK "mailto:roseberry3 at cox.net"roseberry3 at cox.net land: 860-956-8190 _____ From: B Barry [mailto:roseberry3 at cox.net] Sent: Saturday, March 21, 2009 1:16 AM To: ctgp-news at ml.greens.org Cc: roseberry3 at cox.net; CTGP-internal-elections at yahoogroups.com Subject: Reminder: candidates need to submit their names for CTGP officers and GPUS representatives by 9PM 3-31-09 to CTGP secreatary Dear All, This is a reminder that any registered Green Party voters may submit their names CTGP officers and GPUS representatives by 9PM 3-31-09 to this CTGP secretary in order to be accepted as candidates. Candidates also need to summit a 100 word or less statement of why they want to be considered by voters. (This deadline is needed due to need for this information to sent to the printer the following morning.) NOTE: The annual CTGP Convention will (likely) be on Saturday, 4-25-09, from noon to 4pm at the New Haven Labor Union Hall. The following vacancies will need to be filled for a one-year duration: For CTGP officers: a) Three (3) co-chairpersons for CTGP: one needs to be female; b) One for secretary; c) One for treasurer. GPUS (Green Party of United States): a) Five (5) representatives from CTGP to represent the state party as a whole to the GPUS and to report to the CTGP SCC in a timely fashion; b) Representatives to the following GPUS Permanent Committees: * Accreditation Committee (AC) * Annual National Meeting Committee (ANMC) regarding the GPUS annual meeting 6-25-09 through 6-28-09 meeting in Durham, NC * Ballot Access Committee (BA); * Bylaws, Rules, Policies, Procedures Committee (BRPP); * Coordination Campaign Committee (CCC); * Credentials Committee (CC); * Dispute Resolution Committee (DRC); * Diversity Committee (DC); * Eco committee (EC); * Finance Committee (FC); * Fundraising (FRC); * Green Party internet news (formerly a newspaper); * International Committee (IC); * Media Committee (MC); * Merchandizing Committee (MERCH); * Outreach Committee (OC); * Peace Committee (GPAX); * Platform Committee (PC); * Presidential Campaign Support Committee (PCSC); * Steering Committee (SC). Additional GPUS information may also be obtained via HYPERLINK "http://www.gpus.org/"www.GPUS.org No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.22/2015 - Release Date: 3/20/2009 7:01 PM No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.22/2015 - Release Date: 3/20/2009 7:01 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.31/2029 - Release Date: 3/29/2009 4:56 PM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From roseberry3 at cox.net Mon Mar 30 23:48:32 2009 From: roseberry3 at cox.net (B Barry) Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 23:48:32 -0400 Subject: {news} reaffirm the proposed agenda for the 7PM 3-31-09 SCC CTGP meeting at Portland Senior Center Message-ID: <20090331034813.CUGS21373.eastrmmtao103.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net> Proposed agenda for the 7PM 3-31-09 SCC CTGP meeting at Portland Senior Center Location: Portland Senior Center, 7 Waverly Avenue, Portland, CT 06480 Facilitator: To Be Determined A. Preliminaries: 1. (1 minute): Introductions of voting/non-voting attendees; chapters; if quorum was met; timekeeper; ground rules. 2. (2-4 minutes): Approval of tonight?s proposed agenda, any deletions or additions. 3. (2-4 minutes): Review and approval of minutes of 12-30-08 and 2-24-09 SCC meetings. 4. (2 minutes): Review and acceptance of the minutes of the 3-18-09 EC meeting. 5. (2-4 minutes): Treasurer?s report from treasurer: Christopher Reilly. B. Any proposals/referendums by chapters, committee. C. Reports: 1. (10-15 minutes): GPUS reports from: a) Cliff Thornton, National Co-chairperson of the GPUS; b) CTGP representatives: Tim McKee and Charlie Pillsbury; c) National Committee Members: Steve Fournier, Richard Duffee and S. Michael DeRosa. 2. (20 minutes): Report about the 3-09 court hearing about our lawsuit against the State of CT regarding the 2005 State of CT Campaign Finance Reform Laws. 3. (15-20 minutes): a) Internal Election Committee: discussion of date, site, agenda and any additional volunteers for the 4-25-09 CTGP Annual Convention. b) CTGP registered voters may submit their names to run for the indicated offices. A 100-word statement about why they are running for the positions needs to be provided to the secretary, Barbara Barry, (HYPERLINK "mailto:roseberry3 at cox.net"roseberry3 at cox.net) by 9PM 3-31-09 to be considered for the ballot for the 4-25-09 annual convention. c) Convention Committee: monitors for attendees/vote count; literature, merchandise, volunteers; food for fundraising? 4. (5 minutes): CT. Secretary of State list of registered Green Party members in CT has been received. 5. (5 minutes): CTGP literature. 6. (5-10 minutes): CTGP potential goals for 2009: a) legislative goals for petitioning; b) electric rates; c) universal health care. 7. (2-5 minutes, each): Chapter reports. 8. (2-5 minutes): any future CTGP Road Shows? 9. Date and place of the next SCC meeting: to be determined. Date, place and time of next EC meeting: to be determined. 10. Any additions Green Party Key Values: non-violence, respect for diversity, grassroots democracy, social justice and equal opportunity, ecological wisdom, decentralization, community-based economics and economic justice, future focus and sustainability, personal and global responsibility, feminism and gender No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.33/2031 - Release Date: 3/30/2009 5:56 PM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From justinemccabe at earthlink.net Tue Mar 31 07:59:54 2009 From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 07:59:54 -0400 Subject: {news} Fw: USGP-INT Voting period begins on IC Proposal: Draft Statement onIsraeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Call for BDS endorsement byInternational Green Parties Message-ID: <498C87C012DB49628438B378B42C3201@JUSTINE> FYI, This proposal is now being voted on in the International Committee Justine Co-Chair, IC ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Herrick" To: "USGP International Committee" Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 1:08 AM Subject: USGP-INT Voting period begins on IC Proposal: Draft Statement onIsraeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Call for BDS endorsement byInternational Green Parties Dear IC, We have not been able to reach consensus on this proposal. According to our bylaws, we now move to a vote by the full committee with passage requiring a majority vote. The language of the statement itself has received support by most committee members, both in the earlier straw vote and in the discussion period that just ended. However, several IC delegates wish to include a further step in which the proposal is sent to the GPUS NC for an additional vote after IC approval. A majority of delegates have indicated the belief that the proposal complies with a directive to the IC by GPUS NC in Proposal 190. Our GPUS Steering Committee (SC) liaison, Jill Bussiere has suggested the statement only needs to be reviewed by the SC. Therefore, if the IC passes this proposal, it will go to the Steering Committee (SC) for review before being implemented. The SC will have the option of sending it to the NC. The vote will take place on our list beginning today, Tuesday, March 31, 2009, ending Monday, April 6, 2009 at 10 PDT. We look forward to everyone's participation. Peace, Justine McCabe and Steve Herrick Co-chairs, International Committee, GPUS ----------------------------------------------------- PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Call for BDS endorsement by International Green Parties PRESENTER: International Committee, GPUS CONTACT: Justine McCabe justinemccabe at earthink.net SUBJECT: DRAFT Green Party Statement on Gaza Crisis and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Call for Boycott, Divestment Sanctions Against Israel BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Implementation of the GPUS International Committee?s mission as directed by GPUS Prop 190 of November 21, 2005, ?The GPUS National Committee directs the International Committee to work with our sister Green parties around the world in implementing an international boycott.? http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2005_11_28.shtml In keeping with Prop 190, and in response to the three-week Israeli assault on Gaza beginning in December 2008, the International Committee considered a draft statement to be circulated among international Green Parties urging them to join our party in endorsing the Boycott, Divestment Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel. That statement was discussed at length among IC members and a straw poll revealed majority support for it. This proposal is an opportunity for the IC to formally endorse the statement with the intention of circulating it among international Green Parties for endorsement of the BDS campaign as directed by GPUS Prop 190. If this proposal passes, it would go to the GPUS Steering Committee (SC) for review. FULL PROPOSAL: Draft statement is below TIME LINE: Voting: beginning Monday, March 30, 2009 ending Sunday, April 5, 2009 at 10 pm PDT RESOURCES: Lobbying efforts by members of GPUS International Committee REFERENCES: http://www.gp.org/platform/2004/democracy.html#310677 ; http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2005_11_28.shtml; http://www.gp.org/committees/intl/response_on_palestine.html ==================================================================== DRAFT Green Party Statement On Gaza Crisis and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Call for Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions Against Israel Although Green Parties represent different countries and regions of the world, we share common principles essential to understanding and resolving this conflict. Among these principles are non-violence, including consistent enforcement of international law; ecological wisdom and sustainability, including reducing the negative impact of humankind on the natural environment; and social justice, thereby rejecting discrimination based on gender, class or ethnicity. These principles guide our response to the recent crisis in Gaza that began on December 27, 2008 in which we condemn the killing of civilians, condemn the excessive and disproportionate force used by Israel, the Occupying Power in Gaza, call for a full and continuing ceasefire between Israel and the Hamas government in Gaza, and a complete withdrawal of all Israeli forces with the opening of all border crossings in Gaza As of January 18, the Gaza crisis resulted in displacement of thousands of Palestine, the injury of more than 5,300, and the killing of over 1,300, mostly civilians. It has also caused the destruction of Gaza?s infrastructure, including demolition of hundreds of homes and attacks on UN schools and on the UNRWA warehouse, which is the source of basic necessities, such as food, fuel and medicines. According to a 1/15/09 UN press release: ?One in every 250 people in Gaza is either now dead or significantly injured . . . This number is comparable to 33,000 people in New York City or 1.2 million people in the United States.? http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/47d4e277b48d9d3685256ddc00612265/b974aca8e8fe201d85257540004ffedc!OpenDocument Contrast this with the Hamas rocket attacks, which during the same period killed 3 Israelis civilians and 10 Israeli soldiers. http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1232171510978&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout Furthermore, we are greatly distressed by the continuing decoupling of these recent hostilities from their historic context, which encourages, inter alia, the following obstacles to peace: ? Demonization of Palestinians as inherently anti-Semitic, hateful terrorists; ? Delegitimization of lawful resistance by Palestinians to Israeli violations of their human and legal rights; ? Propounding the myth of balance between the two peoples despite the patently disproportionate military and political power between them: an occupying power, Israel ? nuclear-armed with the fourth largest military in the world, backed by a superpower ? and Palestinians, an effectively disarmed, impoverished and occupied people; ? Jettisoning of international law in favor of bilateral negotiations between two actors of such grossly unequal power, a course begun with the Madrid /Oslo process; ? Distortions of human security needs of Israelis in favor of Israeli state security and regional domination; ? Conflation of criticism of Israeli policies with anti-Semitism, which promotes regressive elements on both sides for political gain, trivializes the historic prejudice against Jews, and inhibits the expression of sympathy Palestinians do have for Jewish suffering, especially the Nazi holocaust. As a consequence we call for a redirection of international attention to the root causes of past and ongoing hostilities between Israelis and Palestinians, i.e., Palestinian dispossession and ethnic cleansing by Israel since 1948, and the establishment of an apartheid-like system in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) that discriminates against non-Jews.* THEREFORE: Recalling the historic examples of apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany that a just, enduring peace, and reconciliation between Palestinians and Israelis depend on acknowledgement of wrongdoing and restitution and; Recalling that Europeans, not Palestinians, were responsible for the Nazi holocaust; we believe that individual European Green Parties, especially those with elected representatives in their governments, and in the EU parliament in their capacity to influence the European Union?s relation to Israel, have a special duty to ensure that Palestinians no longer bear the blame for historic European transgressions against Jews; and Recalling that the Green Party of the United States has a particular obligation in relation to this conflict as the US government is Israel?s closest ally: ? That Israel receives more than $5 billion annually in military and financial aid; that as current hostilities in Gaza illustrate, Israel?s use of this military aid often violates American laws in that the Arms Export Control Act stipulates that US-supplied weapons be used only for ?legitimate self-defense? and that the US Foreign Assistance Act prohibits military assistance to any country ?which engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights? and that the Proxmire Amendment bans military assistance to any government that refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to allow inspection of its nuclear facilities, as Israel refuses to do; ? That the United States government, including both its major parties, has not been an impartial peace broker in this conflict but continues to provide political cover and protection to Israel internationally, particularly at the United Nations, where it has vetoed scores of Security Council Resolutions opposing Israel?s violations of Palestinian human rights and international law, thereby undermining the central purpose of the UN Charter to maintain international peace and security; ? That US support for Israeli violations against the Palestinian people is a main source of antipathy to the US and the West among the world?s formerly colonized peoples who identify with Palestinians; that this US support not only decreases US/Western national security, but also contributes to Middle East and international instability; and http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=41982 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/world/14clash.html http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/65b122b6-e8c0-11dd-a4d0-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1 Recognizing that this conflict continues to have a devastating ecological impact on Israel/Palestine, especially water sources, thereby decreasing security for the whole region; and Recognizing that despite 61 years of continuous diplomatic attempts by the international community, it has failed to bring about Israel?s compliance with international law or respect for basic Palestinian human rights; and Recognizing that, despite abundant condemnation of Israel?s policies by the UN, International Court of Justice, and all relevant international conventions, the international community of nations has failed to stop violations by Israel of Palestinian human rights in Israel and the OPT, while Israeli crimes continue with impunity, as the recent assault on Gaza illustrates; and Recalling that ending institutionalized racism (apartheid) in South Africa demanded an unusual, cooperative action by the entire international community in the form of a boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaign against apartheid South Africa, and that BDS can become the most effective nonviolent means for achieving justice and genuine peace between Palestinians and Israelis, and in the region, through concerted international pressure as applied to apartheid South Africa; and Recognizing that Palestinian resistance to ongoing dispossession has mainly been nonviolent, including its most basic form ? remaining in their homes, on their land; and that while Palestinian armed resistance is legitimate under international law when directed at non-civilian targets, we believe that only nonviolent resistance will maintain the humanity of Palestinian society, elicit the greatest solidarity from others, and maximize the chance for future reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians; and Recognizing, however, that our appeal to Palestinians to continue to resist nonviolently in the face of ongoing existential threats from Israel is hypocritical unless accompanied by substantial acts of international support; and Recalling that in 2005, Palestinian Civil Society appealed to the international community to support a BDS campaign against Israel; and Recalling that in response, at least two Green Parties have passed resolutions supporting this BDS campaign: Green Party of the United States in 2005 http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2005_11_28.shtml Green Party of England and Wales in 2008 http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=1733; We, international Green parties: Call publicly for the implementation of boycott and divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era; and Agree to pressure our respective governments to impose embargoes and sanctions against Israel; and Support maintaining these nonviolent punitive measures until Israel meets its obligation to recognize the Palestinian people?s inalienable right to self-determination and fully complies with the precepts of international law by: 1. Ending its occupation and colonization of all Palestinian lands and dismantling the Wall in the West Bank; 2. Recognizing the fundamental rights of Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and 3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194. From richard.duffee at gmail.com Tue Mar 31 10:20:42 2009 From: richard.duffee at gmail.com (Richard Duffee) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 10:20:42 -0400 Subject: {news} Fwd: USGP-INT Voting period begins on IC Proposal: Draft Statement on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Call for BDS endorsement by International Green Parties In-Reply-To: <128795d10903302208s6ac20881ua40cc2b1dee81240@mail.gmail.com> References: <128795d10903302208s6ac20881ua40cc2b1dee81240@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <21f4f7390903310720v2be2ed16xaf1e0c040b456a7b@mail.gmail.com> Hi, Ct. Green, News from the International Committee: At the beginning of the month Justine McCabe and Steve Herrick won the vote for Co-Chairs of the International Committee. This email is about the most significant decision of the month: the BDS (Boycott-Divestment-Sanctions) proposal against Israel in response to the Israeli attack on Gaza. My understanding is that when the International Committee is making a decision that will affect the posture of the Green Party, it is the democratic right of members of the Green Party to do anything legal to affect the decision. So I forward the email below for your consideration. Between now and April 6, the International Committee is voting on the following proposal that the USGP should advocate that the Green Parties of other nations, in response to Israel's treatment of Gaza, should boycott Israeli goods, withdraw investments in Israeli corporations, and seek international sanctions against Israel. If you want to argue your own position in hopes of persuading any of the three Connecticut members of the International Committee to vote one way or the other, please contact Justine McCabe, Amy Vas Nunes, or Richard Duffee. (I, Richard Duffee, favor the proposal; I believe I am accurate in stating that Justine McCabe favors it and Amy Vas Nunes opposes it.) Richard Duffee ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Steve Herrick Date: Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 1:08 AM Subject: USGP-INT Voting period begins on IC Proposal: Draft Statement on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Call for BDS endorsement by International Green Parties To: USGP International Committee Dear IC, We have not been able to reach consensus on this proposal. According to our bylaws, we now move to a vote by the full committee with passage requiring a majority vote. The language of the statement itself has received support by most committee members, both in the earlier straw vote and in the discussion period that just ended. However, several IC delegates wish to include a further step in which the proposal is sent to the GPUS NC for an additional vote after IC approval. A majority of delegates have indicated the belief that the proposal complies with a directive to the IC by GPUS NC in Proposal 190. Our GPUS Steering Committee (SC) liaison, Jill Bussiere has suggested the statement only needs to be reviewed by the SC. Therefore, if the IC passes this proposal, it will go to the Steering Committee (SC) for review before being implemented. The SC will have the option of sending it to the NC. The vote will take place on our list beginning today, Tuesday, March 31, 2009, ending Monday, April 6, 2009 at 10 PDT. We look forward to everyone's participation. Peace, Justine McCabe and Steve Herrick Co-chairs, International Committee, GPUS ----------------------------------------------------- PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Call for BDS endorsement by International Green Parties PRESENTER: International Committee, GPUS CONTACT: Justine McCabe justinemccabe at earthink.net SUBJECT: DRAFT Green Party Statement on Gaza Crisis and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Call for Boycott, Divestment Sanctions Against Israel BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Implementation of the GPUS International Committee?s mission as directed by GPUS Prop 190 of November 21, 2005, ?The GPUS National Committee directs the International Committee to work with our sister Green parties around the world in implementing an international boycott.? http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2005_11_28.shtml In keeping with Prop 190, and in response to the three-week Israeli assault on Gaza beginning in December 2008, the International Committee considered a draft statement to be circulated among international Green Parties urging them to join our party in endorsing the Boycott, Divestment Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel. That statement was discussed at length among IC members and a straw poll revealed majority support for it. This proposal is an opportunity for the IC to formally endorse the statement with the intention of circulating it among international Green Parties for endorsement of the BDS campaign as directed by GPUS Prop 190. If this proposal passes, it would go to the GPUS Steering Committee (SC) for review. FULL PROPOSAL: Draft statement is below TIME LINE: Voting: beginning Monday, March 30, 2009 ending Sunday, April 5, 2009 at 10 pm PDT RESOURCES: Lobbying efforts by members of GPUS International Committee REFERENCES: http://www.gp.org/platform/2004/democracy.html#310677 ; http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2005_11_28.shtml; http://www.gp.org/committees/intl/response_on_palestine.html ==================================================================== DRAFT Green Party Statement On Gaza Crisis and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Call for Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions Against Israel Although Green Parties represent different countries and regions of the world, we share common principles essential to understanding and resolving this conflict. Among these principles are non-violence, including consistent enforcement of international law; ecological wisdom and sustainability, including reducing the negative impact of humankind on the natural environment; and social justice, thereby rejecting discrimination based on gender, class or ethnicity. These principles guide our response to the recent crisis in Gaza that began on December 27, 2008 in which we condemn the killing of civilians, condemn the excessive and disproportionate force used by Israel, the Occupying Power in Gaza, call for a full and continuing ceasefire between Israel and the Hamas government in Gaza, and a complete withdrawal of all Israeli forces with the opening of all border crossings in Gaza As of January 18, the Gaza crisis resulted in displacement of thousands of Palestine, the injury of more than 5,300, and the killing of over 1,300, mostly civilians. It has also caused the destruction of Gaza?s infrastructure, including demolition of hundreds of homes and attacks on UN schools and on the UNRWA warehouse, which is the source of basic necessities, such as food, fuel and medicines. According to a 1/15/09 UN press release: ?One in every 250 people in Gaza is either now dead or significantly injured . . . This number is comparable to 33,000 people in New York City or 1.2 million people in the United States.? http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/47d4e277b48d9d3685256ddc00612265/b974aca8e8fe201d85257540004ffedc!OpenDocument Contrast this with the Hamas rocket attacks, which during the same period killed 3 Israelis civilians and 10 Israeli soldiers. http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1232171510978&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout Furthermore, we are greatly distressed by the continuing decoupling of these recent hostilities from their historic context, which encourages, inter alia, the following obstacles to peace: ? Demonization of Palestinians as inherently anti-Semitic, hateful terrorists; ? Delegitimization of lawful resistance by Palestinians to Israeli violations of their human and legal rights; ? Propounding the myth of balance between the two peoples despite the patently disproportionate military and political power between them: an occupying power, Israel ? nuclear-armed with the fourth largest military in the world, backed by a superpower ? and Palestinians, an effectively disarmed, impoverished and occupied people; ? Jettisoning of international law in favor of bilateral negotiations between two actors of such grossly unequal power, a course begun with the Madrid /Oslo process; ? Distortions of human security needs of Israelis in favor of Israeli state security and regional domination; ? Conflation of criticism of Israeli policies with anti-Semitism, which promotes regressive elements on both sides for political gain, trivializes the historic prejudice against Jews, and inhibits the expression of sympathy Palestinians do have for Jewish suffering, especially the Nazi holocaust. As a consequence we call for a redirection of international attention to the root causes of past and ongoing hostilities between Israelis and Palestinians, i.e., Palestinian dispossession and ethnic cleansing by Israel since 1948, and the establishment of an apartheid-like system in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) that discriminates against non-Jews.* THEREFORE: Recalling the historic examples of apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany that a just, enduring peace, and reconciliation between Palestinians and Israelis depend on acknowledgement of wrongdoing and restitution and; Recalling that Europeans, not Palestinians, were responsible for the Nazi holocaust; we believe that individual European Green Parties, especially those with elected representatives in their governments, and in the EU parliament in their capacity to influence the European Union?s relation to Israel, have a special duty to ensure that Palestinians no longer bear the blame for historic European transgressions against Jews; and Recalling that the Green Party of the United States has a particular obligation in relation to this conflict as the US government is Israel?s closest ally: ? That Israel receives more than $5 billion annually in military and financial aid; that as current hostilities in Gaza illustrate, Israel?s use of this military aid often violates American laws in that the Arms Export Control Act stipulates that US-supplied weapons be used only for ?legitimate self-defense? and that the US Foreign Assistance Act prohibits military assistance to any country ?which engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights? and that the Proxmire Amendment bans military assistance to any government that refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to allow inspection of its nuclear facilities, as Israel refuses to do; ? That the United States government, including both its major parties, has not been an impartial peace broker in this conflict but continues to provide political cover and protection to Israel internationally, particularly at the United Nations, where it has vetoed scores of Security Council Resolutions opposing Israel?s violations of Palestinian human rights and international law, thereby undermining the central purpose of the UN Charter to maintain international peace and security; ? That US support for Israeli violations against the Palestinian people is a main source of antipathy to the US and the West among the world?s formerly colonized peoples who identify with Palestinians; that this US support not only decreases US/Western national security, but also contributes to Middle East and international instability; and http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=41982 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/world/14clash.html http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/65b122b6-e8c0-11dd-a4d0-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1 Recognizing that this conflict continues to have a devastating ecological impact on Israel/Palestine, especially water sources, thereby decreasing security for the whole region; and Recognizing that despite 61 years of continuous diplomatic attempts by the international community, it has failed to bring about Israel?s compliance with international law or respect for basic Palestinian human rights; and Recognizing that, despite abundant condemnation of Israel?s policies by the UN, International Court of Justice, and all relevant international conventions, the international community of nations has failed to stop violations by Israel of Palestinian human rights in Israel and the OPT, while Israeli crimes continue with impunity, as the recent assault on Gaza illustrates; and Recalling that ending institutionalized racism (apartheid) in South Africa demanded an unusual, cooperative action by the entire international community in the form of a boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaign against apartheid South Africa, and that BDS can become the most effective nonviolent means for achieving justice and genuine peace between Palestinians and Israelis, and in the region, through concerted international pressure as applied to apartheid South Africa; and Recognizing that Palestinian resistance to ongoing dispossession has mainly been nonviolent, including its most basic form ? remaining in their homes, on their land; and that while Palestinian armed resistance is legitimate under international law when directed at non-civilian targets, we believe that only nonviolent resistance will maintain the humanity of Palestinian society, elicit the greatest solidarity from others, and maximize the chance for future reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians; and Recognizing, however, that our appeal to Palestinians to continue to resist nonviolently in the face of ongoing existential threats from Israel is hypocritical unless accompanied by substantial acts of international support; and Recalling that in 2005, Palestinian Civil Society appealed to the international community to support a BDS campaign against Israel; and Recalling that in response, at least two Green Parties have passed resolutions supporting this BDS campaign: Green Party of the United States in 2005 http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2005_11_28.shtml Green Party of England and Wales in 2008 http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=1733; We, international Green parties: Call publicly for the implementation of boycott and divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era; and Agree to pressure our respective governments to impose embargoes and sanctions against Israel; and Support maintaining these nonviolent punitive measures until Israel meets its obligation to recognize the Palestinian people?s inalienable right to self-determination and fully complies with the precepts of international law by: 1. Ending its occupation and colonization of all Palestinian lands and dismantling the Wall in the West Bank; 2. Recognizing the fundamental rights of Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and 3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194. -- Steve Herrick Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. - Hobbes the tiger _______________________________________________ usgp-int mailing list usgp-int at gp-us.org http://forum.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/usgp-int -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From justinemccabe at earthlink.net Tue Mar 31 10:47:56 2009 From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net (Justine McCabe) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 10:47:56 -0400 Subject: {news} Fwd: USGP-INT Voting period begins on IC Proposal: DraftStatement on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Call for BDS endorsement byInternational Green Parties References: <128795d10903302208s6ac20881ua40cc2b1dee81240@mail.gmail.com> <21f4f7390903310720v2be2ed16xaf1e0c040b456a7b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <215AB8929AF147BFA5D0FC47856B180B@JUSTINE> Dear CT Greens, As Richard indicates, I drafted and am in favor of this proposal. I do want to clarify one part of his introduction--that we are not voting on GP support for boycott, divestment, sanctions (BDS) against Israel. That position was taken, in November, 2005, when the Green Party formally endorsed the call from Palestinian civil society for BDS against Israel, Proposition 190, which was introduced by Wisconsin Greens, Ben Manski and Ruth Weill to the National Committee where there was good discussion and debate, and a majority passed it. (Greens, Calling for Palestinian Rights, Urge Divestment from Israel -- 11.28.2005) In response to the Gaza assault, the current proposal before the IC is an implementation of a directive to the IC contained in Prop 190--to lobby our sister green parties worldwide to support BDS. I urge you to register your opinions on this as Ken Humphrey did in support, during an earlier, IC straw poll on this proposal. Peace, Justine McCabe Co-Chair, International Committee, GPUS ----- Original Message ----- From: Richard Duffee To: CT Greens News Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 10:20 AM Subject: {news} Fwd: USGP-INT Voting period begins on IC Proposal: DraftStatement on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Call for BDS endorsement byInternational Green Parties 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hi, Ct. Green, News from the International Committee: At the beginning of the month Justine McCabe and Steve Herrick won the vote for Co-Chairs of the International Committee. This email is about the most significant decision of the month: the BDS (Boycott-Divestment-Sanctions) proposal against Israel in response to the Israeli attack on Gaza. My understanding is that when the International Committee is making a decision that will affect the posture of the Green Party, it is the democratic right of members of the Green Party to do anything legal to affect the decision. So I forward the email below for your consideration. Between now and April 6, the International Committee is voting on the following proposal that the USGP should advocate that the Green Parties of other nations, in response to Israel's treatment of Gaza, should boycott Israeli goods, withdraw investments in Israeli corporations, and seek international sanctions against Israel. If you want to argue your own position in hopes of persuading any of the three Connecticut members of the International Committee to vote one way or the other, please contact Justine McCabe, Amy Vas Nunes, or Richard Duffee. (I, Richard Duffee, favor the proposal; I believe I am accurate in stating that Justine McCabe favors it and Amy Vas Nunes opposes it.) Richard Duffee ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Steve Herrick Date: Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 1:08 AM Subject: USGP-INT Voting period begins on IC Proposal: Draft Statement on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Call for BDS endorsement by International Green Parties To: USGP International Committee Dear IC, We have not been able to reach consensus on this proposal. According to our bylaws, we now move to a vote by the full committee with passage requiring a majority vote. The language of the statement itself has received support by most committee members, both in the earlier straw vote and in the discussion period that just ended. However, several IC delegates wish to include a further step in which the proposal is sent to the GPUS NC for an additional vote after IC approval. A majority of delegates have indicated the belief that the proposal complies with a directive to the IC by GPUS NC in Proposal 190. Our GPUS Steering Committee (SC) liaison, Jill Bussiere has suggested the statement only needs to be reviewed by the SC. Therefore, if the IC passes this proposal, it will go to the Steering Committee (SC) for review before being implemented. The SC will have the option of sending it to the NC. The vote will take place on our list beginning today, Tuesday, March 31, 2009, ending Monday, April 6, 2009 at 10 PDT. We look forward to everyone's participation. Peace, Justine McCabe and Steve Herrick Co-chairs, International Committee, GPUS ----------------------------------------------------- PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Call for BDS endorsement by International Green Parties PRESENTER: International Committee, GPUS CONTACT: Justine McCabe justinemccabe at earthink.net SUBJECT: DRAFT Green Party Statement on Gaza Crisis and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Call for Boycott, Divestment Sanctions Against Israel BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Implementation of the GPUS International Committee's mission as directed by GPUS Prop 190 of November 21, 2005, "The GPUS National Committee directs the International Committee to work with our sister Green parties around the world in implementing an international boycott." http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2005_11_28.shtml In keeping with Prop 190, and in response to the three-week Israeli assault on Gaza beginning in December 2008, the International Committee considered a draft statement to be circulated among international Green Parties urging them to join our party in endorsing the Boycott, Divestment Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel. That statement was discussed at length among IC members and a straw poll revealed majority support for it. This proposal is an opportunity for the IC to formally endorse the statement with the intention of circulating it among international Green Parties for endorsement of the BDS campaign as directed by GPUS Prop 190. If this proposal passes, it would go to the GPUS Steering Committee (SC) for review. FULL PROPOSAL: Draft statement is below TIME LINE: Voting: beginning Monday, March 30, 2009 ending Sunday, April 5, 2009 at 10 pm PDT RESOURCES: Lobbying efforts by members of GPUS International Committee REFERENCES: http://www.gp.org/platform/2004/democracy.html#310677 ; http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2005_11_28.shtml; http://www.gp.org/committees/intl/response_on_palestine.html ==================================================================== DRAFT Green Party Statement On Gaza Crisis and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Call for Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions Against Israel Although Green Parties represent different countries and regions of the world, we share common principles essential to understanding and resolving this conflict. Among these principles are non-violence, including consistent enforcement of international law; ecological wisdom and sustainability, including reducing the negative impact of humankind on the natural environment; and social justice, thereby rejecting discrimination based on gender, class or ethnicity. These principles guide our response to the recent crisis in Gaza that began on December 27, 2008 in which we condemn the killing of civilians, condemn the excessive and disproportionate force used by Israel, the Occupying Power in Gaza, call for a full and continuing ceasefire between Israel and the Hamas government in Gaza, and a complete withdrawal of all Israeli forces with the opening of all border crossings in Gaza As of January 18, the Gaza crisis resulted in displacement of thousands of Palestine, the injury of more than 5,300, and the killing of over 1,300, mostly civilians. It has also caused the destruction of Gaza's infrastructure, including demolition of hundreds of homes and attacks on UN schools and on the UNRWA warehouse, which is the source of basic necessities, such as food, fuel and medicines. According to a 1/15/09 UN press release: "One in every 250 people in Gaza is either now dead or significantly injured . . . This number is comparable to 33,000 people in New York City or 1.2 million people in the United States." http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/47d4e277b48d9d3685256ddc00612265/b974aca8e8fe201d85257540004ffedc!OpenDocument Contrast this with the Hamas rocket attacks, which during the same period killed 3 Israelis civilians and 10 Israeli soldiers. http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1232171510978&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout Furthermore, we are greatly distressed by the continuing decoupling of these recent hostilities from their historic context, which encourages, inter alia, the following obstacles to peace: . Demonization of Palestinians as inherently anti-Semitic, hateful terrorists; . Delegitimization of lawful resistance by Palestinians to Israeli violations of their human and legal rights; . Propounding the myth of balance between the two peoples despite the patently disproportionate military and political power between them: an occupying power, Israel - nuclear-armed with the fourth largest military in the world, backed by a superpower - and Palestinians, an effectively disarmed, impoverished and occupied people; . Jettisoning of international law in favor of bilateral negotiations between two actors of such grossly unequal power, a course begun with the Madrid /Oslo process; . Distortions of human security needs of Israelis in favor of Israeli state security and regional domination; . Conflation of criticism of Israeli policies with anti-Semitism, which promotes regressive elements on both sides for political gain, trivializes the historic prejudice against Jews, and inhibits the expression of sympathy Palestinians do have for Jewish suffering, especially the Nazi holocaust. As a consequence we call for a redirection of international attention to the root causes of past and ongoing hostilities between Israelis and Palestinians, i.e., Palestinian dispossession and ethnic cleansing by Israel since 1948, and the establishment of an apartheid-like system in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) that discriminates against non-Jews.* THEREFORE: Recalling the historic examples of apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany that a just, enduring peace, and reconciliation between Palestinians and Israelis depend on acknowledgement of wrongdoing and restitution and; Recalling that Europeans, not Palestinians, were responsible for the Nazi holocaust; we believe that individual European Green Parties, especially those with elected representatives in their governments, and in the EU parliament in their capacity to influence the European Union's relation to Israel, have a special duty to ensure that Palestinians no longer bear the blame for historic European transgressions against Jews; and Recalling that the Green Party of the United States has a particular obligation in relation to this conflict as the US government is Israel's closest ally: . That Israel receives more than $5 billion annually in military and financial aid; that as current hostilities in Gaza illustrate, Israel's use of this military aid often violates American laws in that the Arms Export Control Act stipulates that US-supplied weapons be used only for "legitimate self-defense" and that the US Foreign Assistance Act prohibits military assistance to any country "which engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights" and that the Proxmire Amendment bans military assistance to any government that refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to allow inspection of its nuclear facilities, as Israel refuses to do; . That the United States government, including both its major parties, has not been an impartial peace broker in this conflict but continues to provide political cover and protection to Israel internationally, particularly at the United Nations, where it has vetoed scores of Security Council Resolutions opposing Israel's violations of Palestinian human rights and international law, thereby undermining the central purpose of the UN Charter to maintain international peace and security; . That US support for Israeli violations against the Palestinian people is a main source of antipathy to the US and the West among the world's formerly colonized peoples who identify with Palestinians; that this US support not only decreases US/Western national security, but also contributes to Middle East and international instability; and http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=41982 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/world/14clash.html http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/65b122b6-e8c0-11dd-a4d0-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1 Recognizing that this conflict continues to have a devastating ecological impact on Israel/Palestine, especially water sources, thereby decreasing security for the whole region; and Recognizing that despite 61 years of continuous diplomatic attempts by the international community, it has failed to bring about Israel's compliance with international law or respect for basic Palestinian human rights; and Recognizing that, despite abundant condemnation of Israel's policies by the UN, International Court of Justice, and all relevant international conventions, the international community of nations has failed to stop violations by Israel of Palestinian human rights in Israel and the OPT, while Israeli crimes continue with impunity, as the recent assault on Gaza illustrates; and Recalling that ending institutionalized racism (apartheid) in South Africa demanded an unusual, cooperative action by the entire international community in the form of a boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaign against apartheid South Africa, and that BDS can become the most effective nonviolent means for achieving justice and genuine peace between Palestinians and Israelis, and in the region, through concerted international pressure as applied to apartheid South Africa; and Recognizing that Palestinian resistance to ongoing dispossession has mainly been nonviolent, including its most basic form - remaining in their homes, on their land; and that while Palestinian armed resistance is legitimate under international law when directed at non-civilian targets, we believe that only nonviolent resistance will maintain the humanity of Palestinian society, elicit the greatest solidarity from others, and maximize the chance for future reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians; and Recognizing, however, that our appeal to Palestinians to continue to resist nonviolently in the face of ongoing existential threats from Israel is hypocritical unless accompanied by substantial acts of international support; and Recalling that in 2005, Palestinian Civil Society appealed to the international community to support a BDS campaign against Israel; and Recalling that in response, at least two Green Parties have passed resolutions supporting this BDS campaign: Green Party of the United States in 2005 http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2005_11_28.shtml Green Party of England and Wales in 2008 http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=1733; We, international Green parties: Call publicly for the implementation of boycott and divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era; and Agree to pressure our respective governments to impose embargoes and sanctions against Israel; and Support maintaining these nonviolent punitive measures until Israel meets its obligation to recognize the Palestinian people's inalienable right to self-determination and fully complies with the precepts of international law by: 1. Ending its occupation and colonization of all Palestinian lands and dismantling the Wall in the West Bank; 2. Recognizing the fundamental rights of Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and 3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194. -- Steve Herrick Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. - Hobbes the tiger _______________________________________________ usgp-int mailing list usgp-int at gp-us.org http://forum.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/usgp-int ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.34 - Release Date: 3/31/2009 12:00 AM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amyvasnunes at hotmail.com Tue Mar 31 18:21:06 2009 From: amyvasnunes at hotmail.com (Amy Vas Nunes) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:21:06 -0400 Subject: {news} USGP-INT Voting period begins on IC Proposal: Draft Statement on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Call for BDS endorsement by International Green Parties In-Reply-To: <128795d10903311405t2218289akc1738cc73accf088@mail.gmail.com> References: <128795d10903302208s6ac20881ua40cc2b1dee81240@mail.gmail.com> <3f95fa510903311317w1337d3bhbe47b6d051700a1c@mail.gmail.com> <128795d10903311405t2218289akc1738cc73accf088@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: From: amyvasnunes at hotmail.com To: estebandido at gmail.com Subject: RE: USGP-INT Voting period begins on IC Proposal: Draft Statement on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Call for BDS endorsement by International Green Parties Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:14:38 -0400 VOTE NO Only belive in ending economic and military aide and not punishing Isreali people, Peace Groups, Refusnios for Govt they do not support This needs to go to SC and NC. Amy > Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:05:08 -0500 > From: estebandido at gmail.com > To: dschwartzman at gmail.com > CC: usgp-int at gp-us.org > Subject: Re: USGP-INT Voting period begins on IC Proposal: Draft Statement on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Call for BDS endorsement by International Green Parties > > 2009/3/31 David Schwartzman : > > I vote yes (again). > > I suppose co-chairs should vote, too, so I vote yes. > -- > Steve Herrick > > Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. > - Hobbes the tiger > _______________________________________________ > usgp-int mailing list > usgp-int at gp-us.org > http://forum.greens.org/mailman/listinfo/usgp-int -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: