---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
END THE U.S. OCCUPATION OF IRAQ!
BRING ALL THE TROOPS HOME NOW!
MARCH AND RALLY TO STOP THE WAR NOW!
WEDNESDAY, NOV. 3RD, 5PM
POWELL AND MARKET-MARCH TO 24TH & MISSION ST., S.F.
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
VOTE YES ON N! MEETING THURSDAY, OCT. 28, 7PM,
GLOBAL EXCHANGE, 2017 MISSION STREET, SUITE 303
(NEAR 16TH & MISSION STREETS)
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
NEXT BAUAW MEETING
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 26, 7 P.M.
1380 VALENCIA STREET
(BETWEEN 24TH & 25TH STREETS)

Dear All,

One thing is for sure, the war is not over and a new, massive
Offensive against the people of Iraq is about to begin-right
after the elections, of course.

We can't let this go on. We have to come together in a
massive outpouring of opposition to this war-
bigger than Feb. 15/16.

Vote Yes on N! Bring all the troops home now! Money for Human
Needs, not war!

All out Nov. 3rd, 5pm, Powell and Market Streets, S.F.
March to 24th and Mission.

Come to the meeting with your ideas for building these
actions and for future actions.

Peace and solidarity,
Bonnie


---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

1) An Evening of Anti-War Culture:
Art, Comment, Spoken Word, Poetry,
Music in support of Prop N
Saturday, October 23, 4-7 PM
523 Gallery, 523 Sutter between Powell and Mason near
Union Square

2) BVHP mothers fight for their children's environmental health
by Marie Harrison
http://www.sfbayview.com/102004/bvhpmothers102004.shtml

3) After Terror, a Secret Rewriting of Military Law
By TIM GOLDEN
WASHINGTON
October 24, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/24/international/worldspecial2/24gitmo.html?h
p&ex=1098590400&en=65eec9e56f90971f&ei=5094&partner=homepage

4) Rebel Attacks Kill 12 Iraqis; G.I.'s Injured
By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr.
BAGHDAD, Iraq
October 24, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/24/international/middleeast/24iraq.html?hp&ex
=1098590400&en=34534b10fa606fde&ei=5094&partner=homepage

5) CORRUPTION ACCUSATIONS
Memos Warned of Billing Fraud by Firm in Iraq
By ERIK ECKHOLM
October 23, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/23/politics/23whistle.html

6) Wife of Soldier Sentenced in Prison Abuse Scandal Speaks Out
By Brian Witte
The Associated Press
Baltimore
Friday 22 October 2004
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/102304V.shtml

7) Stand in Solidarity with the People of Haiti

8) Safeguarding Colombia's Oil
By JUAN FORERO
PUERTO VEGA, Colombia
October 22, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/22/business/worldbusiness/22colombia.html?ore
f=login&oref=login&pagewanted=print&position

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

1) An Evening of Anti-War Culture:
Art, Comment, Spoken Word, Poetry,
Music in support of Prop N
Saturday, October 23, 4-7 PM
523 Gallery, 523 Sutter between Powell and Mason near
Union Square

Art: OUTRAGE exhibit of 60 paintings and sculpture
by Sheila Haligan-Waltz
www.outrage2004.org

Program Includes:
> Matt Gonzalez, President of SF Board of Supervisors
> Neeli Cherkovski, writer in residence New College
Spoken word by members of the Molotov Mouths
* Outspoken Word Troupe
> School of the Arts Creative Writing Program Students
> Ilya Kaminski
> Music by John Duke
> and more

Refreshments served
Suggested donation $5-$250
No one turned away for lack of funds
If you want to be in the program contact
Jim Dorenkott, 415-240-8839

More info: contact Howard Wallace 415-861-0318

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

2) BVHP mothers fight for their children's environmental health
by Marie Harrison
http://www.sfbayview.com/102004/bvhpmothers102004.shtml

With San Francisco's No. 1 polluter, the Hunters Point power plant,
as a backdrop, BVHP residents teach about environmental racism at
a People's Earth Day celebration. Photo: www.greenaction.org (Go
to web site to view image.)

Young mothers straight out of Hunters Point - fighting for the
environmental health of their community. It's a great story and
a source of pride for all of us!

Tessie Ester, coordinator for the "Mothers Committee" and president
of the Huntersview Tenants Association said it best: "We want thing
to change. We have to fight for our community and our children. We
know we can't do it all, but it's time each one of us did something."

She is always emotional when she is talking about her community:
"You realize that people in Bay View Hunters Point are still eating
mercury contaminated fish? It's a disgrace that our people are
getting cancer because nobody took the time to tell them the
simple truth."

That was one of the first projects that the Mothers Committee took
on. Fifteen mothers canvassed the community door-to-door, handing
out leaflets on the dangers of subsistence fishing and telling their
neighbors about the dangers of eating fish from the Bay. Toxins like
DDE, chlordane, selenium, mercury and dioxins. "These were things
we had never heard of," said Ester. "It's no wonder we have one of the
highest rates of infant mortality in the Bay Area." The flier the Mothers
Committee put out explained the dangers of each chemical and the
health risks when toxins accumulate in the body.

"It was tough to decide where to begin," said Sabrina Warren, mother
of three. "This community is so screwed up - it's a toxic soup. "She
stops to listen to her 8-year-old talk about school work and continues,
"I still feel like Hunters Point Power Plant poses the biggest danger to
our children. The Mothers Committee did research on the plant. Did
you know that it sends up 600 tons of pollution every year!"

She looks angry and continues, "It's about time that we stop being
sick and just get plain mad! Gov. Schwarzenegger and Mayor Newsom
better start listening, because we're going to come gunning for them
next. And the ISO! Who gave these people the right to make decisions
about our lives? They don't even live here."

The Mothers Committee started out more than a year ago as
a collaboration between Huntersview Tenants Association and
Greenaction for Health and Environmental Justice. The official name
was "Bayview Hunters Point Mothers Environmental Health and Justice
Committee," but that was a mouthful, so soon it was shortened
to the Mothers Committee.

The goal is to educate a new generation of environmental advocates,
mothers from public housing, to fight for their own and their children's
futures. Mothers Committee meetings were always open to the
public and tended to be spirited. Participants know first hand
how their community is being destroyed by pollution and neglect.

PG&E was a favorite subject. Everyone had a horror story about the
plant or their electric bill. Early on, it became a priority for the
Mothers Committee.

"Everyone knows that that plant should have been closed down
years ago," said Monica Autry. "Government agencies look right
through you like you were invisible. Our young men and woman
can't get jobs and can't take care of their families - and to add
insult to injury, die a little at a time to keep the lights on in other
parts of the Bay Area."

"Remember how Willie Brown said we'd get jobs when they put in
the light rail?"she asks. "We all know what happened to that promise."

The Mothers Committee set their targets high. They lobbied the
city, state agencies and even the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. They also circulated a petition calling on Gov. Arnold
Schwarzenegger and the California Independent System Operator
(ISO) to remove the Reliability Must Run Contract from PG&E's
Hunters Point Power Plant. Going door to door, they collected
more than 5,000 signatures that they plan to deliver to the state
capital. "We've listened to promises long enough,"says Ester,
"Now it's time for action."

The Mothers Committee is reaching out to other neighborhoods
in other areas of San Francisco to educate them on what's
happening in Bay View Hunters Point. "We're not looking for
a handout. This city is just 49 miles square. People have to
understand that pollution is a problem for everyone," says
Autry, a long-term resident of BVHP. "The soot from PG&E
hits us first," she continues, "but the other parts of San
Francisco are breathing the same toxic chemicals we are."

In a public meeting held at Milton Meyers Auditorium in
Hunters Point, Mothers Committee members unveiled
a year-long effort entitled "Pollution, Health, Environmental
Racism and Injustice: A Toxic Inventory of Bayview Hunters
Point, San Francisco." The 40-page report describes the
sources of water and air pollution in BVHP and talks about
the worst toxic waste sites in the community and the health
problems that the residents are suffering. The Mothers
Committee introduced it to the community at their meeting.
The full report can be read or downloaded at
www.greenaction.org/hunterspoint/documents/TheStateoftheEnvironment090204Fin
al.pdf.

The Mothers want to continue their work, perhaps expanding
it to youth activities that include parents and highlight
environmental issues. "It's still hard to figure out where
to begin,"says Ester. "We're a needy community but also
a community with a lot of heart."

As I walked away from the Mothers Committee meeting at
Milton Meyers, I had to agree. We do have a lot of heart. It's
amazing to see what a few mothers in public housing can do.
With the full support of the community, Bay View Hunters
Point could again become the safe and healthy community
we all hope for.

If you are interested in the work of the Mothers Committee,
contact me at marie@greenaction.org or Tessie Ester, president
of Huntersview Tenants Association, at (415) 821-2873 or
see www.greenaction.org for more information.
About us
Search sfbayview.com
Search WWW

Advertise in the Bay View!
San Francisco Bay View
National Black Newspaper
4917 Third Street
San Francisco California 94124
Phone: (415) 671-0789
Fax: (415) 671-0316
Email:
editor@sfbayview.com

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

3) After Terror, a Secret Rewriting of Military Law
By TIM GOLDEN
WASHINGTON
October 24, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/24/international/worldspecial2/24gitmo.html?h
p&ex=1098590400&en=65eec9e56f90971f&ei=5094&partner=homepage

WASHINGTON - In early November 2001, with Americans still
staggered by the Sept. 11 attacks, a small group of White House
officials worked in great secrecy to devise a new system of justice
for the new war they had declared on terrorism.

Determined to deal aggressively with the terrorists they expected
to capture, the officials bypassed the federal courts and their
constitutional guarantees, giving the military the authority to detain
foreign suspects indefinitely and prosecute them in tribunals not
used since World War II.

The plan was considered so sensitive that senior White House officials
kept its final details hidden from the president's national security
adviser, Condoleezza Rice, and the secretary of state, Colin L. Powell,
officials said. It was so urgent, some of those involved said, that they
hardly thought of consulting Congress.

White House officials said their use of extraordinary powers would
allow the Pentagon to collect crucial intelligence and mete out swift,
unmerciful justice. "We think it guarantees that we'll have the kind
of treatment of these individuals that we believe they deserve," said
Vice President Dick Cheney, who was a driving force behind the policy.

But three years later, not a single terrorist has been prosecuted.
Of the roughly 560 men being held at the United States naval base
at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, only 4 have been formally charged.
Preliminary hearings for those suspects brought such a barrage
of procedural challenges and public criticism that verdicts could
still be months away. And since a Supreme Court decision in June
that gave the detainees the right to challenge their imprisonment
in federal court, the Pentagon has stepped up efforts to send home
hundreds of men whom it once branded as dangerous terrorists.

"We've cleared whole forests of paper developing procedures for
these tribunals, and no one has been tried yet," said Richard L. Shiffrin,
who worked on the issue as the Pentagon's deputy general counsel
for intelligence matters. "They just ended up in this Kafkaesque
sort of purgatory."

The story of how Guantánamo and the new military justice system
became an intractable legacy of Sept. 11 has been largely hidden
from public view.

But extensive interviews with current and former officials and a review
of confidential documents reveal that the legal strategy took shape
as the ambition of a small core of conservative administration
officials whose political influence and bureaucratic skill gave them
remarkable power in the aftermath of the attacks.

The strategy became a source of sharp conflict within the Bush
administration, eventually pitting the highest-profile cabinet
secretaries - including Ms. Rice and Defense Secretary
Donald H. Rumsfeld - against one another over issues of due
process, intelligence-gathering and international law.

In fact, many officials contend, some of the most serious problems
with the military justice system are rooted in the secretive and
contentious process from which it emerged.

Military lawyers were largely excluded from that process in the
days after Sept. 11. They have since waged a long struggle to
ensure terrorist prosecutions meet what they say are basic standards
of fairness. Uniformed lawyers now assigned to defend Guantánamo
detainees have become among the most forceful critics of the
Pentagon's own system.

Foreign policy officials voiced concerns about the legal and diplomatic
ramifications, but had little influence. Increasingly, the administration's
plan has come under criticism even from close allies, complicating
efforts to transfer scores of Guantánamo prisoners back to their
home governments.

To the policy's architects, the attacks on the World Trade Center
and the Pentagon represented a stinging challenge to American
power and an imperative to consider measures that might have been
unimaginable in less threatening times. Yet some officials said the
strategy was also shaped by longstanding political agendas that
had relatively little to do with fighting terrorism.

The administration's claim of authority to set up military commissions,
as the tribunals are formally known, was guided by a desire to
strengthen executive power, officials said. Its legal approach, including
the decision not to apply the Geneva Conventions, reflected the
determination of some influential officials to halt what they viewed
as the United States' reflexive submission to international law.

In designing the new system, many of the officials said they had
Osama bin Laden and other leaders of Al Qaeda in mind. But in
picking through the hundreds of detainees at Guantánamo Bay,
military investigators have struggled to find more than a dozen they
can tie directly to significant terrorist acts, officials said. While
important Qaeda figures have been captured and held by the C.I.A.,
administration officials said they were reluctant to bring those
prisoners before tribunals they still consider unreliable.

Some administration officials involved in the policy declined to be
interviewed, or would do so only on the condition they not be named.
Others defended it strongly, saying the administration had
a responsibility to consider extraordinary measures to protect
the country from a terrifying enemy.

"Everybody who was involved in this process had, in my mind,
a white hat on," Timothy E. Flanigan, the former deputy White
House counsel, said in an interview. "They were not out to be
cowboys or create a radical new legal regime. What they wanted
to do was to use existing legal models to assist in the process
of saving lives, to get information. And the war on terror is all
about information."

As the policy has faltered, other current and former officials
have criticized it on pragmatic grounds, arguing that many of
the problems could have been avoided. But some of the criticism
also has a moral tone.

"What several of us were concerned about was due process,"
said John A. Gordon, a retired Air Force general and former deputy
C.I.A. director who served as both the senior counterterrorism
official and homeland security adviser on President Bush's National
Security Council staff. "There was great concern that we were
setting up a process that was contrary to our own ideals."

An Aggressive Approach

The administration's legal approach to terrorism began to emerge
in the first turbulent days after Sept. 11, as the officials in charge
of key agencies exhorted their aides to confront Al Qaeda's threat
with bold imagination.

"Legally, the watchword became 'forward-leaning,' '' said a former
associate White House counsel, Bradford Berenson, "by which
everybody meant: 'We want to be aggressive. We want to take risks.' ''

That challenge resounded among young lawyers who were
settling into important posts at the White House, the Justice
Department and other agencies. Many of them were members
of the Federalist Society, a conservative legal fraternity. Some had
clerked for Supreme Court justices, Clarence Thomas and Antonin
Scalia in particular. A striking number had clerked for a prominent
Reagan appointee, Lawrence H. Silberman of the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

One young lawyer recalled looking around the room during a meeting
with Attorney General John Ashcroft. "Of 10 people, 7 of us were
former Silberman clerks," he said.

Mr. Berenson, then 36, had been consumed with the nomination
of federal judges until he was suddenly reassigned to terrorism
issues and thrown into intense, 15-hour workdays, filled with
competing urgencies and intermittent new alerts.

"All of a sudden, the curtain was lifted on this incredibly frightening
world," he said. "You were spending every day looking at the dossiers
of the world's leading terrorists. There was a palpable sense of threat."

As generals prepared for war in Afghanistan, lawyers scrambled to
understand how the new campaign against terrorism could be
waged within the confines of old laws.

Mr. Flanigan was at the center of the administration's legal
counteroffensive. A personable, soft-spoken father of 14 children,
Mr. Flanigan's easy manner sometimes belied the force of his beliefs.
He had arrived at the White House after distinguishing himself as
an agile legal thinker and a Republican stalwart: During the Clinton
scandals, he defended the independent counsel, Kenneth W. Starr,
saying he had conducted his investigation "in a moderate and
appropriate fashion." In 2000, he played an important role on
the Bush campaign's legal team in the Florida recount.

In the days after the Sept. 11 attacks, Mr. Flanigan sought advice
from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel on "the
legality of the use of military force to prevent or deter terrorist
activity inside the United States,'' according to a previously
undisclosed department memorandum that was reviewed by
The New York Times.

The 20-page response came from John C. Yoo, a 34-year-old Bush
appointee with a glittering résumé and a reputation as perhaps the
most intellectually aggressive among a small group of legal scholars
who had challenged what they saw as the United States' excessive
deference to international law. On Sept. 21, 2001, Mr. Yoo wrote
that the question was how the Constitution's Fourth Amendment
rights against unreasonable search and seizure might apply if the
military used "deadly force in a manner that endangered the lives
of United States citizens."

Mr. Yoo listed an inventory of possible operations: shooting down
a civilian airliner hijacked by terrorists; setting up military
checkpoints inside an American city; employing surveillance
methods more sophisticated than those available to law
enforcement; or using military forces "to raid or attack dwellings
where terrorists were thought to be, despite risks that third parties
could be killed or injured by exchanges of fire."

Mr. Yoo noted that these actions could raise constitutional issues,
but said that in the face of devastating terrorist attacks, "the
government may be justified in taking measures which in less
troubled conditions could be seen as infringements of individual
liberties." If the president decided the threat justified deploying
the military inside the country, he wrote, then "we think that the
Fourth Amendment should be no more relevant than it would be
in cases of invasion or insurrection."

The prospect of such military action at home was mostly
hypothetical at that point, but with the government taking
the fight against terrorism to Afghanistan and elsewhere around
the world, lawyers in the administration took the same "forward-
leaning" approach to making plans for the terrorists they thought
would be captured.

The idea of using military commissions to try suspected terrorists
first came to Mr. Flanigan, he said, in a phone call a couple of days
after the attacks from William P. Barr, the former attorney general
under whom Mr. Flanigan had served as head of the Justice
Department's Office of Legal Counsel during the first Bush
administration.

Mr. Barr had first suggested the use of military tribunals a decade
before, to try suspects in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over
Lockerbie, Scotland. Although the idea made little headway at the
time, Mr. Barr said he reminded Mr. Flanigan that the Legal Counsel's
Office had done considerable research on the question. Mr. Flanigan
had an aide call for the files.

"I thought it was a great idea," he recalled.

Military commissions, he thought, would give the government wide
latitude to hold, interrogate and prosecute the sort of suspects who
might be silenced by lawyers in criminal courts. They would also put
the control over prosecutions squarely in the hands of the president.


The same ideas were taking hold in the office of Vice President Cheney,
championed by his 44-year-old counsel, David S. Addington. At the
time, Mr. Addington, a longtime Cheney aide with an indistinct portfolio
and no real staff, was not well-known even in the government. But he
would become legendary as a voraciously hard-working official with
strongly conservative views, an unusually sharp pen and wide influence
over military, intelligence and other matters. In a matter of months, he
would make a mark as one of the most important architects of the
administration's legal strategy against foreign terrorism.

Beyond the prosecutorial benefits of military commissions, the two
lawyers saw a less tangible, but perhaps equally important advantage.
"From a political standpoint," Mr. Flanigan said, "it communicated the
message that we were at war, that this was not going to be business
as usual."

Changing the Rules

In fact, very little about how the tribunal policy came about resembled
business as usual. For half a century, since the end of World War II,
most major national-security initiatives had been forged through
interagency debate. But some senior Bush administration officials felt
that process placed undue power in the hands of cautious, slow-moving
foreign policy bureaucrats. The sense of urgency after Sept. 11 brought
that attitude to the surface.

Little more than a week after the attacks, officials said, the White House
counsel, Alberto F. Gonzales, set up an interagency group to draw up
options for prosecuting terrorists. They came together with high
expectations.

"We were going to go after the people responsible for the attacks,
and the operating assumption was that we would capture a significant
number of Al Qaeda operatives," said Pierre-Richard Prosper, the
State Department official assigned to lead the group. "We were
thinking hundreds."

Mr. Prosper, then 37, had just been sworn in as the department's
ambassador-at-large for war crimes issues. As a prosecutor, he
had taken on street gangs and drug Mafias and had won the first
genocide conviction before the International Criminal Tribunal for
Rwanda. Even so, some administration lawyers eyed him suspiciously
- as more diplomat than crime-fighter.

Mr. Gonzales had made it clear that he wanted Mr. Prosper's group
to put forward military commissions as a viable option, officials said.
The group laid out three others - criminal trials, military courts-martial
and tribunals with both civilian and military members, like those used
for Nazi war criminals at Nuremberg.

Representatives of the Justice Department's criminal division, which
had prosecuted a string of Qaeda defendants in federal district court
over the previous decade, argued that the federal courts could do the
job again. The option of toughening criminal laws or adapting the
courts, as several European countries had done, was discussed, but
only briefly, two officials said.

"The towers were still smoking, literally," Mr. Prosper said.
"I remember asking: Can the federal courts in New York handle
this? It wasn't a legal question so much as it was logistical. You
had 300 Al Qaeda members, potentially. And did we want to put
the judges and juries in harm's way?"

Lawyers at the White House saw criminal courts as a minefield,
several officials said.

Much of the evidence against terror suspects would be classified
intelligence that would be difficult to air in court or too sketchy to
meet federal standards, the lawyers warned. Another issue was
security: Was it safe to try Osama bin Laden in Manhattan, where
he was facing federal charges for the 1998 bombings of American
embassies in East Africa?

Then there was a tactical question. To act pre-emptively against
Al Qaeda, the authorities would need information that defense
lawyers and due-process rules might discourage suspects from
giving up.

Mr. Flanigan framed the choice starkly: "are we going to go with
a system that is really guaranteed to prevent us from getting
information in every case or are we going to go another route?"

Military commissions had no statutory rules of their own.
In past American wars, when such tribunals had been used
to carry out battlefield justice against spies, saboteurs and
others accused of violating the laws of war, they had generally
hewed to prevailing standards of military justice. But the
advocates for commissions in the Bush administration saw
no reason they could not adapt the rules, officials said. Standards
of proof could be lowered. Secrecy provisions could be expanded.
The death penalty could be more liberally applied.

But some members of the interagency group saw it as more
complicated. Terrorism had not been clearly established as
a war crime under international law. Writing new law for
a military tribunal might end up being more difficult than
prosecuting terrorism cases in existing courts.

By late October 2001, the White House lawyers had grown
impatient with what they saw as the dithering of Mr. Prosper's
group and what one former official called the "cold feet" of
some of its members. Mr. Flanigan said he thought the
government needed to move urgently in case a major
terrorist linked to the attacks was apprehended.

He gathered up the research that the Prosper group had
completed on military commissions and took charge of the
matter himself. Suddenly, the other options were off the table
and the Prosper group was out of business.

"Prosper is a thoughtful, gentle, process-oriented guy," the
former official said. "At that time, gentle was not an adjective
that anybody wanted."

A Secretive Circle

With the White House in charge, officials said, the planning
for tribunals moved forward more quickly, and more secretly.
Whole agencies were left out of the discussion. So were most
of the government's experts in military and international law.

The legal basis for the administration's approach was laid
out on Nov. 6 in a confidential 35-page memorandum sent
to Mr. Gonzales from Patrick F. Philbin, a deputy in the
Legal Counsel's office. (Attorney General Ashcroft has
refused recent Congressional requests for the document,
but a copy was reviewed by The Times.)

The memorandum's plain legalese belied its bold assertions.

It said that the president, as commander-in-chief, has
"inherent authority'' to establish military commissions
without Congressional authorization. It concluded that
the Sept. 11 attacks were "plainly sufficient" to warrant
applying the laws of war.

Opening a debate that would later divide the administration,
the memorandum also suggested that the White House could
apply international law selectively. It stated specifically that
trying terrorists under the laws of war "does not mean that
terrorists will receive the protections of the Geneva Conventions
or the rights that laws of war accord to lawful combatants."

The central legal precedent cited in the memorandum was
a 1942 case in which the Supreme Court upheld President
Franklin D. Roosevelt's use of a military commission to try
eight Nazi saboteurs who had sneaked into the United States
aboard submarines. Since that ruling, revolutions had taken
place in both international and military law, with the adoption
of the Geneva Conventions in 1949 and the Uniform Code of
Military Justice in 1951. Even so, the Justice memorandum said
the 1942 ruling had "set a clear constitutional analysis" under
which due process rights do not apply to military commissions.

Roosevelt, too, created his military commission without new
and explicit Congressional approval, and authorized the
military to fashion its own procedural rules. He also established
himself, rather than a military judge, as the "final reviewing
authority'' for the case.

Mr. Addington seized on the Roosevelt precedent as a model,
two people involved in the process said, despite vast differences.
Roosevelt acted against enemy agents in a traditional war among
nations. Mr. Bush would be asserting the same power to take on
a shadowy network of adversaries with no geographic boundaries,
in a conflict with no foreseeable end.

Mr. Addington, who drafted the order with Mr. Flanigan, was
particularly influential, several officials said, because he represented
Mr. Cheney and brought formidable experience in national-security
law to a small circle of senior officials. Mr. Addington turned down
several requests for interviews and a spokesman for the vice
president's office declined to comment.

"He was probably the only one there who would know what an order
would look like, what it would say," a former Justice Department
official said, noting Mr. Addington's work at the Defense Department,
the C.I.A., and Congressional intelligence committees. "He didn't
have authority over anyone. But he's a persuasive guy."

To many officials outside the circle, the secrecy was remarkable.

While Mr. Ashcroft and his deputy, Larry D. Thompson, were closely
consulted, the head of the Justice Department's criminal division,
Michael Chertoff, who had argued for trying terror suspects in federal
court, saw the military order only when it was published, officials
said. Mr. Rumsfeld was kept informed of the plan mainly through
his general counsel, William J. Haynes II, several Pentagon officials
said.

Many of the Pentagon's experts on military justice, uniformed
lawyers who had spent their careers working on such issues, were
mostly kept in the dark. "I can't tell you how compartmented things
were," said retired Rear Adm. Donald J. Guter, who was then the
Navy's senior military lawyer, or judge advocate general. "This was
a closed administration."

A group of experienced Army lawyers had been meeting with
Mr. Haynes repeatedly on the process, but began to suspect that
what they said did not resonate outside the Pentagon, several of
them said.

On Friday, Nov. 9, Defense Department officials said, Mr. Haynes
called the head of the team, Col. Lawrence J. Morris, into his office
to review a draft of the presidential order. He was given 30 minutes
to study it but was not allowed to keep a copy or even take notes.

The following day, the Army's judge advocate general, Maj.
Gen. Thomas J. Romig, hurriedly convened a meeting of senior
military lawyers to discuss a response. The group worked through
the Veterans Day weekend to prepare suggestions that would have
moved the tribunals closer to existing military justice. But when
the final document was issued that Tuesday, it reflected none of
the officers' ideas, several military officials said.

"They hadn't changed a thing," one official said.

In fact, while the military lawyers were pulling together their
response, they were unaware that senior administration officials
were already at the White House putting finishing touches on the
plan. At a meeting that Saturday in the Roosevelt Room,
Mr. Cheney led a discussion among Attorney General Ashcroft,
Mr. Haynes of the Defense Department, the White House lawyers
and a few other aides.

Senior officials of the State Department and the National Security
Council staff were excluded from final discussions of the policy,
even at a time when they were meeting daily about Afghanistan
with the officials who were drafting the order. According to two
people involved in the process, Mr. Cheney advocated withholding
the draft from Ms. Rice and Secretary Powell.

When the two cabinet members found out about the military
order - upon its public release - Ms. Rice was particularly angry,
several senior officials said. Spokesmen for both officials
declined to comment.

Mr. Bush played only a modest role in the debate, senior
administration officials said. In an initial discussion, he agreed
that military commissions should be an option, the officials said.
Later, Mr. Cheney discussed a draft of the order with Mr. Bush
over lunch, one former official said. The president signed the
three-page order on Nov. 13.

No ceremony accompanied the signing, and the order was released
to the public that day without so much as a press briefing. But its
historic significance was unmistakable.

The military could detain and prosecute any foreigner whom the
president or his representative determined to have "engaged in,
aided or abetted, or conspired to commit" terrorism. Echoing the
Roosevelt order, the Bush document promised "free and fair"
tribunals but offered few guarantees: There was no promise of
public trials, no right to remain silent, no presumption of innocence.
As in 1942, guilt did not necessarily have to be proven beyond
a reasonable doubt and a death sentence could be imposed even
with a divided verdict.

Despite those similarities, some military and international lawyers
were struck by the differences.

"The Roosevelt order referred specifically to eight people, the eight
Nazi saboteurs," said Mr. Shiffrin, who was then the Defense
Department's deputy general counsel for intelligence matters and
had studied the Nazi saboteurs' case. "Here we were putting in
place a parallel system of justice for a universe of people who we
had no idea about - who they would be, how many of them there
would be. It was a very dramatic measure."

Mounting Criticism

The White House did its best to play down the drama, but criticism
of the order was immediate and widespread.

Civil libertarians and some Congressional leaders saw an attempt
to supplant the criminal justice system. Critics also worried about
the concentration of power: The president or his proxies would
define the crimes (often after an act had been committed); set the
rules for trial; and choose the judges, juries and appellate panels.

Senator Patrick J. Leahy, the Vermont Democrat who was then
chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, was among a handful
of legislators who argued that the administration's plan required
explicit Congressional authorization. The Congress had just passed
the Patriot Act by a huge margin, and Mr. Leahy proposed authorizing
military commissions, but with some important changes, including
a presumption of innocence for defendants and appellate review
by the Supreme Court.

Critics seized on complaints from abroad, including an
announcement from the Spanish authorities that they would
not extradite some terrorist suspects to the United States if they
would face the tribunals. "We are the most powerful nation on
earth," Mr. Leahy said. "But in the struggle against terrorism, we
don't have the option of going it alone. Would these military
tribunals be worth jeopardizing the cooperation we expect and
need from our allies?"

Senators called for Mr. Rumsfeld and Mr. Ashcroft to testify about
the tribunals plan. Instead, the administration sent Mr. Prosper
from the State Department and Mr. Chertoff of the Justice
Department - both of whom had questioned the use of commissions
and were later excluded from the administration's final deliberations.

But the Congressional opposition melted in the face of opinion
polls showing strong support for the president's measures against
terrorism.

There was another reason fears were allayed. With the order
signed, the Pentagon was writing rules for exactly how the
commissions would be conducted, and an early draft that was
leaked to the news media suggested defendants' rights would
be expanded. Mr. Rumsfeld, who assembled a group of outside
legal experts - including some who had worked on World War II-
era tribunals - to consult on the rules, said critics' concerns would
be taken into account.

But all of the critics were not outside the administration.

Many of the Pentagon's uniformed lawyers were angered by the
implication that the military would be used to deliver "rough justice"
for the terrorists. The Uniform Code of Military Justice had moved
steadily into line with the due-process standards of the federal
courts, and senior military lawyers were proud and protective of
their system. They generally supported using commissions for
terrorists, but argued that the system would not be fair without
greater rights for defendants.

"The military lawyers would from time to time remind the civilians
that there was a Constitution that we had to pay attention to," said
Admiral Guter, who, after retiring as the Navy judge advocate general,
signed a "friend of the court" brief on behalf of plaintiffs in the
Guantánamo Supreme Court case.

Even as uniformed lawyers were given a greater role in writing
rules for the commissions, they still felt out of the loop.

In early 2002, Admiral Guter said, during a weekly lunch with
Mr. Haynes and the top lawyers for the military branches, he
raised the issue with Mr. Haynes directly: "we need more
information."

Mr. Haynes looked at him coldly. "No, you don't," he quoted
Mr. Haynes as saying.

Mr. Haynes declined to comment on the exchange.

Lt. Col. William K. Lietzau, a Yale-trained Marine lawyer on
Mr. Haynes's staff, often found himself in the middle. "I could
see how the JAGs were frustrated that the task of setting up the
commissions hadn't been delegated to them,'' he said, referring
to the senior military lawyers. "On the other hand, I could see
how some of their recommendations frustrated the leadership
because they didn't always appear to embrace the paradigm
shift needed to deal with terrorism."

Some Justice Department officials also urged changes in the
commission rules, current and former officials said. While
Attorney General Ashcroft staunchly defended the policy in
public, in a private meeting with Pentagon officials, he said
some of the proposed commission rules would be seen as
"draconian," two officials said.

On nearly every issue, interviews and documents show, the
harder line was staked out by White House lawyers: Mr. Addington,
Mr. Gonzales and Mr. Flanigan. They opposed allowing civilian
lawyers to assist the tribunal defendants, as military courts-
martial permit, or allowing civilians to serve on the appellate
panel that would oversee the commissions. They also opposed
granting defendants a presumption of innocence.

In the end, Mr. Rumsfeld compromised. He granted defendants
a presumption of innocence and set "beyond a reasonable doubt"
as a standard for proving guilt. He also allowed the defendants
to hire civilian lawyers, but restricted the lawyers' access to case
information. And he gave the presiding officer at a tribunal license
to admit any evidence he thought might be convincing to a
"reasonable person.''

One right the administration sought to deny the prisoners was
the ability to appeal the legality of their detentions in federal
court. The administration had done its best to decide the question
when searching for a place to detain hundreds of prisoners captured
in Afghanistan. Every location it seriously considered - including an
American military base in Germany and islands in the South Pacific -
was outside the United States and, the administration believed,
beyond the reach of the federal judiciary.

On Dec. 28, 2001, after officials settled on Guantánamo Bay,
Mr. Philbin and Mr. Yoo told the Pentagon in a memorandum that
it could make a "very strong" claim that prisoners there would be
outside the purview of American courts. But the memorandum
cautioned that a reasonable argument could also be made that
Guantánamo "while not part of the sovereign territory of the United
States, is within the territorial jurisdiction of a federal court." That
warning would come back to haunt the administration.

A Shift in Power

Some of the officials who helped design the new system of justice
would later explain the influence they exercised in the chaotic days
after Sept. 11 as a response to a crisis. But a more enduring shift of
power within the administration was taking place - one that became
apparent in a decision that would have significant consequences for
how terror suspects were interrogated and detained.

At issue was whether the administration would apply the Geneva
Conventions to the conflicts with Al Qaeda and the Taliban and
whether those enemies would be treated as prisoners of war.

Based on the advice of White House and Justice Department lawyers,
Mr. Bush initially decided on Jan. 18, 2002, that the conventions
would not apply to either conflict. But at a meeting of senior national
security officials several days later, Secretary of State Powell asked
him to reconsider.

Mr. Powell agreed that the conventions did not apply to the global
fight against Al Qaeda. But he said troops could be put at risk if the
United States disavowed the conventions in dealing with the Taliban -
the de facto government of Afghanistan. Both Mr. Rumsfeld and the
chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Richard B. Myers, supported
his position, Pentagon officials said.

In a debate that included the administration's most experienced
national-security officials, the voice that was heard belonged to
Mr. Yoo, who was only a deputy in the Office of Legal Counsel. He
cast Afghanistan as a "failed state," and said its fighters should not
be considered a real army but a "militant, terrorist-like group."
In a Jan. 25 memorandum to the president, the White House counsel,
Mr. Gonzales, characterized that opinion as "definitive."

The Gonzales memorandum suggested that the "new kind of war"
Mr. Bush wanted to fight could hardly be reconciled with the "quaint"
privileges that the Geneva Conventions gave to prisoners of war, or
the "strict limitations" they imposed on interrogations.

Military lawyers disputed the idea that applying the conventions
would necessarily limit interrogators to the name, rank and serial
number of their captives. "There were very good reasons not to
designate the detainees as prisoners of war, but the claim that
they couldn't be interrogated was not one of them," Colonel Lietzau
said. Again, though, such questions were scarcely heard, officials
involved in the discussions said.

Mr. Yoo's rise reflected a different approach by the Bush administration
to sensitive legal questions concerning foreign affairs, defense and
intelligence.

In past administrations, officials said, the Office of Legal Counsel
usually weighed in with opinions on questions that had already been
deliberated by the legal staffs of the agencies involved. Under
Mr. Bush, the office frequently had a first and final say on such
questions.

"O.L.C. was definitely running the show legally, and John Yoo in
particular," a former Pentagon lawyer said. "He's kind of fun to be
around, and he has an opinion on everything. Even though he was
quite young, he exercised disproportionate authority because of his
personality and his strong opinions."

Mr. Yoo's influence was amplified by friendships he developed not
just with Mr. Addington and Mr. Flanigan, but also Mr. Haynes, with
whom he played squash as often as three or four times a week at
the Pentagon Officers Athletic Club.

If the Geneva Conventions debate raised Mr. Yoo's stature, it had the
opposite effect on lawyers at the State Department, who were later
excluded from sensitive discussions on matters like the interrogation
of detainees, officials from several agencies said.

"State was cut out of a lot of this activity from February of 2002 on,"
one senior administration official said. "These were treaties that we
were dealing with; they are meant to know about that."

The State Department legal adviser, William H. Taft IV, was shunned
by the lawyers who dominated the detainee policy, officials said.
Although Mr. Taft had served as the deputy secretary of defense
during the Reagan administration, more conservative colleagues
whispered that he lacked the constitution to fight terrorists.

"He was seen as ideologically squishy and suspect," a former White
House official said. "People did not take him very seriously."

Through a State Department spokesman, Richard A. Boucher,
Mr. Taft declined to comment.

The rivalries could be almost adolescent. When field trips to
Guantánamo Bay were arranged for administration lawyers, the
invitations were sometimes relayed last to the State Department
and National Security Council, officials said, in the hope that lawyers
there would not be able to come on short notice.

It was on the first field trip, 10 days after detainees began to arrive
there on Jan. 11, 2002, that White House lawyers made clear their
intention to move forward quickly with military commissions.

On the flight home, several officials said, Mr. Addington urged
Mr. Gonzales to seek a blanket designation of all the detainees
being sent to Guantánamo as eligible for trial under the president's
order. Mr. Gonzales agreed.

The next day, the Pentagon instructed military intelligence officers
at the base to start filling out one-page forms for each detainee,
describing their alleged offenses. Weeks later, Mr. Haynes issued
an urgent call to the military services, asking them to submit
nominations for a chief prosecutor.

The first trials, many military and administration officials believed,
were just around the corner.Next: A Policy Unravels

Jack Begg contributed research for this article.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

4) Rebel Attacks Kill 12 Iraqis; G.I.'s Injured
By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr.
BAGHDAD, Iraq
October 24, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/24/international/middleeast/24iraq.html?hp&ex
=1098590400&en=34534b10fa606fde&ei=5094&partner=homepage

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Oct. 23 - Insurgents launched strikes on Saturday
at United States and Iraqi outposts across Iraq, killing at least
a dozen Iraqi police officers and national guardsmen in car bombings
and wounding dozens of Iraqis and Americans in the assaults,
which included mortars and hidden roadside bombs.

No American soldiers were killed but six were wounded when their
Bradley fighting vehicle was attacked on the dangerous road that
leads to the Baghdad airport.

The deadliest attack occurred outside the gates of a Marine base in
Baghdadi, in the restive Anbar Province of western Iraq, a Sunni
area where a car bomber killed at least 10 Iraqi policemen and
wounded 5 others, according to the Marines. The police were
gathered at a checkpoint on the perimeter of the base, which is
home to a Marine aircraft wing near the Euphrates River about
110 miles west of Baghdad.

Mujtaba Ahmed al-Hiti, the police chief in Hit, a nearby town, told
Agence France-Presse that a total of 40 people had been wounded,
and he said the attacker had been trying to drive into an academy
where police were training.

In Falluja, the insurgent-controlled stronghold west of Baghdad
where a major offensive is being planned to take back the city,
United States officials say an early morning raid led to the capture
of a lieutenant to the terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
Mr. Zarqawi is the Jordanian militant said to have sworn allegiance
to Al l Qaeda and taken responsibility for scores of car bombings,
beheadings and other acts of terror.

American officials said the "individual targeted and captured today
was recently assessed to be a relatively minor member of the
Zarqawi network." But with more important Zarqawi aides having
been detained or killed in recent weeks, the aide captured at a safe
house south of Falluja at 1:30 a.m. "had moved up to take a critical
position as a Zarqawi senior leader." Five other terrorists were captured,
the military said.

Members of Mr. Zarqawi's network are increasingly moving to the
outskirts of the city to evade American attacks on safe houses and
other hideouts and are trying to blend in with civilians, military
officials say. United States forces, they say, have eliminated meeting
sites and safe houses for the network and destroyed car bombs and
other weapons. Military officials say Iraqi civilians in Falluja have
been providing information about the whereabouts of Zarqawi
associates.

The Marines have stepped up operations on the outskirts of Falluja
during the last two weeks, trying to flush out insurgents and
members of Mr. Zarqawi's Tawhid and Jihad terror organization
in anticipation of what Iraqi leaders have said will be a major offensive.
The Marines have also conducted nightly bombing raids for the last
two months aimed at the Zarqawi network. Since this summer,
Falluja has been controlled by insurgents and a Taliban-style
Islamist local government that United States and Iraqi officials say
has given refuge to Mr. Zarqawi and members of his network.

The flurry of violence on Saturday underscores the challenge facing
American and Iraqi officials as national elections draw near. Violence
and attacks have been rising, and American deaths continue to
mount, though by most accounts there are fewer attacks taking
place than during the recent peak in August.

In one of the most dangerous areas, the sprawling Sadr City slum,
a Shiite neighborhood in eastern Baghdad, the security situation has
been surprisingly calm of late, according to some American officers.
But in other places, especially Anbar Province, car bombings and
other attacks have continued at a steady pace.

In a statement on Saturday afternoon following the attack in Baghdadi,
the Marines said: "Insurgents have increased attacks on Iraqi Security
Forces seeking to secure a free Iraq."

Near Samarra, an insurgent flashpoint north of Baghdad that United
States forces retook early this month after a grisly three-day battle,
several Iraqi national guardsmen were killed Saturday morning by
a car bomb at a checkpoint south of town.

Reports quoting Iraqi officials said at least four guardsmen died
in the attack, but American forces that control the area say there
were two fatalities. Lt. Wayne Adkins, a spokesman for the Army's
First Infantry Division, said the attack occurred at 10:40 a.m.

"Two Iraqi National Guard soldiers were killed and one was injured
when Anti-Iraqi Forces detonated" a vehicle-borne improvised
explosive device at an Iraqi National Guard checkpoint, he said.
One Iraqi guardsman died at the scene and a second died later
from his wounds, Lieutenant Adkins said.

Insurgents also struck in central Baghdad, lobbing mortars during
lunchtime near the American-controlled green zone, where the
American Embassy and the Iraqi government have headquarters.
There were no reports of deaths or injuries from the mortars,
which could be easily heard throughout central Baghdad. A rocket
also struck the building that houses an Iraqi legal association.

And six soldiers were wounded at 7:15 a.m. when their Bradley
was struck by an improvised explosive device on the road that
leads to the Baghdad airport.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

5) CORRUPTION ACCUSATIONS
Memos Warned of Billing Fraud by Firm in Iraq
By ERIK ECKHOLM
October 23, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/23/politics/23whistle.html

Managers of a security firm that won large contracts in Iraq warned
their bosses in February of what they called a pattern of fraudulent
billing practices, internal company memorandums suggest.

The memorandums, written primarily by two company managers,
charged that the security firm, Custer Battles, repeatedly billed the
occupation authorities for nonexistent services or at grossly
inflated prices.

The company, which quickly grew to garner security contracts worth
$100 million in little more than a year, denies the charges. It argues
that the managers confused sincere attempts to document jobs done
in a hurry, in a war zone, with deliberate deception and that the
company provided all contracted services for the agreed-upon price.

The memos and a lawsuit filed by former employees cite several
specific instances, including billing the Coalition Provisional Authority
$157,000 for a helicopter pad that in fact cost $95,000, and repainting
forklifts abandoned by Baghdad Airways and then charging the
authority thousands of dollars a month, claiming that the forklifts
were leased.

One of the managers was later fired by the company and is part of
a lawsuit charging Custer Battles with defrauding the federal government
of tens of millions of dollars. The other manager, who has since been
appointed to a high-level position with the company, recently declared
that after further research, he believed that any questionable practices
were the fault of a few individuals and had not been condoned by
the owners.

On Sept. 30, the Pentagon, concerned by the allegations raised by
the employees, barred Custer Battles from receiving further military
contracts, and it has withheld at least $10 million in payments to the
company. The company is appealing the ban.

The charges swirling around Custer Battles in part reflect a problem
that American government auditors have acknowledged: the inability
of the Iraq occupation authority, particularly in its first year, to monitor
properly the performance of hundreds of companies, large and small,
that flocked to Baghdad seeking contracts for everything from building
materials to armed guards.

The memorandums, provided by a lawyer for the managers who filed
the lawsuit against Custer Battles, charge that the company submitted
invoices from supposed subcontractors or suppliers that - unbeknownst
to the American officials who paid the final tab - were virtual shells,
newly created by Custer Battles executives and their partners.

Custer Battles, founded in 2001 by Scott Custer and Michael Battles,
both in their 30's, says it has about 700 employees.

Pete Baldwin, then the Iraq facilities manager, wrote in a Feb. 2
memorandum that in one typical invoice, Custer Battles claimed that
one of its shell companies had installed a helicopter pad for $157,000.
In fact, Custer Battles had hired a different company to build the pad
for $95,000, he asserted. He wrote that "every line item on that invoice,"
which was submitted for a total of $250,000, was just as "false,
fabricated, inflated."

Mr. Baldwin wrote that he had repeatedly informed Mr. Custer, the
company co-owner, of similar practices, but to no avail. A lawyer for
Custer Battles, Richard Sauber, said that Mr. Custer had subsequently
brought accountants to Iraq to clear up incomplete books but that they
had not found fraud.

Mr. Baldwin said in the memorandum that after he began raising alarms,
an executive with the company tried to fire him. Mr. Baldwin was given
notice on Feb. 20 - he has said because of his charges of fraud. Larry
Robbins, a lawyer for Custer Battles, says he was fired for "incompetence.''

Last week, documents unsealed by the Justice Department disclosed
that two former managers of Custer Battles, including Mr. Baldwin,
had brought a civil suit under the federal whistle-blower act charging
the company with fraud.

The company called those charges baseless and the work of
"a competitor and a disgruntled employee." The two former managers
could win million of dollars in rewards if the charges hold up.

In a memorandum dated Feb. 28, 2004, Peter Miskovich, who was
manager of the company's $21 million contract to safeguard Iraq's
new currency as it was being distributed, gave a scathing review of
the project, which he took over in midstream. Mr. Miskovich - who
is not part of the whistle-blower lawsuit - wrote to his superior,
Charles Baumann, then the country manager, that the records provided
"prima facie evidence of a course of conduct consistent with criminal
activity and intent."

Mr. Miskovich was later named director of the company's new Office
of Corporate Integrity. In an Oct. 13 affidavit, he said that after further
review, he had concluded that financial improprieties were more
isolated than he had declared in February. He said that "I do not
believe, based on what I learned during my tenure" as a project
manager, "that Scott Custer or Mike Battles was involved in the
questionable conduct."

Reached by telephone this week, Mr. Miskovich refused to speak to
a reporter. Mr. Baldwin could not be reached for comment.

The Air Force, which suspended the Custer Battles contract, wrote
a memorandum citing suspicion of repeated fraud. The Air Force
quotes Mr. Miskovich's Feb. 28 memorandum, and calls the evidence
of company misconduct "of so serious or compelling a nature that
it affects their present responsibility to be government contractors
or subcontractors."

In the case of the currency exchange project, said Mr. Sauber, the
lawyer for Custer Battles, the occupation authority agreed on
a final fee of $21 million, but the Pentagon has held up the final
$10 million in payments while it investigates the contract.

Earlier this month, the Justice Department declined to prosecute
Custer Battles, though the civil suit continues under the whistle-
blower law. The department gave no public explanation, but officials
had previously told lawyers in the lawsuit that because the alleged
fraud was against the Coalition Provisional Authority, federal
prosecutors did not have jurisdiction. Some experts have
questioned that reasoning.

The company founders, Scott Custer and Michael Battles, are both
Army veterans. Mr. Battles unsuccessfully ran for Congress in
Rhode Island as a Republican two years ago.

The two started out by offering security services to nongovernmental
organizations in Afghanistan after the fall of Kabul in late 2001.

But their business really took hold in June 2003, soon after the fall
of Baghdad. The men obtained a $16.5 million contract from the
occupation authorities to provide security for the Baghdad airport.

That one-year contract was not renewed, but the company had
already begun pulling in others, directly with the Coalition Provisional
Authority or as a subcontractor to other companies.

As it cut a quick and profitable swath, Custer Battles sometimes
angered more experienced security companies with its aggressive
recruitment of scarce security experts and claims to industry
leadership. The company describes itself as "the premier security
company in Iraq" on its corporate Web site.

The two founders have received praise for their entrepreneurship.
The internal memorandums charge that part of that success, at least,
was built on questionable practices.

One example captures some of the fog of post-invasion Iraq. With
forged invoices, Mr. Miskovich wrote, Custer Battles billed for providing
a security detail for the road delivery from Baghdad to Mosul of
prefabricated cabins. The housing was urgently required by teams
carrying out the currency exchange.

Not only did the company provide no guards for the trip, Mr. Miskovich
said in his Feb. 28 memo, but the convoy was also somehow lost for
a week, officials in Mosul had to sleep in tents, and the company
had to offer a reward to locate the cabins.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

6) Wife of Soldier Sentenced in Prison Abuse Scandal Speaks Out
By Brian Witte
The Associated Press
Baltimore
Friday 22 October 2004
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/102304V.shtml

Baltimore - The wife of an Army reservist sentenced to prison
for abusing prisoners in Iraq said she knows her husband was wrong,
but she also blames higher-ranking officials who "sit behind the
curtains" for the abuse.

Martha Frederick, wife of Staff Sgt. Ivan "Chip" Frederick, said the
eight-year sentence he received Thursday for his role in the Abu
Ghraib prison scandal will force her family to "endure hardships
and many sacrifices."

"The pain sets deeper yet in knowing that he serves these years
not only for his actions or actions of a few reservists, but those
included in the chain of command," she wrote in an e-mail to
The Associated Press.

Her 38-year-old husband, of Buckingham, Va., received the
stiffest punishment given so far in the scandal. But she questioned
why her husband's superiors weren't being punished for what she
said was their complicity on the abuse.

"I feel outrage that he and a few others will bear the weight for
the actions of many," she wrote.

Since finding out her husband faced charges, Frederick wrote
that her family has felt as if they were "facing a life-threatening
situation when you relive your life's most memorable moments
as well as contemplating all the things that you wish you could
change or have done differently."

Martha Frederick said she will always see her husband as a
"good soldier."

"I will see my husband as a far greater man than those who
have abandoned him, left him to be convicted for his acts and
the failures of their own," she wrote.

Throughout the e-mail, she claims "misguided" leadership led
to the abuse of Iraqi detainees. She wrote that the photographs
and videos showing abuse "do not represent the people of this
country, nor do they represent Chip as a person."

"I do not see Chip as a good soldier gone bad but as a good
soldier thrust into a no-win situation," she wrote.

She writes of the pain and isolation her family has felt, especially
her husband, who was sentenced in Iraq, far from his family.

"It is not just how my husband will endure incarceration but how
he will endure being left behind, used and discarded," she wrote.

Frederick joined the Army National Guard at 17, after convincing
his mother to sign the papers authorizing his enlistment.

Seven members of the 372nd Military Police Company of Cresaptown,
Md., have been charged in the scandal. Spc. Jeremy C. Sivits of
Hyndman, Pa., is already serving a one-year sentence after pleading
guilty in May to three counts.


(c) Copyright 2004 by TruthOut.org

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

7) Stand in Solidarity with the People of Haiti

The crisis situation in Haiti continues to deepen. The A.N.S.W.E.R.
Coalition -
along with the Haiti Support Network and progressives in the Haitian
community - initiated the Emergency Campaign to Support the Haitian
People. Many people are joining as volunteers to help support an
effective political response in Haiti and here in the United States in
solidarity with those resisting a wave of repression. We are also sending
humanitarian assistance in the form of much-needed medicines.

In the past two weeks, the de facto Haitian government has demonstrated its
complete bankruptcy by doing nothing for the flood victims and instead
launching a brutal crackdown on people in the neighborhoods of Belair
and Cité Soleil. On October 13, Haitian police, backed by UN occupation
troops, beat and arrested well-known activist priest Gérard Jean-Juste
as he was distributing food to hungry children. He is accused of being
"a threat to public order." The de facto prime minister called the
warrantless arrest "pre-emptive."

Meanwhile, the police and occupation troops have arrested and killed
dozens of other anti-coup activists. The former soldiers of the banned
Haitian Army now openly patrol the streets and have openly announced
their plan to "wipe out" resistance to the coup and occupation.

These developments make the indoor rally planned for Dec. 5 in
Brooklyn at New York Technical College all the more important.
Speakers from the Lavalas Family Party and the National Popular Party
will outline their respective visions of how the Haitian people's struggle
can advance. Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark and others
will also take part.

Thanks to your responses, we have been able to begin sending medicine
to help stave off and treat the diseases stemming from waters polluted
by sewage and cadavers. But more help is needed given the dramatic
medical and political situations in Haiti.

The Haitian people need our further support. At this time of great crisis,
generated by the U.S. government and its financial and political
dictates, the independent response of the people in the U.S. to help
stop the suffering of the Haitian people is urgently needed. Stand
with the Haitian people in their fight for democracy and
self-determination, and in their hour of medical and
humanitarian need.

You can make an urgently needed contribution immediately to the
Emergency Campaign to Support the Haitian People by clicking here
to donate by credit card online through our secure server. Credit
card donations are not tax deductible. If you want to make a tax
deductible donation to the Emergency Campaign, you can do so
by writing a check made out to the Progress Unity Fund/Haiti and
send it to Progress Unity Fund, 167 Anderson St., San Francisco,
CA 94110.

A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition
Act Now to Stop War & End Racism
http://www.ANSWERcoalition.org
info@internationalanswer.org
National Office in Washington DC: 202-544-3389
New York City: 212-533-0417
Los Angeles: 323-464-1636
San Francisco: 415-821-6545
For media inquiries, call 202-544-3389.

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

8) Safeguarding Colombia's Oil
By JUAN FORERO
PUERTO VEGA, Colombia
October 22, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/22/business/worldbusiness/22colombia.html?ore
f=login&oref=login&pagewanted=print&position

PUERTO VEGA, Colombia - In the biggest, most ambitious army
offensive in Colombia's 40-year rebel war, 18,000 counterinsurgency
troops have since January fanned out across four isolated southern
states, a lawless swath that for years functioned as a de facto republic
for Marxist rebels.

Aided by American helicopters, planning and surveillance, Colombian
forces have the stated goal of penetrating the historic heart of
Colombia's largest rebel group to "strike a decisive blow to narco-
terrorists," as Gen. James Hill, the commander of United States
forces in Latin America, put it earlier this year.

But the Washington-backed offensive has another motive, oil and
military authorities say, one that Colombian and American officials
only gingerly discuss: to make potentially oil-rich regions safe for
exploration by private companies and the government-run
oil company.

With Colombian oil production falling and the Bush administration
eagerly seeking to diversify American oil imports, Colombia's
government has made securing potentially lucrative oil basins
and other energy infrastructure a cornerstone of its efforts to
pacify this vast country.

"For the military, the priority is to protect and provide confidence
for investors, in particular in the petroleum sector," said Mauricio
Salgar, operations director for Ecopetrol, the state oil firm. "For
the investor, it's important that he know that in Colombia he has
an ally."

The policy's twin emphasis of protecting oil production and
challenging Colombia's most formidable rebel group, the
Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, is most apparent
here in Putumayo province, where coca once grew like weeds
and rebels freely controlled roads and towns.

One of the newcomers is Petrotesting Colombia, a small, spirited
homegrown company that has made the production of crude in
dangerous corners of Colombia something of a specialty. But it
does not operate here alone.

Four hundred troops patrol a narrow dirt road used by tankers
to transport crude. At one Petrotesting well, soldiers with Galil
assault rifles stand guard from a heavily fortified base circled
by a dozen sandbag bunkers.

"We went in with the support of the armed forces," Frank C. Kanayet,
the company's president, said in an interview in at the company's
new offices in Bogotá. "Without government support, we would
not have been able to come in."

Much of the coca, used to produce cocaine, has been destroyed
here in an American-funded eradication drive. The soldiers who
now stand guard in the wilting heat say they have been told their
job is vital - ensuring that the oil and government revenues flow.
Lately, they have been in an upbeat mood.

"All of this belonged to the guerrillas," said Lt. Luis Villalba, the
young commander of a group of soldiers standing sentry. "Now
it belongs to the army."

Such boasts may be premature. Across four provinces, the guerrillas
have melted into the jungle, avoiding direct confrontations. But they
have left behind snipers and land mines that have bogged down
army forces, killed about 50 soldiers and wounded hundreds. Here
in the cattle pastures and jungles south of the Putumayo River, the
rebels also recently burned nine tankers carrying Petrotesting's oil
and killed one driver.

"They've told us, 'This is our crude, and you are only helping the
multinationals,' " said José Ney, 44, whose tanker was set on fire
by rebels in September. "If they stop me again, they'll kill me."

Still, for the first time in years, soldiers and police have arrived in
isolated pockets of this province, as well as forgotten regions of
three others, Caquetá, Meta and Guaviare. And while bombings
against infrastructure like oil pipelines and wells continue in
Putumayo, the attacks have fallen from 149 in 2003 to 58 this
year through mid-October.

The military and oil company representatives credit two battalions
created just to guard oil infrastructure. They and other units protect
such companies as Argosy Energy International of Houston, which
has 15 wells in Putumayo, and Petrobank Energy and Resources,
a Canadian oil producer that has banked much of its future in
Colombia on tapping into an oil deposit in the Orito region that
may contain a billion barrels.

"There's a feeling of safety, that we're keeping the peace," said
Major Pedro Sánchez, an 18-year counterinsurgency specialist
who is the second in command of the battalion that protects oil
installations in Orito. "We've provided confidence so companies
can explore here."

Employing Colombia's 200,000-member army to further oil
interests is seen as critical to President Álvaro Uribe's ambitious
plans to boost oil production. Oil is Colombia's No. 1 export,
providing nearly a third of the state's revenues. Latin America's
third-largest exporter of oil, Colombia has long been among the
top 10 suppliers of crude to the United States.

But a worsening conflict, coupled with contract terms that
prospective investors found unpalatable, prompted oil companies
to abandon the country and caused exploration to stagnate. From
production of 830,000 barrels a day in 1999, Colombia now pumps
535,000 daily.

With many of the country's major fields fast declining, like
Occidental Petroleum's Caño Limón and BP's Cusiana and Cupiagua,
energy planners here say Colombia will become a net importer by
2009 unless new discoveries are made.

That means luring oil companies, large and small, even to regions
like Putumayo, where energy planners say production of just
10,000 barrels a day could easily quadruple with more exploration.

"Whatever barrel of oil that's out there, we're going to go after
aggressively," said Mr. Salgar, the Ecopetrol director of operations.
"Some of these fields are very small, but we think they are all
important. One barrel of oil is better than no barrels."

Though unproven, Colombian energy officials believe the country
may contain 47 billion barrels of oil, an estimate based on
Colombia's proximity to its oil-rich neighbor, Venezuela, with
which it shares much of the same oil-producing geology.

Colombia, however, is vastly underexplored, with exploration
and production going on in only 7 of the nation's 18 sedimentary
basins, Ecopetrol officials said.

To spur exploration, the state in 2001 reduced Ecopetrol's
mandatory share in joint ventures from 50 percent to 30 percent.
Then, in 2002, the government replaced its flat 20 percent royalty
with a sliding scale that enhances the financial viability of small
projects.

In April, the state went further, eliminating Ecopetrol's required
participation in projects. Taxes were also reduced, the lifespan
of contracts extended and the awarding of concessions made
more flexible. Ecopetrol itself was split into two units, one
devoted to developing business.

The scope of the changes prompted the regional president of one
major oil company, who asked that his name not be used, to remark:
"The government is literally desperate."

Armando Zamora, director of the National Hydrocarbon Agency,
which administers concessions, agreed. "We were anguished and
that's what permitted us to undertake these reforms."

The measures have attracted attention and business. The biggest
catch this year has been Exxon Mobil , which along with Petrobras,
a long-time oil producer here, took advantage of beneficial terms
to undertake an ambitious offshore exploration project.

Other big companies like ChevronTexaco and Occidental Petroleum
have extended natural gas and oil contracts. The Harken Energy
Corporation , Repsol-YPF of Spain, Hocol and several smaller
companies have in recent months signed either exploration
contracts or viability agreements that will likely lead to exploration.

In all, 20 exploration contracts have been signed this year, continuing
a trend from 2003, when 21 companies signed contracts. In 2002,
when the conflict was raging and before new terms were introduced,
14 contracts were signed.

But the state realized that it needed to address security if it wanted
oil companies to explore in regions like the foothills of the Andes in
Meta and Casanare provinces or in the war-torn Catatumbo region
in northeastern Colombia. These areas may have oil, but they are
lawless and violent.

Upon taking office in August of 2002, Mr. Uribe's government
stepped up its protection of power lines and reduced the theft of
gasoline by right-wing paramilitary groups that had a long-
standing practice of tapping into government-owned pipelines.

The government also established a new office in the presidency,
the Presidential Councilor for Infrastructure Protection, which meets
frequently with military officials, Ecopetrol and oil officials to
discuss security measures.

The Bush administration, meanwhile, reversed American policy and
dispatched Special Forces trainers from Fort Bragg, N.C., to train
Colombian soldiers to protect a 500-mile pipeline used by Occidental
Petroleum, which is based in Los Angeles, to pump crude from its
northeastern oil fields.

State oil officials say the idea now is to simply get prospective
companies to travel to Colombia to discuss the safety issues.
"Those companies that are afraid, we tell them, 'First send your
security people,' " said Mr. Zamora of the National Hydrocarbons
Agency. "They come down, and we take them to the Defense
Ministry, the Mines and Energy Ministry, to other companies,
so they can see for themselves."

Such measures have raised concerns among some policy analysts
who question using public funds, both American and Colombian,
to benefit mostly private companies.

Many of the companies are American and, like Occidental, have
long lobbied Washington to back Colombia's government more
strongly. American military planners have also played an important
role in devising military efforts to both protect infrastructure and
hit the guerrillas.

"Even if the Uribe government has launched offensives in other
places, the U.S. assistance has been in places that do have oil
reserves," said Adam Isacson, a senior policy analyst who tracks
Colombia for the Center for International Policy, an organization
in Washington that promotes demilitarization and human rights.
"Coincidence?"

The policies, though, have in many cases benefited ordinary
Colombians long forgotten by the state.

There are now security forces in all 1,100 Colombian municipalities
nationwide; two years ago, nearly 200 towns had no police or soldiers.
Soldiers and light tanks line vital roads near big cities where
Colombians were often kidnapped.

For Petrobank's Colombian subsidiary, Petrominerales, the presence
of troops has been reassuring. Steven J. Benedetti, Petrominerales'
general manager in Colombia, notes that the company has not gone
unscathed: rebels have been attacking its wells since production
began in January of 2003.

Still, Mr. Benedetti remains optimistic. "It's a situation where we
have to weigh the risks with the benefits," he said. "Putumayo is
going to be important for a long time to come."

Copyright 2004 The New York Times

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
END THE U.S. OCCUPATION OF IRAQ!
BRING ALL THE TROOPS HOME NOW!
MARCH AND RALLY TO STOP THE WAR NOW!
WEDNESDAY, NOV. 3RD, 5PM
POWELL AND MARKET-MARCH TO 24TH & MISSION ST., S.F.
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
VOTE YES ON N! MEETING THURSDAY, OCT. 28, 7PM,
GLOBAL EXCHANGE, 2017 MISSION STREET, SUITE 303
(NEAR 16TH & MISSION STREETS)
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
NEXT BAUAW MEETING
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 26, 7 P.M.
1380 VALENCIA STREET
(BETWEEN 24TH & 25TH STREETS)
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

1) Dear UFPJ Bay Area Members, (and BAUAW and everyone...bw)
"This week both the San Francisco Chronicle and the Examiner came out
strongly against Prop N..."
Quote from Chronicle Editorial:
"Such is the danger of a symbolic resolution written by a group
of politicians who have enough trouble solving problems in the
streets of their own city. They are clearly over their heads in
trying to figure out how to bring peace and stability to Fallujah
or Baghdad."

2) Yes on N Lowell coverage/photos
"Jeff Paterson"
Thu, 21 Oct 2004 13:57:11 -0700

3) MWM Meeting Sunday October 24th 5:30PM !!!
From: "Douglas MacDonald"
To: All MWM supporters and Committee Memebers
(NOTE: The Date for the Report Back on the MWM is SUNDAY
October 24 th !!!!! ( not the 22 nd )

4) Just Say No to More Cops!
This special Education not Incarceration announcement
is being sent out as the No on Measure Y campaign goes
into its home stretch.

5) A Call to Action:
The following Call to Action was raised from the stage at
the Million Worker March on Sunday, and supported by a
meeting of the Million Worker March Committee on Monday,
October 18.

6) Bush Signs $136 Billion
Corporate Tax Cut Bill
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON
Filed at 3:51 p.m. ET
October 22, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Corporate-Taxes.html?oref=login

7) Why Didn't Anyone Tell Us?
Environmental Racism Threatens the Lives of our Babies
By Ebony Colbert
http://www.sfbayview.com/102004/why102004.shtml

8) A Schoolgirl Riddled with Bullets. And No One is to Blame
Questions remain after Israeli unit commander is cleared
of Palestinian pupil's death
By Chris McGreal in Rafah
Published on Thursday, October 21, 2004 by the Guardian/UK
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1021-03.htm

9) Cancer and the Environment
What the Bill Moyers Program "Trade Secrets" Revealed
By Roland Sheppard

10) Ogallala Aquifer
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/sci/tech/3754520.stm
Published: 2004/10/20 07:48:58 GMT
[map on url]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/sci/tech/3754520.stm
Map: The world's water hotspots

11) I Was Robbed Last Sunday
My Personal Reflections After the Washington DC.
Million Workers March and
the Armed Robbery Happened to Me
By: Lee Siu Hin
October 20, 2004

12) DOCUMENTARY: 'A Killing in Choctaw' tells an extraordinary
American story of murder and forgiveness

13) Dear Readers
Here is the digest for October 21, 2004
1-Two killed in the northern Gaza Strip, another dies
of wounds sustained on Wednesday
2-231 Palestinians, including 88 children, killed in
Khan Younis in four year

14) Return of the Class Struggle: Hotel Workers National
Battle, One We Can't Afford to Lose
By Gene Pepi
craigslist.org/cgi-bin/search?areaID=1&subAreaID=1&query=san+francisco&cat=o
ff&minAsk=500&maxAsk=1000&minSqft=600&neighborhood=




---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

1) Dear UFPJ Bay Area Members, (and BAUAW and everyone...bw)
"This week both the San Francisco Chronicle and the Examiner came out
strongly against Prop N..."
Quote from Chronicle Editorial:
"Such is the danger of a symbolic resolution written by a group
of politicians who have enough trouble solving problems in the
streets of their own city. They are clearly over their heads in
trying to figure out how to bring peace and stability to Fallujah
or Baghdad."

Prop N needs your help. This week both the San Francisco Chronicle
and the Examiner came out strongly against Prop N despite
endorsements from dozens of San Francisco groups including
the SF Labor Council, SF Building & Construction Trades Council,
the Sierra Club and the SF Democratic Party. This is a low blow to
the local Peace Movement.

In both arguments, the editors state that there is no place for
opposition to the Iraq War in local politics, appear to ignore the
psychological, economic and even physical harm caused to people in
our city because of the Iraq War, and seem to encourage the citizens
of San Francisco who are voicing their opposition through local
government to essentially burry our heads in the sand and let the
Bush or Kerry Administration take care of it. Yeah, right.

The Chron went so far as to suggest that Prop N was conceived
exclusively by ill-witted SF Supervisors, mockingly rename
Prop N 'Bring the supes home now', and say "(The Supervisors)
are clearly over their heads in trying to figure out how to bring
peace and stability to Fallujah or Baghdad." Are we activists
over our heads, too?

Both newspapers also took the common stance that an immediate
withdrawal of US Troops would do more harm than good. But,
if they had taken the time to speak to some of us working on the
Prop N, maybe they would have come to the conclusion that the
US military presence is a source of violence, not tranquility and
that our military occupation should be replaced by humanitarian
aid in order to bring peace. Maybe they would have also learned
about similar legislation that occured in many cities across the
nation during the final stages of the Vietnam War.

At the bottom of this message are links to the Chron and Examiner
Prop N arguments. If you want to help counter their assaults,
please send your opinion to the editors:

http://www.sfgate.com/feedback/
letters@examiner.com

Finally, to give you an idea of the Chron's cogent perspective on
local politics, today's headline in their online political section is
'Lovin' Mouthfuls' in which "Kimberly Guilfoyle Newsom recently
shared steamy details about hubby Gavin's sexuality, prowess
and much more...". I'm sorry, but is that really newsworthy?

Jon Previtali
Bring Our Troops Home Now, Vote Yes on N!
www.yesonn.net


Chron (10/21/04) "Bring the supes home now" (No on Prop N)
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/10/21/EDGD99CLKK1.DTL

Examiner (10/19/04) "No on Prop N"
http://www.examiner.com/article/index.cfm/i/101904op_editorial

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

2) Yes on N Lowell coverage/photos
"Jeff Paterson"
Thu, 21 Oct 2004 13:57:11 -0700

Hi folks,

Here is the IMC coverage with photos from yesterday's
"Yes on N" rally at Lowell I filed today. Feel free to use the
photos for anything related to the campaign.

High school students organize rally against the war, for SF prop N.

http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/10/1700635.php

Jeff for
Not in Our Name


---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

3) MWM Meeting Sunday October 24th 5:30PM !!!
From: "Douglas MacDonald"
To: All MWM supporters and Committee Memebers
(NOTE: The Date for the Report Back on the MWM is SUNDAY
October 24th! (not the 22nd)



Dear Brothers and Sisters;



The SF MWM Committee voted at our last meting to have a report
back to describe and discuss what occurred and what will come
from the MWM on Washington . Please make certain to attend this
Million Worker March Meeting on SUNDAY Oct 24 th at 5:30PM,
400 North Point, the ILWU Local 10 Hall.

Proposed Agenda includes:

Report Back on March and Evaluation
Report Back on Regional Meeting and Proposed Organizing
Campaigns/Activities (see below)
Discussion on Division of Labor/Structure and
Membership of the SF MWM Committee
Old Business
Telephone Workers Solidarity Event
Update on Hotel Workers Struggle
Update on Bricklayers Struggle with Valero Refinery
Outreach to Local Endorsing Unions and Organizations

The following activities and actions were proposed to be brought
back to the regional committees in order to gain grass roots input.
Some, none or all of the activities can be executed, changed and modified.
The next Regional MWM conference call will develop an action plan
based the input gathered from the members of each regional committee.
The proposed actions and activities are listed below:

_ 11/7 - Support rallies for the National Japanese Day of Protest

_ November - Develop local workers boards to take testimony on
the harassment of workers organizing drives, the difficulty in obtaining
workers compensation and the general attack on workers rights in each
region of the nation.

_ November - Contacting UNITE/HERE to determine what the MWM
regional committees can do to support the national struggle of the hotel
and restaurant workers. Propose a National Day of Solidarity with
these workers struggle for a fair contract.

_ 12/3-12/10 - Support the National week of anti-war protests.

_ 12/4 - 12/5 - Attend the US Labor Against the War Conference
in Chicago and advocate for the cooperation of the MWM movement
and USLAW.

_ December - Send representatives to the Labor Party Meeting
to advocate for cooperation between the MWM movement and the
Labor Party.

_ 1/20/05 - Participate as a delegation in the anti-inauguration
activities

_ 3/20/05 - Support International Women's Day activities.

_ 5/1/05 - (International Labor Day) Promote a global demonstration
against privatization while building international solidarity for workers
rights.

_ 6/23/05 - Organize protests against Taft-Hartley, the slave-labor
law that undermines union organizing and strikes. 6/23 is the
anniversary of the creation and adoption of Taft-Hartley.

_ 7/7/05 - Send representatives to the national AFL-CIO convention
in Chicago to promote the MWM movement and advocate for cooperation
between the organized labor movement and community organizations
on the demands of the MWM.

_ 7/16/05 - Convene a National MWM Conference in order to promote
the MWM demands and the independent movement of working people
mobilizing in their own name to advance their own needs in their own voice.

_ Encourage ongoing regional actions and organizing around the
MWM demands by building labor-community alliances and coalitions
in each region.

Solidarity;

Douglas MacDonald

925-890-6430

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

4) Just Say No to More Cops!
This special Education not Incarceration announcement
is being sent out as the No on Measure Y campaign goes
into its home stretch.

Hi Friends,

Please join me at the fundraiser for the No on Measure Y campaign
(just say no to more cops) in Oakland this Friday night, 8pm,
Humanist Hall, 390 27th Street, downtown Oakland, and at the
following events Saturday and Monday. The movie "Every Mother's Son"
is a powerful documentary on three victims of police murder in New
York City and the mothers' quest for justice and accountability, and
the panel afterwards with the mothers of Idris Stelly, Cammerin Boyd,
and Malaika Parker of Bay Area Policewatch will bring it home to the
Bay Area.

Californians for Justice is the latest endorser of No on Y; let's keep
working to build a movement for peace and justice in Oakland.

Thank you,
Aaron Shuman
510-938-0654 mobile
510-428-9417 home

From: "Education Not Incarceration"
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 11:38:00 -0700 (PDT)
To: ednotinc@riseup.net
Subject: Special Announcement for No on Measure Y

NO ON MEASURE Y!!!!

This special Education not Incarceration announcement
is being sent out as the No on Measure Y campaign goes
into its home stretch. First is a list of 3 upcoming
No on Measure Y events. Following that is a powerful
essay written by a high school student at Oakland Tech
HS about being racially profiled in the hallway of his
school. Please endorse the No on Y campaign and share
this with your friends.

No on Measure Y: Jobs, Housing, Education and Health
Care, Not 63 More Cops

1. Fundraiser for No on Measure Y
A screening of the film, "Every Mother's Son," which
is about victims of police violence in New York City.
There will be guest speakers following the film,
including mothers of the victims. The event is
happening this Friday, October 22nd, from 8pm-10pm at
the Humanist Hall in Oakland, which is located at
390 27th Street (near 27th and Broadway)

Suggested Donation of $5-10, but no-one will be turned
away for lack of funds.

2. Saturday, October 23rd: Stop America's Other War.
March for Social Justice and Against Measure Y,
beginning at 11AM at Lake Merrit (Macarthur and Grand)

3. Monday, October 25th, No on Measure Y: Rally
Against Police Brutality, Racial Profiling and
Harrassment: 10:30AM at the Oakland Police
Headquarters, 7th Str. and Washington St.

Make a Donation...
If you can't make it to the fundraiser or the other
events, you can still help out by donating money to
the No on Measure Y campaign. Any amount of money would
be appreciated! Checks can be made payable to
No on Measure Y.org and sent to: No
on Measure Y, 3746 39th Ave, Oakland, CA 94619

A BLACK OAKLAND YOUTH SPEAKS OUT AGAINST MEASURE Y

Please pass this on to your friends (not to other
listservs). Please sign it at the bottom with your
name and organization to show that you are endorsing
No on Measure Y. If you are signature # 5,10,15 etc.
please also send the e-mail to noonmeasurey@yahoo.com

http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2004/10/1703950.php

What Are You Doing in the Hall?
by Laurence Ashton/PoorNewsNetwork Youth in Media

One Black youth speaks out against Measure Y and the
march toward a whiter, richer more militarized Oakland

" What are you doing in the hall?" A mechanical voice
shot through the cavernous hall of Oakland Technical
High School. It couldn't have been for me, I thought,
I had a hall pass and wasn't causing no trouble for
noone

"……did you hear me…what are doing in the hall?" And
then it hit me , it was for me and this time it was
accompanied the dreaded click click noise of police
heels studded with metal tips for that almost
like-a-gun sound.

"I have a pass," I turned around and faced two Oakland
Police Officers who by this time were now fingering
their guns and coming toward me, clicking in unison.

"Let me see it" They had reached me now and one of
them was less than five inches away from my face"

I fumbled for my jacket pocket, as I did 'the other
cop began whispering into his shoulder, "code… call
for back-up"

Suddenly before my nervous hands could find the pass,
I was against the wall and they were patting me down.
Within seconds instead of weapons, they found the pass
and after a short cough, one of them helped me up and
said, "you should of spoke up sooner, next time keep
your pass in your hand" With that, they both walked on
down the hall ready to harass the next unsuspecting
student who happened in their path.

Later that day I found out that the Oakland Police
Department had been called on campus for "a
disturbance" which turned out was nothing, so I
figured just to make their day not a complete waste of
time, they decided to get me on a casual WWB (Walking
While Black) violation. But of course what they failed
to differentiate was the fact that I wasn't just
"walking" I was a 16 year High School student walking
through The Halls of my school and, in my opinion,
they had absolutely no right in there in the first
place.

This disgusting experience, one of many I have
encountered as young African Descendent male living in
Amerikka, happened almost 3 years ago, and it all came
back to me in living sickening color when my editor at
PNN asked me to write about the proposed legislation
Measure Y, which aims to put at least 63 more cops on
the streets in Oakland funding it with a new flat tax
on Oakland homeowners.

Measure Y will go on November's ballot because it was
approved by a majority vote of the Oakland City
Council, and instead of funding the already poverty
stricken Oakland schools will direct 60 percent of the
newly raised taxes to hire more police officers in
Oakland.

Education Not Incarceration reported that just like in
my case, cops don't prevent violence, they cause
violence, they instigate problems where there aren't
any. When there were less cops on Oakland's streets
such as between 1995 - 1996 when there approximately
100 less cops on the streets, homicides decreased from
152 to 102 and a similar situation occurred from 1999
to 2000, when homicide rates decreased when the number
of Oakland police officers decreased.

Those of us who deal on the frontline of racism and
poverty have known all of this for a long time, in my
case, not only is it my situation but my fathers' who
is a houseless, mentally ill Black man. He lives
homelessly in LA and the Bay Area and gets harassed,
abused and profiled by cops every day. He doesn't get
accepted into over-filled supportive housing or access
to scarce mental health treatment just because he is
arrested for sleeping in a park at night. And
similarly, I don't get a better public education
because I get harassed in my school's hall. Police
don't get at the root causes of poverty and racism;
they just make life harder for the poor folks and the
folks of color unlucky enough to be on their radar
screen that day.

Now I am not saying that all cops are bad, only most
of them, but the idea that getting more cops will
solve Oakland's' problems is just more Jerry Drowning
of our scarce resources and services to supposedly
make life better for scared rich folks who want to
move foreword with the march towards a whiter, richer,
more militarized Oakland.
www.poormagazine.org


I ENDORSE NO ON MEASURE Y:
*Organization Names are for identification purpose
1. Jonah Zern, Education not Incarceration and Oakland
Education Association
2. Zachary Runningwolf, Native American Leader
3. Tommy Escarcega, Proyecto Common Touch
4. Alice DoValle, Justice Now
5. Wilson Riles Jr., Oakland Community Action Network
6. David Laub, Oakland Education Association
7. Desley Brooks, Oakland Citycouncilwoman
8. Greg Hodge, School Board Member
9. Patricia Loya, Centro Legal de la Raza
10. Lisa Gutierez Guzman, Teachers for Social Justice
11. Fannie Brown, state co-chair, ACORN
12. Heath Maddom, Education not Incarceration
13. Cici Malin. Education not Incarceration
14. Jumoke Hinton Hodge
15. Dwayne Wiggins
16. Ricardo Barba

Benefit , Film Showing And Music
For San Francisco Unite-HERE Local 2 Locked Out Hotel Workers

Hotel Workers Battle For Justice
A series of films/videos celebrating the struggle of hotel and restaurant
workers.

Friday October 29, 2004 6:30 PM
New College Of California rm 4
777 Valencia St.
San Francisco

Sliding Scale $5.00-$10.00


Join labor supporters and activists when LaborFest will
screen hotel worker videos from

1946 Hotel Workers Strike with striking workers "Beauty
Pageant" at the Mark Hopkins
"Walking Out" a video of the Zim's restaurant workers strike
"Union Town" of the 1980 hotel workers strike

Sponsored by

LaborFest
P.O. Box 40983
San Francisco, CA 94140
(415)642-8066
laborfest@laborfest.net

Co-sponsored by
Labor Video Project
P.O. Box 425584
San Francisco, CA 94142
(415)282-1908

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

5) A Call to Action:
The following Call to Action was raised from the stage at
the Million Worker March on Sunday, and supported by a
meeting of the Million Worker March Committee on Monday,
October 18.

We forward this to you in lieu of a full report of this
historic and important event, which has formed a new level
of unity between the antiwar movement and the workers'
struggle.

We encourage activists across the country to begin
discussing December 3-10. Send us your ideas and feedback
as soon as possible.

There has been a suggestion that Friday, December 3 might
be a perfect day for student walkouts--this is something
that student activists will know best.

In the coming days, this web page will report on the
specific proposals for action on the various days, Dec.
3-10, including actions planned by labor activists and
unions, by students and youth, and by community
organizers.

Please contact us to endorse, to offer feedback, and to
share your ideas:
stopthewar@antiwar4themillionworkermarch.org

***ENOUGH!
A Call to Action

Dec 3 - Dec 10

"The War Must Stop Now!" Week

Not one more life - or U.S. bullet or bomb - or new war to
pacify Iraq.

It is with a shared sense of seriousness and urgency that
we appeal to all antiwar forces, including: those of us
who are based in the union/workers movement; organizations
that are fighting for jobs, health care and housing; youth
and student organizations; veterans; military families;
military resisters; solidarity movements; and all the
other progressive movements - to make the week of Friday
Dec. 3 - Friday Dec. 10 (International Human Rights Day) a
time for truly mass action across the country to Stop The
War Now! including job actions, student walkouts,
boycotts, and business closings.

The U.S. has started a new war to conquer Iraq - It Will
Not Work - But it will be deadly - UNLESS we say, "No
More!"

The bombing raids on Falluja and other Iraqi cities have
been intensifying, and after the U.S. presidential
elections, the occupation forces are preparing a
full-scale new war to "pacify" Iraq in preparation for
phony U.S.-controlled elections in January. This assault
will not subdue the Iraqi people; they have made it clear
that they want the U.S., and U.S.-led occupation forces to
leave immediately.

However, this new desperate and deadly plan to conquer a
people who refused to be conquered will cause enormous
death and destruction unless we make it clear that the war
will no longer be tolerated.

The War & Occupation must end now! And the People can end
it!

Our challenge, especially for those of us who have marched
against the war, and those of us who have worked hard to
organize those marches, to remind ourselves that the
election is not going to stop the war, and that waiting
for something beyond our control to stop the war only
weakens our movement. The majority of the people want the
war and occupation to end immediately. It is up to us to
act with a sense of urgency, immediacy, passion, and
determination. It is time to say “No More!”

Jobs - Unions - Healthcare - Education - Housing - Bring
the Troops Home Now!

stopthewar@antiwar4themillionworkermarch.org

Million Workers March Audio and Video by Ryme Katkhouda,
Fred Nguyen and the dc-radio-coop
http://dc.indymedia.org/feature/display/107031/index.php

Read the Washington Post article about the Million Worker
March:
http://www.antiwar4themillionworkermarch.org/washingtonpost.htm

http://www.antiwar4themillionworkermarch.org

To Donate: http://www.peoplesrightsfund.org

Other Upcoming Actions:

Dec. 4 - No Draft, No Way Conference in New York in NYC

Dec. 5 - Indoor Solidarity Rally with Haiti in NYC

Jan. 20 - Counter-Inaugural in Washington, DC

Anyone can subscribe.
Send an email request to
AntiWar4theMillionWorkerMarch-subscribe@organizerweb.com

To unsubscribe AntiWar4theMillionWorkerMarch-unsubscribe@organizerweb.com

Subscribing and unsubscribing can also be done on the Web at
http://www.organizerweb.com/mailman/listinfo/antiwar4themillionworkermarch

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

6) Bush Signs $136 Billion
Corporate Tax Cut Bill
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON
Filed at 3:51 p.m. ET
October 22, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Corporate-Taxes.html?oref=login

WASHINGTON (AP) -- With no fanfare, President Bush on Friday
signed the most sweeping rewrite of corporate tax law in nearly
two decades, showering $136 billion in new tax breaks on businesses,
farmers and other groups.

Intended to end a bitter trade war with Europe, the election-year
measure was described by supporters as critically necessary to aid
beleaguered manufacturers who have suffered 2.7 million lost jobs
over the past four years.

But opponents charged that the tax package had grown into a massive
giveaway that will add to the complexity of the tax system and end up
rewarding multinational companies that move jobs overseas.

There was no ceremony for the bill-signing. White House press
secretary Scott McClellan announced it on Air Force One as Bush flew
to a campaign appearance in Pennsylvania.

Bush mentioned the new tax law at the beginning of a health care
event in Canton, Ohio.

``I signed a bill that's going to help our manufacturers -- that will
save $77 billion over the next 10 years for the manufacturing sector
of America,'' Bush said. ``That will help keep jobs here.''

The handling of the corporate tax bill was in contrast to Bush's action
on Oct. 4 when he sat before television cameras on a stage in Des Moines,
Iowa, to sign three tax-cut breaks popular with middle-class voters and
reviving other tax incentives for businesses.

Bush's campaign rival, Sen. John Kerry, missed the vote on the corporate
tax breaks. Kerry spokesman Phil Singer said there were many important
things in the bill but that ``George Bush filled the bill up with corporate
giveaways and tax breaks for multinational companies that send jobs
overseas. In his first budget, John Kerry will call for the repeal of all
the
unwarranted international tax breaks that George Bush included in this
bill.''

The Joint Tax Committee said the overall bill would not increase the
deficit because the $136 billion in tax cuts were balanced by $136 billion
in tax increases. Democrats contended the true costs of the tax cuts would
be nearly $80 billion higher because Republicans used accounting gimmicks
such as having popular provisions expire after a few years.

The original purpose for the legislation was to repeal a $5 billion annual
tax break provided to American exporters that was ruled illegal by the
Geneva-based World Trade Organization. Repeal of the tax break was
needed to lift retaliatory tariffs that are now being imposed on more than
1,600 American manufactured products and farm goods exported to
Europe.

The bill replaces the $49.2 billion export tax break with $136 billion in
new tax breaks over the next decade for a wide array of groups from
farmers, fishermen and bow and arrow hunters to some of America's
largest corporations.

The legislation also includes a $10.1 billion buyout of quotas held by
tobacco farmers. However, a Senate provision that would have coupled
this buyout with regulation of tobacco by the Food and Drug
Administration was dropped by the conference committee that
resolved differences between the two chambers.

The measure is the most sweeping overhaul of corporate tax law
since 1986. It provides a wide range of tax benefits for native Alaskan
whalers, importers of Chinese ceiling fans and NASCAR race track
owners.

The centerpiece is $76.5 billion in new tax relief for the battered
manufacturing sector, but manufacturing is broadly defined to include
not just factories but also oil and gas producers, engineering,
construction and architectural firms and large farming operations.

The bill was seen as must-pass legislation because it repeals a
$5 billion annual subsidy for U.S. exporters that has been ruled
illegal by the World Trade Organization. Because of that ruling,
1,600 American exports to Europe have been hit by penalty tariffs
that now stand at 12 percent and are rising by 1 percentage point
a month.

In addition to the $76.5 billion in tax relief for manufacturing, the
measure would also provide $42.6 billion in tax relief to multinational
companies.

Supporters argued that the tax relief for multinational corporations
would boost the competitiveness of U.S. companies, but opponents
argued that it would simply provide more tax benefits to support the
movement of U.S. jobs overseas.

To pay for the $136 billion total of new tax relief over the next decade,
the legislation would rely on the savings from repealing the export
subsidy and would close corporate loopholes and tax shelters --
thereby raising an estimated $82 billion over the next decade.

Copyright 2004 The Associated Press

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

7) Why Didn't Anyone Tell Us?
Environmental Racism Threatens the Lives of our Babies
By Ebony Colbert
http://www.sfbayview.com/102004/why102004.shtml

Ebony holds little Shana, with Shawn beside
them and Keshawn standing behind, in this Christmas 2003 family
portrait.

Part 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle's major
front page exposé on California neighborhoods with unusually high
rates of infant death gave us a glimpse into the lives of Bay View
Hunters Point residents Tuli and Walter Hughes, a couple whose six-year
marriage had been burdened with several miscarriages and the depression
that follows. After five such losses, Tuli's doctor informed her
that she had a weak cervix, for which she was treated and given
much needed attention. She eventually conceived and carried to term
a beautiful baby girl, who just turned a year old. Their story is
one that is all too familiar for many young people of child bearing
age in Bay View Hunters Point, including myself.

This is why I felt compelled to write this article: Also a BVHP
resident, I am the mother of a happy, healthy 17-month-old baby
girl and am expecting a baby boy in January of 2005. My fiancé and
I, though ecstatic, are being very cautious. Together since March
1999, we experienced miscarriages once in the year 2000 and twice
in 2001 - all before the third month of pregnancy.

I was diagnosed, by a nurse practitioner at Kaiser, as having
polycystic ovaries, a reproductive disorder that affects the hormones
responsible for ovulation and conception. It causes lapses in your
menstrual cycle and spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) along with
a host of other problems. After getting a second opinion at San
Francisco General Hospital, I was told by a fertility specialist
that the disorder was not only hereditary but common among women
of color and those who are overweight.

He also told me that he had treated quite a few cases in women
who lived in Hunters Point for the same disorder. It wasn't until
my fiancé and I moved away from the Bay View in 2002 that we were
able to conceive and carry a child to term.

April 24, 2003, the day my daughter was born, was the happiest
day of my life.

For many women in Bay View Hunters Point, the confusion and
embarrassment of reproductive disorders and infertility have heard
many cases of them losing their unborn children before they feel the first
kicks. Erin McCormick, who wrote the Chronicle's five-part series,
"Too young to die" (10/3-7/04, www.sfgate.com/infantmortality/),
surmised that the "stress of racism, environmental problems, poverty
and crime may explain why so many babies die young."

Her article shed light on a problem whose cause could literally
be "up in the air." Until now, no one, not even the San Francisco
Department of Public Health, has disclosed to residents how these
issues may also be the cause of hundreds of cases of infertility
among BVHP's female population. To date, no studies on the matter
have been published.

Even those young women in our community who are not interested
in having children any time in the near future may find it interesting
to know that their chances for even conceiving a child may be lower
than those in other neighborhoods in the city.

In the past 10 years, we have learned of high instances of breast
cancer and asthma in BVHP, zip code 94124. However, no stretch of
the imagination could prepare us for the reality that not only are
our children at higher risk for death due to violence, they are
also less likely to even be born - and more than twice as likely
to perish before their first birthday than those who are merely
living in a nearby zip code.

Infant mortality rates have dropped significantly throughout the
United States in the past 16 years. San Francisco, in fact, has
the lowest rate of infant death of any large city in the U.S. However,
according to the Chronicle, which studied 10 years of state data,
Black babies in Bay View Hunters Point are three times more likely
to die than white babies born throughout California! The mortality
rate for all infants in BVHP is 2.5 times higher than for San Francisco
citywide.

So how it is possible for a woman to have a healthy pregnancy
and uneventful birth and still lose a child - who seems perfectly
healthy - before he utters his first word? One young woman I spoke
with recalls the funeral of a friend's "healthy" baby boy. "It was
so sad, and everyone was wondering how it could have happened. My
friend doesn't smoke, she doesn't drink. The baby slept in his own
crib. He shouldn't have died. His parents said they woke up and
he just wasn't breathing. He was fine before he went to sleep. He
always slept through the night. When she woke up to check on him
to see if he needed changing, he didn't have a pulse. He was only
5 months old." Until the Chronicle's study was released, most of
us would have called it the will of God. Now it's open to speculation.

So-called experts in the field would expect you to believe that
young mothers in the Bay View don't get adequate pre-natal care,
don't eat right, use drugs and alcohol or are uneducated when it
comes to parenting. They put the blame on the victims. New moms
and their families tend to disagree with these opinions. Of the
infant death cluster the Chronicle found - five families who had
lost a total of eight babies around Double Rock, near the Shipyard
- only one mother had a history of drug abuse.

Many new mothers complain that when they visit their doctors'
offices, they are immediately referred to social workers. They are
often treated as statistics and even insulted by doctors who question,
"Are you sure of the paternity of the baby?"

"I feel like they're trying to intimidate me," said Porshe, 16.
"I know that I'm young to be having a baby. But the point is that
I'm pregnant and I should be treated the same way as any pregnant
woman - with respect. They shouldn't just assume that I'm not with
my baby's daddy or that I'm ignorant and don't know how to take
care of my baby. That's what makes people not even want to go to
the doctors until they go into labor. They make you feel ashamed
when you should be happy."

Although some of these mommies are busy with school and work and
are discouraged - once treated poorly by their doctors - from returning,
they still make the trip, often across town, to make sure their
babies are healthy. In addition, more young fathers are committed
to attending the appointments than ever before. Mothers, fathers
and even grandparents are also getting more involved in the care
of the pregnancy. So why hasn't anyone informed them that though
their pregnancy may not be "high risk," the very life of their newborn
child may be?

One mother says that the answer lies within the healthcare system.
Latiesha Bermont, 31, says that she didn't know she was pregnant
the first time until she was three months along. She was only 20
years old. "I never had regular periods and the doctor never made
a big deal out of it, so neither did I. I went to the doctor's,
and the pregnancy test was negative. I started cramping one night
really bad and was bleeding heavy, so I went to emergency. That's
when they decided to give me a blood test. It was positive," she
sighed.

"By the time I found out I was pregnant, I was already miscarrying.
They said there was nothing they could do. I felt confused." Like
many young women, Latiesha admits that she didn't expect to ever
have a miscarriage. She also says that she visited the doctor regularly
because she had "issues with her cycle." She swears they should
have been able to tell her something, but her doctors remained
indifferent.

She was never given an answer to her many questions about her
problems with infertility. She is convinced that not knowing is
what put her at risk. Not stress or poverty. She changed her insurance
and eventually was told she had a non-working right ovary that wasn't
producing enough estrogen. After years of treatment and trying,
at 24 years old she finally conceived a child, who died of SIDS
just four months later. At 26, she saw another specialist who helped
her to safely deliver her daughter, Unique, who is almost 5 years
old. Even though she and her husband have been trying for three
years, though, they have yet to be blessed with another pregnancy.
"I guess the medicine isn't working anymore. I think we may just
give up," she says.

How is it possible that our neighborhood and a few other neighborhoods
of color in the most populous state in the country have held the
record for infant mortality for over 10 years? Some who have lived
in the Bay View for decades are convinced, as is the Chronicle,
that environmental racism looms just below the surface of this problem.
For years, residents have complained about the stench coming from
the sewage treatment plant on Phelps Avenue. "That can't be healthy,"
one non-Bay View resident exclaimed as the No. 19 bus passed the
facility. "It smells like death over here. How can anyone breathe?"

Residents have complained to the Department of Public Health about
the abundance of respiratory problems and cancers in the areas surrounding
the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard. All to no avail. If nothing has
been done about these issues, how can we be sure that a problem
as monumental as infant mortality won't be swept under the rug?

How is it possible that the same things are happening in predominately
Black or Latino neighborhoods in both Oakland and Richmond, yet
no one has bothered to bring it to the forefront? The Naval Shipyard,
the city sewage plant, the PG&E and Mirant power plants and
several other toxic dumping grounds and waste facilities in or around
BVHP have yet to be investigated as causes for not only the death
of dozens of babies, but the reproductive disorders and cancers
plaguing the young women who will eventually give them life. There
are also hot spots of infant death in South Central LA and in Fresno
and Shafter, Calif., in the Central Valley, all in low-income neighborhoods
populated by Blacks or Latinos and exposed to highly polluted air.

The Chronicle reports: "Studies published in the past few years
link pesticides, carbon monoxide and tiny airborne particles with
birth defects, prematurity, low birth weight and respiratory ailments
that can lead to an infant's demise." Nevertheless, the blame has
continued to be laid at the feet of the parents. Already deemed
incompetent by their lack of income, these moms and dads often blame
themselves.

"Stuff like this wasn't even discussed when we were growing up,"
says 50-year-old grandmother Sylvia Gross. "If your baby died, it
was crib death. This has been happening for years, babies dying,
and nobody blamed nobody. We didn't even contemplate that the very
air we were breathing could be the cause. It's amazing that no one
has even mentioned that it was a possibility until now."

This is what our local government wants. They take no responsibility
for the environmental genocide being unleashed upon our community
and don't anticipate confrontation because we have been conditioned
to believe our suffering is ultimately our own fault.

We've been taught that the best way to have a safe pregnancy is
to eat right and exercise, not indulge in drugs or alcohol and get
prenatal care as early as possible. Our doctors have continued to
us the standard "Put your baby on his back to sleep," "Don't
smoke in the house," "Breastfeeding is best" script when we become
new parents. Never once are you told, "If you live near power plants,
sewage plants and landfills, your baby may die ... but even if you
try your best to be a good parent, if your baby gets sick or dies,
we'll blame you." If someone had had the forethought to warn us,
perhaps this issue would have been brought to the front page long
ago and those who really deserve the blame could have been held
accountable.

While local politicians give Bay View Hunters Point gentrification-inducing
perks like Muni Light Rail, they should be fighting to make the
city's air safe for all its residents to breathe - not just for
those who live in Diamond Heights, Nob Hill or the Castro. They
should shut down plans to build housing in the Hunters Point Shipyard,
which is unfit for human habitation, investigate how the release
of toxins and particulates into the air from the city's sewage plant
and PG&E's power plant are affecting the quality of life in
our community, and provide our citizens with programs that will
educate them about how to live healthier lives. Instead, they continue
to target our young mothers as potential CPS cases, hire corrupt
companies to fill the most unsafe land with homes that will ultimately
be our coffins, and ignore or block our own efforts to rebuild our
community.

One brand new mommy of twins agreed to give me her opinions on
the topic but only if she could challenge me with some questions
of her own: "Has everyone been so blinded by the bad media coverage
about HP that they can't see that this is bigger than any shooting
on the 10 o'clock news? What makes our children's lives less important
than the babies born in Fillmore or in Chinatown? Why is it okay
for so many of them to die, and nobody does anything about it?"

I couldn't even begin to give her the answers she was looking
for, but I suggested that in her quest to find them, she start with
answering this one first: "Why didn't anyone tell us?"

I'm not sure we'll get any closure on the pain this issue has
caused any time soon. But I am confident that with hard work and
research, we'll have the answers we're looking for. I doubt that
our local government will be happy to answer them for us. I am hopeful
that with patience and diligence on the part of myself and my family,
my unborn son will survive these statistics, and I pray that with
the grace of God, others will as well.

Email Ebony at efcolbert@yahoo.com.

San Francisco Bay View
National Black Newspaper
4917 Third Street
San Francisco California 94124
Phone: (415) 671-0789
Fax: (415) 671-0316
Email:
editor@sfbayview.com

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

8) A Schoolgirl Riddled with Bullets. And No One is to Blame
Questions remain after Israeli unit commander is cleared
of Palestinian pupil's death
By Chris McGreal in Rafah
Published on Thursday, October 21, 2004 by the Guardian/UK
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1021-03.htm


The undisputed facts are these: it was broad daylight, 13-year-old Iman
al-Hams was wearing her school uniform, and when she walked into the
Israeli army's "forbidden zone" at the bottom of her street she was
carrying her satchel. A few minutes later the short, slight child was
pumped with bullets. Doctors counted at least 17 wounds and said
much of her head was destroyed.

Beyond that there is little agreement between the army top brass and
Palestinian witnesses as to how Iman came to die last week, or even
among members of the military unit responsible for killing the child
in Gaza's Rafah refugee camp.

Palestinian witnesses described the shooting as cold-blooded. They
say soldiers could not have failed to see they were firing at a child,
and she was killed as she already lay wounded and helpless.

"Some soldiers were lying on the ground and shooting very heavily
toward her," said Basim Breaka, who saw the killing from her living
room. "Then one of the soldiers walked to her and emptied his clip
into her. For sure she died on the second or third bullet. I could see
her lying on the ground, not moving. I can't imagine why that soldier
wanted to shoot her after she was dead."

This week an army investigation cleared the unit's commander after
some of his own soldiers accused him of giving the order to shoot
knowing the target was a young girl, and of then emptying the clip
of his automatic rifle into her.

On the day she died, Iman left home shortly before 7am for the short
walk to school in Rafah's Tal al-Sultan neighborhood. The school,
facing the heavily militarized border with Egypt, is under the shadow
of a towering camouflaged Israeli gunpost.

Like almost every other building in the area, Iman's school is
pockmarked by bullets. Last year, a 13-year-old boy was shot
dead by the army outside the school. This year, two pupils and
a teacher were wounded by bullets inside the grounds.

Iman walked past her school with her satchel over her shoulder,
crossed the road and climbed down a small sandy bank to an area
that was an olive and citrus orchard until the army's bulldozers
flattened it in April. She had entered the "forbidden zone" next
to the watchtower where any Palestinian risks being shot.

The schoolgirl kept on walking toward the tower but was still several
hundred meters away when two shots caught her in the leg. She
dropped her bag, turned, tried to hobble away, and fell.

Four or five soldiers emerged from the army post and shot at her
from a distance. Palestinian witnesses and some Israeli soldiers
say that the platoon commander moved in closer to put two bullets
in the child's head. They say that he then walked away, turned back
and fired a stream of bullets into her body.

Iman's corpse was taken to Rafah's hospital and inspected by
Dr Mohammed al-Hams. "She has at least 17 bullets in several
parts of the body, all along the chest, hands, arms, legs," he said.
"The bullets were large and shot from a close distance. The most
serious injuries were to her head. She had three bullets in the head.
One bullet was shot from the right side of the face beside the ear.
It had a big impact on the whole face. Another bullet went from the
neck to the face and damaged the area under the mouth."

The doctor said that the nature of the wounds suggested that
Iman was already dead when some of the bullets hit her. The
army swiftly blamed Iman for her own death by entering the forbidden
zone. At first, the military said soldiers suspected the girl was carrying
a bomb in her satchel. When it turned out there was no bomb, it said
she was being used by Palestinian combatants to lure troops from
their post.

But some soldiers in the unit responsible, the Shaked battalion, were
outraged at what they saw as a cover-up. One told Yedioth Ahronoth
newspaper that a soldier in the watchtower had told the company
commander that he was about to shoot a child: "Don't shoot, it's
a little girl".

"The company commander approached her, shot two bullets into her,
walked back towards the force, turned back to her, switched his
weapon to automatic and emptied his entire magazine into her.
We were in shock. We couldn't believe what he was doing. Our
hearts ached for her. Just a girl of 13," a soldier told the newspaper.

Other soldiers said that if the company commander was not
dismissed they would refuse to serve under him: "It is a disgrace
that he is still in his position. We want him kicked out."

The accounts of Palestinian witnesses back the claims of the
protesting soldiers.

Fuad Zourob was working at a small brick factory overlooking
the area where Iman was shot. "The girl was walking in the sand.
She was shot from the army post. She was hit in the leg and she
was crawling.

"Then she stood up and started to try and run and then she fell.
The shooting went on. The soldiers arrived by foot. One came close
to the girl and started to shoot. He walked away, turned back and
then shot her some more," he said.

Yousef Breaka watched from the balcony of his second floor flat.
He owns the 12 acres of bulldozed land beside the building which
Iman crossed minutes before she was shot.

"The first shot came from the army post. It hit her in the leg. She
was starting to walk on and then fell. She dropped her bag. They
were firing, heavy shooting. I am sure she died before the two
soldiers came and shot her bag and then her," he said.

Mr Breaka's living room wall is decorated with the holes of nine
bullets fired from the Israeli army watchtower two years ago.
A tenth bullet killed his 80-year-old mother, Jindiya.

Neither Iman's father, Samir al-Hams, nor the witnesses know why
the girl walked into the forbidden zone.

"I can't explain why she was there. I've asked everyone and no one
can explain it. Perhaps she just wanted to walk on the sand. Perhaps
she was confused. I don't know," said Mr al-Hams.

Mr Zourob was surprised to see Iman walking at the back of his
factory. "I was astonished. I didn't know why she was there. No
one goes toward that area. She was alone but some of the school
children were calling her: Iman, why are you there?" he said.

The watchtower sits atop a large hill of sand. It is surrounded by
barbed wire and other defenses. Even before she was hit in the leg,
it would have taken Iman 10 minutes or more to scramble up the
hill. Once she was wounded, there was little chance she could have
got to the watchtower.

If she was carrying a bomb, it could have harmed Israeli troops
had she got close enough to them. But after Iman was shot in the
leg she dropped her school bag.

Palestinian witnesses say soldiers pumped it full of bullets,
establishing that it was not a bomb, but still went on to shoot
the girl.

The Israeli army's rules of engagement permit soldiers to wound
a person who enters a security zone and does not heed warning
shots to leave. But once the person is wounded, soldiers are only
permitted to kill if there is an imminent threat to their lives.
Witnesses say Iman was helpless and posed no such threat.

Her father is a teacher at a primary school neighboring his daughter's.
"The day Iman was killed, the headmistress of her school called me
at 8.15 and asked why she wasn't at school. I said I had no idea.,"
he said.

"I ran to the school. The teachers and headmistress told me the
army shot toward a small girl but she was fine, don't worry. I calmed
down a bit when I heard that and thought maybe they shot toward
her to make her afraid and arrested her for interrogation and they
will release her. But then they declared her dead. That was the worst
moment in my life."

This week, the officer responsible for the Gaza strip, Major General
Dan Harel, completed his investigation and pronounced that the
company commander had not acted unethically in the shooting
of Iman but was being suspended for losing the confidence of his
soldiers.

The speed of the investigation has revealed once again the cursory
nature of the army's inquiries into such shootings. A more thorough
investigation usually only follows if there is external pressure, such
as in the case of three Britons shot dead by Israeli soldiers over the
past two years.

The military has quietly dropped an investigation into the killing by
an Israeli sniper of a brother and sister, both teenagers, in Rafah in
May. The army falsely claimed that the pair were killed by a Palestinian
bomb and only began the investigation after journalists found the
bodies of the children and reported that both had a single shot to
the head.

Under pressure from the revelations of the Shaked battalion soldiers,
the military police has launched a separate investigation into the
death of Iman al-Hams. The soldiers say they will insist that it
is completed.

(c) Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004
(c) Copyrighted 1997-2004
www.commondreams.org

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

9) Cancer and the Environment
What the Bill Moyers Program "Trade Secrets" Revealed
By Roland Sheppard

On March 26, 2001, a "Bill Moyers PBS Special" titled "Trade Secrets"
documented the chemical industry's conspiracy of silence and refusal
to properly inform hundreds of thousands of workers about the risks
of cancer and other diseases associated with the manufacturing of
vinyl chloride (VC) and its polyvinyl chloride (PVC) product.
The program was based on a Houston Chronicle article written by
Jim Morris in 1998 titled "Rules for hazardous chemicals evolve
slowly-Industry challenges frustrate regulation'

According to www.mycounsel.com, "a trade secret is any piece of
information used in a business that isn't generally known to the public.
This is valuable because the information is kept secret. Trade secret
law can apply to a broad variety of information, including formulas,
patterns, business plans, designs and procedures. The law provides
some protection against others from misappropriating, or improperly
obtaining, your secret.' Companies in the industry have applied "Trade
Secret Protection' to their study of health effects caused by the
chemicals they produce.

Usually, these "Trade Secrets" or "Smoking Guns" do not become
known until a successful lawsuit is filed against a company and their
files are opened. This was the case with the Tobacco Companies and
was the case with the manufacturers of vinyl chloride. The PBS show
made it clear that the drive for profits superceded precaution for
workers lives in particular and life in general.

The show was a good introduction to the hazards of capitalist
production. It demonstrated the endemic problems of capitalist
production and its effects on the environment. It will help increase
the general awareness of the causes of cancer and other diseases.
However, the program only showed the "tip of the iceberg' about the
daily catastrophe of production for profit at the expense of human
lives and the future of humanity.

The chemical industry is well aware of the environmental health
consequences of its products. The following is from "Environmental
Illness Briefing Paper" published by the Chemical Manufactures
Association, Washington D.C. (1990)

"There is no doubt these patients are ill...and deserving of
compensation, understanding and expert medical care (...) The
primary impact on society would be the huge cost associated with
the legitimization of environmental illness"

The conclusion in the above statement is absolutely correct. There is
currently a huge cost in human life and the pursuit of happiness.
The cost they talk about are the huge costs, in compensation for victims
of chemical diseases, if all of the "Trade Secrets" become public
knowledge forcing the recognition and "legitimization of
environmental illness!"

In reality, Trade Secrets only get exposed after a sufficient number
("body count") of workers and others die from a common exposure
to a chemical. The increase in cancer begins with the expansion
and development of the chemical industry sine World War II. The
development and production of synthetic organic chemicals, used
in everyday life, has increased over 100 fold since World War II in
the United States. The increase has been geometric, doubling every
seven to eight years. In the United States, by the late 1980s,
production had reached over 200 billion pounds per year. Many
of these new compounds and medicines have been to the benefit
of humanity.

Unfortunately, only approximately 3 percent of these chemicals
have been tested for their toxicity and potential long-range harm.
Under the banner of "Better Living Through Chemistry," life and
production changed. The "miracle fiber" asbestos was used
everywhere and everything was dusted with DDT. Twenty years
after their introduction, the death toll from cancer caused by these
two substances began to come in. The development and production
of synthetic organic chemicals, used in everyday life, has increased
over 100 fold since World War II in the United States. The increase
has been geometric, doubling every seven to eight years. In the
United States, by the late 1980s, production had reached over
200 billion pounds per year.

In her book Living Downstream, Sandra Steingraber wrote:

"In 1964, two senior scientists at the National Cancer Institute,
Wilhelm Hueper and W.C. Conway, wrote, 'Cancers of all types
and all causes display even under already existing conditions,
all the characteristics of an epidemic in slow motion.' The
unfolding epidemic was being fueled, they said in 1964, by
"increasing contamination of the human environment with

chemical and physical carcinogens and with chemicals supporting
and potentiating their action."

"And yet the possible relationship between cancer and what
Hueper and Conway called 'the growing chemicalization of the
human economy' has not been pursued in any systematic,
exhaustive way....

"Industrialized countries have far more cancers than countries
with little industry (after adjusting for age and population size).
One-half of all the world's cancers occur among people living in
industrialized countries, even though such people are only one-
fifth of the world's population. From these data, WHO (the World
Health Organization) has concluded that at least 80 percent of
all cancer is attributable to environmental influences."

One of the most alarming factors is that the original safety standards
that the Occupation Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) adopted
in 1971 were the standards set by a private organization called the
American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH).
The ACGIH is a group composed of industrial hygienists from state
and local governments, plus academics and industry consultants.
From that point on it has been nearly impossible to improve the
standards to protect lives.

In the late 1970's OSHA administrators estimated that the agency's
proposed legislation would produce a 20 percent drop in cancer
rates. Since all such regulations are a battle between businesses with
their "Trade Secrets' and science independent of corporations the proposed
legislation to eliminate 20% of all cancer was never approved by the
capitalist politicians. In fact, the current "body count' for cancer is
over 40% of the people in the United States will get cancer. Such is
the tragedy of "Trade Secrets."

The most glaring example is the occupational environment, where
workplaces have become "killing fields." In the United States, in 1990
the American Public Health Association estimated that at least 350,000
workers get occupational diseases (cancer, etc.) and 50,000-70,000
workers will die each year from these diseases. Given the steady
decline in occupational health these estimates are now most likely
much higher!

Blue-collar workers and agricultural workers all have higher rates of
cancer and other diseases because they receive higher doses of the
toxic chemicals at the workplace than the rest of the population.
Eventually, these toxins spread to the entire working class as they
become part of the environment.

An example of this fact is the population living "downwind" from the
many Oil Refineries in Contra Costa County in the San Francisco Bay
Area. People living near these refineries have very high rates of cancer.
In EPA terms, this is called a cancer cluster.

The EPA , in its corporate manner, determined that the high rates of
cancer were caused by high rates of smoking in the area-not from the
refineries carcinogenic pollutions! However, under the rules of
Proposition 65 in California and after several years of litigation, the
entire Gasoline Refining Industry, in California, had to post this
warning in the February 24, 1999 issue of the San Francisco Chronicle:

"WARNING: Chemicals known to the State to cause cancer, birth
defects, or other reproductive harm are found in gasoline, crude oil,
and many other petroleum products and their vapors, or result from
their use. Read and follow label directions and use care when handling
or using all petroleum products.

"Chemicals known to the State to cause cancer, birth defects, or
other reproductive harm are found in and around gasoline stations,
refineries, chemical plants, and other facilities that produce, handle,
transport, store, or sell crude oil and petroleum and chemical products.

"Other facilities covered by this warning include, for example, oil and
gas wells, oil and gas treating plants, petroleum and chemical storage
tanks, pipeline systems, marine vessels and barges, tank trucks and
tank cars loading and unloading facilities, and refueling facilities."

The contradiction between governmental agencies agencies is part
and parcel of the overall problem of "Trade Secrets." By keeping
most of the old pre-OSHA standards and by not even enforcing
the regulations that exist due to understaffing and underfunding,
the government regulatory agencies are not protecting workers or
the public-they are protecting the polluters who are poisoning
humanity.

The following is an article that I wrote on this subject that was
published in San Francisco Painters District Council l#8's Newspaper
"The Voice" and was also published in Organized Labor, the newspaper
of the San Francisco Building and Construction Trades Council.

Why Painters Should Wear Respirators and Skin Protection At All Times
In our safety classes you are taught to read "MSDS sheets." For
prevention of cancer, these sheets are of no value. The reason is
that NIOSH, the scientific part of OSHA, does not set the permissible
legal (OSHA) limits of particles in the air while you are working.
From the following examples from the 1994 NIOSH Pocket Guide
To Chemical Hazards, one can see what is wrong with OSHA.

SUBSTANCE NIOSH PEL OSHA PEL

Benzene. 1 ppm 1 ppm
Ethylene Oxide .1 ppm 1 ppm
Formaldehyde .0165 ppm 0.75 ppm

From Page 342 of the "Pocket Guide": "NIOSH has not identified
thresholds that will protect 100% of the population. NIOSH usually
recommends that occupational exposures to carcinogens be limited
to the lowest feasible concentration.'(In an occupational health video,
"Before Their Time," produced by the Windsor Occupational Health
Information Service, Windsor Canada, Peter Infante, the Director of
Standards for OSHA, stated that NIOSH includes one more cancer
per 1000 workers exposed as feasible.)

From these facts about two known carcinogens and one probable
carcinogen, common in paints, one can tell that OSHA can not
prevent occupational cancer. Especially in painters who are
exposed to over 150 known and suspected carcinogens and over
3000 hazardous substances daily. As you can see people getting
cancer are part of the equation; OSHA pel's are at least ten times
higher than NIOSH; therefore, the OSHA "feasible" risk for cancer
is at least ten times higher. (This is the usual difference between
NIOSH and OSHA.)

Cancer being a part of painting is guaranteed by OSHA.
Children and spouses of painters also have high rates for cancer.

One must also remember that ethylene glycol is the base for most
latex paints and radiator fluid. NIOSH recommends when working
with ethylene glycol that you should prevent skin and eye contact,
wash when contaminated and change clothes daily.

OSHA and MSDS sheets can not protect you from occupational
diseases. Work safe! Be smart! Wear respirators, gloves, goggles,
and long sleeve shirts at all times when painting. Protect yourself
and your family from occupational diseases.

OSHA tried to correct itself in the 1970's but with no success. If, as
OSHA administrators estimated, during the Carter presidency, that their
proposed legislation would produce a 20 percent drop in cancer rates,
then Ronald Reagan was a carcinogen, and a potent one at that.
Today, one can add Clinton to the list.

Scientific technology exists to prevent the high rate of occupational
diseases, but the profit motive and capitalist competition prevent
the implementation of preventive action and proper safety precautions.

Science and technology are not an obstacle to maintaining a safe
environment. The barrier to a safe environment is capitalism and
its paramount principle of production and science for profit. Most
environmental studies demonstrate that environmental destruction
has become globally intertwined within our society and that the
globalization of capitalism has quickened the destruction of the planet.

The struggle for environmental health and safety is directly against
the very fibre of capitalist production. In fact, environmental illness
is so intertwined within our society that it requires all of humanity to
act, in their overall interests for survival as a species, to correct the
problem. It requires a society where humanity has social control
over the entire environment, social, economic, and political-
a socialist society in which science is in the interests of humanity
in harmony with nature.

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

10) Ogallala Aquifer
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/sci/tech/3754520.stm
Published: 2004/10/20 07:48:58 GMT
[map on url]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/sci/tech/3754520.stm
Map: The world's water hotspots

From disappearing lakes and dwindling rivers to military threats over
shared resources, water is a cause for deep concern in many parts of the
world. Click on the map to read about some of the world's water hotspots.

Ogallala Aquifer

Ninety-five percent of the United States' fresh water is underground.
One crucial source is a huge underground reservoir, the 800-mile
Ogallala aquifer which stretches from Texas to South Dakota and provides
an estimated third of all US irrigation water.

The aquifer was formed over millions of years, but has since been cut
off from its original natural sources and is being steadily depleted. In
some areas its level is dropping by three to five feet (90 - 150cm) a
year. Estimates for its remaining lifespan vary in different areas,
ranging from 60 to 250 years.

Many farmers in the Texan High Plains, which rely particularly on the
underground source, are now turning away from irrigated agriculture as
they become aware of the hazards of over-pumping.

Mexico City

Mexico City is sinking because of the amount of water being pumped out
from beneath its foundations.

One of the largest and most populous cities in the world, it was once a
lush land of lakes.

The city draws 80% of its water from aquifers below it, and has sunk an
estimated nine metres into the soft, drained lake bed since the 1900s.

It already buys in a third of its water from surrounding areas, and an
estimated million people are dependent on water trucks.

Although work is being done on its rusting pipe system, 27% of the
city's water is still wasted through leaks.

Spain

The battle to provide water for Spain's parched southern coast has
generated major controversy in recent years.

A 4.2 billion euro plan to divert water from the River Ebro to supply
the area around Valencia, Almeria and Murcia was abandoned by the
incoming Socialist government in 2004.

Tens of thousands had protested against the project, which was
criticised by environmentalists concerned that it would encourage misuse
of water and that the Ebro's fragile delta would suffer.

Work had already begun and developers were planning new tourist
developments and golf courses when the project was scrapped.

The new government plans to build several desalination plants instead to
provide water for the near-desert region.

Chad

Lake Chad, once a huge lake straddling the borders of Chad, Niger,
Nigeria and Cameroon, has shrunk by 95% since the mid 1960s.

The region's climate has changed during that time, with the monsoon
rains which previously replenished the lake now greatly reduced.

Local weather changes, rather than global warming, are blamed, but human
activities such as overgrazing and crop irrigation are thought to have
made the situation worse.

Nine million farmers, fishermen, and herders in the region now face
water shortages, crop failure, livestock deaths, collapsed fisheries,
soil salinity and increasing poverty.

There are plans to divert water from a tributary to the Congo to
replenish the lake, and also to establish better management of the
remaining water.

Oil has recently been found in the Chadian sector of the lake, raising
hopes of a longer-term solution to the region's economic problems.

River Nile

The Nile is vitally important to the survival of 160 million people in
10 countries who share the basin in which it flows.

To Egypt in particular, the river is a matter of life and death as the
country has almost no other source of water.

A 1929 treaty between Britain and Egypt said no work would be done on
the river that would reduce the volume of water reaching Egypt.

But tensions have been rising as neighbouring countries question the
treaty - Tanzania, for example, is building a pipeline to extract
drinking water and Ethiopia is planning to use the water for irrigation.

Cairo has said in the past that it was ready to use force to protect its
access to the 7,000km-long river. Talks took place in 2004, but an
agreement is yet to emerge.

Israel

With 5% of the world's population trying to survive on 1% of its water,
there is strong competition for water in the Middle East.

A series of dry years - together with population growth - has recently
increased the pressure. Both Israel and Jordan rely on the River Jordan
- but Israel controls it and has cut supplies during times of scarcity.

The level of the Sea of Galilee has dropped in recent years, sparking
fears that Israel's main reservoir will become salinated.

The Palestinians - whose water supply is also controlled by Israel - say
supplies are intermittent and expensive, and that the underground
aquifer which they share with Israel has become depleted and damaged
through overuse. Israeli settlers in the West Bank use several times
more water than their Palestinian neighbours.

To help ease the crisis, Israel has agreed to buy water from Turkey and
is investigating building desalination plants.

Iraq

Drainage and irrigation schemes carried out by the government of Saddam
Hussein in southern Iraq have led to the loss of an estimated 90% of one
of the world's most significant wetlands.

A vast network of canals has diverted water from the 20,000 square
kilometres of marsh land between the Tigris and Euphrates, in places
leaving nothing but salty, crusted earth behind.

Turkish dams upstream are also thought to have reduced the water flow
and contributed to the wetlands' fate.

Most of the Marsh Arabs fled, facing both political persecution under
Saddam Hussein's regime and the loss of the freshwater which sustained
their way of life.

Since the US-led invasion of Iraq, local people have attempted to
restore water flow, but there are reports that this has led to disease
as much of the water is contaminated.

A UN project to restore the area was announced in July 2004.

Turkey

Water-rich by Middle-Eastern standards, Turkey has in recent years
undertaken an ambitious project to sell water from its Manavgat river
across the region.

It is still vulnerable to shortages, however - just a few weeks after
Turkey agreed to sell water to Israel, officials were warning of a water
crisis.

Turkey has spent billions of dollars in the past decades building dams
to increase its water reserves and boost its hydroelectric capabilities.

Two particular projects the Ilisu and Yusefeli dams, have faced delays
after several Western companies withdrew funding following bad publicity
over human rights concerns.

Another project, a system of 22 dams on the Tigris and Euphrates rivers,
has provoked criticism from downstream neighbours Iraq and Syria.

Aral Sea

The Aral Sea in Central Asia was once the world's fourth biggest inland
sea, and one of the world's most fertile regions. But economic
mismanagement has turned the area into a toxic desert.

The two rivers feeding the sea, the Amu Darya and the Syr Darya, were
diverted in a Soviet scheme to grow cotton. Between 1962 and 1994, the
level of the Aral Sea fell by 16 metres.

The surrounding region now has one of the highest infant mortality rates
in the world, and anaemia and cancers caused by chemicals blowing off
the dried sea bed are common.

China

China is undertaking two huge projects to tackle flooding in the south
and drought in the north.

The Three Gorges Dam under construction on the Yangtze River aims to
control flood waters and generate power.

The dam will provide 10% of the country's electricity when finished.
More than 600,000 have been moved to make way for a reservoir longer
than Lake Michigan behind the $25bn dam.

In the north, all three rivers feeding China's Northern Plain are
severely polluted, damaging health and limiting irrigation.

The lower reaches of the Yellow River, which feeds China's most
important farming region, run dry for at least 200 days every year.

In the north China plain, 30 cubic kilometres more water is being pumped
to the surface each year by farmers than is replaced by the rain.

As groundwater is used to produce 40% of the country's grain, experts
warn that water shortages could make the country dependent on grain
imports.

To counter this, work has begun on China's biggest ever construction
project - a massive scheme to channel billions of cubic metres of water
from the Yangtze to the replenish the dwindling Yellow River.

The River Ganges

The most sacred Hindu river, the Ganges, is suffering from depletion,
pollution and has been the source of a long-running dispute between
India and Bangladesh.

The Gangorti glacier at the head of the River Ganges is retreating at a
rate of 30 metres per year - experts blame climate change.

Deforestation in the Himalayas has caused subsoil streams flowing into
the river to dry up.

Downstream, India controls the flow to Bangladesh with the Farakka
Barrage, 10km on the Indian side of the border.

Until the late 1990s, India used the barrage to divert the river to
Calcutta to stop the city's port drying unds and mangrove forests at the
river's delta seriously threatened.
The two countries have now signed an agreement to share the water more
equally.

Water quality, however, remains a huge problem, with high levels of
arsenic and untreated sewage in the river water.

Southern Australia

Australia is the continent with the least rainfall, apart from Antarctica.

Its two largest rivers, the Murray and the Darling, have been
extensively dammed for power and irrigation, reducing flows to the sea
by three-quarters - but providing three million people and 40% of
Australia's farms with water.

Salt rising to the surface as the lower reaches of the Murray dried out
has destroyed prime agricultural land. Wetlands have shrunk, species
numbers have dropped and the Australian National Trust has declared the
whole river an "endangered area".

In the east, the Snowy River was dammed and diverted to the Murray basin
decades ago to water the country's dry interior. But the ecological
impact on the depleted river was so great that some flow was restored in
2002.

Water extraction from the Murray river was capped in 1995 and programmes
to repair some of the destruction are now under way.

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

11) I Was Robbed Last Sunday
My Personal Reflections After the Washington DC.
Million Workers March and
the Armed Robbery Happened to Me
By: Lee Siu Hin
October 20, 2004

Last Sunday, October 17 at
D.C. I was participating at the
historical Million Workers March's
(MWM) and organized the immigrant workers tent.

After the march, around 9:50 PM
when I left the post-MWM event and walk back
to my sleeping space, at the
corner of O & 11th Street of the D.C.
neighborhood (just few blocks
away from the event). I was robbed by two
African-American youths who were
drunk and claimed to have "weapons"
on their pocket. They stole my wallet
with approx. $80.00 cash, remarkably
they didn't stole my cell phone and
I was not injured, and I immediately
used my cell phone to call the police.

I am not here to write my 30 seconds
experience of how being robbed; rather
I want to talk about why it happened.
The experience last Sunday night didn't
frightened me at all, rather I felt very sad,
because at the earlier same
day we just had a labor march to
demand justice for the working class & the
poor, and demand to hold the
corrupt corporations & government
accountable, just
few hours and less then
2 miles ways away I was robbed. How I can convince
the skeptics who caused the
problems of poor, and how
I can tell the pro-gun,
pro-death penalty advocates
that more cops and jail is not the answer? And to
assume black=criminals is
reasonable self-protection on the mean street
since I was robbed by two African-American youths?

It was ironic that I went to a poor
African American neighborhood to attend
the post MWM-anarchist event--
who organized by a group of white youths who
are not even came from the neighborhood,
I was robbed by two black teenagers
from the neighborhood, and no choice
but need to call white cops for the
help, and they didn't help me too much.

We need to ask, why this neighborhood?

Anyone living in will understand this is
the so-called the North eastern
part of the D.C., where most poor
African-American family lives. It's famous for
their impoverishment, high crime, high
unemployment rates with crack house,
street prostitute, robbery are at every
corner. While wealthy and powerful
white D.C. politicians and power
brokers working just few blocks away from the
area (The infamous F.B.I. headquarters
are just 10 blocks south at the same
11th street), they are living at the north
-western part of the city or
Maryland suburbs.

With the rapid gentrifications of the
neighborhood for the past ten years,
many white middle and upper class
are moving back to the city, forcing the
poor black families out, with the newly
build 3-blocks long Washington
Convention center had opened recently
across the street, this neighborhood
will soon become the next Dupont
circle kind of the wealthy neighborhood for the white
middle classes, with the streets are
getting "better" and "safer," the lucky
ones from the community will get
a job to work at the nearby convention
center or newly build shopping
establishments, the unlucky one will be eventually
force out from the neighborhood.

I had so many mixed feelings
about the labor and social justice
movements--When we were talking
about the workers right for the bottom
of our society, except beautiful slogans,
we still doesn't seem have able to help
anyone to win their struggles. Sadly, we
spend more time to fight within ourselves then
fight for our real enemy-the multi-national
corporations, the imperialism and
corrupt government policies. Think about
it! I was thinking about it deeply
when I was walking alone at this
neighborhood at the same moment when two
teenagers jump from the dark ally to robbed me....

It's ironic that we fight more often
within ourselves then to fight against
our true enemy-the corporations and
the government policies. Just like what
happened these days when the AFL-CIO
working with right-wing business and
CIA-funded sources to launch racists
China-bashing campaign, and mobilized the
American workers instead to held
corporations and the government policy
accountable, we blindfully blame China
is the reason who American jobs were lost.
However, beside thankful that I was
not hurt, by miracle they also dropped
my lucky half U.S. dollar coin from
my wallet, this coin had been following me
every step of my life, my work and
places I visited for the past 5 years,
included Iraq, Mexico and China, it
gives a sense of hopes that like what
Martin Luther King, Jr. said before--
our dreams will come true one of these days.

ActionLA
Action for World Liberation Everyday!
Tel: (213)403-0131
URL: http://www.ActionLA.org
e-mail: Info@ActionLA.org
Please join our ActionLA Listserv
go to: http://lists.riseup.net/www/subscribe/actionla
or send e-mail to: actionla-subscribe@lists.riseup.net
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

12) DOCUMENTARY: 'A Killing in Choctaw' tells an extraordinary
American story of murder and forgiveness

[Carl Ray's refusal to say "sir" to a white man in the deep South one summer
night in 1962 led to his father's murder by a white neighbor in 1962. He
continued his education and became a successful engineer, but was haunted by
depression and nightmares. For years no one who knew him, including his own
wife and children, knew about what had happened. But years later, after he
had given up a successful career as an engineer to become a stand-up
comedian,
Carl Ray found a way to tell about this experience through performance art
--
and now, a documentary film by Chike C. Nwoffiah called "A Killing in
Choctaw:
The Power of Forgiveness." Below: (1) An Oct. 20, 2004, *New York Times*
story on the film and Carl Ray's story; (2) a description of the original
play, from Carl Ray's web site; (3) a review of the play that appeared in a
San Jose, CA, magazine in 1999; (4) a description of the documentary, from
the
web site; (5) the press release for the documentary, dated Aug. 10, 2004;
(6)
a detailed account in an Oct. 3, 2004, *Mobile Register* (Mobile, AL) story;
(7) Carl Ray's biography; (8) booking information. --Mark]

1.

HAUNTED BY HIS FATHER'S MURDER AT THE HANDS OF A RACIST
By Carol Pogash

New York Times
October 20, 2004

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/20/movies/20kill.html

SAN JOSE, Calif. -- Amelia Ray was 22 when she sat in a darkened theater,
watching her father, Carl Ray, perform his autobiographical one-man show, "A
Killing in Choctaw." Only then did she discover that he had witnessed the
murder of his father decades before, killed because Carl had refused to say
"sir" to a white man.

After a scene in which Mr. Ray begs his dead father to rise and see him go
to
college, a friend who was at the theater that night in 1999 leaned over and
whispered: "Did you know about this?" Ms. Ray shook her head no. She
didn't
even think it was odd, she explained recently in an interview. "I guess I'd
grown accustomed to the silence."

At first it was only on stage that Mr. Ray, now 60, could give voice to his
experience. Recently that story has been made into a documentary by Chike
C.
Nwoffiah, a filmmaker and executive director of the Oriki Theater, a
nonprofit
community theater here in Silicon Valley. Called "A Killing in Choctaw: The
Power of Forgiveness," after the Alabama county where Mr. Ray was born, the
film had its premiere last month at the Montgomery Theater here. Explaining
why he was moved to make the documentary, Mr. Nwoffiah said, "It's an
important enough story that it needs to get out there."

That story began in Butler, Ala., on Sept. 6, 1962, when Carl was 18 and
preparing to leave for the Tuskegee Institute to major in engineering. With
his bags packed, he and a cousin shot off firecrackers near his house. The
echoing booms attracted their neighbor, Bill Carlisle, who pulled up in his
pickup and blasted the boys with angry questions. After Carl replied with a
series of yeses and nos, Mr. Carlisle asked if Carl didn't know that he
should
say "yes, sir" and "no, sir" to a white man.

"No," Carl said.

Mr. Carlisle knocked him to the ground and pulled out a knife. "I was
looking
straight in his eyes," Mr. Ray says in the film, remembering the moment.
"Just before he plunged the knife in my throat, he stopped." Mr. Carlisle
rose, Mr. Ray recalled, returned to his truck and drove away.

Carl went home, and with his father, George, waited. "I knew Bill was
coming.
My daddy knew Bill was coming," Mr. Ray says in the documentary.

George Ray moved his family next door to a relative's house, and then pushed
the television set onto the porch. Father and son sat outside watching
"Douglas Edwards With the News" while they waited.

Carl Ray says he remembers the crunch of the truck tires as Mr. Carlisle
arrived. After angry words and a scuffle, Mr. Carlisle cocked his .45
automatic.

In a segment of his show, which is part of the documentary, Carl Ray slowly
re-enacts the events: "Each time the bullet hit, Daddy's body would flinch.
The dust particles from his clothes began to float up and mix with the smoke
from the gun barrel. Bill continued to fire. Pop! Pop! Pop! Pop! Daddy
falls in slow motion. He takes his last breath."

"When I saw his body at the church," Mr. Ray says in the film, "reality set
in. When they took him outside and put him in the ground, I began a
nightmare
that lasted a lifetime."

For the documentary Mr. Ray returned to the Alabama courthouse where Mr.
Carlisle was tried.

"It was like a one-day circus come to town," Mr. Ray recalls as he sits on
the
witness stand retelling what happened some four decades earlier. Joe
Thompson, Mr. Carlisle's defense attorney, accused Carl Ray of murdering his
father. Mr. Ray impersonates Mr. Thompson: "You killed your daddy because
you don't know how to talk to white people! If you knew how to talk to
white
people he would still be alive. Isn't that so?"

"No, sir," Mr. Ray said.

"Damn uppity negra," Mr. Thompson said to the judge and jury.

At intervals Mr. Nwoffiah was so overcome that the camera trembles. "As a
director," he said in an interview, "you wonder at what point do you stop?
Mr. Ray always said: 'Keep going. We have to get through this.' "

Mr. Ray recalled blacks sitting upstairs in the courthouse crying as if the
trial were a funeral, while downstairs whites laughed.

The jury found Mr. Carlisle guilty of first-degree manslaughter and
sentenced
him to nine years in prison. Although the state has no record of Mr.
Carlisle's having served any time, Mr. Ray's oldest brother, Lindsey, and
Mike
Dale, a former Butler resident who knew the Carlisle family, said he had
heard
that Mr. Carlisle served less than a year.

Mr. Ray said that he has always felt responsible for his father's death, and
worried that his siblings blamed him as well. He suffered from severe
depression and nightmares. For years he told no one what had happened. He
felt "a silent scream," he said.

His wife, Brenda Hampton-Ray, learned of her husband's history 10 years ago,
when she came across an old clipping about the killing.

"He had this facade for so many years," Ms. Hampton-Ray says in the
documentary. "We really didn't know who the real husband and real father
was."

Despite his troubles, Mr. Ray graduated from Tuskegee, then began working as
an engineer at the Lockheed Corporation in California. Then this haunted
man,
who as a child had used humor to ward off bullies, decided to become a
comedian.

The documentary blends portions of his show with Mr. Ray's commentary and
interviews with others. At one point a split screen shows a thinner Mr. Ray
darting onstage, wowing a Southern California crowd with his comedy. On the
other half of the screen, Mr. Ray's old, sad eyes barely move: "You walk
back
off that stage," he says, "you walk back into that prison where all the
demons
are waiting for you."

Mr. Ray began finding his voice in 1998 when an exhibition of civil rights
photos from the Smithsonian Institution were displayed at the San Jose
Museum
of Art, and an official there who knew Mr. Ray was a comedian from Alabama
asked him to speak about the civil rights era there.

"She didn't really know what she was getting," Mr. Ray said recently. Among
those who listened was Tommy J. Fulcher Jr., president of Economic and
Social
Opportunities Inc., a nonprofit organization in the area. Mr. Fulcher told
Mr. Ray that his story was more moving than all the famous photos from the
civil rights exhibition. He made Mr. Ray an offer: Mr. Fulcher would back
a
one-man play written and acted by Mr. Ray. A year later, Mr. Ray was
telling
his story onstage.

Since then Mr. Ray has traveled the country, performing his play before
college audiences and in community theaters. Wanting to make a documentary,
he searched for the right filmmaker. He contacted Mr. Nwoffiah after seeing
his 2000 documentary about a black hospital, "A Jewel in History." With no
financing, Mr. Ray raised $150,000 himself. Amelia, one of his five
children,
wrote the accompanying music and designed the Web site, www.carlraye.com.
Mr.
Nwoffiah said he plans to submit "A Killing in Choctaw" to film festivals
and
show it at community theaters and colleges. No New York showings have been
scheduled yet.

Theaters in Choctaw County probably won't be too eager to show it though,
said
Tommy Campbell, the editor and publisher of The Choctaw Sun, who knows both
the Carlisle and Ray families. "This is not the South of the 1960's
anymore,"
he said. Residents "would just like to let it alone,'' he said.

Mr. Ray wanted to expose what happened 42 years ago, but he was not quite
ready to watch the documentary. During the premiere he stood silently in the
back of the theater, seeing snippets of his life, before fleeing outside.

2.

[The play]

A KILLING IN CHOCKTAW
Performed by: Carl Ray
Directed by: Ann Johnson

http://www.carlraye.com/story.shtml

"A Killing In Choctaw" is a one-man, two-act play written and performed by
Carl Ray. The play is about his life growing up in Alabama. In 1962, while
being questioned by a white man, Carl responded by saying "yes" and "no,"
instead of "yes sir" and "no sir," which was the customary response when
addressing white people. Carl was severely beaten for being disrespectful.
An hour later, that man went to Carl's home and shot his Father eight times
as
Carl looked on.

The play deals with the years following the tragedy, beginning with the
trial,
in which Carl was blamed for his Father's death because he did not know how
to
respect whites. It was suggested to the court that Carl be taken to the
Mississippi State Line and thrown out of the state of Alabama, and not
allowed
back until he knew how to talk to white people.

After the trial, the traumatized and guilt-ridden 18-year old was taken to
Tuskegee Institute where four faculty members spent a year counseling him
through nervous breakdowns and depression. Due to shock, Carl had shut down
and refused to talk. He remained in a zombified state. As a result of the
incident, Carl developed three different personalities. One of the
personalities was prone to blackouts and violent behavior.

Carl graduated from Tuskegee in Electrical Engineering and worked for
thirteen
years in the Aerospace Industry before pursuing a career as a stand-up
comedian. On the surface, Carl appeared to be a normal, successful
individual. After 22 years of trying to manage his secret of his Father's
death, his states of depression, guilt, and multiple personalities, Carl was
still suffering.

In 1984, Carl met a man who talked to him about the power of forgiveness.
Carl attributes the act of forgiving the man who killed his Father as saving
his life. He describes it as being the most enjoyable moment of his life --
a
day of freedom from his self-imposed prison.

In the play, Carl takes the audience through his personal agony of being
humiliated in a Jim Crow court trial to being locked in a hotel room and
being
harassed by eight members of the Klan, the night before George Wallace stood
in the door of the University of Alabama to keep black students out; he
gives
you a peek into the struggles of being a polio victim attending grade
school;
how his Father's killer became his imaginary enemy and friend; the nurturing
environment at Tuskegee Institute, his changes in careers -- from engineer
to
taxi driver to stand-up comedian -- and more.

3.

"A KILLING IN CHOCTAW": A WALK IN THE SHOES OF CARL RAY
By Joe Aytch

City Flight News (San Jose, CA)
August 1999

http://www.carlraye.com/walkinshoes.shtml

SAN JOSE -- "Why must we suffer? Why are we here? God I'm not complaining,
I'm just asking why . . ." pleads Comedian/Actor Carl ray at the end of his
one-man play "A Killing in Choctaw."

"A Killing in Choctaw" is a biography that chronicles the incredible
struggle
to success of a young Black man from Alabama after witnessing the brutal
murder of his father in 1962, and how forgiveness changed his life. This
particular young person happened to be named Carl Ray. But he or she could
have been the child of a lynching victim, or a relative of the 200 to 300
killed during the Oklahoma Race riots of 1921, or one of the people beaten
or
murdered during the Civil Rights movement.

It's a play that demonstrates the essence of African American theatre. It's
Our Story, told as only we can tell it. From Jim Crow to status quo -- it's
a
drama, and documentary. It's a horrendous family tragedy, an abject lesson
on
racism in America, and its sprinkled with the topical down-home humor that
Carl Ray is known for.

CARL RAY'S JOURNEY

Not only did 18-year old Carl witness the murder of his father -- he was
left
feeling responsible.

"All because I didn't say 'sir' to a white man," says Carl, referring to an
encounter he had with Bill Carlisle, a white neighbor, earlier that fateful
day. "Don't you know you're supposed to say sir to a white man?" demands an
angry Carlisle when Carl responded with yes or no answers to the man's
questioning on September 6, 1962.

After beating Carl to the ground for being uppity, the angry man later
followed the battered youth home. There, in front of Carl and his family,
Carlisle argued, then emptied a 45-caliber gun into the chest of George Ray.

The subsequent trial was a sham. Even so, the trial of Bill Carlisle was
considered by many to be the first time a white man was sentenced for
killing
a black man in that part of Alabama.

Attempting to put the past behind him, after attending Tuskegee Institute,
Carl went on to 13 successful years as an engineer in the aerospace
industry.
He retired in 1980 to pursue his dream of being a stand-up comic. He went
to
comedy school in San Francisco, and began touring the country performing at
colleges and comedy clubs. Eventually, he recorded an album in 1989, and
hosted "The Carl Ray Comedy Show" on cable TV. He also continued to perform
on TV and in comedy clubs throughout the country.

Carl is also a successful motivational speaker, a husband going on 20 years,
and a father of five.

Still, others know him for his very successful Black College Tour that for
12
years has taken dozens of college bound Black youth on tours of Black
Colleges.

Back in Butler, Alabama he was known as a smallish child with polio, often
referred to as that "flicted kid". A young Carl used humor to disarm school
bullies. Others may still think he's the uppity colored boy who caused the
death of his father, as he was portrayed during the trial of Bill Carlisle.
"People don't know the aftermath of the time of survival. I felt guilty
[responsible]," says Carl Ray today. "It ate away at me and did a lot of
damage. There were many years of turmoil."

THE PLAY

Last year, the San Jose Museum hosted a display of approximately 75 pictures
on loan from the Smithsonian documenting the Civil Rights Movement. Carl
Ray
and several others served as tour guides at the exhibit, sharing their
stories
before the tour in hopes of giving the pictures more meaning.

After one particular tour, Tommy Fulcher, Jr., Founder/President of the
Economic & Social Opportunity (ESO), approached Carl and suggested he do a
play based on his life. Fulcher graciously offered to assist with the
financing.

Carl sat down and began to write. Then he enlisted the aid of local
Actress/Director Ann Johnson, President of the Board of Directors for the
San
Jose Multicultural Actors Guild.

Ann, best known for her work with San Jose's Tabia African American Theatre
Ensemble, has over 15 years of directing and acting credits. "Ann knew how
to
put my story into a play form," says Carl. "The sections were broken up and
staged. She put an order to it, a flow."

Although Ann had directed five plays previously, "A Killing in Choctaw"
presented a different set of challenges. "Initially it was just one big
story," says Ann. "I had to have an understanding of what it meant to Carl,
then visualize and stage it, getting what he wanted and getting what was
good
for the audience. He really was still dealing with a lot of [emotional]
stuff
during the whole process . . . [it was] a way of working towards healing."

About the comedy portions of the play she adds, "Yes we had to show his
suffering, but we knew people would come expecting to see Carl Ray the
comedian. We used the comedy to make people comfortable."

The play may be good for the Ray family. A family still struggling to
understand why. It may be good for all to see, especially in a nation that
continues to be confounded by the destructive nature of bigotry.

Look for [a] . . . showing of "A Killing In Choctaw" . . . and prepare to
have
what promises to be one of your best theatrical experiences in years.

4.

[The documentary]

"A KILLING IN CHOCTAW"
Directed by: Chike Nwoffiah

"A Killing In Choctaw" is a documentary based on the one-man, two-act play
written and performed by Carl Ray. The play is about his life growing up in
Alabama. In 1962, while being questioned by a white man, Carl responded by
saying "yes" and "no," instead of "yes sir" and "no sir," which was the
customary response when addressing white people. Carl was severely beaten
for
being disrespectful. An hour later, that man went to Carl's home and shot
his
Father eight times as Carl looked on.

"A Killing In Choctaw" is an enthralling documentary on Ray's life and how
the
dreadful incident of 1962 defined his life and held him prisoner in his own
skin for over 20 years. Ray's compelling story comes alive under Nwoffiah's
masterful direction. Nwoffiah effectively blends narration, reenactment,
archival footage, and interviews with actual witnesses of the murder and
trial
participants. The documentary takes us back to the 1960s and sets the social
context that bred many such horrific crimes. We then follow the subsequent
trauma, depression, and denial that young Ray suffered and endured for over
20
years until he met a man in 1984 that taught him about the power of
forgiveness. Ray attributes the act of forgiving the man who killed his
Father
as saving his life. He describes it as being the most enjoyable moment of
his
life and a day of freedom from his self imposed prison.

"A Killing In Choctaw is a haunting awakening to the affects of America's
age-long racial injustice," said Nwoffiah. "It is a documentary that
celebrates the triumph of light over darkness."

Carl graduated from Tuskegee in Electrical Engineering and worked for
thirteen
years in the Aerospace Industry before pursuing a career as a stand-up
comedian. On the surface, Carl appeared to be a normal, successful
individual.
After 22 years of trying to manage his secret of his Father's death, his
states of depression, guilt, and multiple personalities, Carl was still
suffering.

1984, Carl met a man who talked to him about the power of forgiveness. Carl
attributes the act of forgiving the man who killed his Father as saving his
life. He describes it as being the most enjoyable moment of his life - a day
of freedom from his self-imposed prison.

In the court, Carl takes the audience through his personal agony of being
humiliated in a Jim Crow court trial; the nurturing environment at Tuskegee
Institute, his changes in careers - from engineer to taxi driver to stand-up
comedian - and more.

For production and distribution information, contact Chike Nwoffiah at
ChikeCN@aol.com

5.

Press Release: Art/Entertainment, Education, Features, Event Calendars

CARL RAY'S SPELLBINDING AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL MOVIE DOCUMENTARY

** Premieres September 19th at Montgomery Theater, San Jose, CA; Film
Adaptation of Ray's Critically-acclaimed Stage Production **

--Carl Ray carried scars from witnessing his father's brutal 1962 murder in
segregated Choctaw County, Alabama; a white man's retaliation for
18-year-old
Ray's having responded to the man's questioning by saying "yes" and "no"
instead of "yes, sir" and "no, sir," which were the customary responses when
addressing white people. In 1984 -- more than twenty years after the
incident
-- Ray met a man from whom he learned about the power of forgiveness.

August 10, 2004

http://www.carlraye.com/docpr.shtml

Thousands of viewers have raved about the critically acclaimed
autobiographical play by and about comedian, activist and educator Carl Ray.
Della Productions now brings a candid and soul stirring documentary
adaptation
of Ray's spellbinding play "A Killing in Choctaw" directed by award winning
filmmaker Chike Nwoffiah, co-founder and artistic director of the celebrated
Oriki Theater. While being questioned by a white man in 1962, in the small
town of Butler, Choctaw County, Alabama, an 18-year-old Ray responded by
saying "yes" and "no" instead of "yes sir" and "no sir," which was the
customary response when addressing white people. He was severely beaten for
being disrespectful. An hour later, the man went to Ray's home and shot his
father eight times as Ray looked helplessly on. "A Killing In Choctaw" will
premiere on Sunday, September 19, 2004 at Montgomery Theater, 291 So. Market
Street, San Jose, Ca. Tickets for the 4:00 p.m. premiere are $30. Tickets
may be purchased online at www.urbanevents.com or by calling 408-668-2578 or
408-259-6516.

"A Killing In Choctaw" is an enthralling documentary on Ray's life and how
the
dreadful incident of 1962 defined his life and held him prisoner in his own
skin for over 20 years. Ray's compelling story comes alive under Nwoffiah's
masterful direction. Nwoffiah effectively blends narration, reenactment,
archival footage, and interviews with actual witnesses of the murder and
trial
participants. The documentary takes us back to the 1960s and sets the
social
context that bred many such horrific crimes. We then follow the subsequent
trauma, depression, and denial that young Ray suffered and endured for over
20
years until he met a man in 1984 that taught him about the power of
forgiveness. Ray attributes the act of forgiving the man who killed his
Father as saving his life. He describes it as being the most enjoyable
moment
of his life and a day of freedom from his self-imposed prison.

"A Killing In Choctaw is a haunting awakening to the affects of America's
age-long racial injustice," said Nwoffiah. "It is a documentary that
celebrates the triumph of light over darkness."

ABOUT CARL RAY:

In 1967, Carl Ray graduated from Tuskegee Institute with a B.S. Degree in
Electrical Engineering. After graduation, he traveled to California to
begin
a career in the Aerospace Industry. Early in his career, he was sidetracked
by a yearning to perform stand-up comedy.

Carl Ray started a Youth Opportunity Program in East Palo Alto in 1968;
began
recruiting youth to attend Historically Black Colleges and Universities in
1970; then undertook sponsoring tours to the colleges. Ray continues to
host
Spring and Fall tours to Historically Black Colleges and Universities
(HBCU).
To date, he has chaperoned more than 2,000 students on HBCU tours.

In 1988, Ray, together with his wife, founded Courtland Esteem School -- a
private school in San Jose, California -- where they continue to educate
young
African American children in grades one through six.

Carl Ray has performed "A Killing in Choctaw" live nearly 100 times at
theaters, churches, colleges, museums and other venues throughout the United
States.

To learn more about Ray's fascinating biography, please visit
www.carlraye.com

###

MEDIA CONTACT: PR, et Cetera, Inc. -- Toni Beckham -- 408-499-3664 --
Toni@PRetCetera.com

6.

ALABAMIAN SPREADS MESSAGE OF FORGIVENESS WITH DOCUMENTARY
By Casandra Andrews

Mobile Register (Mobile, AL)
October 3, 2004

http://www.carlraye.com/candrews.shtml

SAN JOSE, Calif. -- Even before Carl Ray appeared on screen, his voice
reverberated through the Montgomery Theater here, mimicking the sounds of
gun
fire that repeatedly pierced his father's chest.

"Pop! Pop! Pop!" he shouted as some in the audience gasped, then grimaced at
the cruel image his words conjured. "Pop! Pop! Pop!"

Then silence.

Forty-two years ago, an 18-year-old Ray watched as his father's body was
riddled with bullets in Choctaw County because the youth hadn't addressed a
white neighbor as "sir."

After the shots rang out, witnesses said the shooter, William "Bill"
Carlisle,
lowered his .45-caliber handgun, stumbled to his truck, then drove away.
George Ray, a 62-year-old farmer, lay dying in the yard of a friend's home
near Butler.

That moment, and much of Ray's life since, has become the subject of a
documentary that premiered here in late September, thousands of miles from
the
spot where the engineer-turned-comedian-turned-actor-turned-activist grew
up.

Despite rain and unseasonably cool conditions, several hundred people packed
into the theater in Silicon Valley to see the film chronicling Ray's pain,
plight and path to forgiveness.

Speckled with comedic as well as somber moments, the autobiographical
documentary, "A Killing in Choctaw, the Power of Forgiveness," follows Ray's
life through a series of interviews with friends, family and journalists.
It
also includes clips from the one-man play, "A Killing in Choctaw," that Ray
began performing five years ago.

Now 60, he's presented the play nearly 100 times at community theaters and
college campuses across the country. The production chronicles his life
growing up in a racially divided Alabama, including his father's 1962 death
and the years he spent blaming himself for the slaying.

The play, as well as the film adaptation, details the strange set of
circumstances that led Ray to forgive the man who killed his father. The
documentary digs deeper and brings viewers into Ray's struggle for peace.

"As I was watching, I was thinking it was a personal story, but it really
does
reach out to other people," said Orpheus Crutchfield, 37, from Hercules,
Calif. "It's a horrible story, but it's a universal story."

Crutchfield, who literally sat on the edge of his seat through most of the
film, met Ray a few years back at a conference on race relations.

"I think it's going to Sundance," he said, referring to the independent film
festival in Utah started by actor Robert Redford. For Crutchfield, the
film's
message was clear: "We all think we have problems, but they can be
overcome."

Ray is living proof of that, he said.

The film opens with Ray describing his past in a monologue interspersed with
photos from his childhood.

The youngest of five children, he was born two months premature. He
contracted polio at age 4. Ray said he was known as "that 'flicted boy"
throughout his elementary school years.

Ray grew up just outside the tiny town of Butler, Ala., a spot close to
nowhere in particular, about 120 miles north of Mobile.

Fate had divided the population about evenly between black and white there,
and the state of Alabama, by custom and law, had guaranteed privilege for
only
one side.

Ray's parents, who never made it much past sixth grade, saw to it that their
children all went to college. It wasn't a subject for debate in the Ray
household.

As the youngest, Ray was the last to leave home.

On Sept. 6, 1962, a teenage Ray was packing his bags for Tuskegee Institute,
about 150 miles east in Tuskegee. He found some old fireworks in a
footlocker
as he rummaged around, he said.

In his documentary, Ray describes what happened next:

Done with his packing, Ray and a younger cousin went out to a nearby dirt
road
to light the fireworks. They weren't long without company.

Carlisle rambled up in his truck and asked them about what he thought was
gunfire. Ray explained that the loud noise was just fireworks, answering
the
man's questions with "yes" and "no."

Because Ray didn't respond with "yes, sir" and "no, sir," as was the custom
then in much of the rural South, Carlisle violently beat him, stopping just
short of cutting his throat, Ray said.

For reasons Ray still doesn't understand, the man spared his life, climbed
back in his pickup and roared away. Ray, bruised and bleeding, went home
and
told his family what happened.

About an hour later, Ray and his parents went down the road to a friend's
home
to watch the evening news. Instead of staying inside, George Ray placed the
television in the doorway and sat outside to watch.

It wasn't long before Carlisle came calling.

The white man told George Ray his son needed to leave town, explaining that
he
needed to be taught how to talk to white folks. The elder Ray said his son
was leaving for college in just a few days.

George Ray's words only seemed to enrage Carlisle.

The white man slammed his pistol into George Ray's head more than once.
Bleeding, the black man fell into a flower bed.

Trying to protect his father, Ray picked up an empty glass bottle and
shattered it against Carlisle's head. That's when the white man began
firing
his weapon at George Ray.

Originally charged with the murder of George Ray, Carlisle was convicted of
manslaughter in 1963 in circuit court in Butler, and sentenced to nine
years.
All of the jurors were white. Ray thinks the case marked the first time a
white man was sent to jail for killing a black man in Choctaw County.

Nine years later, Carlisle, who by then was out of jail, was shot in the
chest
and killed by his father-in-law in during an argument in 1973, according to
a
news story in the *Choctaw Advocate*, a weekly newspaper.

Two years ago, while filming the movie about his life, Ray walked up the
worn
steps inside the Choctaw County Courthouse, then took a seat in the wooden
witness box where he'd been questioned some 40 years earlier.

It wasn't long before the past became the present.

"I'm sitting here and he's ripping me apart," Ray recalled in the film of
the
day he testified in Carlisle's trial. As the camera moved in closer, Ray
looked down, then wiped at his cheeks.

Many in the audience at the film premiere did the same.

"I'd never seen so much hatred," Ray said, looking into the camera again
after
a few moments, then gesturing to where the all-white spectators sat on the
first floor of the courtroom. "It was like, how could somebody hate like
that? I'll never understand. It was just a sea of hate."

His older brother, Lindsey, who lives in Montgomery, said the treatment Ray
received at the trial was "a lynching without a rope" in the documentary.

Ray said Carlisle's attorney, who is now deceased, blamed him for his
father's
death. "In my mind I had subconsciously accepted that fact," he said of the
way he held himself responsible for the killing.

Bracing for Carlisle's trial and staying in school proved difficult. After
dropping out of Tuskegee, Ray eventually went back to college. Before
leaving
Alabama in 1967, he had a bachelor's degree from Tuskegee and a job in
engineering in San Jose.

But comedy tugged at him, even with a wife and five children to support. He
broke into the comedy scene at northern California clubs in the late 1970s.
By 1984, he was in Los Angeles, working comedy stints and driving a cab for
the money and because he liked being around people.

One day he picked up a man in Hollywood and dropped him off at the airport.
About a week later, he got a call to pick up someone at a hotel. It was the
same man, country songwriter Wil Hinkson. Within weeks, he found himself
driving Hinkson for a third time. The cabbie and his paying rider were
amazed
at the coincidences.

As they talked during their third meeting, a news item on the radio sparked
a
solemn turn in their conversation. Out of the blue, Ray said, the
songwriter
started talking about forgiveness. Ray offered bits of his own life story,
explaining his lingering anger.

The white man told Ray to simply forgive Carlisle.

It was then, Ray said, that he stated he forgave Carlisle, if for no other
reason than to silence Hinkson. "After I said the words," Ray says in the
film, "it was as if I had been instantly moved from one planet to another
planet."

While much of the anger and pain had vanished, Ray says in the film he was
still left with emotional scars: "There's no such thing as closure. You
get
to different levels of peace."

After more than two years of performing the story of his life for audiences
around the country, the play's subject matter was taking its toll.

Ray said that 2001 was one of the toughest years he's ever endured,
comparing
the time period to when he first started college just after his father's
death.

Things got so bad that his wife, Brenda, tried to make him stop performing
the
one-man show. "I felt like if I didn't do the play, Bill would win," Ray
said. "I'd been in a battle with him all my life."

Eventually, he sought help from a psychologist.

"The forgiveness part freed me," Ray said, "but it didn't get rid of my
depression. I forgave Bill for killing my father but I still had my own
guilt
and I was trapped. The hardest part to do was to forgive myself."

A few years back, looking to elevate his play to another level, Ray went in
search of a director. After attending a film festival in California, he met
filmmaker Chike Nowffiah, who had recently completed a documentary about the
closure of black hospitals in America.

The two hit it off.

As producer of the documentary, Ray spent more than two years working with
Nowffiah to make the 90-minute adaptation.

Ray accompanied the director and a film crew to Alabama several times,
interviewing those who lent perspective to the production, including Choctaw
County residents, his guidance counselor at Tuskegee and some of his
siblings.
Ray sold shares in the production as a way to maintain control over the
finished product.

Another Alabama resident who took part in the film was Hollis Curl, a former
newspaper reporter in Choctaw County who arrived on the scene of the
shooting
shortly after it happened. Curl, who is white, was interviewed at length in
the film about what he saw that day and his feelings about segregation.

"I thought the races were getting along pretty good," Curl says in the film.
"I thought that separate but equal worked for me."

The term "separate but equal" meant that blacks didn't eat in the same
restaurant dining rooms as whites, didn't use the same bathrooms, didn't
share
the same schools.

Ray's plan is to enter the project at various film festivals across the
country. He also is working to market a shorter version of the documentary
to
cable television companies and universities. Ray said he would like to tour
with the film, much like he has done with the play, introducing audiences to
his life story and path to forgiveness.

Mike Dale, a former Choctaw County resident who went to high school in
Butler
during the turbulent 1960s, knew one of Carlisle's sons.

"I think it's good to remember all this stuff," said Dale, who now lives in
Michigan and attended the film premiere. "The world's a better place than
it
was in Choctaw County in 1964. It's a better place and people are better
than
they were."

In the Montgomery Theater's lobby in San Jose, famous black-and-white images
from the South's segregated past sat on large easels for the premiere. News
photographs of Ku Klux Klansmen, a burning cross and a group crossing a
bridge
in Selma set the scene for Ray's documentary.

Inside the 500-seat arena, blacks and whites sat side by side to see the
film.

Rick Callender, president of the San JosSilicon Valley branch of the NAACP,
addressed the audience before the presentation. "It's not only the story of
one man," Callender said. "It is our collective story. It's the story of
our
strength."

After a standing ovation at the end of the film, a beaming Ray took the
stage,
chest out and thumbs through his belt loops.

He was ready to answer questions.

There were many.

People who traveled from as far away as Michigan and Mississippi wanted to
know more about the man who shot his father. They wanted to know what
became
of the lawyer who blamed Ray for his father's death. They also wanted to
reassure him that the shooting wasn't his fault.

"If white America could change places with you, what do you think they would
have learned?" someone eventually asked.

Ray's answer was immediate.

"It's hell being a black man in America," he said.

"Should we forget?" a man from the balcony wondered aloud.

Ray, along with others in the audience, responded almost in unison: "We
should forgive but we should never forget."

It's the kind of dialogue Ray hopes to spark in communities across the
country.

"We have to share our problems," he said. "We have to talk to each other."

7.

[Carl Ray's biography]

http://www.carlraye.com/bio2.shtml

In 1967, Carl graduated from Tuskegee Institute with a B.S. Degree in
Electrical Engineering. After graduation he traveled to California to begin
a
career in the Aerospace Industry. During the morning commutes, he listened
to
comedians on the "Freeway Funnies" morning show and enjoyed it immensely.
After hearing a commercial for a comedy school, he enrolled in a comedy
class
in San Francisco.

After two years of honing his comedy skills in comedy clubs in the Bay Area
clubs, Carl left his engineering career for comedy, and headed to Hollywood.
Upon arriving in Hollywood, Carl found himself competing with hundreds of
aspiring entertainers searching for part-time employment to support their
dreams. Thus, Carl became a taxi driver with Celebrity Cabs.

His dream began to materialize, and four years later he was working in
comedy
clubs throughout the country. In 1989, he was host and producer of his own
cable television show, "The Carl Raye Comedy Show." In 1990, while working
the college circuit, Carl discovered he had a talent for public speaking.
He
added motivational speaking to his resumé. It was a motivational speaking
engagement that led him to performing the one-man play about his life.

After speaking at the San Jose Museum of Art about his life and the Civil
Rights Movement, he was approached by one of the guests in the audience.
The
guest shared a vision that entered his mind while Carl was speaking. The
vision was a one-man play about Carl's experiences. Carl was made an offer
he
couldn't refuse. If he would agree to perform his life story, the guest
would
finance the production. That was the birth of the play, "A Killing In
Choctaw."

8.

[Booking information]

FOR BOOKINGS CONTACT:

Della Productions
Dellap44@aol.com
408.206.1768 - phone
408.259.6516 - phone/fax


---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

13) Dear Readers
Here is the digest for October 21, 2004
1-Two killed in the northern Gaza Strip, another dies
of wounds sustained on Wednesday
2-231 Palestinians, including 88 children, killed in
Khan Younis in four year

1- Two killed in the northern Gaza Strip, another dies of wounds
sustained on Wednesday
Saed Bannoura -IMEMC & Agencies, October 21, 2004

An Israeli military source claimed that two residents were shot dead
overnight near Nahal Oz settlement in the Gaza Strip, in addition to
another resident who died of wounds sustained on Wednesday in
Jabalia refuge camp.

The source claimed that soldiers spotted two activists crawling
towards a restricted zone, near the border fence, under cover of
fog, and shot them dead, suspecting that they intended to carry out
shootings in settlement blocs near the fence.

Meanwhile, Dr. Moaweya Hassanein, head of the Emergency Unit in the
Ministry of Health, said that Mohammad Zaki Abu Hliyyil, 31 years
old, died of critical wounds sustained on Wednesday, after soldiers
fired several shells at a number of homes in Jabalia refugee camp
killing four residents and wounding four others.

The Army continued its military operations in several areas in the
Gaza Strip despite their claims that 'Operation Days of Penitence'
had officially ended. Soldiers shelled several areas in the Gaza
Strip especially in Jabalia refugee camp, in the north, and Rafah in
the south of the Gaza Strip.

On Wednesday, soldiers shot dead a youth near Salah Ad-Deen Street,
in Rafah, in the south of the Gaza Strip, after claiming that two
men had attempted to place an explosive charge near the Egyptian
Borders.

According to the army, a third activist managed to escape.
Moreover, also on Wednesday, in Rafah, in the south of the Gaza
Strip, soldiers fired several shells at homes in Tal Zo'rob area,
south of Rafah, in the south of the Gaza Strip killing one youth and
causing damages to tens of homes, in addition to raiding Beit
Hanoun, in the north of the Gaza Strip, and firing several shells
causing large scale damages on Wednesday at dawn.

In addition, UNRWA said on Tuesday, that the number of homes
demolished in the latest military operation in Jabalia refugee camp,
in the north of the Gaza Strip, exceeded 90 homes. more than 140
residents were killed, 30 among them children, and approximately 400
residents were wounded.

2- 231 Palestinians, including 88 children, killed in Khan Younis in
four years
Saed Bannoura -IMEMC & Agencies, October 21, 2004, 14:12

The Public Relations Office at Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis
revealed that soldiers killed more than 231 Palestinians, mainly
children and women, in Khan Younis, since the outbreak of Al-Aqsa
Intifada, in September 30, 2000.

The office said in a report published on Thursday that soldiers
killed 321 Palestinians from Khan Younis in four years, in addition
to hundreds of residents who sustained different kinds of injuries
among the residents including children and elderly.

The published report revealed that more the 88 children were killed,
199 under the age of 39, and 34 residents between the ages of 40-70.
Moreover, the number of wounded residents exceeded 413 residents;
most of them sustained moderate and critical wounds; most of the
injuries were to the head and upper parts of the body.

The report of the Hospital revealed that 1701 Palestinians were
admitted to surgery in several branches of the hospital, and that
soldiers shot wounded four medics, three ambulance drivers, and
three administrators, in addition to destroying three ambulances
which belongs to the hospital.

It is worth mentioning that soldiers lately increased the military
attacks and violations against the medical teams, and shelled the
hospital causing damages in the reception Desk, Physiotherapy
Section, Surgery Branch, Kidney Section, in addition to other
branches in the hospital.

The damages were estimated with more than one million Dollars.

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://asia.groups.yahoo.com/group/Marxists/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Marxists-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://asia.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

14) Return of the Class Struggle: Hotel Workers National
Battle, One We Can't Afford to Lose
By Gene Pepi
craigslist.org/cgi-bin/search?areaID=1&subAreaID=1&query=san+francisco&cat=o
ff&minAsk=500&maxAsk=1000&minSqft=600&neighborhood=

On September 29, 2004, 1400 San Francisco hotel workers (members of
UNITE-HERE Local 2) hit the streets at four of fourteen major San Francisco
hotels for a two-week strike. Two days later, the other ten hotels in the
San Francisco Major Employers Group (SFMEG-who bargain together
against UNITE-HERE Local 2) responded by locking out the other 2600
San Francisco UNITE-HERE members covered under the SFMEG contract.

A week earlier, Local 2 members had authorized a strike by a 97% vote
of more than 3000 members. As of September 23, 2004, in cities across
the US, over 14,000 hotel and casino workers had passed resolutions to
authorize strikes by margins and numbers similar to those in San Francisco.
And on October 1, 2004, 10,000 union casino workers in Atlantic City,
New Jersey, struck with massive picket lines against seven of the twelve
major Atlantic City casinos. This is the start of a new wave of class
struggle, one we should win.

Hotel union labor contracts began to expire last June for 2800 Los
Angeles workers and in August for San Francisco hotel workers.
Contracts have expired for casino workers at the 12 major Atlantic
City gaming palaces, 12 major hotels in Washington, DC and on the
casino boats and casino facilities in cities of Indiana: Gary, Michigan
City and East Chicago.

Across the country in every hotel, casino, and union restaurant UNITE-
HERE members face similar issues. The bean counters at the hotel,
restaurant and gambling conglomerates want workers to pick up the
increased costs of healthcare for their families and retirees, to hold
the line on pension contributions, and to accept increased workloads
without increases in wages.

They absolutely do not want to have major hotel contracts expire in
2006, the common expiration date that UNITE-HERE members and
leaders are fighting for.

The 2006 expiration date would align the contract negotiations
for somewhere near 50,000 to 70,000 hotel workers from New York
City, up and down the East Coast, through Chicago and the Midwest,
up and down the West Coast, and across the Pacific Ocean to Hawaii.

It also reflects the merger of the unions that now make up UNITE-
HERE, possible changes in the leadership of the AFL-CIO union
confederation and the massive restructuring and consolidation of
the hotel, restaurant and gambling industries as represented by
the conglomerates that own, run and franchise what is now a multi-
billion dollar industry. The hotel and casino conglomerates adamantly
oppose the 2006 common contract expiration date, as reflected in
the San Francisco lockout and "bad-faith bargaining" legal action
by SFMEG taken against UNITE-HERE Local 2.

Merger Mania

On July 8, 2004, two existing AFL-CIO affiliated unions merged to
form UNITE-HERE. They were the Union of Needletrades, Textiles
and Industrial Employees (UNITE) and the Hotel Employees and
Restaurant Employees International Union (HERE).

The combined unions now number almost 500,000 active members
and 400,000 retirees throughout North America. More than half of
the current active members are women and the combined union has
organized more than 100,000 new workers in the last five years.

Three things preceded this union merger. UNITE itself was created
by the merger of two unions: the International Ladies Garment
Workers Union (ILGWU) and the Amalgamated Clothing and Textile
Workers Union (ACTWU), both famous for their struggles in textile
manufacturing and US politics. However in the years since the 1950s,
the two unions have lost a combined total of 850,000 members, as
clothing and textile manufacturing jobs were exported from the US.
By 2004 their combined membership totaled only 180,000.

The Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union
(HERE) was originally formed in the 1890s. Its membership peaked
in the 1980s. Just before September 11th, 2001 its membership was
272,000. Following the 2001 terrorist attacks union membership
dropped to 180,000, as much of the tourism industry collapsed.
The collapse was aggravated by the bursting of the 1990s economic
bubble. However by 2004 HERE membership had grown again to 260,000.

To support its call for the 2006 expiration date, UNITE-HERE points
out that in the last two decades, hotel lodging companies have
undergone a major consolidation. Hotels that used to be locally
owned are now parts of huge transnational corporations.

According to information provided by the union, 75% of UNITE-
HERE Local 2 workers in San Francisco are employed by national
chains (like Hilton, Hyatt, InterContinental, Marriott and Starwood).
These 5 transnational conglomerates together run 60% of San Francisco
hotels. Local companies run only 5% of San Francisco hotels.

The largest conglomerate, InterContinental, owns or franchises
3500 hotels in 100 countries and in San Francisco operates the
Mark Hopkins hotel and others. In 2003 InterContinental reported
an operating profit of more than one-half billion dollars.

In a like manner, in 2003 the Hilton Corporation reported over
$160 million profits on $4 billion in revenues, Marriott reported
$500 million profits on $9 billion in revenues, and Starwood reported
over $309 million profits on $3.8 billion in revenues.

Power in 2006

On Friday, August 13th, Hyatt Chicago Regency hotel workers
marched into management offices wearing their new red and black
"2004 Unity, 2006 Power" buttons. They presented managers with
a 500-signature petition. Five workers were sent home for wearing
the "2004 Unity, 2006 Power" buttons.

On Saturday, August 14th, in the face of 1400 guest check-outs,
82 button wearing hotel workers, including the main kitchen crew
and the main luncheon banquet server crew, were sent home when
they refused to remove their "2004 Unity, 2006 Power" buttons.
Food service at the hotel all but collapsed.

Management had to scramble to serve food buffet style and serve
a VIP luncheon using managers and other hotel staff. On Sunday
Hyatt Regency hotel managers asked UNITE-HERE Local 1 hotel
workers to come back to work and said that it was OK to wear the
"2004 Unity, 2006 Power" buttons.

"We sent a message to the hotels in Chicago and the giant
corporations that run them that this is a national fight and
we are ready for it," Francine Jones, a Hyatt Chicago Room
Attendant said.

UNITE- HERE Local 2 Vice-president Lamoin Werlein-Jean, told
San Francisco news-media reporters that, "We're fighting to build
a national movement to unite our brother and sister hotel workers
across the country so we may be able to negotiate with more
balance with these multinational hotel corporations."

Ignacio Ruiz, a food server at the Los Angeles Century Plaza, told
an LA reporter that hotel workers had learned from the super-market
strike that they need national coordination to win these battles against
international hotel chains.
UNITE- HERE Local 2 President Mike Casey told us that UNITE- HERE
is trying to avoid the problems that UFCW grocery workers in Southern
California had with their contracts. Casey also said they are trying to
connect with Northern California UFCW Grocery workers and SEIU-
represented hospital workers, who face similar issues in their
contracts that are expiring and are being negotiated now.

Post 911 Recovery

The tourism industry suffered an economic blow immediately
following the 911 terrorist attacks. That was on top of the economic
downturn already taking place. In San Francisco, about one third of
union hotel workers were laid off and many of the rest had their work
hours reduced. However in the last year, the industry has been
experiencing a recovery to levels at or above those of 2001,
particularly in San Francisco and New York.

In Washington, D.C. both room occupancy and rates have increased
in the last year. The Washington Post, reported on September 3, 2004
that Smith Travel Research Inc. states that area hotels reported revenue
per room to be up from $75.77 in 2003 to $86.45 in 2004, over
a similar time period.

This figure is also higher than the same period preceding the
terrorist attacks in 2001. However employment levels in the
hotels have not kept pace with increased workloads. Fewer
workers are now doing more work than they did in 2001.

As Mike Casey, President of UNITE- HERE Local 2 puts it, "We
won't allow the hotels to balance their books on our backs ..."

In San Francisco (and around the country), UNITE-HERE Local 2
is also fighting to defend immigrant workers, arguing that employers
should join the union in the fight to change US immigration laws.
UNITE-HERE unions are also proposing to increase the hiring rates
of black workers, which are underrepresented in the hotel work
force. UNITE-HERE Local 2 also has endorsed San Francisco Ballot
Initiative F, which would allow non-citizens, with children in public
schools, to vote in school board elections.

The contracts expiring in San Francisco affect other San Francisco
hotels, where contracts will expire soon. Which is why we see SFMEG
(and all other hotel employers across the country) proposing
increased employee contributions to health insurance costs,
meager wage proposals, inadequate pension contributions, and
finally, more than anything else, opposition to the 2006 contract
expiration date. In fact the fight for the 2006 expiration date is
the main reason that negotiations broke down and that UNITE-
HERE Local 2 called the strike.

In every hotel across the country, if their regular employees strike
or employers lock union workers out, hotel managers and executives
say they will keep their hotels open. It remains to be seen if they can
do this if union workers put up the fight necessary to shut down the
hotels despite the use of strikebreakers.

Words are cheap. What the striking workers need is massive solidarity.
The AFL-CIO and all local Labor Councils and individual unions must
help the Hotel Workers with money, food and, more importantly, labor
actions such as boycotts of hotel chains and massive support for picket
lines. Supporters must enforce the premise that picket lines are not to
be crossed.

Politicians, especially those running for office, should be put on the spot
and in the spotlight. They must speak out in favor of the mostly
immigrant strikers and avoid the trap of "mediating" in favor of the
hotel owners-as San Francisco's Mayor Gavin Newsom has hinted at doing.
On September 29, 2004, 1400 San Francisco hotel workers (members of
UNITE-HERE Local 2) hit the streets at four of fourteen major San Francisco
hotels for a two-week strike. Two days later, the other ten hotels in the
San Francisco Major Employers Group (SFMEG-who bargain together
against UNITE-HERE Local 2) responded by locking out the other 2600
San Francisco UNITE-HERE members covered under the SFMEG contract.

A week earlier, Local 2 members had authorized a strike by a 97% vote
of more than 3000 members. As of September 23, 2004, in cities across
the US, over 14,000 hotel and casino workers had passed resolutions
to authorize strikes by margins and numbers similar to those in San
Francisco. And on October 1, 2004, 10,000 union casino workers in
Atlantic City, New Jersey, struck with massive picket lines against seven
of the twelve major Atlantic City casinos. This is the start of a new wave
of class struggle, one we should win.

Hotel union labor contracts began to expire last June for 2800 Los
Angeles workers and in August for San Francisco hotel workers.
Contracts have expired for casino workers at the 12 major Atlantic
City gaming palaces, 12 major hotels in Washington, DC and on the
casino boats and casino facilities in cities of Indiana: Gary, Michigan
City and East Chicago.

Across the country in every hotel, casino, and union restaurant UNITE-
HERE members face similar issues. The bean counters at the hotel,
restaurant and gambling conglomerates want workers to pick up the
increased costs of healthcare for their families and retirees, to hold
the line on pension contributions, and to accept increased workloads
without increases in wages.

They absolutely do not want to have major hotel contracts expire in
2006, the common expiration date that UNITE-HERE members and
leaders are fighting for.

The 2006 expiration date would align the contract negotiations for
somewhere near 50,000 to 70,000 hotel workers from New York City,
up and down the East Coast, through Chicago and the Midwest, up
and down the West Coast, and across the Pacific Ocean to Hawaii.

It also reflects the merger of the unions that now make up UNITE-HERE,
possible changes in the leadership of the AFL-CIO union confederation
and the massive restructuring and consolidation of the hotel, restaurant
and gambling industries as represented by the conglomerates that own,
run and franchise what is now a multi-billion dollar industry. The hotel
and casino conglomerates adamantly oppose the 2006 common contract
expiration date, as reflected in the San Francisco lockout and "bad-faith
bargaining" legal action by SFMEG taken against UNITE-HERE Local 2.

Merger Mania

On July 8, 2004, two existing AFL-CIO affiliated unions merged to
form UNITE-HERE. They were the Union of Needletrades, Textiles
and Industrial Employees (UNITE) and the Hotel Employees and
Restaurant Employees International Union (HERE).

The combined unions now number almost 500,000 active members
and 400,000 retirees throughout North America. More than half of
the current active members are women and the combined union has
organized more than 100,000 new workers in the last five years.

Three things preceded this union merger. UNITE itself was created
by the merger of two unions: the International Ladies Garment Workers
Union (ILGWU) and the Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers
Union (ACTWU), both famous for their struggles in textile manufacturing
and US politics. However in the years since the 1950s, the two unions
have lost a combined total of 850,000 members, as clothing and textile
manufacturing jobs were exported from the US. By 2004 their combined
membership totaled only 180,000.

The Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union
(HERE) was originally formed in the 1890s. Its membership peaked in
the 1980s. Just before September 11th, 2001 its membership was
272,000. Following the 2001 terrorist attacks union membership
dropped to 180,000, as much of the tourism industry collapsed.
The collapse was aggravated by the bursting of the 1990s economic
bubble. However by 2004 HERE membership had grown again to
260,000.

To support its call for the 2006 expiration date, UNITE-HERE points
out that in the last two decades, hotel lodging companies have
undergone a major consolidation. Hotels that used to be locally
owned are now parts of huge transnational corporations.

According to information provided by the union, 75% of UNITE-HERE
Local 2 workers in San Francisco are employed by national chains
(like Hilton, Hyatt, InterContinental, Marriott and Starwood). These
5 transnational conglomerates together run 60% of San Francisco
hotels. Local companies run only 5% of San Francisco hotels.
The largest conglomerate, InterContinental, owns or franchises
3500 hotels in 100 countries and in San Francisco operates the
Mark Hopkins hotel and others. In 2003 InterContinental reported
an operating profit of more than one-half billion dollars.

In a like manner, in 2003 the Hilton Corporation reported over
$160 million profits on $4 billion in revenues, Marriott reported
$500 million profits on $9 billion in revenues, and Starwood
reported over $309 million profits on $3.8 billion in revenues.

Power in 2006

On Friday, August 13th, Hyatt Chicago Regency hotel workers
marched into management offices wearing their new red and
black "2004 Unity, 2006 Power" buttons. They presented managers
with a 500-signature petition. Five workers were sent home for
wearing the "2004 Unity, 2006 Power" buttons.

On Saturday, August 14th, in the face of 1400 guest check-outs,
82 button wearing hotel workers, including the main kitchen crew
and the main luncheon banquet server crew, were sent home when
they refused to remove their "2004 Unity, 2006 Power" buttons.
Food service at the hotel all but collapsed.

Management had to scramble to serve food buffet style and serve
a VIP luncheon using managers and other hotel staff. On Sunday
Hyatt Regency hotel managers asked UNITE-HERE Local 1 hotel
workers to come back to work and said that it was OK to wear the
"2004 Unity, 2006 Power" buttons.
"We sent a message to the hotels in Chicago and the giant corporations
that run them that this is a national fight and we are ready for it,"
Francine Jones, a Hyatt Chicago Room Attendant said.

UNITE- HERE Local 2 Vice-president Lamoin Werlein-Jean, told San
Francisco news-media reporters that, "We're fighting to build
a national movement to unite our brother and sister hotel workers
across the country so we may be able to negotiate with more
balance with these multinational hotel corporations."

Ignacio Ruiz, a food server at the Los Angeles Century Plaza,
told an LA reporter that hotel workers had learned from the
super-market strike that they need national coordination to win
these battles against international hotel chains.
UNITE- HERE Local 2 President Mike Casey told us that
UNITE- HERE is trying to avoid the problems that UFCW grocery
workers in Southern California had with their contracts. Casey
also said they are trying to connect with Northern California UFCW
Grocery workers and SEIU-represented hospital workers, who face
similar issues in their contracts that are expiring and are being
negotiated now.

Post 911 Recovery

The tourism industry suffered an economic blow immediately
following the 911 terrorist attacks. That was on top of the
economic downturn already taking place. In San Francisco,
about one third of union hotel workers were laid off and many
of the rest had their work hours reduced. However in the last year,
the industry has been experiencing a recovery to levels at or above
those of 2001, particularly in San Francisco and New York.

In Washington, D.C. both room occupancy and rates have increased
in the last year. The Washington Post, reported on September 3, 2004
that Smith Travel Research Inc. states that area hotels reported
revenue per room to be up from $75.77 in 2003 to $86.45 in 2004,
over a similar time period.

This figure is also higher than the same period preceding the terrorist
attacks in 2001. However employment levels in the hotels have not
kept pace with increased workloads. Fewer workers are now doing
more work than they did in 2001.

As Mike Casey, President of UNITE- HERE Local 2 puts it, "We won't
allow the hotels to balance their books on our backs ..."

In San Francisco (and around the country), UNITE-HERE Local 2 is also
fighting to defend immigrant workers, arguing that employers should
join the union in the fight to change US immigration laws. UNITE-HERE
unions are also proposing to increase the hiring rates of black workers,
which are underrepresented in the hotel work force. UNITE-HERE Local 2
also has endorsed San Francisco Ballot Initiative F, which would allow
non-citizens, with children in public schools, to vote in school board
elections.

The contracts expiring in San Francisco affect other San Francisco hotels,
where contracts will expire soon. Which is why we see SFMEG (and all
other hotel employers across the country) proposing increased employee
contributions to health insurance costs, meager wage proposals,
inadequate pension contributions, and finally, more than anything
else, opposition to the 2006 contract expiration date. In fact the fight
for the 2006 expiration date is the main reason that negotiations broke
down and that UNITE-HERE Local 2 called the strike.

In every hotel across the country, if their regular employees strike or
employers lock union workers out, hotel managers and executives say
they will keep their hotels open. It remains to be seen if they can do this
if union workers put up the fight necessary to shut down the hotels
despite the use of strikebreakers.

Words are cheap. What the striking workers need is massive solidarity.
The AFL-CIO and all local Labor Councils and individual unions must help
the Hotel Workers with money, food and, more importantly, labor actions
such as boycotts of hotel chains and massive support for picket lines.
Supporters must enforce the premise that picket lines are not to be
crossed.

Politicians, especially those running for office, should be put on the spot
and in the spotlight. They must speak out in favor of the mostly immigrant
strikers and avoid the trap of "mediating" in favor of the hotel owners-as
San Francisco's Mayor Gavin Newsom has hinted at doing.

posted 2:47 PM  0 comments

Targets of Empire Demonstration Sat November 13

bayareapalestine Main Page
 

No matter who wins the election
in November, many people will find
themselves still struggling to get by
because of the actions and inactions
of the US government.  As people in
Palestine and Iraq are killed by US made
and funded bombs and bullets, the
people of Haiti will be kept from having a
democratically elected government,
and prevented from trying otherwise.  As
the US continues to reap havoc in
Afghanistan and threaten countries around
the globe, people here at home
will struggle for housing, healthcare,
education and jobs.
 
The Justice in Palestine coalition has
called this demonstration to call
attention to these "Targets of Empire"
and reassert the importance of the
unity between different groups through
grassroots struggle. Please save the
date and get out the flyer. We are looking
for others to endorse and help
build the protest with us.  Please
send your endorsements to
info@justiceinpalestine.net and come
to the planning meeting this Thursday
night at 7.00 at  Muddy Waters cafe on
Valencia Street near the corner of
16th.
 
Solidarity!
 
Josh
 
 * To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bayareapalestine/
 
* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
bayareapalestine-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
 
* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
Yahoo! Terms of Service.

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
END THE U.S. OCCUPATION OF IRAQ!
BRING ALL THE TROOPS HOME NOW!
MARCH AND RALLY TO STOP THE WAR NOW!
WEDNESDAY, NOV. 3RD, 5PM
POWELL AND MARKET-MARCH TO 24TH & MISSION ST., S.F.
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
VOTE YES ON N! MEETING THURS. OCT. 22 & OCT. 28, 7PM,
GLOBAL EXCHANGE, 2017 MISSION STREET, SUITE 303
(NEAR 16TH & MISSION STREETS)
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

1) Oct 21 & Oct 22 - 9th Natl Day of Protest to Stop Police
Brutality, Repression & the Criminalization of a Generation
From: rita akayama wrote:
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 19:36:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: rita akayama
Subject: To: office@october22.org, no1022 ,
oct22sf@energy-net.org
Check out the Calendar of events below.

2) EMERGENCY ACTION ALERT!
Stop HR 10 Before Congress Starts a New War on Immigrants!
In the past two weeks, the most right-wing Congressmen have
tried to sneak horrible anti-immigrant measures past the public.
These are not just any bills: Congress has begun its single
BIGGEST ATTACK on immigrants in almost a DECADE.

3) Anger Over Tax Cuts as Jobs Leave Towns
By TIMOTHY EGAN
GALESBURG, Ill.
October 20, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/20/national/20taxes.html?hp&ex=1098331200&en=
b5b229e8f0a15ebd&ei=5094&partner=homepage

4) Soldiers fear that they are 'sleeping with the enemy'
Adrian Blomfield discovers deep mistrust between American
troops and Iraqi soldiers they are training
(Filed: 18/10/2004)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/10/18/wirq218.xml&
sSheet=/news/2004/10/18/ixnewstop.html

5) Maritime Worker Monitor #7
October 13, 2004
STOP THE WAR ON IRAQ AND
THE WAR ON WORKERS!
Join the Million Worker March!
(This is a great argument in favor of the MWM and others like it.
I felt it was important to pass it along even though it is after the
Fact...BW)

6) How Many Iraqis Are Dying? By One Count, 208 in a Week
TALLYING THE DEAD
By NORIMITSU ONISHI
BAGHDAD, Iraq
October 19, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/19/international/middleeast/19casualties.html
?oref=login&hp

7) Oil Prices Climb Back to the $54 Level
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
LONDON
October 20, 2004
Filed at 12:07 p.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/business/AP-Oil-Prices.html

8) Homeless Families Blocked From Seeking U.S. Housing Aid
By LESLIE KAUFMAN
October 20, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/20/nyregion/20homeless.html

9) Public University Tuition Is Up Sharply for 2004
By GREG WINTER
October 20, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/20/education/20college.html?hp&ex=1098331200&
en=7556ff201f536c43&ei=5094&partner=homepage

10) 2 Shipbuilders Get Big Breaks in New Corporate Tax Bill
By EDMUND L. ANDREWS
WASHINGTON
October 19, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/19/business/19corptax.html?hp&ex=1098244800&e
n=9c348723956b0000&ei=5094&partner=homepage

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

1) Oct 21 & Oct 22 - 9th Natl Day of Protest to Stop Police
Brutality, Repression & the Criminalization of a Generation
From: rita akayama wrote:
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 19:36:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: rita akayama
Subject: To: office@october22.org, no1022 ,
oct22sf@energy-net.org
Check out the Calendar of events:

This is the 9th National Day of Protest to Stop Police Brutality, Repression
and the Criminalization of a Generation. There will be protests around
the country in more than 25 cities.

Why is it important why we mobilize a powerful national outpouring
for October 22nd, 2004:

+ As our research for the Stolen Lives Project makes clear, the authorities
continue to give a green light to brutal, murdering cops. In the New York/
New Jersey over 101 people killed by law enforcement officers since
2001, and in the SF Bay Area over 40 killed by law enforcement since 2001.

+They’ve continued racial profiling targeting Blacks and Latinos even
as they expanded this heinous practice to target Arabs, Muslims and
South Asians.

+They’ve continued and expanded the police state clampdown they've
been putting into place since Sept 11th. The sever limits on the rights
to protest that was put in place around the RNC were only the most
recent examples of this.

CALENDAR OF EVENTS FOR THE SF BAY AREA

October 21- San Jose

Justice Review Committee of the Human Relations
Commission Meeting

Thursday October 22nd 5:30pm pm
70 W. Hedding St. West Wing, basement,
San Jose CA 95110

Many families who have been impacted by police shootings
will share their concerns. If you can attend, please come
dressed in black.

contact: Richard Konda sccala@pacbell.net

October 22, 4pm - San Francisco

Press Conference/Speak Out
4921 3rd St (between Palou and Quesada)
Familes Speak Out- Marylon Boyd, Mesha Irizarry and
Sandra-Juanita Cooper,Danny Garcia, Regina Cardenas,
Soto family and many other family members

Also Organizations such as: Amnesty International,
Dennis Cunnigham, atty, October 22nd Coalition,
Police Watch/Ella Baker Center, Idriss Stelley Foundation,
Day Laborers, Samina Faheem of American Muslim Voice,
Yuri Kochiyama, Leroy Moore- poetry reading, And many more!

Wear black that day in memory of those whose lives have been
stolen from them. We must say loudly and clearly "We don't want
your kind of safety. There ain't no safety in a police state!
No More Stolen Lives!"

Fight Back ! On October 22nd, Wear Black!

October 22- Oakland

Premiere Showing: Every Mother's Son 8-10pm
Fellowship of Humanity
390 27th Street

Fundraiser for No on Measure Y: Showing of the Film,
"Every Mother's Son." The film is about victims
of police violence in New York City and there will be guest
speakers, including mothers of the victims.

Suggested Donation $5-10.
No one will be turned away for lack of funds.

Sponsored by United for Peace and Justice Bay Area

October 22, 9pm-4am - Hip Hop Event San Francisco at Club Six

In support of the 9th National Day of Protest to Stop Police
Brutality, Repression and the Criminalization of a Generation

Club Six
60 6th St.
(Hidden between Market/Mission in the heart of San Francisco's
world famous SOMA district. Or take MUNI lines 5, 6, 7, 21, 71
towards Market, exit Powell, and walk 1 block to 6th St.)

Lioness and Mr. E presents:
SF UPROCK 5 with members of LOCO BLOCO
SAKE 1 ,Jennicyde , Ren, Mr. E ,I-Jonah ,Jahyzer, Jus Rite
B-boy & B-girl Psyher hosted by:
Hound Dog Truckers

Price: Ladies free b4 10:30pm, $10 after

Check out our website at www.october22.org


October 22nd Coalition

2940 16th St 200-6

San Francisco, CA 94103

(415) 864-5153

oct22sf@energy-net.org

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

2) EMERGENCY ACTION ALERT!
Stop HR 10 Before Congress Starts a New War on Immigrants!
In the past two weeks, the most right-wing Congressmen have
tried to sneak horrible anti-immigrant measures past the public.
These are not just any bills: Congress has begun its single
BIGGEST ATTACK on immigrants in almost a DECADE.

Please circulate widely.
*If you live in these states you have a chance to help. Five Minutes
of your time can safe many immigrant families. Will you please help?
Samina F. Sundas

EMERGENCY ACTION ALERT!

Stop HR 10 Before Congress Starts a New War on Immigrants!

In the past two weeks, the most right-wing Congressmen have tried
to sneak horrible anti-immigrant measures past the public. These
are not just any bills: Congress has begun its single BIGGEST ATTACK
on immigrants in almost a DECADE.

Recently, both houses passed the “911 Commission Recommendations
Implementation Act." The House of Representatives version --
HR 10 -- includes immigration amendments that were NEVER part
of the Commission’s recommendations. Now,without further debate,
against the wishes of the Commission, and with complete disregard
for the rights of noncitizen Americans, a group of 21 Senators and
House members will conference behind closed doors and decide
whether to keep the anti-immigrant amendments when it goes to
President Bush to be signed into law.

We need your help, NOW! In 7 years alone, over one million
immigrants have been deported. HR 10 would strip the few rights
that noncitizens enjoy under our Constitution, and tear millions
more families apart. Specifically, the proposed bill:
· Radically expands drive-by-deportations

· Suspends habeas corpus (the right to ask a court to review your
detention/deportation) for the first time since the Civil War
(Section 3009)

· Allows deportations to a country with no government (Section
3035)

· Allows more mandatory indefinite detentions,(Section 3032)

· Makes it more difficult for people fleeing torture to gain
asylum (Section 3007)

· Allows Homeland Security to deport immigrants before federal
courts have decided on their case. (Section 3009)

· Restricts driver's licenses and consular ID cards (Section
3006)

PLEASE PICK UP YOUR PHONE AND CALL!

The War on Terror is a War on Immigrants. We have to stop it.
So far, House staffers have said that they have received 5000
comments in support of HR 10 and only 15 in opposition of
HR10. Change what they are hearing!

CALL the members of Congress below and tell them: "I want you
to remove ALL the immigration provisions of HR10 from the final 911
Commission bill. The immigration provisions strip people of basic
Constitutional rights, and will tear countless families apart without
serving national security."


*In order of importance, call:

1. Congresswoman Susan Collins from Maine (202-224-2523) -
She has the most influence over which version of the bills pass.

2. Senator Joe Lieberman from Connecticut (202-224-4041) - He
is the ranking Democrat who needs to be told to stick firmly to the
Senate bill and reject the House’s anti-immigrant provisions.

3. Senator Mike DeWine (Ohio, 202-224-2315); Congressman
Sensenbrenner (Wisconsin, 202-225-5101); Senator Graham
(Florida, 202-224-3041); and SenatorVoinovich
(Ohio, 202-224-3353).

4. Your own Congressperson and Senators. You can call the
Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 and ask to be connected.
Or look them up at www.house.gov and www.senate.gov.

5. As many of the other members of the Conference Committee
as you can – these are the only people who will be deciding what
sections of the bills will stay and what will go from the final bill.
Senate Members of the Conference Committee
Frank Lautenberg, New Jersey, 202-224-3224
Norm Coleman, Minnesota, 202-224-5641
John Sununu, NH, 202-224-2841
Pat Roberts, Kansas, 202-224-4774
Trent Lott, Mississippi, 202-224-6253 <>
Carl Levin, Michigan, 202-224-6221
Richard Durbin, Illinois, 202-224-2152
John Rockefeller, West Virginia

House Members of the Conference Committee Peter Hoekstra,
R-Mich., 2nd, 202-225-4401
Henry Hyde, R-Ill., 6th, 2020225-4561
David Dreier, R-Calif., 26th, 202-225-2305
Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., 52nd, 202-225-5672
Jane Harman, D-Calif., 36th, 202-225-8220
Ike Skelton, D-Mo., 4th, 202-225-2876
Robert Menendez, D-N.J., 13th, 202-225-7919

EMAIL or FAX
(Go to http://capwiz.com/aila2/mail/oneclick_compose/?alertid=6540936
and write
your message in the boxes provided.)

Use your own words and experiences. You can include:

· Remove all HR 10 immigration provisions from the final version
of the "911 Commission Recommendations Implementation Act,"
especially Sections 3009 and 3039. These provisions were never
a part of the 9-11 Commission’s recommendations.

· If passed, they will prevent immigrants from being able to
fight to keep their families together. They will tear apart families
faster than the 1996 laws, which have already deported 1.2 million
people and which many agree are unjust.

· People will be deported before courts finish deciding their
cases. Some people won’t even have access to federal courts to
fight their deportations.

Some people won’t have access to any courts.

· These laws will not make the US any safer. Stop the war on
immigrants. Stop calling us terrorists or pay with our families’ votes!

IF YOU WANT TO DO MORE:

Call us at Families for Freedom at 212-898-4121 or
www.familiesforfreedom.org For

more info on the bills, Visit
http://www.immigrationforum.org/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=654


In 1996, one year after an act of terror in Oklahoma, a Republican
Congress and Democratic president passed laws that have brutally
destroyed families and communities. History has shown that we
cannot expect ANY party to defend our rights if we don't make
our voices heard.

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

3) Anger Over Tax Cuts as Jobs Leave Towns
By TIMOTHY EGAN
GALESBURG, Ill.
October 20, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/20/national/20taxes.html?hp&ex=1098331200&en=
b5b229e8f0a15ebd&ei=5094&partner=homepage


GALESBURG, Ill. - People in this big-shouldered town, birthplace
of the poet Carl Sandburg, say Maytag broke their hearts. After
a decade of tax breaks and union concessions to keep the company
in a place that has been making refrigerators for more than 50 years,
Maytag closed its factory last month, terminating 1,600 jobs.

Maytag may be done with Galesburg, but Galesburg is not done with
Maytag.

District Attorney Paul L. Mangieri wants to sue Maytag to recoup
what he says were excess tax breaks in a broad package of incentives
to keep the company here. Much of the money, he said, came from
a purse that would have gone to schools in this economically fragile
community.

"We gave Maytag these incentives, and they accepted them," said
Mr. Mangieri, a Navy veteran who grew up in a small town not far
from here in western Illinois. "We did it based on faith and trust.
If we don't do anything now, it sends a message that we lack the
resolve to treat the rich and privileged the same as everybody else."

Maytag says it honored its agreement and took just the breaks to
which it was entitled.

There are echoes of Mr. Mangieri's argument in Putnam County, Fla.,
which gave $4.5 million in cash and tax breaks to attract a call center
owned by Sykes Enterprises, only to have it pull up stakes this month
after less than five years in Palatka.

"We ought to sue them," said Timothy Keyser, a Putnam County lawyer
who opposed the tax breaks from the start. "They sold the county
a bill of goods."

Galesburg and Putnam are losers in the increasingly cutthroat game
of using tax breaks to keep or attract jobs. Across the country,
communities are competing with one another to offer the most lucrative
incentives to lure good payrolls, from the giant assembly jobs at
Boeing to small centers for processing credit cards, despite some
studies that question the effectiveness of such tactics.

Most communities that lose business afterward lick their wounds and
walk away, as Putnam County plans to do. But in Galesburg, some
people have decided to take a stand, and it has split this community,
showing the challenges of fighting back against a corporation.

After initially cheering their prosecutor for trying to regain some of the
money used to keep Maytag, some people say they are afraid that they
may scare off future employers. They question whether suing to
reclaim tax breaks will hurt the community even more, adding that
they have to pay companies to compete and that it is the cost of doing
business in a vulnerable town.

"Maytag's leaving town has devastated our community," said Jeff Klinck,
a car dealer and the former chairman of the economic development office
here. "But I don't think any good comes from revenge. We want to move
forward, not move back."

The final decision on whether to sue will be made by November,
Mr. Mangieri said. Galesburg, site of a ferocious debate between Abraham
Lincoln and Stephen Douglas in 1858, has a fighting spirit. Residents
say the current civic gut check may determine whether the town becomes
another casualty of the force that has devastated communities throughout
much of Middle America.

Next door in Iowa, officials are keeping one eye on the fight while trying
to determine whether they should try to recoup up to $25 million in public
money given to business partnerships that have not lived up to their
agreements to increase employment.

In New York, State Comptroller Alan G. Hevesi said in an audit this year
that a program that gives millions of dollars in tax breaks to businesses
that promise to create work ended up rewarding some businesses that
lost jobs. Other state officials disputed those findings.

"We're all in the same boat: we're hungry for business and we need the
tax and job base," said Nancy S. Harris, a Putnam County commissioner.
"But in the future, I think we have to do better background checks and tie
tax breaks to length of stay and number of jobs."

Executives at Maytag and Sykes said they had lived up to their
agreements in accepting the tax breaks. In return for cash and reduced
taxes, the companies created payrolls that more than made up for the
inducements from local governments, they said.

"We did not in any way break an agreement," Lynne Dragomier,
a spokeswoman for Maytag at its headquarters in Newton, Iowa, said.
"We believe we have paid our fair share of taxes in Galesburg."

The legal question in Galesburg centers on whether Maytag received
excess property-tax breaks. Under Mr. Mangieri's interpretation of the
original deal, Maytag was entitled to $1 million in reduced property
taxes. That amount grew to $2.1 million without protest from the
county because the company was staying, county officials said.

Though the dollar amount is relatively small, the company and
Galesburg residents cite a larger principle.

Over the years, Maytag benefited from state and local tax abatements,
as well as money raised when people agreed to increase the sales
tax. According to Mr. Mangieri, Galesburg raised $2.8 million in sales
tax revenue to retrofit the refrigerator plant here, the State of Illinois
came through with $5.8 million in aid, and Maytag was given 10 years
of property tax abatements. Those breaks ended in 1999 and were
not to exceed $1 million, Mr. Mangieri said.

Ms. Dragomier said Maytag, which is moving most of the work from
Galesburg to a new plant in Mexico, had always been honest in its
dealings with Galesburg, population 33,000.

"It's very difficult to close a plant like this, and we understand the
pain it causes," she said.

The company has 11 manufacturing plants in the United Stares,
Ms. Dragomier said, and prides itself on its American workforce.
But, she said, it is under "competitive pressure" to make some
refrigerators at cheaper locations.

At a Labor Day rally here, union leaders decried tax breaks for
companies that do not agree to keep their jobs in the United States.
They backed a proposal for "patriot corporations" that some
lawmakers are circulating. Under that program, a company would
receive a tax advantage if it kept production and a high percentage
of sales in the United States.

"Maytag betrayed us; everybody knows that," said Dave Bevard,
a leader of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace
Workers local here. "What our district attorney wants to do is not
a vindictive act. It's an issue of fairness."

In Florida, Putnam County spent more money to lure Sykes, which
operates call centers that provide customer service for other
companies, than on any other economic development project,
county officials said. In addition to the cash, Sykes was given
a five-year break from local property taxes. The company opened
its center in 2000.

In barely four years, the payroll more than made up for the public
cash, said Andrea Burnett, a spokeswoman for the company,
which is based in Tampa.

"Yes, they gave us $4.5 million, but in return they got a $120
million payroll," Ms. Burnett said. "That's a good return on their
investment."

The company is closing some of its American call centers while
adding jobs to cheaper overseas centers, company executives
have said.

Smaller businesses say there is also a fundamental issue of
fairness. Why not give a tax break to the reliable little company
that holds a piece of Main Street real estate and never threatens
to leave town?

"We let the other taxpayers down if we don't go after Maytag,"
said Robin Davis, the county treasurer here in Galesburg, who
favors a lawsuit to recover taxes from Maytag. "My sense is if
people don't want to work here and pay taxes, we don't want
them."

There are six taxing entities that gave incentives to Maytag, and
several have decided not to pursue the company, arguing that it
sends the wrong message at a time the town is desperate to
attract new jobs.

"When I first heard Paul Mangieri talk about suing Maytag,
I cheered," Mr. Klinck, the car dealer, said. "But on further
reflection, I thought this would negate our message."

Galesburg never tied its tax breaks and cash grants to
a long-term stability, but the State of Illinois has since
written certain requirements into its laws on enterprise zones.

The city has passed a bond issue to build a logistical center
that it hopes will attract railroad jobs.

In Putnam County, Mr. Keyser was so incensed at Sykes's
receiving cash and tax breaks that he sent a mock bill to
county officials asking for a tax break of $25,000 for the one
new employee he hired at his law firm.

"It's universal blackmail out there," Mr. Keyser said, "with
corporations all playing the same game."

Copyright 2004 The New York Times

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

4) Soldiers fear that they are 'sleeping with the enemy'
Adrian Blomfield discovers deep mistrust between American
troops and Iraqi soldiers they are training
(Filed: 18/10/2004)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/10/18/wirq218.xml&
sSheet=/news/2004/10/18/ixnewstop.html

If the US marines and Iraqi national guardsmen living at the Karmah
military barracks near Fallujah talk at all, they speak through the
bars of a small window.

The Americans peer out from the ammunition room, filled with
weapons confiscated from suspected insurgents, trading banter
with the Iraqis who stand on tiptoes in a huddle outside, their eyes
squinting against the glare of the late summer sun.

Troops in Iraq

Though there is laughter, things are not as they should be at Karmah
barracks. "This is camp poison," whispers a marine. "Watch your back."

The sinister atmosphere at Karmah barracks is not difficult to
understand. The marines are convinced that many, perhaps most,
of the 140 members of the Iraqi National Guard (ING) they share the
camp with are double agents working on behalf of the insurgents
holding Fallujah.

In the past week alone the marines have arrested five of the guardsmen,
including their commanding officer, Capt Ali Mohammed Jasim.

It is just one example that a Vietnam-era experiment Washington
resurrected to form the backbone of an offensive planned by the end
of the year to retake Fallujah, the crucible of Iraq's insurgency, is
going disastrously wrong. Under the Combined Action Platoon (CAP)
scheme, US soldiers train Iraqi guardsmen, live with them in the same
barracks and venture out on joint patrols, all steps towards
a longer-term objective of the withdrawal of American troops.

The plan was first developed in Vietnam, where US marines cohabited
with local militias to defend villages from Vietcong raids. At the same
time the marines trained the militiamen with the intention of turning
them into an effective fighting force, but they were too ill-equipped
and underpaid for the plan to have much success.

Mark II of the CAP programme seems to be running into even
greater problems. Across the country American troops work
with their poorly equipped Iraqi colleagues in an atmosphere
soured by distrust - especially in provinces where the insurgency
is at its most intense.

With Fallujah under insurgent control, US marines such as those
at Karmah are trying to secure the surrounding al-Anbar province.

Their efforts have been blighted by remotely detonated mines,
known as improvised explosive devices (IEDs), targeting the patrols
that nervously venture out on to the lawless streets of towns that
have become insurgent havens. Since June, some platoons have seen
up to half their men wounded in action. Eighty marines have been
killed in the province.

The marines are convinced that the ING knows where many of the
IEDs are planted, and even say they have caught guardsmen in the
act of laying mines. When joint patrols come under attack, they say,
the ING simply refuses to fight. As the relationship worsens, more
and more ING are simply refusing to turn up at work. Of the 140
guardsmen based at Karmah an average of between 40 and 60 turn
up on any given day. At other CAP barracks, that number is sometimes
as low as two. Since the arrest of the Karmah ING captain, the rapport
has become even more sullen. The marines sit under canvas shelters,
convinced that the guardsmen lurking in their dormitories are traitors
and murderers.

"We know when this place is about to come under mortar attack
because the ING suddenly disappear," one marine said, staring across
the dusty compound at two guardsmen smoking on a wooden bench.
"We are supposed to be fighting together, instead we are sleeping
with the enemy."

In their bare dormitory angry guardsmen queue up to tell their side
of the story, accusing the marines of arrogance, bullying and a cavalier
disregard for civilian life. Twelve guardsmen spoke to The Daily
Telegraph, but all refused to identify themselves, saying they feared
reprisals from the marines.

"The first mistake they make is that when they are attacked they don't
just fire at the terrorists, they shoot everywhere," one said.

Other guardsmen alleged that the marines publicly humiliated and
even physically assaulted them for minor misdemeanours. Another
said he, like many others, had been arrested on suspicion of involvement
in planting an IED. He said he was held for 14 days in a tiny "cooler" and
then tortured during interrogation.

"They would make me drink water and drink water and then kick me in
the stomach till I vomited," he said.

Information appearing on telegraph.co.uk is the copyright of Telegraph
Group Limited and must not be reproduced in any medium without
licence.

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

5) Maritime Worker Monitor #7
October 13, 2004
STOP THE WAR ON IRAQ AND
THE WAR ON WORKERS!
Join the Million Worker March!
(This is a great argument in favor of the MWM and others like it.
I felt it was important to pass it along even though it is after the
Fact...BW)

The Maritime Worker Monitor supports the Million Worker March on
Washington on October 17th because workers in this country are
catching hell and we need to organize to fight back. Millions of workers
in this country remain jobless, homeless and without health care,
while the U.S. government wages a bloody, and increasingly unpopular,
war for oil and empire supported by both the Democrat and Republican
Parties. We give the march critical support because it is calling for the
independent mobilization of workers from the politicians of both big
business parties, but does not explicitly call for a break with those
parties and building an independent labor party, which was until
recently ILWU's position. Ironically, the anti-war ILWU, as well as
other unions, is supporting the pro-war Democratic Party presidential
candidate John Kerry.

Not only don't workers have a party to fight for them, the overwhelming
majority (87%) have no union to fight for them. Today hotel workers
across the country are under attack. They're striking to defend their
union health care benefits and win a common contract expiration
date nationwide. Last year it was the Southern California grocery
workers whose medical benefits were under attack. They struck
back but without the full mobilization of the organized labor
movement, they lost. Police have been used against union workers
striking for health care by both Democrat and Republican politicians.
The fraudulent capitalist slogan of "guns and butter", (military
might and social programs) is being exposed by the brutal daily
slaughter of innocent people in Iraq, while workers here face
intensified attack, often under the guise of "national security",
as did the ILWU in its last contract negotiations.

We faced threats to shackle us with legislation similar to the
Railway Act, banning strikes. There were intimidating phone
calls to the ILWU-- from Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, Homeland
Security Czar Ridge, White House aides and Labor Department
attorneys-- all warning that any disruption of cargo movements
would jeopardize "national security". They threatened to occupy
the docks with troops. Such threats did not apply to PMA's lockout
which shutdown every port on the West Coast for 10-days. Then,
at the urging of Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein, Bush invoked
the slave labor Taft-Hartley Act on the heels of PMA's lockout of
longshore workers on the West Coast. Not one Member of Congress,
Democrat or Republican, opposed the employer lockout or use of
Taft-Hartley against the ILWU. It was a joint coercion of maritime
employers and the government

Labor needs to build its own party. We don't mean a phony labor
party like the one in Britain that wages imperialist wars or a workers
party like Lula's in Brazil which implements neo-liberal capitalist
policies and uses police against striking workers and landless
peasants. Defend workers' rights! End the war and occupation in
Iraq NOW! It's the same struggle --against capitalist greed.There
is a crying need for a powerful voice for labor to be heard NOW in
its own name and for its own class interests! This march should
be the first step in building our own fighting workers party!

Yet, the voice of the top officials of the AFL-CIO obediently
continue to support the war in Iraq and support the pro-war
Democrat Kerry for president. The only answer is to end the
war and immediately withdraw U.S. troops in Iraq. That's the ILWU
position adopted May 1, at our Convention shortly after the war
began. A growing number of unions have been following our lead
in opposition to the war and occupation. Now, the ILWU Longshore
Division has called for a march on Washington to demand that
workers' concerns be addressed. AFL-CIO President John Sweeney,
an old-fashioned business unionist, has called the Million Worker
March a "diversion" from getting Kerry elected and getting Bush
out of the White House, as if labor's problems will be solved by
Kerry. But Kerry and the Democrats also supported unionbusting
"free trade" agreements like NAFTA, the Iraq war and bloody
occupation, the repressive USA Patriot Act. And their double-
dealing didn't just start recently. The slave laborTaft-Hartley Act
was passed under Democrat President Truman with a majority
Democrat/Dixiecrat Congress. Democrat President Carter tried
to use it to break the miners' strike in 1978, but miners defied
it. The recent tide of anti-labor attacks began with Republican
President Reagan's busting of the PATCO, air controllers union,
while the AFL-CIO did nothing. It continued under Democrat
President Clinton who pushed for the passage of NAFTA, after
winning labor's vote campaigning AGAINST it. That's typical of
Democrat political shenanigans: Talk "labor" to get workers'
votes. Act for the "bosses" once elected.The truth is that the
government has attacked labor regardless of which party is
in office--Republican or Democrat. The tactic of voting for
the "lesser evil" has only left the labor movement in a weaker
position politically after each election.

Sweeney said he even agrees with many of the demands of the
march, but that all union resources must be used to elect the
so-called "friend of labor", the billionaire Kerry. This has been
the timeworn task of labor fakers: to do the bosses' bidding as
ILA President Ryan did in the 1934 maritime strike and as
union bureaucrats cravenly do at election time, delivering
labor's votes for the big business Democrat Party. ILWU's
International, guided by its "new direction" (really an old
direction) of collaborating with the employers (on technology)
and the government (on "port security") and staying off the
"militant union" radar screen is in lockstep with Sweeney.
In fact, The Dispatcher, our union newspaper, had been silent
on the Million Worker March which, along with the question of
"port security", was energetically debated at our last Longshore
Caucus. The Million Worker March resolution passed unanimously
by delegates representing all ports on the U.S. West Coast.
It finally saw the light of day in The Dispatcher AFTER Local 10
protested. By then, the ILWU International Executive Board had
voted against the March at its August meeting.

Despite bureaucratic attempts to block the march, it continues
to steamroll ahead with endorsements and contributions pouring
in from unions and rank and filers across the country. However,
workers should be leery of the participation in the march by
Jesse Jackson, the pied piper of the Dixiecrat/Democrat Party.
The stated reason for the march is to mobilize workers independently
of the Democrat and Republican Parties to fight for a workers'
agenda in Washington. Jackson is one of the most prominent
speakers for the Democrats. As death row prisoner, Mumia Abu-Jamal,
says it doesn't matter which "brokerage party" wins. He exhorts
workers not to accept a slice of the pie. We produce all the wealth
and need to make a revolutionary change in the social order. For
this we need our own party, a workers party to fight against
imperialist wars, racism and poverty and for free public education,
universal health care, decent housing, and jobs for all. None of
these social demands is achievable while the U.S. is engaged in
the Iraq war/occupation, to which both parties' politicians pledge
their undying loyalty, though none of their kids are in Iraq. Social
gains can only be won by class struggle, fighting for them politically
and on the picket line.

Even the pretext of democracy is being shredded by capitalist
government attacks against unions, against civil liberties and against
civil rights, here and internationally. They must not go unchallenged.
Police attacks against dockworkers have increased in frequency and
intensity from Charleston, South Carolina to today in Holland and
Spain. To not defend ourselves against such brazen unionbusting
attacks--whether in the name of "port security" or "free trade" is
to encourage bloodier attacks. One Portland longie said ,"It's like
the bully in the schoolyard who steals your lunch money. If you don't
stand up to him, he'll keep coming after you." The upcoming big
fight will be over the "free trade" issue of "self-handling", in which
employers claim the right to have the crew (frequently non-union
slave wage workers) do longshore work of lashing onboard ship or
dock work. The European Parliament barely defeated that measure
last year, but the shipowners are trying their damdest to get it
passed this year. Last year the ILWU took a token action in solidarity
with our European dockworkers. This time we'll need to take real
action to stop these unionbusting attempts by our joint global
shipowners because we'll be next on the chopping block.

The importance of this march is that it was generated from below,
from the rank and file of labor, expressing an anger and alienation
at the politics of both parties and at the leadership of the organized
labor movement. The call for the march comes from workers that
have recently engaged in militant union struggles. Furthermore,
many of these union members, come from black and latino
communities, amongst the most oppressed in America. We must
turn this anger into the struggle for a fighting workers party.

ALL OUT OCTOBER 17th!

SOLIDARITY WITH THE MILLION WORKER MARCHERS!

BUILD A WORKERS PARTY TO FIGHT FOR WORKERS!

Editors:

Jack Mulcahy, Portland --
laborunity@msn.com
Mark Downs, Seattle--
mdowns@unions- america.com
Jack Heyman, Oakland--
jackheyman@comcast.net

Maritime Worker Monitor

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

6) How Many Iraqis Are Dying? By One Count, 208 in a Week
TALLYING THE DEAD
By NORIMITSU ONISHI
BAGHDAD, Iraq
October 19, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/19/international/middleeast/19casualties.html
?oref=login&hp

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Oct. 18 - It began with the killing of two Iraqi
civilians in a suicide bomb attack against an American military
convoy in the northern city of Mosul last Monday. It ended Sunday
evening, when a car bomb killed seven Iraqi police officers and
civilians at a Baghdad cafe where police officers had apparently
broken their fast during this month of Ramadan.

A weeklong effort to tally Iraqi casualties shows soldiers, insurgents,
politicians, journalists, a judge, a medic and restaurant workers
among the victims. They included Dina Mohammed Hassan,
a television reporter killed by three men who called her a collaborator,
and Ali Hussein's son and nephew, nighttime guards who died
when Americans bombed a restaurant in Falluja.

From Oct. 11 to Oct. 17, an estimated 208 Iraqis were killed in
war-related incidents, significantly higher than the average week;
23 members of the United States military died over the same period.

The deaths of Iraqis, particularly those of civilians, has become
an increasingly delicate topic. Early this month, the Health Ministry,
which had routinely provided casualty figures to journalists, stopped
releasing them. Under a new policy that the government said would
streamline the release of the figures - which were clearly an
embarrassment to the government as well as to the Americans -
only the Secretariat of the Council of Ministers is now allowed
to do so.

"It's a political issue," a senior Health Ministry official said last week.

This account was pieced together from partial tallies by the Iraqi
government, reporting by Iraqi employees of The New York Times
stationed in Falluja, Mosul and Najaf, and counts from hospitals,
news agencies and the American military.

The tally remains imprecise and does not fully answer many of the
most charged questions about the war. How can civilians be
distinguished from insurgents? How can contradictory accounts
of the same death be reconciled?

According to a report by the Health Ministry, which last April began
compiling figures for all regions except the Kurdish north, 3,040
Iraqis were killed in war-related incidents during the 22 weeks from
April 5 to Sept. 6 - a little more than 138 deaths a week. The dead
included 2,753 men, 159 women and 128 children. There are no
agreed figures for civilian deaths in Iraq over all since the war began
in early 2003, but the best estimates, by private groups and
independent news organizations, place the figure in the 10,000
to 15,000 range.

While many Iraqis blame American airstrikes and other military
actions for taking the lives of innocents, they also believe that
foreign fighters are behind the suicide attacks that tend to kill
more Iraqis than Americans.

The United States military emphasizes that the targets of its actions
have been insurgents, and it also blames them for other deaths
and damage that result from such raids.

Last Thursday, on the same day that American jets intensified their
bombardment of Falluja, thought to be the base of Abu Musab
al-Zarqawi, the Jordanian militant suspected of leading many anti-
American attacks, the United States military released a statement
that read in part: "A top priority is to avoid harming civilians and
causing damage. However, by operating and hiding among civilians,
the terrorists endanger innocent civilians and are directly responsible
for any harm to the women and children they hide behind."

The Secretariat of the Council of Ministers gave only partial figures
for last week, releasing the numbers for only four days and mostly
for Baghdad and the nearby cities. Of course, casualty figures tend
to vary greatly depending on their source. On the first day of the
seven-day period, 12 Iraqis were reported killed, including in the
Mosul suicide attack. The other deaths took place in the three
locations that proved the deadliest over the week: Falluja and Ramadi,
where American forces have been engaged in combat, and Baghdad.

On a highway outside Falluja, five passengers in one car were killed
in an incident involving American soldiers.

According to residents and hospital officials, the five - Kadhim Ahmed
Hussein and his two sons, Jawad and Dhiya; and Layla Awad and her
son Ali Khalaf - were driving from the Lake Habbaniya area, where
they had sought shelter during the ongoing fighting, to check on
their houses in Falluja.

According to the United States military, the car approached
a checkpoint at a location that an American patrol had cordoned off.

Because the driver ignored warnings to stop even as the patrol
received fire from elsewhere, the soldiers fired on the car. People
in Falluja, however, said the five were shot without provocation.

On Tuesday, 46 Iraqis were reported killed. Just after midnight,
an American warplane flattened Falluja's most popular restaurant,
Hajji Hussein, famous for its kebabs. The military said it was
a meeting place for terrorists and was no longer frequented by
ordinary people. Ali Hussein, the owner, said his son and nephew,
who had been working as nighttime guards, were killed in the strike.

He denied that insurgents came to the restaurant, which was
founded by his father.

"This is a well-known restaurant in midtown," Mr. Hussein said.
"We have a lot of people always going in and out. No one can hide
in here. We are on the main street. How could there be any
Zarqawi people inside?"

The largest number, at least 15, were reportedly killed in an attack
against an Iraqi National Guard outpost near Qaim, along the border
with Syria. Many Iraqi insurgents are believed to be based on the
other side of the border and to receive support from Syrians.

On Wednesday, 10 people were reportedly killed, including a police
captain in Baquba, 35 miles northeast of here.

Thursday, with 58 reported deaths, was the week's deadliest day
and was also punctuated by suicide bombs inside the Green Zone,
the site of the American Embassy and Iraqi government ministries.

Many Iraqis regarded by insurgents as collaborating with the
Americans or the United States-backed government have been
assassinated, and several were killed Thursday.

South of here near Latifiya, Kamel al-Yassiri, an official with the
secular National Democratic Coalition Party, was gunned down
while driving on a highway; he was buried in Najaf the next day.
In Mosul, a photographer who has worked for Western news
organizations, Karam Hussein, 22, was gunned down outside
his home.

In Baghdad, a judge was shot to death while leaving his home
for work; around the same time, Ms. Hassan, 38, a reporter for
the Kurdish television network Al Huriya, was also killed.

She had received three letters warning her to quit her job, said
colleagues who were waiting to pick up her body outside the city
morgue. She joined the network nine months ago after long working
at the Ministry of Information, they said.

"We used to joke to her that she should use the money she had saved
to fix her teeth and get married," said a colleague, Naseer al-Timimy.
"But because she was an orphan, she felt she needed to hold on to
her money."

On Thursday morning, as she and a colleague waited outside her
apartment building for a company van, a blue Oldsmobile with
three men pulled up in front of them, according to the account
of the colleague, who survived. One of the men shot at her with
a Kalashnikov and, after she fell on her back, shot her again in
the face. "Collaborator! Collaborator!" the gunman is said to
have yelled.

"You could no longer recognize her features," said Ahmed
al-Hamdani, a colleague who saw her minutes after the shooting.

On Friday, the first day of Ramadan, though many had feared
a surge in violence similar to the one last year, there were
fewer deaths than on Thursday, with 24 people killed. Of those,
10 civilians died after a car bomb aimed at an Iraqi police
patrol exploded in Baghdad.

The dead included four laborers working in a nearby palm grove,
two bystanders and a family of four inside a car, according to
the American military.

On Saturday and Sunday, 31 and 27 deaths were recorded,
respectively. The largest number of victims were police officers,
who have been attacked with deadly frequency by insurgents,
who accuse them of supporting the Americans.

On Saturday, nine police recruits returning from a training course
in Jordan were ambushed near Latifiya. Then on Sunday evening,
seven police officers and civilians were killed here after a car bomb
went off outside a cafe popular with police officers, bringing an
end to a deadly week in Iraq.

Iraqi employees of The New York Times contributed reporting from
Mosul, Falluja and Najaf for this article.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

7) Oil Prices Climb Back to the $54 Level
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
LONDON
October 20, 2004
Filed at 12:07 p.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/business/AP-Oil-Prices.html

LONDON (AP) -- Crude oil prices climbed back to the $54 level
Wednesday, reversing a two-day slide, after the U.S. government's
weekly petroleum supply report showed a fifth straight week of
declining inventories of distillate fuel, which includes heating oil
and diesel.

Traders are concerned about a potential winter-fuels crunch globally
and remain jittery about the world's limited crude oil supply cushion.

Crude for November delivery traded at $54.20 per barrel, up 91 cents,
on the New York Mercantile Exchange in morning trade. The November
crude contract expires Wednesday.

The Energy Department reported a 1.9 million barrel drop in distillate
fuel, bringing nationwide inventories to 119 million barrels, or 9.5
percent below year ago levels.

Crude oil stocks grew by 1.2 million barrels to 279.4 million barrels,
or 3.7 percent below last year.

Oil prices have gone up sharply in the past month because of
production snags in the Gulf of Mexico, where more than 22 million
barrels of production have been lost since Hurricane Ivan hit in mid-
September. Some 430,000 barrels of the region's potential daily oil
output remains off line.

Potential output problems in Iraq, Venezuela, Nigeria and Russia
have kept oil markets on edge all year, especially because the world's
available production capacity is just 1 percent of daily demand,
leaving little wiggle room in the event of a supply disruption.

Although prices are up about 75 percent from a year ago, they
are still about $26 below the all-time highs -- in inflation-
adjusted terms -- of February 1981.

In London, December Brent crude futures on the International
Petroleum Exchange rose 33 cents to trade at $49.10 per barrel.
Brent reached a record intraday high of $50.40 on Oct. 12.

While gasoline consumption typically tapers off at this time of year,
demand for home-heating fuels begins to rise. Moreover, heating
oil stocks are also running low in Western Europe and in Japan,
where kerosene stocks are down more than 10 percent from
a year ago.

Copyright 2004 The Associated Press

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

8) Homeless Families Blocked From Seeking U.S. Housing Aid
By LESLIE KAUFMAN
October 20, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/20/nyregion/20homeless.html

Ending a decades-old policy, city officials said yesterday that effective
immediately, homeless families in emergency city shelters would no
longer be allowed to apply for federal rent vouchers or public housing,
tools that had been used to move troubled families into more
permanent housing.

Instead, the city is proposing to create a new program for helping
homeless adults and families: a joint city, state and federally financed
effort that would provide rental-assistance grants for up to five years,
with the size of the grant shrinking each year.

The city acknowledges that the new strategy carries significant financial
risks. If the state does not agree to its share of the financing, the city
estimates that 3,500 additional families will wind up in shelters - adding
significantly to the near-record number there today - 37,000 people,
including 9,000 families. Although the city on average bears only
a third of those costs, the $25,000 per family price tag for a year in
a city shelter is significantly higher than the estimated cost of rental
assistance.

Linda I. Gibbs, the city's commissioner of homeless services, said she
had little choice but to search for an alternative to the use of federal
vouchers. For starters, she said, the city has run out of available
vouchers to give families, homeless or not. Also, she said, the
program was making poor families believe that the fastest road
to getting their own apartment was to become homeless. "We don't
want people to think that the best way to get housing is to bundle
their children up and take them to the E.A.U.," she said referring
to the Emergency Assistance Unit, the Bronx office that is the
entry point for the city's shelter system.

The city's announcement was also meant to address what it said
was another unacceptable consequence of being too generous
in giving federal vouchers to the homeless: the cheating of working
poor families who needed the benefit as well, but who stayed in
difficult housing situations nonetheless.

Steve Banks, the Legal Aid Society lawyer who has represented
homeless families in their two-decade-old legal fight with the
city, said the city's decision was a recipe for trouble. While
praising the city for offering to put up new money for rental
assistance, he said it would probably take too long to put the
program in place, and in the interim there would be another
influx of families into the city's shelter system. In past years,
such surges would often leave the Emergency Assistance Unit
overwhelmed, with families forced to sleep overnight on benches
while they awaited placement in a shelter.

In addition, Mr. Banks said the temporary nature of the new
aid would cause problems in the future. "The assistance assumes
relocated families will be able to pay their own rent on a phased-
in basis, and available evidence is the homeless families have
significant barriers to employment," he said.

But Ms. Gibbs said that she was determined that the new
subsidy would help people leave the shelters and achieve
true self-sufficiency.

The first year of the proposed subsidy, she said, would be
about $925 a month for a family of three, but would decline
by 20 percent a year after that.

Officials said the city's proposed program would have
numerous advantages over the current voucher subsidy.
The money, for instance, would be available more quickly.

In addition, the new program would be available to individual
homeless adults, couples without children and families who
could not get their children out of foster care simply because
they did not have permanent housing. This year, none of
those people qualify under the federal program, and childless
couples never have.

Of course, leaders in Albany have not yet signed on to the
program. Ms. Gibbs said she is optimistic that the state will
participate for numerous reasons. Since the state shares in
the cost of the city's shelters, she said, it has an incentive
to participate in a more effective, less expensive effort.

Ms. Gibbs said she had been discussing the proposal with
officials in Albany for more than a week. She had heard no
response to the plan yet, but had been promised that one
would come promptly. Calls made to the state Office of
Temporary and Disability Assistance after hours were not
answered.

In either case, city officials say their hand has been forced
by the near-nonexistent supply of federal rent vouchers.
The program is now at 100 percent capacity, according to
Doug Apple, general manager of the city's housing authority,
and tens of thousands of people are on the waiting list.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

9) Public University Tuition Is Up Sharply for 2004
By GREG WINTER
October 20, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/20/education/20college.html?hp&ex=1098331200&
en=7556ff201f536c43&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Tuition at the nation's public universities rose an average of
10.5 percent this year, the second largest increase in more
than a decade, according to the latest annual survey by the
College Board. Last year's rise, 13 percent, was the highest.

Private universities and community colleges also increased tuition,
by 6 percent and 9 percent, in a year when inflation has been about
2.5 percent. The tuition increases at private and community colleges
were also among the steepest in a decade.

It is the first time that the average tuition at the nation's
postsecondary institutions has surpassed $20,000 for a private
college, $5,000 for a public university and $2,000 for a community
college.

The survey of nearly 2,700 colleges and universities, released
yesterday, did not try to determine the reasons for the steep
increases. But among the many factors cited by its authors and
other higher education experts were shrinking endowments,
large increases in health insurance costs for campus employees
and anemic spending on higher education by states.

"Until we publicly debate the quiet cost-shifting from state support
to tuition that continues in far too many states, no amount of effort
by our institutions to raise revenue and cut expenses will be able
to preserve affordable tuition formulas, particularly at public
colleges and universities," said David Ward, president of the
American Council on Education, which represents college
presidents.

Despite the increases, the survey found, students are not necessarily
paying all the extra costs. Financial aid has been increasing as well,
and though it has not always kept pace with rising tuition, it has
often softened the blow.

As of last year, for example, the impact of grants and federal tax
redits meant that students at private colleges actually paid an average
of $9,600 a year in tuition and fees, about $1,000 more than they did
a decade earlier, after adjusting for inflation, the survey found. At public
universities, students ended up paying only $1,300 a year in tuition,
about $200 less than they did a decade before, with adjustments for
inflation. And at community colleges, grants and tax credits took care
of the typical student's entire tuition.

The authors said, however, that this year's increases in tuition were so
large that they did not expect grants to keep up. Students are also
becoming increasingly dependent on loans instead of grants, according
to the College Board, an association of more than 4,500 schools, colleges
and educational organizations. About a decade ago, there was almost as
much grant money available to students as there were loans. But by last
year, loans had become a much bigger piece of the financial aid puzzle,
making up almost 50 percent more of the total pool than grants.

Moreover, the nature of grants themselves has changed. The growing
prominence of merit-based aid among many institutions, coupled with
broader definitions of who qualifies for financial aid in such a costly
market, has meant that by 2000 middle-income and wealthy students
typically received larger grants from their colleges than did their low-
income counterparts.

Some of that may be because wealthier students tend to go to the
wealthiest, most expensive institutions, which, in turn, can afford to
give bigger grants than the colleges that poorer students usually
attend. Nonetheless, the survey's authors said, the grants to wealthier
students underscore a larger shift, echoed in many state programs,
away from awarding financial aid on the basis of need.

"It's absolutely true that the biggest increase in institutional aid has
been to the upper-income families," said Sandy Baum, who analyzed
the data for the College Board.

In recent years, the issue of college affordability has increasingly
become a political one, at times giving rise to Congressional campaigns
to penalize colleges that raise tuition too quickly. But what the
colleges say they fear most is that some prospective students,
especially those who are wondering whether to attend, will choose
not to go because of the cost.

To that end, the College Board survey included data showing that
graduates with bachelor's degrees could expect to earn 73 percent
more than a high school graduate over their lifetimes. Those with
master's degrees can expect to earn twice as much. Those with
professional degrees can expect nearly three and a half times
as much.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

10) 2 Shipbuilders Get Big Breaks in New Corporate Tax Bill
By EDMUND L. ANDREWS
WASHINGTON
October 19, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/19/business/19corptax.html?hp&ex=1098244800&e
n=9c348723956b0000&ei=5094&partner=homepage


WASHINGTON, Oct. 18 - A little-noticed provision in the sweeping
corporate tax bill that passed Congress last week would reduce
taxes at two major military contractors by nearly $500 million over
the next 10 years.

The provision, which primarily benefits General Dynamics and
Northrop Grumman, would allow shipbuilders to postpone their
taxes for years on profits from building ships and submarines
for the Navy.

The new provision would benefit a handful of major shipyards,
all owned by one of the two military conglomerates. They include
the Bath Iron Works in Maine acquired by General Dynamics in
1995 and the company's Electric Boat division in Groton, Conn.,
as well as the Northrop-owned Newport News shipyard in Virginia.

The new tax break would reverse a rule that Congress imposed
as part of the sweeping tax overhaul of 1986, when lawmakers
in both parties were incensed that major military companies
often paid no income taxes despite earning billions of dollars
providing major weapons systems to the military.

Under the bill, Navy shipbuilders would be allowed to once again
defer paying most federal income taxes on a project until the
contract was completed. Because it takes about five years to build
an aircraft carrier and three years to build a destroyer, the shipyards
would be able to delay their tax bills for years, allowing more
opportunity to offset taxes against future losses.

The measure's primary sponsor was Senator Olympia J. Snowe,
Republican of Maine, who said she was determined to protect
Bath Iron Works, one of her state's largest employers.

"This provision takes dramatic steps to remedy the inequity of
how naval shipbuilders pay their taxes," Ms. Snowe said in a
statement last week, just after House and Senate negotiators
agreed to include the provision in a broader bill that would
shower $140 billion in tax cuts across almost every segment
of industry.

But critics said the provision would not create jobs, the stated
intention of the tax bill, because employment at naval shipyards
is determined almost entirely by federal spending on ships and
submarines rather than by tax incentives.

"We're not going to buy any more war boats if we give them
a tax incentive," said Robert S. McIntyre, director of Citizens
for Tax Justice, a liberal research group here that has long
scrutinized corporate tax practices. "We're going to buy more
boats if the government decides we need more boats."

The shipbuilders' tax cut was typical of the furious scramble by
lawmakers to include special provisions for their constituents in
the bill. The final bill, which President Bush is expected to sign soon,
includes tax breaks for oil companies, corn farmers, wine distributors
and dozens of other highly specific industries.

General Dynamics and Northrop Grumman, which will also benefit
from many of the new bill's general tax cuts, are heavy contributors
to political campaigns. Since January 2003, General Dynamics'
employees and political action committees have contributed $1.3
million, about 64 percent to Republicans. Northrop contributed
$1.24 million, about 58 percent to Republicans.

Senator Snowe was among dozens of lawmakers whose support
was needed to win final passage. She was also part of a bipartisan
group that tried to tie a $10 billion buyout program for tobacco
farmers, which is also part of the bill, to a new requirement that
would allow the Food and Drug Administration to regulate cigarettes
and other tobacco products.

House Republicans rejected that provision, but Ms. Snowe voted for
the overall bill in part because it included the shipbuilding tax break
that she had proposed.

She was hardly alone. Senator John Breaux, Democrat of Louisiana,
opposed many parts of the overall bill but supported the shipbuilding
tax break and numerous other tax cuts for oil companies that are
big employers in his state.

Few if any lawmakers publicly objected to the shipbuilding provision,
which was tiny in comparison with sweeping tax cuts, worth $42
billion over 10 years, on foreign profits of American multinationals.

The House and Senate passed the overall bill by overwhelming
majorities.

Under current law, shipbuilders have to pay income taxes on
long-term Navy contracts based on the percentage of work they
have finished. When that requirement was imposed in 1986,
lawmakers were furious that top military contractors were deferring
almost all of their taxes, even though they were getting progress
payments throughout the term of their contracts. According to
Mr. McIntyre, the top 12 Pentagon suppliers paid an effective tax
rate of only 6.3 percent in the early 1980's, and some companies
often paid none.

General Dynamics and Northrop Grumman have both enjoyed big
jumps in sales and profits from their shipbuilding divisions, which
are dominated by Navy contracts, but tax payments at both
companies during the same period declined.

At General Dynamics, which makes the Arleigh Burke class of
Navy destroyers and Seawolf-class nuclear submarines, its marine
division generated $2.5 billion in sales in the first six months of
2004, up 20 percent from the first half of 2003. Earnings in the
marine business increased 39 percent, to $179 million, in the first
six months of this year, compared with the first half of 2003.

Despite rising profits in all its divisions, General Dynamics' overall
tax payments declined sharply in the first six months of this year,
to $78 million from $119 million in the first half of 2003.

At Northrop Grumman, which produces aircraft carriers and a new
generation of destroyers, profits in the shipbuilding division nearly
doubled, to $186 million, in the first half of 2004 from $98 million
in the first half of 2003. Northrop's overall tax payments fell to
$291 million in the first half of 2004 from $112 million in the
first half of 2003.

Cynthia Brown, president of the American Shipbuilding Association,
said the new measure was necessary because shipbuilders often
lose money early in a multiyear contract.

"A naval ship takes us anywhere from three and one half years
to seven years to build, and an aircraft carrier can take as long as
eight years,'' Ms. Brown said. Even though the government makes
periodic "progress payments'' as the work is completed, she said,
those payments often fall short of costs in the beginning because
the heaviest costs are at the start of a contract.

"This is not a tax cut,'' she said. "This is a cash-flow issue.''

Copyright 2004 The New York Times

posted 2:29 PM  0 comments

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
END THE U.S. OCCUPATION OF IRAQ!
BRING ALL THE TROOPS HOME NOW!
MARCH AND RALLY TO STOP THE WAR NOW!
WEDNESDAY, NOV. 3RD, 5PM
POWELL AND MARKET-MARCH TO 24TH & MISSION ST., S.F.
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
VOTE YES ON N! MEETING THURS. OCT. 22 & OCT. 28, 7PM,
GLOBAL EXCHANGE, 2017 MISSION STREET, SUITE 303
(NEAR 16TH & MISSION STREETS)
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

1) Workers March in D.C. for Health Care
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP)
Filed at 8:04 p.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Workers-March.html

2) Unionists Mobilize for Work, Benefits
Thousands Drawn to Rally at Lincoln
Memorial in Prelude to Nov. Vote
By Manny Fernandez and David Nakamura
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, October 18, 2004; Page B01


3) National Day of Protest to Stop Police Brutality,
Repression, and the Criminalization of a Generation,
on Friday, October 22nd.
Events in San Jose, San Francisco, and Oakland this
week.
More info (including links) at
http://www.indybay.org/police

4) Subject: Lynne Stewart trial
From: "Larry Felson"
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 08:05:15 +0000
Post from Lynne Stewart web site:
October 13, 2004: Because of circumstances beyond our control, the
trial
will resume on Monday, October 18th.
Check back to her web site for up dated information:
http://www.lynnestewart.org/

5) Soldiers Saw Refusing Order as Their
Last Stand
By NEELA BANERJEE and ARIEL HART
October 18, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/18/national/18guard.html?hp&ex=1098158400&en=
b6cde713635fabbc&ei=5094&partner=homepage

6) Iraqi Premier Plans Expansion of
Arms Handover Program
By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. and DEXTER FILKINS
BAGHDAD, Iraq
October 18, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/18/international/middleeast/18CND-IRAQ.html?h
p&ex=1098158400&en=39fafcef49fdf2f4&ei=5094&partner=homepage

7) Study Says White Families' Wealth
Advantage Has Grown
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 (AP
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/18/national/18wealth.html

8) Southwest Airlines Third-Quarter
Profit Increases
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
DALLAS (AP)
Filed at 6:36 p.m. ET
October 14, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/business/AP-Earns-Southwest-Airlines.html

9) Justices Weigh Executions of Young Killers
By LINDA GREENHOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 14, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/14/politics/14scotus.html

10) Militants ready for onslaught on Fallujah
By Aqeel Hussein in Fallujah and Philip Sherwell
(Filed: 17/10/2004)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/10/17/wirq17.xml&s
Sheet=/portal/2004/10/17/ixportal.html

11) Britain Considers U.S. Request for More Iraq Help
By Kate Kelland
LONDON (Reuters)
Mon Oct 18, 2004 07:15 AM ET
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6527746&src=eD
ialog/GetContent§ion=news

12) Iraq to Widen Arms Amnesty, Bring Falluja to Heel
By Alistair Lyon
BAGHDAD (Reuters)
Mon Oct 18, 2004 08:27 AM ET
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6528800&src=eD
ialog/GetContent§ion=news

13) Broad Use of Harsh Tactics Is Described at Cuba Base
By NEIL A. LEWIS
WASHINGTON, Oct. 16
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/politics/17gitmo.html

14) 'If this isn't genocide, then what on earth is?'
Lord Alton reports on the killings, rape, burnings and
looting that continue unabated in Darfur in an impassioned
plea for action to the Prime Minister
18 October 2004
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/africa/story.jsp?story=573217

15) Why is war-torn Iraq giving $190,000 to Toys R Us?
Comment
Naomi Klein Iraqis are still being forced to pay for
crimes committed by Saddam
The Guardian
Saturday October 16, 2004
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1328664,00.html

16) Indian Country Today
Denver police arrest 245 for blocking Columbus Day Parade
by: Brenda Norrell



---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

1) Workers March in D.C. for Health Care
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP)
Filed at 8:04 p.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Workers-March.html

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Hundreds of workers gathered at the Lincoln
on Sunday to demand health care, better wages, guaranteed Social
Security benefits and an end to the war in Iraq.

Many of the longshoremen, transit workers, carpenters and mail carriers
carried signs saying ``Bush lied, thousands died,'' ``More money for
jobs, not war'' and others. In the decidedly anti- President Bush
atmosphere, some wore T-shirts and badges advocating the election
of Democrat John Kerry or Reform Party candidate Ralph Nader.

Organizers had billed the gathering as the ``Million Worker March'' and
had obtained a permit for a gathering of more than 100,000 on the
National Mall. The turnout was much smaller, but U.S. Park Police has
not made official crowd estimates since a furor arose in 1995 over its
estimate of 400,000 at the ``Million Man March'' sponsored by the
Nation of Islam.

Standing on the Lincoln Memorial steps where his father delivered his
``I have a dream'' speech in 1963, Martin Luther King III told the crowd
that civil rights, workers and anti-war activists must come together
in common cause.

``Our most important step that we can take is the short step to the
ballot box,'' King said. ``We must vote like we never have before.''

Robert Ortiz, 45, a safety and health representative for Local 100 of
the Transport Workers Union of Greater New York, said he plans to
vote for Kerry, but the Democrats take labor for granted. ``Republicans
are an overt enemy of labor,'' he said, ``but Democrats are not as
active as they could be.''

Organizers claimed endorsements from unions representing
3.5 million workers, including chapters of the Communications
Workers of America, United Auto Workers and the American
Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.

Copyright 2004 The Associated Press

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

2) Unionists Mobilize for Work, Benefits
Thousands Drawn to Rally at Lincoln
Memorial in Prelude to Nov. Vote
By Manny Fernandez and David Nakamura
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, October 18, 2004; Page B01


Union members from across the country gathered at the steps of the
Lincoln Memorial yesterday for a rally dubbed the Million Worker
March, assembling in smaller-than-expected numbers but making a
passionate plea for workers' rights.

Linking their struggle with the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. by
standing on the same spot where the slain civil rights leader made
his famous "I Have a Dream" speech in August 1963, workers from a
variety of trades and causes said King's vision of social and
economic equality remains more dream than reality.

"The majority of working people in America are not doing well," said
Clarence Thomas, 57, a crane operator on the Oakland, Calif., docks
and a leader of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union Local
10 in San Francisco, a key organizer of yesterday's rally. "With jobs
being offshored, outsourced, privatized, our young people are looking
at a much more dismal future."

Thousands stood at the foot of the memorial and along the sides of
the Reflecting Pool on a chilly October afternoon, calling for more
jobs, universal health care and an end to the war in Iraq. But with
room to walk freely and stretches of grass visible, the crowd by
midafternoon appeared far smaller than the 100,000 that organizers
had estimated on their National Park Service permit application.

A law enforcement official estimated the crowd at less than 10,000.
Organizers said 10,000 to 15,000 attended.

The Million Worker March title was meant to evoke the imagery of the
1995 Million Man March and not to reflect a crowd count, the
organizers said. They said they were not disappointed by the turnout,
although they complained that authorities prevented about 30 buses
from dropping off passengers near the memorial and redirected them to
Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium, causing many to show up late or
not at all. U.S. Park Police and D.C. police officials said they were
not aware of any buses being diverted.

The protest and a few related small marches were largely peaceful.
Sgt. Scott Fear, a Park Police spokesman, said only one arrest was
made -- a woman charged with demonstrating in a restricted zone near
the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, a misdemeanor.

In the crowd were postal workers and longshoremen, school bus drivers
and teachers, department store staff and railway repair crews. They
said they came to Washington by car, bus and airplane just days
before Election Day to highlight the social, economic and political
hardships facing working Americans at home and on the job.

"I think we need a change," said Ronnie White, 48, a production
worker at a food plant in Kansas City, Mo., who stood on the steps
above the Reflecting Pool proudly wearing his black Teamsters Local
838 jacket. "We need the jobs here, not overseas."

An end to the outsourcing of jobs abroad was just one of the rally's
many far-reaching goals. Workers called for health care coverage from
"cradle to grave" for all Americans, a national living wage, a repeal
of the USA Patriot Act, more funding for public schools and free mass
transit, to name a few of their 22 demands.

Antiwar sentiment was also strong. Workers criticized the Bush
administration for leading the country into what they called an
unjustified war with Iraq, saying that the billions of dollars paying
for the war are needed instead in struggling schools and communities.
"We need to employ, not deploy," said Mark Barbour, 51, of
Blacksburg, Va., a longtime railway worker and member of the
Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees Local 551.

Steve Burns, 43, a teacher at a Madison, Wis., community college,
endured a 14-hour van ride to Washington to have his voice heard --
and his handmade sign seen. Burns's felt-pen message was "End
For-Profit Health Care." He said he does not receive health care
benefits as an adjunct math instructor and is still paying off a
recent $1,200 hospital bill for an infection. "Our health care system
is a disaster, and neither candidate wants real reform," Burns said.

Though organizers had planned their protest as nonpartisan, speakers
and rallygoers were not bashful in showing their disapproval of
President Bush.

From a podium on a wide granite landing on the memorial steps, former
U.S. attorney general Ramsey Clark called for the impeachment of Bush
for war crimes. Activists in the audience carried anti-Bush stickers
and signs, and one of the most prominent banners on display was one
declaring, "The Bush regime engineered 9-11."

The turnout fell far short of the 250,000 who filled the Mall for the
labor movement's last major Washington demonstration, an August 1991
"Solidarity Day" rally that blamed political leaders, including
Bush's father, then-President George H.W. Bush, for turning their
backs on U.S. workers. That rally was sponsored by the AFL-CIO, the
nation's largest labor federation. But AFL-CIO leaders refused to
officially endorse or help organize yesterday's gathering, saying
they were focused instead on mobilizing voters for the presidential
election, a decision echoed by several major unions.

Organizers, who said unions representing more than 3.5 million
workers backed the demonstration, said the AFL-CIO's decision hurt
the turnout, but they expressed pride that their low-budget rally was
largely a rank-and-file effort.

Not all were trade unionists. About 100 protesters took part in an 11
a.m. "anarchist march," where Daniel Hall, 20, a student at the
University of Maryland, marched with a group of students holding up a
large banner that read, "Students and workers unite!" Hall said he
hoped the march "gets people thinking about labor and how things are
not getting better. It's a system of inequality."

Later in the afternoon, following speeches by King's son, Martin
Luther King III, and other civil rights and union leaders, a few
hundred marched from the Lincoln Memorial to the Hotel Washington on
15th Street NW in support of District hotel workers.

Negotiators for several major Washington hotels and the union that
represents 3,800 hotel employees remain deadlocked on a new contract.
Protesters chanted outside the hotel's doors as police looked on.
Three hotel workers leaned out a third-floor window, looked down on
the crowd and waved in support.
--
Yoshie

* Critical Montages: < http://montages.blogspot.com/ >
* Greens for Nader: < http://greensfornader.net/ >
* Bring Them Home Now! < http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/ >
* OSU-GESO: < http://www.osu-geso.org/ >
* Calendars of Events in Columbus:
,
, & < http://www.cpanews.org/ >
* Student International Forum: < http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/ >
* Committee for Justice in Palestine: < http://www.osudivest.org/ >
* Al-Awda-Ohio: < http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio >
* Solidarity: < http://www.solidarity-us.org/ >

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

3) National Day of Protest to Stop Police Brutality,
Repression, and the Criminalization of a Generation,
on Friday, October 22nd.
Events in San Jose, San Francisco, and Oakland this
week.
More info (including links) at
http://www.indybay.org/police

The week after the National Conference on Police
Accountability comes the 9th Annual National Day of
Protest to Stop Police Brutality, Repression, and the
Criminalization of a Generation, on Friday, October
22nd. A variety of events will take place around the
Bay Area during that week. Many of the events provide
a way to bring out the stories of families and loved
ones of people who have been killed by law enforcement
officers or while in custody, as well as addressing
other problematic interactions between police and
civilians. This year's call to action focuses on the
parallels between what is happening in Iraq and
Palestine, and what is happening in neighborhoods like
San Francisco's Bayview/Hunter's Point; exposure of
the problems related to racial profiling in the US,
particularly of new groups such as Arabs and Muslims,
and the criminalization of the right to protest by
programs such as Homeland Security.

On Thursday the 21st in San Jose, family members of
people who died in police shootings will share their
concerns at the Justice Review Committee of the Santa
Clara County Human Relations Commission, at 5:30pm.
Members of the Rudy Cardenas Family, Bich-Cau Thi Tran
Family, and Zaim Bojcic family will attend the meeting
and speak about their issues. Speakers at the meeting
will also address the use of tasers/stun guns by law
enforcement. In the last two police shootings in San
Jose tasers were deployed but were not effective. More
info about tasers Members of the Coalition for Justice
and Accountability, which formed after the tragic
death of Bich-Cau Thi Tran last year, the October 22nd
Coalition to Stop Police Brutality, Repression and the
Criminalization of a Generation, Amnesty
International, and Justice for Rudy will also be in
attendance.

In San Jose on October 22nd, an event will be held to
sensitize people to the history, culture, customs, and
different concerns that European immigrant communities
face, in order to make people more aware of the
different issues that refugees have to deal with in
their lives here in the US. This event was inspired by
the death of Zaim Bojcic.

Also on October 22nd, a press conference and speak-out
rally will be held at 4pm at 3rd St. and Palou in the
Bayview District of San Francisco.

Later in the evening on October 22nd, the No on
Measure Y Campaign will show the film Every Mother's
Son as a fundraiser, from 8-10 at the Humanist Hall,
390 27th Street (near 27th and Broadway) in Oakland.
From 9pm till late on October, 22nd, Lioness and Mr. E
presents: SF Uprock 5, with members of October 22nd
supporters Loco Bloco, as well as SAKE 1, Jennicyde,
Ren, and Mr. EB-boy & B-girl Psyher; hosted by: Hound
Dog Truckers-- at Club Six in San Francisco.

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

4) Subject: Lynne Stewart trial
From: "Larry Felson"
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 08:05:15 +0000
Post from Lynne Stewart web site:
October 13, 2004: Because of circumstances beyond
our control, the trial will resume on Monday, October 18th.
Check back to her web site for up dated information:
http://www.lynnestewart.org/
--
On behalf of the
National Office of Refuse & Resist!
305 Madison Ave., Suite 1166
NY, NY 10165
http://www.refuseandresist.org
info@refuseandresist.org
Tel: 212.713.5657
Get hooked in to the movement of resistance, subscribe to the R&R! email
list.
TO SUBSCRIBE: General information about the mailing

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

5) Soldiers Saw Refusing Order as Their
Last Stand
By NEELA BANERJEE and ARIEL HART
October 18, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/18/national/18guard.html?hp&ex=1098158400&en=
b6cde713635fabbc&ei=5094&partner=homepage

JACKSON, Miss., Oct. 17 - What does it take for a man like Staff
. Michael Butler, a 24-year veteran of the Army and the Reserve who
was a soldier in the first Persian Gulf war and a reserve called up to
fight in the current war in Iraq, to risk everything by disobeying
a direct order in wartime?

On the morning of Oct. 13, the military says, Sergeant Butler and
most of his platoon, some 18 men and women from the 343rd
Quartermaster Company, refused to deliver a shipment of fuel from
the Tallil Air Base near Nasiriya, Iraq, to another base much farther
north.

The Army has begun an inquiry, and the soldiers could face
disciplinary measures, including possible courts-martial. But Jackie
Butler, Sergeant Butler's wife, and her family in Jackson say he
would not have jeopardized his career and his freedom for
something impulsive or unimportant.

The soldiers, many of whom have called home this weekend,
said their trucks were unsafe and lacked a proper armed escort,
problems that have plagued them since they went to Iraq nine
months ago, their relatives said. The time had come for them, for
her husband, to act, Ms. Butler said.

"I'm proud that he said 'no,' " Ms. Butler said. "They had complained
and complained for months to the chain of command about the
equipment and trucks. But nothing was done, so I think he felt
he had to take a stand."

Other soldiers completed the mission the platoon turned down,
the military kept functioning, and the Army has cast the incident
as isolated.

But as the soldiers involved in the refusal in Tallil and others begin
to speak out, it is growing more apparent that the military has yet
to solve the lack of training, parts and equipment that has riddled
the military operation in Iraq from the outset, especially among
National Guard and Reserve units.

Brig. Gen. James E. Chambers, commander of the 13th Corps
Support Command, which the 343rd reports to, said at a news
conference in Baghdad on Sunday that he had ordered two
investigations into the incident and the concerns expressed by
the 18 soldiers "regarding maintenance and safety.''

General Chambers said preliminary findings showed that the unit's
trucks were not yet armored and were among the last in his command
to get such protection, because they usually functioned in less
dangerous parts of Iraq. None of the trucks in his command were
armored when they arrived in Iraq, General Chambers said. He told
reporters that he had ordered a safety and maintenance review of
all trucks in the 343rd.

"Based on results of this investigation other actions may be
necessary,'' the general said, but he added, "It's too early in the
investigation to speculate on charges or other disciplinary actions.''

General Chambers described the episode as "a single event that is
confined to a small group of individuals.''

A number of Army officers contacted in recent days said such an
apparent act of insubordination was very unusual, particularly among
such a large number of soldiers in a single unit and especially since
the military is all volunteer.

The incident has prompted widespread interest among military
families who have complained in months past of inadequate
equipment and protection for their soldiers.

Nancy Lessin, a leader of Military Families Speak Out, which
opposes the war, said she had been flooded with calls and e-mail
from families with a simple message: What had happened to the
reservists echoed the conditions their own soldiers experienced in
Iraq: a shortage of armored vehicles, especially for part-time
soldiers' units; convoy missions through dangerous stretches
without adequate firepower; and constant breakdowns among
old vehicles owned, especially, by National Guard and reservist units.

"This is absolutely striking a nerve," Ms. Lessin said. "People are s
aying, 'This is the same thing that happened to my son,' and if the
Army tries to spin this as 'just a few bad apples,' people need to
know that these are common problems and what these soldiers
did required a tremendous amount of courage."

Nothing seems to separate the men and women who defied their
command in Tallil from the tens of thousands of others now in Iraq,
their families say. The 343rd was drawn mainly from Southern
states like the Carolinas, Alabama and Mississippi, and the military
said Friday that the 343rd had performed honorably during its
tour in Iraq.

The soldiers in the platoon are described as devoted to the military
and unabashedly patriotic. A wall of Sergeant Butler's living room
is covered with certificates and citations from the Army. Another
member of the 343rd, Specialist Joe Dobbs, 19, of Vandiver, Ala.,
had his bedroom painted the dark blue of the American flag. And
another soldier in the unit, Sgt. Justin Rogers of Louisville, Ky., liked
to walk around town in his uniform when he was home on leave,
said Chris Helm, a 14-year-old high school student and his first
cousin.

When Sergeant Rogers went home for a two-week leave in July,
his brother Derrick asked whether the war and all the deaths were
worth it. "His answer was simple," Derrick Rogers said. "He said, 'If
I didn't feel like it was worth it, I wouldn't be there.' ''

Ms. Butler did not want to speak for her husband on his feelings
about the war. Better he should do that when he is finally home,
she said, which is scheduled to be sometime next year. But Sergeant
Butler knew he would be called up, once the war against Iraq was
begun in March 2003. Late last year, he reported to Rock Hill, and
quickly, his confidence was shaken, his wife said. He saw that the
equipment to be shipped with his unit was "not very good,"
Ms. Butler said.

Once the unit arrived in Iraq, the inadequacy of the platoon's
equipment and preparedness was thrown into sharp relief against
the dangers the country posed. Although the unit is based near
Nasiriya in the Shiite-controlled south, which is not as volatile as
Sunni-dominated areas, the whole country has been convulsed by
battles and uprisings during most of the 343rd's tour of duty.
"This is not the first time that there has been a problem with these
charges and stuff, with them not having armor, not having radios,"
said Beverly Dobbs, mother of Specialist Dobbs. "My son told me
two months ago - he called me, he said, 'Mom I got the scare of my life.'

"'I said what's wrong?'" Ms. Dobbs said. "He said, 'They sent us
out, we come under fire, our own people was shooting and we
didn't even have radios to let them know.' They're sending them
out without the equipment they need. I don't care what the
Army says."

Families that spoke to the soldiers this weekend received slightly
differing accounts of what happened the morning of Oct. 13.
They all said, however, that fuel the soldiers had to deliver was
unusable because it had been contaminated with a second liquid.
They all said the soldiers were under armed guard. General
Chambers denied both assertions. Relatives say that Sergeant
Butler, Sgt. Larry McCook of Jackson and Specialist Scott Shealey
of Graysville, Ala., have been identified as three of five "ringleaders"
of the incident and reassigned to other units on the air base.
Specialist Shealey's parents said their son said in a telephone
call that he was going to be discharged.

"He'll be home in three to four weeks, that's what he's being told,"
said Ricky Shealey, Specialist Shealey's father, a retired Postal
Service supervisor and former sergeant in the Army. "He's depressed,"
Mr. Shealey said. "He just can't believe it's happening."

Ms. Butler said her husband did not know what he might be facing
and had heard nothing about a discharge. Other families said the
military had yet to contact them to explain the situation. The families
have not hired lawyers yet, in large part because they are uncertain
what charges might be brought against their relatives.

Some families are reaching out to one another through e-mail and
phone calls, offering help and discussing strategy. They have contacted
their members of Congressmen. Others, like Ms. Dobbs and her family,
are glued to television news, awaiting some clarification of the incident.

Ms. Butler has her big family to lean on, and on this Sunday, the day
after the phone call from her husband, they went to church and turned
to their neighbors, friends and faith. Ms. Butler went to the altar rail
of Zion Travelers Missionary Baptist Church and told the congregation:
"My husband has been in the Army more than 20 years, but refused
to take those men in that convoy. He said it would be suicidal.''

"So, I'm going to ask you to pray for me," she said, "because he is
not going to take no other men's children into the land of death."

She bowed her head, and so did everyone else. "Lord, Sister Butler
needs you," the Rev. Daniel Watkins said, shutting his eyes tight.
"Her husband, he needs you. All the soldiers in Iraq, they need you."

Monica Davey contributed reporting from Chicago for this article,
and Richard A. Oppel Jr. and Dexter Filkins from Baghdad.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

6) Iraqi Premier Plans Expansion of
Arms Handover Program
By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. and DEXTER FILKINS
BAGHDAD, Iraq
October 18, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/18/international/middleeast/18CND-IRAQ.html?h
p&ex=1098158400&en=39fafcef49fdf2f4&ei=5094&partner=homepage


BAGHDAD, Iraq, Oct. 18 - Prime Minister Ayad Allawi of Iraq
said today that a weapons-for-cash program in Baghdad
would be expanded nationwide.

Militiamen loyal to the rebel Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr started
surrendering hundreds of weapons last week in a deal struck
with the Iraqi government and the American military to end
months of fighting in the rundown eastern Baghdad neighborhood
known as Sadr City. The buy-back brought in enough arms in its
first week to prompt Iraqi officials on Sunday to extend the
program to Tuesday.

The cooperation with the buyout has raised hopes that Mr. Sadr
would go forward with plans to turn away from fighting and toward
entering the country's democratic process.

Underscoring the buyout's progress, Dr. Allawi ventured into the
heart of Baghdad's hostile Shiite district on Sunday to salute the
militia, the Mahdi Army, for surrendering more than 1,000 of its
heavy weapons in the past week. As Iraqi troops nearby assembled
stacks of surrendered weapons at a soccer stadium in the district,
Sadr City, Dr. Allawi said he was "thrilled" and urged more progress.

A senior aide to Mr. Sadr said on Sunday that the militia had no
objection to the extension.

"The government is determined to disarm cities and neighborhoods
because our forces are now ready to fight terrorists and there's
no justification for people to keep weapons at home," Dr. Allawi
told Iraqi lawmakers, according to news agency reports.

Iraqi and American officials contend that Mr. Sadr still has much
of his arsenal. But American commanders echoed Dr. Allawi's
encouragement on Sunday, though they emphasized that the militia
must deliver far more weaponry. The military said that Mr. Sadr's
militia had turned in about 700 rocket-propelled grenades and
about 400 mortar shells, along with hundreds of lighter weapons,
and that the Iraqi government had paid about $1.2 million in return.

Even as the disarmament appeared to gain momentum, insurgents
continued attacks in Baghdad on Sunday. Before Dr. Allawi arrived
at the stadium in Sadr City, mortar fire struck it, killing two people.
And news agencies reported that a car bomb had exploded near
a cafe, killing at least seven and wounding 20.

In a message posted Sunday on Islamic Web sites, Iraq's most
wanted militant, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, pledged his loyalty to
Osama bin Laden and emphasized the need for unity against
"the enemies of Islam."

Outside Falluja, American marines resumed fierce clashes with
insurgents, continuing a military push that began on Friday and
appeared to be laying the groundwork for an attempt to retake
the city from insurgents. The military fired heavy artillery and
tank-gun barrages and dropped guided bombs on militant safe
houses and weapons caches, military officials said.

Dr. Allawi also said today that a $2 million aid package worth
$2 million would be extended to Falluja, according to the
Agence France-Press.

Mr. Sadr is thought to have hundreds of loyalists across southern
Iraq, in cities like Amara, Basra and Diwaniya. Iraqi officials have
long worried that unless those groups also turn in their heavy
weapons, they pose a serious threat to the nationwide elections
scheduled for January.

In recent weeks, Mr. Sadr has been meeting with leaders from
across the Iraqi political spectrum, telling them he is planning
to transform his movement from an armed group into a democratic
one. Many Iraqis, and the Americans especially, are skeptical of
Mr. Sadr, given his record of breaking similar promises.

But circumstances for Mr. Sadr have changed in recent months,
all of which may be nudging him into the political system. His
militia has suffered a pounding at the hands of the Americans
in Sadr City and Najaf. And the Americans and the Iraqi government
have promised to embark on a campaign of house-to-house
searches in the area to find whatever weapons Mr. Sadr does
not turn over.

At the same time, Mr. Sadr has come under intense pressure from
mainstream Shiite leaders, who see the elections in January as the
clearest path to political power. Shiites comprise about 60 percent
of the Iraqi population.

Mr. Sadr's own aides said he was moving in that direction. "We are
part of the political process now," said Karim Bakhati, a representative
of Mr. Sadr, after the meeting with Dr. Allawi at the weaponsfor-cash
handover. "The Iraqi government wants to have such centers outside
Baghdad, and we don't have any objections to that."

American and Iraqi officials say they believe that Mr. Sadr is playing
something of a double game: He may intend to make a foray into
democratic politics, but he is trying to keep as much as of his militia
as he can, if only because many of the country's largest political
parties have their own armed groups as well.

The Americans said they were still worried about as many as 100
homemade bombs that are thought to be planted under the streets
of Sadr City, a type of bomb that has killed and wounded dozens of
American soldiers. American commanders said that only two such
bombs had been turned in, and that it would be difficult or impossible
to restart the American-financed reconstruction program, which
employed 15,000 Iraqis until the fighting intensified in August,
until the roadside bombs were unearthed.

Still, the American commanders said they were encouraged by the
effort. "We're never going to get them to give up everything," a senior
American military officer said. "But this is not a bad deal. It gets these
weapons off the street and it helps us equip the new Iraqi security
forces. I can't imagine it's not hurting the Mahdi militia in some way."

Whatever else it has accomplished, the deal struck by Mr. Sadr and
the Iraqi government earlier this month has transformed the atmosphere
in Sadr City. Since August, the area has been the scene of intense
fighting and almost nightly air raids by American planes and jets.
On Sunday, the streets were mostly quiet, and the tension in the
area had receded significantly.

The public appeal of Mr. Sadr was driven home Sunday to Dr. Allawi.
As the prime minister prepared to leave the soccer stadium, a crowd
of Mr. Sadr's militiamen began to chant. "Long Live Moktada!" they
shouted. "Long live Moktada!"

In Falluja on Sunday, American marines engaged in gun battles with
insurgents at the outskirts of the town. The marines said that one
of their patrols was attacked by a group of insurgents firing mortars,
machine guns and grenade launchers, and that they returned fire with
artillery, tanks and seven bombs dropped from the air. The marines
said the insurgents, some of whom evidently survived the onslaught,
piled their guns into a taxi and a pickup truck and drove to a mosque.

"Marines did not fire on the mosque," the statement said.

The patrols being carried out by the marines are intended to disrupt
the insurgents and draw their fire. The operations, which began Friday,
appear to be laying the groundwork for an offensive to recapture the
city, which fell under the control of insurgents in April.

The insurgents are still very much in control of the city. One of them,
Muhammad al-Mehimmadi, took a break from the fighting on Sunday
and spoke with fervor about resisting an American-led assault.

"We are on the right side, and God is with us, and anyone who has
God on his side never loses," Mr. Mehimmadi said. "The greatest
evidence of that is what happened in April. Let the Americans do
what they intend to do, and they will see wonders."

Eric Schmitt contributed reporting from Baghdad for this article,
and an Iraqi employee of The New York Times from Falluja.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

7) Study Says White Families' Wealth
Advantage Has Grown
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 (AP
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/18/national/18wealth.html

WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 (AP) - The enormous wealth gap between white
families and black and Hispanic families grew larger after the most
recent recession, a private analysis of government data has found.

White households had a median net worth of greater than $88,000 in
2002, 11 times that of Hispanic households and more than 14 times
that of black households, the Pew Hispanic Center said in the study,
being released Monday.

Blacks were slowest to emerge from the economic downturn that started
in 2000 and ended early in 2001, the report found.

Net worth accounts for the value of items like a home and a car, checking
and savings accounts, and stocks, minus debts like mortgage, car loans
and credit card bills.

Roberto Suro, director of the Pew Hispanic Center, said the accumulation
of wealth allows low-income families to rise into the middle class and
"have some kind of assets beyond next week's paychecks."

"Having more assets enabled whites to ride out the jobless recovery
better," Mr. Suro said.

According to the group's analysis of Census Bureau data, nearly
one-third of black families and 26 percent of Hispanic families were
in debt or had no net assets, compared with 11 percent of white families.

"Wealth is a measure of cumulative advantage or disadvantage," said
Roderick Harrison, a researcher at the Joint Center for Political and
Economic Studies, a Washington research organization that focuses
on black issues. "The fact that black and Hispanic wealth is a fraction
of white wealth also reflects a history of discrimination."

After accounting for inflation, net worth increased 17 percent for
white households from 1996 to 2002 and 14 percent for Hispanic
homes, to about $7,900. It fell for black households by 16 percent,
to roughly $6,000.

The median net worth for all American households, representing all
races and ethnicities, was $59,700 in 2002, a 12 percent gain
from 1996.

Only white homes recouped all their losses from 2001 to 2002. Both
Hispanics and blacks lost nearly 27 percent of net worth from 1999
to 2001; the next year Hispanics gained it almost all back (26 percent),
while blacks were up only about 5 percent.

Mr. Harrison said Hispanics were more insulated from the downturn
than blacks, so they suffered less. For example, Hispanics made
employment gains in lower-paid, lower-skilled areas like service
and construction.

Blacks were hit hard by job losses in the manufacturing industry and
in professional fields, where they were victims of "last hired, first fired"
policies, he said.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

8) Southwest Airlines Third-Quarter
Profit Increases
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
DALLAS (AP)
Filed at 6:36 p.m. ET
October 14, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/business/AP-Earns-Southwest-Airlines.html

DALLAS (AP) -- Southwest Airlines Co. reported a 12 percent jump
in third-quarter profits on Thursday, as its decision to buy fuel in
advance helped insulate the low-cost carrier from rising oil prices.
But executives warned that competitive pressures could hurt revenues
in the current quarter.

Southwest said Thursday that it earned $119 million, or 15 cents
a share, in the July-September quarter, up from $106 million, or
13 cents a share, a year earlier.

Analysts surveyed by Thomson First Call had forecast 12 cents per
share in earnings.

Revenue was $1.67 billion, up nearly 8 percent from $1.55 billion
a year earlier -- but a bit below the $1.69 billion forecast by analysts.

Chief executive Gary Kelly said the revenue shortfall was partly due
to hurricanes that dampened travel in Florida, but mostly because
carriers are adding flights, making it harder for airlines to raise fares.

``This many quarters after the official end of the recession, the
industry should be performing better,'' Kelly told analysts. ``There
are just too many seats chasing too few passengers. The revenues
are disappointing.''

Chief financial officer Laura Wright added that fourth-quarter revenue
``could be lower than a year ago.''

The result, the officials said, will be an increasing focus on containing
costs. They said, however, that Southwest, which has about 400 jets,
still expects to add 29 planes next year, matching the 2004 increase.

Kelly said the new planes would allow the carrier to expand service
next year in Philadelphia -- if it can get gates now controlled by
troubled US Airways -- or begin flying to one or two new cities.

Southwest shares closed up 57 cents, or 4.2 percent, at $14.14 on
the New York Stock Exchange.

Southwest was the first major carrier to report third-quarter results.

The airline had hedged -- or made advance purchases at fixed prices
-- for most of its jet fuel purchases, which helped offset rising fuel
prices.

Southwest said that excluding fuel, costs were flat with a year ago
and below the levels in the first half of this year.

Southwest said it has hedged 80 percent of its fourth-quarter fuel
prices at the equivalent of $24 a barrel, about half the current price,
and 80 percent hedged next year at $25 per barrel.

The carrier also saved by eliminating travel agent commissions,
closing three reservation call centers and steering customers to buy
tickets on its Web site. The company also eliminated about 1,000 jobs
through an early retirement program, although it was unclear whether
that was yet paying benefits.

As a result, Southwest reversed a four-quarter trend of rising cost per
mile flown by passengers, a key measurement of efficiency in the
airline industry.

``They are doing a good job controlling costs, and they have to,''
said Raymond Neidl, an analyst with Calyon Securities. He also praised
the company for concentrating on domestic growth, including its
new service in Philadelphia, rather than jumping into international
routes.

Tony Cristello, an analyst with BB&T Capital Markets, said Southwest
and other carriers will continue to struggle to increase revenue until
a shakeout in the industry.

``That could be US Airways going away, coupled with Delta and
United making material cuts in capacity, but it is going to take
a substantial capacity reduction,'' he said.

At Southwest, traffic as measured by miles flown by paying customers,
rose 10.4 percent. Southwest has increased its fleet to 400 planes,
which pushed capacity up 7 percent from a year ago.

Average occupancy on the Southwest planes rose to 72.7 percent
from 70.5 percent a year earlier.

For the first nine months of the year, Southwest earned $258 million,
or 32 cents per share on revenues of $4.40 billion. A year ago, the
company earned $233 million, or 28 cents, per share on revenues
of $4.05 billion. The $233 million figure excludes a $143 million
government grant the airline received in 2003.

------

On the Net:

Southwest: http://www.southwest.com

Copyright 2004 The Associated Press

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

9) Justices Weigh Executions of Young Killers
By LINDA GREENHOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 14, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/14/politics/14scotus.html


WASHINGTON, Oct. 13 - If American society has indeed reached
a consensus that the death penalty should not apply to those who
kill at age 16 or 17, as the lawyer for a young Missouri murderer
argued to the Supreme Court on Wednesday, no such consensus
was apparent among the justices themselves.

Two years after ruling 6 to 3 that the execution of mentally retarded
offenders is categorically unconstitutional, the court appeared
deeply divided over whether the reasoning of that decision meant
that the death penalty for acts committed while a juvenile should
likewise be seen as "cruel and unusual punishment" in violation
of the Eighth Amendment.

The Missouri Supreme Court reached that conclusion by a 4-to-3
decision in August 2003, freeing Christopher Simmons from death
row for a murder he committed in 1993 when he was 17. It resentenced
him to life in prison without parole.

Missouri appealed to the United States Supreme Court, arguing that
the state court lacked authority to reject the Supreme Court's last
decision on the question, a 1989 ruling that upheld capital punishment
for 16- and 17-year-olds. A 1988 decision barred the execution of
those who killed when they were younger than 16.

Seth P. Waxman, representing Mr. Simmons, argued that not only the
increasing rarity of juvenile executions since 1989 but also new
medical and psychological understanding of teenage immaturity
validated the step the Missouri court took last year.

"These developments change the constitutional calculus," Mr. Waxman,
a former United States solicitor general, told the justices. The new
scientific evidence, described in briefs filed by the American Medical
Association, the American Psychological Association and other
professional groups, "explains and validates the consensus that
society has drawn," he said.

Justice Antonin Scalia countered: "If all this is so clear, why can't the
legislature take it into account? All you have to do is bring these facts
to the attention of the legislature."

Mr. Waxman replied that the number of states that actually execute
people for crimes committed as juveniles is "very small." While 19
states nominally permit the execution of 17-year-old murderers,
only three states - Texas, Virginia and Oklahoma - have executed
juvenile offenders in the past 10 years.

Oklahoma has no juvenile offender on its death row. Virginia has
one, and a jury there refused last year to impose a death sentence
after finding Lee Malvo, the teenage member of a pair of Washington
-area snipers, guilty of murder. Texas, with 29 inmates now on death
row for juvenile crimes, accounts for more than half the executions
of juvenile offenders, 13 of 22, carried out in the United States since
the modern era of capital punishment began in 1976. There were
2 juvenile death sentences imposed in the United States last year
and 1 so far this year, down from 14 five years ago.

Justice Scalia told Mr. Waxman he was not surprised by the low
numbers. They demonstrated juries' ability to take a defendant's
youth into consideration, he said, adding that the question was
whether to leave it to juries or to impose a "hard rule."

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist challenged Mr. Waxman on
whether the scientific evidence contained in the briefs was even
appropriate for the court's consideration. Noting that the studies
had not been introduced at Mr. Simmons's trial, he said, "You're
talking facts, and facts are ordinarily adduced at trial for cross-
examination."

Mr. Waxman, temporarily nonplussed, replied: "The issue for this
court is not the application of law to a particular defendant, but
what the Constitution requires as a matter of law."

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy asked Mr. Waxman whether he would
lose the case if the court accepted neither the scientific evidence
nor the existence of a consensus.

"This is truly a case in which the whole is greater than the sum of
the parts," Mr. Waxman replied.

Four justices - John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader
Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer - have made clear in recent years
their desire to invalidate the juvenile death penalty. "The practice
of executing such offenders is a relic of the past and is inconsistent
with evolving standards of decency in a civilized society," the four
wrote in October 2002, dissenting from the court's refusal to grant
a writ of habeas corpus to a Kentucky inmate, an action that
required five votes.

Just as clearly, Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices Scalia and
Clarence Thomas, the three dissenters in the retardation case,
will not vote to extend that decision to juveniles.

With these facts known to most people in the courtroom, the focus
of attention was on Justice Kennedy and Justice Sandra Day O'Connor,
both of whom rejected the challenge to juvenile executions in 1989
and at least one of whom must repudiate that precedent if Mr. Simmons
is to prevail.

Justice O'Connor, usually an active participant in the court's arguments,
made only one comment, to James R. Layton, Missouri's state solicitor.
She noted that the number of states that have rejected execution of
those younger than 18 was "about the same" as the number that had
rejected execution of the retarded in the years leading up to the court's
ruling in that case. Of the 38 states with a death penalty, 19 have
a minimum age of 18. In 2002, 18 states barred execution of the
retarded. "Are we at least required to look at that?" Justice O'Connor
asked.

Mr. Layton replied that the retardation case, Atkins v. Virginia, took
account of an "inexorable trend" among the states, and "we don't have
that here." In the retardation case, there had been what the court called
a "dramatic shift in the state legislative landscape," with only two states
having barred execution of the retarded as recently as 1989.

In fact, Justice Stevens, in his majority opinion in the retardation case,
went out of his way in a footnote to contrast that shift with the much
slower rate of change on the youth question. The footnote may have
been necessary to hold the vote of Justice O'Connor or Justice Kennedy.

On Wednesday, Justice Kennedy appeared deeply conflicted throughout
the argument. He said he was concerned that drawing the line at
18 might induce teenage gangs to designate their 16- or 17-year-old
members as "hit men." A brief filed by Alabama that contained grisly
descriptions of murders committed by teenagers made for "chilling
reading," Justice Kennedy said, adding that he wished all those who
had signed briefs for Mr. Simmons "had read it before they signed on."
This led Justice Stevens to say that the death penalty did not seem to
have deterred those crimes, all of which took place in states that permit
the execution of juvenile offenders.

The case, Roper v. Simmons, No. 03-633, has attracted wide interest
overseas, with briefs for Mr. Simmons signed by the European Union,
the 45-member Council of Europe, and other organizations. The
United States and Somalia are the only nations that have not formally
repudiated executing juveniles. A brief filed by former United States
diplomats asserted that the situation was an irritant in international
relations.

Should the court give that brief any credence, Justice Stevens asked
Mr. Layton. No, Missouri's lawyer replied, the question remained one
for legislatures and not courts.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

10) Militants ready for onslaught on Fallujah
By Aqeel Hussein in Fallujah and Philip Sherwell
(Filed: 17/10/2004)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/10/17/wirq17.xml&s
Sheet=/portal/2004/10/17/ixportal.html

Preparations for a last-ditch defence of Fallujah have been stepped
up by Iraqi militants after the breakdown of negotiations with Baghdad
aimed at averting an American-led onslaught on the city.

Hundreds of fighters marshalled on the city's main street yesterday
armed with machine guns, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, and
assault rifles. Fighters are also stationed on the rooftops to repulse
American-led Iraqi forces.

Abdullah Janabi, one of the leaders of the rebel Shura or Islamic council
that controls the city, said that negotiations had collapsed completely
over demands that foreign militants be expelled from the city before Iraqi
troops enter.

He warned that a fiery welcome was being prepared for any "invaders".
"Those who invade the city of mosques will be entering their last days,"
he said. "We will all give our blood to defend this place from the infidel."

The American military has established a cordon around the city, ensuring
that access is restricted to those on foot. The rebel checkpoints that had
been established on approach roads have been withdrawn, apparently
to lure the American military into the city.

At dawn yesterday, the Americans launched further air strikes targeting
strongholds of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the Islamic terrorist held
responsible for the beheading of western hostages, including the
Briton Kenneth Bigley.

A senior Pentagon official said that there was no plan to enter Fallujah
and take back the city during the holy month of Ramadan, which began
on Friday. Instead the military is determined to isolate Zarqawi and
severely limit his operations.

An attack will be postponed until December, but imposing a cordon
around the city will tie down 2,000 crack Marine and Army troops.

Meanwhile, a UN audit of spending by the American administration
in Iraq, leaked overnight in Washington, revealed that half the £3.2
billion spent in the first half of this year could not be accounted for,
including one payment of £800 million into a Kurdish bank account.

Information appearing on telegraph.co.uk is the copyright of
Telegraph Group Limited and must not be reproduced in any medium
without licence. For the full copyright statement see Copyright

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

11) Britain Considers U.S. Request for More Iraq Help
By Kate Kelland
LONDON (Reuters)
Mon Oct 18, 2004 07:15 AM ET
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6527746&src=eD
ialog/GetContent§ion=news

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain is considering a U.S. request to move
troops into more potentially dangerous areas of Iraq, a politically
charged move which has re-ignited anger over Prime Minister
Tony Blair's support for the war.

Officials said Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon will confirm the request
in a "holding statement" to parliament Monday, but will stress he
has made no decision yet and that when he does, it will be made
purely on operational grounds.

"We will await firm proposals before ministers and the prime
minister make a decision," Blair's spokesman said. "This is a proposal
that has come from the operational level, not the political level."

British troops have until now operated only in the relatively quiet
Basra area of southern Iraq, where some 8,000 UK troops are stationed.
Since the Iraq war began, 68 British troops have died, compared with
well over 1,000 American troops.

Analysts say up to 650 British troops may be moved north in response
to the U.S. request to cover for U.S. units battling insurgents in the
rebel-held city of Falluja and elsewhere.

The most likely move would be to redeploy troops from the army's
Black Watch regiment from Basra to U.S. controlled areas south of
Baghdad. Commentators suggest the volatile towns of Iskandariya,
Latifiya and Hilla as possible destinations.

Blair's spokesman said he was not aware of any plans for UK soldiers
to patrol flashpoint areas in Baghdad or Falluja.

U.S. POLITICS AT PLAY?

He also rejected opposition politicians' accusations that Blair was
preparing to put the lives of UK troops at greater risk for the sake
of President Bush. Iraq is the key issue in upcoming U.S. presidential
elections in November.

A central theme of Democratic challenger John Kerry's attack on Bush
is that his go-it-alone approach in invading Iraq has left United States
soldiers shouldering the vast majority of the post-war military burden.

"If this is about any elections it is about preparing for the Iraqi
elections (planned for January), not the U.S. elections," the spokesman
told reporters.

But Charles Kennedy, leader of Britain's third party the Liberal
Democrats and a fierce opponent of the war, said it was difficult
to see why Washington thought the redeployment of a British unit
of around 650 troops -- just 0.5 percent of the total coalition
troops in Iraq -- was so vital at this time.

He said Britain should be planning its withdrawal from Iraq, not
becoming more deeply involved.

"This, far from being an exit strategy, runs the risk of being an
ensnarement strategy that drags Britain further into the mire,"
he told BBC radio.

Any prospect of a sharp rise in British casualties would be acutely
uncomfortable for Blair, whose unpopular decision to join President
Bush in the March 2003 invasion has hit his ratings and divided
his party.


Thousands of anti-war protesters marched though London on
Sunday to demand UK troops withdraw from Iraq altogether.

(c) Copyright Reuters 2004

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

12) Iraq to Widen Arms Amnesty, Bring Falluja to Heel
By Alistair Lyon
BAGHDAD (Reuters)
Mon Oct 18, 2004 08:27 AM ET
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6528800&src=eD
ialog/GetContent§ion=news

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq's interim government will declare a
nationwide arms amnesty next week, but insists the city of Falluja
must turn in foreign militants or face assault, National Security
Adviser Kassim Daoud said Monday.

Daoud would not be drawn on the timing of a Falluja offensive if the
city did not hand over militants led by Jordanian Abu Musab al-Zarqawi,
America's top enemy in Iraq. "We have a timetable and we will stick to
it," he told Reuters.

U.S. forces released overnight Falluja's chief negotiator, whom they
detained Friday, after day-long battles and air strikes on the
outskirts of the rebel-held Sunni Muslim stronghold west of
Baghdad.

The interim government has vowed to crack down on insurgents
and pacify Iraq before elections due in January.

"Next week, we will announce a nationwide arms collection drive,"
said Daoud, but gave few details of the arms amnesty.

In a country awash in weaponry, Iraqis are permitted to keep
personal guns, such as pistols and assault rifles, at home. Previous
gun amnesties since last year's U.S.-led invasion of Iraq have
involved heavier weapons.

Daoud said a cash-for-weapons scheme already under way in
Baghdad's Sadr City district, a stronghold for Shi'ite militants, had
been extended to Thursday.

He said many people still wanted to disarm in Sadr City. "It would not
be fair to search houses now when these people have not had enough
time to turn over their weapons."

Loyalists of fiery cleric Moqtada al-Sadr had been fighting U.S. troops
in Sadr City before the arms handover was agreed.

Falluja, a hotbed of Sunni insurgency, is an even tougher challenge
for the interim government and its U.S. backers.

"I think the residents of Falluja don't want this sort of peace. They
want real peace, not a peace that stabs in the back and strikes and
destroys homes and kills women," Falluja representative Khaled
al-Jumaili said after his release.

U.S. marines detained the bearded cleric Friday while he was taking
his family out of the city for safety.

QUEST FOR ZARQAWI

Residents said Falluja was relatively quiet after Sunday's fierce battles,
in which hospital officials said four civilians were killed and 12 wounded.
A child was among the dead.

Falluja residents, enraged by U.S. air strikes that they say kill
civilians, deny knowledge of Zarqawi's network.

Asked what evidence the government has that Zarqawi's group
is operating in Falluja, Daoud said: "There are many of his followers,
Jihadists (holy warriors). The proof is there."

Jumaili said the hunt for Zarqawi was a pretext to attack Falluja,
comparing it to U.S. assertions that Saddam Hussein had weapons
of mass destruction before last year's invasion.

Zarqawi, who has a $25 million U.S. bounty on his head, has
declared loyalty to al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden for the
first time, according to a statement posted on the Internet.

"We announce that the Tawhid wal Jihad (One God and Holy
War) Group, its prince and soldiers, have pledged allegiance to
the sheikh of the mujahideen Osama bin Laden," said the
statement purportedly from Zarqawi's group.

Washington says Zarqawi is al Qaeda's link to Iraq but the
statement was the first by the group to announce its allegiance
to bin Laden's network, which carried out the Sept. 11, 2001
hijacked airliner attacks on U.S. cities.

Britain is considering a U.S. request to move troops now
based in southern Iraq into more potentially dangerous areas to
cover for U.S. units battling rebels in Falluja and elsewhere.

Officials say Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon will confirm the
request to parliament later Monday, but will stress he has made
no decision yet. Any such deployment would reignite anger in
Britain over Prime Minister Tony Blair's support for the war.

Insurgents struck at Iraq's fledgling security forces again
with a car bomb blast near a Baghdad cafe used by Iraqi police.
The U.S. military said eight people were killed, including a
policeman, and 28 wounded, in the Sunday night attack.

Earlier, a car bomb that blew up in traffic killed five
people and wounded 15 in the northern city of Mosul. The
beheaded body of an Iraqi translator employed by U.S. troops
was found near Baiji, north of Baghdad, police said.

An Australian television journalist was held hostage for
24 hours at the weekend before being released unharmed.

(c) Copyright Reuters 2004

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

13) Broad Use of Harsh Tactics Is Described at Cuba Base
By NEIL A. LEWIS
WASHINGTON, Oct. 16
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/politics/17gitmo.html

WASHINGTON, Oct. 16 - Many detainees at Guantánamo Bay were
regularly subjected to harsh and coercive treatment,
several people who worked in the prison said in recent interviews,
despite longstanding assertions by military officials that such
treatment had not occurred except in some isolated cases.

The people, military guards, intelligence agents and others,
described in interviews with The New York Times a range of
procedures that included treatment they said was highly abusive
occurring over a long period of time, as well as rewards for
prisoners who cooperated with interrogators.

One regular procedure that was described by people who worked
at Camp Delta, the main prison facility at the naval base in Cuba,
was making uncooperative prisoners strip to their underwear,
having them sit in a chair while shackled hand and foot to a bolt
in the floor, and forcing them to endure strobe lights and
screamingly loud rock and rap music played through two
close loudspeakers, while the air-conditioning was turned up
to maximum levels, said one military official who witnessed
the procedure. The official said that was intended to make
the detainees uncomfortable, as they were accustomed to high
temperatures both in their native countries and their cells.

Such sessions could last up to 14 hours with breaks, said the
official, who described the treatment after being contacted by
The Times.

"It fried them,'' the official said, who said that anger over the
treatment the prisoners endured was the reason for speaking
with a reporter. Another person familiar with the procedure
who was contacted by The Times said: "They were very wobbly.
They came back to their cells and were just completely out of it.''

The new information comes from a number of people, some of
whom witnessed or participated in the techniques and others
who were in a position to know the details of the operation
and corroborate their accounts.

Those who spoke of the interrogation practices at the naval base
did so under the condition that their identities not be revealed.
While some said it was because they remained on active duty,
they all said that being publicly identified would endanger their
futures. Although some former prisoners have said they saw
and experienced mistreatment at Guantánamo, this is the first
time that people who worked there have provided detailed
accounts of some interrogation procedures.

One intelligence official said most of the intense interrogation
was focused on a group of detainees known as the "Dirty 30''
and believed to be the best potential sources of information.

In August, a report commissioned by Defense Secretary
Donald H. Rumsfeld found that tough techniques approved by
the government were rarely used, but the sources described
a broader pattern that went beyond even the aggressive
techniques that were permissible.

The issue of what were permissible interrogation techniques has
produced a vigorous debate within the government that burst into
the open with reports of abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad
and is now the subject of several investigations.

Since the Sept. 11 attacks and the war in Afghanistan, the
administration has wrestled with the issue of what techniques
are permissible, with many arguing that the campaign against
terrorism should entitle them to greater leeway. Alberto R. Gonzales,
the White House counsel said, for example, in one memorandum
that the Geneva Conventions were "quaint" and not suitable for
the war against terrorism.

David Sheffer, a senior State Department human rights official in
the Clinton administration who teaches law at George Washington
University, said the procedure of shackling prisoners to the floor
in a state of undress while playing loud music - the Guantánamo
sources said it included the bands Limp Bizkit and Rage Against
the Machine, and the rapper Eminem - and lights clearly constituted
torture. "I don't think there's any question that treatment of that
character satisfies the severe pain and suffering requirement, be
it physical or mental, that is provided for in the Convention Against
Torture,'' Mr. Sheffer said.

Pentagon officials would not comment on the details of the
allegations. Lt. Cmdr. Alvin Plexico issued a Defense Department
statement in response to questions, saying that the military was
providing a "safe, humane and professional detention operation
at Guantánamo that is providing valuable information in the war
on terrorism.''

The statement said: "Guantánamo guards provide an environment
that is stable, secure, safe and humane. And it is that environment
that sets the conditions for interrogators to work successfully and
to gain valuable information from detainees because they have built
a relationship of trust, not fear.''

The sources portrayed a system of punishment and reward, with
prisoners who were favored for their cooperation with interrogators
given the privilege of spending time in a large room nicknamed
"the love shack'' by the guards. In that room, they were free to relax
and had access to magazines, books, a television and a video player
and some R-rated movies, along with the use of a water pipe to
smoke aromatic tobaccos. They were also occasionally given
milkshakes and hamburgers from the McDonald's on the base.

The Pentagon said the information gathered from the detainees
"has undoubtedly saved the lives of our soldiers in the field,'' adding:
"And that information also saves the lives of innocent civilians at
home and abroad. At Guantánamo we are holding and interrogating
people that are a clear danger to the U.S. and our allies and they are
providing valuable information in the war on terrorism.''

Although many critics of the detentions at Guantánamo have said that
the majority of the roughly 590 inmates are low-level fighters who
have little intelligence to impart, Pentagon and intelligence officials
have insisted that the facility houses many dangerous veteran terrorists
and officials of Al Qaeda.

The intelligence official said that many of those imprisoned at
Guantánamo had valuable information but that it was not always
clear what their standing in Al Qaeda was. The official said the first
four detainees now facing war crimes charges before a military
tribunal at the base were specifically chosen because they had not
been harshly treated and therefore would be less likely to make
any embarrassing allegations.

The people who worked at the prison also described as common
another procedure in which an inmate was awakened, subjected to
an interrogation in a facility known as the Gold Building, then
returned to a different cell. As soon as the guards determined
the inmate had fallen into a deep sleep, he was awakened again
for interrogation after which he would be returned to yet
a different cell. This could happen five or six times during
a night, they said.

Much of the harsh treatment described by the sources was
said to have occurred as recently as the early months of this
year. After the scandal about mistreatment of prisoners at the
Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq became public in April, all harsh
techniques were abruptly suspended, they said.

The new accounts of mistreatment at Guantánamo provide
fresh evidence about how practices there may have contributed
to the abuses at Abu Ghraib. One independent military panel said
in a report that the approach used at Guantánamo had "migrated
to Abu Ghraib.

The vigorous debate within the administration about what
techniques were permissible in interrogations was set off
when the Justice Department provided a series of memorandums
to the White House and Defense Department providing narrow
definitions of torture. In February 2002, Mr. Bush ordered that
the prisoners at Guantánamo be treated "humanely and, to the
extent appropriate with military necessity, in a manner consistent
with'' the Geneva Conventions.

In March 2002, a team of administration lawyers accepted the
Justice Department's view, concluding in a memorandum that
President Bush was not bound by either the Convention Against
Torture or a federal antitorture statute because he had the
authority to protect the nation from terrorism. When some of
the memorandums were disclosed, the administration tried to
distance itself from the rationale for the harsher treatment.

At the request of military intelligence officials who complained
of tenacious resistance by some subjects, Mr. Rumsfeld approved
a list of 16 techniques for use at Guantánamo in addition to the
17 methods in the Army Field Manual in December 2002. But he
suspended those approvals in January 2003 after some military
lawyers complained they were excessive and possibly unlawful.

In April 2003, after a review, Mr. Rumsfeld issued a final
policy approving of 24 techniques, some of which needed his
permission to be used.

But the approved techniques did not explicitly cover some that
were used, according to the new accounts. The only time that
using loud music and lights seems to appear in the documents,
for example, is as a proposal that seems never to have been
adopted. The April 16 memorandum allows interrogators to place
a detainee "in a setting that may be less comfortable'' but should
not "constitute a substantial change in environmental quality.''

Officials said the guards' patience was often stretched, especially
when inmates threw human waste at the military police officers,
a frequent occurrence. The guards, for their part, had their own
tricks, including replacing the prayer oil in little bottles given to
the inmates with a caustic pine-smelling floor cleaner.

An August 2004 report by a panel headed by James R. Schlesinger,
the former defense secretary, said the harsher approved techniques
on Mr. Rumsfeld's list were used on only two occasions. In addition,
the report said, there were about eight abuses by guards at
Guantánamo that occurred and were investigated.

In guided tours of Guantánamo provided to the news media and
members of Congress, the military authorities contended that the
system of rewards and punishments affected only issues like
whether the inmates could be deprived of books, blankets and
toilet articles. The interrogation sessions themselves, the officials
consistently said, did not employ any harsh treatment but were
devised only to build a trusting relationship between the
interrogator and the detainee.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

14) 'If this isn't genocide, then what on earth is?'
Lord Alton reports on the killings, rape, burnings and
looting that continue unabated in Darfur in an impassioned
plea for action to the Prime Minister
18 October 2004
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/africa/story.jsp?story=573217

'If this isn't genocide, then what on earth is?'

Leading article: Relief for Darfur has been delayed far too long

While the international community procrastinated last week about
whether events in Darfur constitute genocide, I visited the Ardamata
refugee camp in Geneina, where 30,000 people are sheltering. Tribal
leaders there testified to a campaign of killing, rape, burning and
looting by the Janjaweed militias which have killed an estimated
70,000 people and displaced 1.4 million others.

Three months ago, the UN described the situation in Darfur as "the
world's worst humanitarian crisis". On my two-day visit, I found that
nothing much has changed. The government of Sudan has reneged
on its promise to disarm the Janjaweed. Their campaign has the sole
objective of eradicating the black tribes and installing the Arabs in
their place. If this isn't genocide, then it's difficult to imagine what
on earth is.

I have sent a full report to Tony Blair and will ask a question about
Darfur in the House of Lords today. My report is a catalogue of
systematic violence driven by ethnic hatred and aided by the Sudanese
regime. We heard first-hand accounts of the rape of girls as young
as 10 and women as old as 80. Men wept as they recounted the
humiliations and killings. The report is on the website of the human
rights group the Jubilee Campaign, which arranged the visit
(www.jubileecampaign.co.uk).

We joined a group of 17 women sitting in the shade of a tree,
drinking coffee. Most were widows, and most had also lost fathers,
brothers and sons. They need firewood for cooking and grass for
their animals, and are thus forced to go beyond the camp. They
had all, without exception, been the victims of attack and rape by
the Janjaweed. Although they are clearly traumatised by the daily
risks they run, they speak philosophically about it: "If our men go
out, they die. If we go, we are raped. That's the choice."

Hawry, 35, told us that when her village was attacked, the men
"harassed and beat" the women and girls before they rode off.
These are euphemisms for rape; in their society, it is an
unmentionable subject, bringing shame and humiliation on the
victim and her family.

We were told that the "Arabs" carried razor blades and sharp
knives to cut open the atrophied vaginas of old women before
they raped them. When the Janjaweed had gone, Hawry said, the
women abandoned the village. "My family once had 88 head of
cattle, but I put one baby around my neck and another child on
my back, and I started walking." Her other three children had to
walk for the next eight days.

An immeasurable problem will be the impact of so many babies
born due to rape. While the women eventually opened up about
the attacks by the militias, they would not even discuss what the
future holds for the children. "They want to dilute our blood,"
one woman said. "They hate black people."

A traumatised, helpless mood of resignation simmers in the
camps. Sometimes it boils over, as, for instance, at Otash camp,
near Nyala, where a policeman was lynched. A woman had
recognised him as one of those who massacred her family

I understand why Tony Blair wanted face-to-face discussions
with President Omar al-Bashir when he visited Khartoum this
month. But before we shake too many hands in Sudan we should
remember the blood on them.

Britain refuses to follow America's lead in saying that what
is happening in Darfur is genocide. The Government's line
is that it would not help it in its efforts to put pressure on
the Sudanese Government.

Yet Britain is one of 135 signatories to the 1949 Geneva
Convention Against Genocide. This is not merely declamatory,
it places a duty on the signatories to "prevent and protect" and
subsequently to prosecute and to bring to justice those who
commit crimes against humanity.

My visit to Africa also included Rwanda where, 10 years ago,
800,000 people died in 100 days as the international community
looked on. I left Darfur fearing that we are sleepwalking into
another Rwanda.

There are no UN troops in Darfur - just a handful of African Union
soldiers to protect the monitors. Poignantly, the first country to
send troops was Rwanda.

The country's President, Paul Kagame, told me that they decided
to do this because they can see the parallels with what happened
to them.

The terrified tribal leaders that we met in Darfur believe that the
mere presence of monitors and international non-governmental
organisations will prevent incursions by the Janjaweed. Rwanda
illustrates the dangers of such illusions.

Over one million people have been herded into camps run by
the Government. Some of the officers who patrol the camps
are Janjaweed militiamen in police uniforms.

The elders said that security remains their greatest concern.
They called for the disarmament of the Janjaweed; the restoration
of looted livestock; the return or rebuilding of property;
a resolution of the land issue and freedom to move about.

Above all, they told us, the genocide must end. One, Sheik De
Allah, said poignantly: "We are a simple people. We know our
farms and cattle and that's all we want. The Government created
Janjaweed and has created this situation. We are desperate and
pray that the international community will intervene."

Lord Alton of Liverpool is an independent crossbench peer and
a founder of the Jubilee Campaign.

(c) 2004 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

15) Why is war-torn Iraq giving $190,000 to Toys R Us?
Comment
Naomi Klein Iraqis are still being forced to pay for
crimes committed by Saddam
The Guardian
Saturday October 16, 2004
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1328664,00.html

Next week, something will happen that will unmask the upside-
down morality of the invasion and occupation of Iraq. On
October 21, Iraq will pay $200m in war reparations to some
of the richest countries and corporations in the world.

If that seems backwards, it's because it is. Iraqis have never
been awarded reparations for any of the crimes they suffered
under Saddam, or the brutal sanctions regime that claimed the
lives of at least half a million people, or the US-led invasion,
which the UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, recently called "illegal".
Instead, Iraqis are still being forced to pay reparations for crimes
committed by their former dictator.

Quite apart from its crushing $125bn sovereign debt, Iraq has
paid $18.8bn in reparations stemming from Saddam Hussein's
1990 invasion and occupation of Kuwait. This is not in itself
surprising: as a condition of the ceasefire that ended the 1991
Gulf war, Saddam agreed to pay damages stemming from the
invasion. More than 50 countries have made claims, with most
of the money awarded to Kuwait. What is surprising is that even
after Saddam was overthrown, the payments from Iraq have
continued.

Since Saddam was toppled in April, Iraq has paid out $1.8bn
in reparations to the United Nations Compensation Commission
(UNCC), the Geneva-based quasi tribunal that assesses claims and
disburses awards. Of those payments, $37m have gone to Britain
and $32.8m have gone to the United States. That's right: in the
past 18 months, Iraq's occupiers have collected $69.8m in reparation
payments from the desperate people they have been occupying.
But it gets worse: the vast majority of those payments, 78%, have
gone to multinational corporations, according to statistics on the
UNCC website.

Away from media scrutiny, this has been going on for years. Of course
there are many legitimate claims for losses that have come before the
UNCC: payments have gone to Kuwaitis who have lost loved ones,
limbs, and property to Saddam's forces. But much larger awards
have gone to corporations: of the total amount the UNCC has awarded
in Gulf war reparations, $21.5bn has gone to the oil industry alone.
Jean-Claude Aimé, the UN diplomat who headed the UNCC until
December 2000, publicly questioned the practice. "This is the first
time as far as I know that the UN is engaged in retrieving lost
corporate assets and profits," he told the Wall Street Journal in
1997, and then mused: "I often wonder at the correctness of that."

But the UNCC's corporate handouts only accelerated. Here is
a small sample of who has been getting "reparation" awards
from Iraq: Halliburton ($18m), Bechtel ($7m), Mobil ($2.3m),
Shell ($1.6m), Nestlé ($2.6m), Pepsi ($3.8m), Philip Morris ($1.3m),
Sheraton ($11m), Kentucky Fried Chicken ($321,000) and
Toys R Us ($189,449). In the vast majority of cases, these
corporations did not claim that Saddam's forces damaged their
property in Kuwait - only that they "lost profits" or, in the case
of American Express, experienced a "decline in business" because
of the invasion and occupation of Kuwait. One of the biggest
winners has been Texaco, which was awarded $505m in 1999.
According to a UNCC spokesperson, only 12% of that reparation
award has been paid, which means hundreds of millions more will
have to come out of the coffers of post-Saddam Iraq.

The fact that Iraqis have been paying reparations to their occupiers
is all the more shocking in the context of how little these countries
have actually spent on aid in Iraq. Despite the $18.4bn of US tax
dollars allocated for Iraq's reconstruction, the Washington Post
estimates that only $29m has been spent on water, sanitation,
health, roads, bridges, and public safety combined. And in July
(the latest figure available), the Department of Defence estimated
that only $4m had been spent compensating Iraqis who had been
injured, or who lost family members or property as a direct result
of the occupation - a fraction of what the US has collected from
Iraq in reparations since its occupation began.

For years there have been complaints about the UNCC being used
as a slush fund for multinationals and rich oil emirates - a backdoor
way for corporations to collect the money they were prevented
from making as a result of the sanctions against Iraq. During the
Saddam years, these concerns received little attention, for obvious
reasons.

But now Saddam is gone and the slush fund survives. And every
dollar sent to Geneva is a dollar not spent on humanitarian aid
and reconstruction Iraq. Furthermore, if post-Saddam Iraq had
not been forced to pay these reparations, it could have avoided
the $437m emergency loan that the International Monetary Fund
approved on September 29.

With all the talk of forgiving Iraq's debts, the country is actually
being pushed deeper into the hole, forced to borrow money from
the IMF, and to accept all of the conditions and restrictions that
come along with those loans. The UNCC, meanwhile, continues
to assess claims and make new awards: $377m worth of new
claims were awarded last month alone.

Fortunately, there is a simple way to put an end to these grotesque
corporate subsidies. According to United Nations security council
resolution 687, which created the reparations programme, payments
from Iraq must take into account "the requirements of the people
of Iraq, Iraq's payment capacity, and the needs of the Iraqi economy".
If a single one of these three issues were genuinely taken into
account, the security council would vote to put an end to these
payouts tomorrow.

That is the demand of Jubilee Iraq, a debt relief organisation based
in London. Reparations are owed to the victims of Saddam Hussein,
the group argues - both in Iraq and in Kuwait. But the people of Iraq,
who were themselves Saddam's primary victims, should not be paying
them. Instead, reparations should be the responsibility of the
governments that loaned billions to Saddam, knowing the money
was being spent on weapons so he could wage war on his neighbours
and his own people. "If justice, and not power, prevailed in international
affairs, then Saddam's creditors would be paying reparations to Kuwait
as well as far greater reparations to the Iraqi people," says Justin
Alexander, coordinator of Jubilee Iraq.

Right now precisely the opposite is happening: instead of flowing
into Iraq, reparations are flowing out. It's time for the tide to turn.

·Naomi Klein is the author of No Logo, and Fences and Windows
Guardian Unlimited (c) Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004

---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

16) Indian Country Today
Denver police arrest 245 for blocking Columbus Day Parade
by: Brenda Norrell

DENVER - Calling it a ''Convoy of Conquest,'' American Indian Movement
members and their allies, including Western Shoshone Carrie Dann,
blocked the Columbus Day Parade in a protest of the Colorado holiday
that represents genocide and the theft of homelands for indigenous
people in the Americas.

''America continues to fight the 'Indian wars' and one expression of
that is Columbus Day,'' AIM organizer Glenn Morris told Indian Country
Today.

Protesters focused on exposing the root of genocide in America as they
were arrested for blocking the path of the Sons of Italy's Columbus Day
Parade of bikers, limos and semi-trucks. Denver police arrested 245
people, including 44 juveniles.

Morris said Indian children as young as seven and eight chose to be
arrested because of the injustice they face in U.S. schools.

''Every year they confront the silence of their ancestors' voices in
their history classes.''

Further, Morris said when the 245 cases go to court, American
Indians and their allies will not be the ones on trial.

''We intend to put Columbus on trial, the city of Denver on trial and
the state of Colorado and the United States on trial for celebrating
genocide.''

The protesters arrested included the event organizers, Morris, Osage
professor Tink Tinker, activist Nita Gonzales, professor Ward Churchill
and activist TroyLynn Yellowwood. Charges included interference,
failure to comply, loitering and blocking a public street.

The protesters, led by Dann and Lakota from the ''Stop Lewis and
Clark'' movement in South Dakota, first gathered at the state capitol
before blocking the parade route Oct. 9. Facing 600 Denver police,
many armed with riot gear and pepper spray, hundreds refused to
move and were arrested without incident and booked. They were
released from jail in the afternoon at about 3 p.m.

Morris pointed out that Colorado is the perfect place to halt Columbus
Day because Colorado was the first to proclaim it as a state holiday
in 1907. Far from being rhetoric, Morris said the bedrock of Columbus
Day is the Doctrine of Discovery of 1492, which is the basis of all
federal Indian law.

Morris, professor and chair of the political science department at
the University of Denver, said Indian lands have been reduced from
2 billion to 50 million acres, based on this doctrine. Columbus
advanced and expanded the arrogant European Doctrine of Discovery,
claiming that superior, civilized, Christian Europeans had the right
to seize and appropriate indigenous peoples territories and resources.

This legacy of Columbus continues today and allows the U.S.
government to ''lose'' between $40 and $100 billion that the U.S.
was to administer for the benefit of individual American Indians.
The government has admitted that it deliberately destroyed evidence
in the case, and it appears that the U.S. has no intention of finding
or accounting for the money that it has stolen, he said.

This doctrine has been embedded into racist Federal Indian Law,
and is apparent today in the case of the Western Shoshone in Nevada
and the Lakota in the Black Hills of South Dakota.

''We're not talking about a hypothetical theory to Native people.''

Morris said the result of the Doctrine of Discovery was the loss
of land and lives for Indian people. Today, the rhetoric of ''Indian
wars'' is used in Iraq by the United States military as it seeks to
take control of territory. ''All hostile territory in Iraq is still called
'Indian country.' People who fraternize with Iraqi are said to be
'going Native.'''

Columbus Day protesters followed the philosophy of Martin
Luther King Jr., who expressed the hope that direct action would
lead to negotiations. In Denver, the Transform Columbus Day
Alliance struggles to bring a halt to the Colorado holiday. Other
states, including South Dakota, have replaced Columbus Day
with Native American Day.

Western Shoshone Carrie Dann, struggling with other Western
Shoshone to protect their homelands in Nevada, and the Red
Earth Women's Alliance helped organize and lead the marches,
one in a local park on Oct. 8 and the culminating protest in
downtown Denver on Oct. 9.

''Our arrests are designed to expose a corrupt educational, legal
and political system that refuses to describe the destruction of
millions of indigenous people at the hands of Columbus for
what it is: Genocide,'' Colorado AIM said in a statement after
the arrests.

The action was to ''expose such moral and legal bankruptcy,
and we actively refuse to cooperate with legalized murder and
theft.''

Morris pointed out the facts: Christopher Columbus was a slave
trader. Columbus was involved in trading African slaves prior
to his voyage to the Americas in 1492. Columbus was personally
responsible for overseeing a colonial administration that directly
led to the death of millions of indigenous people.

Father Bartolome de Las Casas, an eyewitness and a contemporary
of Columbus, estimated that 15 million indigenous people died
in the Caribbean.

Prior to the march, American Indians urged a letter-writing
campaign to local newspapers, including the Rocky Mountain
News and Denver Post, accusing both papers of failing to provide
balanced coverage of the issues. Italian-Americans wrote letters
pointing out that not all Italians in this country support Columbus
and many stand with Indian protesters.

In preparation of a protest, Mohandas K. Gandhi was quoted:
''Civil disobedience becomes a sacred duty when the state has
become lawless or corrupt. And a citizen who barters with such
a state shares in its corruption and lawlessness.''

In 2003, Colorado AIM and allies were led by the late American
Indian elder Wallace Black Elk and Richard Costaldo, a paralyzed
Italian-American survivor of the Columbine massacre. They
turned their backs on the parade and walked away. However,
this year, they said was a year for direct action.

''In that spirit, we commend the organizers of the Festival Italiano,
which was held in Lakewood on Sept. 25 - 26,'' Colorado AIM
said, pointing out that it is the type of festival that fosters unity
and understanding.

posted 12:54 PM  0 comments