> WW News Service Digest #156 > > > >------------------------- >Via Workers World News Service >Reprinted from the Aug. 31, 2000 >issue of Workers World newspaper >------------------------- > >PROTESTS CANCEL 'URBAN WAR GAMES' > >Baltimore community stops Navy SEALS > >By Sharon Black-Ceci >Baltimore > >Community, labor and anti-war activists scored a major >victory Aug. 21 when Navy officials announced they would not >conduct military exercises at the vacant Memorial Stadium in >Baltimore's Northeast community. > >On Aug. 17, the Navy had announced that its Special Warfare >Forces, including the elite Navy SEALS, planned to conduct >military exercises at Memorial Stadium. The exercises were >to simulate combat against an "urban uprising." > >The City Board of Estimates granted permission to the Navy >to use the public facility at no charge. > >Local residents and activists were outraged. Myles Hoenig >from the Waverly Improvement Association was concerned about >the noise level, possible property damage and disruption to >the community. > >The All-Peoples Congress, International Action Center, >Baltimore Emergency Response Network, Unity for Action and >other groups announced plans for a demonstration in front of >the stadium for the following Wednesday, Aug. 23. > >Dennis Chornowski, a spokesperson for the City Department of >Public Works, said Navy officials pointed to the publicity >as the reason for canceling. > >"They were not happy about it. It's really a shame because >it would have given them an opportunity to do training in a >real-world situation," Chornowski said. > >Local activists believe it was the threat of mass protests, >fueled by community anger over rampant police terror and >other government attacks, that forced the Pentagon to back >off. > >Andre Powell, spokesperson for the All-Peoples Congress, >explained: "Our group's office is just blocks away from the >area where the Navy wanted to conduct these exercises. We >had vowed to do everything in our power to shut it down. > >"There are many issues at stake here. Why did the city >choose to allow military exercises to take place in a >predominately African American, working-class neighborhood? >Why not the wealthy area of Roland Park? > >"How can the city justify millions of dollars being spent on >the military when it cannot feed the homeless and hungry >right here in the Waverly community? > >"Who does the Navy intend to target when they train for >'urban warfare'? Obviously, their targets are communities >just like this one." > >Jeff Bigelow, an organizer for the State, County and >Municipal Employees union and a representative of the >Baltimore/Washington International Action Center, said: >"There is a growing movement to shut down military bases >that are causing havoc all around the world, from Vieques to >Okinawa to Maehyang-ri. > >"While the Navy's plans for Baltimore were not on the scale >of what it has done in Vieques, we nevertheless had vowed to >stop it. > >"We consider this a people's victory." > >The All-Peoples Congress will hold a community meeting Aug. >24 to discuss the victory. There will also be eyewitness >reports from the anti-base struggle in south Korea and >protests at the Democratic Convention in Los Angeles. > >- END - > >(Copyleft Workers World Service: Everyone is permitted to >copy and distribute verbatim copies of this document, but >changing it is not allowed. For more information contact >Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] For subscription info send message to: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.workers.org) > > > > > >Message-ID: <007f01c00d6a$f38ca870$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >From: "WW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: [WW] Strikers win at Verizon >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 21:30:56 -0400 >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >------------------------- >Via Workers World News Service >Reprinted from the Aug. 31, 2000 >issue of Workers World newspaper >------------------------- > >'New economy' bends to workers' power > >STRIKERS WIN AT VERIZON > >By Shelley Ettinger > >Remember all that stuff about how the "new economy" and high >technology have made unions obsolete? With their Aug. 20 >strike victory, 86,000 workers at Verizon served up a nice >corrective to that fallacy. > >By withholding their labor, these members of the >Communications Workers and Electrical Workers unions did >more than win a strong contract for themselves. > >They sent a message to all the bosses, from billion-dollar >monopolies like Verizon down to the smallest start-up: It >doesn't matter whether a company's stock is traded on the >big board or its name ends in dot-com. As long as its owners >profit off employees' labor, they will face a fight. > >More important is what the Verizon strikers showed the >workers themselves, those millions who aren't supposed to >expect any rights in the "new economy": You can organize, >you can fight, and you can wrest back some of the wealth >stolen from you. > >Not a bad accomplishment for 15 days on the picket lines. > >When the strike began Aug. 6, Verizon executives tried to >make light of it. No problem, they assured their 27 million >customers in 12 states up and down the East Coast. >Management will fill in for the absent workers. You won't >even know they're gone. > >In fact, the strike hit very hard. It came at the busiest >time of the year, when there is the most demand for new >phone and Internet service, especially from college students >moving into dorm rooms and apartments. > >Complaints poured in. By the time the tentative contract >settlement was reached, Verizon faced a backlog of more than >90,000 orders or repairs. > >At the same time, Verizon stock fell by more than 10 percent >over the course of the strike. > >Given these factors, when the unions warned that their >negotiators would walk out of talks and ratchet up the >struggle if the company didn't come up with an acceptable >offer by Aug. 18, it was the final push Verizon needed. The >company did return to the table seeking a settlement. The >unions extended their deadline. And within two days a >tentative pact was in place. > >As of the evening of Aug. 21, the settlement did not yet >cover all the strikers. Local agreements covering 37,000 >workers in the mid-Atlantic region were not yet in place. >"Our workers are standing firm on the picket lines" in those >states, Candice Johnson of the Communications Workers >reported at 4 p.m. Aug. 21. > >The outstanding issue for workers in that region was forced >overtime. In the overall agreement the union did win >reductions in mandatory overtime, according to unconfirmed >reports. > >On a related issue, speedup and stress from overwork, the >pact includes language providing some relief for customer- >service representatives and telephone operators. > >Another key concern was protecting existing union jobs. The >strike pushed Verizon far back from its plan to shift work >to non-union locations. > >The terms reportedly limit the number of employees who can >be transferred to a different region. Verizon cannot move >more than 0.7 percent of the unionized work force in a given >geographic region. > >The agreement also includes a 12-percent wage raise over >three years. > >But the real victory lies in what the strikers won for their >32,000 sisters and brothers who work in Verizon's wireless >division: the right to a union. Verizon agreed to card-check >union recognition for these workers rather than insisting on >a National Labor Relations Board election. > >Once a majority of the workers sign cards saying they want >to be represented by the union, the bosses say, the company >will recognize the union. > >The company also agreed to open up to union employees some >areas of work it had been subcontracting to non-union firms, >like installing high-speed Internet lines. > >Communications Workers Vice President Larry Mancino >characterized the pact as "a breakthrough not just for our >members who work at Verizon but for workers throughout the >telecommunications industry." > >Marcus Courtney of the Washington Alliance of Technology >Workers agreed. He has been organizing workers in high-tech >firms in the Pacific Northwest. He said: "Now we can hold up >this example that says, 'Your voice can be heard.'" > >- END - > >(Copyleft Workers World Service: Everyone is permitted to >copy and distribute verbatim copies of this document, but >changing it is not allowed. For more information contact >Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] For subscription info send message to: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.workers.org) > > > > > >Message-ID: <008701c00d6b$0cc1c0a0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >From: "WW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: [WW] Sub tragedy: Are U.S. & Britain behind it? >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 21:31:39 -0400 >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >------------------------- >Via Workers World News Service >Reprinted from the Aug. 31, 2000 >issue of Workers World newspaper >------------------------- > >Editorial > >IMPERIALISM & THE KURSK TRAGEDY > >The submarine Kursk may have sunk and its 118 sailors >perished because it collided with a U.S. or British >submarine, according to Russian media reports that are being >spread across the Internet. Russian Defense Minister >Marshall Igor Sergueyev raised this possibility at a news >conference broadcast on ORT, the main Russian TV channel, >Aug. 21. Sergueyev said that Russian sailors spotted part of >a buoy with British colors near the crash site. > >Such collisions also happened during the Soviet era, though >the imperialists never admitted it. > >Whatever the cause of the Kursk tragedy, the big-business >media from the United States to Germany have used it to >attack the Russian government and its head of state, >President Vladimir Putin. > >First they charged that the Russians waited too long to call >in help from British and Norwegian ships in the area. Then >the media--including a lead New York Times editorial Aug. 23- >-went out of their way to hit Putin for failing to rush to >the area to publicly show his concern. > >U.S. capitalist politicians always feign concern for fallen >soldiers. That doesn't mean they promote relief for veterans >suffering from Agent Orange or Gulf War illnesses. > >There are lessons from this event and the media's handling >of it that shouldn't be lost: > >* There is no longer a Soviet Union, and Russia has a pro- >capitalist government. But the Western imperialist powers >want a subservient Russia, not a capitalist competitor. > >* If the Russian Navy goes on maneuvers to defend its seas, >NATO forces still spy on it. Two U.S. submarines and a >British submarine were reported in the area. > >* There is no such thing as a humanitarian rescue by NATO. >We saw how "humanitarian" they were during the brutal >bombardment of Yugoslavia last year. If British imperialism >tries to save Russian sailors, it is also spying and trying >to humiliate the Russian military. > >* The imperialist governments have shown they are unhappy >with the Putin leadership. Not because he is moving toward >socialism, but for steps that he has taken to assert >independent Russian policies, whether it be toward >eliminating sanctions on Iraq, trading with Yugoslavia, >making agreements with the People's Republic of China or >strengthening the Russian military. > >Perhaps the greatest danger of the Kursk sinking is that the >most rabid militarist sectors of U.S. imperialism will take >it as a sign of Russian weakness and push harder to threaten >Russia militarily. The anti-war movement in the United >States should be on alert to combat this danger as it would >any other possibility of U.S. military intervention. > >- END - > >(Copyleft Workers World Service: Everyone is permitted to >copy and distribute verbatim copies of this document, but >changing it is not allowed. For more information contact >Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] For subscription info send message to: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.workers.org) > > > > > >Message-ID: <008f01c00d6b$24ba8840$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >From: "WW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: [WW] West scrambles for Africa's diamonds >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 21:32:19 -0400 >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >------------------------- >Via Workers World News Service >Reprinted from the Aug. 31, 2000 >issue of Workers World newspaper >------------------------- > >U.S. intervenes in Sierra Leone > >WEST SCRAMBLES FOR AFRICA'S DIAMONDS > >By Johnnie Stevens > >U.S. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Thomas >Pickering announced Aug. 9 that the United States will send >several hundred Special Forces troops from Ft. Bragg, N.C., >to Nigeria. Their mission is to train and equip 4,000 >Nigerian soldiers to fight against an insurgent movement in >Sierra Leone. The U.S. forces will also train smaller >numbers of troops from Ghana, and possibly from Mali and >Senegal. > >The U.S. bill will be $20 million. It is the biggest >commitment of U.S. troops to Africa since Pentagon forces >were routed from Somalia in 1993. > >Then, the United States claimed to be helping Somalia avert >a famine. But the U.S. troops' real role--as an >interventionist force--was exposed and they were finally >driven out after fierce resistance in the capital city of >Mogadishu. > >Pickering said that Washington has "gone through an >agonizing reappraisal" of its policy toward Sierra Leone. >Trying to justify U.S. military involvement, he reiterated >charges that the Revolutionary United Front, the force >fighting the government, had chopped off the limbs of >civilians. > >Pickering said nothing about the casualties inflicted by >British troops, who carried out an offensive last month in > _______________________________________ KOMINFORM P.O. Box 66 00841 Helsinki - Finland +358-40-7177941, fax +358-9-7591081 e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kominf.pp.fi _______________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe/unsubscribe messages mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] ________________________________________
