[PEN-L:7496] WHY NATO CONSENSUS IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY - Lewis Mackenzie
THE VANCOUVER SUN SATURDAY MAY 29, 1999 A Soldier's View: WHY NATO CONSENSUS IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY By Lewis Mackenzie OTTAWA On Thursday a relatively long column of mine ap- peared on the practicality of NATO launching a ground invasion of Kosovo before the snow flies in the surrounding mountains in October or November. The theme of the piece was "Sorry folks, it's too late for this year!" My argument mentioned the fact that gaining consensus from the 19 NATO heads of state on such a contentious issue would border on the impossible, not to mention the logistical nightmare presented by the scale of any multinational operation on such inhospitable territory. Shortly after the article was published I received a particularly enlightening communication from a former U.S. diplomat who has been at the centre of decision making and consensus building during NATO's involvement in support of the UN peacekeeping mission in Bosnia and subsequently with the NATO-led operation that followed. He was kind enough to agree with my analysis of the challenge facing any ground assault prior to winter but took exception with my deduction that consensus building with 19 NATO members inevitably ended up approving the "lowest common denominator." The gentleman made a compelling argument that unambiguous political decisions from NATO required three things: O U.S. leadership seeking to achieve a clear goal. O U.S. willingness to share risks with other allies. O The support of at least one other major ally. Applying these three criteria, NATO is in serious trouble during this critical phase of its war with Yugoslavia. The initial goal of the NATO operation as stated by U.S. Sec- retary of State Madeleine Albright was to change Slobodan Milosevic's mind and stop his heavy-handed treatment of the Kosovo Albanians. Shortly thereafter the goal was expanded to include the implementation of all the conditions laid down in the Rambouillet Agreement, including withdrawal of Serbian security forces from Kosovo, the insertion of a NATO-led peace implementation force, and a referendum within three years on the future political structure of Kosovo. During the ensuing weeks, the Rambouillet conditions became merely "a basis for discussion" in the event of a ceasefire. The fact that the Kosovo Liberation Army representing the Kosovo Albanians now refuses to accept each and every one of the Rambouillet conditions combined with the absolute rejection by the overwhelming majority of the Kosovo refugees to the idea of returning to an autonomous province within Yugoslavia, means that NATO's goal has changed yet again. It would seem to me that the current goal is to preserve as much of NATO's credibility as possible with a secondary goal of assisting the refugees to the extent practical, remembering that they represent but a tiny percentage of the millions of refugees around the world that need help but do not have the benefit of CNN coverage. The point is that the current goal, whatever it might be, has not been made clear and as a result NATO's decision making is drifting and consensus building on an issue as critical as a ground invasion will border on the impossible. The U.S. leadership is adverse to the point of paranoia about military operations that would expose their personnel to significant risk. If the argument that there is an overriding national interest in Kosovo was accepted by American citizens, aversion to risk would not be a factor, as the majority of the population would support the cause with their sons' and daughters' blood. That is not the case however, and so a war has been conducted from the relative safety of 5,000 metres and above. The 24 Apache helicopters continue to sit on the ground in Albania. NATO wants them to operate into Kosovo but the Pen- tagon, on behalf of the Clinton administration, says no. A German newspaper is reporting that the first of the Apaches to crash in a training accident in Albania was shot down by a Yugoslav missile. True or not, the U.S. is clearly not prepared to risk its ground personnel and resources at this stage. The third and last of the key criteria "the support of at least one other major ally" presumably only applies when the U.S. is attempting to gain consensus. That being the case there are lots of allies who share the U.S. aversion to a ground assault into Kosovo. If my diplomatic pen pal is correct, and I think that he is, obtaining a consensus beyond the continuation of the air war will be difficult, at least until NATO's credibility becomes the key issue. As I've suggested before, it's the strongest side in a conflict that should initiate direct discussions. With all its problems, that is still NATO. If discussions fail, we can always go back to 5,000 metres.
[PEN-L:7495] NATO'S BARBARISM - James Bissett, former Canadian ambassadorto Yugoslavia
The National Post Monday, May 31, 1999 NATO'S BARBARISM By James Bissett It is time for NATO's political leaders to admit their unjust and unnecessary war against Yugoslavia has been a colossal failure. It is time to put an immediate end to the bombing before ground troops are engaged and the war escalates. For 69 days the democratic countries of the West have been systematically smashing to pieces a modern European state. None of NATO's objectives has been achieved. The air strikes have degenerated into a war of annihilation against the Serbian people. Yugoslavia is a small country with a population of less than 10 million people of whom approximately 65% are of Serbian origin. Even before the bombing, its economy had collapsed as a result of economic sanctions. Its leader was unpopular, and in the last municipal elections in Belgrade his party received less than 20% of the vote. It was a country that presented no threat either to its neighbours or to European security. Despite this, our NATO leaders -- without consulting their parliaments or their people -- have chosen to bomb Yugoslavia into submission. There should be no misunderstanding about this. NATO is using the most dreadful weapons of modern warfare: cluster bombs and cruise missiles. Many of the weapons being used contain depleted uranium, which will spread deadly radioactive dust throughout the region, contaminating for generations water, soil and crops. It may come as a surprise to many Canadians to realize Canada is the major supplier of depleted uranium to the U.S. military complex. NATO's unprovoked attack is a blatant violation of every precept of international law. It is a violation of the Final Act of the Conference On Security and Co-operation in Europe, signed in Helsinki in August, 1975, which reaffirmed respect for sovereign equality, the inviolability of frontiers, the peaceful settlement of disputes, non-intervention in internal affairs, and the avoidance of the threat or use of force. It is a violation of NATO's own treaty by which it undertakes "to settle any international dispute . . . by peaceful means . . . and to refrain from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations." Some apologists for NATO, including our own foreign minister, feebly try to justify the NATO bombing by arguing ethnic cleansing in Kosovo had to be stopped. Prior to March 24, the Yugoslav military, using classic counter-insurgency tactics, did burn and destroy villages in Kosovo suspected of harbouring KLA rebels, and many of the unfortunate inhabitants of these villages were killed or displaced -- but there was no mass expulsion from Kosovo. As has been verified by OSCE monitors who were on the ground in Kosovo, the mass expulsion of Albanians took place after the bombing. The Yugoslav army is forcing the Albanians out of Kosovo as a strategy of war. In anticipation of a NATO ground invasion, the Yugoslavs do not wish to fight against the world's most powerful military force while at the same time surrounded by a hostile population. In war, the friend of your enemy is your enemy. It is not a humane strategy, but then neither is the use of cluster bombs. If NATO felt compelled to intervene militarily in what was a relatively low-grade armed rebellion in Yugoslavia, why then did it not follow the rules and go before the United Nations Security Council seeking authority to intervene? We are told NATO did not do so because it was assumed Russia or China might have vetoed such an action. But this is precisely why the founders of the UN stipulated that before there could be intervention in a sovereign state there must be agreement by all five of the great powers. It was considered that intervention without unanimity might involve armed conflict between or among the five themselves. Today some NATO leaders scorn the UN and tell us human rights must prevail over sovereign rights. Yet none of them are able to suggest new rules to replace the ones in place. Those who express concern about this are regarded as old-fashioned, but is it old-fashioned to assume that until new laws are proclaimed the old ones should be respected? It may be some of our NATO leaders are not old enough to remember that the founders of the United Nations had lived through two cataclysmic world wars in less than 20 years. They had witnessed the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by atomic bombs. Those who drafted the United Nations framework for world peace and security did so in the conviction of one simple truth, that if mankind were to survive it had to learn at all costs to put an end to war and to learn to settle disputes by peaceful means. To their everlasting shame, our NATO leaders have chosen war over peace in Kosovo. They have
[PEN-L:7494] Important article from Chinese People's Daily
People's Daily (China) May 27, 1999 This Observer commentary excerpted: The US-led NATO's wanton bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and its outrageous missile attack on the Chinese Embassy in Yugoslavia have aroused the great indignation of the Chinese government and people and been severely condemned by the world's peace-loving countries and people. These barbaric atrocities committed by the United States have fully laid bare the hegemonist ferocious features and the imperialist nature of aggression. A worldwide observation clearly shows the armed intervention conducted by the United States against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is by no means an isolated and accidental phenomenon. It is an important measure taken by the United States to step up implementation of its global strategy of seeking hegemony at the turn of the century, and a major indication of the new development of US hegemonism. This represents a new trend in the current international situation that merits serious attention. (1) After the break-up of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, the United States, being the only superpower in the world and relying on its mighty economic, technological and military strength, has been putting on airs and swaggering about and considering itself unexcelled in the world. Its ambition of seeking domination of the world has rapidly swelled. In order to achieve its strategic goal of world domination, the United States has poked its nose everywhere into the affairs of other countries, for instance in the Balkans, the Near and Middle East and other parts of the world, in disregard of the United Nations Charter as well as related international laws and international conventions (2) The United States has established, in two lines of the East and the West, military group or military alliance in the service of US hegemonism, and built up a US-led global security system. In Europe, the United States uses NATO as an important tool for it to push its global strategy of seeking hegemony. The current war of aggression launched by US-led NATO against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia represents the beginning of implementation of its new strategy. It is the first time that NATO uses armed force to interfere in the internal affairs of another country outside its traditional defense area, thus setting a dangerous precedent of NATO's armed intervention in the affairs of a sovereign state. In the Asia-Pacific region, the United States has continued to keep its 100,000 stationed troops, intensified the US-Japan military alliance, and signed with Japan new defense cooperation guidelines. Japan's House of Representatives and Senate have passed the bills related to the new Japan-US defense cooperation guidelines, which expand the scope of US-Japan military cooperation to the entire Asia-Pacific region including China's Taiwan, posing serious threat to the peace and security in the Asian region. At the same time, the United States and Japan have decided to engage in cooperative research and development of the "war zone missile defense system (TMD), building up a missile defense system aimed at gaining military advantage. These activities indicate a major development in the US implementation of the strategy of global military alliance. (3) Increasing military investment and vigorously developing high-tech weaponry. In 1999, US defense budgeted spending is set to reach US$276.2 billion, euivalent to 1.67 times the total of the military expenses of the six countries of Russia, Britain, France, Germany, Japan and China. The United States has also decided to increase its defense budget by US$112 billion in the coming six years. To guarantee its absolute superiority in the military area, the United States has published its national missile defense system (NMD) plan. (4) The United States attempts to guide the international economic new order, and establish its status as global overlord in the economic, trade, science, technology and finance fields. (5) Launching a new cold war against the socialist countries and the third world. The United States dislikes China's adherence to the socialist road and is unwilling to see China developing into a powerful country. It applies pressure to bear on China in political and economic fields in an attempt to overwhelm China with one action. However, instead of collapse under pressure, China has developed and grown steadily and, in a brand-new posture as a large developing socialist country, stands in the galaxy of the world's nations. The United States also applies pressure on and conducts so-called containment of some other socialist countries. However, socialist countries have not vanished from the earth in compliance with the will and wishes of the West headed by the United States. Through summing up experiences and lessons and making self-improvement and self-development, socialist countries are demonstrating fresh
[PEN-L:7493] Civilian population in Kosovo may be about to crack, but itdoesn't look that way - Daily Telegraph
The Daily Telegraph May 31, 1999 SUFFERING TURNS SERB BULLIES INTO MARTYRS It may be that civilian population in Kosovo is about to crack. It is just that it doesn't look that way here. By Boris Johnson Something went bang very loudly and the alarms went off. Dogs started barking. "Cleenton, Cleenton!" said the old fellow with the scar, waving his hands skywards. Actually it turned out it was only the sonic boom of a NATO jet, easing back to Aviano perhaps after re-demolishing some suburban radio mast, and Belgrade got on with Sunday morning. "Cleenton criminal," said the codger and carried on with his brandy and coffee. In the National Museum, highbrows were listening to the crashing chords of Serbian classical music. The postcard sellers got on with hawking views of "Belgrade By Night" (tracer fire). The passers-by hardly glanced at the remnants of the foreign ministry and other buildings, where the Tomahawks have left 20ft entry wounds. It may be that the alliance is right in claiming the civilian population is about to crack, and that they will rise up and demand an end to the reign of Milosevic. It is just that it doesn't look that way here. If anything, it looks as though NATO is merely strengthening Serb resistance. Vuk Draskovic, once touted as the democratic alternative to Slobo, told this newspaper that "since the beginning of the NATO aggression, European and American bombs have killed 128 members of my party who, two years ago, demonstrated carrying American and European flags. That is how NATO helps the democratising process in this country". When civilised Serbs think of sufferings caused by the Kosovo war, they think of premature Serbian babies snuffed out in maternity wards when NATO cuts the power, of vaporised make- up girls and sackfuls of body parts from bombed trains and buses. "Serbs are for NATO what the Jews were for Hitler," says Mr Draskovic. "Targets." That is why the miseries of the Kosovo Albanians are not uppermost in the Serbian conscience. We who watch the BBC know there is incontrovertible evidence of ethnic cleansing, murder and rape by Serb forces in Kosovo. That is not quite the picture presented here. Over the weekend a convoy of journalists was taken to see how the destruction of the Zastava car factory had wrecked the economy of Kragujevac, about 90 miles south of Belgrade. An Albanian family was produced, led by Idris Dahiri. He had in fact been laid off by Zastava in 1991, but was dependent on the firm for his dole. "This NATO pact with their attacks took the bread from our table," said Mr Dahiri, through a Yugoslav interpreter. To make matters worse, he now has to support his daughter and two of her children, who had fled Kosovo. Why did they flee? NATO attacks, of course. "Yes, we ran away from NATO. We did not run away from the Serbs," parroted Nedzmija Dahiri, the daughter. "Yes, our house was destroyed by NATO. It was destroyed completely. "No, we did not see any ethnic cleansing. On the contrary, we received much help from the Serbian army." A British reader might greet this account with suspicion, and there are many Serbs who will acknowledge, privately, the dark things done by their people. Outside the Dahiri flat, where young people were mooching around and playing with dogs, Zlatko, 22, made a chopping motion with his hands and said: "I don't want to talk about Albanians. I think there should be ethnic cleansing." Mario, 13, exclaimed: "We should do ethnic cleansing here." There may very well be Serbs who would be appalled by such attitudes. But any sense of guilt has been all but extinguished by the Serbs' own sufferings. Any sense that they have been bullies is replaced by their own martyr complex, of this tiny nation against the world. That is the flaw in the NATO strategy - one of the flaws, anyway.
[PEN-L:7492] SUGGESTED SCRIPT FOR AN UPCOMING MASTER CARD COMMERCIAL
SUGGESTED SCRIPT FOR AN UPCOMING MASTER CARD COMMERCIAL: Lockheed F-16 Fighting Falcon - $25 million dollars Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk Stealth Fighter - $45 million dollars. Boeing B-52 Stratofortress - $74 million dollars. Brand new B-2 Stealth Bomber - $2.1 billion dollars. A decent map of downtown Belgrade - Priceless. There are some things that money can't buy... Unfortunately, good intelligence isn't one of them. For the rest, there's MasterCard, the official card of the 19 member NATO alliance.
[PEN-L:7461] Apparent Movement on Diplomatic Front
Stratfor Commentary 990528 2054gmt Apparent Movement on Diplomatic Front In surprising news out of Belgrade, Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic has reportedly accepted the basic principles of the G-8 proposal for peace in Kosovo and has agreed to a resolution that will be brought by the UN Security Council. The statement from Milosevics office also noted that the international community had accepted the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Yugoslavia. According to Serbia's Beta news agency, Russian envoy Viktor Chernomyrdin was "very satisfied" with his talks he had with Milosevic, and would return to Belgrade next week with Finnish President Martti Ahtisaari. Ahtisaari has previously refused to travel to Belgrade until NATO and Moscow presumably as a proxy for Belgrade had reached a common negotiating position. We say this news is surprising in that Chernomyrdins visit was preceded by statements of lowest expectation from both the Russian and NATO sides. Russian Prime Minister Sergei Stepashin said that the fate of Russia's diplomatic drive to end the Kosovo crisis hinged on Chernomyrdin's trip to Belgrade. "After Chernomyrdin's return (to Moscow) we shall definitely be able to answer the question whether further political dialogue is possible (on Kosovo) or whether Yugoslavia will be sucked into a ground war, which of course should not be allowed in principle," Stepashin told reporters. For his part, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott played down hopes of an early breakthrough to the Kosovo crisis, but said there had been progress in talks with Russia to seek an end to the conflict. Talbott said, "We have had some success and made some progress." However, he said, "The real issue here is not what can be agreed between the U.S. and Russia --it is what is Belgrade going to agree to. We are not negotiating with Belgrade through the Russians or through the Finnish president." From the tone prior to todays Chernomyrdin-Milosevic meeting, it appeared at best that NATO and Russia expected nothing, and at worst, that Russia would abandon its efforts to negotiate a settlement. Now, assuming the reports are accurate, Ahtisaari is ready to go to Belgrade and a draft UN Security Council resolution on ending the crisis already exists. What offer could Chernomyrdin have delivered to Belgrade that reconciled the NATO and Yugoslav positions? It was apparently delivered grudgingly, judging by Stepashins comment that it was ready to wash its hands of the affair and Talbotts comment that NATO cared only what Belgrade accepted, not what Moscow liked. The only hint emerging from the talks between Talbott, Ahtisaari, Chernomyrdin, and Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov in Moscow was Ivanovs comment to reporters on Wednesday ruling out any partitioning of Kosovo as a means of solving the Balkans crisis. Since he most likely did not pull that comment out of thin air, we can only assume that the U.S. floated the idea of partition in hopes of reaching a breakthrough in negotiations. Interestingly, on Thursday, the Yugoslav news agency Tanjug announced that Milosevic was ready for a political solution to the Kosovo crisis "without delay." A partition of Kosovo, with both sectors under nominal Yugoslav sovereignty, is not a perfect solution, but might could possibly be tolerable to all sides except the Kosovar Albanians, who have played a secondary role in this since NATO took up their cause anyway. The Kosovar Albanians could return, but not to all of Kosovo probably only to a small corner. An international peacekeeping force could move into Kosovo with Russians, Ukrainians, etc. policing the Serbian sector and a NATO contingent policing the Kosovar Albanian sector. Yugoslav troops would withdraw, since the Russians wouldnt raise much fuss when they returned shortly thereafter to the Serbian sector. Interminable negotiations would then ensue, absent the NATO bombings. Of course, this speculative, and even if a partition is on the table, it defers more than it solves Kosovos problems. We must wait for both the details and the expected clarifications, retractions, and stipulations out of Belgrade subsequently to be rejected by NATO that have spoiled Chernomyrdins previous negotiating breakthroughs. Nevertheless, and whatever the ultimate outcome of todays meeting, things appear to be moving again on the diplomatic front.
[PEN-L:7460] What is the real reason for NATO's bombing campaign?
NOTE: NATO spokespeople now claim to be bombing Kosovo to put a stop to ethnic cleansing by Serbia. Put aside for a moment the issue of whether the bombing has had this effect or whether it in fact _speeded up_ the expulsion of the Kosovars. The following chronology released by AFP today shows that preventing ethnic cleansing was _not_ the reason given when NATO commenced the bombing on March 24. Agence France PresseMay 28, 1999 65 DAYS OF WAR IN THE BALKANS: A CHRONOLOGY PARIS - Following is a chronology of events in the Kosovo crisis in the 65 days since NATO launched air strikes against Yugoslavia: March 24: NATO launches air campaign, with the goal of crippling the Serbian war machine in Kosovo and enforcing compliance with the international peace plan drawn up at Rambouillet, France. March 26: The first of a massive tide of refugees arrive in Albania. March 27: A US F-117 Nighthawk Stealth fighter is lost near Belgrade but the pilot is recovered. March 28: NATO begins directly targeting Yugoslav armed forces. March 31: Three US soldiers are snatched by Serb forces after an incident on the Macedonian border. April 1: Moderate Kosovar leader Ibrahim Rugova is shown on Serb television talking with Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic and apparently calling for a "political solution" to the conflict. April 13: Yugoslav forces mount a cross-border attack on a village in northern Albania. April 14: Yugoslavia claims that rockets fired by allied jets killed 75 people in two separate refugee columns. NATO later admits accidentally hitting a civilian vehicle. April 16: The UN refugee agency UNHCR warns that the Serbian province of Kosovo could soon be completely emptied of its ethnic Albanian population. April 20: Russian President Boris Yeltsin says Moscow "cannot break with leading world powers" over Kosovo. Twenty-four US Apache attack helicopters arrive in Albania. April 21: Two NATO missiles smash into the headquarters of Yugoslavia's ruling Socialist Party. April 22: NATO raids destroy Milosevic's official Belgrade residence. April 23: NATO bombs the headquarters of Serbian state television. NATO leaders in Washington rebuff as inadequate an offer by Milosevic to accept an "international presence" in Kosovo. April 28: Yugoslav Deputy Prime Minister Vuk Draskovic is dismissed after he accuses the country's rulers of "lying to the people." May 1: Forty-seven bus passengers are killed when NATO bombs a bridge in Kosovo. May 2: Three captured US soldiers are released into the custody of US civil rights leader Jesse Jackson. May 3: NATO blacks out most of Serbia with an attack on the power system using so-called graphite bombs. May 5: NATO suffers its first losses when the two-man crew of a US Apache attack helicopter die in a crash in Albania. Rugova is released by the Yugoslav authorities and flies to Rome. May 6: Foreign ministers from the Group of Eight (G8) agree on a framework for a peace plan which calls for the return of all refugees and the deployment of an international "security" force in Kosovo. May 8: The Chinese embassy in Belgrade is hit by NATO missiles which kill three people. Tens of thousands of Chinese take to the streets of Beijing, stoning the US embassy. NATO describes the bombing as a "tragic mistake" caused by "faulty information." May 10: Yugoslavia begins proceedings before the UN International Court of Justice in the Hague, accusing NATO of genocide. Belgrade says it has begun pulling troops out of Kosovo. May 12: Yeltsin warns that Moscow could pull out of international efforts to find a peaceful solution to the Kosovo crisis. May 13: NATO dismisses as insignificant a reported pullout by 250 Yugoslav troops. May 14: At least 79 people are killed and 58 wounded when NATO missiles hit Korisa, a village in southern Kosovo. May 19: Milosevic and Russia's Balkans envoy Viktor Chernomyrdin back a settlement of the Kosovo conflict within the framework of the United Nations, and a role for Belgrade in working out a G8 peace plan. May 21: Russia says mediation efforts with the West are deadlocked over the make-up of an international military force in Kosovo. A NATO bomb kills 10 inmates in a Pristina jail. May 22: A UN humanitarian mission visits Kosovo, as NATO admits bombing a position held by the KLA. May 23: Fighting flares on border between Serb forces and Albanian police. President Bill Clinton says he no longer rules out "other military options". May 24: A UN mission to Yugoslavia says it has seen enough evidence to confirm ethnic cleansing in Kosovo. May 26: NATO agrees to boost the number of troops in a future Kosovo peacekeeping mission from 28,000 to 45,000, reviving speculation that the alliance is eyeing a ground offensive. May 27: Milosevic and four other top officials are indicted for war crimes
[PEN-L:7459] Indictment of Milosevic a Cover for the Real Story -International Action Center
From: "iacenter" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 Subject: CLINTON SENDING 90,000 GROUND TROOPS TO YUGOSLAVIA Emergency Mobilization to Stop the War 39 West 14th St., #206 New York, NY 10011 (212) 633-6646 fax: (212) 633-2889 http://www.iacenter.org email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CLINTON SENDING 90,000 GROUND TROOPS TO YUGOSLAVIA Hague Indictment of Milosevic a Cover for the Real Story Today's London Times reported that the U.S. is deep in the throes of planning a full-scale ground war in Yugoslavia. Under the headline "Clinton to Order 90,000 Troops to Kosovo," the Times reported, "[T]here is a growing feeling in Washington and London that the alliance must prepare itself for a much bigger operation, involving 150,000-160,000 troops." "This is the real story behind the so-called `war crimes' indictments against Yugoslav President Milosevic," said Sara Flounders of the Emergency Mobilization to Stop the War. "The charges are to justify a massive bombing campaign. The Hague indictment is the newest tactic to justify a ground war. All of it is intended to break up Yugoslavia for takeover by Wall Street. "The war planners didn't count on the fierce determination of the Yugoslav people to resist NATO occupation troops," Flounders said. "After 65 days of bombing, with their plans frustrated, the architects of this war are desperate. They are driven to take actions which can't help but fuel the growing anti-war sentiment now leading to the June 5 National March on the Pentagon. "NATO's massive, unrestricted bombardment of major cities, the destruction of water and electricity for the whole population, the bombing of chemical plants, the use of radioactive depleted uranium weapons - all of these are war crimes, specifically prohibited by International Law. The International War Crimes Tribunal at the Hague is a creation by the Western powers. It is not part of the World Court or in the UN Charter. The NATO war makers act as investigator, prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner. "The real story is that, once again, the U.S. will be sending poor people to kill and be killed for corporate profits. The only thing that can stop them is a peoples' anti-war movement here and in all NATO countries, in solidarity with the people of Yugoslavia, that demands an immediate end to the bombing, and money for jobs, education and healthcare - not war."
[PEN-L:7456] LOSING THE MORAL WAR - San Jose Mercury editorial
The San Jose Mercury News Friday, May 28, 1999 Editorial LOSING THE MORAL WAR President Clinton should be ashamed of the attacks on civilians Admittedly, the line separating the justifiable from the inexcusable in NATO's bombing of Yugoslavia is not clear. But wherever it is, we crossed it this week. We got into this nasty little war to save innocent civilians in Kosovo. Now we are punishing innocent civilians in Serbia. This is no longer just the occasional bomb or missile gone accidentally astray, although that continues as well; an 8-year-old boy and his 5-year-old sister died Thursday when NATO bombed their home in a Belgrade suburb. Now, however, such accidents occur in the context of a cynical, calculated campaign by NATO to victimize the entire civilian population -- to make life such hell for them that they turn against their elected president, Slobodan Milosevic. By all accounts, it is not working. ''Reduced to a 'Caveman' Life, Serbs Don't Blame Milosevic,'' a Page 1 headline in the New York Times said Tuesday. The story quoted a Serbian woman who had worked for the American embassy in Belgrade. She is 64, and remembers the city being bombed by the Nazis and the Allies in World War II. ''If NATO wants to overturn the government, this is not the way to do it,'' she said. ''I am absolutely certain this will not make people revolt against their government -- they will revolt against whoever is doing this to them. NATO is terrorizing 6 million civilians in large cities in Yugoslavia. Making people's lives miserable is not solving any problem.'' Other Serbs say the same: far from loosening Milosevic's hold on the nation, the bombing solidifies his power and makes it impossible for others to oppose him. Now, in the heaviest bombing yet, NATO has targeted Serbia's electric power grids, blacking out much of the country. That had been done before. But this time the damage is more devastating and less easily repaired. Without electricity, water pumping stations and filtration plants don't work. Hospitals cannot bathe patients or sterilize instruments. In private homes, scarce food is spoiling in freezers. Cold, dirty, thirsty and hungry, the Serbs are pleading with the United Nations and other international agencies to intervene. Officially, NATO still says it is bombing military targets. But this week senior military officials admitted they also want to damage the quality of everyday life for the people of Serbia. Bill Clinton should be ashamed. He began this war by promising that the bombing would be confined to military targets, and that ground troops would not be used. Steadily, little by little, those assurances are eroding. NATO has authorized 50,000 soldiers, calling them ''peacekeepers.'' Obviously they could also fight. Clinton and other NATO leaders are frustrated that the air war hasn't succeeded, and they are stung by criticism that they undermined its effectiveness by taking ground war off the table. Now, they are putting it back on. At the same time, they are intensifying the bombing. NATO now has 1,000 planes over Yugoslavia, about 700 of them ours. The bombing goes around the clock, up to 500 missions a day. Thursday it began to hit suburbs around Belgrade. This week also brought the indictment of Slobodan Milosevic as a war criminal, which he surely is. But whatever impact that might have had on Serb civilians is overwhelmed by their conviction that NATO is committing war crimes against them. This war has taken a subtle but sure turn for the worse. President Clinton's earlier denials that we were at war with the Serbian people apparently are ''no longer operative,'' as Richard Nixon would have put it. We are destroying Yugoslavia, little by little, day by day. Our side began this war with a moral imperative. This week we lost it, somewhere in the skies over Belgrade.
[PEN-L:4576] ASHAMED TO BE A CANADIAN
The National Post Friday, March 26, 1999 ASHAMED TO BE A CANADIAN By Michael Bliss Canadian aircraft have bombed targets in Yugoslavia. Our country has committed acts of war against a sovereign European nation. We and our NATO allies are attacking a country that has not attacked us or any other country. We are not acting under the sanction of the United Nations or any other font of international law. We, in fact, are acting in direct contravention of the UN Charter. Nor has Parliament authorized our government to make war on Yugoslavia. What in the world is happening to us? NATO is trying to save lives in Kosovo; it is waging war in order to bring peace to the Balkans, we are told in good Orwellian doublespeak. It's true that a civil war is raging in a province of Yugoslavia, as the government of the country tries to suppress an armed insurrection. Led by the United States, NATO has insisted that the fighting in Kosovo stop, and has developed a peace plan that would involve stationing tens of thousands of foreign troops on Yugoslavian territory. The Yugoslav government will not agree to the terms of this foreign interference in what it deems a domestic matter. So it is being pounded into submission. Having no brief for Slobodan Milosevic and his policies, I hope that he and other Yugoslavian leaders decide that the cost of resisting NATO assaults is too high, that they return to the table, and that the fighting, by all parties, ends quickly and permanently. But even if that most desirable outcome takes place, the world is going to pay a serious price for such a Kosovo settlement. The price involves what we have done to NATO and what we are doing to the rule of law. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization was created in 1949 as a defensive alliance for mutual protection against Communist aggression. Canada was a founding member of NATO because we believed such an alliance was obviously in our national interest. Without ever having to fire a shot, NATO did help protect us through the remainder of the Cold War. After the Soviet Union collapsed, there was no obvious role for NATO to play, and from a Canadian point of view a case could be made for winding down the military role of the grand alliance. Instead, NATO is making war on a sovereign country to try to enforce its view of how that country's internal affairs should be arranged. It is acting as a kind of international police force, making the rules as it goes. It does not have the sanction of the UN for attacking Yugoslavia, only instructions from its members' governments. A military alliance created for purposes of defence against an obvious potential enemy has appointed itself global enforcer. Is this what Canadians believe NATO should be doing? Canada has always and only used its military in accordance with well-understood principles of international law. We declared and fought a just war against Nazi Germany. We fought under the UN flag in Korea and in the Gulf War. We made a point of staying out of the undeclared war in Vietnam; we made a point of not taking military action against Cuba in the 1962 missile crisis or supporting American efforts to overthrow Castro. We have always been proud of our support for the rule of law in international affairs. Now we are complicit with our NATO allies in tearing up the rule of law in the name of an allegedly higher principle. That higher principle is not nearly as clear as that American leader of vision and integrity, Bill Clinton, suggests. It was not clear that the rebellion in Kosovo threatened other Balkan states. Only if the Albanian rebels succeeded, either in winning independence or in persuading other countries to widen the war, would the Balkans be enflamed. Yes, much blood was being shed as Serbs suppressed the Albanian revolt in Kosovo -- just as it has been shed putting down rebellions in Russia, Turkey, the United States, and Canada, among many other countries. Now that NATO has intervened, of course, much more blood is being shed, the war has been enlarged, and if the Russians decide to intervene the peace of the world might be threatened. And the rule of law in the affairs of nations has been seriously undermined. The strong intervene where and when they choose. Today it's NATO attacking Yugoslavia; tomorrow it might be Iraq attacking Kuwait again, or Russia, or China, or whoever has big guns and superficial moral certitude. It's unprecedented and disheartening that Canada should be part of a retrograde movement toward international anarchy. We should disengage our forces from NATO and begin to ask why we continue to be part of NATO. Where is Parliament? Why isn't it debating these great issues of war and peace? Why are we risking Canadian lives and why are Canadians killing
Happy International Women's Day (fwd)
Subject: Happy International Women's Day "Sure I think Fred Astair was a good dancer. But, Ginger Rogers was good too. And she did what Fred Astair did, only she did it backwards and in high heels." Happy International Women's Day
MAI Int Women's Day (fwd)
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 1998 20:10:09 -0500 Subject: MAI Targets Women's Jobs -- CUPE NEWS RELEASE TRANSMITTED BY CANADIAN CORPORATE NEWS MARCH 6, 1998 MAI Targets Women's Jobs and The Services They Depend On OTTAWA, ONTARIO--In a statement released for International Women's Day, the head of Canada's largest union condemned the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) as an attack on women and the public sector. "First there was the "war on the deficit". Now there is the MAI. In both cases, it is women who bear the brunt of the attack," said Judy Darcy, National President of the Canadian Union of Public Employees. "The MAI targets the public sector in a way that NAFTA never did," said Darcy. "It will encourage the privatization of existing public services and make it impossible to create new public services. And that will hurt women." Women depend on the public sector for good jobs that pay decent wages and offer good benefits. In the last five years, 120,000 jobs have been lost in the public sector. Last year alone, 12,000 hospital jobs were cut. "It is women who have born the cost of these cuts. It's their jobs and the services they use that have been cut. And it's women who are expected to fill in the growing gaps in service, caring for the young and the ill and the frail," said Darcy. "For years, women have been mobilizing in support of a national child care system, a national pharmacare plan and a national program for home care. Each of these desperately needed services would be more difficult to achieve under the MAI," said Darcy. "If the MAI had existed forty years ago, the Saskatchewan government would never have been able to launch medicare," Darcy added. She called on women to make International Women's Day an occasion to redouble their efforts to stop the MAI. "The momentum behind the MAI has begun to falter," said Darcy. "If we work together, we can stop this trade deal in its tracks. And wouldn't that be a sweet victory to celebrate on March 8, 1999?" The Canadian Union of Public Employees represents 460,000 members coast to coast to coast, 60 per cent of whom are women.
Technologies of Surveillance and Control (fwd)
http://www.telepolis.de/tp/deutsch/inhalt/te/1393/anchor1.html An Appraisal of Technologies of Political Control SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL OPTIONS ASSESSMENT STOA AN APPRAISAL OF TECHNOLOGIES OF POLITICAL CONTROL Working document (Consultation version) Luxembourg, 6 January 1998 PE 166 499 Directorate General for Research Cataloguing data: Title: An appraisal of technologies for political control Publisher: European Parliament Directorate General for Research Directorate B The STOA Programme
Green Alternatives to the MAI (fwd)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 1998 00:19:33 -0500 From: Brian Milani [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Green Alternatives to the MAI A new essay on alternatives to globalization and possible grassroots strategy: A Green Perspective on the MAI: Beyond Globalization: The Struggle to Redefine Wealth By Brian Milani, of the Eco-Materials Group, and Toronto's Metro Labour Education Centre, it is available on the EMG's Green Economics website at: http://www.web.net/~bmilani/MAI.htm From the introduction: "Globalization is not simply increasing exploitation, inequality and injustice, but it is suppressing great and growing POTENTIALS for human development. Until the opposition to globalization puts equal emphasis on these positive potentials, it is doomed to failure. The alternative to globalism is not the old industrial Welfare State, but something completely new---more participatory, egalitarian, ecological, self-regulatory, and grounded in a radically different, more QUALITATIVE, notion of wealth." It is almost 7000 words, or 20 typewritten pages, and includes the following subsections: *Globalization and Crisis *Consumption and Planning *Quality and the Industrialization of Culture *Globalizing Waste *Countering Globalization: The Strategy of Design *Green Industry and Resource-Productivity *Money, End-Use and the New Wealth *Eco-Regulation and the MAI *Regeneration vs. the MAI Any and all feedback and discussion is welcome. Brian Milani ECO-MATERIALS GROUP "Information for Regeneration" EMG Homepage http://www.web.net/~emg Green Economics Website http://www.web.net/~bmilani
Re: E.U.-U.S.A. free trade in the works
I don't think it quite accurate to say the US is dropping one scheme and proposing something else in the face of adversity. I think that the FTA spilled over into NAFTA, which is being used as a model for much of the MAI. In many ways, these are all parts of an amazingly coherent long term strategy. If Penners are interested, I'll shortly have completed an analysis that I'm co-authoring on the MAI and its effect on Canadian telecommunications. It includes a lot of background on the various trade forums and agreements and how they interrelate. Sid Shniad At 11:47 AM 3/6/98 -0800, The Guardian wrote: EU-US TRADE ZONE LAUNCHED I'm wondering what to make of this. It's rather astonishing to me how quickly the U.S. drops one or another scheme to expand markets for the export of commodities and capital (FTAA, MAI) in the face of momentarily inopportune political conditions, only to very quickly propose (or at least seem hospitable to) something else. It seems to me that this proposal comes out of a mutual recognition by both the U.S. and Europe that East Asia is a basket case and can be left to sink on its own, since Japan is owed the most in East Asia and is unwilling to act as a regional hegemon and reflate its own economy. But (per our recent discussion on EMU) it seems like now is not the time for the EU to be pushing for bilateral liberalization given popular fears that EMU is going to eviscerate social democracy. It seems like _really_ ill timing. And is it reasonable to suppose that _all_ tariffs and quotas on _all_ traded goods/services (save agriculture and culture industry products) will be eliminated ? This just seems like some Ricardian wet dream, but completely politically unfeasible. John Gulick John Gulick Ph. D. Candidate Sociology Graduate Program University of California-Santa Cruz (415) 643-8568 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Judge to GM: Do I Have to Arrest You? (fwd)
Subject: Judge to GM: Do I Have to Arrest You? Sometimes it takes a threat of jail time for corporate lawyers to abide by the law. Attorneys for General Motors, threatened with imprisonment for contempt, last month turned over internal documents that are likely to undermine the giant automaker's defense in product liability cases around the country. In Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, Broward County Judge Arthur Franza ordered GM to turn over the documents in a lawsuit brought by the parents of 13-year old Shane McGee. Shane was killed in 1991 when the fuel tank in the 1983 Oldsmobile Cutlass station wagon he was riding in burst into flames after being struck in the rear by another vehicle. GM fought to keep the documents secret, but at a showdown hearing on February 5, Judge Franza threatened "very severe sanctions" if GM did not obey his order. Pursuant to a subpoena, GM's in-house attorney Glenn Jackson appeared before Judge Franza on that day, but did not bring with him the documents that Franza had ordered him to bring to court. Jackson, GM's case manager for the McGee lawsuit, told the Judge that GM would not give him the documents to bring to trial. "Do I have to arrest you, and book you, and put you on bond and release you?" Judge Franza asked Jackson. "I am warning you all and your client to produce these documents by Monday. Let me tell you, if you don't, there is going to be some very severe sanctions, and I mean very severe. I don't think General Motors is big enough to thumb its nose at the Court. I don't think they are big enough to obstruct justice or to conceal evidence." On February 9, GM finally produced the documents that it had sought for years to keep secret. Judge Franza conducted an evidentiary review, and ordered a number of them admitted into evidence. The legal skirmishing centers around a dispute between two former General Motors engineers, Edward Ivey and Ronald Elwell. On June 29, 1973, Ivey, then an engineer at Oldsmobile, prepared a two-page report and calculated that fatalities related to fuel-fed fires were costing GM $2.40 per automobile. Ivey multiplied 500 fatalities times an estimated $200,000 per fatality ($100 million) and divided that by 41 million automobiles. "This cost will be with us until a way of preventing all crash related fuel-fed fires is developed," Ivey concluded. The Ivey report, as it is known, has been used by plaintiffs attorneys against GM in fuel-fed fire cases for almost 10 years now. But there has been an ongoing dispute between Ivey and Elwell about why Ivey prepared the report and what he meant by it. Elwell, a retired GM engineer and whistleblower, testified in the McGee case that in 1981, the Ivey report appeared on his desk at General Motors in a plain brown envelope. Elwell said that the Ivey report had on it a cover sheet which showed it was distributed to GM management. Elwell testified that after reading the report, he met Ivey in an Oldsmobile garage and Ivey told him he prepared the report at the request of GM management "because General Motors wanted to know how much they could spend on fuel systems." Ivey says he had never met with Elwell and that he did not know why he prepared the report or who asked him to prepare it. "I don't remember anyone asking me to write it and I don't believe anyone did," Ivey said. In May 1997, McGee's attorney sought from GM any documents relating to the Ivey report. GM said that no such documents existed. But after the February 5 showdown, GM produced the documents, one of which is a legal summary of an interview conducted with Ivey on November 3, 1981. In that document, GM attorneys conclude that "Ivey is not an individual whom we would ever, in any conceivable situation, want to be identified" to plaintiffs attorneys in fuel-fed fire cases "and the documents he generated are undoubtedly some of the potentially most harmful and most damaging were they ever to be produced." This document also appears to contradict Ivey's claim that he doesn't know why he prepared the report. In the document prepared by GM attorneys, Ivey said he wrote the report "for Oldsmobile management" and engineers to "assist them in 'trying to figure out how much Olds could spend on fuel systems.'" GM doesn't want anyone to think it was a cheapskate, unwilling to spend more than $2.40 per car to fix the problem. In a statement last week, GM said that "a dollar value cannot be placed on human life" and that "any suggestion that GM does not care about occupant and product safety is reprehensible and couldn't be further from the truth." Whatever you say, big boy. Russell Mokhiber is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Corporate Crime Reporter. Robert Weissman is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Multinational Monitor.
WORKERS OF THE WORLD UNITE (fwd)
Written 10:56 PM Feb 4, 1998 by [EMAIL PROTECTED] in labr.organize */ /* -- "Sex Trade Workers Organize" -- */ Jan-Feb 98 Washington Free Press Sex Trade Workers Organize Lawsuits filed in Washington State and Minnesota; Labor Union formed in California by Rebecca Kavoussi Free Press contributor photos courteys SCALD; from the book The Lusty Lady by Erika Langley Seattle's erotic dancers could be instigating a wave of change [Image] in business as usual, but the scene in Seattle does not necessarily appear ready for reform. All of Seattle's erotic dancers are private contractors; at peep shows like the Lusty Lady they are employees: they make an hourly wage and have certain rules governing their routines and appearance that dancers at other clubs don't have. At clubs like Deja Vu, dancers pay the club a fee to dance, and, some would say, operate more like private contractors than employees. Employees have the right to unionize and private contractors have the right to dictate their own working conditions. What do erotic dancers have? The Lusty Lady in San Francisco ratified the nation's first sex worker union contract this April after a year-long battle with its workers. The Lusty's dancers organized after theater management repeatedly dismissed complaints about customers filming dancers through the club's one-way mirrors. Although the one-way mirrors were eventually removed, Lusty Lady management continued to deny dancers' efforts at unionization. One San Francisco dancer says, "Though the one-ways were gone, the power inequity their presence symbolized was still festering: favoritism was the norm, the company's disciplinary policy was unwritten, erratically and inconsistently applied, dancers had their pay cut in half for missing a staff meeting or calling in sick, and were suspended for reasons like not smiling enough." Even after an arduous struggle and ratification of a union contract, the workers in San Francisco are still strapped with an open shop, which means union membership is not required. With the rapid turnover in the sex industry, this open shop policy continually threatens to invalidate unionization. According to Morgan, a sex industry worker who edits the Seattle-based newsletter Blackstockings, unionization at Seattle's Lusty Lady is dubious. Despite the prospect of job security and legal recourse for unfair treatment, the still strained situation between management and staff at San Francisco's newly unionized Lusty has Seattle employees thinking twice about pushing for reforms here. "The general consensus up here is that it's a very tense situation [at San Francisco's Lusty Lady] and that we don't want to be there," says Morgan. [Image] Dancers at clubs like Deja Vu throughout Washington live off customer tips and pay varying amounts to the house in order to work. At Deja Vu dancers sign independent contractor agreements and are not entitled to earn an hourly wage, file discrimination claims, receive unemployment benefits or worker's compensation, or take part in collective bargaining. On the flip side, they are allowed more flexibility in scheduling and tax declaration. Susan*, a dancer at Deja Vu on Denny Way, likes the freedom and money attendant with being a private contractor- as opposed to an employee. State law mandates that employees cannot perform completely nude, which Susan fears would slow down business. However, contractors at Deja Vu have few of the freedoms that other contractors enjoy: they have to work a minimum of six hours per shift; the music they use is screened and sometimes banned by management; and they tip out an average of one third of their earnings to cover their stage fee and voluntary gratuities to club disc jockeys, waitresses, bartenders, and doormen. Safety and comfortable working conditions are two other problems topping the list of common complaints. "We feel that they [management] want customer dollars over the girls' safety," says Susan. "We have a floor manager and a couple of doormen, but they don't get the job because they're big or trained about security. They get their jobs because they're perverts." Morgan echoes these sentiments, saying, "The attitude in the clubs as far as management and non-dancing staff is that the dancers are there to feed money to the boss and the staff isn't there to protect the dancers." Apparently fed up with the conditions of independent contract work in the sex industry, 93 Deja Vu dancers in Washington recently filed a suit (Langlois v. Deja Vu) against the company under the Fair Labor Standards Act. While the terms of a settlement reached this month are suppressed by a confidentiality clause, similar suits throughout the country are using the same precedents to prove
E.U.-U.S.A. free trade in the works
The GuardianMarch 4, 1998
EU-US TRADE ZONE LAUNCHED
Asian crisis spurs plan for transatlantic common
market pounds 60 billion benefits of lifting barriers
Ambitious proposals that could revolutionise trade relations between the
United States and the European Union and provide a huge economic boost
on both sides of the Atlantic will be launched by the European Commission
today.
The New Transatlantic Marketplace, which aims to scrap remaining
tariffs on goods, harmonise regulations and liberalise services, will ease
fears that the single market will turn into a "fortress Europe".
However, EU officials acknowledge that the market-opening
measures will step up pressure on Japan and other key trading countries to
liberalise.
The proposal, which has received a preliminary welcome in
Washington after long discussions with the Clinton administration and with
both sides in the US Congress, is being marketed by the EU trade
commissioner, Sir Leon Brittan, as a way to "enhance the broader political
relationship between the US and the European Union".
Although the scheme contains no explicit reference to the single
currency, it looks to a future dominated by the dollar and the euro - the
currencies of the two economic systems that between them account for
two-thirds of world trade and more than half the planet's gross domestic
product.
"The strong message we bring back from the US is that this has a
good chance, both in Congress and in the administration, because of the
common values and general level of development and civilisation we
Europeans share with the US," one senior European official involved in the
negotiations said yesterday.
After years of fruitless discussions about a transatlantic free trade
area, the marketplace proposal is being launched because the Asian
financial crisis has revealed the limitations of the Clinton administration's
infatuation with the Pacific Rim as its new commercial partner.
It also follows the defeat of President Bill Clinton's plan to extend
the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to Chile and
Argentina, after congressional fears of low-wage competition and the
dilution of US environmental standards.
"The issues of wage levels, labour rights and environmental
standards which nag US relations with other countries simply do not crop
up with Europe," the EU official added.
The plan's eight-part agenda for the plan is highly ambitious, with
the EU recognising that freedom of services will require some liberalisation
of visa and work permit regimes, so providers of services can work freely
in both the US and the EU.
The key provisions are:
-- A free trade area in services.
-- A commitment to end all tariffs on goods by 2010.
-- Further liberalisation, aimed at a free trade area, of government
procurement, intellectual property and investment.
-- Scrapping technical and non-tariff barriers to trade through
mutual recognition of technical and safety standards and
consumer safeguards.
"We see this as having a similar economic growth effect to the
Uruguay Round {of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)}
- an addition of 1 per cent of GDP for both the EU and the US," an EU
official said yesterday, citing internal surveys. This would mean, after five
years of the new common marketplace, an extra pounds 60 billion in GDP
for both the US and the EU.
"It should enhance the broader agenda of multilateral trade
liberalisation within the WTO (World Trade Organisation), to which we are
committed," says the draft proposal that Sir Leon will present to the
European Commission today.
"It should not lead to the creation of new trade obstacles to third
countries or weaken their support for multilateral liberalisation."
The plan excludes the most contentious issues of transatlantic trade
- agricultural goods and audiovisual services - on which earlier proposals to
forge a US-EU free trade area broke down.
"There is no sense in having negotiations about the impossible.We
have agreed that we should tackle the stuff that is hard, but achievable," an
EU spokesman said.
Meanwhile, Sir Leon's former Cabinet ally on Europe, Kenneth
Clarke, warned the Tory leader William Hague against "shattering 50 years
of reasonable Conservative unity" on Europe, and still "getting it all
wrong".
In an equally upbeat account of Europe's trading future, Mr Clarke
differed only in regretting that monetary union should be "the key issue of
European policy".
He said: "I have always criticised the rigid EMU timetable laid
down in the Maastricht treaty."
===
Agence France-Presse
BC Government takes strong stand against MAI
The Vancouver Sun Friday 6 March 1998 CLARK JOINS OPPONENTS OF MAI B.C.'s premier says the treaty, negotiated largely in secret, will garner more detractors as details of the deal become public. By Petti Fong With the May deadline looming for the signing of the Multilateral Agreement on Investment, Premier Glen Clark led a group of high-profile social issues leaders, environmentalists and native Indian representatives in a meeting Thursday to discuss how to derail the proposed deal. The Multilateral Agreement on Investment, currently being negotiated by 27 industrial countries including Canada, is a proposed accord that supporters say puts countries in better positions to attract investment and compete in the global marketplace. Under the treaty, countries that sign would agree to treat foreign- controlled companies the same as domestic firms. Opponents of the agreement argue the MAI is tantamount to a charter of rights for multinational corporations. They say it would allow companies to override local communities and will eventually result in lower wages and environmental standards. Clark, who stands firmly on the side of the opponents, said hearings will be held to gather response from the public about their views on the MAI. "The more people know about it, the less they'll like it. Because it's been negotiated largely in secret, there's not a lot of information out there, so we'll try to talk to people and engage the citizens." The MAI is an alarming document, Clark said. Despite the upcoming deadline, he said it's not too late to start gathering public response to the proposed treaty. At the table with Clark for the meeting were Ken Georgetti, with the B.C. Federation of Labour, environmentalist David Suzuki, and Maud Barlow of the Council of Canada. Federal Trade Minister Sergio Marchi has already hinted he may not sign the treaty if Canadian interests aren't protected and suggested that the May deadline will likely not be met. In B.C., the MAI could mean that the province must allow private American hospitals to operate or pay compensation to not let them do it, according to Barlow. Fishing, mining and logging licences may also be taken out of Canadian hands, she said.
Check Out Issue #5 (fwd)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Mar 3 18:06:50 1998 Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 17:55:37 -0800 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (MCR Online) Subject: Check Out Issue #5 MEDIACULTURE REVIEW ONLINE! http://www.mediademocracy.org/MediaCultureReview MediaCulture Review, the award-winning quarterly zine published by Institute for Alternative Journalism, is now weekly in electronic form. This week's roundup includes: * Raiders of the Last Ark, by Monte Paulsen -- The center of the free world, as it turns out, is a putty-colored plastic box in a squat brick office park outside Washington, D.C. The box looks like the other 100 million personal computers that routinely surf the Internet. except for one thing: Without this box, the Internet wouldn't work. The off-the-shelf Sun workstation is maintained by Network Solutions Inc., under contract with the federal government. That contract expires in March. After that, the Ark of the Internet is up for grabs. http://www.mediademocracy.org/MediaCultureReview/VOL98/5/lastark.html * Slate Switch -- $200 billion Microsoft will make you pay for Slate's online information including the useful Today's Papers as of March 9th. Don Hazen critiques Today's Papers and shares Mike Kinsley's sad appeal for help. http://www.mediademocracy.org/MediaCultureReview/VOL98/5/switch.html * Filmmakers Fight Censorship with Giveaway, by Emily Neye -- Despite right-wing backlash, producer Helen Cohen and Academy Award-winning director Debra Chasnoff of "It's Elementary: Talking About Gay Issues in School" are undaunted in their mission to educate faculty and students. http://www.mediademocracy.org/MediaCultureReview/VOL98/5/thwartcensors.html * Media Mash -- This week: * Sharon Stone's goes against the trend and marries a journalist; * SF Examiner is banned in Loudoun County, Virginia. * a peek inside the head of NPR VP Jeffrey Dvorkin; * the first ever micropower radio conference. Plus, event listings for media mavens. http://www.mediademocracy.org/MediaCultureReview/VOL98/MediaMash/4.html * Media's Dark Age? -- From May 24 to May 28 of this year, Women for Mutual Security will host an international discussion on ownership and control of the media in Athens, Greece. While it is "an exposé of corporate globalization of news and information for media activists and journalists," organizers also hope to begin a "twenty-first century dialogue" on how activists and journalists can subvert the undemocratic control of public information. http://www.mediademocracy.org/MediaCultureReview/VOL98/5/darkage.html * ADD YOUR LINK TO MEDIACULTURE REVIEW http://www.mediademocracy.org/MediaCultureReview/mcrlinks.html Sorry! If this is an unwarranted intrusion into your space, quickly e-mail us at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and we'll take you off the list. __ Don Hazen, MCR Online Executive Editor Nadya Tan, MCR Online Assistant Editor ---MediaCulture Review--- 77 Federal Street, 2nd floor San Francisco, CA 94107 phone: 415/284-1420 | fax: 415/284-1414
DEVELOPMENT: Global Struggle Declar (fwd)
/* Written 3:16 PM Feb 28, 1998 by igc:newsdesk in web:ips.english */ /* -- "DEVELOPMENT: Global Struggle Declar" -- */ Copyright 1998 InterPress Service, all rights reserved. Worldwide distribution via the APC networks. *** 25-Feb-98 *** Title: DEVELOPMENT: Global Struggle Declared Against Liberalisation By Gustavo Capdevila GENEVA, Feb 25 (IPS) - The first global movement opposed to the liberalisation of trade and the World Trade Organisation (WTO) was created Wednesday in Geneva by 303 delegates of civic groups from every continent. The new group's strength will be put to the test May 18 to 20 with worldwide protest demonstrations, scheduled to coincide with a WTO ministerial conference here in Geneva. A coordinating body, People's Global Action (PGA), will concentrate information on the demonstrations, which will be adapted to the needs and realities of each region. ''We have a common strategy, but will adopt different forms of protest,'' said Medha Patkar, the head of India's National Alliance of People's Movements. But the political manifesto of the PGA, approved at the close of the conference Wednesday, underlines that the protests against the WTO and neo-liberal economic model will consist of non-violent acts of civil disobedience. ''Such democratic action carries with it the essence of non- violent civil disobedience to the unjust system,'' says the document. The PGA conference accepted the peaceful character of the disobedience after some debate. But on the request of Latin American indigenous delegates, an article was added that reads ''however, we do not judge the use of other forms of action under certain circumstances.'' ''Even democratically elected governments have been implementing these policies of the globalisation of poverty without debate among their own peoples or their elected representatives,'' the document stresses, and ''the people are left with no choice but to destroy'' WTO-led trade agreements. ''We want to tell the governments that they are destroying humanity with these policies. We aspire to a more just world,'' said Argentina's Alejandro Demichelis, of the Confederation of Education Workers. Demichelis' union was one of the creators of the PGA, along with the Peasant Movement of the Philippines, Brazil's Landless Movement, the Sandinista Central Workers union in Nicaragua and Mexico's Zapatista National Liberation Front (EZLN), and many other groups. Rene Riesen, with France's Confederation of Farmers, maintained that developing countries were not the only ones disturbed by the expansion of the neo-liberal model. Agricultural and food products should be excluded from globalisation, as they cannot be put in the same category as other merchandise, he added. The PGA issued a call to people worldwide to cooperate in the action against ''anti-democratic development.'' ''We call for direct confrontation with transnational corporations harnessed to state power for short term profit,'' the document says, while underlining that direct democratic action against globalisation should be combined with the constructive building of alternative and sustainable lifestyles. Spain's Sergio Hernandez, with the Fair Play organisation, pointed out that all other attempts to organise movements against neo-liberalism at an international level this decade had failed. But he added that the example provided by the Zapatista movement, which burst on the scene in Mexico in 1994, contributed to the success of the PGA conference, which was organised with a broad-minded outlook along the lines of the EZLN call for ''a world in which all worlds fit.'' PGA leader Hernandez added that like the Zapatistas, the global movement ''is not interested in power.'' (END/IPS/TRA-SO/PC/MJ/SW/98) Origin: Montevideo/DEVELOPMENT/ [c] 1998, InterPress Third World News Agency (IPS) All rights reserved May not be reproduced, reprinted or posted to any system or service outside of the APC networks, without specific permission from IPS. This limitation includes distribution via Usenet News, bulletin board systems, mailing lists, print media and broadcast. For information about cross- posting, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED].For information about print or broadcast reproduction please contact the IPS coordinator at [EMAIL PROTECTED].
[Fwd: (Fwd) France Says NO! MAI
Dear friends, News from Paris France Date 26 02 1998 Thanks to international pressure and a very stong national opposition from all sectors - social - cultural - environmental - development - the french government stated yesterday at the Parliament that France is not going to engaged the country in further negociations on the MAI. The minister of Economy and Finances Dominique Strauss-Kahn stated yesterday: 'The (french) government has no intention to engage itself in whatever multilateral agreement which will, limit its action or the one of its Parliament, to define our social rules, our fiscal laws, or our environmental legislation, or that will enable any foreign companies to challenge its national legislation in the name of this agreement. The Prime Minister, Lionel Jospin, was in the room and agreed to this and more. For those reading french, I know it's hard... We are scanning the press clipping and we are waiting for your numerous messages, I am sure, asking for more information. Together we can change the world Cheers to all and one more time congatulations. Etienne Vernet / Ecoropa For Thierry David / Observatoire de la Mondialisation . Bob Olsen notes that the email address for Etienne and Thierry may be [EMAIL PROTECTED] Otherwise try asking Peter Bleyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] to forward a message if you want to contact them in Paris.
RIGHTS-MEXICO: Impunity for Hundreds of Murderers
/* Written 3:28 PM Feb 27, 1998 by igc:newsdesk in web:ips.english */ /* -- "RIGHTS-MEXICO: Impunity for Hundred" -- */ Copyright 1998 InterPress Service, all rights reserved. Worldwide distribution via the APC networks. *** 24-Feb-98 *** Title: RIGHTS-MEXICO: Impunity for Hundreds of Murders of Opponents By Diego Cevallos MEXICO CITY, Feb 24 (IPS) - Impunity reigns over the murders of some 270 members of Mexico's centre-left opposition Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) who have been killed over the past three years. ''The PRD continues to suffer from a phenomenon that could be described as legal-political persecution and criminal threats,'' said a spokesman for the party's Secretariat of Human Rights, according to which a total of 570 PRD militants have been killed in the last nine years. ''Nothing has changed under the government of Ernesto Zedillo. The members of the PRD are still exposed to the threats and dangers of a political struggle waged by fire and sword,'' Isabel Molina, the president of the Ovando y Gil Foundation, which provides support for the victims' families, told IPS. The latest victim was Alejandro Reyes, the head of the Union of Democratic Taxidrivers in the southern state of Guerrero and a member of the PRD, who was shot and killed Monday. ''Reyes' murder undoubtedly had political shades,'' said Silverio Diaz, the union's spokesman. More than 300 members of the PRD were killed under the government of Carlos Salinas (1988-94), most of them leaders of grassroots organisations or activists from indigenous communities or poor neighbourhoods. ''In spite of a few detentions, the PRD considers 95 percent of the cases as unresolved until the persons responsible for ordering the murders are found and arrested,'' said Molina. The first assassinations of PRD members were reported in 1988, when the party was founded by former PRI member and present governor of Mexico City Cuauhtemoc Cardenas. Two of Cardenas' closest cronies, Javier Ovando and Ramon Gil, were killed that year. As occurred in 1994 with the murders of Luis Colosio, the presidential candidate of the ruling Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), and PRI secretary-general Jose Ruiz Massieu, the government launched a special probe into the deaths of Ovando and Gil and promised prompt answers. But none of the four cases have been solved. The spokesperson for the PRD's Secretariat of Human Rights said 570 victims in nine years ''is an enormous figure for a country that has not declared a state of siege, and which has a National Human Rights Commission and a government vision of respect for individual liberties and guarantees.'' According to the Ovando and Gil Foundation, PRD members are at highest risk in the Mexican states of Guerrero, Oaxaca, Chiapas and Michoacan, which have large indigenous peasant populations. The Mexican government has often blamed the murders on brawls between peasant farmers. In other cases, the victims had been previously accused of collaborating with guerrilla groups. PRD leader Manuel Lopez said ''the Zedillo administration must clear up all the murders, many of which were committed by members or sympathisers of the PRI.'' The murders are just one more expression of the tough political transition Mexico is experiencing, after 69 years of PRI governments, say local analysts. The PRD - the country's third political force, comprised of former communists, socialists, social democrats and former PRI members - and the conservative National Action Party govern several states today and have held a majority of seats in Congress since September 1997. Analysts predict that a non-PRI candidate - possibly Cardenas - will win the presidential elections of the year 2000. (END/IPS/TRA-SO/DC/AG/SW/98) Origin: Montevideo/RIGHTS-MEXICO/ [c] 1998, InterPress Third World News Agency (IPS) All rights reserved May not be reproduced, reprinted or posted to any system or service outside of the APC networks, without specific permission from IPS. This limitation includes distribution via Usenet News, bulletin board systems, mailing lists, print media and broadcast. For information about cross- posting, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED].For information about print or broadcast reproduction please contact the IPS coordinator at [EMAIL PROTECTED].
Harper Collins and China
From: Daniel Cohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: HarperCollins and China Date: Sat, 28 Feb 1998 09:48:39 -0500 (EST) In the last couple of days there have been a number of reports from reputable media sources in the United Kingdom (including the BBC and the Times) that HarperCollins was ordered by its ultimate owner, Rupert Murdoch, not to honour its contract with Chris Patten (former Governor of Hong Kong) for the publication of his forthcoming memoirs East West. It has been alleged that Murdoch ordered the book killed because he was worried that it was too critical of China, and as a result, China might retaliate against his corporate assets in that country and by blocking his future plans to expand his Asian satelite broadcasting empire. In memos published in the press it has become clear that the order was given directly by Murdoch as head of NEWSCORP, that the Chair of News America Publishing passed it on and HarperCollins UK head Eddie Bell only complied reluctantly conceeding "KRM(kieth Rupert Murdoch) has outlined to me the negative aspects of publication which I fully understand)". My, first instinct on hearing all of this was "so?" Freedom of the press belongs to those who own them and if Murdoch does not have the brains to publish an instant best seller someone else will. And in fact the day the story broke Macmillan announced that they'ld struck a deal with Patten and will now publish the book. However, the more I think about this the more I am concerned that this is not just a fight between an author and a publisher but much more. NewsCorp is now on record as saying it will sacrifice its integrety as a publisher and news-source in order to protect the revenue that it might earn by re-broadcasting dubbed re-runs of Baywatch and Melrose Place in authoritarian coutries such as China. Second Newscorp's empire includes news and academic publishing resources that are integral to the academic process. On the News side they countrol the London Times, Fox News and variety of lesser papers and political magazines including the Weekly Standard (a conservative opinion journal). HarperCollins academic imprints include, Basic and Torch Book. We know about this affair because Chris Patten is to big to be discredited. He is a former member of Mrs. Thatcher's cabinet and won worldwide aclaim for the manner in which he managed the return of Hong Kong to Chinese rule. At first, Murdoch tried to claim that the book was cancelled because it was not up to snuff. However, Newscorp's spin doctors have backed off that claim as it just won't wash. Especially after the editor in charge of the book (Stuart Profit) quit in protest over the decision. What happens when a group of academics who write a text on the Pacific rim get called up by HarperCollins and are told "sorry we don't like your chapter on Indonesia, its too, you know..."? Do they re-write the text to make President Suharto not sound like a corrupt dictator, responsible for the murder of hundreds of thousand of people in East-Timor? Drop Indonesia from the text? Going elsewhere, is not likely to be an option for many of us if Newscorp is prepared to try to discredit us as they initially tried to do with Patten. I think that we now have a concrete example of something academics throughout the liberal capitalist democracies have secretely feared for a while, that large multi-national corporate publishers will sacrifice integrity to either further the interests of other portions of their corporate empires or those of the political cronies who they support. I suppose the question is what should be done? and perhaps more depressingly, what can be done? Does anyone else have any thoughts on this? I'ld be interested in hearing what authors who have worked with HarperCollins think about this. Although I suppose given this episode, many of them might just want to stay mum on the whole thing.
The March issue of Labour Left Briefing (fwd)
Hi The March 98 issue of LLB is now on-line. Below is a list of the articles in this issue and their URL's: *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/news1.html Don't bomb Iraq Will McMahon, Hackney North and Stoke Newington CLP, argues that key motives for the latest US attack on Iraq are to send a message to other world powers and test new technologies. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/news2.html Peace not bombs Parliament's unconditional backing for a war against Iraq was an astonishing piece of political history we may soon come to regret, argues Alan Simpson MP. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/news3.html Benn on Gulf War Tony Benn's parliament speech against war in the Gulf. [This is reproduced in full - a edited version appeared in the paper issue] *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/news4.html Mitchell's flexible principles Liam Mac Uaid, West Ham CLP, argues that there are a few weeks respite for a Time to Think Campaign. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/news5.html Sinn Fein: "shut up!" Brian Campbell, editor of Sinn Fein's An Phoblacht/Republican News, looks at SF's expulsion from the peace talks. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/news6.html The antics roadshow: the value of welfare reform Robert Deans, North East Cambs CLP, rejects notions that we cannot afford the welfare state. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/news7.html Action on pensions needed Terry Heath, secretary of the South West TUC Pensioners Forum, argues that Labour must link pensions to earnings. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/news8.html Benefit cuts make us sick Kate Adams, Incapacity Action. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/news9.html Waiting lists up John Lister, London Health Emergency, looks at the crisis in the NHS. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/news10.html Brown fiddles while "tigers" burn Brian Burkitt, Pudsey CLP and University of Bradford, presents an alternative to Gordon Brown's neo-Thatcherite economic agenda. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/news11.html Defend municipal housing Tony Dale on Labour councils headlong rush to embrace local housing companies. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/news12.html New Deal for old money John Perry examines the reality of Labour's "New Deal". *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/news13.html Free to speak out Ken Coates MEP replies to criticism in last month's LLB. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/news14.html When Blair's bubble bursts John Nicholson, convenor of the Network of Socialist Alliances in England, sees things altogether differently from LLB *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/lp1.html New Labour into Power -- what price democracy? New Labour proclaims its desire to democratise and decentralise politics. Leonora Lloyd of the London Labour Party executive, suggests that the opposite is happening in the London Labour Party. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/lp2.html Why I'm standing for the NEC Councillor Liz Davies, Islington North CLP, calls for a united and effective campaign for the NEC. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/lp3.html Return of the daleks Mark Seddon, editor of Tribune, calls for a "Real Labour" challenge for NEC places. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/lp4.html The class struggle Tobie Glenny, a teacher in Islington, looks at Labour's school policies. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/lp5.html Reproductive rights -- a year of change Leonora Lloyd reports. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/lp6.html PLP Policy Forum elections *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/tu1.html Liverpool dockers: the music of the future Liz Knight, London Support Group for the Liverpool Dockers, reports. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/tu2.html LLB's tribute to the dockers *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/tu3.html Union leaders on go-slow John McIlroy, Withington CLP and author of Trade Unions in Britain Today, gives his seasonal round up of the state of play in the unions. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/tu4.html Britain -- UN law breaker John Hendy QC examines Britain's repressive anti-union laws and reports on new initiatives to campaign for changes. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/tu5.html Membership control needed Steve Battlemuch, CPSA BA Nottingham, reports on how the courts have stopped a union merger that the left in both unions opposed. *** http://www.llb.labournet.org.uk/1998/march/tu6.html UNISON officials
McUnion Busting, McCl (fwd)
Subject: McUnion Busting, McClosure in Quebec Date: Sat, 14 Feb 1998 From: Patrick Borden [EMAIL PROTECTED] Montreal, 14 Feb 1998 Friday the 13th brought bad luck to McDonald's workers in St-Hubert, Quebec. Midnight saw management permanently close the store they were close to unionizing. According to McDonald's officials, the store was closed because it had never been profitable. The fact that the workers were due to gain accreditation with the Teamsters Union in just a few weeks had absolutely nothing to do with it. "It's a wildcat closure!" fumed Jacques Godbout, president of the FTQ (Quebec Federation of Workers). For Godbout the fight is not yet over: "We have not ruled out calling for a boycott of McDonald's in Quebec." A decision will be announced at a press conference on Tuesday. Added Godbout, "McDo is rapidly losing ground in public opinion. They might find their decision to be rather painful." At McDonald's headquarters, Barbara Thompson affirmed, "This was a financial decision. The franchise has existed for 17 years and has always had a low volume of business. It was losing money before the arrival of the union." Teamsters rep Henri van Meerbeck doesn't believe it, "I pass by the restaurant everyday and the parking lot is always full." Even the workers were taken by surprise, informed only 24 hours before the closure. This is a violation of Quebec law which demands 7 days notice. Nonetheless, the workers were compensated with two months salary plus a seniority bonus. This would have been the first unionized McDonald's in Canada. Still, every black cloud has a silver lining. There is now one less McDo in Quebec. -- Article by Patrick Borden Reprint with acknowledgement of source --- U.S. McLibel Support Campaign Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 62Phone/Fax 802-586-9628 Craftsbury VT 05826-0062http://www.mcspotlight.org/ --- To subscribe to the "mclibel" electronic mailing list, send email To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: not needed Message: subscribe mclibel To unsubscribe, change the message to: "unsubscribe mclibel" Received: from 205.236.175.6 (205.236.175.6 [205.236.175.6]) by Received: (qmail 18162 invoked from network); 26 Feb 1998 17:20:55 - Received: from ppp-0138.infobahnos.com (HELO ?204.19.114.48?) (204.19.114.48) X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-Id: v03102800b11b55204864@[204.19.114.16] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 26 Feb 1998 12:21:42 -0500 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (janet cleveland), [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (beausejour), [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Schaechter), [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: David Briars [EMAIL PROTECTED] (by way of Sam Boskey) Subject: McUnion Busting, McClosure in Quebec
Re: environmental issues
Hey Mike -- how about stripping out the machine language before you forward articles? That would make it lots easier to share with others. Thnx. Sid
Ronald McDonald Burned in Effigy at McDonalds Protest (fwd)
Subject: Ronald McDonald Burned in Effigy at McDonalds Protest Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 From: Aaron Koleszar [EMAIL PROTECTED] FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Ronald McDonald Burned in Effigy at McDonalds Protest CHARLOTTETOWN, PEI - At 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, February 18, six members of Island Residents Against Toxic Environments (IRATE) gathered outside of the new McDonalds restaurant in Charlottetown, PEI. The event was the Grand Opening for the new building, and Ronald McDonald was in attendance for the ribbon cutting ceremony and to play with the children. The protest culminated with a 5-foot tall Ronald McDonald lookalike being set afire as the "real" Ronald was getting into his van. When the activists arrived, they set up the homemade Ronald, then proceeded to distribute leaflets to bystanders and the customers inside the store. The leaflets were about what's wrong with McDonalds, how Ronald lies to children, the global impacts of eating meat, and the condom found in a McDonalds burger in the USA. The protesters also carried placards with slogans like "McGreedy," "McLies," "Anti-union," "McGrease," and "McSlaughterhouse." The public responded positively by honking as they drove by or by turning into the parking lot to talk and get a leaflet. Ronald kept casting nervous glances out the window, but his twin just stared back at him. The reasons for protesting McDonalds are many, including: cruelty to animals, damaging the environment, low wages and poor treatment of workers, and brainwashing children into eating unhealthy food. As Ronald left the building, his twin burst into flame. He hurried to his van and didn't wait around to chat. After Ronald had finished burning, the demonstrators doused his charred remains with water and left. "I want to apologize for participating in helping to brainwash North America's young people into doing something that I now know to be contrary to the purpose of life." - Geoffrey Giuliano, who played Ronald McDonald for two years for Mcdonalds of Canada. The reason McDonalds' food is cheap, is because the true costs are borne by their workers, the environment, animals, and the health of the children and others who consume their unhealthy food. - Aaron Koleszar, Island Residents Against Toxic Environments (IRATE) Note: Workers at a McDonalds outlet in Quebec decided to form a union, then on February 13, the manager of the McDonalds announced that the restaurant would close. Newsworld reporters were denied an interview with staff, so they visited the drive-through window to speak to them. "When do you go for your break?" asked the reporter. "I don't get a break'" replied the drive-through server. "Funny," commented the reporter, "I thought 'Have you had your break today?' was McDonald's motto." -30- Contact: Aaron Koleszar, Island Residents Against Toxic Environments (IRATE) (902) 659-2570, [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Prince Edward Island PROPAGANDA JOURNAL look at http://www3.pei.sympatico.ca/brad/ "Cowardice asks the question: is it safe? Expediency asks the question: is it politic? Vanity asks the question: is it popular? But conscience asks the question: is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular---but one must take it because it is right. One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws---an unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law." -- Martin Luther King --- U.S. McLibel Support Campaign Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 62Phone/Fax 802-586-9628 Craftsbury VT 05826-0062http://www.mcspotlight.org/ ---
NZ - Union Journal Editor Sacked over MAI (fwd)
From: GATT WATCHDOG Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: NZ - Union Journal Editor Sacked over MAI PSA Editor sacked, escorted from work - Evening Post, Wellington, New Zealand; 26/2/98 - Mark Stevens Employment Reporter The editor of the Public Service Association journal has been sacked for allegedly failing to carry out an instruction. Editor Pat Martin was suspended on Monday and escorted from the building. He was couriered a letter of dismissal last night but would not comment other than to confirm legal action would be sought through the Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing Union. The incident has been confirmed by union solicitor Tony Wilton, and PSA general secretary David Thorp. Mr Thorp would not say whether the instruction was about editorial content in the PSA journal. Mr Wilton says it is. The Post understands the dispute involves an article proposed for March 4. It covered the international public sector unions calling for a halt to the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) talks. Information in the article came from a Public Services International (PSI) conference, which PSA representatives attended as affiliates. A source said management wanted an article more in line with New Zealand Council of Trade Union policies. Internal PSA communication obtained by The Post shows Mr Martin sent a message to president Na Raihania and Mr Thorp the day before his suspension asking for comments on the MAI article. Mr Thorp returned an email message saying he didn't agree with the emphasis of the article - the PSA position was decided by the CTU and should be the main focus of the story, his message said. Mr Martin responded in another email that the story needed a public sector angle because it was written for public sector workers. The PSA was at the conference where the investment agreement was discussed and he questioned whether he sould be distancing the union from the PSI. He also said: "The CTU exec resolutions are reported in the story. I did not realise that the CTU had already decided the PSA's position." Mr Wilton said his client didn't refuse to comply with an instruction but rather sought to have it clarified. "Pat's position is that he was not...refusing to comply with this instruction because the management of the PSA had failed to follow its own policies regarding the making of decisions about the content of the journal. "Pat sought to have this instruction put on hold until such time as the proper policies have been followed." It was not the first time a union had been called in to support a union employee. "Unfortunately it does happen from time to time," Mr Wilton said. Mr Thorp said there was nothing unusual about union management dismissing an employee. It had to manage its resources. The Independent reported yesterday that Mr Martin had a willingness to run articles critical of employers. A determination to include a broad range of views had put him out of favour. He was described as a "marked man". The PSA national policy council was discussing the union's policy on the MAI today.
EU Parliament Opposes MAI (fwd)
As reported in this message, forwarded from Holland, a committee of the European Parliament recommends that: The European Court of Justice should examine thoroughly the Multilateral Agreement on Investments (MAI) before it is signed by the EU member states. Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 13:14:30 +0100 (MET) From: Erik Wesselius [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: European Parliament Committee on Foreig Affairs adopts critical report on MAI PRESS RELEASE (The Green Group in the European Parliament) Brussels, 25 February 1998 Kreissl-Doerfler Report approved in EP Committee with overwhelming majority EU Court of Justice should scrutinize MAI The European Court of Justice should examine thoroughly the Multilateral Agreement on Investments (MAI) before it is signed by the EU member states. This is the demand put up in a report by German Green MEP Wolfgang Kreissl-Doerfler, which was approved today by the Committee for External Economic Relations by an overwhelming majority. The MAI, which should guarantee the protection of foreign investments, is currently being negotiated by the 29 member states of the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development). The Greens have raised at a very early point serious doubts about the agreement which they say gives one-sided privileges to big investors and will overrule environmental and economic regulations. "The protection of foreign investments must not lead to a corrosion of environmental or social standards," MEP Kreissl-Doerfler said today after the vote in the Committee. "We urge substantial ameliorations to the draft of the OECD." The European Parliament is the first legislative body in the EU which is coming up with a report on this highly sensitive question. "The MAI must not be signed without a thorough discussion in the public as well as in the national parliaments," said Kreissl-Doerfler. The Green MEP criticised that the MAI was negotiated behind closed doors and under strong lobbying by industry associations. Kreissl-Doerfler expects the report to be supported by a vast majority in the plenary in Strasbourg where it is scheduled for 11 March. The MAI must not break existing environmental agreements as Rio 92 or Kyoto nor hinder the development of further international environmental regulations, Kreissl-Doerfler stressed. Moreover, the cultural autonomy and sovereignty of the signatory states must remain untouched by MAI. "The developing countries must not be forced to join the MAI unconditionally," Kreiss-Doerfler raised another problem. "The interests of the developing countries must not be put behind the interests of the big investors." The Green MEP also rejected the introduction of a new arbitration procedure. "This would give unilateral and unjustified rights to the investors in regards to the national states. Thus Chiquita could sue the United Kingdom, but London could not sue the banana multinational." ** Press Service of the Green Group in the European Parliament *** Helmut WEIXLER phone:+32-2-284 4683 fax: +32-2-284 4944 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Results of the vote on the MAI in the EP REX (External Economic Relations) committee (25.2.98) -- 1. The vote echoes the fears expressed in recent weeks publicly on the MAI project, especially the fears concerning loss of sovereignty in many policy sectors, from environmental law to social policies, including the cultural sector. 2. The REX states that the aim of the MAI should be to stop ruinous competition between investors -- the so-called race to the bottom by lowering standards in order to attract investors -- in order to foster, on a global scale, environmentally and socially sustainable and regionally balanced economic development. 3. The REX recalls that there have not yet been made impact studies concerning transport, trade, labour market, intellectual property and on the compatibility with existing legislation within the EU, including ACP relations and development policy. 4. The MAI should be compatible with all international agreements signed by the EU. 5. Concerning the actual project, the REX is extremely sceptical about the chapter on performance requirements which aims at reducing existing legislation in the fields of environment, social policy etc. as well as the chapter on investment protection, expropriation and compensation. 6. The REX insists on a REIO clause to facilitate further harmonisation of environmental and other legislation inside the EU. 7. Concerning any MAI, the REX asks to include the Guidelines on Multilateral Companies as compulsory and to establish National Contact Points to monitor and sanction the
pl.fwd..Chiapas: Indicators of Impending War (fwd)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 1998 01:52:07 -0800 (PST) From: John Shafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Chiapas: Indicators of Impending War Subject: Your help urgently Needed For Chiapas World-Wide Online Campaign! ***Please immediately forward this message to all progressive websites, listserves,*** newsgroups, and individuals with which you are aquainted. This is an emergency. To: All concerned individuals and webmasters From: Chiapas Alert Network http://www.stewards.net/chiapas/10.htm [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi there, With just a two minute effort, you can help to end the brutal paramilitary and military violence and intimidation currently directed by the Mexican government and its ruling party against Indigenous civilians in Mexico's southern state of Chiapas. Many respected international human rights organizations such as Amnesty International have roundly denounced the recent violence in Chiapas as an extreme violation of human rights. If you are an *individual*, please go to http://www.stewards.net/chiapas/47.htm where you will find an automated messaging system which will enable you to instantly and automatically send copies of a strong pre-prepared letter of protest, or a letter of your own design, to all three Nafta governments - Mexico, the U.S., and Canada, as well as the European Union. These protest letters will carry both your own name and your email address. If you are a *webmaster*, please go to http://www.newhumans.com/chiapas/hotlogo1.html, where you will be able to obtain an attractive and poignant animated icon which can be placed on your website. When clicked by visitors to your site, this icon will take them to the automated messaging page to send the protest letter. Help us bombard the Nafta governments and Eu with our message! Eric P.S. When the numbers warrant, we will also announce the campaign - and the results - to the world media. P.P.S. There's a `notification system' at the page which allows you to automatically inform your online friends and acquantances about the campaign. BACKGROUND Right-wing violence and intimidation aimed at civilian Indigenous people in Mexico's southern state of Chiapas has not ceased since a brutal massacre (people were hunted like animals for 5 hours) in Chiapas at the little town of Acteal took the lives of 45 people at prayer in a church, most of them women and children, on Dec.22 last year. The Mexican government has used this massacre as the pretext to greatly expand its aggression not only against the Zapatista Indigenous Army, camped in the jungle at the extreme southern tip of Chiapas, and with which the government has a supposed peace agreement. But the `crisis' has also been used to justify using the army to attempt occupations of many civilian communities in Chiapas, in an attempt to break the power of the civilian Indiginous cooperative economic and political organizations, and the Chiapas indigenous automony movement, which are consciously seeking to pursue a path of cooperative ecological development in the region, and which in many cases are not even closely aligned with the Zapatistas. Deaths, injuries, terrible fear, and thousands of refugees have been generated by this military activity in the past 10 days. There is every reason to fear that a still more aggressive campaign, and far more deaths, may be on the immediate horizon. Your help is needed. Please forward this message. Please go to our website.
The Legal Assault on Workers' Rights (fwd)
Thursday, February 26, 1998 COLUMN LEFT / ALEXANDER COCKBURN Will a Tsunami of Suits Sink Dockworkers? The Pacific Maritime Assn. is targeting union locals and picket sympathizers to break solidarity. By ALEXANDER COCKBURN Jack Heyman, a member of Local 10 of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union in San Francisco, faces the possibility of being fined hundreds of thousands, maybe millions in damages because he honored a picket line. He's also threatened with being permanently barred from doing his job. Members of the Laney College Labor Studies Club in Oakland face the same financial sanction because the club's banner was seen at the same picket line. The Peace and Freedom Party faces such fines for similar reasons. All these people and groups are also being harassed to name all participants in the protest and to reveal all their past political and union associations. What provoked this assault? In the fall of 1997, there was a protest in the port of Oakland against a container ship called the Neptune Jade chartered by a Singapore company. The reason for the protest was the ship's British cargo. Back in 1995, the Mersey Docks and Harbor company in Liverpool fired 500 men when they refused to cross a picket line set up by their work mates, some of whom had been fired earlier for having tried to fight employers' attempts to sabotage a labor agreement. Liverpool was at the time the last organized port in the Britain with a collective bargaining agreement. The fight sparked a big response by dockworkers all over the world. There were pickets from Vancouver south to Long Beach and across the Pacific to Japan and Australia. Unable to discharge its cargo in Oakland, the Neptune Jade traveled to Vancouver, then Yokohama, then Kobe. At each stop, the dockers said no. It was a reaction that might surprise some in this era when organized labor has been so much on the defensive. But worldwide, even in these dour times, the dockworkers have had a huge political effect. When Nelson Mandela visited the United States in 1991, he made a particular point of thanking ILWU workers for solidarity actions in the 1970s and 1980s--refusing to handle South African cargo, for example--which he said had been crucial in "reigniting" the spark of anti-apartheid action in the U.S. While in theory the men in charge of the employers' Pacific Maritime Assn. might be against apartheid, they were, and are, even more fiercely opposed to anything that inhibits their capacity to move cargo as swiftly and cheaply as possible. Such is the logic of business that prefers casual dockers to union workers, or cowed union workers to organized folk standing up for their rights. In the wake of the Neptune Jade protest, the PMA has brought lawsuits against the ILWU and the picketers, designed to send a simple message: Acts of worker solidarity will not be tolerated. Again and again, the PMA has gone to court in a program of intimidation in the form of multimillion-dollar damage suits and associated legal maneuvers against individual workers and sympathetic outsiders as well as the unions. The drive-them-to-the-wall strategy of the PMA is the work of Joseph Miniace, who came two years ago from outside the industry--from the health care sector. Miniace tells the Journal of Commerce that all he wants is the unions to be "accountable." He talks about "win-win" situations in reorganizing the dispatch halls in the interests of competition and efficiency. If there's one thing workers have learned these last 20 years when most workers' wages have remained static, it is that a win-win plan from management means a sure loss for workers. The Longshore workers, precisely because they're tough and well-organized, make good money--though not nearly as good as Miniace's. The PMA continues to seek damages for a 1995 coast-wide strike in support of two Seattle officials of the ILWU who, the union says, were unfairly disciplined on the job. The PMA has already won a federal injunction forcing the union in the Port of Oakland to cross solidarity picket lines. And the PMA is readying McCarthy-style probes against anyone who might defy them. Part of the bedrock of freedom is the right to strike, though the right to honor a picket line was eroded as long ago as the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947. Nonetheless, the dockworkers have always found ways to act in support of causes such as fighting apartheid. But if the PMA's lawsuits stick, the union will be busted, which is Miniace's obvious aim. Unless all workers see the importance of this struggle, the right to set up and honor picket lines, the very survival of the labor movement is at stake. - - - Alexander Cockburn Writes for the Nation and Other Publications Copyright Los Angeles Times
Wallerstein's view of wages
In the presentation by Immanuel Wallerstein, "Ecology and Capitalist Costs of Production: No Exit," uploaded to Pen-l by Louis, Wallerstein makes the following point as part of his larger argument about the capitalist degradation of the environment: "Deruralization is crucial to the price of labor. Reserve armies of labor are of different kinds in terms of their bargaining power. The weakest group has always been those persons resident in rural areas who come to urban areas for the first time to engage in wage employment. Generally speaking, for such persons the urban wage, even if extremely low by world, or even local standards, represents an economic advantage over remaining in the rural area. It probably takes twenty to thirty years before such persons shift their economic frame of reference and become fully aware of their potential power in the urban work place, such that they begin to engage in syndical action of some kind to seek higher wages. Persons long resident in urban areas, even if they are unemployed in the formal economy and living in terrible slum conditions, generally demand higher wage levels before accepting wage employment. This is because they have learned how to obtain from alternative sources in the urban center a minimum level of income higher than that which is being offered to newly-arrived rural migrants. Thus, even though there is still an enormous army of reserve labor throughout the world-system, the fact that the system is being rapidly deruralized means that the average price of labor worldwide is going up steadily. This means in turn that the average rate of profits must necessarily go down over time." Wallerstein uses this point to bolster his ecological argument: that given the ineluctable increase in the average price of labour, capitalists must degrade the environment as a key part of their general effort at profit maximization. While I am sympathetic to the point W's trying to make, I'm wondering what folks on this list think of his argument that 1) there is a secular trend toward an increase in the average price of labour worldwide and 2) that there is a secular trend for the average rate of profit to decrease as a result. Sid Shniad
Deaths Blamed on IBM
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 11:18:51 -0800 (PST) From: "Camp. Resp. Tech." [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Deaths Blamed on IBM--JOIN OUR LIST-SERVE Published Monday, February 23, 1998, in the San Jose Mercury News Deaths blamed on IBM: Its workers allegedly were exposed to cancer-causing chemicals. Mercury News Staff Writer Citing a high incidence of cancer among workers at IBM Corp. in San Jose, a wrongful death lawsuit filed last week in Santa Clara County Superior Court blames the company for exposing employees to fatal levels of cancer-causing chemicals since the mid-1960s. The lawsuit was brought on behalf of the families of five former San Jose International Business Machines Corp. workers who have died of cancer, as well as four other current or former IBM employees now stricken with the disease. In addition to IBM, the suit names as defendants a host of other companies responsible for manufacturing the chemicals used by IBM, including Shell Oil Co. and Union Carbide Corp. However, the suit focuses mostly on IBM and whether the company took the necessary precautions for employees who worked in ``clean rooms'' and areas where disk drives and microcircuitry were manufactured. All the workers involved in the court case, including the five who died of cancer -- Michael White, John Thomas, Suzanne Rubio, Mose Jefferson and Christopher Corpuz -- worked in such chemical-filled environments. ``Motivated by a desire for unwarranted economic gain and profit, defendants willfully and recklessly ignored knowledge . . . of the health hazards,'' the suit states. ``The objective of these defendants was maximizing production, but in doing so, these defendants endangered the health, welfare and safety of IBM workers.'' IBM spokeswoman Tara Sexton said Friday the company would have no comment because officials had not yet reviewed the suit. In the past, IBM and other representatives of the semiconductor industry have defended their safety records, denying any link between work conditions and cancer clusters. IBM has been confronted with similar allegations in recent years as current and former IBM chemists and researchers have come forward with concerns about what they contend has been a mysterious pattern of cancer among certain workers, particularly those toiling in the clean rooms. A story last year in the Mercury News' West magazine detailed how some of these employees have tried to get IBM to examine the issue. For example, Gary Adams, a longtime IBM chemist who has fought cancer, alerted the company to his concerns as early as the mid-1980s, according to that account. Adams, a Campbell resident, is not a plaintiff in the Santa Clara County lawsuit but has described in detail how IBM colleagues and friends contracted cancer over many years. His calls for medical monitoring programs were rejected by top IBM officials, who assured him such a program was unnecessary. Another lawsuit involving the IBM safety issue has been pending in New York since 1996, when lawyers targeted Union Carbide and other manufacturers of the chemicals used by IBM. That suit now involves more than 100 plaintiffs, including the families of 11 people dead of cancer. The sweeping suit, known on the East Coast as simply the ``IBM case,'' attributes a variety of cancers to chemicals used in the semiconductor industry, particularly within IBM. San Jose attorney Amanda Hawes, who has been involved in the massive New York case, filed last week's suit in Santa Clara County. She said the case is aimed at forcing IBM to correct a long history of health problems for the company's workers. ``It concerns me that given all the technology we have at our fingertips, what were they doing with it?'' Hawes said. ``The story about the IBM scientists (and cancer) has been out there.'' The suit alleges that IBM has misled its employees for years by assuring them that the clean rooms were safe and had been tested for side effects and carcinogens. Hawes' court papers maintain IBM has ``no factual basis'' for those assertions and never conducted tests to determine whether employees were exposed to hazardous chemicals. The IBM employees involved in the suit held various positions, such as researchers and scientists, but all had ``hands-on'' exposure to the chemicals, according to Hawes. Some were young when they contracted cancer: Suzanne Rubio was 36 when she died of breast cancer. ``People are told that clean means safe,'' Hawes said of IBM's attitude about the clean rooms. ``The average person assumes when they hear that that somebody has actually investigated, and (IBM) can't make that showing.'' The suit does not specify a dollar amount but is seeking punitive damages against IBM and the chemical makers. 1997 - 1998 Mercury Center. The information you receive online from Mercury Center is protected by the
Krugman on the Asia crisis
Fortune MagazineMarch 2, 1998 ASIA: WHAT WENT WRONG Paul Krugman There is a part of me that is excited, even happy, about Asia's financial crisis. You see, financial disasters are one of my specialties. The very first serious economics paper I ever wrote, more than 20 years ago, was titled "A model of balance-of-payments crises." And so I am a bit like a tornado- chaser who has just caught up with a monster twister. I'm as sorry as anyone about those poor people in the trailer park, but I am also more than a bit thrilled to have the chance to watch this amazing spectacle unfold. I can even offer an excuse for my mixed feelings: You learn a lot more about how the global economy works when something goes wrong than when everything hums along smoothly. And maybe the lessons we learn from this crisis will help us avoid, or at least cope better, with the next one. So what have we learned from Asia's mess? Speculative attacks on currencies are nothing new, and some of us even warned a couple of years ago that Southeast Asian countries might be at risk. But the scale and depth of this crisis have surprised everyone; this disaster has demonstrated that there are financial dangers undreamt of in our previous philosophy. By now we have a pretty good idea of what happened to Asia. Think of it, so far, as a play in two acts, the first about reckless behavior and the second about its consequences. What nobody knows yet is how close we are to the end. Is the play almost over, or is there a tragic final act still to follow? The first act was the story of the bubble. It began, we now think, with bad banking. In all of the countries that are currently in crisis, there was a fuzzy line at best between what was public and what was private; the minister's nephew or the president's son could open a bank and raise money both from the domestic populace and from foreign lenders, with everyone believing that their money was safe because official connections stood behind the institution. Government guarantees on bank deposits are standard practice throughout the world, but normally these guarantees come with strings attached. The owners of banks have to meet capital requirements (that is, put a lot of their own money at risk), restrict themselves to prudent investments, and so on. In Asian countries, however, too many people seem to have been granted privilege without responsibility, allowing them to play a game of "heads I win, tails somebody else loses." And the loans financed highly speculative real estate ventures and wildly overambitious corporate expansions. The bubble was inflated still further by credulous foreign investors, who were all too eager to put money into faraway countries about which they knew nothing (except that they were thriving). It was also, for a while, self- sustaining: All those irresponsible loans created a boom in real estate and stock markets, which made the balance sheets of banks and their clients look much healthier than they were. Soon enough, Asia was set up for the second act, the bursting of the bubble. The bursting had to happen sooner or later. At some point it was going to become clear that the Panglossian values Asian markets had placed on assets weren't realistic in this imperfect world, that Asian conglomerates are no better than their Western counterparts at trying to be in every business in every country. But the collapse came sooner rather than later because speculative bubbles are vulnerable to self-fulfilling pessimism: As soon as a significant number of investors begin to wonder whether the bubble will burst, it does. So Asia went into a downward spiral. As nervous investors began to pull their money out of banks, asset prices plunged. As asset prices fell, it became increasingly doubtful whether governments would really stand behind the deposits and loans that remained, and investors fled all the faster. Foreign investors stampeded for the exits, forcing currency devaluations, which worsened the crisis still more as banks and companies found themselves with assets in devalued baht or rupiah, but with liabilities in lamentably solid dollars. What actually started this downward spiral? Who cares! Any little thing can set off an avalanche once the conditions are right. Probably the proximate causes were a slump in the semiconductor market and a rise in the dollar- yen exchange rate, but if they hadn't triggered the crisis, something else would have. Asia's financial implosion is, of course, dragging the real economies down with it. Partly, that is because the collapse of asset values is making people feel poorer, depressing consumer demand; partly it is because low stock prices and high interest rates are depressing investment. But there is also-- disturbingly--a supply-side effect. Although runaway banks were the original source of the mess, a
New York Times Hi-Tech Spy System (fwd)
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 1998 22:02:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Chilling Portrait of Technology Uses February 24, 1998 By BRUNO GIUSSANI European Study Paints a Chilling Portrait of Technology's Uses A massive telecommunications interception network operates within Europe and, according to a new study circulating on the Internet, "targets the telephone, fax and e-mail messages of private citizens, politicians, trade unionists and companies alike." The report says that the network has the ability to tap into almost all international telecommunications as well as parts of domestic phone traffic and is apparently operated by intelligence agencies without any mechanism of democratic control. The network, dubbed Echelon, is described in a new study by the European Parliament titled "An Appraisal of Technologies of Political Control." The 112-page document, dated January 6, 1998, is considered an internal working paper and, therefore, has not been posted on the parliament's own Web server. While paper copies of the report have been made public, in the last three weeks, it has begun to be reproduced on the Internet by civil liberties advocates and is now available from several Web sites. The report was written by Steve Wright, an analyst with the Omega Foundation, a British human rights organization, on behalf of a research unit of the European Parliament known as STOA (Scientific and Technological Options Assessment). [The European Parliament is the legislative body of the European Union (EU), an economic and political alliance of 15 countries.] According to the report, in the last few years many governments have spent huge sums on the development of new technologies from surveillance systems to paralyzing weapons for their police and security forces. While the adoption of these technologies may have legitimate law enforcement functions and may be relatively harmless when accompanied by strong regulation and accountability mechanisms, "without such democratic controls they provide powerful tools of oppression," the report states. Outmatched by the speed and complexity of technological innovation, the fear is that these controls have been quickly weakening in recent years. The rapid and unchecked proliferation of surveillance devices among both the private and public sector presents today "a serious threat to civil liberties in Europe" and could have "awesome implications," the document stresses. Drawing from sources as diverse as academia, intelligence agencies and non-governmental organizations, the STOA study offers a rare description and evaluation of the technologies of political control what it calls weaponry aimed "as much at hearts and minds as at body." This includes electronic surveillance systems; data gathering, processing and filtering devices; biometric and other human identity recognition tools; so-called "less-lethal" weapons for crowd control; new prison control systems, and torture and execution techniques. One core trend identified by Wright has been "towards a militarisation of the police and a paramilitarisation of military forces in Europe," meaning that the technologies used by police and the army converge and become "more or less indistinguishable." This "parallels a political shift in targeting," the report adds. Instead of investigating crime (which is a reactive activity) law enforcement agencies are now increasingly "tracking certain social classes and races of people living in the red-lined areas before any crime is committed" a form of pre-emptive policing dubbed "data-veillance" and based on military models of gathering huge amounts of low-grade intelligence and digging out deviant patterns. The term data-veillance covers an impressive range of methods and devices, including vision technology; bugging and interception techniques; satellite tracking; through-clothing human scanning; automatic fingerprinting; human recognition systems that can recognize genes, odor and retina patterns, and biometric systems. Electronic surveillance technology, the systems that can monitor the movements of individuals and their communications, "is one of the areas where outdated regulations have not kept pace with an accelerating pattern of abuses" by law enforcement agencies and private companies, Wright says in the report. The report paints a frightening picture of an Orwellian world. For example, it states that Britain has set up the first DNA databank, and at least one political party is suggesting "to DNA-profile the nation from birth." Face-recognition systems "are perhaps five years off." Parabolic and laser microphones can detect distant conversation, even behind closed windows. Stroboscopic cameras can individually photograph all the participants in a march. Among the more futuristic scenarios portrayed in the study, robots called
Visa and The Anti-Child Support Act (fwd)
From: Robert Weissman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Multiple recipients of list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Visa and The Anti-Child Support Act Call it the Anti-Child Support Act. It is the product of a full-throttled campaign by the credit card companies and financial services industry to rewrite U.S. bankruptcy laws. Their goal: to make it harder to declare bankruptcy and to impose heavy burdens on debtors who do fall into bankruptcy. More than one million Americans declare bankruptcy each year. This should not be a surprise: the credit industry sends out 2.5 billion solicitations each year; credit card advertisements urge consumers, simply, to spend; and the consumer culture encourages extravagant purchases and constantly upgrades the measure of what is an "essential" versus a "convenience." All the while, real wages have stagnated or dropped over the last 25 years for 80 percent of the population. When a person declares bankruptcy, they are required to undertake court-supervised repayment plans. During a period of three to five years, with some money set aside for essential needs like food and rent, they allocate their income to pay off their debts as best they can. At the end of the repayment period, their debts are wiped clean. For the credit industry, of course, personal bankruptcies mean unpaid accounts. That's why the industry wants to make it harder to declare bankruptcy and more onerous to live through it. The industry-supported "Responsible Borrower Protection Act" would force debtors to litigate their right to be in bankruptcy, and impose expensive new filing and other bureaucratic requirements -- just to get into bankruptcy. Once in bankruptcy, debtors would be forced to stay in repayment plans for five to seven years. The legislation would place payment obligations for credit card debt on a par with secured debt on critically important items like a home mortgage or a car loan. It even would place credit card debt on equal footing with child support payment obligations, says Gary Klein of the National Consumer Law Center. In other words, debtor repayment plans could not prioritize paying off mortgages -- enabling people to keep their homes -- or paying back child support over payments on overdue Visa or Mastercard accounts. The industry spin on this draconian legislation is that it would crack down on "bankruptcies of convenience." The American Financial Services Association argues that debtors routinely file for bankruptcy to escape debts when they have the means to make payments. Bankruptcy is becoming a "financial planning tool," the Association contends. These claims ignore some inconvenient facts: Bankruptcy debtors have an income 40 percent below the national average, for example. And the existing bankruptcy system imposes tough oversight provision on debtors, with strong civil and criminal penalties for fraud and dismissal of claims by people who can afford to pay their debts. But the credit industry doesn't intend for facts to get in its way. It has launched a massive PR and lobbying blitz to generate public support for the Anti-Child Support Act. Financial interests have banded together to form the National Consumer Bankruptcy Coalition. Members of the coalition poured more than $700,000 into federal candidate campaign coffers in the first half of 1997 alone. The American Financial Services Association has hired a Dream Team of lobbyists and consultants to push the Anti-Child Support Act. Among its hires: Verner Liipfert, a law firm that is the current home of Bob Dole and Lloyd Bentsen, former Treasury Secretary; Timmons Co., run by William Timmons, a top White House aide in the Nixon and Ford administrations; and former Republican National Committee Chair Haley Barbour's law firm. The industry's big bucks and lobbyist Dream Team are all working to sabotage an institution that provides a modicum of fairness in the American economy. There is no debtor's prison in the United States; when people fall on hard times and into financial troubles from which there is no escape, we make them pay what they can -- and then offer them a fresh start. There is, of course, one serious issue of bankruptcy abuse -- big corporations declaring bankruptcy to avoid liability payments for dangerous products they sold. But somehow that problem hasn't drawn the attention of the self-proclaimed advocates of "bankruptcy reform." Russell Mokhiber is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Corporate Crime Reporter. Robert Weissman is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Multinational Monitor. (c) Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman
Fwd: NYC Demo Against IMF Indonesia Bailout (fwd)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: February 25, 1998 CONTACT: Jane Guskin, 212-674-9499 [EMAIL PROTECTED] NEW YORKERS PROTEST IMF INDONESIA BAILOUT On Friday, Feb. 13 a group of 75 people rallied in New York's midtown area to protest the bailout of Indonesia's Suharto dictatorship by the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The protesters demonstrated first outside an IMF branch office; they then marched, singing, chanting and carrying enormous puppets, to the Citicorp Center, corporate headquarters of Citibank, one of Indonesia's major creditors. Speakers at the rally included Polk award-winning journalist Allan Nairn, a survivor of the Indonesian Army's November 1991 massacre of 250 protestors in East Timor; Christian Lemoine, of the Disney/Haiti Justice Campaign; Ken Mercer, Associate Executive Director of the Edenwald-Gun Hill Community Center in the Bronx, one of the sponsors of the youth campaign against Nike sweatshops. Rev. Max Surjadinata, an Indonesian-American member of the New York local East Timor Action Network, gave the closing speech. At Citicorp, between chants against the IMF, individual demonstrators denounced the bailout and the Suharto regime in English, German, Chinese (Mandarin) and Spanish. The rally was covered by the Portuguese newspaper Publico, by the PBS television program Globalvision, by New York radio station WBAI and by a stringer for the Voice of America Indonesian language service. "Suharto's army can crush demonstrations in Indonesia and Timor, but it can't stop them here," says Nairn. "Whenever Americans protest, it resonates in Jakarta because the regime sees Washington as their lifeline. Activism can cut it off. Clinton and the IMF are blocking Indonesia's chance for democracy. Instead of starving Indonesian workers, we should be supporting their fight for freedom." The demonstration was initiated by the East Timor Action Network and Justice for All. Endorsers included Jews Against Genocide and the Global Sweatshop Coalition, Disney/Haiti Justice Campaign, the New York Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador, the Nicaragua Solidarity Network of Greater New York, and other groups. === Weekly News Update on the Americas * Nicaragua Solidarity Network of NY 339 Lafayette St, New York, NY 10012 * 212-674-9499 fax: 212-674-9139 http://home.earthlink.net/~dbwilson/wnuhome.html *[EMAIL PROTECTED] ===
Fwd: BT: In defence of the IMF (fwd)
BUSINESS TIMES SINGAPORE 1998/02/24 IMF-bashing will not help Asia By Vikram Khanna BACK in 1988, as a relatively green IMF staffer, I attended a conference in Chicago. I found myself seated next to an Argentine academic and I struck up a conversation with him. On finding out where I worked, the professor shifted his chair a few inches away from me and quipped: "It's better to keep one's distance from the IMF." Good-humoured as the incident was, it was my first direct exposure to the "image problem" the International Monetary Fund had developed in Latin America as a result of its involvement in the debt crisis. I got away lightly, of course: some of my colleagues at the Fund used to be pelted with tomatoes and rotten eggs when they visited Latin America. At the time, virtually every economy of the region was in the dumps. Between them, they had seen it all: hyperinflation, food riots, crashing currencies, mass layoffs, corporate bankruptcies, bank insolvencies and even insurrections. The IMF was seen to be, if not the cause of these problems, certainly an aggravating influence. It was perceived as a kind of financial vampire that was draining resources from the region to ensure that the world's fat-cat bankers got their money back. A similar scenario is now beginning to unfold in Asia. As many of the region's economies reel under their respective crises, the IMF has come under attack. Labour groups, non-governmental organisations, government officials and freelance economic advisers, among others, have complained that the IMF medicine being administered in Asia is too harsh, that it isn't working and that the IMF has, in fact, misdiagnosed the region's problems. The chances are that the critics will become increasingly strident, because in the months to come, economic conditions will get tougher across the region. Credit will get tighter, bankruptcies, liquidations and layoffs will rise, and asset prices will decline. At least three of the region's economies -- Indonesia, Korea and Thailand -- will shrink, and most others will be lucky to achieve half the economic growth rates they enjoyed last year. A detailed examination of the appropriateness of IMF-backed policies for Asia would need a separate column -- perhaps more than just one. But a few broad points are worth noting here. First is a point often made by IMF officials themselves: that the critics tend to confuse the disease with the medicine. The economic pain that is beginning to be felt around the region is the ultimate result of the distortions in economies, such as overinflated asset prices and under-supervised banking systems, not of the measures to correct these distortions. The undoing of years and sometimes decades of financial excesses and distorted economic structures will inevitably cause some pain. To expect there can be a magically painless way to deal with, for example, overextended companies and insolvent banks and to unwind artificially inflated asset values -- not to mention rampant cronyism -- is a pipe-dream. At any rate, nobody has produced credible, alternative strategies to resolve the Asian countries' woes that are remotely as comprehensive as those contained in IMF-supported programmes. To be sure, the IMF has not exactly covered itself in glory thus far. It has made its share of mistakes: it did not see the crisis coming, except, we are told, in Thailand; it was wrong to have backed the precipitous closure of 16 private banks in Indonesia in the midst of a panic; the social safety nets it has provided in its programmes with Indonesia and Thailand are probably inadequate and these programmes might have to be modified in the months ahead. Its secrecy has not helped either: had the IMF said in public what it claims to have told Thailand in private, the problems there might have been arrested earlier. For all this, however, the IMF's prescriptions are broadly what the doctor ordered for the crisis-ridden economies of Asia. What's more, these prescriptions command the confidence of the world's major economic powers and the international financial community -- an essential prerequisite for any workable strategy for unwinding the crisis. The repeated vilification of the IMF-supported programmes in Asia is counter-productive: it makes governments less committed to implementing policies of reform. By undermining confidence, it makes such policies harder to implement. And it dissuades governments of countries that might need to approach the IMF from going ahead and doing so, which generally leads to a deterioration of the economies of those countries to a point where there is little option but to adopt stronger and more painful programmes of reform -- invariably supported by the IMF. As for Latin America, it recovered to become one of the world's most economically vibrant regions. The image of the
MAI Handbook Available (fwd)
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 1998 16:04:31 -0500 (EST) TO: MAI Activists FR: Friends of the Earth - US RE: Hot Off the Press -- Handbook on the MAI Friends of the Earth has just produced a guidebook to the MAI, called License to Loot: the MAI and How to Stop It!'. The report provides useful information and analysis about the MAI, beginning with a section on what is in the text of the MAI that is so dangerous and what it really means. License to Loot' also has an issue by issue analysis of the impacts of the MAI on issues from the environment, to workers, human rights, and development; to intellectual property rights and speculative capital flows. The report concludes with useful ideas of what citizen groups and concerned citizens can do to stop the MAI in a What You Can Do' section. To order your copy of License to Loot': Send an email message to Mark Vallianatos at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or send a fax to 202-783-0444. The order form must include: Your Name Organization Full Mailing Address Country Send all requests for License to Loot' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Friends of the Earth is limited to offering one complimentary copy per person, unless you can pay the shipping and handling costs for more copies. * Andrea Durbin Friends of the Earth U.S. 1025 Vermont Avenue, NW 3rd Fl Washington, DC 20005 tel: 202-783-7400, ext. 209 fax: 202-783-0444 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Inspection of US weapons of mass destruction
Media Advisory For Immediate Release February 24th, 1998 LIBBY DAVIES, M.P., TO LEAD SEARCH FOR U.S. NUCLEAR WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION (Vancouver) Libby Davies, Member of Parliament for Vancouver East, will lead a Citizens' Weapons Inspection Team composed of community and church leaders to search for U.S. weapons of mass destruction suspected to be deployed in neighbouring Washington State. The team's visit to Washington State will occur as nuclear-armed U.S. and British military forces, backed by Canadian forces, stand poised for a military assault against Iraq to enforce U.N. weapons inspections. "Canada should play the role of peacemaker by working to ensure that all weapons of mass destruction are banned," said Libby Davies. "Our team will begin by inspecting the country which possesses thousands of the most deadly weapons ever created - nuclear weapons." Analysts suspect that 1600 active nuclear weapons are based in Washington State - more active weapons than Britain, France, and China combined. The team will focus its inspection on Submarine Base Bangor, the homeport of eight Trident submarines located near Puget Sound, west of Seattle. A Trident submarine can carry 24 missiles and 200 nuclear bombs - enough to destroy an entire country. Joining Libby Davies, M.P., will be Peter Coombes, President of End the Arms Race; Murray Dobbin, National Board Member of The Council of Canadians; Ed Schmitt, Chair of the Peace and Social Justice Committee of the Anglican Diocese of New Westminster; David Morgan, President of Veterans Against Nuclear Arms; and others. The team will depart Vancouver at 7 A.M. Thursday, February 26th, (the same day the H.M.C.S. Toronto arrives in the Persian Gulf). It will be joined by U.S. members at a meeting in Seattle at 11 a.m., and the team will arrive at Submarine Base Bangor at 4:00 p.m. The team has written the base commander requesting full and unconditional access to the site to search for nuclear weapons of mass destruction. "Only rogue states stockpile and conceal weapons of mass destruction," said Peter Coombes. "We expect to be granted our request for an inspection of nuclear weapons deployed on the U.S. submarines." (30) Contact: Libby Davies, Ottawa (613) 992-6030, Vancouver (604) 775-5800. Jillian Skeet, End the Arms Race at (604) 688-8846. The team will depart in white vans at 7 A.M. from 1207 Salsbury Drive (at William St. near Commercial Drive). ** END THE ARMS RACE Suite 405 825 Granville Street Vancouver BC V6Z 1K9 604/ 687-3223 Fax 604/ 687-3277 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.peacewire.org President William Jefferson Clinton The White House Washington, D.C. February 24, 1998 Mr. President: End the Arms Race, one of Canada's largest peace and disarmament organizations, is currently working with peace workers in Washington State to organize an international Citizens' Weapons Inspection Team to visit Naval Submarine Base Bangor on Thursday February 26. We are scheduled to arrive at the Naval Submarine Base Bangor at approximately 4:00 p.m. The team will consist of eight to ten Canadians and will be joined by an equal number of Americans. Among the Canadian team are prominent community workers and a Member of the Parliament of Canada. We trust that you will take the appropriate action to ensure that our international Citizens' Weapons Inspection Team is given full access to Naval Submarine Base Bangor in Washington State. The team visiting the area is requesting a brief meeting with the Commanding Officer of Naval Submarine Base Bangor so we can get detailed information regarding its purpose. It is suspected that Submarine Base Bangor in Washington State is being used to store and deploy weapons of mass destruction. It is commonly understood that at least eight Trident nuclear submarines are based at Bangor, each with the capacity to carry twenty-four intercontinental ballistic missiles armed with eight nuclear warheads each. Continuing, indefinite reliance on nuclear weapons as the cornerstone of United States and NATO defence strategy is a clear violation of the nuclear disarmament obligation in Article VI of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which was described in the 1996 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice as an obligation "to bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects." Therefore, as ethically concerned and law abiding citizens, we acknowledge our duty and responsibility to confirm whether or not weapons of mass destruction are stored in the area. Thus, we are requesting a tour of the base and access to all documentation that confirms whether or not weapons of mass destruction or the delivery vehicles of any such weapons are present on the base. We also request access to inspect any nuclear
Newman Outlines Threat of MAI (fwd)
Peter C. Newman, Macleans Magazine, March 2, 1998 MAI: a time bomb with a very short fuse The inability of negotiators in Paris to finalize the proposed Multilateral Agreement on Investment gives Canada a welcome chance to stand back and consider the treaty's awesome consequences. Ottawa has been virtually silent on the issue, presumably following the same advice as was given in a secret PMO memo, leaked in Maclean's when the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement was being negotiated in 1988. At the time, Brian Mulroney's advisers told their master: "It is likely that the higher the profile the issue attains, the lower the degree of public support will be. Benign neglect from a majority of Canadians may be the realistic outcome of a well-executed communications program." That has certainly been Trade Minister Sergio Marchi's approach, and it has worked up to now. Considering that 29 countries, including Canada, have been negotiating the new trade accord since May, 1995, the proceedings have been kept amazingly secret. There has yet to be a full-scale parliamentary debate on the issue; it is as if the future of this country had surreptitiously been relegated to senior civil servants, apparently with a mandate to sign the country away. They have done virtually all the negotiations to date, and no one with any degree of public accountability has had much of a look in. This is not only wrong; it is stupid. Nobody understands the likely impact of the MAI. Reading the draft treaty, I kept thinking it must be either a joke, or Tom d'Aquino's ultimate dream come true. To be fair, d'Aquino and the Business Council on National Issues that he heads, have been surprisingly quiet on the issue. When I talked to him about MAI, he would only say "the fundamentals of the Multilateral Agreement on Investment have been around for years. All that stuff about reciprocal access to each other's economies, none of it is really new. "And yet MAI has been painted by the left as this great Satan. To say this is going to be the final screw-down, and that we're going to lose our sovereignty is madness, absolute madness. It's only through economic emancipation, only through being economically stronger, that we have the best chance of protecting our independence and our sovereignty." The Supreme Court ought to be examining the legality of signing the MAI instead of Quebec's possible independence His argument is valid, in terms of the notion that only the strong can survive in a global economy. But the question remains whether any self-respecting country can sign such an agreement. Unless it doesn't mean what it says, and is a statement of philosophy instead of intention, its provisions will rob national governments of the ability to impose sovereignty inside their own territory. Once that is gone, what is the point of pretending you're still a country? If we sign the MAI as it is now written, the threat to Canada could far outweigh the potential harm of Quebec separation. The Supreme Court of Canada ought to be examining the legality of such a treaty, instead of the largely symbolic case of Quebec's possible unilateral declaration of independence. The heart of the MAI is that there ought to be no difference between domestic and foreign investors in any of the 29 countries that make up the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. That could mean an end to protection for any cultural sector or parts of the economy currently covered by domestic ownership rules. Everything would be wide open in such a Darwinian world, up for grabs to the highest bidder. In all likelihood that would be some U.S. transnational, which would treat our most treasured institutions with all the subtlety of a Genghis Khan. Carla Hills, the U.S. trade representative, recently gave cause for concern when she summed up American trade intentions this way: "We want corporations to be able to make investments overseas without being required to take local partners, to export a given percentage of their output, to use local parts, or to meet a dozen other domestic restrictions." The MAI, if I read it correctly, goes even further than granting national treatment to foreign corporations. In effect, it endows privately owned corporations with the power -- but not accountability -- of nation-states. It is no coincidence that 488 of Fortune's 500 leading global corporations are domiciled in OECD countries. (Only five Canadian companies -- BCE Inc., CIBC, George Weston Ltd., Royal Bank of Canada and Seagram Co. Ltd. -- make the grade.) The MAI would remove many barriers that now apply to these corporate giants, and the ability of the government to freely take action regarding environmental standards, labor laws and patent exclusions that adversely affect foreign investors would be compromised. This kind of sanction would not merely apply to big
Chiapas Refugees Ambushed, 1 Killed (fwd)
The Associated Press 02/23/1998 18:05 EST Chiapas Refugees Ambushed, 1 Killed SAN CRISTOBAL DE LAS CASAS (AP) -- Attackers ambushed a group of refugees as they returned from a meeting with foreign human rights observers in bloodied Chiapas state, killing one, survivors and rights groups said Monday. Witnesses identified the attackers as members of a pro-government group known as ``Peace and Justice'' -- an opponent of the rebel Zapatistas in Mexico's southernmost state. Saturday's attack came two months after pro-government gunmen massacred 45 people outside a church in rural Acteal. It also came amid an official crackdown against pro-Zapatista foreigners, whom Mexico accuses of meddling in events in Chiapas. The man killed, Jose Tila Lopez Garcia, and several other men displaced by fighting in the region had walked six hours to meet with members of a Spain-based human rights organization. The group's trip was authorized by the government. As they returned home, the refugees were intercepted by eight heavily armed men, who opened fire on them, according to a press release issued by the observer commission. The commission called the killing ``reprisal for their participation in the meeting with the observers.'' Chiapas state Gov. Roberto Albores Guillen issued a statement Sunday ordering his attorney general to investigate and ``apply the full weight of the law on those who are responsible.'' Chiapas has seen repeated clashes between pro- and anti-government factions since the Zapatistas rebelled in January 1994. Thousands of people have been forced from their homes because they were suspected of sympathizing with either the government or the rebels.
Canadian petition opposing Canada's role in Iraq crisis
If you would like to sign an online petition protesting Canada's role in supporting what the U.S. is doing in the Iraqi crisis, click on the following URL: http://w-3productions.com/cgi-bin/miva?/petition/petition.hts
WHC: APPEAL FOR ASIAN CONFERENCE (fwd)
Subject: WHC: APPEAL FOR ASIAN CONFERENCE Date: Tue, 24 Feb 98 08:03:02 - From: Alan Benjamin [EMAIL PROTECTED] NOTE: The Continuations Committee of the Western Hemisphere Workers¹ Conference Against NAFTA and Privatizations received this ³Appeal for an Asian Conference² from Brother Tafazzul Hussain, President of the National Workers Federation of Bangladesh (BJSF), with the request that we forward it to all the participants at the San Francisco conference and to the U.S. trade union movement as a whole. Brother Hussain, as you will recall, was one of the speakers at the conference's Saturday, Nov. 15 plenary session. APPEAL FOR AN ASIAN CONFERENCE IN DEFENSE OF WORKERS¹ AND DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS: (DACCA, BANGLADESH -- MAY 26-27, 1998) Dear Friends of all the Countries of Asia: We are sending you this letter from Bangladesh on behalf of a group of trade union leaders, leaders of peasant organizations, professionals, and political activists known for their unrelenting struggle in defense of workers' and democratic rights who are calling at the end of May 1998 a convention to form a political organization devoted to the defense of workers, peasants, professionals and youth of Bangladesh, to the struggle for democracy and the defense of the sovereign rights of the people of Bangladesh. We propose to take the opportunity of that Convention to organize an: ASIAN CONFERENCE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE LABOR AND DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENTS ALL OVER ASIA This initiative is taking place in the midst of an unprecedented onslaught of multinationals and international financial institutions against all the people of Asia. "THE PEOPLE MUST PAY!" The crisis which started in Asia in the form of a financial crisis with the domino-like downfall of the currencies is now returning forcefully to its starting point as a destructive social crisis. In the name of globalization people must pay for the bankruptcy engendered by the main financial powers. Officially, the evaluation of the immediate consequences in terms of job losses forecast for 1998 is as follows: Thailand: 2 million Korea: 3 million Indonesia: 9 million China: 11 to 15 million A country like ours is sometimes presented as escaping from this disaster because it is less integrated into the world economy. What is the truth? More than ever before, under the conditions of the general crisis, the IMF and World Bank are proceeding to implement the so-called "structural adjustment plans" that are leading to the total destruction of the jute industry, which was the life-line of the Bangladesh economy: 50% of the people, directly or indirectly dependent on that industry. The privatization of the textile industry, fertilizers, mineral resources, power-generation and public services, industry and railways has resulted in hundreds of thousands of lay-offs in a country where 50% of the active population is unemployed without any social benefits. Bangladesh is being carved up by the oil giants of the world. For instance, in the region of Sylhet, the American multinational Occidental was drilling oil when an explosion set off a forest fire (in June 1996) which is still burning. In fact, one fifth of the territory of Bangladesh is cut off. The company refused to take any responsibility for the losses and simply withdrew from the area. Isn't this fact a crystal clear expression of the way multinationals and international speculators treat our country: They walk in, devastate and leave the disaster behind them, the people are supposed to pay so that the multinationals and the speculators recover their losses. In accordance with the needs of multinationals and world financial institutions, Bangladesh is being dismembered: regional agreements are set up between Bangladesh and states of India -- such as Assam, Tripura, and West Bengal -- without going through the federal government of India. Bridges on our highways have been leased to American companies who look after the toll, which means that all Bangladesh traffic is taxed for the benefit of foreign companies. THIS IS NOT OUR FATE ALONE This is not the fate of Bangladesh alone. Of course, when one speaks of the forest fires in Bangladesh, one is reminded of the catastrophe which took place in Indonesia. But beyond those examples, it is a fact that hot money was poured into our countries, not to help in the development, but to yield fast profits on the basis of a speculative boom increasing the shares of international swindlers which feed upon the labor and misery of our peoples, upon over-exploitation, the spreading of special economic zones where the country's laws do not apply any more, where trade union rights are curtailed or suppressed. We all know that was the basis of the so-called Asian prosperity. THE
Re: Red vs Green
This isn't the whole story of the NDP, loggers and the environmental movement, Paul. As part of its pandering to business and right wing labour, the BC NDP government actually labelled Greenpeace "enemies of BC". When enviros were arrested for blocking logging in the Carmanah watershed a couple of years back (this is -- was? -- a pristine valley of old growth) they were charged with _conspiracy_ for Chrissake. In further pandering to the loggers (who have helped organize notoriously anti-labour, right wing groups like the Share folks), the government has encouraged logging in very fragile watersheds, jeopardizing the water supply in areas like the Slocan Valley. The NDP's environmental record may look good from afar. But here on the ground it looks like the shits. Sid Shniad Max talks about the conflict between the coal miners and ecologists in the US. Here in Canada, there has been a major conflict between loggers and ecologists, particularly in BC where the forest industry is the key to the provincial economy. This has led to major problems for the NDP both electorally and in policy making. The NDP relies on the unions for both financial and electoral support but also on ecologist for support and election workers. The forest industry keeps yelling, if you protect old growth forests and oppose clear cutting you (the loggers) will lose your jobs. So vote Liberal (the right-wing party currently so you can keep your jobs. (or federally, vote for the unltra right Reform (sic) Party). As a result, the NDP government which has done more for the ecology (increased parks, introduced more forest restrictions, etc.) than any other jurisdiction in Canada, is teetering on the electoral edge, while still being roundly condemned by the environmentalist who would prefera right-wing ecological collapse to gradual improvement in forest practice. It is all very discouraging for us Red-Greens. Paul Phillips Economics, University of Manitoba
Developments in South Africa
The Daily Telegraph Sunday 22 February 1998 ANC GUERRILLAS TURN TO CRIME By Alec Russell in Johannesburg In a nightmare for post-apartheid South Africa, former African National Congress guerrillas have become disillusioned with their political masters and turned to crime. With a demoralised and corrupt police and a limitless supply of weapons from the region's many recent wars, President Mandela's society has long been seen by international criminal syndicates as ripe for exploitation. Now as former ANC guerrillas tire of waiting for their government to keep its promises, the crime-lords have on tap a desperate and ruthless source of manpower to do their dirty work. Over the last few months South Africa has been hit by a spate of military-style raids on bank vans. More than a dozen guards have been killed and more than 10 million stolen. In the bloodiest hit, which left six guards dead, the attackers cordoned off a major highway with a spiked chain before ambushing a bank van. They first sprayed it with armour-piercing bullets then stopped it by ramming into it with a commandeered 20-ton lorry. It was a professional job with echoes of the tactics township defence units used against the police in the apartheid era. Few South Africans were surprised when Collins Chauke, a former member of the ANC's armed wing, Umkhonto we Size, was identified as a prime suspect. The government has claimed that he was an exceptional case. But the inmates of Devon military camp 60 miles east of Johannesburg tell a very different story. Left to fester in their brick blockhouses they are simmering with resentment at the government. They also leave little doubt that many ex-colleagues are resorting to crime. "The government promised us heaven and earth and they have not delivered," said Sipho Mavundla, a 32-year-old veteran of the "liberation" war who spent four years in exile in Tanzania. "I can survive on the 600 rands (80) a month they pay us. But some can't. I won't say my comrades are robbing banks, but if you had army training, no job, and were desperate to feed your family, what would you do?" On a fire-extinguisher behind him someone had scratched: "This government is driving us to crime. They force us to rob banks." A cartoon strip on an adjacent wall rammed home the message. In the first picture, three soldiers are marching up and down in freshly pressed uniforms. In the second, a duck labelled the "commissioner" struts around in a parody of a general out of touch with his men. In the third a man in a balaclava with an AK-47 on his back is running with a television in his arms. Peter Swarahle, a wiry 25-year-old, is the unofficial spokesman for those in the Devon camp. He joined Umkhonto we Size in the late Eighties and after the briefest of training fought in his local township, Hammanskraal, north of Pretoria, against the apartheid security forces. At the end of the apartheid era in May 1994 he was among thousands of ANC soldiers who were promised a career in the army or training to adapt to civilian life. He opted for the latter. But since then he says all he has done is sleep and eat and collect his 20 rands (2.50) a day. Last month he decided enough was enough. Now he and 11 colleagues are preparing to sue the government for breach of contract for failing to prepare them for civilian life. "Most of us have been here for three years and all we have to show for it is a certificate of a few weeks' training," he said. "We've written to the government and no one has replied." Ronnie Kasrils, the deputy minister of defence and a former Umkhonto we Size leader, told The Telegraph that frustration was not widespread. The reality, he said, "does not fit the picture of ex-combatants being thrown out on the streets and becoming highway robbers. If we find there are former [Umkhonto we Size] members involved in crime it shouldn't surprise anyone. Every country in the world has seen former policemen and soldiers finding it hard to return to civilian life". The British-monitored integration of the old white-led army and black guerrillas has been widely praised as one of the triumphs of South Africa's transition. But that is no consolation in Devon and other camps for demobilised freedom fighters. "We were helping to set our country free," shouted one man who would only give his nickname, Triple M. "Now we are bounced around like a rubber ball. No one ever comes here. People call us criminals. But we have been forgotten."
Solidarity tours for Detroit strikers
SPRING OFFENSIVE TOURS Knocked down but not knocked out. Detroit's locked-out newspaper workers are continuing their thirty-two month long fight against the Detroit News and the Detroit Free Press and for their jobs and a good union contract. 2000 Detroit newspaper workers struck the Detroit Free Press and the Detroit News in July 1995. Following nineteen months on the picket line their unions offered the Detroit's newspaper bosses an unconditional return to work in February of last year only to have the newspaper bosses leave the large majority of them locked-out while the scabs who had crossed their picket lines during the strike continued to do their jobs. More than 1,400 workers remain locked out while the approximately 600 workers who have been allowed to return to work are "locked-in" working without a contract in intolerable conditions. Meanwhile the courts have ruled that Detroit's newspaper bosses bear full responsiblity for the strike because they bargained in bad faith. But the same courts have failed to compel Detroit's newspaper bosses to remove the scabs and give all the locked-out workers back their jobs. It is in this context that an informal network of local union leaders and worker activists in Canada and the U.S. have are launching a "Spring Offensive" comprised of an ambitious series of speaking tours. These tours will mobilize support for Detroit's locked-out newspaper workers and send out a message that the fight in Detroit is the fight of workers everywhere and that we are determined to do what we can to ensure that all of Detroit's courageous newspaper workers win back their jobs and return to work in dignity with a good union contract firmly in place. There will be three "Spring Offensive" Tours. The first tour will take place across Southern Ontario and coincide with International Women's Day events in Toronto. The second tour will span almost the entire U.S. West Coast. The third tour will feature a series of events in British Columbia and Alberta and include participation in a Canadian Union of Public Employees convention in Alberta. Tour events are scheduled for: Tour 1 March 3 in Windsor, Ontario March 4 in St. Catharines, Ontario March 5, 6 7 in Toronto, Ontario Tour 2 March 7-12 in San Francisco, CA. March 13 in Portland, Oregon March 14 in Salem, Oregon March 15 in Corvallis, Oregon March 16 17 in Seattle, WA. Tour 3 March 17-19 in Vancouver, B.C. March 20 in Lethbridge, Alberta March 21 24 in Calgary*, Alberta March 22-23 25-26 in Edmonton, Alberta March 27 28 in Harrison, B.C. * March 24 appearance at a concert by Chumbawamba. For further details about events in your town contact: For general information about the tour: (905) 934-6233 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] To learn more about the Action Coalition of Strikers and Supporters in Detroit contact: (810) 447-2716 or (810) 574-9539 or write: ACOSS 5750 15-Mile Rd. Box 242, Sterling Heights Michigan 48310-5777
Linguistic reform in the EU
CREDIT: Lila Kingsland, Calgary The European Union commissioners have announced that agreement has been reached to adopt English as the preferred language for European communications, rather than German, which was the other possibility. As part of the negotiations, the British government conceded that English spelling had some room for improvement and has accepted a five-year phased plan for what will be known as EuroEnglish (Euro for short). In the first year, "s" will be used instead of the soft "c". Sertainly, sivil servants will resieve this news with joy. Also, the hard "c" will be replaced with "k". Not only will this klear up konfusion, but typewriters kan have one less letter. There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year, when the troublesome "ph" will be replaced by "f". This will make words like "fotograf" 20 per sent shorter. In the third year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible. Governments will enkorage the removal of double letters, which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling. Also, al wil agre that the horible mes of silent "e"s in the languag is disgrasful, and they would go. By the fourth year, peopl wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing "th" by "z" and "w" by " v". During ze fifz year, ze unesesary "o" kan be dropd from vords kontaining "ou", and similar changes vud of kors be aplid to ozer kombinations of leters. After zis fifz yer, ve vil hav a reli sensibl riten styl. Zer vil be no mor trubls or difikultis and evrivun vil find it ezi tu understand ech ozer. Ze drem vil finali kum tru. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
(fwd) Union Buster Files Defamation Suit vs Academic Researcher (fwd)
From: "Ellen Dannin [EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Union Buster Files Defamation Suit vs Academic Researcher Date: 21 Feb 1998 20:04:46 GMT Statement of Protest On February 9, 1998, Beverly Enterprises, a company with a deplorable record in labor relations matters filed a defamation suit in federal court against Dr. Kate Bronfenbrenner. Dr. Bronfenbrenner is well-respected academic who has done important research on a variety of labor issues. Beverly seeks both compensatory and punitive damages. With the complaint, Beverly's attorneys, Pietragallo, Bosick Gordon of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and Walter Haverfield, of Cleveland, Ohio, served a massive request for production of documents. Among the documents requested, Beverly seeks copies of all documents and confidential survey data relating to Dr. Bronfenbrenner.'s research on union and employer behavior in union organizing campaigns. It also seeks documents concerning Cornell's policies concerning the faculty research, speeches, presentations, lectures and seminars. The circumstances and background of this suit make clear that this is a thinly veiled attack on Dr Bronfenbrenner's academic freedom and her rights under the first amendment. The lawsuit is based on remarks made by Dr Bronfenbrenner at a May 19, 1997 Congressional Town meeting sponsored by several western Pennsylvania congressional representatives and Rep. Lane Evans (D-Ill). They were joined by Senator Arlen Spector (R-PA). The meeting was called for the express purpose of investigating Beverly's employment policies. Beverly is one of the country's largest nursing home chains. Four days before the Town Hall meeting, Rep. Lane Evans had introduced the Federal Procurement and Assistance Integrity Act (HR 1624), which would give the labor secretary the authority to debar or suspend companies from receiving federal contracts if they have a clear pattern or practice of violations of the National Labor Relations Act, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, or the Fair Labor Standards Act. Of the more than 750 nursing homes Beverly Enterprises operates, 42 are in Pennsylvania. Beverly is defending itself from hundreds of unfair labor practice complaints brought by the National Labor Relations Board. It also has been identified by the U.S. General Accounting Office as a serious labor law violator. In January 1993, the NLRB issued its decision in Beverly I, finding that the chain had committed some 135 unfair labor practices at 32 facilities in 12 states between mid-1986 and mid-1988. Two other Administrative Law Judge decisions found Beverly had committed additional unfair labor practices between mid-1988 and early 1992 at a number of nursing homes. In the most recent Beverly decision issued November 26, 1997, NLRB Administrative Law Judge Robert Wallace found that Beverly's "wide-ranging and persistent misconduct, demonstrat[ed] a general disregard for the employees' fundamental rights." Dr. Bronfenbrenner's testimony at the meeting presented the results of her past decade's research concerning union organizing. Based on her studies, she concluded: "Beverly stood out in my findings, both for the high level of union activity at Beverly Enterprises facilities and for the consistency and intensity of their union avoidance efforts." Filing a lawsuit against Dr Bronfenbrenner under these circumstances is an affront to the Congress, an insult to academic inquiry and a disgrace to the legal profession. It undermines our legislative process and important democratic values. It is intended to send a warning Dr. Bronfenbrenner and to other academics not to engage in honest inquiry into topics a powerful corporation finds unpleasant. We, the undersigned, are labor teachers and researchers, law professors, and constitutional law scholars at universities and law schools throughout the United States. We condemn Beverly's actions and urge it to withdraw this lawsuit. - We urge our colleagues to join with us in protesting Beverly Enterprises' attack on Dr. Kate Bronfenbrenner's academic freedom and first amendment rights. Michal Belknap, Professor of Law, California Western School of Law Clete Daniel, Professor of American Labor History, School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell University Ellen Dannin, Professor of Law, California Western School of Law Julius Getman, The Earl E. Sheffield Regents Chair and Professor of Law,University of Texas Law School and former President, American Association of University Professors Lois S. Gray, Alice Grant Professor of Labor Relations, NYSSILR, Cornel University Harry C. Katz, The Jack Sheinkman Professor of Collective Bargaining, NYSSILR, Cornell University Risa Lieberwitz, Associate Professor, School of
janitors march (fwd)
SACRAMENTO JANITORS 11-DAY MARCH FOR JUSTICE By David Bacon SACRAMENTO, CA (2/21/98) -- This week, Sacramento janitors took their long-running war to end their poverty-level wages and conditions to the doorstep of the corporation they hold responsible for them - Hewlett-Packard Corp. Starting February 14, a committed band of union activists began walking from the state capitol to the company's headquarters 150 miles away in Cupertino. Through eleven rough days of some of the most violent rainstorms in the state's history, the marchers trekked beside freeways and through the working-class towns of the delta and eastern Bay Area. High winds swept through their line, blowing out their red umbrellas and tearing their plastic raincoats to shreds by the time the march was half-completed. They called their journey a peregrinacion, or pilgrimage. Marchers were met almost daily by rallies of other union members, students, religious activists and community supporters. On Tuesday, they arrived at Hewlett-Packard's expensive Cupertino glass-and-steel headquarters, where they demanded that the company respect their right to organize. The union for Sacramento janitors, Service Employees Local 1877, has been locked in an almost epic struggle to win a union contract at Somers Building Maintenence, the capitol's largest building service company with 1000 employees. Hewlett-Packard is Somers' largest client, using the firm to clean five of its Sacramento-area buildings. "Even though I work full time, I only earn $12,500 per year," explained Somers janitor and marcher Marta Villalobos. "I have no health insurance for my four kids, and my husband and I live in fear that any unexpected illness will put us on the street." Somers workers were joined by fellow janitors from around the state, who took time off work to walk with them. "Low wages and conditions in Sacramento affect us in Los Angeles," said Local 1877 member Alfredo Rodriguez. "If we support our brothers and sisters at Somers, our union will be stronger, and we'll all benefit." In 1989 Rodriguez was beaten by Los Angeles police, who charged a march of janitors trying to organize a union in Century City. "I learned then how important it is for us to stick together," he said. Somers workers began signing Local 1877 union cards in the spring of 1995. Organizers explained to them that the local had won better wages in Silicon Valley, Alameda County and Los Angeles by organizing a majority of building service companies. Previously, these contractors competed against each other, trying to win cleaning contracts with large building owners by cutting wages and benefits. Union agreements standardized wages, taking them out of competition. After winning workers' support, Local 1877 asked Somers to acknowledge that a majority had signed union cards, and recognize the union. The union sought to avoid the legal process administered by the National Labor Relations Board, since it normally involves lengthy delays and legal battles, company intimidation of workers, and firings. The company refused. According to its spokesperson Randall Schaber, Somers insisted on a labor board election, and hired the west coast's best-known anti-union law firm, Littler, Mendelssohn, Fastiff and Tichy. While refusing to recognize Local 1877, an ex-supervisor began going through the buildings at night, collecting signatures on cards for Couriers and Service Employees Local 1, a hitherto unknown union unaffiliated with the AFL-CIO. After a few weeks, Somers management told workers it had recognized Local 1 because a majority had signed cards, and agreed to a contract with no wage increases. In September 1996, Isidro Camarillo, a Somers janitor supporting Local 1877, was attacked at night in one of Hewlett-Packard's buildings by Crisanto Martinez, a Local 1 steward. On October 27 Luis Camarillo, another 1877 supporter, was beaten in an H-P building as well. Martinez is still employed by Somers. Eventually, the National Labor Relations Board found that Local 1 was a company union, and invalidated its agreement with Somers. Nevertheless, the company's war with Local 1877 continued. According to Raul Lara, a Somers janitor, "the company still threatens to fire workersfor participating in union activities. Many support the union but are afraid to show their face," he said. Justice for Janitors built a community coalition to back up the workers' organizing effort. It mounted a campaign to convince Hewlett-Packard to take responbility, both for the low wages and conditions of the workers, and for the anti-union tactics used by its contractor. Marlene Somsak, a public relations spokesperson for Hewlett-Packard, says the company is opposed to these kinds of corporate campaigns, which she
Correction of: CALL FOR SOLIDARITY ACTION ! (fwd)
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 1998 06:16:20 -0100 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Correction of: CALL FOR SOLIDARITY ACTION ! GPDI_GERAKAN PENDUKUNG DEMOKRATISASI DI INDONESIA SUPPORTING MOVEMENT FOR DEMOCRATISATION IN INDONESIA E-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web-sitehttp://www.xs4all.nl/~peace__ BOYCOTT THE MARCH 7th -11th 1998 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS SUPPORT THE REFERENDUM FOR MAUBERE PEOPLE IN EAST TIMOR The history of the Indonesian people is the history of the people's struggle well known for its perseverance in opposition to all kinds of efforts of repression and exploitation in upholding peace and humanity. Under the present government, which has been maintaining the political repression, corruption and inflationary policies, protest movements are growing rapidly. These protests are still going on and are becoming widespread and strong. Initiated mainly by the basic sectors of the society such as workers, peasants, and urban poor, they now find a wider resonance among the Indonesian population. The people believe that the struggles of the Indonesian people is the struggle for human rights and for Democracy. Indonesia is under military rule; General Soeharto has been president for more than 30 years, and his family has been identified as being one of the richest in Asia. The military attack on the PDI's headquarters on the 27th and 28th of July 1996 shouwed the blody characteristic of the 'New Orde' regime. The PRD (People's Democratic Party) was accused of formenting the riot taking place soon after the attack. A general crackdown on pro-democracy groups began 124 people were detained on the same day of the event and later PRD chairperson Budiman Sudjatmiko and 7 collegues were arrested. And people should not forget how Soeharto in 1965, with connivance of western Imperialist power, especially the US government seized power through a military coup d'tat leading to the killing and the imprisonment of more than a million of innocent people. Since then, massacres, illegal arrest, tortures, disappearances and other oppresive and undemocratic measures have been common practices of the military regime against any action of popular resistence. The invasion and accupation of East Timor have betryed the spirit and the letter of the Indonesian constitution and once again a crime against humanity was commited by the Soeharto's fascist regime. In spite of repression and terror, the Indonesia people remains committed to the struggle for Democracy and a just society. In the last few years the people's resistence has gained a lot of strength. Another sign of refused to Soeharto's regime is the fact that more people are gathering around the figure of Megawati, chairman of PDI, support her candidacy for the presidency in march 1998. In an atmosphere of economic uncertainty and political crisis, there are fears that old and painful divisions in Indonesian society will be exposed. The Suharto's regime can no longer hide its crimes behind lies, falsification and distortion of the reality of the Indonesian pro-democracy movement and the East Timorese pro-Independence movement. The monetary crisis has destroyed the myth that the Soeharto's regime has build economic miracle transforming backward Indonesia into another 'Asian tiger'. Now the price of staple commodities keep rising. As result, riots accure everywhere, one after the other. The military is obviously unable to handle the riots which are not organized, but a spontaneous act by the people. The power of arms (ABRI) cannot stem the people, many of whom have lost their fear because of the weight of their suffering. ABRI can only turn the issue to become an issue of ethnic conflicts which do not threaten the authorities directly. Smoke from forest fires in Sumatra and Kalimantan in Indonesia created a haze which mixed with air pollution has choked millions of residents in Sumatra, the Malaysia peninsula and Borneo. Many people have died from smoke, thousands have been treated in hospital and millions of others will be badly affected over next few years. Fires have swept through more than 80.000 hectares in Sumatra, Kalimantan, and Irian Jaya with the potential to spread to 300.000 hectares. Finally, at international forums Soeharto is more and more isolated. The international community is increasingly aware of the Suharto Military regime's brutal acts in its colonization of East Timor, oppression of the pro-democratic movement and its contempt for human rights. Meanwhile, the objective conditions of the people's anger has boiled over, witnessing the authoritarian actions which day by day became open tyranny, taking and repressing the basic rights of the people for more than thirty years. The government runs the country based on their autority : the rule of rulers. The parliament (DPR) and the People's Consultative Assembly
Re: Amerikkkan Democracy at work...
Here's your correction, Maggie: Clinton was opposed to being _drafted_ into the Vietnam War. Sid THE ONLY OPINION THAT REALLY COUNTS IS THE PRESIDENT'S. And he's not going to be affected by a bunch of goofy hecklers." Correct me if my memory is faulty, but wasn't Clinton opposed to the Vietnam war?
MAI Booklet (fwd)
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 15:34:46 -0800 (PST) From: MichaelP [EMAIL PROTECTED] MAI INFORMATIONAL BOOKLETS: Ruth Caplan of the Alliance for Democracy has coordinated the production of informational booklets about the MAI. With input from Public Citizen, Friends of the Earth, AFL-CIO and several other NGOs, this 3-color cover/24-page/business envelope-sized booklet portrays worldwide concerns about the effects of the proposed Agreement. The back cover will list sponsoring organizations and have space for organizational contact information. For more information, please contact Ruth directly at [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you are interested in previewing the booklet online or ordering a quantity of booklets.
Goodbye, Roberta: The CBS-Nike Connection (fwd)
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 1998 12:29:58 -0500 (EST) From: Robert Weissman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Multiple recipients of list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Goodbye, Roberta: The CBS-Nike Connection CBS News reporter Robert Baskin has a problem -- she's not getting along with her boss. In October 1996, Baskin broke the story of Nike's labor practices in Vietnam on CBS investigative program "48 Hours." Baskin traveled to Vietnam, talked with young women who make Nike shoes and heard tales of physical abuse, illegally low wages and long working hours. Now, Nike is sponsoring CBS Sports' coverage of the Winter Olympics from Nagano. Earlier this month, CBS News reporters covering the Olympics appeared on screen wearing the CBS logo on the left side of their parkas, with the world-famous Nike logo on the right. Baskin hit the roof and on February 6, 1998 sent out a two- paged, single-spaced memo to executives throughout the CBS News hierarchy. "As far as I could remember, in my 20 years in television journalism, it was the first time a network news organization had allowed its correspondents to double as billboards," Baskin wrote. Baskin alleged that her boss, CBS News President Andrew Heyward, vetoed last July's scheduled rebroadcast and update of her "Nike in Vietnam" investigation. "I urged 48 Hours executive producer Susan Zirinsky to change Andrew's mind," Baskin wrote. "Zirinsky told me she overheard new Vice president Jonathan King talking with Andrew Heyward, discussing a letter Nike had sent to the head of CBS Sales, expressing concern over the relationship between Nike and CBS at the Winter Games. I assumed it meant Nike probably was going to be a prime sponsor of CBS's Olympic coverage at a cost of millions of dollars and that Nike's concerns had to do with my report." Baskin said that over the past year, she has suggested follow-up reports on Nike's labor practices when news warranted, but was told no. Baskin said that she also wanted to respond to a Wall Street Journal op-ed attacking her reporting on the issue, but she was told she couldn't. "Last night, when I saw CBS correspondents adorned with the Nike 'swoosh,' it became clear to me why Heyward had spiked all follow-up reports on my Nike investigation and blocked my reply to the criticisms printed in the Wall Street Journal," she wrote. In a two-page "Dear Roberta" letter, Heyward professed that he was "shocked" and "amazed" at Baskin's "intemperate message." "Your circulation of allegations of this kind to virtually the entire senior staff of CBS News without first having discussed them with me is not only a shocking breach of professional etiquette, but entirely unacceptable," Heyward wrote. Heyward said he is "instructing all CBS News correspondents in Japan to ensure that the Nike logo is not visible when they appear on the air." Heyward said that he nixed Baskin's reply to the Wall Street Journal op-ed piece because "I felt your proposed letter assumed a tone of advocacy that was journalistically inappropriate." He said that the decision not to rerun Baskin's original Nike piece "had absolutely nothing to do with Nike's relationship with CBS." Heyward denied spiking other news stories on Nike. "The simple fact is this, Roberta," Heyward lectured. "There is no connection whatsoever -- NONE -- between Nike's sponsorship of the Olympic Games or any other CBS program it might sponsor and CBS News coverage of the Nike story. Heyward said that Baskin's sending of the memo was "reckless and irresponsible." But Heyward's huffing and puffing does not change the simple fact that CBS employees are still acting as Nike billboards. For while CBS News reporters might no longer be allowed to wear the Nike "swoosh," CBS Sports said its reporters will continue to wear the "swoosh" on their parkas. "Yes there is a deal," said Dana McClintock, a CBS Sports spokesperson said from Nagano. "We can't disclose the terms of the contract, but Nike is paying CBS and we're wearing the logo." McClintock said that sports reporters promoting a sponsor's product "have become part of television sports." "During the last winter Olympics, reporters wore the logo of NorthFace, and NBC reporters have worn the logo of ProPlayer," McClintock said. And that is part of the deal, isn't it? That's what commercial television is about -- bowing down to the almighty corporation. People like CBS reporter Roberta Baskin who have the gall to question the practices of Nike and other global corporations will be shown the door. Goodbye, Roberta. Russell Mokhiber is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Corporate Crime Reporter. Robert Weissman is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Multinational Monitor. (c) Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman Focus on the Corporation is a weekly column written by Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman.
Re: Taking Control (fwd)
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 1998 15:20:55 +1300 (NZDT) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: campaign against foreign control of aotearoa [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Taking Control 15 February 1998 Chief Reporter THE FIGHTBACK STARTS HERE! FRIDAY FEBRUARY 27 - SUNDAY MARCH 1 KNOX PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH HALL 28 BEALEY AVENUE, CHRISTCHURCH Transnational corporations (TNCs) dominate the world economy and New Zealand is one of the most extreme examples. But Taking Control will be unlike most conferences, which only analyse the problem. It will look at what we can about it. The subtitle is: The Fightback Against Transnational Corporate Power. It will bring together leading activists from around the country to talk about their struggles against the TNCs, and their fightback against the effects of foreign control.The title means what it says - taking control back from those who have taken control of our country. Disarming the hijackers, in short. It will also feature two international speakers - from Bougainville and Canada, because our struggle is not unique. Taking Control will be action oriented, with the outcome being a better functioning network of resistance to the TNC takeover. We will be focusing on some specific campaigns and events, such as: - This is local body election year. The TNCs, with the connivance of some politicians, are steadily making inroads into ownership and control of local assets and services, such as water, electricity supply, rubbish collection, etc, etc. Taking Control will be about fighting "market forces" at the local level. - The Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI), due to be signed this year, which aims to stitch up a charter of rights and freedoms for transnationals. - The APEC 1999 Leaders Summit in Auckland. This huge event is a golden opportunity to show the assembled dictators, presidents and prime ministers that the people of New Zealand reject the global "free trade and investment" agenda. The international speakers are Moses Havini (Bougainville) and Sharon Venne (Canada). NZ speakers include: Sue Bradford, Annette Sykes, Moana Jackson, Catherine Delahunty, Maxine Gay, Murray Horton Aziz Choudry. Taking Control will include the announcement, on February 28, of the winner of the first Roger Award for the Worst TNC In NZ In 1997. Murray Horton for the organisers Mobile number is 025 361888 Friday 27 - Monday 2 inclusive. SPEAKERS: International Sharon Venne Sharon is a Cree lawyer/activist based in Alberta, Canada. For many years she has represented the Treaty Six peoples at the UN, and is involved in ongoing work with indigenous peoples to resist the onslaught of transnational corporations (TNCs) on their lands and resources. She is also the author of many articles and books on indigenous peoples. Moses Havini Moses represents the Bougainville Interim Government in Australia and will speak on the impact of the British owned Rio Tinto copper mine on Bougainville and the reasons why the revolutionary forces shut the mine of this transnational giant. New Zealand Moana Jackson Moana is the Director of Nga Kaiwhakamarama I Nga Ture (The Maori Legal Service). He will speak about TNCs in the context of the colonisation of Aotearoa. Sue Bradford from the Auckland Unemployed Workers Rights Centre, Sue is a veteran campaigner and grassroots community organiser, who will speak about the impact of the TNC agenda on beneficiaries and the working poor, and the fightback against institutionalised unemployment and poverty. Annette Sykes Annette is from Ngati Pikiao, she is a high profile Treaty of Waitangi activist and lawyer. She will speak on the impact of TNCs on Maori, particularly in the area of forestry, and the Maori fightback. Catherine Delahunty Catherine represents Coromandel Watchdog of Hauraki. She will speak about the decades long campaign against TNC mining companies in the Coromandel. Maxine Gay President of the NZ Trade Union Federation, Maxine will speak about the impact of TNCs on workers and the union fightback. Murray Horton Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa organiser, Murray is a veteran activist and writer. He will concentrate on the impact of one transnational - Telecom - and the wide range of fightbacks against it. Aziz Choudry GATT Watchdog and Corso activist on trade issues, he will speak about the broadbased campaign against the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) and free trade. Barry Cope from Hamilton. Barry will speak about the ongoing campaign against the takeover of the local power company by American TNC, Utilicorp. Dennis Enright from Mosgiel. Dennis will detail how a determined Otago campaign stopped Chinese TNC, Wenita, from building a major wood processing plant on the Taieri Plain. TIMETABLE Friday night: 7.30 public meeting - speakers: Havini, Venne, Sykes, Horton
Who will pay for a united europe? (fwd)
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 11:32:38 -0500 Sender: Forum on Labor in the Global Economy [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: DK Project [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Who will pay for a united europe? (fwd) WHO WILL PAY THE PRICE OF A NEW UNITED EUROPE? By David Bacon ROME, ITALY (1/15/98) -- Morena Pivetti's mother was a school teacher. Until she retired a few years ago, she devoted her working life to Italy's greatest and most-loved resource, its children. She was a dedicated teacher, and when she retired, she got one of the best pensions in Europe. Over decades, the social respect gained by Italian teachers has earned them the right to retire with full benefits after 20 years in the classroom. Next year, however, these generous pensions will be history. Italy's new government of former communists says the country can't afford them any longer. Pivetti defends the decision as inevitable, a price that had to be paid to keep the country's whole pension system afloat, while meeting the stiff budget-cutting requirements for joining the new Europe. "I may have to work ten years longer than my mother to get a pension," she charges hotly, "but at least I'll get one." Pivetti is managing editor at L'Unita, the newspaper which held aloft the banner of class struggle in Italian politics for five decades, as the voice of the former Italian Communist Party (PCI). Every day she puts out another edition from a modern office filled with computer terminals, in a stylishly old building on Via Due Maceli, the heart of Rome's fashion district. These days, though, L'Unita's take on class politics has changed. The paper prints columns by Robert Reich, the former U.S. labor secretary who counsels American workers not to fight the new global economy. Workers need to accept the price for keeping their nations competitive, Reich argues, even when their plants close and they have to change jobs many times. Like a large section of the European left, many of Italy's former communists are attracted to Reich's politics of sacrifice. And for the first time in 50 years, since World War Two, Pivetti's comrades are in power. Her Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS), which anchors the ruling Olive Coalition, was born when the Italian Communist Party split in 1992, in the wake of the fall of the Soviet Union. The PCI's larger and more conservative wing formed the PDS. A smaller, more militant group reorganized itself as the Refoundation Communist Party, or Rifondazione. Since Mussolini's downfall in 1944, Italy's communists have run many of its largest cities. But for 50 years, they were kept out of every national government, often at the behest of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. Now the old Socialist and Christian Democratic parties, which excluded the communists from government, no longer exist. Mired in the mud of corruption scandals in the early 1990s, they lost their credibility with voters and expired. In 1994, in the wake of their dissolution, the PDS' Olive Coalition won the historic election which finally gave it a governing majority in the Italian parliament. But it's a very slim majority. The PDS depends on the votes of its old comrades in the Rifondazione. The hard-liners keep the PDS in power, but refuse to join its government. L'Unita followed the PDS wing of the split in the old PCI. A daily with a huge circulation, it's been the envy of other western communist parties for years. The annual festival for the paper still draws over a million people. It is an institution, not just of the Italian, but of the European left. Pivetti warns, however, that sometime this coming year L'Unita will lay off half its 300 workers. The "Mattina" editions, started to serve readers with local news in cities like Florence and Milan, will likely be discontinued. This can't help but be a bitter irony, not just to the papers' staff, but to millions of Italians who loyally supported Europe's most widely-read communist periodical through thick and thin. The PDS won the government, but they may lose the paper. "The PDS can't carry the paper the way the old party did," Pivetti says. When the Italian Communist Party dissolved, party subsidies ended which had helped to pay L'Unita's bills. "Now we will have to make it on our own, just from sales, subscriptions and advertising," she explains. Whether the paper will survive in a chilly new market-oriented world is a question no one can answer. While it certainly has a loyal readership, it's hard to imagine department stores and big corporations paying for pages of ads. The struggle over L'Unita's fate is just one reflection of a fierce debate raging through Italy and Europe, pitting the old values of social stability against the new ones of the marketplace. For the first time Italian workers have a government which they can justly feel in some degree belongs to
(Fwd) Universities reap windfall from research (fwd)
Last updated: Wednesday 18 February 1998 http://www.vancouversun.com Universities reap windfall from research BOSTON (AP) - Universities and colleges in the United States and Canada are cashing in on their faculties' inventions to the tune of more than $500-million US a year, according to a new report. The schools made $592 million US from licences and royalties in 1996, the last year for which the figures are available, the Association of University Technology Managers said in a report to be released Wednesday. That's up from $495 million the year before and a 167 per cent increase in five years. This growth comes even as research spending by government and private industry has slowed and colleges and universities are seeking new ways to raise money. "Look at it as a hard-earned windfall," said Marvin Guthrie, the association's president and vice-president of patents and licensing at Massachusetts General Hospital. "You've got research, you've got the successful transfer of research information to a company, the company hires people. So there is a return all the way down: people hold their jobs, the investors make money, some of the money goes back to the university in the form of royalties and everybody benefits." Developing and marketing products that originated from academic research pumped an estimated $25 billion US into the American and Canadian economies and supported 212,500 jobs in 1996, according to the association's study. Such products range from cutting-edge bio-pharmaceuticals to a soap that protects against infection from tick bites developed at Harvard, a high-yield hybrid cotton patented by the University of Arizona, orthodonture wire made from titanium invented at the University of Connecticut and grass grown at the University of Nebraska that needs less mowing, watering and fertilizer. Critics worry closer ties between academia and the private sector may transform universities into industrial laboratories, focused only on potentially money-making research. They worry some schools may soon put pressure on their research faculties to focus on those areas most likely to produce a profit. "Money is a pretty strong driver, and as the money gets bigger, the push to get more involved in things that have a potential for making big money gets stronger and stronger," said Jules LaPidus, president of the Council of Graduate Schools. But university authorities point out that licence fees and royalties from patents represent a fraction of the $21.4 billion US a year in research conducted by the 173 universities and colleges surveyed. Collectively, American and Canadian colleges and universities awarded a record 2,741 licences to private industry to develop products based on their research. The schools applied for 3,261 patents, up 11 per cent from 1995.
Inside U.S. Trade, Feb. 13, 1998 (fwd)
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 10:57:33 -0500 (EST) From: Chantell Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Multiple recipients of list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Inside U.S. Trade, Feb. 13, 1998 The following article in Inside US Trade gives a poltical and technical overview of the pre-negotiation status of the MAI. There has been little news reported yet on the proceedings of this weeks negotiations. If anyone has information to share, please do so. I will continue to keep you posted. Until then, keep on bein' active! Chantell U.S. POISED TO SEEK EXTENSION OF DEADLINE FOR OECD INVESTMENT PACT The Clinton Administration this week concluded that it will not be possible to conclude the Multilateral Agreement on investment in time for a late April deadline. At a interagency meeting on Feb. 11, deputy-level officials concluded that finalizing the agreement at that time would not bring a significant reduction of barriers to U.S. investment, and that there is it best lukewarm support for the MAI among private groups and in Congress. The "fundamental" U.S. problem with the agreement as it stands is that other countries are seeking broad exceptions from the agreement, as well as narrower country-specific reservations, which would dilute the quality of the MAI, a U.S. official said. "It would be unrealistic to assume that we will be able to fully address the range of our objections by the April deadline," the official said. As a result, the U.S. is virtually certain to press for some sort of extension of the April 28 deadline, which coincides with the 1998 ministerial of the Organization for Economic Cooperation Development. The U.S. request for a delay will likely run afoul of arguments by European countries in particular that no extension of the negotiations is possible. Frans Engering, the chairman of the MAI Negotiating Group, said in a Feb. 6 interview that European countries strongly oppose a move to extend deadline for an additional year, after they agreed to such an extension in 1997. "If this is again moved to the future, then I think the Europeans will stop making efforts," he said. "There will be no negotiations after April," he said. Engering emphasized that the key issue for the MAI is whether the U.S. has the political will to finalize an agreement in the face of an eroding consensus in favor of open trade and investment. "Up to now, I feel here in Washington that they are so bogged down in problems that they cannot go on, [even though] the MAI is almost ready," Engering said, "I have the feeling the U.S. is not ready." The U.S decision to seek a delay follows the emergence of a split among the agencies handling the MAI negotiations, informed sources said. The State Dept. was the most supportive of efforts to move as quickly as possible towards conclusion of the pact. State was opposed by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, which argued char concluding the MAI by April would not bring enough liberalization of barriers to U.S. investment. The Treasury Dept. which plays a secondary role in the MAI, has not offered strong support for the agreement, and has in any case been preoccupied by the Asian economic crisis. Beyond specific problems related to the agreement itself, some agencies also expressed the view that there is little support among private groups and in Congress for the MAI, informed sources said. But one official insisted that this factor was "secondary by a substantial measure" to concerns about the quality of the agreement. A high-level OECD meeting scheduled for next week (Feb. 16-17) will now have to determine how to manage the MAI process beyond the April deadline, if that is indeed possible, informed sources said. One MAI negotiator said that the "most optimistic scenario" is now that OECD members reach a "conditional agreement" on the text of the MAI, but then continue the talks in an effort to negotiate a further reduction in barriers to investment. Undersecretary Stuart Eizenstat and Deputy U.S. Trade Representative Jeffrey Lang will co-chair the U.S. delegation to the meeting. The U.S. is planning to issue a statement on its goals for the MAI negotiation following that meeting, U.S. officials said. OECD members appear to be within reach of a solution on the outstanding substantive issues in the negotiation if the U.S. and other countries decided to move towards an agreement by the end of April, Engering said. Compromises appear possible regarding the country-specific reservations and general exceptions which have been proposed for the agreement, as well n possible labor and environmental provisions, he said. But the completion of the MAI will be impossible without a "more or less acceptable resolution" to the U.S. European dispute over Helms-Burton, Engering said. The two sides
!*COMMENTARY: Middle East quiz (fwd)
Subject: COMMENTARY: Middle East quiz A pop quiz on the Middle East -- answers may surprise you By Charley Reese of The Sentinel Staff Published in The Orlando Sentinel, http://www.orlandosentinel.com February 8, 1998 Just so you can keep up with the perpetual crisis in the Middle East, I have a little quiz for you. Question: Which country in the Middle East has nuclear weapons? Answer: Israel. Q: Which country in the Middle East refuses to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and bars internationalinspections? A: Israel. Q: Which country in the Middle East seized the sovereign territory of other nations by military force and continues to occupy it in defiance of UnitedNations Security Council resolutions? A: Israel. Q: Which country in the Middle East routinely violates the international borders of another sovereign state with warplanes and artillery and naval gunfire? A: Israel. Q: What American ally in the Middle East has for years sent assassins into other countries to kill its political enemies (a practice sometimes called exporting terrorism)? A: Israel. Q: In which country in the Middle East have high-ranking military officers admitted publicly that unarmed prisoners of war were executed? A: Israel. Q: What country in the Middle East refuses to prosecute its soldiers who have acknowledged executing prisoners of war? A: Israel. Q: What country in the Middle East created 762,000 refugees and refuses to allow them to return to their homes, farms and businesses? A: Israel. Q: What country in the Middle East refuses to pay compensation to people whose land, bank accounts and businesses it confiscated? A: Israel. Q: In what country in the Middle East was a high-ranking United Nations diplomat assassinated? A: Israel. Q: In what country in the Middle East did the man who ordered the assassination of a high-ranking U.N. diplomat become prime minister? A: Israel. Q: What country in the Middle East blew up an American diplomatic facility in Egypt and attacked a U.S. ship in international waters, killing 33 and wounding 177 American sailors? A: Israel. Q: What country in the Middle East em-ployed a spy, Jonathan Pollard, to steal classified documents and then gave some of them to the Soviet Union? A: Israel. Q: What country at first denied any official connection to Pollard, then voted to make him a citizen and has continuously demanded that the American president grant Pollard a full pardon? A: Israel. Q: What country on Planet Earth has the second most powerful lobby in the United States, according to a recentFortune magazine survey of Washington insiders? A: Israel. Q: Which country in the Middle East is in defiance of 69 United Nations Security Council resolutions and has been protected from 29 more by U.S. vetoes? A: Israel. Q: What country is the United States threatening to bomb because ``U.N.Security Council resolutions must be obeyed?'' A: Iraq. -- The preceding document was posted on AMILAnet - a service of American Muslims Intent on Learning and Activism (AMILA) San Francisco Bay Area - http://www.mpac.org/amila -- May the Afrikan ancestors kiss your eyelids... Visit: http://www.netset.com/~khandi/ Khandi Pages KhAwards! Afrikan Centered Webring! Support the Million Woman March Movement End the amerikkkan Lockdown Jericho '98 Speak Out is the country's only national not-for-profit artists and speakers agency. Our roster includes some 200 women and men who represent the breadth of movements for social justice. For a full listing, send us your full street address. Speak Out Phone: (510) 601-0182 PO Box 99096Fax: (510) 601-0183 Emeryville, Ca 94662Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.vida.com/speakout _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Computer Use Splits Between Along Income Lines
Vancouver Sun, Page D06, Wednesday, February 18, 1998 B.C. Net use splits between affluent and poor By Peter Wilson If you live in British Columbia there's about a 50-per-cent chance you've used the Internet at least once. If you go online regularly you're likely to be young, have a steady job, have some higher education and live in the city. These are some of the results of a new Angus Reid survey, conducted in December for the provincial Minister's Advisory Council on Information Technology, that shows 69 per cent of B.C. residents use a computer and of those, 72 per cent have been on the Net. While everyone surveyed had at least heard of the Internet, 27 per cent of B.C.'s population has never seen it or had access to it. They are, in contrast to Net users, more likely to be old, unemployed, low-income earners and have limited formal education. Others who do not use the Internet include rural dwellers, women and those households without children. Technology minister Dan Miller says while the results show a large number of residents use the Internet in their daily lives, there are those who are being left out. "Unfortunately, the results confirm that those who have access to technology are those who can most easily afford it. It's clear we need to continue to develop strategies that will make the electronic highway more accessible to British Columbians." Only 19 per cent of residents have been online for more than two years but they also tend to be younger, more educated and affluent. Those who have used the Net for less than six months are more likely to include the unemployed, those with a limited education, women and those outside the city. Of those who do use the Net, 80 per cent say they go online to surf the Web; 62 per cent use it for e-mail; 32 per cent read news groups and only nine per cent can be found in chat rooms. The survey questioned 800 people by telephone, 400 of whom live in areas of the province categorized as rural, and is accurate to 3.5 per cent, 19 times of 20.
NEW LIST SERVE: STOP-IMF (fwd)
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 11:37:19 -0500 (EST) From: Robert Weissman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: NEW LIST SERVE: STOP-IMF Stop-IMF is a new moderated listserve that will include clips, essays, updates and urgent actions relating to the International Monetary Fund. It will focus especially on: 1) the U.S. congressional battle over the request to allocate $18 billion to expand the IMF; 2) NGO positions and campaign activities around capital account liberalization; 3) information about the IMF's attempt to expand its Articles of Agreement in order to control capital account liberalization programs and country specific positions on the issue; 4) IMF reform proposals or alternative strategies to decrease volatility of international capital flows. The list will be moderated by Friends of the Earth and Essential Action. To subscribe to stop-imf, send the following message all in one line to [EMAIL PROTECTED]: subscribe stop-imf your name (no period) Please forward this message to other lists. Please accept apologies for any cross-posting.
Russian Workers (fwd)
The current issue of the San Francisco Flier contains an article about labor conditions in Russia that begins as follows: Russia: Whats Up, Whats Down, Whats Left At the height of Cold War xenophobia in America there came the occasional heretical suggestion that were we really interested in knowing what the Russian people were like, we should simply make an excursion to our own Midwest. If anything, the comparison understated the abidingly conservative values of family, custom and sodality cherished by the Russian populace. Historically their strain of forbearance has been singularly resolute, as we should at least have been reminded by the example of their experience in WWII. Such heroic patience is the only way to explain the fact that Russian wage workers have not as yet attempted to seize the country. More than 20 million people, one Russian worker in four, are not paid regularly. Another five percent, approaching four million people, are owed between six and twelve months' pay. Only one-quarter of Russian workers are paid in full and on time. Forty percent of workers in a survey last year (and 54 percent of unskilled workers) said they had not received salaries for the previous month. As of October 1 nearly 55.3 trillion rubles ($9.4 billion) in unpaid wages were owed by the state and private enterprises. Almost half of the countrys 22,000 companies are in violation of Russian Federation legislation on wage payment. This compilation of State Statistics Committee figures and independent research data are furnished by the International Federation of Chemical, Energy, Mine and General Workers' Unions (ICEM), which is leading the campaign against non-payment of wages in conjunction with the FNPR, the Russian Independent Federation of Trade Unions, and the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU). The 20-million member ICEM, which successfully pioneered the use of the Internet against Bridgestone/Firestone in organized labor's first cyber-campaign in 1996 (Flier, 7/25/96), launched an electronic campaign against wage arrears in Russia in November. As with the Bridgestone strike, the ICEM web site (http://www.icem.org/) provides links for sending protests to the World Bank and other international institutions, the Russian government, regional administrations and employers, and multinational banks and corporations. The article can be read in its entirety at http://www.well.com/user/sfflier. -- Betsey Culp San Francisco Flier Box 346, 1550 California St. San Francisco, CA 94109 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.well.com/user/sfflier
European analysis of MAI
This analysis contains a very useful explanation of the origins of the MAI and its relationship to GATT, MIA, WTO, etc., as well as the tensions between the First and Third Worlds that led U.S. and European capital to start promoting an investment treaty through the OECD when they couldn't get one through the WTO. http://www.xs4all.nl/~ceo/mai/index.html MAIGALOMANIA Citizens and the Environment Sacrificed to Corporate Investment Agenda We are working on a full HTML edition of this latest CEO briefing and hope to have it running around 16 February 1998. For the moment you can read the ASCII version of the briefing as it was sent out by e-mail on 10 February 1998. PART ONE: INTRODUCTION PART TWO: LAYING THE GROUNDWORK -- A SHORT HISTORY OF THE MAI PART THREE: MULTIFACETED ATTACK FOR INVESTMENT DEREGULATION PART FOUR: THE MAIN CORPORATE PLAYERS PART FIVE: RESOURCES AND WEBLINKS
Putting deficit reduction in perspective
[Michael Campbell is a right wing media commentator and brother of British Columbia Liberal Party opposition leader Gordon Campbell. He often lectures the social democratic NDP government on the facts of capitalist life.] The Vancouver Sun Tuesday 17 February 1998 Reality forcing left-wingers to swing toward right You even see the NDP privatizing some government services (parts of B.C. Systems Corp., for example). By Michael Campbell What's become of the left wing. It used to be you could count on their opposition to free trade, debt reduction, the lowering of business taxes and payroll taxes, just to name a few of the more defining characteristics of their economic platform. Have some of these guys been snowboarding without a helmet? All of these issues were characterized as the "corporate agenda" right- wing rhetoric. The same people who used to call analysts like me right wing for voicing concerns about selling off the escalating federal debt to foreign investors are now watching high profile left-wing politicians taking up the call. Otherwise bright people couldn't see that the debt issue was rooted in interest payments that were compounding faster than government revenues. It didn't matter which philosophical approach anyone supported; in the end that situation was untenable. But still they considered it right wing. That position became more difficult to defend for self-described left- wing groups like the Canadian Labour Congress when New Democratic Party heavyweights like Bob Rae and Roy Romanow joined the ranks of those concerned about the debt. I remember a couple of years back when Rae was asked what he thought of people who still denied we had a debt problem. His reply was that they should get a brain. I often wondered if the boisterous left thought that Bob had been brought over to the dark side. I think he realized, belatedly, that compounding interest payments were not a philosophical question. What did they think when the NDP's Romanow closed more than 40 hospitals in Saskatchewan soon after he took office. Had he also been won over? What did they think when NDP Finance Minister Andrew Petter suggested that Ottawa lower Employment Insurance payments because payroll taxes kill job? When business groups like the Confederation of Independent Business made similar claims they were dismissed as right-wing whiners. They were called callous for not caring about the unemployed and the less fortunate. What happened to Andrew Petter? What do they think when they see left-wing politicians front and centre on international trade missions to developing countries trying to secure business for Canadian firms? Could there be some benefit to trade agreements with developing countries? And now the final betrayal. In British Columbia, the NDP government is talking about lowering taxes on business. Is nothing sacred? It was bad enough when Labour's Tony Blair became prime minister of Britain and one of his first moves was to lower corporate taxes. Not even the hated Brian Mulroney did that. Blair was probably dismissed as a black sheep because he also supported entrepreneurialism and free trade. And now you even see the NDP privatizing some government services (parts of B.C. Systems Corp., for example). Lower business taxes, trade missions, debt control and privatization. What's next? The reason for this dramatic conversion can be summed up in a word -- reality. Too many well-meaning people have confused political rhetoric with economic analysis. Once in power that is a luxury our leaders cannot afford. The unfortunate part is how expensive the economic lessons have been to learn. = Here, then, can be found capital's theoretical and political understanding of [budgetary] "constraints". From this point of view, here and now, the alternatives are either liberalism - that is, a strategy to increase the social rate of exploitation - or the reduction of the social rate of profit. From this point of view, a Keynesian - style management of capitalism has become unthinkable, not so much because an increase in demand will not increase employment, but rather because Keynesian policies presuppose a social structure able to engender institutionalised productivity deals between labour bureaucracies and employers, able to subordinate the social rate of exploitation to economic growth. This social compact, this class composition, has gone forever, destroyed through restructuring after it became a political composition and began to threaten capital. Its dismantling also destroyed the material base of any joint (union - employer) management of the rate of exploitation. At the microeconomic level, and in
Remark by Horta
"Morally and psychologically, the overnight collapse of the 'Asian tiger' economies is the equivalent of the fall of the Berlin wall. But it is not yet the political equivalent." -- Jos. Ramos-Horta, East Timor's Nobel laureate for peace in 1996, quoted by Christopher Hitchens in the March 2, 1998 issue of The Nation Magazine.
The state of the left
1) A recent Economist article entitled "Mr. Blair goes to Washington" included the following quote: "In the manner of Mr. Clinton, he will continue to denouce the social consequences of 18 years of Tory rule, while (with luck) preserving and even extending the essentials of Thatcherism. Plain-speaking types might decry these Blair-Clinton tactics as dishonest; realists could applaud them as astute. Telling a sceptical electorate that essentially conservative policies are consistent with "social justice" is less heroic than actually seeking the third way, but far less harmful, and voters lap it up. It's surprising what you can do with a winning smile." 2) Note the Italian left's desire to emulate Blair: Associated PressFebruary 14, 1998 ITALIAN LEFTISTS CHANGE PARTY NAME FLORENCE, Italy -- Italy's leftist parties ended a congress Saturday with a new name, new symbol and appeals for unity. ``The conditions now exist to work together,'' declared Massimo D'Alema, leader of the former Communists. ``No one is left out of the challenge.'' Until Saturday, Italy's ex-Communists were called the Democratic Party of the Left. By changing its name to the Democrats of the Left, Italy's largest party hopes to unify a myriad of leftist splinter groups under its banner. During the meeting, D'Alema said the Left party would drop the hammer and sickle from its symbol and replace it with a rose and the stars of the European Union. D'Alema and other Left Party leaders said they were trying to emulate the image and policies of other Socialist parties in Europe, especially Tony Blair's Labor Party in Britain. While the small but influential hard-line Communists will remain on their own, it was not immediately clear how many of the leftist splinter groups would join Democrats of the Left. The ruling center-left coalition, dominated by the newly renamed party in an alliance with a small number of former Christian Democrats led by Premier Romano Prodi, will remain the Olive Tree. The weekend congress was billed in the media as a major development in Italian politics. But it was only the latest in a flurry of name-changes and realignments since a massive corruption scandal first struck in 1992. The scandal caused the collapse of the powerful Christian Democrats, who had run the country since World War II, and the Socialists, who took on a major role in Italian politics in the 1980s.
Tanks,amphibious and armored vehicles...Chiapas (fwd)
la Jornada, 2-15-98 Translated by Susan Rasco'n for Nuevo Amanecer Press: From: "Marco A." [EMAIL PROTECTED] NAP has not been able to enter La Jornada for two days now; it is reported that other alternative media in the U.S. have not been able to either. La Jornada February 14, 1998 Tanks, amphibious and armored vehicles with artillery turrets Hermann Bellinghausen, correspondent, La Realidad, Chiapas., February 13 Yesterday and today there has been an intense movement of military vehicles of a kind never before seen here, between Las Margaritas and the Euseba Rivera. This afternoon four heavy artillery tanks, as well as amphibious vehicles, passed through La Realidad. Meanwhile, yesterday 40 new vehicles including anti-riot tanks, armored personnel carriers, radio communication intercepting equipment and armored vehicles with artillery turrets entered the Lacandona Jungle from Las Margaritas. Also today, an incursion into La Realidad by a Television Azteca helicopter left two persons wounded and the school destroyed, in addition to causing an extreme scare to the population, which this noon suspended its activities when it saw the helicopter descend into the center of town, without the authorization of the community or any prior warning. Yesterday, the Guadalupe Tepeyac military garrison had its ranks swelled by some forty assault and civilian control vehicles. In the different towns along the way, surprise prevailed at the transfer operation. Covered with dust, aiming their rifles and machine guns, the soldiers traveled the route, some of them wearing protective masks, most of them showing their dirty, bare faces. Especially noticeable were the armored cars, complete with excavation equipment, tubes perhaps to spray gases, equipment for intercepting radio transmissions, an artillery turret and three pairs of axles with small, compact tires. The armored personnel carriers they sent through La Realidad today had their gun barrels out and aiming forward; soldiers peered out of the roof pointing their machine guns at the town. According to campesinos (peasants) from communities near Guadalupe Tepeyac, the soldiers arrived yesterday at the hospital in that town saying that they had had an accident, for which they requested sheets from the medical personnel. Although a helicopter search was carried out, the campesinos of the region could not confirm the report of an accident. Yesterday a large twin-engine search plane overflew La Realidad at low altitude, and yesterday and today there were helicopters flying over the homes. The Helicopter on the Roof The worst fright in many days, however, for the inhabitants of La Realidad, occurred this noon, when they saw that a large white helicopter was descending into the center of town. The farmworkers ran from their fields toward town. A woman named Berta seriously injured her foot while running and had to receive medical attention later in the day. The helicopter split in two the trunk of a guava tree near the community chicken coop. It was the crew of the program, let's speak plainly, led by their host Lolita de la Vega. The indigenous people, several hundred of whom gathered around the aerostat, expectantly and silently finally decided to ask the visitors to leave La Realidad immediately. On behalf of the campesinos, one man demanded that the reporters turn over the film they had shot during their descent and, while the community deliberated, Mr. Raquel Tino Cervantes, production assistant of the television crew, asked that their ID cards be returned to them. Another campesino explained that they would do that later. First they would investigate who they were and why they had arrived in this manner in the heart of La Realidad. The people's fright began to give way to anger. "They should go," said one young woman. Voices began to be raised; the helicopter crew stopped insisting, and closed their hatches. The blades began to turn and the helicopter lifted off, not in a vertical direction as would be normal, but flying low toward the houses. As it passed over the school, right next to the large ceiba (silk-cotton tree), the steel sheet roofs collapsed and sheets of steel and wooden boards began to fly; terrified women ran to protect their children. Jose Alfredo Rodriguez, age 5, was hit in the head by a metal sheet, resulting in a deep cut which bled; he nearly lost consciousness. Sebastian, a young father from La Realidad, scratched his head as he said with grief: "That's the end of the school," and he watched, his face still pale, as the helicopter flew off toward Comitan or Tuxtla Gutierrez. _ NUEVO AMANECER PRESS - N.A.P. Nuevo Amanecer Press Organizacio'n de NO lucro dedicada a la difusio'n y al apoyo del trabajo en defensa de los Derechos
Re: U.S. will not sign MAI (fwd)
So when are you going to provide the salutory corrective, Doug? Sid Politically, I think it's important to defeat things like NAFTA MAI, but I think Bill is right to doubt. All these struggle flare up around documents proposed by bourgeois states, but the processes that lead the law, like capital and labor mobility, chug on regardless. The Barlows and the Naders know only how to talk about state action, and to react to state documents, but have nothing to say about capitalism itself. Doug
(Fwd) (en) Argentina: Historic Tour of Illegal Detention Centr (fwd)
_ ARGENTINA: HISTORIC TOUR OF ILLEGAL DETENTION CENTRE _ Source: PeaceNet newsdesk in cdp:ips.english 14 February 1998 * * * By Marcela Valente BUENOS AIRES, Feb 11 (IPS) - Judges, lawmakers, military officers, relatives of 'disappeared' victims and survivors of Argentina's 1976-83 dictatorship made the first joint inspection Wednesday of the site that operated as the largest illegal detention centre in that period. ''I'm doing this for my sons and my husband,'' Laura Bonaparte said through tears as she entered the Navy School of Mechanics (ESMA), where she suspects her husband, three sons and three daughters-in-law were tortured and 'disappeared' in 1977. The installations allegedly held a total of more than 4,000 detainees during the de facto military regime. The historic tour took place after residents living nearby reported that furniture and machines had been removed from ESMA under cover of night, in spite of a court order suspending the presidential decree that ordered the demolition of the building and the construction of a park and a monument to peace. The decree, issued by President Carlos Menem and signed in January, triggered an outcry from human rights groups, which argued that the building should be left standing and open to the public as a symbol of state terrorism and a reminder for future generations that the past must not be repeated. Nevertheless, the president went ahead with the project of transferring ESMA to a city in the province of Buenos Aires. In response, two relatives of 'disappeared' victims went to court to get a stay of action. Not only did the federal court find that the families of 'disappeared' victims had valid reasons to keep the building from being torn down, but it urged the preservation of the installations in case evidence remained that could shed light on the final fate of the victims. The 'Madres de la Plaza de Mayo', a group of mothers seeking their 'disappeared' sons and daughters, contend that ESMA installations contain secret graves. Although amnesty laws and presidential pardons have kept army troops and officers implicated in the ''dirty war'' out of prison today, families have not stopped demanding the truth on the whereabouts of their loved ones. The 'Abuelas de la Plaza de Mayo' still entertain hopes of recuperating their grandchildren, who were born in captivity or taken away as small children. According to human rights groups, around 30,000 people were 'disappeared' during the dictatorship. Human rights activists were dealt a severe blow last Friday when the Defence Ministry appealed the judicial decision to block the decree, arguing that ''it was not completely clear'' that victims had been abducted, tortured and 'disappeared' in ESMA - even though that had been proven in trials in the late 1980s in which the dictatorship's military commanders - later pardoned - were found guilty. Protests by human rights groups and opposition lawmakers against the Defence Ministry's statement forced Minister Jorge Dominguez to apologise this week and request the resignation of the legal advisers who drafted the communique. In spite of denials by Menem himself that objects had been secretly removed from ESMA, the courts heard the complaints brought by neighbours Wednesday, and sent two judges to make an on-site inspection. Two parliamentarians and relatives of 'disappeared' victims were invited to accompany the judges. Survivors of the clandestine concentration camp, who during the 1980s trials of the former military commanders helped reconstruct part of the grisly events that took place in ESMA, also accompanied the group. Further testimony on what occurred there was provided by former navy captain Adolfo Scilingo, who worked in ESMA during the de facto regime and confessed in 1995 that many detainees were thrown alive but drugged into the sea from navy aircraft. Copyright 1998 InterPress Third World News Agency (IPS). All rights reserved. Worldwide distribution via the APC networks. * * * ** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, material appearing here is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for research and educational purposes. ** +:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+ +:A N T I F A I N F O - B U L L E T I N:+ +: NEWS * ANALYSIS * RESEARCH * ACTION :+ +: RESISTING FASCISM* BY ALL MEANS NECESSARY! :+
NZ-Govt Irresponsibility, Insincerity, Slammed Over Paris Igotiations (fwd)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Feb 14 20:30:08 1998 Subject: NZ-Govt Irresponsibility, Insincerity, Slammed Over Paris Igotiations Comments: Gatt Watchdog Date: Sun, 15 Feb 98 17:34:13 +1200 Organization: PlaNet Gaia Otautahi GATT Watchdog [EMAIL PROTECTED] MEDIA RELEASE 15th February 1998 For Immediate Use Government Social Irresponsibility, Insincerity, Slammed Over Paris Investment Negotiations This week, negotiations on the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) reach a critical point as senior officials from 29 OECD countries meet in Paris on 16 and 17 February to assess whether and how to complete the controversial treaty by its current April deadline*(see footnote). This is the time that governments will be formulating their final negotiating positions. New Zealand fair trade coalition GATT Watchdog condemns the New Zealand government's behaviour in relation to the MAI as insincere and so cially irresponsible. It is calling on the government to halt its involvement in negotiations on the MAI, which it describes as a bill of rights and freedoms for foreign investors. "On the eve of Jenny Shipley's major announcement about the government's Code of Social Responsibility that it wants to impose on hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders it is outrageous that senior government officials will sneak off to this highlevel meeting in Paris which few people are even aware of. The government has still not completed its series of consultation hui with Maori, and has failed to honour its commitment to hold a Parliamentary debate on the subject," says Aziz Choudry, a spokesperson. (The next series of hui starts on 23 February). "Some have already questioned the sincerity and real motives for setting up a consultation round with Maori and the promise of a Parliamentary debate on the MAI. It is now quite clear that these are merely meaningless stabs at domestic damage control." "The MAI, if signed, will lock in the worst features of a dog-eat-dog deregulated, open economy which has already cost untold job losses and contributed to a rapidly-widening poverty gap. The fact that the New Zealand government thinks that it can push on regardless of public opinion at home or abroad, without any genuine attempt to consult with Maori or non-Maori, or a debate on the issues in Parliament calls into question its sincerity and intentions to ever engage in any open discussion about the issue. How dare it demand "social responsibility" of low-income New Zealanders when it still refuses to be accountable to the public in its international treaty negotiations on the MAI?" The political, social and economic fallout of pushing on with MAI negotiations will have longterm repercussions for New Zealand, he said. "It would be far wiser instead to commit to a moratorium on further MAI negotiations at least until a genuine open public consultation process has taken place, not the insincere, half-hearted and belated efforts that it is trying to pass off as consultation even as it furtively prepares to dot the "i"s and cross the "t"s on as much of the MAI text as possible this week". He says that it is not only the many hundreds of non-governmental organisations, indigenous peoples, unions, and peoples' movements throughout the world which oppose the MAI. "The provincial governments of British Columbia and Prince Edward Island have both called on the Canadian federal government not to ratify the MAI until full public consultations have been carried out across Canada. The BC provincial government has warned that the federal government should not assume that it will allow the MAI to be applied to the province in the event of it signing the agreement. Meanwhile, the US government, whose companies would be the largest beneficiaries of the MAI, is demanding an exemption from the agreement for all existing state and local government laws." The New Zealand government has been singled out by observers of the negotiations as one of the very few governments opposing even token recognition of environmental and labour issues by the corporations who would gain from the MAI. "Its position is quite clear," said Mr Choudry, "it wants social responsibility from the victims of its policies, but not from the corporations who benefit". For further comment, contact: Aziz Choudry (GATT Watchdog) at (03) 3662803 *NOTE(It seems increasingly unlikely that the April deadline for a final signing of the MAI will be met. US Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky last week publicly stated that the US cannot sign in April. There continue to be many tensions and differences in negotiating positions among OECD member countries which are unacceptable to the USA. But it is likely that there will be a push to lock in the provisions of the MAI on which there is consensus by April, and then to set up a work programme and deadline to resolve
Re: U.S. will not sign MAI (fwd)
Bill, I have a methodological question: why is there a single "real reason" involved? This implies that the real actors are capitalists and that the actions of the little folk in striking, demonstrating,etc. are merely incidental. Or am I missing something? Sid On Fri, 13 Feb 1998, Sid Shniad wrote, on why the US has said they will not sign the MAI: Maybe they were looking for a way to save face by backing out this way Marty, rather than acknowledging the enormous ground swell of opposition to the damned thing. Isn't it more likely due to differences between imperialists? This may include each's margin of manuever in dealing with pressure from below, but the real reason is their rivalry. Bill Burgess
Re: US drops support for MAI: LA Times
See explanatory note from Lori Wallach, debunking the spin that's being put out by the USTR office. Sid
DON'T CELEBRATE YET!! (fwd)
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998 19:00:31 -0500 (EST) From: Chantell Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Multiple recipients of list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: DON'T CELEBRATE YET!! US officials have made several announcements implying a withdrawal from MAI negotiations. Let's not be fooled. They can still lock in the key provisions of the text without officially "signing." ***This fight is not over -- if anything, we need to turn up the opposition even louder!!*** More later, Chantell
USTR on MAI (fwd)
Here is the report that willappear in tomorrow's FTL. I think it does reveal a possible negotiating stratey on the part of the USTR. Notice the comparison to the Financial services talks where by holding out the USA did win more. It also shows business is unhappy when Canada and France do hang tough on culture. Investment: US shies away from multilateral accord SATURDAY FEBRUARY 14 1998 __ ___ By Nancy Dunne in Washington __ ___ The US will not endorse a draft multilateral investment agreement it proposed itself more than two years ago because it is "unbalanced" and prejudicial to US interests, the US Trade Representative said yesterday. Charlene Barshefsky said at a news conference that the deal being negotiated by the 29 members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development would require "very substantial work to make it something the US will sign". 3 High-level officials are to meet next week in Paris to determine the future of the MAI, which will lay down binding rules for policies on direct investment. The proposed pact has generated opposition worldwide among environmentalists, labour unions and other citizen groups, who say it threatens national sovereignty. If the US does not endorse the agreement by its April 28 deadline, other countries may continue the negotiations - with or without the Americans. The US refused to sign a multilateral financial services pact - although a partial deal was reached under EU sponsorship - until a much stronger deal was agreed last year. The opposition in the US - mostly heard among Democrats - is particularly damaging at a time when President Bill Clinton has presented an agenda designed to attract support from his party. Democratic foes helped sink his bid for new "fast-track" trade 4negotiating authority last year, and the White House has hoped to unite Democrats going into the 1998 congressional elections. The MAI talks have proved much more contentious than was expected when the effort was launched in 1995. Member countries are seeking broad exemptions from the accord, which in the US view, would defeat its original purpose. The US has been particularly upset that France and Canada have clung to their cultural exemptions for media services, and it has opposed the EU push for exemptions for countries within its regional economic integration organisation. Meanwhile, US industry groups which pushed for the pact originally have grown disillusioned. 5"It's a disappointment that we've gotten to this stage," said Nancy McLernon, deputy director of the Organisation for International Investment. "At the beginning we had really high hopes. This was supposed to be a state-of-the-art agreement among industrialised countries that were like-minded. But there has been a lot of concern that it was going down the wrong path. If you have a great agreement but carve out half the stuff in it, the agreement isn't worth much any more." US agencies have been split over the pact. The State Department reportedly has wanted to continue negotiations. The trade office, however, has warned that it did not contain enough to attract the support needed for the deal to win Senate approval as a treaty. US trading partners have also been disappointed. It was hoped the deal would bring a commitment by the US to end imposition of sanctions. Such a provision would never win approval in a Congress which regards trade retaliation as an important foreign policy tool. 6 Negotiators had reportedly reached accord on environmental and labour clauses, which would require countries not to lower standards in order to attract investment. This would do little to satisfy the pact's opponents. __ ___ For other articles on this subject, try Site Search and The Archive __ ___ World News "FT" and "Financial Times" are trademarks of The Financial Times Limited.
URGENT CLARIFICATION! (fwd)
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 1998 07:05:34 -0500 (EST) From: Chantell Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Multiple recipients of list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: URGENT CLARIFICATION! URGENT CLARIFICATION FROM LORI WALLACH -- NO CHANGE IN US MAI POSITION! A COPY OF A U.S. REUTERS STORY HAS BEEN SENT ALL OVER THE WORLD THAT CONTAINS OLD NEWS -- THAT IT WILL NOT BE POSSIBLE TO SIGN THE MAI IN APRIL. THIS IS NOT NEW INFORMATION. YET IT IS BEING MISCHARACHETRIZED AS A BREAK THROUGH. DO NOT FALL INTO THIS TRAP! BOTTOMLINE: ALL THAT STORY SAYS IS THAT THE US WILL NOT BE SIGNING MAI IN APRIL -- OF COURSE NOT. NO ONE HAS THOUGHT ALL THE RESERVATIONS COULD BE FINALIZED AND THE TREATY ACTUALLY SIGNED IN APRIL. THE NGOs OPPOSING MAI HAVE KNOWN THIS FOR WEEKS. EVEN THE US GOVERNMENT HAS BEEN SAYING IT FOR WEEKS ON "BACKGROUND." NOW USTR COMMENTED ON NOT SIGNING A FINAL TREATY IN APRIL PUBLICLY. BIG DEAL. What was really interesting is that they had to admit that they had problems with some of the core terms and would not cave in on Helms Burton or culture. But what all of this is really is just the hardening of their negotiating position which is what is that also is occurring this week in numerous countries. WE NEED TO CLEAR UP MASSIVE CONFUSION ABOUT WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON. THERE WAS UNFORTUNATE SPERADING OF THIS MISCHARACTERIZATION ALL OVER THE WORLD. TO BE VERY VERY CLEAR WHAT THE US SAID: THURSDAY'S WASHINGTON POST RAN A PARAGRAPH IN THE NEWS SUMMARTIES SAYING THAT THE MAI NEGOTIATIONS WOULD NOT MEET AN APRIL DEADLINE FOR FINAL SIGNING. TODAY ANOTHER REPORTER ASKED US TRADE REPRESENTATIVE CHARLENE BARSHEFSKY AT A MORNING BRIEFING WHAT YESTERDAY'S WASHINGTON POST BLURB ON MAI MEANT. THE REPORTER, WHO KNOWS ABOUT MAI, ASKED BARSHEFSKY SPECIFIC FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS: Did this mean a total delay on the whole MAI? She answered: we cannot sign in April. Does this mean nothing would be agreed at all in April and all issues would be left open for more talks? And she said: we cannot sign in April. This is not news! NOTICE HOW CAREFUL SHE WAS NOT TO SAY ANYTHING NEW. WE ALL KNEW THAT THE NEW PLAN WAS TO TRY TO GET A POLITICAL AGREEMENT IN APRIL TO LOCK DOWN THE PROVISIONS ON WHICH THERE WAS ALREADY CONSENSUS. WE ALL KNEW THAT THIS WOULD REQUIRE AN ANNOUNCEMENT OF PLANS TO FOLLOW UP ON OUTSTANDING ISSUES. IN OTHER WORDS, THEY COULD NOT SIGN A FINAL AGREEMENT IN APRIL. ALL THAT HAPPENED TODAY WAS BARSHEFSKY SAID IT OUT LOUD. BARSHEFSKY DID THIS FOR SEVERAL REASONS: 1) AN INTERNAL US POLITICAL FIGHT -- THE US TRADE OFFICE HAS BEEN SNIPING THE STATE DEPARTMENT ABOUT STATE DEPARTMENT'S MAI WORK TO THE US PRESS OFF THE RECORD FOR WEEKS (ie. the BusinessWeek on line story that Chantell sent out on Friday that quotes USTR saying State was doing a bad job at MAI. ) ITS AN INTERNAL TURF FIGHT. BARSHEFSKY WANTS TO KEEP STATE OUT OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL NEGOTIATIONS. SHE IS TRYING TO CAST DOUBTS ON STATE'S SKILLS. 2) TRYING TO CALM UP DOWN -- WE HAVE BEEN HEARING THESE SORTS OF LUULABIES FROM STATE RECENTLY. "DON'T WORRY... ITS JUST SUCH A MESS WE CAN'T GET ANYTHING DONE... ETC." THIS AN ATTEMPT TO MAKE UP COMPLACENT. 3) THE U.S. IS TRYING TO OBTAIN NEGOTIATING LEVERAGE -- IE. FOR NEXT WEEK'S TALKS. THIS IS ALL STANDARD U.S. OPERATING PROCEDURE -- DO NOT BE DUPED: Anyone who was around during the NAFTA or GATT Uruguay Round negotiations is very familiar with this dance. The U.S. government announces that there is a disaster and they cannot finish the negotiations. They want the opponents to lay off, the business guys to pile in the pressure and the other governments to offer better deals at the negotiating table. And this Barshefsky lingo was not ever particularly strong compared to their usual Uruguay Round rhetoric in which they regularly said things like: "the US will withdraw from negotiations" or "the Uruguay Round is dead..." Note that within months of such statements, they had a political deal and tied up the lose ends within 9 months and WTO started on time on 1/1/95! PLEASE HELP CLEAN UP THESE FALSE RUMORS -- PASS THIS NOTE ALONG. WE HAVE A LOT OF WORK TO DO TO MAKE SURE THEY DO NOT REACH "POLITICAL" AGREEMENT IN APRIL...
FAIR-L: MR. ANCHORMAN, HAVE YOU EVER COMMITTED ADULTERY?
-- FAIR-L Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting Media analysis, critiques and news reports -- "MR. ANCHORMAN, HAVE YOU EVER COMMITTED ADULTERY?" by Jeff Cohen (Baltimore Sun, Feb. 8) In recent years, mainstream news outlets have found it increasingly acceptable to explore the private lives of public officials. The stated or implied rationale is that the American people, in judging the "character" of a politician, have a right to know if that official has engaged in extramarital affairs. Often, the "character issue" has become a media code word for marital infidelity. Even though polls indicate that Americans believe the mass media now go too far in investigating the intimate behavior of politicians, little seems to slow down sex-hunting journalists, especially those on network TV and "all-news" cable channels. Maybe there's only one way to get these journalists to rethink their actions: turn the tables on them. Perhaps it's necessary to vividly demonstrate to top news media personalities - some of whom arguably wield as much power as the politicians they cover - what it feels like to be on the receiving end of persistent questions about their private lives. So the next time you see a prominent TV journalist like Tom Brokaw or Peter Jennings or Dan Rather at a public lecture or on a call-in talk show, politely ask them if they've ever committed adultery. If they react by saying that such information is none of your business, you can tell them in self-righteous tones that the American public has a right to judge the "character" of journalists who have vast power to influence millions of people. If you get a forthright denial, don't stop there -- especially if you've seen any kind of a rumor of extramarital relations on the Internet or a supermarket tabloid. Rephrase your query (this time you might mention oral sex) and point out that your question "is not about sex, it's about integrity and whether the American people can trust you to tell them the whole truth." If you get a denial that's hesitant or hedged, be prepared with a series of follow-up questions - even if you feel embarrassed. In fact, like a TV news anchor, admit your embarrassment as you proceed to ask "these difficult questions." More importantly, see a hedged denial as your sign to do more investigating, dig up old news or gossip and be ready to challenge this journalist's character the next chance you can. In the real world, most Americans would feel squeamish asking such questions, even if it's just to prove a point about media overkill. Unfortunately, journalists at top news outlets have been anything but squeamish lately. It seems likely that well-known correspondents, pundits and anchors would begin to think twice about personal queries if they found themselves on the receiving end. Some questions are easier to ask than to answer. Jeff Cohen is the director of FAIR (Fairness Accuracy In Reporting), a national media watch group, and co-author of "Wizards of Media Oz.". To subscribe to FAIR-L send a "subscribe FAIR-L your full name" command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You may leave the list at any time by sending a "SIGNOFF FAIR-L" command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please become a member of FAIR. You will receive FAIR's magazine, EXTRA! and its newsletter, EXTRA! Update. You can become a member by calling 1-800-847-3993 from 9 to 5 Eastern Time (be sure to tell them you got the information on-line) or by sending $19 to: FAIR/EXTRA! Subscription Service P.O. Box 170 Congers, NY 10920-9930 FAIR (212) 633-6700 http://www.fair.org/
Computer iconography
We all know those little dumb computer symbols called "emoticons," where :) means a smile and :( is a frown. Well, how about some "assicons"? Here goes: (_!_) a regular ass (__!__)a fat ass (!)a tight ass (_._) a flat ass (_^_) a bubble ass (_*_) a sore ass (_!__) a lop-sided ass (_o_) an ass that's been around (_O_) an ass that's been around even more (_x_) kiss my ass (_X_) leave my ass alone (_zzz_)a tired ass (_o^o_) a wise ass (_13_) an unlucky ass (_?_) a dumb ass
Re: 17 nanograms of fame
Nope. Just to shit on the world on a regular basis. Sid One doesn't have to be paranoid to notice that the International Olympic Committee and the International Monetary Fund both begin with the SAME WORD! Coincidence? Does the IMF ask bankers to pee into a paper cup?
Labour and Workplace Studies position at Manitoba, 1999.
Preliminary informal announcement: Tenure-track position in Labour and Workplace Studies at Manitoba, 1999 The Labour and Workplace Studies Programme at the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada, will have a tenure-track position open as of July 1999. A formal announcement will be made this summer; it will be printed in the usual academic periodicals and circulated over the internet. Details of the position are yet to be determined. In all likelihood, it will be at the junior level. Specialisation in any area of labour and/or workplace studies would apply: industrial relations, bargaining, labour history, health safety, pensions benefits, workplace organisation, labour market policy, internationalisation, etc. etc. For further information, contact the acting programme coordinator: Jesse Vorst, Department of Economics Programme in Labour Studies University College, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg R3T 2M8 CANADA tel. 204-474-9119 (w) / 204-269-1365 (h, main) / 204-275-0474 (h, alt.) fax: 204-261-0021 (w) / time: central (GMT-UTC -6 winter, -5 summer) e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Zedillo Interview New York Times (fwd)
COMPLETE NY TIMES INTERVIEW Ernesto Zedillo: New Optimism on Ending Graft in Mexico City By SAM DILLON MEXICO CITY -- One year ago, as Washington was preparing to certify whether Mexico was a reliable partner in the narcotics war, came stunning charges by the Mexican government that the general serving as anti-drug czar had sold out and was deploying his troops on behalf of a billionaire trafficker. On Wednesday in an interview, President Ernesto Zedillo called that "one of the most difficult moments I've had as president." But since that searing crisis, he said, his government has turned a corner in confronting narcotics corruption, putting the general and several other senior officers on trial in an unprecedented campaign against graft. "What is new, indeed totally new, is that whenever we have caught a member of the Army committing a crime, he is prosecuted," Zedillo said. "That is new. The accountability is what is new." Later this month, the Clinton administration must decide whether to certify Mexico's anti-drug cooperation for another year, and Zedillo's remarks made clear that he hopes Washington will take account of his efforts to fight narcotics corrosion. But instead of pleading for certification, Zedillo bluntly criticized the annual process by which Washington passes judgment on the anti-drug programs of scores of nations. "The balance of this process in terms of its contribution to the fight against drug trafficking, after so many years, is not only negligible but probably negative," Zedillo said. "It's a lose-lose situation for everyone involved." In the interview in his office overlooking rambling pine-shaded presidential gardens, Zedillo spoke not only about the narcotics war, but also deepening distrust of the guerrillas in Chiapas state, the mounting criminality across Mexico that has panicked households and foreign investors, the economy he has shepherded back from a catastrophic crisis and his own role in Mexico's political reforms, which he described in modest terms. "I hate pretentious people, and I would be pretentious if I said I am leading the democratic transition," he said. Nonetheless, starting the second half of his six-year term, Zedillo enjoys robust approval ratings, and he exudes a sense of command that eluded him when he became president, virtually by accident, after the 1994 assassination of the original candidate of the ruling Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI. He said he had already achieved one political goal he set for himself when he took office in December 1994: "establishment of a true democratic system to elect public officials in Mexico." Reforms he negotiated with the opposition in 1995 and 1996 led the way to nationwide elections last July in which the PRI's opponents wrested control of the lower house of Congress for the first time in seven decades. "Now all the parties are in the same ship," he said. As for what comes next in Mexico's political reform, Zedillo said, "Everyone has his own political agenda." "For some people, the political agenda should be to defeat the PRI, to erase the PRI, and they say the president should lead that process," he said. "That's stupid!" Instead, he said, he intends to work to help the PRI compete under new conditions. Despite the deep changes, many Mexicans continue to believe that a president's powers remain overwhelming and that Zedillo, if he wished, could engineer the election of a successor. So his remarks did not resolve one of the largest questions in Mexican politics: how powerful a role he will play in selecting the PRI's candidate next year in preparation for elections in 2000. In an unbroken tradition dating to the 1930s, 11 PRI presidents have all chosen their successors in a system that has been likened to a constitutional monarchy. Mexicans have nicknamed this prerogative to handpick successors Dedazo, or Big Finger. Asked Wednesday which was his Big Finger, Zedillo burst into hearty laughter, extending his hands in front of him. "All 10!" he answered. But he immediately added: "That's a caricature." "I think I will not play the same very strong role other presidents have played," he said. At a convention this year, the party's rank and file will decide how the PRI will pick its candidate, he said. Zedillo's willingness to allow opposition parties to seize large chunks of Mexico's political terrain has raised his approval ratings, which peaked above 70 percent in August after the midterm elections according to some polls. In January, however, his approval fell by eight points, his aides said, both because of public anger over higher prices for basic goods and in reaction to a gruesome massacre, apparently by members of the PRI, of 45 Indian peasants in Chiapas. Zedillo outlined what appeared to be
Union-Buster Memorial Airport (fwd)\
Maybe they should have called it Union-Busting Memorial National Airport, instead. That would have more appropriately highlighted one of Ronald Reagan's most notorious achievements, the decision to fire 1,800 striking air traffic controllers early in his first term. Congress's decision to name Washington's airport for Reagan dishonors working people across the country. Want a sense of how bitter the memories are? Here's Randy Schwitz, executive vice president of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, the successor union to the broken PATCO: "I'd rather have a hot poker in my eye than have an airport named after him [Reagan]." The air traffic controllers' firing was about much more than the men and women who help guarantee air traffic safety. Although it wasn't the era's first large-scale firing or permanent replacement of striking workers, it certainly was the most prominent. Reagan's action sent a message to employers that they could act against striking or organizing workers with virtual impunity. And it sent a message to workers that they struck or sought to organize at their own peril. (The administration backed up those messages by appointing members to the National Labor Relations Board who had little apparent interest in enforcing the nation's labor laws.) A series of bitter labor conflicts over the next decade and a half would drive that message home: Hormel, Continental Airlines, Eastern Airlines, Caterpillar, A.E. Staley and many others. Occasionally unions were able to resist successfully with aggressive and innovative tactics, public outreach and unflinching solidarity -- as at Pittston Coal and more recently UPS -- but these labor victories have been the exception. Big business has capitalized on the new political and cultural climate which Reagan helped create -- as well as enhanced power from increased capital mobility, foreign competition, downsizing and rapid technological change -- to wage full-scale class warfare against working people. Employers use threats of plant relocations to bust unions; they rely on weak or non-existent unions to permit downsizing; they capitalize on technological change to speed restructuring and to shift production abroad. Many workers are so intimidated that they fear unionizing or even asking for a raise. Here is how bad things are: The most comprehensive study done on plant-closing threats in union organizing drives found that employers threaten to close the plant in more than half of all union-organizing drives. The study's author, Kate Bronfenbrenner, director of labor education research at Cornell's School of Industrial and Labor Relations, found that, during unionizing drives, employers regularly refer to NAFTA and Mexican maquiladoras to prove how easy it would be for them to move operations. She reports that one company in Michigan even parked flat-bed trucks loaded with shrink-wrapped production equipment -- accompanied by signs reading "Mexico Transfer Job" -- in front of the plant for the duration of a union organizing drive. Plant-closing threats are regularly accompanied by a host of other ruthless (and often illegal) anti-union measures. In union organizing drives from 1993 to 1995, Bronfenbrenner found that more than a third of employers discharged workers for union activity, 38 percent gave bribes or special favors to those who opposed the union and 14 percent used electronic surveillance of union activists. Sixty-four percent of employers in union election campaigns used more than five anti-union tactics, ranging from holding captive audience meetings where employer representatives lecture employees to threatening to report workers to the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Most astoundingly, where union organizing drives are successful, employers do in fact close their plant, in whole or in part, 15 percent of the time. All of this cannot, of course, be attributed to Ronald Reagan. But he did more than his share to help bring it about. It is the shame of the U.S. Congress that it decided to "honor" such a legacy. Russell Mokhiber is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Corporate Crime Reporter. Robert Weissman is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Multinational Monitor. (c) Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman
Re: U.S. will not sign MAI (fwd)
Having argued that this may be a tactical retreat, I'm compelled to forward the following, which indicates that the bad guys haven't for a moment given up on their desire to reshape the world along neoliberal lines via international trade deals. Sid The Toronto StarFebruary 12, 1998 FUTURE LIES IN WORLD-WIDE TRADE PACTS By David Crane GENEVA - Renato Ruggiero, the director-general of the World Trade Organization, is looking forward to a big celebration here in May, one that he hopes Prime Minister Jean Chrtien and other world leaders will attend. This will be the 50th anniversary of the multilateral trading system, the global body that has campaigned to cut barriers and make rules to govern trade, and which implements and enforces the rules and agreements reached by its members. Indeed, the decline in tariff barriers over the past 50 years and the evolution of a rules-based trading system is credited with stimulating world economic growth and helping many developing countries achieve higher living standards. But the celebration in May will be important for another reason, as Ruggiero says, and that is to initiate the debate on the kind of global system we need for the next 50 years. There is already a partial agenda. The World Trade Organization members are to start negotiating ways to further liberalize trade in agriculture and further liberalization in world trade in services by the year 2000. At the same time, they are supposed to review the existing code on subsidies, which allows countries to subsidize regional development and precompetitive research and development, and look at other issues such as technical standards for products. So does this mean we will be launching a new ''round'' of trade negotiations, like the Uruguay Round, which created and then lowered many tariffs, extended trade rules to cover services and intellectual property, and established a highly effective dispute mechanism ? ''There is a debate whether we should make progress through sectoral negotiations or through a new round,'' Ruggiero acknowledges. But ''it seems to me that this word 'round' is the real psychological obstacle.'' That's because people remember the Uruguay Round took seven years and they don't want to wait another seven years to complete a new set of negotiations. But whatever word is used, there will be a comprehensive set of negotiations because in individual sectors, such as agriculture, ''there will not be the give and take'' to get an agreement among more than 100 countries. Canada's trade minister, Sergio Marchi, has suggested the world embark on negotiations for free trade in a cluster of sectors, but Ruggiero seems to feel this is a non-starter, as he said at the World Economic Forum. Negotiations have to be much more ambitious. So he expects the next set of talks - what Sir Leon Brittan of the European Union has called a ''millennium round'' - will include not just agriculture, services, subsidies and the like but also new areas such as competition policy and more emphasis on investment rules. ''But more than that,'' says Ruggiero, ''I think that the future negotiations have inevitably to be involved with the new technologies and what the new technologies will do to the international trading system.'' Electronic commerce is a good example. It will bring sweeping changes in production, distribution and trade. The United States, for example, is pushing for global free trade for electronic commerce - so that goods and services purchased over the Internet would not face any tariffs when they crossed borders. ''We are entering into a new world and we have to face that reality,'' Ruggiero stresses in underlining the impact of the Internet. But that new world will also include China and, later, Russia as members of the World Trade Organization and the global trading system. Interestingly, he is not the least bit fazed by the amount of time Canada and other countries spend chasing ideas for regional trade blocs, such as sectoral free trade in the Asia Pacific Economic Co-operation world or free trade in North and South America. The World Trade Organization is moving faster and more efficiently in liberalizing trade than regional blocs, Ruggiero insists, pointing to the fact that last year the organization negotiated trade liberalization for most of the world's information technology, financial services and telecommunications markets. ''We have liberalized the infrastructure of the 21st century,'' he boasts. Moreover, he says, regional groupings are limited in what they can accomplish. Only the World Trade Organization can deliver at the global level and ''more and more, technology and services are global.'' These are
Re: U.S. will not sign MAI (fwd)
Maybe they were looking for a way to save face by backing out this way Marty, rather than acknowledging the enormous ground swell of opposition to the damned thing. Sid Shniad The following gives no sense of what the US government found objectionable in the MAI treaty as it now stands. Anyone have any more information or thoughts? I am sure the problem was not the objections of labor and environmental groups -- interesting the way the last sentence is tacked on. Marty Hart-Landsberg On Fri, 13 Feb 1998, Sid Shniad wrote: Friday February 13, 11:34 am Eastern Time U.S. will not sign global investment treaty-Barshefsky WASHINGTON, Feb 13 (Reuters) - The United States will not sign a multilateral investment agreement being negotiated by the 29-member Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky said on Friday. ``This agreement at this stage is simply not good enough,'' Barshefsky said at a news conference announcing a new trade compliance center. ``We do not envision signing on to this agreement this April.'' OECD representatives are set to meet next week in Paris to decide the fate of the investment agreement and whether or not negotiations would be completed in April as had been planned. Barshefsky said that, from the U.S. point of view, the agreement was unbalanced and would require ``very substantial work to make it something the United States will sign.'' She told reporters the United States was not alone in its objections to the agreement, which the OECD hoped would promote global investment. Environmental and labor groups around the world are strongly opposed to the investment agreement, arguing that it gave too much power to investors at the expense of taxpayers. Copyright © 1998 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon See our Important Disclaimers and Legal Information. Questions or Comments?
U.S. will not sign MAI (fwd)
Friday February 13, 11:34 am Eastern Time U.S. will not sign global investment treaty-Barshefsky WASHINGTON, Feb 13 (Reuters) - The United States will not sign a multilateral investment agreement being negotiated by the 29-member Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky said on Friday. ``This agreement at this stage is simply not good enough,'' Barshefsky said at a news conference announcing a new trade compliance center. ``We do not envision signing on to this agreement this April.'' OECD representatives are set to meet next week in Paris to decide the fate of the investment agreement and whether or not negotiations would be completed in April as had been planned. Barshefsky said that, from the U.S. point of view, the agreement was unbalanced and would require ``very substantial work to make it something the United States will sign.'' She told reporters the United States was not alone in its objections to the agreement, which the OECD hoped would promote global investment. Environmental and labor groups around the world are strongly opposed to the investment agreement, arguing that it gave too much power to investors at the expense of taxpayers. Copyright © 1998 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon See our Important Disclaimers and Legal Information. Questions or Comments?
Re: oil
Doug, there's a good, left economist here in Vancouver named Ed Shaffer who's written rather extensively on the subject. Sid I'm rather urgently looking for someone of leftish sensibilities who understands the oil market to yak on the radio. Any volunteers/nominees? Doug -- Doug Henwood Left Business Observer 250 W 85 St New York NY 10024-3217 USA +1-212-874-4020 voice +1-212-874-3137 fax email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://www.panix.com/~dhenwood/LBO_home.html
For the record (continued)
In addition to making it clear that the Canadian government is not following the advice of retired general MacKenzie re: Iraq, it should be noted that Stormin' Norman Schwartzkopf is saying much the same thing. Somehow he doesn't seem to be getting as much air play for this position as he did when he was in charge of Desert Storm. Sid Shniad
Re: David Card
What the fuck's this line of discussion about? (Canadian) Sid Of course. Michael Perelman wrote: I was thinking that we could invite him long but excuse him from some of the more acrimonious aspects of our culture. Why? Because he's Canadian? Doug -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Balancing Valis' kind words about Canada
Valis had some very kind things to say about Canada in response to the comments of General MacKenzie. For the record, the Liberal government in Ottawa is sucking up to Washington big time, proving itself a loyal sycophant when Uncle Sam starts rattling the sabers. (A caller on a talk show I heard a couple of days ago wanted to know where Canadian outrage was hiding when Bush murdered a couple of thousand Panamenos in the Noriega caper.) Here is a comment from someone on another list. Sid Progressive citizens of Canada and Australia would do well to concern themselves with the toady-like behavior of these two governments in sucking up to the U.S. war fever. It won't do us much good to mobilize against measures like MAI if we are at the same time helpless to affect potential mass murder in pursuit of the same political and economic interests. Or at least some of them. frank scott
KCTU delegate conference - on the spot report (fwd)
KCTU delegates reject the "Tripartite Agreement" - Rank and File Revolution in KCTU Delegate Convention KCTU rejected the tripartite agreement in extraordinary delegation convention held in Seoul on February 9. The convention hall was filled with about 270 regular delegates and over 500 observers, and the session began at 2:00 p.m., ending at 3:00 a.m. next morning with heated discussion and tough debates. In the course of discussions, delegates said, "We cannot accept the legislation of lay-off and temporary manpower agencies systems, for it will endanger our lives", "If those systems are legislated, our workplace will be ruined", "Such measures as the legalization of National Teachers' Union or the guarantee of unions' political activities are important, but they are fundamental labor rights which ought to be guaranteed, not something for deal with lay-off and temporary manpower agencies systems." And some delegates showed their strong opposition against the tripartite agreement, claiming that "KCTU leadership, which would not accept the lay-off and temporary manpower agencies systems, arbitrarily signed the agreement, and this is no better than authority arbitration of business union leaders who absolutely ignore opinions of their rank and file union members." KCTU delegate felt sorry and indignant at the situation of leadership resignation en masse, but they also recognized it is right for democratic union movement "to correct errors in a humble way on the basis of comradely affection". They resolved "to prepare a new struggle, on the basis of unity and solidarity, not division." Official Statement of KCTU delegation convention The Decisions made by Extraordinary Delegates Convention on Feb. 9 1. approval of the tripartite agreement: rejected by 184 delegates of 272 attending - against the legislation, and demanding renegotiations; if not accepted, start of struggle; if legislated, immediate start of general strike; concrete plans shall be committed to ECC. 2. total resignation of standing staffs of KCTU 3. infinite postponement of KCTU official election 4. formation of Emergency Executive Committee(EEC) election of Dan Byung-Ho as chairperson of EEC (present president of KDFMTU, Korean Democratic Federation of Metal Trade Unions) 5. adoption of the resolution demanding dissolution of chaebols, legalization of National Teachers' Union, release of imprisoned workers, reinstatement of dismissed workers, etc. (Drafting resolution shall be committed to EEC)
Re: Labor econ syllabi
Why not include Mike Yates' and Bruce Nissen's work? Sid Shniad I have just been informed that I will be teaching undergraduate labor econ in the Spring quarter. the last time I got a chance to teach this course was 10 years ago, and I used Bruce Kaufman's book, which is almost entirely neoclassical. I am hoping to get a more balanced view this time, but I need to find out what books are available for teaching a more heterodox view. If anyone can provide suggested reading, or even better, an entire syllabus for a heterodox course, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks in advance, Doug Orr [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dept of Econ, MS-36 Eastern Washington Univ. Cheney, WA 99002
European briefing on the MAI (fwd)
Corporate Europe Observatory, February 1998 We encourage you to spread this briefing or to use the information contained in it. In the latter case we would very much appreciate if you could send us a copy of your article or publication. If you have any questions and/or remarks regarding this briefing, please contact Corporate Europe Observatory c/o Prinseneiland 329, 1013 LP Amsterdam, Netherlands Tel/fax: +31-30-2364422, E-mail: ceo@xs4all For a HTML version of this briefing, point your browser at: http://www.xs4all.nl/~ceo/mai/
Web/email addresses US financial interests (fwd)
The following is courtsey of the soon-to-be affiliate of the NCDM out in Atlanta (Susan Tomlinson [EMAIL PROTECTED])-thanks to them for compiling the list of web site and email addresses for many of the US investment institutions and corporations we are targeting in our campaign. -NCDLJ These are some of the financial institutions targeted in the Feb. 9, 1998 action. With the aid of someone with access to national bank reference material, we found some addresses, phone numbers and persons to contact. Better still, we have included the website urls for some of the banks. Citibank 260 California St, San Francisco, CA 94111-4303 415/981-3180 FAX 510/891-8964 President/CEO: J Eric Daniels http://www.citibank.com Chase 1 Chase Manhattan Plaza, NYC, NY 10081 212/552- FAX 212/552-3875 CEO: Thomas G Labrecque Global Wholesale Marketing: Richard J Canty http://www.chase.com NationsBank 101 S Tryon St Charlotte, NC 28255 704/386-5000 FAX 704/386-6655 Pres/CEO: C John Hipp III VP-Marketing: Donna S King http://www.nationsbank.com Bank of America 555 California St San Francisco, CA 94104-1502 415/622-3456 FAX 415/624-0412 CEO: David A Coulter Group EVP Investment Manager: Alexander M Anderson http://www.bankamerica.com Goldman Sachs 85 Broad St NYC, NY 10044 212/902-1000 FAX 212/902-4103 CEO: John S Corzine http://www.goldmansachs.com Bear Stearns 245 Parrk Ave NYC, NY 10167 212/272-2000 FAX 212/272-3102 President/CEO: James E Cayne Sr Managing Director, Marketing: Pamela Cuming http://www.bearstearns.com ADDRESSES/PHONE NUMBERS ONLY FOR THESE BANKS: Republic National Bank of New York 452 Fifth Ave. NYC, NY 10018 212/525-5000 Pres/CEO: Dov C Schlein JP Morgan 522 Fifth Ave, NYC, NY 10036 212/837-2300 FAX 212/819-1456 President: Douglas A Warner, III Managing Director/Marketing: Douglas M Fleming Bank of Boston 100 Federal St Boston, MA 02110 617/434-2200 CEO: Charles K Gifford EVP-Global Asset Management: Guilliaem Aertsen First Chicago Bank (merged w/ 1st natl Bank of Chicago) One First national Plaza, Chicago, IL 60670-0002 312/732-4000 CEO: Verne G Istock American Express Bank, Intl 101 E 52nd St, 29th Floor NYC, NY 10022 212/415-9500 FAX 212/319-1673 Sr. Branch Manager/Director: Elodia Hernandez Bankers Trust 280 Park Ave, NYC, NY 10017-1216 212/250-2500 FAX 212/389-4600 CEO: Frank N Newman Merrill Lynch World Financial Center, North Tower, NYC, NY 10281-1332 212/449-1000 Chairman/President: Daniel P Tully Lehman Brothers American Express Tower, C World Financial Center, NYC NY 10285-2500 212/298-2000 President/Vice Chairman: Howard L Clark, Jr Morgan Stanley 1251 Avenue of the Americas, NYC NY 10020 212/703-4000 FAX 212/7036503 Chairman: Richard B Fisher
Job postings
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Feb 9 19:36:52 1998 Date: Mon, 9 Feb 1998 22:28:55 EST Reply-To: Forum on Labor in the Global Economy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: Forum on Labor in the Global Economy [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Patricia Lamborn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dear Friends, I would like to post recent news on several successful campaigns of the Hotel Employees Restaurant Employees Union (HERE), along with current job openings with HERE on these and other campaigns. We appreciate your posting and circulating this information. Circulating our job announcements has really helped attract excellent applicants in the past ---thanks! Pat Lamborn, HERE International Union JOB OPENINGS ORGANIZERS: CONNECTICUT HERE is seeking organizers for Local 34, the Clerical/Technical Union at Yale University and for Local 217, a statewide hotel and gaming local in Connecticut. Must have the commitment to organizing the unorganized and demonstrated ability to develop and recruit leaders in internal and external organizing drives. Salary depends on experience and includes complete benefit package. Send Resume to East Coast HERE Recruiter: Ellen Thomson, P.O. Box 322, Granby, CT 06035, FAX (860)251-6049. ORGANIZERS: BILINGUAL - NATIONWIDE HERE, is also seeking organizers bilingual in Spanish/English for organizing campaigns in California (Oakland and Los Angeles), Washington D.C. and Hartford, CT. HERE seeks an organizer bilingual in Haitian Creole/ English for Stamford, CT. HERE has an excellent training and leadership development program for both staff and members, entry level and experienced organizers encouraged to apply. Salary depends on experience and includes benefit package. For East Coast Positions Send Resume to: Ellen Thomson, HERE, P.O. Box 322, Granby, CT 06035 FAX: (860)251-6049. For West Coast Positions Send Resume to: Pat Lamborn, HERE , 548 20th St. Oakland, CA 94612, FAX (510)893-5362 RESEARCH ANALYSTS: NATIONWIDE HERE is also recruiting campaign research staff for positions in CONNECTICUT, BOSTON, LOS ANGELES, LAS VEGAS, WASHINGTON DC and the SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA, and hires researchers elsewhere occasionally. Staff in HERE's growing Research Department conduct in-depth investigations of companies and develop and implement strategic campaigns for organizing in the hotel, food service, and gaming industries. Ideal candidates will have activist experience: demonstrated research skills; excellent writing and speaking ability; familiarity with basic financial concepts; and ability to work in a team environment. Salary negotiable on the basis of experience; excellent benefits. Send resume and cover letter to: Recruitment, HERE Research Department, 1219 28th St., NW, Washington, DC 20007-3389, FAX: (202)333-6049. *C AMPAIGN UPDATES !!! HERE ORGANIZING AND STRIKE VICTORIES IN RECENT WEEKS. JAN. 12, 1998: ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI Workers on the Admiral President Riverboat Casino chose to join HERE Local 74 by a 171-103 in an NLRB Election. HERE has organized and won contracts for three Illinois Riverboats and all four Northern Indiana riverboats. JAN. 20,1998, NEW LONDON, CONNECTICUT HERE International Union launched an organizing effort among the 12,000 casino workers at the Foxwoods Resort Casino, the most profitable casino in the Western Hemisphere which is owned by the Mashantucket Pequot Indians. Initial surveys and interviews indicate that workers are concerned about cutbacks in raises and bonuses, co-payments on the company health plan and poor air quality resulting in the "Foxwoods Flu". An organizing victory here would be a first for tribal casinos nationwide. JAN. 31, 1998: LAS VEGAS, NEVADA At the stroke of midnight, 258 strikers returned to their jobs at the Frontier Hotel--after seven years on the picket line -- winning the longest running strike in present day labor history. During the strike, HERE Local 226 organized 20,000 new hotel-casino workers in Las Vegas, including those at the MGM Grand Hotel, which signed a first contract in November 1997. JAN. 22, 1998, NEW ORLEANS , LA HERE Local 166 won an organizing victory with a 237-75 NLRB vote for the union in a unit of 450 ARAMARK employees at the New Orleans Convention Center. Another election is scheduled for Feb. 6-7 in a similar sized unit of ARAMARK employees at the Superdome. The union's campaign has featured extensive house visiting, with up to 70 people making house calls. FEB. 4, 1998, NEW YORK CITY HERE Local 100 announced an important, milestone victory at the Box Tree Restaurant -Hotel where the workers have been on strike for a first contract since 1993. The union has negotiated a strong contract including employer paid health insurance for all
KCTU throws out leadership, rejects deal!! (fwd)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Feb 9 18:11:33 1998 Date: Tue, 10 Feb 1998 01:58:31 + Reply-To: Forum on Labor in the Global Economy [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: LabourNet [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: KCTU throws out leadership, rejects deal!! From 3 pm. Feb. 2 to 3 am. 9th, the temporary representative meeting of KCTU held. The representatives rejected the agreement of Tripartite Commission and decided general strike against layoff bill. After the announcement of agreement, a lot of local and affiliated unions declared "The decision on agreement to layoff bill is anti-labor one of leadership, so all of them must resign from their positions." Furthermore, there were heard voices saying "Let's make another union federation." The decision by this meeting is reflecting present situation. The representatives drove out vicarious president Pae Suck-bum, who resigned by himself, and put off leadership election infinitely. And KCTU constructed emergency committee and elected Dan Byoung-ho, president of Democratic Metal Workers' Federation, as chairman. They decided also followings. "1. We should demand re-negotiation on the basis of opposition to layoff. 2. If our demand would be rejected, we will not participate in the Commission. 3. If the layoff bill is passed unilaterally on Feb. 14, KCTU will arrange general strike immediately. 4. The schedule and method of struggle is entrusted to the emergency committee." Report from PICIS (Policy and Information Center for International Solidarity)
Urgent Action (fwd)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 8 Feb 1998 22:05:49 -0800 (PST) To: "undisclosed-recipients:;"@igc.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Compañeros: The war refugees of Chenalhó and the San Cristobal-based organization Enlace Civil are calling for an urgent letter campaign to President Zedillo asking him to please allow the International Committee of the Red Cross to attend to the refugees, many of whom are very ill, and for whom the aid provided by the government-linked Mexican Red Cross has proved seriously inadequate. Please take the time to read the attached information, and send your letters and messages now! Things are very difficult and pressing. Although our broad-based organizing in Mexico and in the U.S. is obviously necessary to effect long-term change, the presence of the International Red Cross can save lives NOW. **Write to Ernesto Zedillo, President of Mexico: Date: Sun, 8 Feb 1998 22:05:13 -0800 (PST) Fax: 011-525-271-1764 email for President Zedillo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: NCDM [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: From Enlace Civil To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SAN PEDRO CHENALHO, AUTONOMOUS MUNICIPALITY OF THE STATE OF CHIAPAS, MEXICO, JANUARY 1998 TO THE INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF THE RED CROSS, GENEVA, SWITZERLAND Regarding: Urgent request for humanitarian aid for the more than 6,000 war refugees in San Pedro Chenalhó. Those who are signing this urgent request for humanitarian aid are representatives of the displaced communities of the municipality of Chenalhó and of the autonomous municipal authority. 1.-Since December 1997, more than 6,000 men, women, children and elders displaced by the Mexican government's dirty war have found ourselves concentrated in this community of Polhó, where we currently live in very difficult conditions due to the lack of shelter. Thousands of people are living under small plastic roofs that do not provide protection from the rain and cold, and many others live out in the open, for which reason we need construction materials such as tin roofing, wood and nails. We are suffering from a severe shortage of food and survive only on a few tortillas and some food that civil society has brought us, but which is not enough for so many people. The products that we most need are: corn, beans, salt, sugar, soap, and other basic items, since all of our things, corn, beans, coffee and all of our animals were stolen by the paramilitary groups and government security forces. Since we were displaced and made refugees outside of our communities, 15 children, 8 women and 10 men have died from illnesses including: diarrhea, fever, respiratory infections, tuberculosis, parasites, ulcers, skin infections, malnutrition, etc. These are the diseases that are attacking and killing the thousands of refugees: right now we have over 200 sick persons, both children and adults, in need of immediate medical attention, yet there is a shortage of doctors and of medicines. They also need clothing and blankets to protect them from the cold, especially for the children and women. 2.- Those of us who are refugees are being persecuted and besieged by elements of the state public security forces and the Mexican federal army, which threatens us day and night and terrorizes us with its tanks, cannons, airplanes, and helicopters of war. The Mexican army has our communities occupied, the children can't go to school because the schools are converted into barracks for the soldiers of the Mexican government. The Mexican government persecutes us to exterminate us, because we are civilian supporters of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN) and we are fighting for land, work, decent housing, education, health care, democracy, freedom and justice; we are fighting for a more just life for the indigenous people, and the government has never granted us that right and has never taken us into account, and we have never received anything from this Mexican government. 3.- Now that we are refugees, the federal government, through its functionaries and through the illegitimate state government, comes to offer us its aid, but we do not trust them and for this reason have made it clear that we will receive the aid that they send but only through the civil society, so that the latter may check that what they send us is good; but the government doesn't listen to us and continues to play dumb and wants to send it directly through its armed forces or through the National Human Rights Commission, which is the same thing because it acts in the interests of the government. We are making it clear to the government that we will not receive anything from them directly, because it is they that are the material authors of the massacres that we have suffered, because they persecute us, discriminate against us and kill us. 4.- It is the government that has us in these conditions under which we are now living; it is the
South Korea: Rank-and-file rebellion in KCTU (fwd)
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 1998 08:48:30 +0200 Sender: Forum on Labor in the Global Economy [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Eric Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: South Korea: Rank-and-file rebellion in KCTU To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For news of the breaking developments surrounding the decision of the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions to reject the accord reached last week and to prepare for the launch of a general strike, check out the Latest News page at the Solidarity with Korea's Labour Movement website, located at: http://www.solinet.org/LEE/korea_news.html The page now includes the full text of the PICIS Newsletter which announced the news, as well as links to articles in the mainstream Korean press about the rank-and-file rebellion..
Request to call Senators toll free re: MAI
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 1998 17:55:00 -0500 From: Barbara Larcom [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Fwd: Request to call Senators toll-free @ MAI tomorrow!] To: Bill Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED], Campaign for Labor Rights [EMAIL PROTECTED], Chris Chase-Dunn [EMAIL PROTECTED], Chuck Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED], Howard Ehrlich [EMAIL PROTECTED], Jon Kerr [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mark Bevis [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mike Bardoff [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nan McCurdy [EMAIL PROTECTED], Peter Grimes [EMAIL PROTECTED], Richard Ochs [EMAIL PROTECTED] Greetings! Please call our Senators tomorrow, 2/10. Details and toll-free number are in attached message. Thanks for your help! REMINDER TOMORROW, TUESDAY 2/10, IS *ALL-CALL DAY* TO THE SENATE!!! ASK FOR THE STAFF MEMBER WHO WORKS ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE ISSUES AND SEND A CLEAR MESSAGE: THE U.S. IS RUSHING INTO A DANGEROUS NEW INVESTMENT TREATY. WE DEMAND THAT THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION WITHDRAW FROM THE NEGOTIATIONS! EDUCATE THE SENATE! 1-800-522-6721 --- TOLL FREE TO THE CAPITOL SWITCHBOARD * Meanwhile, in case you missed this [Posted at 7:46 p.m. PST Friday, February 6, 1998] Groups to protest international investment treaty WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Environmental and consumer groups, worried that an international investment treaty under negotiation will undermine national laws and give too much power to investors, Friday announced a week of protests. ``This is a dagger in the heart of democracy and should be resisted,'' Brent Blackwelder, president of Friends of the Earth, told reporters. His environmental group and others, together with consumer advocate Ralph Nader's Public Citizen, plan a series of protests next week to draw public attention to the agreement being negotiated by the 29 members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in Paris. They argue that the OECD's Multilateral Agreement on Investment gives investors too much power and protection for their investments at the expense of taxpayers while curbing governments' ability to regulate investments and protect the environment. Of particular concern, said Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch, is an expropriation and compensation provision that could allow investors to sue governments when new regulations or laws affected their ability to profit from an investment. ``It would allow any company to hold a government hostage for any action taken in the public interest,'' Wallach said. The group has posted the latest draft of the MAI and an analysis on its Internet site, www.citizen.org. As part of the protest, the groups plan to mail handcuffs to all 535 members of the House of Representatives and Senate and selected White House staff members to symbolize their concern, Friends of the Earth spokeswoman Lisa Baumgartner said. They are also planning a national call-in day Tuesday during which people will be encouraged to call their congressional representatives to protest against the treaty, which would have to be approved by the Senate. A politically activist telephone service company, Working Assets, said that with its January and February billings, it was urging its 280,000 customers to call Secretary of State Madeleine Albright to protest against the treaty. The calls are free, and the San Francisco company said it expected the State Department to get some 30,000 calls and letters by the end of February. The actions are designed to draw attention to the treaty before a Feb. 16-17 meeting of the OECD at which the grouping of wealthy nations will decide whether the treaty can be concluded by an April deadline or whether negotiations should be allowed to continue. A source close to the talks said negotiators were aware of the concerns of citizens' groups and were trying to respond to some of them in their bargaining. He said participants agreed that the expropriation and compensation provision needed some rewording to prevent lawsuits against regulatory actions by governments. ``We want to make sure the MAI will not give rise to a lot of cases of that nature,'' the source, who asked not to be identified, said. The OECD argues that a comprehensive agreement on international investment would give impetus to new investment for economic growth and employment. The organization said it was also posting progress on the negotiations on its Internet site, www.oecd.org. = Comments by MDOLAN@CITIZEN (Mike Dolan) at 2/09/98 10:03 am THIS IS PART AND PARCEL OF THE INTERNATIONAL WEEK OF ACTION AGAINST THE MAI -- 2/9 THROUGH 2/13. NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS AROUND THE WORLD ARE MOBILIZED TO PROTEST THE ADVANCED STATE OF NEGOTIATIONS OF THIS DANGEROUS STEALTH TREATY. PLEASE BE A PART OF THIS MOVEMENT. Thank you. The same citizens'
Retired general advises Canada to opt out of Iraqi adventure
Brief excerpt from opinion piece on the Globe and Mail Op-Ed page, February 10, 1998 Bomb Baghdad? Canada should opt out By Lewis MacKenzie .. My experience with sanctions has convinced me that they don't work -- unless you are trying to make life miserable for the general population of a country without any concern for the long-term consequences. They were a failure in the former Yugoslavia and in Iraq, if anything, they have solidified the population's contempt for the West. If conservative estimates are to be believed, as many as 5,000 Iraqi children are dying each month as a result of UN sanctions. I, for one, am more than a little uncomfortable with that statistic, and bombing Baghdad will only make matters worse. .. Retired Canadian Major General Lewis MacKenzie was the first United Nations forces commander in Sarajevo in 1992.
Well-worth Supporting! (fwd)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Feb 9 19:42:56 1998 Date: Mon, 9 Feb 1998 22:39:47 -0500 (EST) From: "Ms. Aikya Param" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "'Art Shostak'" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Women and Money Date: Mon, 9 Feb 1998 11:07:39 -0800 In February 1998, Women and Money is one-year old. From its start, Women and Money has published articles about labor unions. Highlights for the year include "Mothers and Daughters: Both Union Members" (March 97), "Generations of Black Union Activists: Merle A. Ways and Anderson Ways" (May '97), Dan Clawson's articel "Partnership for a New Labor Movement" (July '97), Art Shostak's "Teamsters, Labor, and PATCO: Hard-Earned Lessons, Hard-Won Gains" (Sept '97), and Robert J.S. Ross's "Sweatshops At Home and Abroad" (Dec '97). Our anniversary issue included Allen Schaaf's "Requiem for the 8-Hour Day," Pat Wynne on "Bringing Labor Alive in Song," "Julia Stein's "Poets Versus Guess Jeans," and Mike Alewitz, "Art Must Be Challenging." In our first year we publicized the "I Am Big Labor" campaign and the June '97 National March in Detroit to support the locked out newspaper workers. We publicized various anti-sweatshop actions including the anti-NIKE campaigns. People in the labor movement are always complaining because the major media doesn't support workers. This is a plea from the minor media publication: PLEASE support a publication that DOES cover unions and issues of concern to working people. Subscription income is still the main support for our publication. We appreciate your interest and we need your financial support. Please subscribe to Women and Money. To celebrate our birthday we have reduced our subscription rate to $35 per year. To subscribe to the publication, please send your snail mail address. Payment should be mailed to Women and Money, P.O. Box 4193, Berkeley, CA 94704-0193. If your organization requires a sample of the publication with your request for payment, please send your snail mail address and we'll forward a sample copy. This year the publication grew from 8 pages to a 20 page monthly report. The excellent writing of Maia Penfold delighted readers. We are seeing excellent contributions in the fields of entrepreneurship, health and health insurance, and most recently in areas of law. Many people are astonished to see that we carry fine pieces on both labor unions and entrepreneurship. We were proud to cover Michael Gandy's excellent report on Migraines, describing his complementary medical research and treatment. The first year also brought the beginning of the womenandmoney listserve for activists who want to continue to discuss and support the issues raised in Women and Money. Subscription information is on our website at http://www2.netcom.com/~aikya/womenandmoney.html The website was chosen a Link of the Week for the week of Feb. 2 by Computer Currents Interactive. Aikya Param, Publisher, Women and Money Economic Justice and Empowerment Monthly Report http://www2.netcom.com/~aikya/womenandmoney.html Arthur B. Shostak, Ph.D., Professor of Sociology, Department of Psych/Soc/Anthro; Director, Center for Employment Futures, Drexel University, Phila., PA, 19104; 215-895-2466; fax 610-668-2727. email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://httpsrv.ocs.drexel.edu/faculty/shostaka/ "This time, like all times, is a very good one if we but know what to do with it." Ralph Waldo Emerson
