[PEN-L:7492] SUGGESTED SCRIPT FOR AN UPCOMING MASTER CARD COMMERCIAL

[Sid Shniad]

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:7494] Important article from Chinese People's Daily

[Sid Shniad]

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 vitality

[PEN-L:7495] NATO'S BARBARISM - James Bissett, former Canadian ambassadorto Yugoslavia

[Sid Shniad]

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 abandoned

[PEN-L:7493] Civilian population in Kosovo may be about to crack, but itdoesn't look that way - Daily Telegraph

[Sid Shniad]

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:7496] WHY NATO CONSENSUS IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY - Lewis Mackenzie

[Sid Shniad]

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:7461] Apparent Movement on Diplomatic Front

[Sid Shniad]

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 
Milosevic’s 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 Chernomyrdin’s 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 today’s 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 Stepashin’s comment that it was 
ready to wash its hands of the affair and Talbott’s 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 Ivanov’s 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 wouldn’t 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 Kosovo’s 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 Chernomyrdin’s previous negotiating 
breakthroughs. Nevertheless, and whatever the ultimate outcome of 
today’s meeting, things appear to be moving again on the 
diplomatic front. 

[PEN-L:7456] LOSING THE MORAL WAR - San Jose Mercury editorial

[Sid Shniad]

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:7460] What is the real reason for NATO's bombing campaign?

[Sid Shniad]

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

[Sid Shniad]

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:4576] ASHAMED TO BE A CANADIAN

[Sid Shniad]

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 Yugo

Happy International Women's Day (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> >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)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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

[Sid Shniad]

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]
> 
> 

E.U.-U.S.A. free trade in the works

[Sid Shniad]

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

CHUMBAWAMBA North American tour schedule (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> The British anarchist punk group CHUMBAWAMBA is on a North American tour.
> They're the folks who recently dumped a bucket of ice on the British Deputy
> Prime Minister at an awards banquet and told him "that's what you get for
> being a scab".
> 
> Check out their web site at (http://www.chumba.com/).
> 
> Here's the schedule for the remainder of Chumbawamba's North American tour.
> 
> MARCH:
>   Friday 6 BOULDER Boulder Theatre
>   Sunday 8 LAWRENCE KS
>   Monday 9 ST LOUIS
>   Wednesday 11 MINNEAPOLIS First Avenue
>   Thursday 12 MILWAUKEE
>   Friday 13 CINCINNATTI Bogart's
>   Sunday 15 INDIANAPOLIS Egyptian Room
>   Monday 16 COLUMBUS Newport Music Hall
>   Tuesday 17 PITTSBURG
>   Wednesday 18 ROCHESTER Water Street Music Hall
>   Thursday 19 TORONTO Warehouse
>   Saturday 21 KAMLOOPS Snojob Festival Sun Peaks
>   Sunday 22 SEATTLE Paramount
>   Monday 23 VANCOUVER Rage
>   Tuesday 24 CALGARY Macewan Hall
>   Thursday 26 ASHLAND Ohio. Ashland University
>   Friday 27 MYRTLE BEACH House Of Blues
>   Saturday 28 ATLANTA Centennial Park
>   Sunday 29 PANAMA CITY Club La Vela
>   Tuesday 31 ORLANDO House Of Blues
> APRIL:
>   Wednesday 1 MIAMI Cameo Theatre
> 
> "Support will be Alabama 3 (or, as they're known in the USA, 'A3')."
> 

Note: the Calgary date will feature a representative from the Detroit
newspaper strikers, who are touring to get out the story on their ongoing
battle.

WORKERS OF THE WORLD UNITE (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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 A

CHOMSKY ON IRAQ INVASION (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> Written 9:02 AM  Feb 22, 1998 by [EMAIL PROTECTED] in mideast.levant
> */
> /* -- "CHOMSKY on the Iraq Crisis" -- */
> 
> -   ___      __
>/  |/  /  /___/  / /_ //M I D - E A S T   R E A L I T I E S
>   / /|_/ /  /_/_   / /\ Making Sense of the Middle East
>  /_/  /_/  /___/  /_/  \
> www.MiddleEast.OrgCHOMKSY on the Iraq Crisis
> ___
>  TO RECEIVE MER REGULARLY EMAIL TO:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ---
>   M I D - E A S T   R E A L I T I E S
> News, Information, & Analysis That Governments, Interest Groups, 
> and the Corporate Media Don't Want You To Know.
> ---
>   
> 
> MER - Washington - The following interview took place 
> on 2/10/98 with Professor Noam Chomsky:
> 
> 
> 1) The intervention of the U.S. in Iraq seems at the 
> moment unavoidable.  Do you think the real reason of 
> this intervention is to impose respect of U.N. 
> resolutions?
> 
> To evaluate the proposal, we can ask how the US itself
> respects UN resolutions. There are simple ways to check.  For the
> past 30 years, the US is far in the lead in vetoing Security
> Council Resolutions (Britain second, France a distant third). In
> the General Assembly, the US regularly votes against resolutions
> in virtual isolation -- hence in effect vetoing them -- on a wide
> range of issues. The pattern extends to the World Court,
> international conventions on human rights, and much else.
> Furthermore the US freely disregards violation of UN resolutions
> that it has formally endorsed, and often contributes materially
> to such violation.  The case of Israel is notorious (for example,
> the 1978 Security Council resolution calling on Israel to
> withdraw immediately from Lebanon). To select another example
> that is quite relevant here, in December 1975 the Security
> Council unanimously ordered Indonesia to withdraw its invading
> forces from East Timor "without delay" and called upon "all
> States to respect the territorial integrity of East Timor as well
> as the inalienable right of its people to self-determination."
> The US responded by (secretly) increasing its shipments of arms
> to the aggressors, accelerating the arms flow once again as the
> attack reached near-genocidal levels in 1978. In his memoirs, UN
> Ambassador Daniel Patrick Moynihan takes pride in his success in
> rendering the UN "utterly ineffective in whatever measures it
> undertook," following the instructions of the State Department,
> which "wished things to turn out as they did and worked to bring
> this about." The US also cheerfully accepts the robbery of East
> Timor's oil (with participation of US-based companies), in
> violation of any reasonable interpretation of international
> agreements. The analogy to Iraq/Kuwait is close, though there are
> differences: to mention only the most obvious, US-backed
> atrocities in East Timor were vastly beyond anything attributed
> to Saddam Hussein in Kuwait.
> 
> It is easy to extend the record.  Like other great powers, the US
> is committed to the rule of force, not law, in international
> affairs. UN Resolutions, World Court Judgments, International
> Conventions, etc., are acceptable if they accord with policy;
> otherwise they are mere words.
> 
> 
> 2) Which difference do you see between this 
> intervention and Operation "Desert Storm", with 
> the Bush administration?
> 
> 
> There are many differences. "Desert Storm" was allegedly
> intended to drive Iraq from Kuwait; today the alleged goal is to
> compel Iraq to permit UN inspection of Saddam's weapons programs.
> In both cases, a closer look reveals a more complex story.
> 
> After Iraq invaded Kuwait, the US feared that in "the next few
> days Iraq will withdraw" leaving in place a puppet government and
> "everyone in the Arab world will be happy" (Chairman of the Joint
> Chiefs Colin Powell). The concern, in brief, was that Iraq would
> act much as the US had done a few months earlier when it invaded
> Panama (vetoing two Security Council resolutions condemning its
> actions). What followed also does not quite conform to standard
> versions.  Today, it is widely expected that a military strike
> will leave Iraq's murderous tyrant in power, continuing to pursue
> his weapons programs, while undermining such international
> inspection as exists.
> 
> It may also be recalled that Saddam's worst crimes were committed
> when he was a favored US ally and trading partner, and that
> immediately after he was driven from Kuwait, the US watched
> quietly while he turned to the slaughter of rebelling Iraqis,
> even refusing to allow them access to captured Iraqi arms.
> 
> Official stories rarely yield an

Judge to GM: Do I Have to Arrest You? (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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
> Multinat

BC Government takes strong stand against MAI

[Sid Shniad]

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. 

Harper Collins and China

[Sid Shniad]

> >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.

RIGHTS-MEXICO: Impunity for Hundreds of Murderers

[Sid Shniad]

> >/* 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]>.

DEVELOPMENT: Global Struggle Declar (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> >/* 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

[Sid Shniad]

> >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.
> >
> 

Check Out Issue #5 (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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
> 
> 
> 

The March issue of Labour Left Briefing (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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 ne

Re: environmental issues

[Sid Shniad]

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

NZ - Union Journal Editor Sacked over MAI (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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.

Ronald McDonald Burned in Effigy at McDonalds Protest (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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/ 
> --- 

McUnion Busting, McCl (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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: 
> 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: 
> 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
> 

pl.fwd..Chiapas: Indicators of Impending War (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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.  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

EU Parliament Opposes MAI (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

>  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
> Multilatera

The Legal Assault on Workers' Rights (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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

[Sid Shniad]

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

[Sid Shniad]

> 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 a

Krugman on the Asia crisis

[Sid Shniad]

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 function

New York Times & Hi-Tech Spy System (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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 

Visa and The Anti-Child Support Act (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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 reco

MAI Handbook Available (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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

[Sid Shniad]

> >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 

Newman Outlines Threat of MAI (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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

Chiapas Refugees Ambushed, 1 Killed (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

>  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

[Sid Shniad]

> 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
> 

Fw: comparty: Online Gulf War Petition (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> From: Rene Bilodeau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: comparty Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: February 23, 1998 9:02 PM
> Subject: comparty: Online Gulf War Petition
> 
> 
> >Comrades,
> >
> >I've created an online petition against the US threat of war against Iraq.
> >It will automatically take the names and email addresses of signers, bundle
> >them up with the wording of the petition and send it off to Prime Minister
> >Chretien via email. (I hope I got his right email message. I found it in a
> >list that Mark O'Neil had).
> >
> >It is programmed to send off the petition after every 25 signatures have
> >been collected. So jump to it and start signing. ;-) It will only allow you
> >to sign once.
> >
> >If you could please pass out the word of this petition to friends and
> >associates, please do so. The sooner and the more signatories the better.
> >Please make announcements in news groups and wherever you can think of of
> >the availability of this petition.
> >
> >Thanks for your help.
> >
> >Find the petition at 
> >
> >http://w-3productions.com/cgi-bin/miva?/petition/petition.hts
> >
> >Cheers, Rene
> >
> >==
> > Custom Design Software & W-3 Productions
> >Web Building and Hosting Services
> >http://w-3productions.com/
> >  ICQ# 5928359
> >
> >Does your organization need a mailing list?
> >Check out ... http://w-3productions.com/mailinglist
> >==
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 

WHC: APPEAL FOR ASIAN CONFERENCE (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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 t

Solidarity tours for Detroit strikers

[Sid Shniad]

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

[Sid Shniad]

 
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!!!  

Developments in South Africa

[Sid Shniad]

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 œ10 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 (œ80) 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 (œ2.50) 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." 

Re: Red vs Green

[Sid Shniad]

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
> 

(fwd) Union Buster Files Defamation Suit vs Academic Researcher (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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
> 

janitors march (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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

Correction of: CALL FOR SOLIDARITY ACTION ! (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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-site__
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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 

MAI Booklet (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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. 

Re: Amerikkkan Democracy at work...

[Sid Shniad]

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?

Goodbye, Roberta: The CBS-Nike Connection (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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 

Re: Taking Control (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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 o

Inside U.S. Trade, Feb. 13, 1998 (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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

Who will pay for a united europe? (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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 

(Fwd) Universities reap windfall from research (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

!*COMMENTARY: Middle East quiz (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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]
> 
> 

NEW LIST SERVE: STOP-IMF (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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  (no period)
> 
> Please forward this message to other lists. Please accept apologies for
> any cross-posting.

Computer Use Splits Between Along Income Lines

[Sid Shniad]

> 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. 
> 

Russian Workers (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> The current issue of the San Francisco Flier contains an article about
> labor conditions in Russia that begins as follows:
> 
> 
> Russia: What’s Up, What’s Down, What’s 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 country’s 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
> (, 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

[Sid Shniad]

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

[Sid Shniad]

[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

[Sid Shniad]

"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

[Sid Shniad]

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. 

Re: U.S. will not sign MAI (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

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
> 
> 
> 
> 

Tanks,amphibious and armored vehicles...Chiapas (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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

NZ-Govt Irresponsibility, Insincerity, Slammed Over Paris Igotiations (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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 whic

(Fwd) (en) Argentina: Historic Tour of Illegal Detention Centr (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> _
>  
>  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  

Re: U.S. will not sign MAI (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

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

[Sid Shniad]

See explanatory note from Lori Wallach, debunking the spin that's being
put out by the USTR office.

Sid

URGENT CLARIFICATION! (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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...
> 
> 

USTR on MAI (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

>  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. 

DON'T CELEBRATE YET!! (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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
> 
> 

Re: U.S. will not sign MAI (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

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 Chr‚tien 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 g

Re: U.S. will not sign MAI (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

Marty, in my last message I responded to you, saying
> 
> 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

Here's some evidence of burgeoning problems with the deal:

Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Subject: MAI War in Europe 12 Feb, 98 
 
Recent updates 
 
1. Dutch group occupies office of chief mai negotiator   (Olivier 
Hoedeman, CEO) 
 
2. Escalation of concern by european ministries (Charles Arden-Clarke, 
WWF International) 
 
1. Short report from action at MAI negotiators Engerings office today 
(12/2): 
 
Earlier today activists occupied the entrance of MAI chief negotiator 
Engering's office, in the Ministery of Economic Affairs in The Hague, 
The Netherlands. Some 40 people from the Dutch anti-MAI action group 
"MAI niet gezien" (= MAI not seen/MAI not for me) went inside the 
ministery to protest against the MAI and to demand the negotiations to 
be extended with at least one year. After about an hour, in which a 
"factory" of cardboard boxes had been constructed in the main hall of 
the building, to indicate that investments would be out of control 
under the MAI, the activists met with Mr. Engering and negotiator for 
The Netherlands Marinus Sikkel. 
 
In the presence of also several media people, the main point raised was 
that trying to finish an agreement by the end of April is undemocratic 
and dangerous. Critique on the MAI from civil society is growing day by 
day, more and more parliaments are demanding a thorough analysis of the 
impacts and both between and within governments conflicts are emerging 
as the negative impacts of the MAI become increasingly clear. To allow 
time for serious impact assesments of the MAI and for a genuine public 
debate to emerge, the only acceptable conclusion would be to expand the 
negotiations with at least another year. Another demand raised was a 
far more open and accessible negotiation procedure, with full 
information available and public participation. Engering answered that 
such decisions could only be taken by the governments and refused to 
promise to work for postponing the deadline for the negotiations. 
 
More actions against the MAI are expected in The Netherlands over the 
next weeks. 
 
2. From:  Charles Arden-Clarke  
 
Will see what I can find out following the EC coordination meeting 
yesterday and today.  EC may have been pushing before this using their 
Article XX tabling as the magic bullet for the environmental concerns. 
My sense is that DG I really do want to complete. 
 
However, since the last coordination all hell has broken loose in some 
EU Members (in the form of some combination of street protests, further 
NGO critiques, inter-agency fights on key issues, outraged 
parliamentarians).  The word "war" has been applied to the situation in 
both Finland and Sweden.  Things are also moving fast in Italy, 
Denmark, the Netherlands and the UK, but I do not know to what effect 
yet.  All this will make it more difficult for the EC to push hard. 
 
I have been told that there is now complete acceptance by the 
negotiators that there will be no MAI in April - ie only a political 
declaration at most, followed by legal scrubbing and late 1998 signing. 
Also talk of at third option, extension for an undefined period, is 
getting increasing air-time.  Engering will be leaving whatever happens 
after April. 

Re: U.S. will not sign MAI (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

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?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 

Zedillo Interview New York Times (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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, apparent

FAIR-L: "MR. ANCHORMAN, HAVE YOU EVER COMMITTED ADULTERY?"

[Sid Shniad]

>--
>  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/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

U.S. will not sign MAI (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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?
> 
> 
> 

Computer iconography

[Sid Shniad]

> 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
> 

Union-Buster Memorial Airport (fwd)\

[Sid Shniad]

> 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
> 

Labour and Workplace Studies position at Manitoba, 1999.

[Sid Shniad]

> 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]
> 

Re: 17 nanograms of fame

[Sid Shniad]

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?
> 
> 

Re: oil

[Sid Shniad]

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: 
> web: 
> 
> 
> 

For the record (continued)

[Sid Shniad]

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: CGIAR Calls for IPR Moratorium on Designated Germplasm

[Sid Shniad]

> CGIAR PRESS RELEASE
> 
> CGIAR Secretariat  .  Mailing Address: 1818 H Street, N.W., Washington,
> D.C. 20433, U.S.A.  .  Office Location: 701 18th Street, N.W.
> Tel: (1-202) 473-8951  .  Cable Address: INTBAFRAD  .  Fax: (1-202)
> 473-8110  .  E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
>   For immediate release
>   Contact:
>   Shirley Geer, CGIAR Secretariat, Washington,DC
>   (1-202) 473-8930
>   Ruth Raymond, IPGRI, Rome, Italy
>   (39-6)  51892215
> 
> 
> CGIAR Urges Halt to Granting of Intellectual Property Rights
> for Designated Plant Germplasm
> 
> 
>   The Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
> (CGIAR) has called for a moratorium on the granting of intellectual
> property rights on designated plant germplasm held in the collections of
> CGIAR agricultural research centers around the world.
> 
>   Designated germplasm refers to plant accessions which the CGIAR
> Centers have placed under the auspices of the Food and Agriculture
> Organization of the United Nations (FAO). These accessions are held "in
> trust for the benefit of the international community, in particular the
> developing countries." As such, they are subject to terms and conditions
> contained in agreements signed between the Centers and FAO in 1994.
> Designated germplasm includes farmers' varieties and landraces, obsolete
> varieties, modern varieties, advanced lines, genetic stocks and wild
> species.
> 
>   The CGIAR holds the world's largest international ex situ
> collection of plant genetic resources -- more than 500 000 accessions that
> are vital for crop improvement world-wide. In announcing the call for the
> moratorium, CGIAR Chairman Dr. Ismail Serageldin reiterated the CGIAR's
> "strong and unequivocal support" for the 1994 agreements, which seek to
> guarantee that access to these resources will not be restricted.
> 
>   "The CGIAR is deeply committed to the conservation, sustainable
> use, and stewardship of genetic resources," Dr. Serageldin said.  "Calling
> for this moratorium is the strongest signal the CGIAR can send governments
> to ensure that these issues be resolved and the materials in the CGIAR
> collections remain in the public domain."
> 
>   Recently, research by the Rural Advancement Foundation
> International (RAFI) has revealed that a small number of organizations have
> sought intellectual property rights on materials obtained directly from the
> CGIAR Centers. The agreements with FAO specify that neither Centers nor
> subsequent recipients of designated germplasm will seek any intellectual
> property rights over that germplasm or related information.
> 
>   "The moratorium will provide governments with the time to carefully
> consider and resolve issues related to the in-trust collections that have
> been brought into sharp focus in recent weeks," said Dr. Geoffrey Hawtin,
> Director General of the Rome-based International Plant Genetic Resources
> Institute, one of the CGIAR Centers. "It will also allow for a considered
> approach to some of the issues that will arise as the details of a
> multilateral system for genetic resources exchange are discussed in
> international fora." The status of plant genetic resources of agricultural
> species is currently being negotiated by the intergovernmental FAO
> Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture.
> 
>   CGIAR Centers routinely distribute germplasm to plant breeders
> through Material Transfer Agreements (MTAs), which enjoin the recipient
> from applying for intellectual property rights on the materials. However,
> recipients who obtained materials prior to 1994, when the MTAs came into
> use, are not legally bound by these restrictions.
> 
>   Dr. Serageldin called upon all recipients of designated material to
> honor the spirit of the agreements with FAO and to refrain from applying
> for intellectual property rights, regardless of the date the material was
> received. "We are grateful to RAFI for bringing to our attention reports
> that some organizations are claiming rights to designated germplasm from
> CGIAR Centers," he said.
> 
>   Efforts are also underway within the CGIAR system to analyse the
> issues, in particular with a view to ensuring appropriate and consistent
> MTAs and other instruments designed to ensure full compliance with the
> terms of the FAO/CGIAR Agreements.
> 
>   The CGIAR is an informal association of 57 public and private
> sector members that exists to mobilize the best in agricultural science on
> behalf of the world's poor and hungry. The CGIAR's cutting-edge research
> has made a major contribution to global food security, helped farmers meet
> the increasingly complex challenges of keeping the environment healthy and
> their farming sustainable, and leveraged resear

KCTU delegate conference - on the spot report (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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

[Sid Shniad]

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
> 
> 

Balancing Valis' kind words about Canada

[Sid Shniad]

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
> 

Re: David Card

[Sid Shniad]

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]
> 

Retired general advises Canada to opt out of Iraqi adventure

[Sid Shniad]

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.

Request to call Senators toll free re: MAI

[Sid Shniad]

> 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 

South Korea: Rank-and-file rebellion in KCTU (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> 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..

Urgent Action (fwd)

[Sid Shniad]

> >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 t