Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Union supporters take anti-corporate action in CHICAGO

NEXT REPUBLIC: Solidarity with UE Workers at Quad City Die Casting
June 23, 2009

Over 75 supporters of UE members at QCDC marched on Wells Fargo Home Mortgage on North Avenue in Chicago, IL. Protesters cordoned off the area with crime scene tape, accusing Wells Fargo of JOBicide and HOMEicide. Wells Fargo, in addition to foreclosing on the homes of thousands of families nation-wide, is cutting financing to small businesses like Quad City Die Casting, leaving hundreds of workers unemployed. Protesters drew chalk outlines of workers affected by the bank's actions. Union members from SEIU Local 73, Teamsters Local 743, UFCW Local 881, The Graduate Employee Organization at UIC, AFSCME DC 31 and others came out to show support. Support also came from Chicago Jobs With Justice, ARISE Chicago, Interfaith Worker Justice, South Austin Coalition, Immigrant Solidarity DuPage and many others.

Photos of the union backers' action against Wells Fargo are at:

Saturday, June 20, 2009

Shout it from the rooftops! Workers in IRAN support the mass movement against Ahmadinejad!!

Reports on the web indicate that on Thursday, June 18, the Vahed Bus Drivers union, representing one of the most combative groups in the workers' movement in Iran, issued a statement in support of the mass movement. This union statement recognizes “the magnificent demonstration of millions of people from all ages, genders, and national and religious minorities in Iran” and states clearly that “the Syndicate of Workers of Tehran and Suburbs Vahed Bus Company fully supports this movement of Iranian people to build a free and independent civil society and condemns any violence and oppression.”

In addition, workers at the gigantic Khodro auto factory, the biggest in the Middle East, having almost 100,000 workers, took action on Thursday, June 18, in support of the mass movement. The striking autoworkers' statement follows:

“We declare our solidarity with the movement of the people of Iran.

“Autoworker, Fellow Laborers (Laborer Friends): What we witness today, is an insult to the intelligence of the people, and disregard for their votes, the trampling of the principles of the Constitution by the government. It is our duty to join this people's movement.

“We the workers of Iran Khodro, Thursday 28/3/88 in each working shift will stop working for half an hour to protest the suppression of students, workers, women, and the Constitution and declare our solidarity with the movement of the people of Iran.
The morning and afternoon shifts from 10 to 10:30. The night shift from 3 to 3:30.

“Laborers of Iran Khodro”

Thus, class-consicous workers in Iran have answered all those who claim the heroic mass movement in that country is somehow a result of imperialist manipulation. -- Yosef M

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Once again, Chávez embraces Ahmadinejad

[From www.presstv.ir]

Chavez congratulates Ahmadinejad
Sat, 13 Jun 2009 07:22:33 GMT
Font size :
File photo of the Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez (L) and his Iranian counterpart Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has congratulated his Iranian counterpart Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for the success of his re-election bid, in yesterday's poll.

In a telephone conversation with the Iranian president, Chavez said, "The victory of Dr. Ahmadinejad in the recent election is a win for all people in the world and free nations against global arrogance," Iran's Presidential Office reported. Chavez usually uses the term "global arrogance" to refer to Venezuela's arch-foe the United States.

The call came after preliminary results were announced by the Interior Ministry saying that Iran's incumbent president has won a landslide victory, gaining more than 64 percent of the votes.

Chavez also noted that the Venezuelan people and government always stand behind the Iranians.

In his reply, Ahmadinejad said that, "Despite all pressures, the nation of Iran had completely won (the election) and indeed this victory shows the clear road for the future.”

Before the start of the election too, the socialist leader had wished Ahmadinejad good luck in his re-election bid.

Speaking to supporters Thursday, Chavez called the Iranian president "a courageous fighter for the Islamic Revolution, the defense of the Third World, and in the struggle against imperialism.”

Sunday, June 7, 2009

Obama --Little real change from Bush assault on Constitution

[The Center for Constitutional Rights has issued an alarming assesment of Obama's first hundred days, at <http://ccrjustice.org/100daysassessment>. It is abundantly clear that defending democratic liberties is completely in the interests of our class, so the following excerpts from the report may be of some interest to comrades.]

The First 100 Days of the Obama Administration: Small Glimmers of Hope, but Little Real Change

... despite several strong steps, the Obama presidency has failed to live up to its promises in many areas of critical importance, including human rights, torture, rendition, secrecy and surveillance.

In the 2008 elections, the people of the United States resoundingly rejected the Bush administration legacy of torture, warrantless surveillance and a seemingly endless expansion of executive power under the rubric of the “war on terror.” What remained to be seen, however, was the political willingness and commitment of the Obama administration to not only promise hope and change, but to take concrete action ....

In its first 100 days, the Obama administration has not lived up to its promises of hope and change....
... most public statements by President Obama and other administration officials have focused on “moving forwards” and avoiding “retribution.” The vast amount of public information pointing to criminal activity committed by high level government officials compels the Obama administration to fully and transparently investigate and hold those responsible accountable to the fullest extent of the law – not to put the issue aside....
... the persistence of Bush-era torture techniques added to the Army Field Manual in Appendix M, make ending torture an unfinished promise....
[On unlawful detention] ... an Obama administration detention policy that has, in practice, too frequently has resembled that of the Bush administration. In practice, the men at Guantánamo have remained imprisoned, often under inhumane conditions, and the Obama administration has defended in court the use of Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan as a new prison outside the reach of law....
... The Obama administration has been largely silent on the issue of preventive detention – particularly the existing domestic preventive detention regimes that have caused vast harm to many people who would never be charged at all or charge only with minor immigration violations without relation to criminal conduct. Preventive detention is a threat to due process, the rule of law and, most directly, to those targeted in “preventive” dragnets....
[On Federal prosecutions against animal rights' and environmental activists for "terrorism"] ...The escalation of “Green Scare” prosecutions in the first 100 days of the Obama administration demonstrate not only the need for action from the Obama administration but an end to complacency among activists about attacks on the right to dissent....
[And so on and so forth. The whole report deserves to be read, to appreciate how little Obama has done in defense of our much-assaulted, battered, constitutional rights. -- YM]

Friday, June 5, 2009

What US imperialism did to IRAN in 1953

President Admits to US "Role in the Overthrow of a Democratically Elected Iranian Government"

[From: news.antiwar.com ][This is not to be construed as any endorsement of Obama, who, as an Illinois State Senator, advocated bombing Iran. -- YM]

by Jason Ditz, June 04, 2009

While far from the focus of his historic Cairo speech today, President Barack Obama’s comments on America’s history with Iran have caused something of a stir, as he became the first sitting US president to publicly admit to America’s role in the 1953 coup in Iran.

“In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government,” Obama admitted, referring to the CIA’s role in the coup against Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq after he nationalized the Iranian oil industry.

The US and British governments supported a coup d’etat in 1953 to ensure Western control over Iranian oil production. Iran remained under the control of the Shahist government until the 1979 Iranian Revolution, in which the current government ceased power.

In the 30 years since the revolution, the US and Iran have had a hostile relationship. In the 1980s this led to the US and Britain supporting the Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein as a regional opponent to Iran. The US provided Iraq with considerable support during the eight year long Iran-Iraq War.

This culminated on July 3, 1988, when a US warship attacked an Iranian civilian jetliner which it claims to have mistaken for an F14 fighter plane. The attack killed all 290 passengers aboard Iran Air Flight 655. Admiral Crowe, the Joint Chiefs chairman at the time, said the US “deeply regretted” the killings.

As Iran faces a hotly contested presidential election this month, the prospect of improved ties with the US looms large, if somewhat tempered by a long history of distrust and repeated comments from US officials saying they don’t really except negotiations with Iran to settle anything. Still, for the first time in 30 years the possibility of somewhat normalized relations seems real.

Thursday, June 4, 2009

Cuba -- OAS, an "historic" decision?

From: <http://www.ft-ci.org/>
La Verdad Obrera 328
Thursday, June 4, 2009
CUBA - OAS An "historic" decision?

The recent vote in the Organization of American States (OAS) lifts the obstacles that prevented Cuba's participation in this organization. In the context of the world crisis, the US is trying a policy of diplomatic détente towards Latin America, compared with Bush's old prescriptions. The statement approved unanimously by the 34 countries, with the support of the US, had the governments of Lula of Brazil and the Kirchners of Argentina, together with Mexico, as its main creators. What is presented as an "historic" event served, however, to promote the survival of a reactionary organization like the OAS, very challenged, and through which the US has always implemented its policy of domination in the region. The progressive governments, which replaced the neo-liberals, are giving cover to this imperial relocation, faced with its crisis of hegemony. The declaration says, "the participation of Cuba in the OAS will be the result of a process of dialogue begun at the request of the government of Cuba and of agreement with the practices, purposes and principles of the OAS," that demands respect for "freedom of expression," "human rights," and "freedom of parties." That is, a platform on which the US seeks to open negotiations that will permit it to push for a "democratic" way to capitalist restoration on the island.

Tuesday, June 2, 2009

Obama embraces environmental devastation

Environmentalists feel betrayed by the EPA's decision not to block new mountaintop mining projects.

By Tom Hamburger and Peter Wallsten May 31, 2009

Reporting from Washington -- With the election of President Obama, environmentalists had expected to see the end of the "Appalachian apocalypse," their name for exposing coal deposits by blowing the tops off whole mountains.

But in recent weeks, the administration has quietly made a decision to open the way for at least two dozen more mountaintop removals. In a letter this month to a coal ally, Rep. Nick J. Rahall II (D-W.Va.), the Environmental Protection Agency said it would not block dozens of "surface mining" projects. The list included some controversial mountaintop mines.

The industry says the practice of using explosives to blast away a peak is safer and more efficient than traditional shaft mining. But critics say the process scars the landscape and dumps tons of waste -- some of it toxic -- into streams and valleys.

The administration's decision is not the final word on the projects or the future of mountaintop removal. But the letter, coupled with the light it sheds on relations between the mining industry and the Obama White House, has disappointed environmentalists. Some say they feel betrayed by a president they thought would end or sharply limit the practice.

The issue is politically sensitive because environmentalists were an active force behind Obama's election, and the president's standing is tenuous among Democratic voters in coal states. West Virginia, for example, voted for George W. Bush in the 2000 presidential election largely because Democrat Al Gore was critical of the coal industry.

Moreover, Obama needs support from local lawmakers for an energy agenda that would further regulate home-state industries, but halting mountaintop mining could eliminate jobs and put upward pressure on energy prices in a time of economic hardship.

Coal advocates have solicited help from officials as high up as White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. And the issue has sparked contentious debates within the administration, including one shouting match in which top officials from two government agencies were heard pounding their fists on the table, according to sources briefed on the meeting who requested anonymity when discussing White House dealings.

The White House is "searching for a way to walk this tightrope," said Phil Smith, a spokesman for the United Mine Workers of America. "They have a large constituency of people who want to see an immediate end to mountaintop removal, and an equally large constituency . . . whose communities depend on those jobs."

Shortly after his inauguration, Obama won praise from the green lobby for taking a skeptical view of the mining process. And in March the EPA announced it would review the mountaintop projects, breaking from the Bush administration's practice of granting permits with little or no scrutiny.

The EPA has the authority to block mountaintop removal under the Clean Water Act. But if the agency raises no objections, the final decision on projects is made by the Army Corps of Engineers, which historically has approved mountaintop mining. The corps previously had indicated its intention to approve 48 pending permits.

Although environmentalists had expected the new administration to put the brakes on mountaintop removal, Rahall and other mining advocates have pointed out that Obama did not promise to end the practice and was more open to it than his Republican opponent, Arizona Sen. John McCain.

A review of Obama's campaign statements show that he had expressed concern about the practice without promising to end it. On a West Virginia visit, when asked about the impact of the mining on the state's streams, he said he wanted "strong enforcement of the Clean Water Act," adding: "I will make sure the head of the Environmental Protection Agency believes in the environment."

And his EPA administrator, Lisa Jackson, has said that the agency had "considerable concern regarding the environmental impact these projects would have on fragile habitats and streams." She pledged that the agency would "use the best science and follow the letter of the law in ensuring we are protecting our environment."

Soon afterward, the agency in effect blocked six major pending mountaintop removal projects in West Virginia, Kentucky and Ohio.

But this month, after a series of White House meetings with coal companies and advocates including Rahall and Democratic West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin III, the EPA released the little-noticed letter giving the green light to at least two dozen projects.

"It was a big disappointment," said Joan Mulhern, a lawyer for Earthjustice, an environmental law firm that has led court challenges to mountaintop removal. "It's disturbing and surprising that this administration, headed by a president who has expressed concern about mountaintop removal, would let such a large number of permits go forward without explanation."

Mulhern charged that the EPA "blew off" Jackson's earlier promises that the agency would adhere to science and would conduct an open process.

Ed Hopkins, a top Sierra Club official, said some of the projects that have now obtained the EPA's blessing "are as large and potentially destructive as the ones they objected to.""It makes us wonder what standards -- if any -- the administration is using," Hopkins said.

EPA and White House officials say that about 200 proposed mining projects are under review and that the administration already had taken steps to break from Bush-era policies.

"We want to make informed decisions guided by science and the law, and a change in such a practice is not something that happens overnight," said Christine Glunz, a spokeswoman for the White House Council on Environmental Quality.

But after the EPA's initial announcement in March that it would conduct aggressive reviews, Manchin and Rahall took the coal industry's concerns to White House officials, including Emanuel and Nancy Sutley, who heads the Council on Environmental Quality.

Manchin said he told the White House that "we are looking for a balance between the environment and the economy, and they assured me that they will work with us to find that balance."

Environmentalists were stunned to learn from Rahall's office May 15 that the EPA had given its blessing to 42 out of the 48 mine projects it had reviewed so far -- including two dozen mountaintop removals.

The news came in a letter to Rahall from Michael Shapiro, the EPA's acting assistant administrator, who wrote, "I understand the importance of coal mining in Appalachia for jobs, the economy, and meeting the nation's energy needs."

[From the Los Angeles Times, May 31, 2009]