Cascadians's topics - tribe.net

Awesome New Blog

Kate — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 20:45:36 GMT

Come check out this new blog, posts from women with all sorts of different herbal backgrounds from Western Washington.
http://medicinewomen.wordpress.com/

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

The Salish Sea

LanSing — Fri, 22 May 2009 10:29:44 GMT

Interesting series of articles by Knute Berger can be found here, describing the effort to officially designate Puget Sound & straits of Georgia & Juan de Fuca as a larger body of water called the Salish Sea. I found the whole series, including reader comments, to be quite interesting. Here's the most recent article:
http://crosscut.com/2009/05/20/mossback/19007/

Related stories can be found under, um, "related stories"....

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

The Cascadian Guidebook Project

aboregional — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 03:16:11 GMT

Please check out the new blog which serves as our preliminary promotion for a bioregional guidebook project now one year in the works. The is based around a bioregional model of the cascadian region, and will serve as a tool for re-envisioning the Pacific Northwest. Get involved! Write to cascadianculture@gmail.com and see the blog at cascadianculture.blogspot.com

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Remember Remember The Fifth of November

Alexander — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 23:59:50 GMT

Remember Remember The Fifth of November

Well girls and boys that favourite holiday season is upon us again. It is time to gather the family and hang the pumpkins on the good old Halloween tree. Time to unbutton and zip down those over stuff pants after eating lots of tasty Vegan tofu turkey on Thanks Taking Day. Time to gather the neighbourhood kids in good cheer as we sing the traditional Election Fraud hymns. There is that great holiday called Bonfire Night to celebrate the rebellious actions of some guy. And who could forget that this Autumn season ends with an early Festivus. Hopefully this year there will be lots of "Airing of Grievances" followed by unusual amount of "Feats of Strength" to give us all that holiday joy and maybe even a "Festivus Miracle" or two.

It is my favourite time of the year. Memories of building leaf men from freshly fallen leaves. My childhood memories of kicking piles of leaves and leaf ball fights. But what is so important not to forget to purchase or make a traditional V for Vendetta mask. I often wear mine to work and when picking up the kids from after school. Right now as you read this stores are filling their stocks and shelves with those beautiful V for Vendetta masks. Yes that is right the mask popularised by the graphic novel and movie. Just imagine you sporting on a fashionable V mask with your hoody or jacket or any other appropriate attire. You could even don on some foxy black Jacobean Era outfit.

But you say "uncle Evergreen V, I ain't got no money to buy me a V for Vendetta mask, cuz the big business bailout also called the Emergency Stabilization Act of 2008 has left me penniless and I ain't got no job either due to outsourcing." I am so glad you asked me that question little Tiny Tim. Here is a shiny brand new penny for your thoughts. Well if you have just a little money for two colour prints then I have a deal for you. You can actually download a papercrafted V for Vendetta mask. This two page colour print out has tags or folds on the various sections of the mask to where you fold and glue the paper mask together. This can be a fun group project with friends and like minded people. You can even work side by side with your significant other or meet some like minded individuals for those heated discussions over steamy issues about civics and social justice. Make it a shared event with friends, neighbours, co-workers, classmates and family. It can be found at the following link:

papercraft-guyfawkes-pdf.zip
http://www.zshare.net/download/161188971bb2c38b/

I will add to this a round of applause to the first person or persons who can make a viral video going step by step on the print out to a well glossed version of the infamous V mask. Yes that is right a viral video rewarded with a round of applause from me.

Remember Remember The Fifth of November

Evergreen V

PS ... please watch

Remember
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ga7wsBd9_M&feature=user

V for Vendetta in Kinetic Typography
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8332842891866779485&ei=LmjqSLeQG4nGqQKIzMmbDA&q=V+for+vendetta&vt=lf&hl=en

November 5 V Speech
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4857964137818958423&ei=-GvqSKSrA5OwrAK17uT8BA&q=V+for+Vendetta+Revolution&vt=lf&hl=en

V speech
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2118953091665527418&ei=-GvqSKSrA5OwrAK17uT8BA&q=V+for+Vendetta+Revolution&vt=lf&hl=en

Poster for a Free Cascadia "Be the Evergreen Revolution"
http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2008/10/13/evergreenrevolutionnovemberv.jpeg

Another site with the Guy Fawkes (V for Vendetta) mask in PDF format
http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2008/10/13/guyfawkesmask.pdf

Image of the Guy Fawkes (V for Vendetta) make after construction
http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2008/10/13/guyfawkesdemomask.jpg

And please forward this message and make it "go viral!"

posted in Cascadians - 3 replies

Cascadian Tax

Balor — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 11:27:54 GMT

What sort of system of taxation should Cascadia adopt?

posted in Cascadians - 4 replies

Spiritual Art and Drum Sale

lavenderfae ~ Wynne — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:11:14 GMT

From Bill Cote:

Sept 20--21

I am moving to Montana & Must reduce my collection of over 400 paintings. My art has been described as 'Outsider', or 'Primitive' Art. The work reflects my interest in mythology, spirituality, family, and geometric design. The work includes pieces ranging from 4 by 8 feet, to many small pieces. I paint on canvas, glass, plastic, but mostly recycled wood.

Northwest style hand drums and a Pow Wow drum also available. I have been creating drums with permission of my elders for 21 years.

ALL ITEMS PRICED TO MOVE.

Please come join us for fun, music, and a slide show of my computer art Sat evening. We invite you to bring an instrument, song, story, poem, or listening ears for fun with art, music, and sharing.

contact info: bill (360) 528-9455

Address of Sale: 5116 se Ankeny, Portland ( 1 block off Burnside), Portland, OR

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Ancient Futures: Learning From Ladakh (now on Google videos)

Alexander — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 00:39:14 GMT

Ancient Futures: Learning From Ladakh (now on Google videos)

So you are sick of the Saviour Kings that cheap Soda Pop Democracy claims will save us. You know no government on the federal, state or even county or city level will save us. You know nearly seven billion people surviving on cheap oil for fertilizers, farming machines, transportation and plastics ould die off tomorrow if it all came to a head. You know your future has been mortgaged, indebted and spent by the wealthy elite. You know universal healthcare and universal higher education was a human rights issues. But you do not know what to do? Watch "Ancient Futures." Call the neighbors over for a picnic and share food. Grow food. Talk. THe only way to survive this one Girls and Boys is by creating small communities of sharing. Time for that picnic with the neighbor and to grow food on the window sill to share. Lets call it a "Cascadian Picnic" and its way overdue.

This is a MUST watch by all Cascadians. I would suggest crowd around the computer monitor with family, friends, lovers, cats, dogs, goldfish, bigffot and neighbors and watch this film (in 3 parts):

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=Ancient+Futures&hl=en&sitesearch=#q=Ancient%20Futures%20Ladakh&hl=en&sitesearch=

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=Ancient+Futures&hl=en&sitesearch=#q=Ancient%20Futures%20Ladakh&hl=en&sitesearch=

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=Ancient+Futures&hl=en&sitesearch=#q=Ancient%20Futures%20Ladakh&hl=en&sitesearch=

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Planning Meeting THIS WEDNESDAY in Portland about the 2008/08/08 Doug Honours Ceremony

Alexander — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 00:10:51 GMT

Planning Meeting THIS WEDNESDAY in Portland about the 2008/08/08 Doug Honours Ceremony

from Collin's post

Wednesday is now the night for Community Outreach at 7 PM. We will meet again at the new Virginia Cafe, 820 SW 10th Ave Portland, OR 97205. A very important discussion that will take place this Wednesday is preparation for the Doug Honours Ceremony at Peace Arch Park, August 8th, 2008.

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Natural environment Shaped our culture

Fri, 09 May 2008 23:46:57 GMT

Cascadia was in on the ground floor of the movement led by Greenpeace

Douglas Todd
Vancouver Sun

Many say the Pacific Northwest is the home of the environmental movement.

It would be challenging to actually prove this claim, but the fact scholars and others think it suggests a lot about the power that the natural environment has had in shaping the culture of B.C., Washington and Oregon.

Evidence can be cited to back the argument that Cascadia was in on the ground floor of eco-activism. Greenpeace, one of the world's most famous environmental organizations, was founded on the Canadian west coast in 1971, aggressively opposing whaling and nuclear-arms testing in Alaska.

Long before, Oregon had been setting an ecological agenda. In 1911, Oregon's Canadian-raised governor, Oswald West, upset the elite by protecting the province's endless ocean beaches forever from private ownership.

In the 1970s, despite huge opposition from soda-pop manufacturers, Oregon politicians, inspired by British Columbians, also brought in the continent's, if not the world's, first bottle-recycling laws.

In 1973, the New Democratic Party government of Dave Barrett introduced the once-radical Agricultural Land Reserve, which has been more or less respected ever since by governments of the left, centre and right.

Along with Greenpeace, the Pacific Northwest brought the world TV eco-activist/scientist David Suzuki and a host of leading environmental organizations, such as EcoTrust, Sightline Institute, Western Canada Wilderness Committee and Sustainable Northwest.

"B.C. is in some ways the birthplace of the environmental movement. Together with Oregon and Washington, Cascadia is a hotbed of environmentalism," said SFU geography professor Warren Gill.

While pundits often raise doubts about whether Cascadia hangs together as an economic or cultural region, there can be no question the binational Pacific Northwest has a shared geography that's heightened residents' environmental awareness.

"Cascadia is defined as the watersheds of rivers that flow into the Pacific Ocean through North America's temperate rainforest zone," says The Cascadia Scorecard.

"Cascadia, or the Pacific Northwest, extends from northern California to southern Alaska -- along a coastline once cloaked in nearly continuous rainforest -- and inland as far as the continental divide."

While this classic bio-regional definition of Cascadia includes Idaho and small tips of Alaska, Montana and California, Cascadia's biggest populations and largest land masses are in B.C., Washington and Oregon, which are the focus of this series.

Even with the incredible environmental ferment that exists in the Pacific Northwest, there may be no group more devoted to Cascadia than the Sightline Institute (formerly Northwest Environment Watch) of Seattle, founded by Alan Durning in 1993.

In recent years, Sightline has published the invaluable Cascadia Scorecard, which scientifically monitors seven key trends across B.C., Washington, Oregon and Idaho.

Each year, Sightline researchers track how Cascadia is progressing at managing urban sprawl, wildlife, the economy, population growth, pollution, health and energy consumption.

Although the Discovery Institute's Cascadia Center focuses on increasing economic and transportation ties linking B.C. with Washington and Oregon, it also sometimes joins Sightline in underlining environmental issues.

The Cascadia Centre's Bruce Agnew is pushing for more regional train and bus use and has supported the so-called Hydrogen Highway, which would see hydrogen-equipped filling stations running along highways from Whistler to California.

B.C. joins Washington, Oregon

One of the most-talked about ecological initiatives across Cascadia centres on the B.C. government's efforts to bypass a slow-moving Conservative government in Ottawa to team up with the Democratic governors of Washington and Oregon to combat climate change.

B.C. is introducing a carbon-taxation system tied to similar efforts in Washington and Oregon, with additional support from California and a few other Western states.

Although Durning applauds politicians combating climate change, his Cascadia Scorecard cautions that people in the Pacific Northwest have a long way to go to overcome their three-decade history as "energy gluttons."

Compared to energy-efficient Germans, Cascadians consume nearly twice as much gasoline per person, says the Cascadia Scorecard, which sets up a kind of social-betterment competition among Cascadian jurisdictions and the wider world.

The Cascadia Scorecard urges residents of B.C., Washington and Oregon to increase efficiency in auto use, lighting and appliances and accelerating the growth of transit- and pedestrian-friendly cities.

Within Cascadia, Washingtonians and Oregonians have to look on in envy as British Columbians use about 45 per cent less gasoline per person.

The Scorecard attributes much of that to B.C. building fewer roads and highways and less suburban sprawl than Washington and Oregon, an enviable record many say is threatened by the B.C. Liberals Gateway program to build more highways through Metro Vancouver.

Although B.C. tends to do better than Washington and Oregon in most environmental measures, the Scorecard says it still faces major challenges in many environmental areas, including wildlife protection.

The numbers of orcas, wolves, Selkirk caribou, sage grouse and salmon in Cascadia now amount to only 18 per cent of their historical abundance.

British Columbians' worries about wildlife populations were heightened in March when the media obtained reports showing a record 430 grizzly bears were killed last year, mostly by hunters, and that the B.C. government, for lack of staff and muddled rules, was failing to protect wildlife in southern B.C. forest districts.

Meanwhile, the once all-pervasive salmon, which many believe should be the symbol of Cascadia, run at less than seven per cent of their historical peak in B.C. and elsewhere.

The regional waters' fragile orca population is down to only about 86 animals traversing Puget Sound and the Strait of Georgia (or, as some propose, The Salish Sea).

The drastic decline in Cascadia's sea stocks is due to overfishing and multiple forms of pollution, as well as dams, conversion of farmland and urban development.

While B.C. may still have more wilderness, eagles and bears remaining than Washington and Oregon, Durning says it's mostly because the province started out with more.

Despite the vast wilderness in Cascadia, more than half the population lives in major cities, which rely on nature for everything from electricity to food.

Urban dwellers are not doing badly. Firmly believing that human health reflects access to clean water and air, stress levels, urban design and the ability to obtain medical care, the Cascadia Scorecard finds that life expectancy in Cascadia is good and modestly improving.

Living longer in B.C.

While the typical lifespan in Cascadia is 79 years, British Columbians live on average more than two years longer than residents of Washington and Oregon. The Scorecard says the strong showing reflects Canada's universal health insurance and other factors.

"British Columbia also has lower rates of violent deaths: fewer homicides and also fewer fatal car crashes, the latter largely due to compact communities that allow residents to drive less than their neighbors to the south."

Since cities are key to Cascadia, ecologists point out one of the most obvious and alarming environmental problems facing Cascadia is suburban sprawl.

Ask almost any planner in Washington, Oregon or B.C. about the biggest difference between the jurisdictions, and most will say Vancouver has a superior approach to transportation.

"Given recent trends, it will take 57 years for the Cascadian city average to match what Vancouver, B.C., has already achieved," says Cascadia Scorecard.

"The keys to combating sprawl are protecting farmland, promoting infill development and limiting sprawl-inducing road projects."

The Cascadia Scorecard says B.C.'s ability to limit sprawl and improve transportation has given the province a social and even financial edge over our neighbours to the south. B.C.'s smaller road-building budget has improved its score in sprawl, energy and health, all while saving the province billions of dollars in transportation costs.

All this helps explain how, when it comes to transportation, Eric Scigliano, of Seattle's Metropolitan Magazine, admits his city has an "inferiority complex" about Vancouver and Portland.

That is not to say British Columbians can't take some ecological and transportation lessons from others in Cascadia, however.

Scigliano and Durning believe Seattle has developed a healthier bus system. In addition, they say all West Coast Canadians can learn from Portland's citizens about building strong local communities.

Still, the one big transportation lesson that Metro Vancouverites learned a long time ago from Seattle's mistake in the 1960s was: Don't run a highway through the centre of a city.

As SFU's Gill says, the decision to push the I-5 Highway and Alaskan Way through the heart of Seattle was the main reason then-activist Mike Harcourt (who would later become B.C. premier) fought against a highway being rammed through Vancouver.

Even though B.C. does relatively well on the ecologically linked areas of sprawl, energy, transportation and wilderness preservation, we can't afford to become self-righteous.

Human communities may be doing reasonably well for now in Cascadia, but the once strong environment is threatened.

Grave issues need to be faced more boldly.

We should not despair.

With a strengthened sense of identity, stronger environmental policy and clearer political and business action, Cascadians could turn this binational region into an example for the rest of the planet.

All Cascadians should be able to find inspiration in the vision of the Sightline Institute "for a more prosperous place, where prosperity is defined not merely by our finances, but by our shared values: healthy people living in strong communities, governed by a vigorous democracy, and exercising responsible stewardship for our shared natural bounty."

British Columbians could do worse than joining the Sightline Institute in declaring Cascadia has the potential to improve to the point where "it can position itself as a model for the world -- not only as a place that can shine in one narrow realm, but as a place where both people and nature are thriving, regenerating and renewing themselves."

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/westcoastnews/story.html?id=a46d2441-ceaf-4e28-abc1-8c89391e1c2c

posted in Cascadians - 3 replies

Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels Suggets Sucession!

Monika — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 07:24:35 GMT

Source: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2004357406_mayors18m.html

Venting Nickels suggests secession

By Sharon Pian Chan and Ashley Bach

Seattle Times staff reporters

Frustrated by the state and federal gridlock on solving Seattle's transportation problems, Mayor Greg Nickels suggested secession at a Thursday luncheon.

"Our region should declare its independence," Nickels said.

The Puget Sound regional economy makes up 67 percent of the state's economic activity, he said. "If we were a country, [our economy] would be just a little smaller than Thailand. We would be larger than Colombia, Venezuela. We are held back because our state and federal government still believe our economies are driven by wheat farms and timber logging."

Nickels spoke as part of a CityClub round table at Town Hall with Bellevue Mayor Grant Degginger and Redmond Mayor John Marchione.

Nickels suggested the region start by putting the Puget Sound Regional Council "on steroids."

The 32-member board, Nickels said, should shrink and take greater control of how to spend state transportation funds.

Nickels spokesman Marty McOmber later said the mayor's comments at lunch — such as, "I am serious when I say we ought to talk about independence" — were meant to be tongue-in-cheek. The mayor was venting his frustration after the state opposed transportation projects and gun-control legislation he wanted.

"We have rural legislators making decisions on things like the viaduct and whether we can keep our city safe," Nickels said.

The three mayors did not disagree on much in a discussion that ranged from homelessness and Highway 520 to improved regional cooperation. Degginger and Marchione both said they would not support a 20-cent fee on disposable grocery bags, as Nickels has proposed in Seattle.

Nickels said he disagreed with King County Metro's plan to distribute 40 percent of new transit service to the Eastside, while Degginger said the policy was necessary to improve service to the underserved suburbs.

A new Highway 520 Bridge is an example of an issue that needs execution, not more discussion, Degginger said.

The biggest challenge ahead is "to show some leadership," he said. "... We need to implement decisions, rather than talk about them over and over again."

All the mayors advocated for better transit service, including buses. Moderator James Vesely, editorial-page editor of The Seattle Times, asked them if they knew what bus route they would take to get to work in the morning.

Each knew the number of his route, which drew applause, though Nickels admitted he does not take the bus.

posted in Cascadians - 5 replies

Grey wolf Delisting***** Please read

Kate — Thu, 03 May 2007 17:58:19 GMT

It seems that on May 9th they are putting up to vote the the delisting of American Grey wolves from the endangered species act. This would allow for the Idaho and wyoming to begin the practice of wolf hunting again, which is something that these two states both seem to want to do.
I have provided a link which has an outline of how to write letter to the government letting them you oppose this act, Please take a momemt to do so.
-Kate

www.defenders.org/wildlife/..._2007.html

After wards your comments can be sent to:
Electronically to WesternGrayWolf@fws.gov. Include ‘‘RIN number 1018–AU53’’ in the subject line of the message.
By mail to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Western Gray Wolf Recovery Coordinator, 585 Shepard Way, Helena, Montana 59601. Include ‘‘RIN number 1018–AU53’’ in the subject line of the letter.
We have until May 9th at 5pm

For more information on the topic please see:

www.defenders.org/wildlife/..._2007.html

posted in Cascadians - 3 replies

MAY 2ND, 2008-- FOUNDERS DAY KICK OFF FOR CASCADIA COMMONS!

Collin S. Ferguson — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 06:37:53 GMT

Klahowya Cascadians,

On May 2nd, 1843, a provisional government was
established in Champoeg. This was the beginning of an
interesting sequence of events, many of which remain
untold in history texts. Nevertheless, the
provisional government was established by 52 men
stepping over a line drawn in the dirt to 48 standing
still, thus authorizing the creation of the Organic
Acts, the first government in Oregon, today known as
Cascadia. Amendments to this document led towards the
movement to break up the Oregon Country/Territory into
the states of Washington, Oregon, Idaho, the Province
of British Columbia, with parts of Northern
California, Western Wyoming, Western Montana,
Southwest Alaska, and Southwest Alberta joining their
respective states and provinces. Cascadia Commons has
chosen to honor this great day in history by hosting
its "kick-off" event at Champoeg State Park and mimic
the historic line crossing event. At 9 PM we will
draw a line in the ground, read the Cascadia Commons
declaration, and ask those in attendance to step over
the line if they choose to ratify the Cascadia Commons
constitution.

Cascadia Commons is in the process of forming a 501
(c) 3 corporation that will work with communities and
other nonprofits to restore the Cascadian Bioregion,
establish a local economy, and protect local
resources. We will encourage businesses and
communities to live more sustainably and wisely so
that Cascadia remains a place that the future can
enjoy. Please view our website at
www.cascadiacommons.org for more information.

Today we made a reservation for Cascadia Commons at
Champoeg State Park for May 2nd, 2008 at lot A12. Lot
A12 will host 8 people, please email me at
savepac17@yahoo.com if you would like to join us at
lot A12. If, however, you would like to reserve your
own lot, please call 1-800-452-5687 and request that
you want to be as close to A12 as possible. Several
lots are still available in section A, however all
lots in section B have been reserved. The
receptionist said that A13 is still available. At
this time, I have not made a decision whether to stay
two nights. Please let me know if you would like to
do that and I will extend the reservation at A12.
Each lot will only hold one car. Alternative forms of
transportation are encouraged (which includes
carpooling), however, additional parking is available
for $5 per night. Please view the Champoeg State Park
website for more information:
http://www.oregonstateparks.org/park_113.php. Again,
please send me an email (savepac17@yahoo.com) if you
would like to join us at lot A12 or call
1-800-452-5687 to reserve your lot today.

Kwanesum Chinook Illahee kopa Kloshe Nanitch,

Collin S. Ferguson

posted in Cascadians - 2 replies

The March 15th March!

Collin S. Ferguson — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 05:57:28 GMT

Klahowya Cascadians,

As I am sure all of you know, on March 15th at 2 PM there will be a march against the 2003 Iraq Invasion. Momentum for the march is heating up as exemplified by the efforts of the iraqbodycountexhibit.org display at Portland State University of over 100,000 miniature white and red flags. The red flags represent the 3,972 American soldiers who were killed in the war and the white flags represent the over 650,000 Iraqi civilians who have perished since the beginning of the invasion. The display covers four city blocks.

It is time we Cascadians made our presence known by taking an open stance against this haineous war. I am asking all of you to march with me and The Doug flag in solidarity. The Doug Flag is not just about Cascadia. It is also about peace with the Earth and peace with humanity. We will meet at SW Jefferson and Park next to the Portland Art Museum. I will be there at noon making signs displaying the Cascadian Stik over a peace symbol. I will have paint and poster board ready for anyone who would like to make a Peace Stik too. In the words of Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, "a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical."

Kloshe nanitch pi mamook kloshe tumtum.

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Free "Free Cascadia" Bumperstickers!

brandon — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 05:35:26 GMT

For those of you not aware, Cascadia is the unique coastal-mountain bioregion between San francisco and the Alaskan panhandle in which the dominant culture is one of respect and honor for the environment and a strong tradition of democracy and social justice. The borders of Cascadia vary, but by some estimates stretch from 42° to 60° north latitude. It's western border consists of the Pacific Coast and a portion of the American state of Alaska. On the east, it borders the American states of Idaho and the Canadian province of Alberta. Cascadia is divided into three prefectures: British Columbia, Oregon and Washington.

To raise awareness of the bio-region, the Cascadian Independence Project has just come out with a batch of 'Free Cascadia' bumperstickers. Orders of up to 5 bumper stickers over the internet are going to be free or by donation. So if you're interested in the concept of Cascadia, just send an address to cascadianow@gmail.com, and we can have them in the mail in the next couple of days.

If you would like to see a picture of them you can go to http://www.cascadianow.org/mediastickers.html

For those who have not previously heard of us, the Cascadian Independence Project is a grass-roots political movement dedicated to building awareness and support for local democracy, global community, and the freedom and eventual independence of Washington, Oregon and British Columbia.

The CIP is also looking for members to form CIP chapters in their communities, schools or cities. If you're interested and would like to volunteer or form your own chapter, please email us at cascadianow@gmail.com!

For more information, please check out the main website at http://www.cascadianow.org

Thanks!

--Brandon

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Goose Steps to Martial Law

Alexander — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 18:36:59 GMT

I got this interesting forward this morning:

Fwd: MARTIAL LAW

the following forward I received comes from several people with urgancy and asked that people forward this series of articles, matrials on to as many people as possible. They expressed the fear of a communication blackout due to either cable cuts or a cyber attack using a combination of viruses, worms, cuts and other means. Recently there has been undersea cable cuts plunging the Middle East into communication blackout and cuts off of China. The US government is in the midst of a simulated cyber war came called Cyberstorm and Mike McConnell claims that the US will have a cyber 911. In May of 2007 Bush decreed an executive order that he could declare martial law if time of crises anywhere and for any cause that he determines a emergency. Could the economic meltdown be that fear of crises? Could corporate elements be seeking martial law to staay in power? The FBI has create a network of businessmen with meetings telling them that they can “shoot to kill” during the coming martial law. In these meetings the FBI representatives talk not as if martial law could happen, but as when it will happen. and to add to all this the US military is stuck in two wars without end and most military bases are now guarded and maintained by private contractors.

From: "*****"
Date: February 11, 2008 9:53:36 AM EST
Subject: Fw: MARTIAL LAW.

There is three parts of this email. Part one is a list of books that should be downloaded, printed, read and stored away. Part two is important quotes from key people on the understanding of where we are today in regards to loss of civil liberties and dictatorship. Part three is current news.

PART ONE

Download, print, read, hide and share.

Jefferson Mack’s
Invisible Resistance to Tyranny
http://stream.paranode.com/imc/portland/media/2008/02/372008.pdf

Jefferson Mack’s
Secret Freedom Fighter
http://stream.paranode.com/imc/portland/media/2008/02/372009.pdf

Aikido: The Art Of Fighting Without Fighting
http://www.huntsab.org/fighting%20without%20fighting.pdf

Stephen DeVoy’s
Meme Warfare: How To Overthrow The Powers That Be On A Low Budget
http://stream.paranode.com/imc/portland/media/2005/03/314249.pdf
http://india.indymedia.org/media/2005/03/210295.pdf

Robert Helvey's
On Strategic Nonviolent Conflict: Thinking About the Fundamentals
http://www.aeinstein.org/organizations/org/OSNC.pdf

CANVAS (Centre for Applied NonViolent Action and Strategies)’s
Nonviolent Struggle: 50 Crucial Points A Strategic Approach To Everyday Tactics
http://www.canvasopedia.org/files/various/Nonviolent_Struggle-50CP.pdf

Edward Bernay’s Propaganda
http://militant.org/files/propaganda.pdf

Sun Tzu’s
Art of War
http://www.ualberta.ca/~cmadan/reading/the_art_of_war.pdf
http://www.artofwarsuntzu.com/Art%20of%20War%20PDF.pdf
http://www.military-quotes.com/downloads/aow.pdf

Ernesto “Che” Guevara’s
Guerrilla Warfare
http://freepeoplesmovement.org/guwar.pdf

CIA’s
Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warefare
http://www.freewebs.com/moeial/CIA's%20Psychological%20Operations%20in%20Guerrilla%20Warefare.pdf

New Developments in Chinese Strategic Psychological Warfare
http://www.iwar.org.uk/psyops/resources/china/chinesepsyop.pdf

Thomas Jefferson’s
The Declaration of Independence of The United States of America
http://www.knowledgerush.com/gutenberg/1/6/7/8/16780/16780-pdf.pdf

Thomas Paine’s
Common Sense
http://pinkmonkey.com/dl/library1/sense.pdf

Thomas Paine’s
Agrarian Justice
http://stream.paranode.com/imc/portland/media/2008/02/372068.pdf

Ecodefense: A Field Guide To Monkeywrenching
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/01/22/17972031.php?show_comments=1#18478081

Carlos Marighella’s
Minimanual of the Ubran Guerrilla
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/12/20/18468009.php?show_comments=1#18478521

US Marine Corps’
Survive Evade Rescue
http://stream.paranode.com/imc/portland/media/2008/02/372233.pdf

PART TWO

We have learn from history and we are at a point of time when our country, and in fact the world, is at yet another point of time of deep crises. As a reminder from those before us in their own words...

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”
- Thomas Jefferson, writer of the Declaration of Independence and 3rd President of the United States of America

"Yes, we may all congratulate ourselves that this cruel war is nearing its close. It has cost a vast amount of treasure and blood. The best blood of the flower of American youth has been freely offered upon our country's altar that the nation might live. It has indeed been a trying hour for the republic; but I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country … As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war. God grant that my suspicions may prove groundless."
- Abraham Lincoln, 16th President of the United States of America

"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power."
- Benito Mussolini, Fascist Dictator of Italy

“We enter parliament in order to supply ourselves, in the arsenal of democracy, with its own weapons. If democracy is so stupid as to give us free tickets and salaries for this bear's work, that is its affair. We do not come as friends, nor even as neutrals. We come as enemies. As the wolf bursts into the flock, so we come.”
- Joseph Goebbels, Minister of Nazi Propaganda

"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it comes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group."
- Franklin D. Roosevelt, 32nd President of the United States of America

"The American fascists are most easily recognized by their deliberate perversion of truth and fact. Their newspapers and propaganda carefully cultivate every fissure of disunity, every crack in the common front against fascism."
- Henry A. Wallace, 33rd Vice President of the United States of America

"I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents."
- Major-General Smedley Darlington Butler, decorated Marine Corps veteran who was asked to head the American fascist coup against FDR in the Business Plot and fouled the plot of the corporate elite

"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross."
- Upton Sinclair, American writer

“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”
- Dwight D. Eisenhower, 34th Presedent of the United States of America

"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator."
- George W Bush, 43rd Presedent of the United States of America

PART THREE

Important news stories and government official steps for martial law

"The FBI Deputizes Businesses”
by Matthew Rothschild
http://www.grandestrategy.com/2008/02/2349048-fbi-deputizes-business.html

Not If -- When
by Shirley Bianchi http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_shirley__080212_not_if____when.htm

Report: Over 23,000 Business Leaders Working With FBI and Homeland Security
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/2/11/report_fbi_deputizes_23_000_business

NSA Must Examine All Internet Traffic to Prevent Cyber Nine-Eleven, Top Spy Says
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/01/feds-must-exami.html

Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act Raises Fears of New Government Crackdown on Dissent
http://www.democracynow.org/2007/11/20/homegrown_terrorism_prevention_act_raises_fears

“The End of America”: Feminist Social Critic Naomi Wolf Warns U.S. in Slow Descent into Fascism
http://www.democracynow.org/2007/11/28/the_end_of_america_feminist_social

Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army http://www.democracynow.org/2007/3/20/blackwater_the_rise_of_the_worlds

Bush Given Power to Deploy US Troops Domestically & Declare Martial Law
In news from Capitol Hill, Congress is coming under criticism for approving a little noticed provision last year that makes it easier for President Bush to declare martial law and to send US troops into American cities. At the administration’s request, Congress approved the changes to a law known as the Insurrection Act without ever holding a public hearing. Under the new law, the president now has the authority to use both active-duty armed forces and the National Guard on American soil—not just during a rebellion—but also a natural disaster, terrorist attack, pandemic or other chaotic situation. All 50 of the nation’s governors have opposed the rule changes. Earlier this month Senators Patrick Leahy, the chair of the Judiciary Committee, and Republican Christopher Bond introduced legislation to repeal the changes Congress approved last year. http://www.democracynow.org/2007/2/20/headlines#7

Bush Anoints Himself as the Insurer of Constitutional Government in Emergency
By Matthew Rothschild
May 18, 2007

With scarcely a mention in the mainstream media, President Bush has ordered up a plan for responding to a catastrophic attack.

In a new National Security Presidential Directive, Bush lays out his plans for dealing with a “catastrophic emergency.”Under that plan, he entrusts himself with leading the entire federal government, not just the Executive Branch. And he gives himself the responsibility “for ensuring constitutional government.”

He laid this all out in a document entitled “National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51” and “Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD-20.”

http://progressive.org/mag_wx051807

White House News

NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD 51

HOMELAND SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/HSPD-20

Subject: National Continuity Policy

Purpose

(1) This directive establishes a comprehensive national policy on the continuity of Federal Government structures and operations and a single National Continuity Coordinator responsible for coordinating the development and implementation of Federal continuity policies. This policy establishes "National Essential Functions," prescribes continuity requirements for all executive departments and agencies, and provides guidance for State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector organizations in order to ensure a comprehensive and integrated national continuity program that will enhance the credibility of our national security posture and enable a more rapid and effective response to and recovery from a national emergency.

Definitions

(2) In this directive:

(a) "Category" refers to the categories of executive departments and agencies listed in Annex A to this directive;

(b) "Catastrophic Emergency" means any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions;

(c) "Continuity of Government," or "COG," means a coordinated effort within the Federal Government's executive branch to ensure that National Essential Functions continue to be performed during a Catastrophic Emergency;

(d) "Continuity of Operations," or "COOP," means an effort within individual executive departments and agencies to ensure that Primary Mission-Essential Functions continue to be performed during a wide range of emergencies, including localized acts of nature, accidents, and technological or attack-related emergencies;

(e) "Enduring Constitutional Government," or "ECG," means a cooperative effort among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government, coordinated by the President, as a matter of comity with respect to the legislative and judicial branches and with proper respect for the constitutional separation of powers among the branches, to preserve the constitutional framework under which the Nation is governed and the capability of all three branches of government to execute constitutional responsibilities and provide for orderly succession, appropriate transition of leadership, and interoperability and support of the National Essential Functions during a catastrophic emergency;

(f) "Executive Departments and Agencies" means the executive departments enumerated in 5 U.S.C. 101, independent establishments as defined by 5 U.S.C. 104(1), Government corporations as defined by 5 U.S.C. 103(1), and the United States Postal Service;

(g) "Government Functions" means the collective functions of the heads of executive departments and agencies as defined by statute, regulation, presidential direction, or other legal authority, and the functions of the legislative and judicial branches;

(h) "National Essential Functions," or "NEFs," means that subset of Government Functions that are necessary to lead and sustain the Nation during a catastrophic emergency and that, therefore, must be supported through COOP and COG capabilities; and

(i) "Primary Mission Essential Functions," or "PMEFs," means those Government Functions that must be performed in order to support or implement the performance of NEFs before, during, and in the aftermath of an emergency.

Policy

(3) It is the policy of the United States to maintain a comprehensive and effective continuity capability composed of Continuity of Operations and Continuity of Government programs in order to ensure the preservation of our form of government under the Constitution and the continuing performance of National Essential Functions under all conditions.

Implementation Actions

(4) Continuity requirements shall be incorporated into daily operations of all executive departments and agencies. As a result of the asymmetric threat environment, adequate warning of potential emergencies that could pose a significant risk to the homeland might not be available, and therefore all continuity planning shall be based on the assumption that no such warning will be received. Emphasis will be placed upon geographic dispersion of leadership, staff, and infrastructure in order to increase survivability and maintain uninterrupted Government Functions. Risk management principles shall be applied to ensure that appropriate operational readiness decisions are based on the probability of an attack or other incident and its consequences.

(5) The following NEFs are the foundation for all continuity programs and capabilities and represent the overarching responsibilities of the Federal Government to lead and sustain the Nation during a crisis, and therefore sustaining the following NEFs shall be the primary focus of

the Federal Government leadership during and in the aftermath of an emergency that adversely affects the performance of Government Functions:

(a) Ensuring the continued functioning of our form of government under the Constitution, including the functioning of the three separate branches of government;

(b) Providing leadership visible to the Nation and the world and maintaining the trust and confidence of the American people;

(c) Defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and preventing or interdicting attacks against the United States or its people, property, or interests;

(d) Maintaining and fostering effective relationships with foreign nations;

(e) Protecting against threats to the homeland and bringing to justice perpetrators of crimes or attacks against the United States or its people, property, or interests;

(f) Providing rapid and effective response to and recovery from the domestic consequences of an attack or other incident;

(g) Protecting and stabilizing the Nation's economy and ensuring public confidence in its financial systems; and

(h) Providing for critical Federal Government services that address the national health, safety, and welfare needs of the United States.

(6) The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government. In order to advise and assist the President in that function, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism (APHS/CT) is hereby designated as the National Continuity Coordinator. The National Continuity Coordinator, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for National

Security Affairs (APNSA), without exercising directive authority, shall coordinate the development and implementation of continuity policy for executive departments and agencies. The Continuity Policy Coordination Committee (CPCC), chaired by a Senior Director from the Homeland Security Council staff, designated by the National Continuity Coordinator, shall be the main day-to-day forum for such policy coordination.

(7) For continuity purposes, each executive department and agency is assigned to a category in accordance with the nature and characteristics of its national security roles and

responsibilities in support of the Federal Government's ability to sustain the NEFs. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall serve as the President's lead agent for coordinating overall

continuity operations and activities of executive departments and agencies, and in such role shall perform the responsibilities set forth for the Secretary in sections 10 and 16 of this directive.

(8) The National Continuity Coordinator, in consultation with the heads of appropriate executive departments and agencies, will lead the development of a National Continuity Implementation Plan (Plan), which shall include prioritized goals and objectives, a concept of operations, performance metrics by which to measure continuity readiness, procedures for continuity and incident management activities, and clear direction to executive department and agency continuity coordinators, as well as guidance to promote interoperability of Federal Government continuity programs and procedures with State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate. The Plan shall be submitted to the President for approval not later than 90 days after the date of this directive.

(9) Recognizing that each branch of the Federal Government is responsible for its own continuity programs, an official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President shall ensure that the executive branch's COOP and COG policies in support of ECG efforts are appropriately coordinated with those of

the legislative and judicial branches in order to ensure interoperability and allocate national assets efficiently to maintain a functioning Federal Government.

(10) Federal Government COOP, COG, and ECG plans and operations shall be appropriately integrated with the emergency plans and capabilities of State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate, in order to promote interoperability and to prevent redundancies and conflicting lines of authority. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall coordinate the integration of Federal continuity plans and operations with State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate, in order to provide for the delivery of essential services during an emergency.

(11) Continuity requirements for the Executive Office of the President (EOP) and executive departments and agencies shall include the following:

(a) The continuation of the performance of PMEFs during any emergency must be for a period up to 30 days or until normal operations can be resumed, and the capability to be fully operational at alternate sites as soon as possible after the occurrence of an emergency, but not later than 12 hours after COOP activation;

(b) Succession orders and pre-planned devolution of authorities that ensure the emergency delegation of authority must be planned and documented in advance in accordance with applicable law;

(c) Vital resources, facilities, and records must be safeguarded, and official access to them must be provided;

(d) Provision must be made for the acquisition of the resources necessary for continuity operations on an emergency basis;

(e) Provision must be made for the availability and redundancy of critical communications capabilities at alternate sites in order to support connectivity between

and among key government leadership, internal elements, other executive departments and agencies, critical partners, and the public;

(f) Provision must be made for reconstitution capabilities that allow for recovery from a catastrophic emergency and resumption of normal operations; and

(g) Provision must be made for the identification, training, and preparedness of personnel capable of relocating to alternate facilities to support the continuation of the performance of PMEFs.

(12) In order to provide a coordinated response to escalating threat levels or actual emergencies, the Continuity of Government Readiness Conditions (COGCON) system establishes executive branch continuity program readiness levels, focusing

on possible threats to the National Capital Region. The President will determine and issue the COGCON Level. Executive departments and agencies shall comply with the requirements and

assigned responsibilities under the COGCON program. During COOP activation, executive departments and agencies shall report their readiness status to the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Secretary's designee.

(13) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall:

(a) Conduct an annual assessment of executive department and agency continuity funding requests and performance data that are submitted by executive departments and agencies as part of the annual budget request process, in order to monitor progress in the implementation of the Plan and the execution of continuity budgets;

(b) In coordination with the National Continuity Coordinator, issue annual continuity planning guidance for the development of continuity budget requests; and

(c) Ensure that heads of executive departments and agencies prioritize budget resources for continuity capabilities, consistent with this directive.

(14) The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall:

(a) Define and issue minimum requirements for continuity communications for executive departments and agencies, in consultation with the APHS/CT, the APNSA, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Chief of Staff to the President;

(b) Establish requirements for, and monitor the development, implementation, and maintenance of, a comprehensive communications architecture to integrate continuity components, in consultation with the APHS/CT, the APNSA, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Chief of Staff to the President; and

(c) Review quarterly and annual assessments of continuity communications capabilities, as prepared pursuant to section 16(d) of this directive or otherwise, and report the results and recommended remedial actions to the National Continuity Coordinator.

(15) An official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President shall:

(a) Advise the President, the Chief of Staff to the President, the APHS/CT, and the APNSA on COGCON operational execution options; and

(b) Consult with the Secretary of Homeland Security in order to ensure synchronization and integration of continuity activities among the four categories of executive departments and agencies.

(16) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall:

(a) Coordinate the implementation, execution, and assessment of continuity operations and activities;

(b) Develop and promulgate Federal Continuity Directives in order to establish continuity planning requirements for executive departments and agencies;

(c) Conduct biennial assessments of individual department and agency continuity capabilities as prescribed by the Plan and report the results to the President through the APHS/CT;

(d) Conduct quarterly and annual assessments of continuity communications capabilities in consultation with an official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President;

(e) Develop, lead, and conduct a Federal continuity training and exercise program, which shall be incorporated into the National Exercise Program developed pursuant to Homeland Security Presidential Directive-8 of December 17, 2003 ("National Preparedness"), in consultation with an

official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President;

(f) Develop and promulgate continuity planning guidance to State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector critical infrastructure owners and operators;

(g) Make available continuity planning and exercise funding, in the form of grants as provided by law, to State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector critical infrastructure owners and operators; and

(h) As Executive Agent of the National Communications System, develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive continuity communications architecture.

(17) The Director of National Intelligence, in coordination with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall produce a biennial assessment of the foreign and domestic threats to the Nation's continuity of government.

(18) The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall provide secure, integrated, Continuity of Government communications to the President, the Vice President, and, at a minimum, Category I executive departments and agencies.

(19) Heads of executive departments and agencies shall execute their respective department or agency COOP plans in response to a localized emergency and shall:

(a) Appoint a senior accountable official, at the Assistant Secretary level, as the Continuity Coordinator for the department or agency;

(b) Identify and submit to the National Continuity Coordinator the list of PMEFs for the department or agency and develop continuity plans in support of the NEFs and the continuation of essential functions under all conditions;

(c) Plan, program, and budget for continuity capabilities consistent with this directive;

(d) Plan, conduct, and support annual tests and training, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, in order to evaluate program readiness and ensure adequacy and viability of continuity plans and communications systems; and

(e) Support other continuity requirements, as assigned by category, in accordance with the nature and characteristics of its national security roles and responsibilities

General Provisions

(20) This directive shall be implemented in a manner that is consistent with, and facilitates effective implementation of, provisions of the Constitution concerning succession to the Presidency or the exercise of its powers, and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (3 U.S.C. 19), with consultation of the Vice President and, as appropriate, others involved. Heads of executive departments and agencies shall ensure that appropriate

support is available to the Vice President and others involved as necessary to be prepared at all times to implement those provisions.

(21) This directive:

(a) Shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and the authorities of agencies, or heads of agencies, vested by law, and subject to the availability of appropriations;

(b) Shall not be construed to impair or otherwise affect (i) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budget, administrative, and legislative proposals, or (ii) the authority of the Secretary of Defense over the Department of Defense, including the chain of command for military forces from the President, to the Secretary of Defense, to the commander of military forces, or military command and control procedures; and

(c) Is not intended to, and does not, create any rights or benefits, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by a party against the United States, its

agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(22) Revocation. Presidential Decision Directive 67 of October 21, 1998 ("Enduring Constitutional Government and Continuity of Government Operations"), including all Annexes thereto, is hereby revoked.

(23) Annex A and the classified Continuity Annexes, attached hereto, are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this directive.

(24) Security. This directive and the information contained herein shall be protected from unauthorized disclosure, provided that, except for Annex A, the Annexes attached to this directive are classified and shall be accorded appropriate handling, consistent with applicable Executive Orders.

GEORGE W. BUSH

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html

posted in Cascadians - 2 replies

Business networking and Events

Sun, 17 Feb 2008 12:55:54 GMT

i would like to invite my Tribe network to join me on www.connectture.com - its a social business network based in Europe with a growing base of users from all over the world. Easy way of keeping track of your Business Network.

Cheers

Sarah

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

No to LNG rally in Salem Feb 6 (Tomorrow!!!!) be there be Cascadian!!! Plus free ride from Portland

Alexander — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 18:10:07 GMT

Before reading the free ride there should also be a free (early in the morning) shuttle service from Barbara Transit to Salem using SMART.

Free Mass Transit to Feb 6 Rally in Salem - NO LNG!
sign up for free mass transit to Salem No LNG Rally on Feb 6th! We are going to the capitol to tell our representatives that we don't want our forests and farmlands to be ravaged for the sake of supplying California with more dirty fossil fuels! Need a ride? You've got one! We have two forms of mass transit available to get you to and from this day of fun on the capitol building steps:

* PDX's favorite biodiesel bus--the COOL BUS--leaving from Daily Grind at 9:15am. 25 seats available and we need people to be there NO LATER than 9am. Please contact Olivia at nolnginoregon@gmail.com to reserve a seat on that bus.
* A student driven van that holds 12 people leaving from PSU on Feb. 6th at 9:15am and we need to know ASAP if you want a ride! Please contact Liz at lizzyg_6@hotmail.com to reserve a space in that vehicle.

Also- there is always rideshare! Checkout PDX Craigslist Rideshare board to find a ride to the event. Check out the attached flier for more info on the rally or go to lngpollutes.org

read more >>
February 6 Rally in Salem: NO LNG in Oregon!
Why should you care about this?
There are 3 LNG projects proposed for the Oregon coast.If even one should get built, it will increase Oregon's greenhouse gas emissions by millions of tons per year. These projects will cost billions, money that could be spent on clean, renewable energy. The terminals and pipelines linking them to California will endanger communities, cross and condemn hundreds of miles of land, and destroy habitat. LNG is not needed in Oregon; even the Governor admits that most of the gas is going out of state. Ask yourself: Why is Oregon being chosen for an LNG that will go to California?

Statewide Call to Action
No LNG in Oregon!
Wednesday, February 6
11 AM to 2 PM
Capitol Steps, Salem

read more >>
Related Articles: LNG Resistance is growing throughout the Pacific NW | Jan 22 '08 - Forest Activists Target NW Natural over the LNG, by Barricading the Front Door with Dead Trees | Dec 12 '07 Liquified Natural Gas Protest in Portland | No on LNG petition | Astoria Carbon Trading Discussion Soundbytes

Groups fighting West Coast LNG: Oregon Citizens Against Pipelines | Columbia Riverkeeper | No California Pipeline | Citizens Against LNG | lngpollutes.org
The bio-diesel bus named
The bio-diesel bus named "Cool" brought forest defenders to the protest

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2008/02/371779.shtml

No LNG Rally in Salem

> Subject: No LNG Rally in Salem
>
> Hello Everyone, I hope you can join me tomorrow in Salem at the Rally against the natural gas pipelines and the liquid natural gas (lng) terminals proposed for Coos Bay and the Columbia River. These projects will severely impact thousands of acres of farm, forest, and coastal land across the northern Willamette Valley and the Cascade Mtns.
>
> This project presents a clear danger to residents along the pipeline route and has many other problems, including a very poor landowner notification process. In addition, while this project will take a significant amount of farm and forest land out of production, our usual land use rules for citizen participation do not apply.
>
> Probably the worst thing about these projects is that Oregon doesn't need the extra gas. We are being used to get the gas to California, which will not permit such pipelines and terminals.
>
> The rally will be Wednesday, Feb. 6, from 11AM to 2PM on the Capital steps. I'll have my bio-diesel powered tractor there. Please say hello, I'd love to meet you.
>
> See you tomorrow! Jim
>
> PS: Soon I will officially announce my candidacy for State Representative. Your contribution will be huge help in launching my campaign. I will send you an envelope or you can contribute on-line at my new website www.gilbertfororegon.com
>
> Jim Gilbert
>
> www.gilbertfororegon.com
>
> www.onegreenworld.com
>
> Northwoods Nursery/One Green World
> 28696 S. Cramer Rd.
> Molalla, OR 97038
> ph. 503-651-3737 bus.
> 503-651-2463 hm.
> fax 503-651-3882

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Surplus: Terrorized into Being Consumers

Alexander — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 01:24:03 GMT

Surplus: Terrorized into Being Consumers

This is a documentary featuring John Zerzan the infamous anarcho-primitivist from Eugene Oregon. Zerzan talks of the alienation that technology has delivered while advocates of technology have promised ease of life and the potential for more leisure time. Personally I agree with John about technology alienating, but I also know that we can not with 6 billion people return to a hunting and gathering way of life. That even in when the human population was at 1 billion in 1800 we could only support that number of people without total inhumane institutions from slavery to child labour and from gender oppression to outright genocide of whole populations. We need alternatives that are not just idealistic looks at hunting and gathering people and at the same time must deal with huge global issues in a just and fair way. Issues such as global climatic change, over population, social injustice and alienation.

Surplus: Terrorized into Being Consumers

Wiki entry:

Surplus: Terrorized Into Being Consumers is a 2003 Swedish documentary film on consumerism and globalization, created by director Erik Gandini and editor Johan Söderberg. It looks at the arguments for capitalism and technology, such as greater efficiency, more time and less work, and argues that these are not being fullfilled.

Surplus - Terrorized into Being Consumers (in 10 parts from google.ca video)

Part 1
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-2017292946244076538&q=Surplus&total=1246&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

Part 2
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-2017292946244076538&q=Surplus&total=1246&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

Part 3
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-2017292946244076538&q=Surplus&total=1246&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

Part 4
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-2017292946244076538&q=Surplus&total=1246&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

Part 5
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-2017292946244076538&q=Surplus&total=1246&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

Part 6
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-2017292946244076538&q=Surplus&total=1246&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

Part 7
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-2017292946244076538&q=Surplus&total=1246&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

Part 8
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-2017292946244076538&q=Surplus&total=1246&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

Part 9
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-2017292946244076538&q=Surplus&total=1246&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

Part 10
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-2017292946244076538&q=Surplus&total=1246&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Succession of the Lakota Nation !!!!!

tineke — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 23:52:37 GMT

http://www.lakotafreedom.com/contact.html

a powerful move.
discuss.

posted in Cascadians - 8 replies

The Take (a MUST see video by Cascadians)

Alexander — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:47:39 GMT

I knew much about what happen in Argentina from personal research. And several years ago I heard of Naomi Klien's movie "The Take" which follows the workers reclaiming their factories after the country went bankrupt (something ALL Cascadians MUST be aware of as the US economy takes its nose dive into debt and collapse leaving the commoner with the bills, mortgages and debt). I was always curious about what I had read as an "autonomist" or "horazonalist" movement by laid off workers in Argentina. Well I finally just saw the film. I would STRONGLY recommend all (specifically Cascadians) to see this film and share it. You could probably get it at a local video shop or even do the very anti-copy right thing of downloading in from one of the torrents like

http://onebigtorrent.org/torrents/70/The-Take

Of course I can not endorse someone doing such an anti NeoLiberal thing like using various torrent programs

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Sibel Edmonds names names

Alexander — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 09:20:35 GMT

if you go to either Sibel's website of the blacklistednews.com version you can see the people she has posted with their names as people of interest.

article:

Sibel Edmonds 'names names' (in pictures!)
Published on Sunday, January 06, 2008.

AddThis Social Bookmarking Widget

Source: Let Sibel Edmonds Speak

Over at Sibel's website, she has published "Sibel Edmonds� State Secrets Privilege Gallery" - twenty one photos of people.

Sibel doesn't say anything about the photos - or the people in the photos - but we can reasonably presume that they are the 21 guilty people in her case.

Sibel has broken the photos into three different groups.

As you can see, there are a couple of 'Question Marks' instead of photos. I'm not sure why that is the case.

I'll have some more later, obviously.
The first group contains current and former Pentagon and State Department officials.
http://blacklistednews.com/view.asp?ID=5192

http://letsibeledmondsspeak.blogspot.com/2008/01/sibel-names-names-in-pictures.html

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

leaving tribe

Sun, 06 Jan 2008 21:47:52 GMT

~ Coulter ads, Christian singles ... don't mind the pitch for paid membership, but something doesn't feel right here. There's no good way to deal with trolls .... and cisco isn't where I want to be.

Good bye tribe

Bambi

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Ohio Secretary of State confirms 2004 election could have been stolen

Alexander — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 16:50:17 GMT

Ohio Secretary of State confirms 2004 election could have been stolen
by Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
December 14, 2007

Ohio's Secretary of State announced this morning that a $1.9 million official study shows that "critical security failures" are embedded throughout the voting systems in the state that decided the 2004 election. Those failures, she says, "could impact the integrity of elections in the Buckeye State." They have rendered Ohio's vote counts "vulnerable" to manipulation and theft by "fairly simple techniques."

Indeed, she says, "the tools needed to compromise an accurate vote count could be as simple as tampering with the paper audit trail connector or using a magnet and a personal digital assistant."

In other words, Ohio's top election official has finally confirmed that the 2004 election could have been easily stolen.

Brunner's stunning findings apply to electronic voting machines used in 58 of Ohio's 88 counties, in addition to scanning devices and central tabulators used on paper ballots in much of the rest of the state.

Brunner is calling for widespread changes to the way Ohio casts and counts its ballots. Her announcement follows moves by California Secretary of State Deborah Bowen to disqualify electronic voting machines in the nation's biggest state.

In tandem, these two reports add a critical state-based dimension to the growing mountain of evidence that the US electoral system is rife with insecurities. Reports from the Brennan Center, the Carter-Baker Commission, the Government Accountability Office, the Conyers Committee Task Force Report, Princeton University and others have offered differing perspectives that add up to the same conclusion.

Coming in the state that decided the 2004 election for George W. Bush, Brunner's confirmation of the electoral system's vulnerabilities adds huge new weight to the charge that the Buckeye State's vote count was stolen.

In a series of investigative reports dating to well before the 2004 election, the Columbus Free Press and Freepress.org have documented several dozen different means used by the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign to steal the official 2004 vote count.

The final official tally for Bush---less than 119,000 votes out of 5.4 million cast---varied by 6.7% from exit poll results, which showed a Kerry victory. Exit polls in 2004 were designed to have a margin of error of about 1%.

In various polling stations in Democrat-rich inner city precincts in Youngstown and Columbus, voters who pushed touch screens for Kerry saw Bush's name light up. A wide range of discrepancies on both electronic and paper balloting systems leaned almost uniformly toward the Bush camp. Voting procedures regularly broke down in inner city and campus areas known to be heavily Democratic.

In direct violation of standing federal election law, 56 of Ohio's 88 counties have since destroyed all or part of their 2004 election data. The materials were additionally protected by a federal court injunction in the King-Lincoln-Bronzeville federal civil rights lawsuit (in which we are attorney and plaintiff). To date, no state or federal prosecutions have resulted from this wholesale destruction of presidential election records, including 1.6 million ballots, cast and uncast, needed for definitive auditing procedures. However, two Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) election officials have been convicted of felony manipulation of an official recount. The Cleveland Plain-Dealer, the state's largest newspaper, recently editorialized that there is "no evidence" the 2004 election was stolen, but omitted mention of the destruction of the electoral records by more than half the counties in the state. The Plain-Dealer and other mainstream media have consistently ignored findings by the Free Press and others indicating widespread manipulation and theft of the kind Brunner has now confirmed was eminently do-able within the Ohio system.

Brunner says "the results underscore the need for a fundamental change in the structure of Ohio's election system to ensure ballot and voting system security while still making voting convenient and accessible to all Ohio voters." Among other things, she advocates replacing touch-screen machines with optical-scan units that include a paper balloting system.

The study was managed by the Battelle Corporation, and conducted by Columbus-based MicroSolved Inc., SysTest Labs of Denver along with a consortium of academic subcontractors. It was reviewed by a dozen county officials, and included scrutiny of voting systems produced by Election Systems & Software (ES&S), Hart Intercivic and Premier Election Solutions (formerly Diebold).

Brunner is the Democratic successor to Republican J. Kenneth Blackwell, who administered the 2004 election as Secretary of State while also serving as state co-chair of the Bush-Cheney campaign. The report comes as part of her pledge to guarantee a fair and reliable vote count in the upcoming 2008 presidential election.

Under Blackwell, Ohio spent some $100 million installing electronic voting machines as part of the Help America Vote Act, passed by Congress in the wake of the scandals surrounding the 2000 election. Former Ohio Congressman Bob Ney, HAVA's principle author, now resides in a federal prison, in part for illegalities surrounding his dealings with voting machine companies.

Blackwell, who was defeated in a 2006 race for the Ohio governorship, outsourced web hosting responsibilities for the 2004 vote count to a programming firm that also programmed the web site for the 2000 Bush-Cheney campaign. Blackwell's chosen host site for the state's vote count was in the basement of the Old Pioneer Bank Building in Chattanooga, Tennessee, where the servers for the Republican National Committee, and the Bush White House, were also located.

Brunner has now recommended that all Ohio's voting be done on optical scan ballots, with reliance on central tabulation. Voters with disabilities could use AutoMark machines with bar coding devices that allow the marking of ballots with little or no additional assistance.

"It's a testament to our state's boards of elections officials that elections on the new (federally) mandated voting systems have gone as smoothly as they have in light of these findings," Brunner said.

Conversely, it is also a testament to the ease with which the 2004 election was stolen by election officials who had clear conflicts of interest aimed at keeping George W. Bush in the White House.

--
Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman are co-authors of HOW THE GOP STOLE AMERICA'S 2004 ELECTION & IS RIGGING 2008 (www.freepress.org) and of WHAT HAPPENED IN OHIO? (The New Press) with Steve Rosenfeld. THE FITRAKIS FILES are available at www.freepress.org, where this article first appeared. Wasserman's SOLARTOPIA! OUR GREEN-POWERED EARTH, A.D. 2030, is at www.solartopia.org.

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2007/2920

posted in Cascadians - 1 reply

Just a note about things to come

Alexander — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 12:58:32 GMT

But let me write a sad warning. The Fascists are just about to hyper jump into something very serious against freedom of speech and our basic human rights. We have seen this Soda Pop Democracy willing to create laws much like the the laws that enabled Hitler to have absolute rule in Germany. Laws that even the Democrats issued in like the Military Commissions Act and the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act. I would like to remind people that there is something called Security Culture and that for yourselves you should be at least aware of that. I am sure the "founding fathers" (and mothers) of the Independent Colonies would understand the balance of personal security and the need to be active. That actions may secure in the long time our basic rights and yet actions may also draw unwanted invasion on those rights during times of despotism. It is a hard choice and I understand all the needs, fears and often confusion that comes along with these sad times. Each is an individual with her/his own specific situation and I respect your individual choice in the upcoming days (or months or even years) on just what you will need to do or not do. All of you (even sadly those I have had petty arguements) are highly intellegent people with an uniqueness of our love for freedom, wilderness, forests and wildness. I will understand the path you as individuals choice to see that our basic rights and our commons preserved and prosper.

Always keep in mind localization, democratization (including the workplace, education and food/water), ecology with equality and the need to be inclusive in dialogue while not giving in to the loudest voice.

These are going to be hard times ahead. No one person can survive on her or his own and these problems that we are faced with can not be solved with bullets and a bunker, but can be overcomed with community, dialogue, cooperation, inclusiveness, empathy, maturity and education with appropriate actions.

We have at this time all the organizations we need to survive and prosper, but only lack the dialogue and cooperation between them. Through diversity of being we will generate numerous solutions and problems solving. That diversity is our communities, ethnicities, genders, sexualities, abilities, genetics, ideas, approaches and circumstance. Way too often our differences are used to "divide and conquer" and it is way passed time that we use our difference in being to create a better and more inclsive and empowering world.

We have long known that our comsumer civilization feeds off of greed and suffering of all. That this suffering is not limited to the forced laborer in a sweatshop or to a victim of one of the vassal states of the empire, but that we suffer in our own souls for the collective consumption of such suffering. That we lose our own sense of self and place as we gobble up the African resources that make our cell phones, eat the chocolates of forced labour in Central America, sniff the roses of child labour from South America, eat the fruit of threatened "illegal" workers and so forth. We are the products of alienating suburbia, of clear cuts behind the wall of tree along the highways, of a fascade two oligarchy party system, of the t-shirt that yells out the name of the corporation that sells our souls. Our cars promised us the dream of a closer society and has given us scattered families and mass pollution. Our internet chats and cell phones promised us greater communications and yet we are more alienated to the people physically in our presence. Our TVs promised we would see the world and yet we hide in our locked up homes not experiencing the world outside those doors. We have created a realistic virtual reality world while we kill the real world with our apathy and neglect.

If you wish to be free it merely starts with a friendly get together with your family and neighbors. Please in the coming times start to build community around you. Become locally aware and empower the local with dialogue and inclusiveness with Respect Reverence and Responsibility for Ecology, Equality and Equity.

homepage: homepage: http://republic-of-cascadia.tripod.com

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2007/12/369960.shtml

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

bioregional animism has a new web page!

Tue, 27 Nov 2007 09:13:57 GMT

come and join us! create a profile and share in the vision!
http://bioregionalanimism.org/

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Did RAND Corporation Pen the Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act?

Alexander — Sat, 24 Nov 2007 14:02:29 GMT

Did RAND Corporation Pen the Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act?
Published on Friday, November 23, 2007.

AddThis Social Bookmarking Widget

By Kurt Nimmo

According to Jessica Lee of Indypendent and Kamau Karl Franklin of the Center for Constitutional Rights, the Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act was penned with plenty of help from the RAND Corporation.

“Rep. Jane Harman, Democrat from California, has had a lengthy relationship with the Rand Corporation,” Lee tells Democracy Now, although she was unable to determine if RAND wrote the bill. On the 12th anniversary of the OKC bombing, Rep. Harman, as chair of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing and Terrorism Risk Assessment, introduced the bill in the House of Representatives.
“The ‘Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007' seeks to address the roots causes of radicalization, and would establish a grant program to provide funds to States to foster badly needed vertical information sharing from the Intelligence Community to the local level and from local sources to state and federal agencies,” explains Harman’s website. “It also creates a Center of Excellence for the Prevention of Radicalization and Home Grown Terrorism to examine the social, criminal, political, psychological and economic roots of domestic terrorism and to propose solutions, and promotes international collaboration on strategies to combat radicalization."

Franklin mentions Brian Michael Jenkins, an “expert” on “terrorism, counterinsurgency, and homeland security,” according to RAND. Jenkins is “someone who helped the United States in counterinsurgency measures in Vietnam,” states Franklin. “In addition to that, he wrote a book, and in his own book” Jenkins declared that “in their international campaign, the jihadists will seek common ground with leftists, anti-American and anti-globalist forces, who will in turn see radical Islam comrades against a mutual foe.”

In short, according to Kamau Karl Franklin, the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act is more about domestic political activism than Islamic terrorism, although it appears Jenkins—and neocons such as the former Marxist David Horowitz—are attempting establish a link between the two, an absurdity at best, as the best way to discredit both the antiwar and patriot movements.

According to a Center for Constitutional Rights factsheet, RAND is a key player in the “domestic terrorism” prevention effort detailed in this draconian bill. A RAND study “Trends in Terrorism,” Chapter 4 on “homegrown terrorism,” advocates “special attention to environmentalist, Anti-globalization activist and anarchists as potentially new terrorist in the making.”

Not surprisingly, RAND is intimately connected to the global elite and the military-industrial-intelligence complex: “The interlocks between the trustees at Rand, and the Ford, Rockefeller, and Carnegie foundations were so numerous that the Reece Committee listed them in its report (two each for Carnegie and Rockefeller, and three for Ford). Ford gave one million dollars to Rand in 1952 alone, at a time when the chairman of Rand was simultaneously the president of Ford Foundation,” notes SourceWatch (Rene Wormser, Foundations: Their Power and Influence, p65-66). “Two-thirds of Rand’s research involves national security issues. This is divided into Project Air Force, the Arroyo Center (serving the needs of the Army), and the National Defense Research Institute (providing research and analysis for the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, and the defense agencies).”

As Lee Rogers notes, the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, in its effort to flush out “terrorists,” including those opposed to the sort of globalism supported by Ford, Rockefeller, and Carnegie foundations, will perform an end-run around the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The bill “states in the first subsection that in general the efforts to defeat thought crime shall not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights and civil liberties of the United States citizens and lawful permanent residents. How does this protect constitutional rights if they use vague language such as in general that prefaces the statement? This means that the Department of Homeland Security does not have to abide by the Constitution in their attempts to prevent so called homegrown terrorism.”

This bill is completely insane. It literally allows the government to define any and all crimes including thought crime as violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism. Obviously, this legislation is unconstitutional on a number of levels and it is clear that all 404 representatives who voted in favor of this bill are traitors and should be removed from office immediately. The treason spans both political parties and it shows us all that there is no difference between them. The bill will go on to the Senate and will likely be passed and signed into the law by George W. Bush. Considering that draconian legislation like the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act have already been passed, there seems little question that this one will get passed as well. This is more proof that our country has been completely sold out by a group of traitors at all levels of government.

“With overwhelming bipartisan support, Rep. Jane Harman’s ‘Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act’ passed the House 404-6 late last month and now rests in Sen. Joe Lieberman’s Homeland Security Committee. Swift Senate passage appears certain,” write Ralph E. Shaffer and R. William Robinson for the Baltimore Sun. “Not since the ‘Patriot Act’ of 2001 has any bill so threatened our constitutionally guaranteed rights.”

Harman’s “proposed commission is a menace through its power to hold hearings, take testimony and administer oaths, an authority granted to even individual members of the commission—little Joe McCarthys—who will tour the country to hold their own private hearings. An aura of authority will automatically accompany this congressionally authorized mandate to expose native terrorism.”

Ms. Harman’s proposal includes an absurd attack on the Internet, criticizing it for providing Americans with “access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda,” and legalizes an insidious infiltration of targeted organizations. The misnamed “Center of Excellence,” which would function after the commission is disbanded in 18 months, gives the semblance of intellectual research to what is otherwise the suppression of dissent.

While its purpose is to prevent terrorism, the bill doesn’t criminalize any specific conduct or contain penalties. But the commission’s findings will be cited by those who see a terrorist under every bed and who will demand enactment of criminal penalties that further restrict free speech and other civil liberties. Action contrary to the commission’s findings will be interpreted as a sign of treason at worst or a lack of patriotism at the least.

While Ms. Harman denies that her proposal creates “thought police,” it defines “homegrown terrorism” as “planned” or “threatened” use of force to coerce the government or the people in the promotion of “political or social objectives.” That means that no force need actually have occurred as long as the government charges that the individual or group thought about doing it.

As Shaffer and Robinson note, examples of “resulting crackdowns on such protests include the conviction and execution of anarchists tied to Chicago’s 1886 Haymarket Riot.” Additionally, we might add that the FBI’s COINTELPRO—targeting civil rights, antiwar, and national liberation movements—may serve as a template for “insidious infiltration of targeted organizations.” Although the official history would have us believe COINTELRPO was shut down in the 1970s, events since that time reveal the government is still in the business of illegally going after Americans who exercise their constitutional right to petition the government. For more on these recent events, see Brian Glick’s COINTELPRO Revisited: Spying and Disruption.

Thus it makes perfect sense that the corporate media—compromised by the CIA under Operation Mockingbird beginning in the 1950s—would employ the likes of Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly to characterize the antiwar, truth and patriot movements—and even supporters of Ron Paul—as potentially violent advocates of “domestic terrorism.” No doubt, in the weeks and months ahead, we should expect more such propaganda as Harman’s “proposed commissions,” little more than federally mandated inquisitions, get up to speed.
Finally, as noted above, it is only a matter of time before the so-called Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 becomes law. The bill has been referred to the Senate where it awaits scrutiny from the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and is almost certain to pass.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2007/231107RAND.htm

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

The Power of Community: How Cuba Survived Peak Oil

Alexander — Wed, 24 Oct 2007 14:35:20 GMT

The Power of Community: How Cuba Survived Peak Oil

In 1991 after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Cuba experienced an 'energy famine.' Transportation and agriculture virtually came to a stop due to lack of diesel fuel and fertilizer shortages. This film explores what changes were put in place. The makers of the film "The End Of Suburbia" went to Cuba to explore it as a test case for what the conditions after Peak Oil would look like. This is that story.

This documentary takes you through various aspects of life in Cuba - Economy, transportation, health-care, agriculture, education - and explores how they dealt with the dramatic reduction of fossil fuels to a mere fraction of their pre 1990 levels. It was nice to meet the people, see the sights, and hear the sounds. The overall feeling was that the Cubans had improved the quality of their life (after a difficult "Special Period"). Their health was better, greater sense of community, better food and healthier land. I was left with the question: Why should we wait until we run out of oil? Let's do it now. The part that I did not expect was how it challenged my understanding of the difference between a Communist country and Capitalism. Did you know that a greater percentage of Cubans own their own home than in America? More farmers now own their own land? Sort of turns the notion of what a "Free-Market" is on its head!

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=4981871524314644822&q=peak+oil+cuba&total=18&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

posted in Cascadians - 3 replies

Cascadia Convergence 10/26-27

LanSing — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 09:08:18 GMT

I've been delinquent in not posting this earlier, but I hope some others from this tribe will join me in attending the first annual Cascadia Convergence this weekend:
http://www.sustainablecascadia.org/events.php

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

New Cascadian sites

Daniel — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 19:31:37 GMT

I've established a couple of new sites and I've posted them on the yahoo group but I forgot to mention them here.

We're trying to become the de facto Cascadian independence group to help everyone organize around Cascadia and free ourselves of this dying empire.

The sites are:

The Evergreen Revolution - A peaceful organization site to help us coordinate (it's still being constructed)
http://www.evergreenrevolution.org

The Cascadian Guard - Mercenary watch blog. This is my blog where I post anything of relevance regarding Mercs and their potential influence in Cascadia
http://www.cascadianguard.org

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Next Cascadian Survivalist Meeting

Collin S. Ferguson — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 23:24:49 GMT

Dear brother and sister Cascadians,

Come on, come all to the next Cascadia Survivalist Society (Skipping Society), which will be Tuesday, October 9th, 2007 at 7pm at the Lucky Lab, 915 SE Hawthorne Blvd., Portland, OR 97214.

At the meeting we will discuss among of things incorporation as a non-profit, forming a bioregional congress (for more information go to http://www.bioregional-congress.org/), how to elect board members, how to spread the campaign, how we can support our cause by supporting existing organizations, and developing regional and student chapters. We are in process of opening chapters in Victoria, British Columbia, Eugene, OR and Portland, Oregon. Please bring yourself and friends to the meeting, enjoy a pint, and have a great time with your fellow Cascadians.

Sincerely,

Collin S. Ferguson

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Fall Ecology and Harvest: An Intergenerational Exploration

nathaniel — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 02:46:19 GMT

Scholarship and Worktrade available. Please call 541 937-2567 ext.116 or email nature@lostvalley.org for more information.

October 13-14, 2007 (Saturday-Sunday)
at Lost Valley Educational Center, Dexter, OR

We invite people ages 12 through 112 to join us to learn about fall ecology, indigenous tradition, and the harvest season here in the western Cascade foothills. Throughout this weekend of presentations, discussions, and activities, we'll explore how we can learn from one another and pass ecological wisdom and insights back and forth between generations. The schedule (subject to change) is as follows:

SATURDAY, OCTOBER 13 morning: indigenous traditions and their modern applications
9-9:30 am: introduction/welcome circle
9:30-10:30 am: Esther Stutzman (Kalapuyan storyteller)
10:40-11:30 am: presentation and discussion circle featuring Bill Burwell (Kalapuya researcher), Jerry Hall (ethnobotanist, Lane Community College), Dharmika Henschel (ethnobotanist/musician), Jude Hobbs (Permaculture teacher and designer, Agroecology Northwest), and Rick Valley (Lost Valley land steward, Permaculture teacher and designer)
11:30 am-12:10 pm: break-out groups
12:10-12:30 pm: concluding morning circle
12:30-1:30 pm: lunch

SATURDAY, OCTOBER 13 afternoon and evening: seasonal harvest activities, ecological restoration, ecovillage development, youth initiatives, and bioregional culture
2-4:30 pm: tour (Rick Valley) and hands-on harvest- and land-related activities
4:45-5:45 pm: Alison Rosenblatt (NextGEN--Global Ecovillage Network)
6-7 pm: dinner
7:30 pm on: music (Dharmika Henschel and others), sharing circle about traditional seasonal celebrations, stories, poems, networking

SUNDAY, OCTOBER 14 morning: school gardening, youth, and horticultural exploration
7:30-8:30 am: breakfast
9-9:30 am: morning welcome circle
9:30-9:50 am: Sharon Blick (former director, School Garden Project)
9:50-10:10 am: Jen Anonia (Food for Lane County Gardens Program Manager)
10:10-10:30 am: Heiko Koester (Permacultural landscaper, Eugene Permaculture Guild)
10:40-11:20 am: Sarah Kleeger and Andrew Still (Seed Ambassadors Project)
11:30 am-12:30 pm: discussion
12:30-1:30 pm: lunch

SUNDAY, OCTOBER 14 afternoon: autumn ecology and ethnobotany
2-4:15 pm: talks and walks with Dave Kofranek (lichenologist), Tobias Policha (ethnobotanist, Institute of Contemporary Ethnobotany), Heiko Koester, and others
4:30-5:30 pm: closing circle

Conference registration fees, including four organic vegetarian meals, are $105 for students 12 and above, $135 for non-students. Overnight lodging ($30) and camping ($10) are also available. We are offering a $10 discount/rebate from your registration fee for each paying registrant who first heard about the event through you, or who cites you as his or her primary influence in considering attending. A limited number of worktrade scholarships are available (for an application, follow the link within the online registration form at www.lostvalley.org/fallecology/registration). If space allows, we will also accept single-day attendees for $80 Saturday only, $65 Sunday only (or, for students, $65 Saturday only, $50 Sunday only.) See www.lostvalley.org/fallecology for updated event details, or contact Fall Ecology and Harvest Event, 81868 Lost Valley Lane, Dexter, OR 97431, (541) 937-2567 x116, nature AT lostvalley.org.

brochure: www.lostvalley.org/files/Fall%20Ecology%20and%20Harvest%20brochure.pdf
poster: www.lostvalley.org/files/Fall%20Ecology%20and%20Harvest%20poster.pdf

Cosponsors:
Lost Valley Nature Center
Lost Valley Educational Center’s 87 acres include oak savanna, natural meadow, stream and riparian areas, ponds, extensive forest lands in various states of maturity, gardens and orchards. Our diverse habitats and several miles of nature trails offer unique environmental education opportunities. Lost Valley Nature Center sponsors walks and public events (like May’s Native Plants and Permaculture Gathering) to help nature-lovers learn from the land and from one another.

NextGEN
NextGEN is a global network organized by young adults concerned with issues of sustainability. We hope to inspire you with examples of viable and positive choices for the future. We offer opportunities for action through conferences, educational workshops, and direct experience in communities. Our international support network develops connections among activists and encourages resource sharing.

Excerpts from May’s Native Plants and Permaculture Conference Proceedings:

Bill Burwell: At the start of each harvest season the Kalapuyans would have a first gathering ceremony. The spiritual leader of each winter village site would harvest a few articles of each resource, bring it back, prepare it in a ceremonial way, bless the plants or animals that were responsible, and then the regular harvest could begin. The first gathering ceremony was very important to them, and it was practiced all throughout the Kalapuya culture, religiously. Their belief was that all plants and animals, including humans, were part of the same format. As above, so below. Just like humans, plants and all animals had families, and then beyond the families they had communities.

There’s one word I know of that was utilized all the way up and down the Willamette Valley, the lower Columbia, and into the Salish area in Washington: Tamanawas. It’s been translated as spirit power. People who went out on a vision quest were looking for their Tamanawas. I think what it really related to was a person’s ability to interconnect with all the rest of nature. I’ve collected a number of tales of the people going out into the woods to find a particular medicine, and their ability to find this medicine came from the ability to plug into that certain plant and interact with it. The plant actually was the teacher of the person who was going out on the search.

Jerry Hall: When we started learning our language, songs began coming to us. There is the belief that songs are just in the ether or in the air, and they select somebody to come to at a time in that person’s life. … My experience is that singing evokes something from us that is beyond talking and gives expression to prayer.

I feel that nature is really part of the home and that people related that way five hundred years ago. People knew where everything was and they took care of it.

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

made in cascaida

Thu, 20 Sep 2007 08:37:13 GMT

i was thinking that a good way to promote bioregionalism and bioregional local economies would be to make stickers to put on local products saying "made in cascadia" could be done in any bioregion really... but they could be given out at farmers markets to the local retailers and producers for free as a way to promote regional economic pride and autonomy...
and to be honest people are allways buying stuff rather unconciously... even at the farmers market... and a little sticker would at least have that subconcious impact... in fine print a www. could be put on which promote regional ecomony. just an idear....

posted in Cascadians - 2 replies

ATTENTION: US AIRFORCE POTENTIAL PEARL HARBOUR ATTACK

Alexander — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 13:22:10 GMT

ATTENTION: US AIRFORCE POTENTIAL PEARL HARBOUR ATTACK

The past few weeks various unusual events have occured that should raise questions by both civilian and military personnel in regards to national security. Questions regarding the five or six mounted nuclear missiles on a B-52H bomber that “mistakenly” flew across the US should be a big clue that something is not normal. All normal protocol was ignored. The moving of such weapons has had a complicated series of rules andd regulations following together with military personnel accompanying every step.

This unusual occurance took place near a time when many in the alternative noncorporate media community were investigating the possible rumours and speculations that some within the US were plotting a self-inflicted wound on America by targetting such places as Portland Oregon during a military drill called Operation Noble Resolve. The fear and speculation was based on the fact that during the tragedy of September 11th 2001 air force excersises strangly similar to the tragedy of that day were occuring. Hence confusing the appropriate responders to react appropriate that day. Portland Oregon has another drill or mock scenerio in October called Operation Top Off 4 with a plan to have drills as if Portland is under martial law due to a “dirty nuke”.

The response of the US Air Force has been to announce that the US Air Force would have “StandDown” on September 14th (over a week when the incodent was to happen). The US Air Force has had one noteable “StandDown” in its history before and that was on September 11th 2001. On the 18th of September the US Air Force will be celebrating the 60th anniverary of its founding. On September 11th 2001, the Pentagon was to celebrate its 60th anniverary of its groundbreaking on the day of the attacks.

The “mistake” of moving armed nuclear missiles on the B-52H interal governmental shifts that question the safety and security of this constitutional democratic republic. On May 9th 2007, George W Bush issued the National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51 in which during any crises that the president determines to be a "Catastrophic Emergency” would gain dictatorial powers. To add to this is the fact that Dick Cheney has covertly told his mouthpieces associated with the corporate media that he wants to step up the drumbeat to war against Iran. Many believe that an “Gulf of Tonkin Incident” maybe planned against the US military by fasistic elements within the US government and corporate sector. The “Gulf of Tonkin Incident” was a situation where some in the US government faked an incident so that the US Congress could pass Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. The concern is that a New Pearl Harbour attack against the US Air Force or a city like Portland Oregon would give George W Bush dictatorial powers as decreed in the NSPD 51 and Dick Cheney could blame the Iranians so as to declare war on Iran. To add to this dreadful potential global war crime is that the worlds largest military is a private contractor firm called Blackwater USA. Blackwater USA has in the passed and currently are the mercenary company the the US has been using in Iraq and other conflict zones as well as used to patrol the streets of New Orleans during the Katrina Huricane tragedy. Blackwater USA is now buying military aircraft for the creation of a Blackwater Air Force. If the US Air Force is attacked in a Pearl Harbour like attack then Blackwater USA could gain to win contracts to sublimit or replace a deminished US Air Force.

If you have friends or family or you are yourself in the US Air Force or other branches of the military it would be recommnded that instead of “Standing Down” on these days of strange orders and questionable actions that you “Stand Up and Stand Out” by reporting to the public of any unusual or disturbing orders or occurances. It is our Constitutional Democratic Republic that maybe in danger of being lost to anti democratic forces now possing as in the name of democracy. Contact any independant media with such information.

The following are news articles recently in the news specifically about what was written above:

NORTHCOM Plans 5 Day Martial Law Exercise
Wednesday, September 05, 2007.

By Lee Rogers - Intel Strike Contributing Writer

The United States Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) has just announced plans for an anti-terrorism exercise called Vigilant Shield 08. The exercise which is slated to run from October 15th to October 20th is described as a way to prepare, prevent and respond to any number of national crises. The exercise is simply a test case scenario for the implementation of martial law. Although the description of the exercise is disturbing, USNORTHCOM also announced that they are more prepared for a natural disaster and a terrorist attack after they used their response to Hurricane Katrina as a test laboratory. During Hurricane Katrina, authorities violated the constitutional rights of citizens by stealing people’s firearms and even relocating people against their will. These announcements are incredibly disturbing on a number of levels as the nature of Vigilant Shield 08 and the admission that Hurricane Katrina was used as a test laboratory shows that the government is actively preparing the military and government institutions for martial law.
Below is the full press release from USNORTHCOM describing Vigilant Shield 08. Also check out the Vigilant Shield 08 fact sheet by clicking here.
North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Northern Command along with U.S. Pacific Command, the Department of Homeland Security as well as local, state and other federal responders will exercise their response abilities against a variety of potential threats during Exercise Vigilant Shield ‘08, a Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff-designated, North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and U.S. Northern Command (USNORTHCOM)-sponsored, and U.S. Joint Forces Command-supported Department of Defense exercise for homeland defense and defense support of civil authorities missions.
VS-08 will be conducted concurrent with Top Officials 4 (TOPOFF 4), the nation’s premier exercise of terrorism preparedness sponsored by the Department of Homeland Security, and several other linked exercises as part of the National Level Exercise 1-08. These linked exercises will take place Ocober 15-20 and are being conducted throughout the United States and in conjunction with several partner nations including Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom, as well as the Territory of Guam.
VS-08 and National Level Exercise 1-08 will provide local, state, tribal, interagency, Department of Defense, and non-governmental organizations and agencies involved in homeland security and homeland defense the opportunity to participate in a full range of exercise scenarios that will better prepare participants to prevent and respond to national crises. The participating organizations will conduct a multi-layered, civilian-led response to a national crisis.
USNORTHCOM’s primary exercise venues for VS-08 include locations in Oregon, Arizona and a cooperative venue with USPACOM in the Territory of Guam. NORAD’s aerospace detection and defense events will take place across all the exercise venues, to exercise the ability to mobilize resources for aerospace defense, aerospace control, maritime warning, and coordination of air operations in a disaster area.

This exercise is clearly a way to prepare government to respond to a national crisis with martial law. This announcement also follows a number of other news stories that indicate the government is becoming more actively prepared for the implementation of martial law.
These stories include the following:
George W. Bush issuing a presidential directive declaring that he is a dictator during the case of a national emergency be it a natural disaster, a terror attack or any number of crises.
KSLA reporting that members of clergy will be used to convince people to submit to government in the case of declare martial law. See the video below.
The U.S. Department of Treasury conducting a disaster drill to prepare for a potential economic crisis.
In addition to the announcement of Vigilant Shield 08, USNORTHCOM also announced that they have been using the lessons learned from Hurricane Katrina to better respond to crises. The response to Hurricane Katrina was essentially used as a test laboratory to implement martial law in a city. People were forced to relocate against their will and authorities stole people’s firearms in the name of safety despite these actions being entirely unconstitutional.
From USNORTHCOM:
“Hurricane Katrina’s impact on this country was unprecedented. There are still many of our fellow Americans whose lives still haven’t returned to normal,” said Gen. Gene Renuart, commander of North American Aerospace Defense Command and USNORTHCOM. “It will take many years for the Gulf Coast to fully recover.
“The United States military was deeply involved in the response to the hurricane and subsequent flooding,” Renuart said. “While our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines helped thousands of people, we also learned many lessons.”
According to Renuart, USNORTHCOM has been using the lessons learned from Katrina to modify plans to respond to both natural disasters and potential terrorist actions.

Northern Command also admits in the same article that they have pre-scripted mission assignments coordinated with FEMA to implement martial law under the pretext of disaster response.
From USNORTHCOM:
USNORTHCOM is ready to help federal, state and local officials to be prepared for a major hurricane and to be successful at conducting response operations, if necessary and requested by the primary responding agency. Some of the ways these objectives are being achieved are:
Through State Engagement programs, USNORTHCOM provides planning support to help states prepare for emergencies.
USNORTHCOM and its subordinates, as well as local, state and federal partners conduct major disaster exercises to refine processes and apply lessons learned.
Working with FEMA, USNORTHCOM has prepared pre-scripted mission assignments to accelerate the disaster response process.
USNORTHCOM conducted a major exercise with the National Guard in May to refine the interface between the National Guard and DoD.

There is no question that Vigilant Shield 08 is either government preparation for the implementation of martial law or a way for criminal elements within the government to distract emergency responders in order to conduct a false flag terror attack as a pretext to actually implement martial law and engage in foreign war. On September 11th, 2001 there were drills run by NORAD including Vigilant Guardian which served as a way to ensure that there was no adequate military response to the hi-jacked planes. A similar scenario unfolding with Vigilant Shield is not out of the question.
http://www.blacklistednews.com/view.asp?ID=4185
__

Was a Covert Attempt to Bomb Iran with Nuclear Weapons foiled by a Military Leak?

Michael E. Salla, M.A., Ph.D.

Critically exploring whether or not there was a covert attempt to instigate a catastrophic nuclear war against Iran is illuminated through an introduction using the recent B-52 Incident. On August 30, a B-52 bomber armed with five nuclear-tipped Advanced Cruise missiles travelled from Minot Air Force base, North Dakota, to Barksdale Air Force base, Louisiana, in the United States. Each missile had an adjustable yield between five and 150 kilotons of TNT which is at the lower end of the destructive capacities of U.S. nuclear weapons. For example, the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima had a yield of 13 kilotons, while the Bravo Hydrogen bomb test of 1954 had a yield of 15,000 kilotons. The B-52 story was first covered in the Army Times on 5 September after the nuclear armed aircraft was discovered by Airmen. LINK

What made this a very significant event was that it was a violation of U.S. Air Force regulations concerning the transportation of nuclear weapons by air. Nuclear weapons are normally transported by air in specially constructed planes designed to prevent radioactive pollution in case of a crash. Such transport planes are not equipped to launch the nuclear weapons they routinely carry around the U.S. and the world for servicing or positioning.

The discovery of the nuclear armed B-52 was, according to Hans Kristensen, a nuclear weapons expert at the Federation of American Scientists, the first time in 40 years that a nuclear armed plane had been allowed to fly in the U.S. LINK. Since 1968, after a SAC bomber crashed in Greenland, all nuclear armed aircraft have been grounded but were kept on a constant state of alert. After the end of the Cold War, President George H. Bush ordered in 1991 that nuclear weapons were to be removed from all aircraft and stored in nearby facilities.

Recently, the Air Force began decommissioning its stockpile of Advanced Cruise missiles. The five nuclear weapons on the B-52 were to be decommissioned, and were to be taken to another Air Force base. An Air Force press statement issued on 6 September 2007, claimed that there "was an error which occurred during a regularly scheduled transfer of weapons between two bases."

Furthermore, the statement declared: "The Air Force maintains the highest standards of safety and precision so any deviation from these well established munitions procedures is considered very serious." The issue concerning how a nuclear armed B-52 bomber was allowed to take off and fly in U.S. air space after an 'error' in a routine transfer process, is now subject to an official Air Force inquiry which is due to be completed by September 14.

Three key questions emerge over the B-52 incident. First, did Air Force personnel at Minot AFB not spot the 'error' earlier given the elaborate security procedures in place to prevent such mistakes from occurring? Many military analysts have commented on the stringent security procedures in place to prevent this sort of mistake from occurring. Multiple officers are routinely involved in the transportation and loading of nuclear weapons to prevent the kind of 'error' that allegedly occurred in the B-52 incident.

According to the U.S. Air Force statement, the commanding officer in charge of military munitions personnel and additional munitions airmen were relieved of duties pending the completion of the investigation. According to Kristensen, the error could not have come from confusing the Advanced Cruise Missile with a conventional weapons since no conventional form exists. So the munitions Airmen should have been easily able to spot the mistake. Other routine procedures were violated which suggests a rather obvious explanation for the error. The military munitions personnel were acting under direct orders, though not through the regular chain of military command. This takes me to the second question

Who was in Charge of the B-52 Incident?

Who ordered the loading of Advanced Cruise missiles on to a B-52 in violation of Air Force regulations? The quick reaction of the Air Force and the issuing of a public statement describing the seriousness of the issue and the launch of an immediate investigation, suggests that whatever occurred, was outside the regular chain of military command. If the regular chain of command was violated, then we have to inquire as to whether the B-52 incident was part of a covert project whose classification level exceeded that held by officers in charge of nuclear weapons at Minot AFB.

The most obvious governmental entity that may have ordered the nuclear arming of the B-52 outside the regular chain of military command is the last remaining bastion of neo-conservative activism in the Bush administration.

Vice President Cheney has taken a very prominent role in covert military operations and training exercises designed for the "seamless integration" of different national security and military authorities to possible terrorist attacks. On May 8, 2001, President Bush placed Mr. Cheney in charge of "[A]ll federal programs dealing with weapons of mass destruction, consequence management within the Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, Justice, and Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, and other federal agencies". LINK. Mr. Cheney subsequently played a direct role in supervising training exercises that simultaneously occurred during the 911 attacks.

According to former Los Angeles Police Officer Michael Ruppelt, Mr. Cheney had a parallel chain of command that he used to override Air Force objections to stand down orders that grounded the USAF during the 911 attacks, LINK.

Mr. Ruppelt learned that the Secret Service had the authority to directly communicate presidential and vice presidential orders to fighter pilots in the air thereby circumventing the normal chain of command. (Crossing the Rubicon, pp. 428 - 429). Furthermore: "It is the Secret Service who has the legal mandate to take supreme command in case of a scheduled major event - or an unplanned major emergency - on American soil; these are designated "National Special Security Events".LINK.

Mr. Ruppelt and others have subsequently claimed that 911 was an "inside job;" and alleges Mr. Cheney through the Secret Service, played a direct leadership role in what occurred over 911. Consequently, it is very possible that Mr. Cheney could have played a similar role in circumventing the regular chain of military command in ordering the B-52 incident. The B-52 incident could be part of a contrived "National Special Security Event" directly controlled by Cheney by virtue of the alleged authority granted to him by President Bush, and through the Secret Service which at least theoretically, has the technological means to by pass the regular chain of military command. I now move to my third key question.

Why was the nuclear armed B-52 sent to Barksdale AFB?

If initial reports that the weapons were being decommissioned, but were mistakenly transported by a B-52 bomber, then the weapons should have been taken to Kirtland Air Force Base. According to Kristensen, this is "where the warheads are separated from the rest of the weapon and shipped to the Energy Department's Pantex dismantlement facility near Amarillo, Texas". LINK.

However, it has been revealed that Barksdale AFB is used as a staging base for operations in the Middle East, LINK.

This is circumstantial evidence that the weapons were being deployed for possible use in the Middle East.

There has been recent speculation concerning a possible attack against Iran given reports that the Pentagon has completed plans for a three day bombing blitz of Iran according to a Sunday Times report, LINK. The Report claims that 1200 targets have been selected and this will destroy much of Iran's military infrastructure. Such an attack will devastate Iran's economy, create greater political instability in the region, and stop the oil supply. A disruption of the oil supply from the Persian Gulf could trigger a global economic recession and lead to the collapse of financial markets.

In a rather disturbing synchronistic development, there have been reports of billion dollar investments in high risk stock options in both Europe and the U.S. that would only be profitable if a dramatic collapse of the stock market were to occur before September 21. Similar stock options were purchased weeks before the 911 attack in 2001, and investigated by the Securities and Exchange Commission for possible insider trading. The combination of the Sunday Times report and the Stock market option purchases is circumstantial evidence that plans for a concerted military attack against Iran have been secretly approved and covert operations have begun, LINK.

Seymour Hersh in May 2006 reported the opposition of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to the use of nuclear weapons against Iran.

In late April, the military leadership, headed by General Pace, achieved a major victory when the White House dropped its insistence that the plan for a bombing campaign include the possible use of a nuclear device to destroy Iran's uranium-enrichment plant at Natanz, nearly two hundred miles south of Tehran. .. "Bush and Cheney were dead serious about the nuclear planning," the former senior intelligence official told me. "And Pace stood up to them.

Then the world came back: 'O.K., the nuclear option is politically unacceptable.' LINK.

Given earlier opposition by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, it is likely that the present attack plans for Iraq drawn up by the Pentagon don't involve the use of nuclear weapons. In order to circumvent the regular chain of command, opposed to a nuclear attack, it is very likely that Vice President Cheney contrived a "National Special Security Event" that involved a nuclear armed B-52. This would have given him the legal authority to place orders directly through the Secret Service to the Air Force officers responsible for the B-52 incident.

Conclusion: Exposing those Responsible for the B-52 Incident

Consequently, there is considerable circumstantial evidence to argue that the nuclear armed B-52 was part of an apparent covert operation, outside the regular chain of constitutional military command. The alleged authority responsible for this was Vice President Cheney. He very likely used the Secret Service to take charge of a contrived National Special Security Event involving a nuclear armed B-52 that would be flown from Minot AFB. The B-52 was directed to Barksdale Air Force base where it would have conducted a covert mission to the Middle East involving the detonation of one or more nuclear weapons most likely in or in the vicinity of Iran. This could either have occurred during a conventional military strike against Iran, or a False Flag operation in the Persian Gulf region.

Apparently, the leaking and discovery of the nuclear armed B-52 at Barksdale was not part of the script. According to a confidential source of Larry Johnson, a former counter-terrorism official from the State Department and CIA, the discovery of the nuclear armed B-52 was leaked. Johnson concludes: "Did someone at Barksdale try to indirectly warn the American people that the Bush Administration is staging nukes for Iran? I don't know, but it is a question worth asking." LINK.

While the general public is likely to be given a watered down declassified report by the Air Force over the B-52 incident on September 14, the real investigation will reveal that it was part of a covert operation that intended to bypass the regular chain of command in using nuclear weapons in the Middle East. This will likely result in a furious backlash by key figures in the regular military chain of Command such as Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, and the Commander of Central Command, Admiral William Fallon, who have direct responsibility for the conduct of military operations in the Middle East. The US. Air Force, the Secretary of Defense and Commander of Central Command, is now aware of what was likely going to be the true use of the B-52 and the responsibility of the Office of the Vice President.

It is very likely that the exposure of the B-52 incident will lead to an indefinite hold on plans to attack Iran given uncertainty whether other nuclear weapons have been covertly positioned for use in the Middle East. Significantly, public officials briefed about the true circumstances of the B-52 incident will almost certainly place enormous pressure on Vice President Cheney to immediately resign if it is found that he played the role identified above. It is therefore anticipated that in a very short time, the public will learn that Cheney has resigned for health resigns.

The forthcoming September 14 U.S. Air Force report will likely describe the B-52 incident as an "error" and an "isolated incident" as foreshadowed in the September 6 Press Statement. This will create some difficulty in exposing the actual role played by Cheney and any other government figures that supported him. There will be a need for continued public awareness of the true events behind the B-52 incident in order to expose the actual role of Mr. Cheney. Only in that way can Cheney be held accountable for his actions, and other government figures that supported his neo-conservative agenda be exposed. Regardless of whether Cheney's role as the prime architect of the B-52 incident is exposed to the public, the official backlash against his covert operation should force his resignation. In either case, a very dangerous public official would be removed from a powerful position of influence. More importantly, the world has been spared a devastating nuclear war by courageous American airmen who revealed the true contents of an otherwise routine B-52 landing at Barksdale, AFB headed for a covert nuclear mission to the Middle East.

About the author:

Michael E. Salla, M.A. Ph.D., is a former Assistant Professor in the School of International Service, American University, Washington D.C. He is the author of five books and founder of the Exopolitics Institute, a 501(c)3 non-profit organization based in Kona, Hawaii.

Click to make a donation-pledge herein

Further Reading

Michael Kane, "Simplifying the case against Dick Cheney," LINK

Larry Johnson, "Staging Nuke for Iran?", LINK

Michael Hoffman, "B-52 mistakenly flies with nukes aboard," LINK

Michael Salla, Ph.D. "Will the U.S. Attack Iran Before September 21? - Are CIA Front Companies Investing $4.5 Billion to Profit from attacking Iran?", LINK

Edward Thomas, Lt. Col., "U.S. Air Force Statement on B-52 Nuclear Incident at Minot," PDF LINK

Michael Ruppelt, Crossing the Rubicon (New Society Publishers, 2004).

Greg Webb, "US Bomber Mistakenly Flies with Nuclear Weapons", LINK

Become a member of The Canadian, with your donation-pledge. Help support independent, progressive, and not-for-profit journalism.

from http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Frontpage/2007/09/07/01751.html

__

The Barksdale Nukes

B-52s and Bush’s War Plans

By SCOTT VEST

former Air Force Captain at Minot AFB

There has been a great deal of speculation in recent days about the Air Force incident on August 30 in which six cruise missiles were transported from Minot AFB in North Dakota to Barksdale AFB in Louisiana with nuclear warheads still attached. There are those who believe that the shipment, revealed to the Military Times by two unnamed Air Force officers, represents part of some nefarious plot by the Bush Administration to stage weapons for a nuclear attack on Iran.

Another article goes so far as to extend the scope of the plot to postulate stock market manipulation by rich administration insiders who are predicting huge near term stock market upheavals in the expected wake of such an attack and are poised to cash in.
In several articles, the authors state that there is no way that the shipment could have been an accident.

However, as much as I can relate to the mind set that the Bush Administration is up to no good, I have to say that it almost certainly had to be an accident, or if not an accident it was not a prelude to nuclear war with Iran or anyone else. The fact is that if a nuclear strike was planned out of Barksdale AFB using the B-52H aircraft stationed there, it could be accomplished without needing to ferry live weapons from North Dakota against long-standing policy on a combat aircraft.

I'm a former Air Force Captain and I was a munitions specialist in the very unit that erroneously shipped the weapons out of Minot AFB from '87 to '90. I am no Republican mouthpiece trying to cover for the administration. I'm a social liberal and fiscal conservative (basically the opposite philosophy of the administration), and I think Bush and especially Cheney are war criminals along with being the normal variety of criminals on a grand scale. I believed in our mission during the Cold War to make the cost of a Soviet nuclear strike too high to consider. After I left the service in 1992, I saw the military increasingly used for actions that had less and less to do with the defense of our nation When we invaded Kosovo in 1999, I resigned my commission in the reserves. Now that I see the horrible misuse of military power that this administration has perpetrated I am so glad that I can no longer get called up to serve in a war of aggression, yet so angry that so many people of honor are being misused.

The key to the matter here is that Barksdale AFB and Minot AFB are both hosts to strategic bomb wings flying B-52H aircraft. The B-52H is designed as a primarily nuclear bomber yet still capable of delivering conventional explosives as has been seen in our imperial adventures in recent years. The two former Strategic Air Command bases both support the same mission when it comes to their nuclear capabilities. Although I can neither confirm nor deny the definite presence of nuclear weapons at any given location (I do value what freedom I still retain under this government), doesn't it stand to reason that if Minot has nukes, as they allegedly do to be able to fly them to Louisiana, then Barksdale is likely to have an inventory of its own?

The fact that warheads were flown between Air Force locations is not unusual. Only the fact that they were flown on a B-52 is. Warheads are routinely transported by air as it's much more secure than traveling over the roads or rail. They are typically flown on transport aircraft inside of drums that are designed to survive a crash. Obviously, the security and secrecy of these missions is higher than what occurred on the B-52 flight in question and this is what caused the unnamed officers to speak out. Breaches of safety, security, or reliability on nuclear weapons is a big deal to anyone who works with them, and this was a major screw-up.

The six advanced cruise missiles (ACMs) were being sent to Barksdale to get decommissioned (destroyed). The fact is that the 5th Munitions Squadron at Minot AFB (my old unit) in North Dakota should have scheduled the six warheads to get 'demated' from the missiles prior to loading them on the jet. They failed to do this, and it was inexcusable. The squadron commander (generally a Lt Col) was fired. There are three levels of nuclear incident reporting that you may have heard of. The most severe is a 'Broken Arrow' where a weapon is lost, stolen, or detonated. The next level is 'Bent Spear' and covers serious breaches of nuclear surety (safety, security, reliability). The last is 'Dull Sword' which covers minor issues or infractions. This incident most likely would have fallen into the 'Bent Spear' category. These are very rare. For 10 hours, Minot didn't know where six of their warheads were. This is shocking to the Air Force, and they've been on it like white on rice.

It's not terribly obvious when looking at a cruise missile whether it carries a warhead or not because these missiles are like small unmanned aircraft and the warhead is enclosed within. However, there are supposed to be red indicators on live missiles that apparently went unnoticed by the transportation and load crews. They have been decertified. There are several steps in the normal processes where this infraction should have been caught, but it wasn't. This indicates poor training and attention to detail, and this was never tolerated when I worked with these weapons, and has not been tolerated now. There may be some contributing factors pertaining to personnel turnover, short handedness, or fatigue related to the ongoing war effort, but I have no such knowledge. Regardless of any of that the incident was still absolutely inexcusable.

Do I think that the administration is drawing up serious plans to attack Iran? I do. Do I think that neocon whack jobs and particularly Dick Cheney are considering the use of nuclear weapons? I do. But the facts are scarier than the conspiracy theories swirling around this B-52 incident. If a decision is made to launch nuclear strikes from US bases using B-52s, it can be done without any telltale unusual movements of assets. A single B-52H can put over 6 megatons of nuclear power on target anywhere on the planet within 30 hours from the time the order is received.

Scott Vest can be reached at vestsa@comcast.net

from http://www.counterpunch.org/vest09132007.html
__

Nuclear Insanity Ordered from the Top

by Tim Riley

http://www.opednews.com

Tell A Friend

Nuclear tipped cruise missiles were moved flown by B-52 from Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota to Barksdale AFB, Lousiana, last Friday August 30.

I have reviewed at least two dozen news reports trying to make sense of the source material and I would like to share my cut and paste summary with you.

Original source:
The Military Times is the original source for the story. (Here's a link to the same story copied in the Navy Times because the source for the original aritcle is already gone: http://www.navytimes.com/news/2007/09/marine_nuclear_B52_070904w/) The journalist, Michael Hoffman, bases the story on "three officers who asked not to be identified because they were not authorized to discuss the incident."
Nuclear armed B-52 flights are not common:

According to the Global Security Newswire:

The risk of flying accidents, however, led the United States to abandon all nuclear-armed bomber flights in 1968, according to Hans Kristensen, a nuclear weapons expert with the Federation of American Scientists.

Further (source):

In 1991, President George H.W. Bush reduced the bomber alert status further by ordering nuclear weapons to be removed from the aircraft and kept in nearby storage facilities.

In a follow up article from Michael Hoffman of the Military Times:

As a gesture to Russia and the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, the first Bush administration took it one step farther in 1991 by ordering all bombers to halt nuclear ground alerts, which allowed bomber crews to practice loading a nuclear warhead, but never taking off with one.

The Defense Department does transport nuclear warheads by air, but instead of bombers it uses C-17 or C-130 cargo aircraft.

The Chain of Custody, paperwork, and Command Control are exhaustive for verifiably secure handling of nuclear weapons.

Many credible comments on various news blogs state that the paperwork required to move nuclear munitions is redundant, exhaustive, taken very seriously, and so stringent that it is "idiot proof."

Comment from Democratic Underground.com:
I worked on nuclear submarines for the Navy at Mare Island Naval shipyard for 20 years. As a Nuc worker I handled nuclear material and weapons for 15 of those years. The controls on weapons and nuclear fuel is insanely tight.. This story just CAN'T happen. The amount of people involved in logistics..Code 105 radcon, Engineers, Nuclear riggers, Code 1390 Engineers..Gawd the paperwork involved for anyone of the groups to sign off on.
This story is impossible.. Something else is afoot..
Who signed off and who told them too?
AND WHY do we need to be moving nuclear weapons unless a logistics operation is underway?
IT JUST DOESN'T HAPPEN... They don't just move weapons from Minot for the hell of it..
Ring...
hello?
hey..we are a little low on thermonuclear tipped weapons this week..
OK, we'll send you a few..
Make it 6
OK
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_tim_rile_070906_nuclear_insanity_ord.htm
__

Langley planes to be grounded

The Air Force has ordered a stand-down for all jet fighters and bombers for Sept. 14.
BY STEPHANIE HEINATZ | 247-7821
September 7, 2007
LANGLEY AIR FORCE BASE - Planes at Langley Air Force Base will be grounded Sept. 14 in response to an incident last week when a B-52 bomber was mistakenly armed with six nuclear warheads and flown for three hours across several states.

The stand-down was ordered by Air Combat Command and includes all jet fighters and bombers in the Air Force. The command, headquartered at Langley, oversees all of the service's fighters and bombers.

Planes in Iraq and Afghanistan and planes participating in air shows this weekend are not affected by the stand-down.
While airmen haven't been given specific instructions for the stand-down, they've been ordered to take the non-flying time to review safety procedures and protocol, an Air Combat Command spokesman said.

To mistakenly load nuclear weapons on a bomber, military officials told the Associated Press, safety protocols likely would have been ignored.

On Aug. 30, a B-52 with six nuclear-tipped cruise missiles flew from Minot Air Force Base, N.D., to Barksdale Air Force Base, La., a military official told The Associated Press.

The missiles, which are being decommissioned, were mounted onto pylons on the bomber's wings.

It is unclear why the nuclear warheads had not been removed beforehand.

The plane's crew, according to news reports, did not know they were carrying nuclear weapons.

The weapons are designed with safety features that ensure the warheads don't detonate accidentally or upon impact during a crash.

Arming the weapons requires stringent protocols and authentication codes, according to the AP.

The munitions squadron commander was relieved of duty, and crews involved with the load have been temporarily decertified for handling munitions, an official told the AP.

Citing Defense Department policy forbidding the release of any information about nuclear weapons, Pentagon officials have not confirmed that nuclear weapons were involved in the incident.

However, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and President Bush were immediately notified of the incident, a Pentagon spokesman said.

Gates has asked to be briefed daily on the Air Force investigation, which is being led by Air Force Maj. Gen. Douglas Raaberg, director of Air and Space Operations for Air Combat Command at Langley.

Raaberg was not available for comment Thursday.

His full report is expected to be delivered to Gates as early as next week.
http://www.dailypress.com/news/local/hampton/dp-18333sy0sep07,0,3949434.story

ACC orders command-wide stand-down on Sept. 14

By Bruce Rolfsen - Staff writer
Posted : Friday Sep 7, 2007 19:12:24 EDT
On Sept. 14, flight lines will be very quiet at Air Combat Command bases.
The entire command — about 100,000 active-duty airmen — is standing down training flights and many other operations as part of a command-wide safety day.
Command boss Gen. Ronald Keys ordered the Sept. 14 safety stand-down in the wake of the Aug. 30 nuclear incident at Minot Air Force Base, N.D., in which six cruise missiles armed with nuclear warheads were loaded onto a B-52H and then flown to Barksdale Air Force Base, La., without anyone on the ground or bomber realizing the nuclear weapons were on the plane. It was not until the B-52H was parked at Barksdale that ground crews discovered the cruise missiles were carrying real warheads.
Command spokesman Maj. Tom Crosson said wing commanders would determine how their units review operations and safety procedures and checklists.
Just how serious Keys takes the lapse of regulations at Minot is reflected in the fact that the safety stand-down is the first command-wide safety day in recent memory. In the past, the command has singled out specific types of aircraft for safety days and in 1997 the Department of Defense held a department-wide safety review day.
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/09/airforce_aircombatcommand_standdown_070807/

_

Who Commanded our Air Force to 'Stand Down' on 911
by Victor Thorn

Of all the peculiarities, unanswered questions, and things that simply don't add up about the 9-11 terrorist attacks, the one aspect that keeps nagging at me revolves around our military's incredible lack of response to the hijacking of four airliners.

Anyone who investigates this matter will soon find that the United States Air Force and the FAA both have established procedures that have been in place for at least 25 years regarding planes that veer abnormally off course. Specifically, federal law MANDATES that the Air Force must dispatch a plane to investigate why a certain craft has strayed from its predestined route. These interceptors are only allowed to shoot an airliner from the sky under orders from the President, but that doesn't negate that they are still required to investigate the situation in a timely manner.

Yet, on 9-11, NO ONE FOLLOWED ORDERS! Why? Who gave these orders? Plus, Washington, D.C. has the most restricted air space in the country, yet from 9:03 a.m., when the second tower was hit, to 9:47 a.m. when the Pentagon came under attack ... when the Air Force KNEW that a jet was headed toward the Capitol, no planes were dispatched to intercept it. Who gave the orders for these planes to 'stand down,' and, God forbid, were some even called back after they had taken off?

To begin understanding how appalling this situation is, we first need to know that there are at least twelve or more National Guard and Air Force installations in close proximity to the World Trade Center and Pentagon. Plus, Andrews Air Force Base is only ten miles from the heart of Washington, D.C. Why wasn't something done to avert this catastrophe, and why isn't the mainstream media asking some very hard questions regarding this deliberately ordered "crime"?

Yes, I said crime, and once you get a load of the following timeline, you'll concur with this strong terminology. Between 7:59 a.m. - 8:10 a.m., the airliners that would ultimately crash into the WTC and Pentagon were hijacked. By 8:15 a.m., air traffic controllers knew that these planes were in trouble. At this point, the Air Force should have dispatched, per standard operating procedures, fighters that would determine why these jets veered from their normal route. By 8:15 a.m.!

At 8:45 a.m. - a half-hour later - American Airlines flight 11 struck the WTC's North Tower. (This flight took off at exactly 7:59 a.m., thus controllers knew it was in trouble for at least 35 minutes, if not more.)

At 9:03 a.m., United Airlines flight 175 crashed into the South Tower. (It took off at exactly 8:10 a.m.)

At 9:05 a.m. (supposedly), Andrew Card told President Bush of the unfolding catastrophe. At the same time, American Airlines Flight 77 veered off course near Chicago and headed toward D.C. for an impending attack.

At 9:06 a.m., the New York Daily News reported that on the morning of the attack, the NYPD dispatched a message declaring, "This was a terrorist attack - notify the Pentagon."

Still, NO Air Force jets had yet been scrambled! None! Why?

At 9:35 a.m., American Airlines flight 77, which had been tracked by radar all the way from Chicago, circled the Pentagon, yet this military installation was not evacuated! Plus, the Air Force had still not sent out any jets! How completely incredible is this scenario?

A few minutes later, with the utmost precision, American Airlines flight 77 drops 7,000 feet in 2 ½ minutes. Do you realize what a truly difficult maneuver this is? It is flying so low at this point that the plane is taking out utility poles and clipping trees en route to its target. The jumbo jet finally zeroes in EXACTLY on the Pentagon while traveling at 460 knots (approx 529 mph). Are we really to believe that this precision "Top Gun" style flying was executed by a group of desert-trained Afghani's who had only flown Cessna and Piper prop-planes at a flight school in Florida for six months, many of them reportedly unable to even take off or land them adequately? Come on! This is the most inept cock-n-bull story since the 'surprise attack' on Pearl Harbor.

Finally, at 9:40 a.m., a full hour and 31 minutes after the FAA knew that the first airliner had been hijacked ... guess what happened. The Air Force dispatched their jets!

The Pentagon was aware of these hijackings since at least 8:45 a.m. when the first tower was struck (and more likely before then), yet it took them 55 minutes to take action. 55 minutes! By 8:15 a.m., when the FAA learned of the hijackings, federal law required that the military dispatch planes to either divert the plane's course, or determine the need to shoot them down. This is normal procedure! But the Pentagon waited until 9:40 a.m. after all the damage was already done.

Who commanded the Air Force to stand down, and why is the media still feeding us the "incompetence" line? The Wright Brothers at Kitty Hawk could have had a plane up in the air in that much time!

Barry Zwicker, a Canadian media analyst, wrote on January 21, 2002: "That morning no interceptors responded in a timely fashion to the highest alert situation. That includes the Andrews squadron which are 12 miles from the White House. Whatever the explanation for the huge failure, there have been no reports, to my knowledge, of reprimands. This further weakens the incompetence theory! Incompetence usually earns reprimands. This causes me to ask whether there were 'stand down' orders."

To add more weight to the peculiarity of this situation, consider the flight capacity of the four hijacked airliners. These routes were extremely popular ones, most of them filled to 100% capacity during weekdays. In fact, oftentimes, fliers were asked if they wanted to give up their seats to another traveler. Yet on 9-11, the four flights in question were uncharacteristically empty.

American Airlines 11 - filled to only 39% of capacity
American Airlines 77 - filled to only 27% of capacity
United Airlines 175 - filled to only 26% of capacity
United Airlines 93 - filled to only 16% of capacity

In an industry that takes extremely close notice of such matters, why didn't anyone see the red flags that were being waved? Did someone tell them to neglect these glaring inconsistencies to lessen the collateral damage (or the insurance payouts)?

Since I mentioned United Airlines flight 93, consider this odd bit of information. The Reuters news agency reported on 9-13-2001 in an article entitled, "Troubling Questions in Troubling Times": "Pennsylvania State Police officials said on Thursday debris from the plan had been found up to EIGHT MILES AWAY from the crash site." Do you realize how immense an eight-mile stretch of land is? Do you also realize that when a plane drops from the sky, the impact does not cause the wreckage to scatter for eight miles? Think about it. Eight miles is the length of 140 football fields laid end-to-end! Obviously, something else happened to bring Flight 93 out of the sky. Strong evidence points to the Air Force shooting it down, then the plane disintegrated during its eight-mile descent into a rural Pennsylvania field. Yet the powers-that-be lied once again to the American people. Now do you know why President Bush personally asked Tom Daschle to limit their Congressional inquiry?

Another aspect of this case that makes me scratch my head is this: why won't the FAA release the entire records of the pilot conversations with their air-traffic controllers?

Another pertinent question revolves around the pilot's curious reactions during these hijackings. Once they got the first inkling that they were being overtaken, why didn't they simply perform a "rollover" to incapacitate or disable the hijackers? The "barrel roll" is an easily-performed procedure for veteran pilots, especially when one considers the backgrounds of the four men who manned these flights. As Colonel Donn de Grand Pre reports:

John Ogonowski - Vietnam Air Force fighter pilot
Leroy Homer - Former Air Force pilot
Victor Saracini - Former fighter pilot
Chic Burlingame - Naval Academy graduate who flew F-4's in Vietnam

All of these pilots were described as being strong, agile, healthy, in excellent physical condition, and certainly capable of performing a simple rollover. Now I'm not blaming these men by any means ... it just seems like, if given the opportunity, these pilots would have disoriented the "hijackers" enough to gain control of the situation and avert disaster. Rather, we're being led to believe that these three jumbo jets were flown into buildings by Middle Eastern hijackers brandishing nothing more than box cutters, and all of them had only six months flying experience. I don't know about you, but if everything were on the up-and-up, I'd put my faith in these pilots being able to nullify the hijackers any day of the week. But again, we're not being given the entire story because something doesn't add up.

I could continue with dozens of other inconsistencies, but instead I'll close on this note.

1) Who in the mainstream media is asking these, and other, pertinent questions? No one!
2) Who in the Pentagon is answering these questions? No one!
3) Finally, who in the Pentagon has been made accountable for the Air Force stand-down? Again, no one!

Do you think it's time that we FORCE our government and the media to start addressing these issues? I do.

http://www.wanttoknow.info/911standdown
_____
Air Force 60th anniversary celebration set for Sept. 18

By Christine Harrison
Dispatch editor

-- Air Force graphic

Related news from the Web
Latest headlines by topic:
• US Air Force
• US News

Powered by Topix.net

In 1947, the proceedings of Congress were first televised, Jackie Robinson became the first African American to play professional baseball and the Army Air Corps became the Air Force.

In honor of the Air Force's 60th anniversary this year, the Maxwell-Gunter community will come together Sept. 18 to pay homage to Air Force warriors past and present, as well as Air Force families.

The celebration revolves around two, large-scale events: an Air Force heritage relay race beginning at 6 a.m. will pit large unit teams against one another; and a 60th birthday festival in Air Park that will run from 3 to 7 p.m.

The relay race will utilize a one-mile course on Maxwell. Runners will begin in the shadow of the static B-52 display next to Air Park, turn left onto the academic circle road, trace along the boundaries of the Squadron Officer College lodging complex, before heading back to the B-52 start/finish line.

Each race team will be responsible for advancing a colored vest around the course a total of 60 times, thereby achieving 60 miles of running in recognition of the anniversary.

For the past several weeks, unit coordinators have been assembling large teams - in some cases 40 to 50 people - that will share the running load together. According to relay race organizers, the response for far has been outstanding, with as many as 18 relay teams expected to compete. The winning team will receive a large trophy from the Air University commander at the birthday festival, and team members will be allocated a one day pass at the discretion of their unit commander.

According to Air University's event organizer, the run is significant for several reasons.

"It's a competition and we expect that unit pride will be on display," Maj. David Stringer said. "But the run is also about getting as many people to participate as possible so we can send a message about how important Air Force heritage is to us, and how much we value those who make sacrifices along the way."

The entire community becomes involved in the program when the 60th Birthday Festival kicks off at 3 p.m. in Air Park, the open area just north of the cadet pool. Vendors and a kids' fun zone, including a bouncy castle and rock wall, will be set up.

Live music by a local cover band will entertain the crowd from 4:30 p.m. until the fireworks show at the end of the night. The Sweet Young 'Uns cover dozens of contemporary rock bands. Organizers invite everyone to bring lawn chairs, blankets and coolers to make themselves comfortable.

Part of the festival is an award presentation and retreat ceremony that will begin at 4 p.m. The Commander of Air University Lt. Gen. Stephen Lorenz and the 42nd Air Base Wing Commander Col. Paul McGillicuddy will address the crowd and recognize the victorious relay team.

Air Force warriors past and present will then be honored with a rendition of Amazing Grace performed by an Air Force Reserve bagpiper. Next, a formation from the Officer Training School will conduct a retreat ceremony as the Sweet Adelines quartet will sing the National Anthem. A fly over will cap the ceremony, and birthday cake will be served.

From there, festival activities will continue, including prize give-a-ways for those in attendance. Finally, at 7 p.m., a professional fireworks display will light up the sky behind the static B-52.

During the event, a shuttle service will be available from the north parking lot of Bldg. 804.

Due to the relay run, there will a number of lane closures around Air Park and the SOC lodging complex Sept. 18. The northbound lane of 2nd Street, from the main gym to Sycamore Street, will be closed until 4 p.m. Therefore, any traffic destined for the north side of base (Officer Training School, lodging, academic circle) will need to take Poplar Street (alongside Air Park) northbound to the circle road in order to get there. Because Poplar Street will be northbound only, any traffic originating from the north side to leave will need to exit via the southbound lane of 2nd Street.

Additional traffic advisories will be published in the Base Bulletin beginning next week.

Lanes around the SOC lodging complex and along 2nd Street will reopen by 4 p.m.

At that time, however, addition barricades will go up around Air Park, completely blocking off Washington Ferry Road, Poplar Street, and the circle road along the northern edge of the park.

http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070907/DISPATCH01/70907007/1115
____
Coming To A State Near You: Blackwater Air Force

As if having them run around Iraq like loose cannons wasn't bad enough, Blackwater is building an Air Force. Via Scholars & Rogues:

Security company Blackwater U.S.A. is buying Super Tucano light combat aircraft from the Brazilian manufacturer Embraer. These five ton, single engine, single seat aircraft are built for pilot training, but also perform quite well for counter-insurgency work.... The bubble canopy provides excellent visibility. This, coupled with its slow speed (versus jets), makes it an excellent ground attack aircraft.

Now why would the good patriots at Blackwater need airplanes that "can carry up to 1.5 tons of weapons, including 12.7mm machine-guns, bombs and missiles"? For their missions in Iraq, of course. Because, you know, the world's largest military merely owning everything that flies over a third-world country isn't enough in the way of air superiority.

My first thought was that this had to do with the Administration's almost promised plans to invade Iran. (Please please please please please please please PLEASE don't do that! I can hope, can't I?) How else are we supposed to keep Iraq's friendly skies safe while we're shocking and aweing the mullahs? But there's an even more awful prospect for these "excellent ground attack aircrafts." Here's Jeremy Scahill, Blackwater expert and biographer:

Blackwater's been in negotiations with several state governments in the United States. Blackwater met recently with California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger about doing disaster response in California. They're opening up a new private military base in San Diego. Another one is in Mount Carroll, Illinois. They have applied for operating licenses in every coastal U.S. state.

That's right, folks: the U.S. military whose expenditures are almost half of the total military spending worldwide needs private military bases in the United States for some reason.

What might that reason be? Perhaps it has something to do with National Security Presidential Directive NSPD-51, which lays out exactly how the Executive Branch would run the entire government in the event of a "Catastrophic Emergency," which could be anything from a terrorist attack to the next Katrina, as far as the ambiguous wording of the directive is concerned:

"Catastrophic Emergency" means any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions

Meanwhile, the clergy is being enlisted to keep citizens in line in the event of a declaration of martial law. Is it really a coincidence that a private company with close ties to the GOP is arming itself with attack planes just at the moment when the President is laying the groundwork for extraordinary wartime powers? The calmer side of me says, "hold judgment." I just can't help but see a mercenary force of palace guards looming in the not-too-distant future.

Should it come to that, I hope Machiavelli's thoughts on mercenaries will prove valid:

Mercenaries and auxiliaries are useless and dangerous; and if one holds his state based on these arms, he will stand neither firm nor safe; for they are disunited, ambitious and without discipline, unfaithful, valiant before friends, cowardly before enemies; they have neither the fear of God nor fidelity to men, and destruction is deferred only so long as the attack is; for in peace one is robbed by them, and in war by the enemy.

Aw, but who am I kidding? If we've learned anything from the Iraq War it's that we can be robbed by mercenaries in war as well.
UPDATE: I've clarified my position re: conspiracy theories. Yes, this probably means I'll get some angry responses and self-righteous condemnations, but it seems that it had to be done.

http://www.declineandfall.net/2007/08/coming-to-state-near-you-blackwater-air.html

__

More on Mercenaries; and Moron Conspiracies
Gee, publish one item indicating the possibility that the powers-that-be are comin' to getcha, and you wouldn't believe who comes out of the woodwork. Prior to publishing my piece on Blackwater's Air Force and some other things that scare me, I had gotten maybe 1500 or so hits during the entire life of this blog, many of which were me, chacking how many hits I've had. I'm now pushing 10,000.

Most of them seem to have come here via the website of Jeff Rense, who is apparently fond of accusing the Jews of training chupacabras to implant radio sensors in the brains of neocons so that they won't leak the truth about Roswell, which is the site of ancient Atlantis. Or something like that. So let this be a lesson to you newbie bloggers: if you want to be read, publish a conspiracy theory.

I've received a few comments on the Blackwater story, most of which either accuse Blackwater of pushing the zionist agenda or the christianist agenda. One favorite ties Allah with the god of ancient Atlantis, which is just so amazingly far out there (read the Timaeus and the Critias some time: Socrates made up the city of Atlantis for the sake of argument) that I had to read it a few times to trace the mental leaps. I've seen what happens when you engage cranks (if you don't know what that is or how to spot one, check out the denialism blog and their Denialists' Deck of Cards for a humorous look at the phenomenon) so I'll avoid that here.

But there was a comment worth responding to at length, from a "Canadian Looking Dispassionately At The American Experience":
The problem with this article is it shows EXCESSIVE bias towards paramilitary groups which is what Blackwater is. Bias is good becuase it is an opinion, but excessive bias is fanaticism in its own right.

The author should also know that they are NOT generally disunited, unambitious and lacking discipline, unfaithful, unvaliant before friends, nor are they cowardly before enemies since the majority of Blackwater Associates have already been in service as Navy Seals, Army Rangers, Ex-Delta Forces, British SAS, etc. They're neither stupid nor untrained and in many cases DO IN FACT do their JOBS with professionalism and tact!

It does help to focus one's mind that 100 Grand A year + bonus is yours if you just DO YOUR DAMN JOB but many join Blackwater because they LIKE being professional soldiers and like the lifestyle. So you don't always have to rail against Blackwater since they do provide a useful service in uncivil times and being paid much more than regular forces can be sent to do the "Dirty Jobs" no one else wants to do!

Well yes, of course my piece is biased. It's my opinion, which is subject to change. Whether my bias is "excessive" or not is another story. I've spent nearly two years of my life in Iraq, and I have encountered many an employee of Blackwater and the other security firms who have security contracts here. (Technically speaking I'm a mercenary, even though I'm not even authorized to carry a weapon.)

Have I found that they are disunited, unambitious, lacking discipline, unfaithful, etc.? That's really an individual thing. They often, as my Canadian interlocutor asserts with a bit too many capital letters, "in many cases DO IN FACT do their JOBS with professionalism and tact." I'll admit, they do tend to be patriotic Americans, but that can take many forms. One form is the one that many on the Right take, which asserts that patriotism means following the President no matter what. They accuse those who protest the current state of American society of anti-Americanism. Many Blackwater contractors share this opinion. Actually, it's been my experience that this opinion is the default one among many sectors in Iraq, as this post indicates. I don't doubt that these people are patriots, but I'm really disturbed by the prospect of them flying around our country in military aircraft designed for close ground support.

I'm disturbed by the prospect of anyone doing that, though.

For most of the Blackwater types I've met, this definitely describes them: "they LIKE being professional soldiers and like the lifestyle." Sure they do--that's why they took a high-paying job to come over here. I do take issue with the "they're all former SEALs and Green Berets line, though: a good rule of thumb is that when someone claims to have been in Special Forces and starts telling stories about it, they're lying. The actual SOF guys I've known have tended to not brag much at all. The Blackwater guys I've known can't shut up about how awesome they are. A close friend who once worked for Blackwater told me that they all claim to have had some sort of high speed career, but most of them turn out to have been garden-variety infantrymen who served, it should be noted, in the 80's and 90's, when there wasn't much combat to be had.

Returning to my point, Blackwater is the closest thing we have to a Foreign Legion, and that should worry anyone who is concerned about civil liberties, if for no other reason that foreign legions, if they must exist at all, ought to be limited in their scope to foreign countries. I think my commenter hits the nail on the head when he says that they "can be sent to do the "Dirty Jobs" no one else wants to do." That's what scares me about them. Sure, right now they're all fighting the fight that our elected officials have sent Americans to fight. No matter how much deceit went into getting us into this war, Congress did, in fact, declare this war, and the President is our Commander in Chief. But what happens when that mission changes? Will our legislative branch have any say whatsoever in any domestic missions a Blackwater would conduct during peacetime? There's no reason to suspect that they would. In that case, they would be an armed wing of whoever paid them, in this case the Executive Branch of the United States government. Need I remind my readers that there is no provision in the constitution for such a thing?

Those "dirty jobs" are dirty not just because no one wants to do them, but also because they are in many cases illegal and the military can't do them. I'm one of those people who likes the fact that there are defined limits to the scope of what the military of a Constitutional Republic can do. That's why I find the Blackwater phenomenon dangerous, and that is why I think my short discussion of NSPD-51 is germane.

And for the record, I suspect that many Blackwater Paramilitary Troops would go AWOL rather than provide close air support to the suppression of, say, an anti-WTO demonstration. But do we really want to trust the individual consciences of these people to protect us should they ever be given that order?

http://www.declineandfall.net/index.htm

__

Hessians at the Gate
One feature that I neglected to address in my recent posts on Blackwater was brought up by some of the commenters to those posts, for instance this one:
The scariest thing about some entity like Blackwater turning America into a police state is the fact that they hire foriegn soldiers of fortune. These Hessians could one day be marching down our streets and commanding American citizens at the point of a gun barrel. Just like they are doing in Iraq. And you see the results there. A lot of dead people.

Although I am hesitant to declare the police state nearly here, I am mindful of the dangers of allowing the seeds for it to be planted while we all assure ourselves that it could never come to that.

As for those foreign soldiers of fortune, I see them all the time. The most visible to me are the guys guarding our mess halls. All of the ones at my local facility seem to be from Uganda, as far as I can tell (I've had brief conversations with some of them). To a man, they seem like nice people, but then again so did Eichmann. The fact of the matter, however, is that they are standing outside (and sometimes inside) our dining facilities with loaded weapons. I've never asked if they have rounds chambered, but the magazines are in their M-16s, which means they could be firing three-round bursts withing seconds if the situation called for it.

While I don't live in fear of them staging an armed takeover of the salad bar, I do wonder what kind of status they might be afforded if their employer, EOD Technology, were called upon to provide homeland security. Doubtless there would be cries of protestation from all corners of the political spectrum shoudl they ever arrive stateside (the Dems would cry "civil liberties" while the GOP would play the xenophobia card, I suspect) but I'm not at all convinced that our Unitary Executive would pay them any heed. The legal aspect of this is something I am utterly unqualified to expound upon, so I won't.

We need to understand this very clearly: the United States is arming private armies of foreign nationals to provide security for its own military on installations in Iraq. This isn't a "coalition of the willing" here, because they aren't operating under their nation's flag. They are employees of American companies, beholden primarily to those companies, and they're paid for by the U.S. taxpayer. And it's not like they're only guarding the mess halls. Foreign security contractors go outside the wire just like Americans.

This would be distressing even if the ones I referred to weren't from a country that is one of the biggest offenders in the horrific production of child soldiers in the world. Were some of the guys guarding me while I eat abducted at a tender age by the Lord's Resistance Army? Somehow, I doubt their employer keeps statistics on these things.

But the point is not that they are foreign, but that they are there at all, and largely unaccountable for their actions.

http://www.declineandfall.net/index.htm

__

Blackwater-Embraer connection stories:

Blackwater Buys Brazilian Bombers
August 27, 2007: Security company Blackwater U.S.A. is buying Super Tucano light combat aircraft from the Brazilian manufacturer Embraer. These five ton, single engine, single seat aircraft are built for pilot training, but also perform quite well for counter-insurgency work. Brazil. The Super Tucano is basically a prop driven trainer that is equipped for combat missions. The aircraft can carry up to 1.5 tons of weapons, including 12.7mm machine-guns, bombs and missiles. The aircraft cruises at about 500 kilometers an hour and can stay in the air for about 6.5 hours per sortie. One of the options is a FLIR (infrared radar that produces a photo realistic video image in any weather) and a fire control system for bombing. Colombia is using the Super Tucanos for counter-insurgency work (there are over 20,000 armed rebels and drug gang gunmen in the country). The aircraft is also used for border patrol. The U.S. Air Force is watching that quite closely. The Super Tucano costs $9 million each, and come in one or two seat versions. The bubble canopy provides excellent visibility. This, coupled with its slow speed (versus jets), makes it an excellent ground attack aircraft.

Blackwater already has a force of armed helicopters in Iraq, and apparently wants something a little faster, and more heavily armed, to fulfill its security contracts overseas. Initially, Blackwater is getting one two-seater, for pilot training in the United States.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairfo/articles/20070827.aspx

____

Blackwater seeks Super Tucano acquisition for trainer role
By Stephen Trimble

Security and training company Blackwater USA confirmed that it has applied for a license to acquire one Embraer Super Tucano light attack trainer.

The acquisition is on hold pending licensing approval by the US government, a Blackwater spokeswoman said.

The aircraft would launch a new pilot training programme for Blackwater, which provides a broad range of training and operational services for military and law enforcement clients.

The Super Tucano programme would be limited to providing for US personnel only, the spokeswoman adds, and the aircraft would not be allowed to leave the country.

The pending license also mandates that all weapons, including the 12.7mm, wing-mounted guns and provisions for smart bomb stores, are not used as part of the training mission.

The pending deal for the two-seat Super Tucano would launch Blackwater’s first training programme dedicated towards a light attack jet. Brazil and Columbia both employ the Super Tucano to battle drug smugglers and insurgents.

The US Air Force, meanwhile, is soliciting for bids to acquire a new fleet of counter-insurgency aircraft on behalf of the Iraqi Air Force.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/08/27/216333/blackwater-seeks-super-tucano-acquisition-for-trainer-role.html
______

Blackwater Buying Counter-Insurgency Aircraft (Updated)
By Sharon Weinberger EmailAugust 27, 2007 | 9:14:03 AMCategories: Mercs, Planes

Uh, oh. Blackwater, the merc outfit private security contractor that some people seem to love to hate, is in the market for an attack aircraft, a likely prelude to offering foreign air forces training in counter-insurgency operations. Jane's Defence Weekly reporter Nathan Hodge (and husband of DANGER ROOM contributor) has an exclusive story (sorry, subscription only) on Blackwater's plans to purchase an Embraer EMB-314 Super Tucano trainer/light attack aircraft:

Tucano Blackwater President Gary Jackson confirmed to Jane's at the Force Protection Equipment Demonstration in Stafford, Virginia, in mid-August that the company is in the process of acquiring the Super Tucano for a new training programme. Transfer of the aircraft to the US is still subject to US government approval and Blackwater would offer no further comment on the transaction or the planned training programme.

If the deal goes through, it will give the company a significant boost in a growing international market for fixed-wing tactical flight instruction, as well as a potential platform for counter-insurgency-style training.

The Super Tucano is in service with the Brazilian Air Force, which operates the aircraft as a primary aircraft trainer and in border-patrol missions under its SIVAM (Sistema de Vigilância da Amazônia) programme. Colombia finalised a contract for 25 Super Tucanos in December 2005; the aircraft has also been marketed to Singapore and the Dominican Republic. Fully equipped, the aircraft features five weapon hardpoints and a night-vision goggle (NVG)-compatible 'glass cockpit'. In military service, it is used for basic and advanced pilot training as well as for precision weapons delivery.

It's not a surprise that Blackwater is getting into this game, given that counter-insurgency aircraft are making a big comeback. But it's still a rather significant precedent to have a private company in the U.S. buy (let alone import) offer training services on an attack aircraft.

Update:

Cirby and Kle correctly note that there are plenty of examples of private purchase and/or import of fighters, and Demophilus notes that even private training on attack aircraft isn't precedent setting either. Ah well, let's leave it at: an interesting move for Blackwater.

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/08/blackwater-buys.html

_____

The Private Praetorians

Saturday, 01 September 2007

Scholars endorse "The Kennebunkport Warning":
Report ominous signs of a privatized takeover of the nation
by Jim Fetzer

A warning about the prospect of an imminent but staged “9/11” attack followed by a strike on Iran and imposition of martial law in the US has been issued by Cynthia McKinney, Webster Tarpley and others. Known as “The Kennebunkport Warning” (August 26, 2007), it has drawn support from Scholars for 9/11 Truth.

According to its founder, James H. Fetzer, not only are there multiple indications the United States is about to attack Iran, but a series of rather odd events suggest that martial law may be near at hand.

“The threat is not from our own military, the strength of which is being depleted by the ongoing occupation of Iraq, but from privatized armies, such as Blackwater USA, which appear to be growing stronger as the US Army is growing weaker.”

According to The Kennebunkport Warning, extensive evidence suggests that those allied with the neo-con faction headed by Vice President Cheney “are determined to orchestrate and manufacture a new 9/11 terror incident . . . (to) be used as a pretext for launching an aggressive war against Iran and for imposing a regime of martial law here in the United States. . . . We solemnly warn the people of the world that any terrorist attack with weapons of mass destruction taking place inside the United States or elsewhere in the immediate future must be considered the prima facie responsibility of the Cheney faction.”

Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, observes that the privatization of military force has created a new problem for the citizens of this nation. “In the past, we have had confidence that the US military, our national guard, our local police and armed citizens had the combined ability to withstand threats to our liberty from our own government. But our military is broken, the National Guard has been placed under the President’s control, and our access to ammunition now appears to be being cut off, which compromises our capacity to resist tyranny.”

That our level of engagement in Iraq cannot be continued has been conveyed by many sources. Associated Press reporter Lolita C. Baldor (August 19, 2007) has written that our level of engagement in Iraq cannot be sustained. “Sapped by nearly six years of war, the Army has nearly exhausted its fighting force and its options if the Bush administration decides to extend the Iraq buildup beyond next year.” Many general officers and National Guard commanders have said similar things, but the effects of a depleted military may have unexpected ramifications.

The control of the National Guard has been placed directly at the disposal of the President of the United States over the opposition of all fifty governors. “I can’t imagine a more blatant violation of states' rights than this,” Fetzer said. “It used to be the case that the Republican Party stood for states' rights. But then it also stood for balanced budgets, Constitutional government, a non-interventionist foreign policy, and keeping the government out of our personal lives. I simply do not understand why any principled Republican would support this administration. Maybe there aren’t any left.”

An article by Reuters (August 26, 2007) confirms that the US is the most heavily armed nation in the world, with 90 guns per 100 people. According a Small Arms Survey conducted by the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva, each year about 4.5 million of some 8 million new rifles, shotguns and hardguns are sold to US citizens, who own about 270 million of the world's 875 million known firearms. “Ordinarily, I would consider this to be a source of security,” Fetzer observed, “but the Second Amendment is meaningless if our access to ammunition is cut off.”

Fetzer was recently startled to read in The Capital Times (August 28, 2007) that police departments across the country are so starved for ammunition that they are resorting to target practice with paint-ball guns. “This is quite shocking,” he said. “Most police ammunition is .38 and 9mm caliber, not the kind that our military requires. The profit margin on the sale and manufacture of bullets is so great and the demand is so strong that it is difficult to imagine how this could happen absent a deliberate policy to curtail access to ammo. Without bullets, those vast stocks of weapons are useless. This appears to be a very clever, insidious plan.”

Other developments raise Fetzer’s concern, including a report (wesh.com, August 22, 2007) that members of the 1st Battalion, 265th Air Defense Artillery are being deployed from Florida to the nation’s capital for a year’s duty, “where they will operate high-tech weapons systems against any potential air threat.” He finds that strange. “I am not aware of any threat from the sky to the White House,” Fetzer said. “Is this to protect Bush and Cheney from foreign terrorists or are they concerned that US citizens may rise up in opposition to their suspension of the Constitution?”

And a disturbing report has just appeared on the internet (nworeport.com/blackwater.htm) that Blackwater, USA, the private security contractor that has assembled a large mercenary force in Iraq (as part of a governmental privatization scheme to keep the official count of American forces involved artificially low) is now building its own air force in the United States, including the purchase of Super Tucano light combat aircraft from Embraer, a Brazilian company. According to the article, it has one new private military base in San Diego, another in Mount Carroll, IL, and has applied for operating licenses in every coastal U.S. state.

“If you believe in coincidence,” Fetzer said, “then perhaps you consider it to be a remarkable improbability that, just as the American military is being weakened in Iraq, the National Guard is being placed under the President’s direct control, and that ammunition is being cut off from police departments and armed citizens, while air defense units are being deployed to Washington, D.C., and mercenaries are developing their own air force. I’m not so sure. If we have the most capable air force in the world, then why is this one needed? To do things our own air force would not do? All of these developments are troubling and lead me to think that the Kennebunkport Warning may be even better founded than its signers realize.”

http://www.pacificfreepress.com/content/view/1614/81/

¬¬¬__

THE KENNEBUNKPORT WARNING
To the American people, and to peace loving individuals everywhere:
Massive evidence has come to our attention which shows that the backers, controllers, and allies of Vice President Dick Cheney are determined to orchestrate and manufacture a new 9/11 terror incident, and/or a new Gulf of Tonkin war provocation over the coming weeks and months. Such events would be used by the Bush administration as a pretext for launching an aggressive war against Iran, quite possibly with nuclear weapons, and for imposing a regime of martial law here in the United States. We call on the House of Representatives to proceed immediately to the impeachment of Cheney, as an urgent measure for avoiding a wider and more catastrophic war. Once impeachment has begun, it will be easier for loyal and patriotic military officers to refuse illegal orders coming from the Cheney faction. We solemnly warn the people of the world that any terrorist attack with weapons of mass destruction taking place inside the United States or elsewhere in the immediate future must be considered the prima facie responsibility of the Cheney faction. We urge responsible political leaders everywhere to begin at once to inoculate the public opinion of their countries against such a threatened false flag terror operation.
(Signed) A Group of US Opposition Political Leaders Gathered in Protest at the Bush Compound in Kennebunkport, Maine, August 24-25, 2007
CYNTHIA MCKINNEY, FORMER U.S. CONGRESSWOMAN, GEORGIA
CINDY SHEEHAN, CANDIDATE FOR U.S. CONGRESS, CALIFORNIA*
ANN WRIGHT, COLONEL US ARMY RESERVE, FORMER US DIPLOMAT*
JAMILLA EL-SHAFEI, ORGANIZER OF KENNEBUNKPORT PEACE DEMONSTRATION , KENNEBUNK PEACE DEPARTMENT*
DAHLIA WASFI, M.D. WWW.LIBERATETHIS.COM*
GEORGE PAZ MARTIN
JOHN KAMINSKI, MAINE LAWYER, IMPEACHMENT ADVOCATE **
WEBSTER G. TARPLEY, AUTHOR, 'UNAUTHORIZED BIOGRAPHY OF GEORGE H.W. BUSH' & '9/11 SYNTHETIC TERROR: MADE IN THE USA'
CRAIG HILL, GREEN PARTY OF VERMONT, CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE
BRUCE MARSHALL, ORGANIZER OF PHILADELPHIA EMERGENCY ANTIWAR CONVENTION, PHILADELPHIA PLATFORM, WWW.ACTINDEPENDENT.ORG, GREEN PARTY OF VERMONT

------------------------------------
* These four signatories have released a statement indicating that the Kennebunkport Warning was "altered" after they signed it. Bruce Marshall, who gathered the signatures, remains adamant that the signatures are authentic, the document has not been altered, and has offered photographic evidence to substantiate his claims.
** (This is not John Kaminski, author of "America's Autopsy Report", etc. Here is some of the Lawyer, John Kaminski's work: Impeachment: We’ve Got a Job to Do).

http://www.911blogger.com/node/10905

Also look at online resources like:

http://ca.groups.yahoo.com/group/Portland-Nuclear-Inquest

http://www.911blogger.com

posted in Cascadians - 2 replies

Triple Global Crises

Alexander — Tue, 18 Sep 2007 14:13:50 GMT

Triple Global Crises

From Empire to Earth Community: Author David Korten on "The Great
Turning"

Listen to Segment || Download Show mp3
Watch 128k stream Watch 256k stream Read Transcript
Help Printer-friendly version Email to a friend
Purchase Video/CD

----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
The International Forum on Globalization and Institute for Policy
Studies is hosting a three day teach-in this weekend
titled "Confronting the Global Triple Crisis: Climate Change, Peak
Oil (The End of Cheap Energy) and Global Resource Depletion &
Extinction." We speak with, among others, David Korten - publisher of
the magazine YES! A Journal of Positive Futures and author of "The
Great Turning: From Empire to Earth Community." [includes rush
transcript]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
A new study from the nation's preeminent scientific advisory group
has revealed that less than two percent of the money spent by the
federal government on climate change research is used to study how
climate change will affect humans.
According to the report issued by the National Academies, the U.S.
Climate Change Research Program spends just $30 million dollar a year
on examining the impact of global warming on humans. To put that
figure in perspective, the United States is spending an estimated
$275 million per day on the Iraq war and occupation.

Spending cuts have also resulted in the grounding of earth-observing
satellites. The authors of the report state QUOTE "The loss of
existing and planned satellite sensors is perhaps the single greatest
threat to the future success" of climate research.

This weekend, the International Forum on Globalization and Institute
for Policy Studies is hosting a three day teach-in
titled "Confronting the Global Triple Crisis: Climate Change, Peak
Oil (The End of Cheap Energy) and Global Resource Depletion &
Extinction."

We speak with four guests from the forum. We begin with David Korten:

David Korten, author of "When Corporations Rule the World". He is the
co-founder of Positive Futures Network, and publisher of the magazine
YES! A Journal of Positive Futures. His most recent book is
titled "The Great Turning: From Empire to Earth Community."

----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
RUSH TRANSCRIPT
This transcript is available free of charge. However, donations help
us provide closed captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing on our
TV broadcast. Thank you for your generous contribution.
Donate - $25, $50, $100, more...

JUAN GONZALEZ: A new study from the nation's preeminent scientific
advisory group has revealed that less than 2% of the money spent by
the federal government on climate change research is used to study
how climate change will affect humans.

According to the report issued by the National Academies, the U.S.
Climate Change Research Program spends just $30 million a year on
examining the impact of global warming on humans. To put that figure
in perspective, the United States is spending an estimated $275
million per day on the Iraq war and occupation.

Spending cuts have also resulted in the grounding of earth-observing
satellites. The authors of the report state, "The loss of existing
and planned satellite sensors is perhaps the single greatest threat
to the future success" of climate research.

AMY GOODMAN: This weekend, the International Forum on Globalization
and Institute for Policy Studies is hosting a three day teach-in
titled "Confronting the Global Triple Crisis: Climate Change, Peak
Oil (The End of Cheap Energy) and Global Resource Depletion &
Extinction."

Today, we're joined by four of the guests in that forum. We begin
with Vandana Shiva and David Korten.

Vandana Shiva, world-renowned environmental leader and thinker,
director of the Research Foundation on Science, Technology, and
Ecology, and the founder of Navdanya, "nine seeds," a movement
promoting diversity and use of native seeds. Dr. Shiva was the 1993
recipient of the Alternative Nobel Peace Prize, the Right Livelihood
Award. She's the author of many books, her latest, Earth Democracy:
Justice, Sustainability, and Peace.

David Korten, also with us, author of When Corporations Rule the
World, cofounder of Positive Futures Network and publisher of the
magazine YES! A Journal of Positive Futures. His most recent book is
called The Great Turning: From Empire to Earth Community.

We welcome you both to Democracy Now! David Korten, let's begin with
you. The Great Turning, explain.

DAVID KORTEN: Well, essentially, this gets to the basic theme of the
conference, that we humans have come up at a defining moment in our
experience, in which we're confronting the limits of the ecosystem at
a time when we are in a condition of extreme inequality between the
rich and the poor, and we're dependent on an economic infrastructure
that, in turn, depends on the assumption of everlasting cheap oil.
Now, we've essentially come up to the limits.

What my book, The Great Turning, does is puts it into our current
situation to the deeper context of 5,000 years of human experience,
organizing ourselves, both our relations among nations and among --
all the way down to among family members, based on dominator
hierarchy. And what this -- the underlying pattern of societies, with
a few people on the top, many people on the bottom, and the majority
of the society's resources being expropriated by the ruling elites in
order to maintain a system of domination. And we have played that out
for 5,000 years, empire through empire, each one falling in turn, is
it, through internal corruption and the devastation of its resource
base. And now we're encountering that on a global scale.

And what -- the key point of this conference is that we are facing a
monumental decision point in human experience in which we have to
actively choose our future. And virtually none of the options on the
table being discussed deal, in any adequate way, with the depth of
the problem, and many of them are actually ultimately
counterproductive. What the establishment is doing is looking for
solutions that will maintain the system of power, but not necessarily
deal with the fact that we have to address in fundamental ways our
human relationship to earth and to the life support system of earth.

And in an already overpopulated world, we absolutely have to deal
with the issues of equity and redistribution of not only income, but
ownership, control and access to resources, so that everyone has a
secure means of living. We also, of course, have to be fundamentally
reconstructing our infrastructure to create an infrastructure that is
consistent with living and balance with the earth, localizing our
economies, bringing an end to war and violence and the massive misuse
of resources to support military establishment.

So what this conference is doing, which is also what my book The
Great Turning does, is bring all of these various crises that we're
facing as a species into a common framework that helps us see the
depth of the solutions and the very dramatic nature of the solutions
turning from systems of domination to systems of partnership and
reestablishing a sense of human community and of living communities
that bring us humans into balance with earth.

JUAN GONZALEZ: David Korten, in the United States we're confronted
here with a mass media system now where the oil companies and the
chemical companies are actually the ones advertising their changes
now, in terms of dealing with global warming. It's an enormous
hypocrisy that the very companies that are involved in the worst
aspects of what is happening to the world are now the ones that are
promoting in their advertisements a consciousness about it.

You talk about the prosperity narrative and how the prosperity
narrative distorts the reality of what's happening with global
warming. Could you talk about that?

DAVID KORTEN: Yes. Part of breaking out of this, breaking out of what
I call the cultural trance of empire, is to recognize the stories,
essentially the lies, that the system feeds us to keep us locked into
this trance. And the key in the empire prosperity story is the idea
that money is wealth, that economic growth is the key to prosperity,
that when people are making money, they are creating wealth, and the
idea that inequality is essential to growth because the rich people
have the money to invest, and so we should honor rich people, we
should welcome inequality, because in the end it makes us all better
off. Now, we're seeing that play out, of course, in the corporations
now, you know: we're benevolent, and so forth.

But the thing that -- you know, I spent thirty years of my life
working on third world development, on the effort to end poverty in
low-income countries. And it took me a long time, but I finally came
to realize that mostly what economic growth is about is rich people
expropriating the resources of poor people to turn them into the
garbage of the consumer system in an accelerating rate in order to
make money, which increases the power of people who -- for people who
already have more than they need.

Now, what we need to come to recognize is that real prosperity is
grounded in the health of our children, our families, our communities
and nature, and that a real economic system promoting real prosperity
is one that is serving the health of children, families, community
and the environment. And it absolutely requires a substantial degree
of equity and sharing of resources to assure that everyone's needs
are met. And you begin to see the -- you know, the stories
fundamentally contrast, and they lead to totally different kinds of
outcomes, in terms of how we allocate resources and even how we think
about what it means to be human at our most foundational values.

AMY GOODMAN: Vandana Shiva, talk about how this plays out on the
ground in places like, well, your home country, India.

VANDANA SHIVA: Well, the triple crisis is really seriously converging
on India, India being one of the preferred spots for outsourcing of
all the pollution and energy-intensive production of the world. We
hear of outsourcing of jobs in the information technology sector. We
don't often enough hear about the outsourcing of pollution to the
third world, the resource-intensive, resource-hungry industry like
steel and iron and aluminum and automobile manufacture. India now is
going to be the home of making cheap cars for the rest of the world.
But every car then requires land, which is grabbed from tribals,
peasants. It requires aluminum and steel, which needs to be mined. It
requires coal, which needs to be mined.

And just as when the first colonization took place, it was assumed
that the earth was empty, terra nullius, no matter how many
indigenous people existed. India, a land of 1.2 billion people, is
being treated as an empty land for global capital, making 80% of
India redundant.

But people are fighting back. And place after place, in Dadri, in
Nandigram, in Singur, people are just getting together in a new earth
democracy and saying, "This land is our land. We will decide what we
do with it. You cannot force a polluting industry on us.
Globalization cannot force it." And we are really seeing a whole new
political practice emerge.

India is engaged in this debate also centrally in another way that
brings the resource question: the alternative -- fuel alternatives to
global warming, as well as the new militarization, on a global scale
together. The three, four options being offered to contain emissions
are biofuels, which, in fact, will increase emissions; carbon and
emissions trading, which is reversing the "polluter pays" principle
and is making the society pay the polluter, rewarding them with
credits. Most of these credits are then being given to polluting
industry: HFC companies, sponge iron plants, cutting down forests and
then planting palm oil. These are becoming clean development
mechanisms, which are really dirty.

But the dirtiest of all, dirtiest of all the new clean options is
nuclear. The US-India nuclear agreement is being offered as a clean
energy option, as a solution to climate change. But it is, in effect,
an instrument of permanent war. In the Hyde Act, which overrides the
India-US agreement, Iran has been mentioned fifteen times. An
agreement between India and the US mentions a third country fifteen
times. This is about a new security policy, a new security policy in
which a militarized empire seeks the last resources of the poorest
person and wants to use the worst form of violence to appropriate the
resources that people need for living.

And across the world, people are saying, "No. We want peace. We want
democracy. We want sustainability. We will live in a different way."
And those alternatives are growing. Our work, in Navdanya, we are
saving seeds that can tolerate the salt after cyclones, seeds that
can survive the floods, in which we have lost 2,000 people in India
this particular extreme monsoon. And around the world people are
creating alternatives, so we really have these two trends right now:
one, a declining trend, but very visible trend because it's so
violent, and violent is always visible; and the other, a peaceful
trend and nonviolent trend, quiet, but much more pervasive.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Vandana Shiva, you've been a spokesperson for years
over the impact on the world's agriculture, of this corporate
dominance. A new battleground has developed recently in Burma with
Bayer and Bayer's efforts, the German giant, in terms of rice. Could
you talk about that?

VANDANA SHIVA: Yeah, but it's not just the German giant in Burma.
It's the American giant, Monsanto, literally killing Indian farmers.
Since 1997, I've been doing studies in every area where farmer
suicides have happened. These happen to be the cotton belt, the
cotton areas where Monsanto has now gained total monopoly. The Bt
cotton seeds that Monsanto is selling have pushed farmers to the
edge, because of the high prices, because of the high levels of
failure and the high requirements, exactly like the rice of Bayer for
Burma will be.

As the corporations that came out of warfare gained control over the
chemical industry for warfare, they became agrichemical giants,
because they deployed chemicals used for war into agriculture. Over
time, they bought up the seed industry. Over time, they bought up the
biotech industry. And, of course, these guys are the same people who
sell us the medicine in pharmaceuticals. So what we've got, a
convergence of death. We've got a convergence of destruction.

And in India, we are witnessing this destruction from the seed end
through Monsanto's monopolies on seed, and that is why I have been
working with Indian farmers, both to save our native seeds and save
our freedom, and do the seed Satyagraha, like Gandhi a hundred years
ago in South Africa -- and we're remembering Steve Biko today -- when
Gandhi started the Satyagraha, the non-cooperation with an unjust
brutal regime. But the global economy has become an unjust brutal
regime. And everywhere -- we are defending the Yamana, because they
want to even use the land where the rivers flow for real estate. I
don't know why land becomes real estate when it moves into the hands
of the rich, and it's treated as nobody's land, no man's land, when
it's generating survival for the poor. So India is definitely at the
heart of the new debate about the real democracy.

AMY GOODMAN: Vandana Shiva and David Korten, I want to thank you for
being with us. Vandana Shiva's latest book is Earth Democracy:
Justice, Sustainability, and Peace. David Korten's latest book is
called The Great Turning: From Empire to Earth Community. They're
both part of the International Forum on Globalization that is holding
a conference this weekend in Washington, D.C. at George Washington
University at the Lisner Auditorium.

When we come back, we'll be joined from two others who are
participating: the author and professor Michael Klare and the British
climate change activist Simon Retallack.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/14/1421257

Vandana Shiva Decries the "Outsourcing of Pollution to the Third
World"

Listen to Segment || Download Show mp3
Watch 128k stream Watch 256k stream Read Transcript
Help Printer-friendly version Email to a friend
Purchase Video/CD

----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
We speak world-renowned environmental leader and thinker, Vandana
Shiva about India and global resource depletion. Shiva says, "India
is one of the preferred spots for outsourcing of all the pollution
and energy-intensive production of the world. We hear of outsourcing
of jobs and informational technology sector. We don't often enough
hear about the outsourcing of pollution to the third world."
[includes rush transcript]

Vandana Shiva, world-renowned environmental leader and thinker. She
is also a physicist and ecologist and the Director of the Research
Foundation on Science, Technology, and Ecology. She is the founder of
Navdanya -"nine seeds", a movement promoting diversity and use of
native seeds. Dr. Shiva was the 1993 recipient of the Alternative
Nobel Peace Prize -the Right Livelihood Award. And she is the author
of many books, her latest is "Earth Democracy: Justice,
Sustainability, and Peace."

----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
RUSH TRANSCRIPT
This transcript is available free of charge. However, donations help
us provide closed captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing on our
TV broadcast. Thank you for your generous contribution.
Donate - $25, $50, $100, more...

JUAN GONZALEZ: A new study from the nation's preeminent scientific
advisory group has revealed that less than 2% of the money spent by
the federal government on climate change research is used to study
how climate change will affect humans.

According to the report issued by the National Academies, the U.S.
Climate Change Research Program spends just $30 million a year on
examining the impact of global warming on humans. To put that figure
in perspective, the United States is spending an estimated $275
million per day on the Iraq war and occupation.

Spending cuts have also resulted in the grounding of earth-observing
satellites. The authors of the report state, "The loss of existing
and planned satellite sensors is perhaps the single greatest threat
to the future success" of climate research.

AMY GOODMAN: This weekend, the International Forum on Globalization
and Institute for Policy Studies is hosting a three day teach-in
titled "Confronting the Global Triple Crisis: Climate Change, Peak
Oil (The End of Cheap Energy) and Global Resource Depletion &
Extinction."

Today, we're joined by four of the guests in that forum. We begin
with Vandana Shiva and David Korten.

Vandana Shiva, world-renowned environmental leader and thinker,
director of the Research Foundation on Science, Technology, and
Ecology, and the founder of Navdanya, "nine seeds," a movement
promoting diversity and use of native seeds. Dr. Shiva was the 1993
recipient of the Alternative Nobel Peace Prize, the Right Livelihood
Award. She's the author of many books, her latest, Earth Democracy:
Justice, Sustainability, and Peace.

David Korten, also with us, author of When Corporations Rule the
World, cofounder of Positive Futures Network and publisher of the
magazine YES! A Journal of Positive Futures. His most recent book is
called The Great Turning: From Empire to Earth Community.

We welcome you both to Democracy Now! David Korten, let's begin with
you. The Great Turning, explain.

DAVID KORTEN: Well, essentially, this gets to the basic theme of the
conference, that we humans have come up at a defining moment in our
experience, in which we're confronting the limits of the ecosystem at
a time when we are in a condition of extreme inequality between the
rich and the poor, and we're dependent on an economic infrastructure
that, in turn, depends on the assumption of everlasting cheap oil.
Now, we've essentially come up to the limits.

What my book, The Great Turning, does is puts it into our current
situation to the deeper context of 5,000 years of human experience,
organizing ourselves, both our relations among nations and among --
all the way down to among family members, based on dominator
hierarchy. And what this -- the underlying pattern of societies, with
a few people on the top, many people on the bottom, and the majority
of the society's resources being expropriated by the ruling elites in
order to maintain a system of domination. And we have played that out
for 5,000 years, empire through empire, each one falling in turn, is
it, through internal corruption and the devastation of its resource
base. And now we're encountering that on a global scale.

And what -- the key point of this conference is that we are facing a
monumental decision point in human experience in which we have to
actively choose our future. And virtually none of the options on the
table being discussed deal, in any adequate way, with the depth of
the problem, and many of them are actually ultimately
counterproductive. What the establishment is doing is looking for
solutions that will maintain the system of power, but not necessarily
deal with the fact that we have to address in fundamental ways our
human relationship to earth and to the life support system of earth.

And in an already overpopulated world, we absolutely have to deal
with the issues of equity and redistribution of not only income, but
ownership, control and access to resources, so that everyone has a
secure means of living. We also, of course, have to be fundamentally
reconstructing our infrastructure to create an infrastructure that is
consistent with living and balance with the earth, localizing our
economies, bringing an end to war and violence and the massive misuse
of resources to support military establishment.

So what this conference is doing, which is also what my book The
Great Turning does, is bring all of these various crises that we're
facing as a species into a common framework that helps us see the
depth of the solutions and the very dramatic nature of the solutions
turning from systems of domination to systems of partnership and
reestablishing a sense of human community and of living communities
that bring us humans into balance with earth.

JUAN GONZALEZ: David Korten, in the United States we're confronted
here with a mass media system now where the oil companies and the
chemical companies are actually the ones advertising their changes
now, in terms of dealing with global warming. It's an enormous
hypocrisy that the very companies that are involved in the worst
aspects of what is happening to the world are now the ones that are
promoting in their advertisements a consciousness about it.

You talk about the prosperity narrative and how the prosperity
narrative distorts the reality of what's happening with global
warming. Could you talk about that?

DAVID KORTEN: Yes. Part of breaking out of this, breaking out of what
I call the cultural trance of empire, is to recognize the stories,
essentially the lies, that the system feeds us to keep us locked into
this trance. And the key in the empire prosperity story is the idea
that money is wealth, that economic growth is the key to prosperity,
that when people are making money, they are creating wealth, and the
idea that inequality is essential to growth because the rich people
have the money to invest, and so we should honor rich people, we
should welcome inequality, because in the end it makes us all better
off. Now, we're seeing that play out, of course, in the corporations
now, you know: we're benevolent, and so forth.

But the thing that -- you know, I spent thirty years of my life
working on third world development, on the effort to end poverty in
low-income countries. And it took me a long time, but I finally came
to realize that mostly what economic growth is about is rich people
expropriating the resources of poor people to turn them into the
garbage of the consumer system in an accelerating rate in order to
make money, which increases the power of people who -- for people who
already have more than they need.

Now, what we need to come to recognize is that real prosperity is
grounded in the health of our children, our families, our communities
and nature, and that a real economic system promoting real prosperity
is one that is serving the health of children, families, community
and the environment. And it absolutely requires a substantial degree
of equity and sharing of resources to assure that everyone's needs
are met. And you begin to see the -- you know, the stories
fundamentally contrast, and they lead to totally different kinds of
outcomes, in terms of how we allocate resources and even how we think
about what it means to be human at our most foundational values.

AMY GOODMAN: Vandana Shiva, talk about how this plays out on the
ground in places like, well, your home country, India.

VANDANA SHIVA: Well, the triple crisis is really seriously converging
on India, India being one of the preferred spots for outsourcing of
all the pollution and energy-intensive production of the world. We
hear of outsourcing of jobs in the information technology sector. We
don't often enough hear about the outsourcing of pollution to the
third world, the resource-intensive, resource-hungry industry like
steel and iron and aluminum and automobile manufacture. India now is
going to be the home of making cheap cars for the rest of the world.
But every car then requires land, which is grabbed from tribals,
peasants. It requires aluminum and steel, which needs to be mined. It
requires coal, which needs to be mined.

And just as when the first colonization took place, it was assumed
that the earth was empty, terra nullius, no matter how many
indigenous people existed. India, a land of 1.2 billion people, is
being treated as an empty land for global capital, making 80% of
India redundant.

But people are fighting back. And place after place, in Dadri, in
Nandigram, in Singur, people are just getting together in a new earth
democracy and saying, "This land is our land. We will decide what we
do with it. You cannot force a polluting industry on us.
Globalization cannot force it." And we are really seeing a whole new
political practice emerge.

India is engaged in this debate also centrally in another way that
brings the resource question: the alternative -- fuel alternatives to
global warming, as well as the new militarization, on a global scale
together. The three, four options being offered to contain emissions
are biofuels, which, in fact, will increase emissions; carbon and
emissions trading, which is reversing the "polluter pays" principle
and is making the society pay the polluter, rewarding them with
credits. Most of these credits are then being given to polluting
industry: HFC companies, sponge iron plants, cutting down forests and
then planting palm oil. These are becoming clean development
mechanisms, which are really dirty.

But the dirtiest of all, dirtiest of all the new clean options is
nuclear. The US-India nuclear agreement is being offered as a clean
energy option, as a solution to climate change. But it is, in effect,
an instrument of permanent war. In the Hyde Act, which overrides the
India-US agreement, Iran has been mentioned fifteen times. An
agreement between India and the US mentions a third country fifteen
times. This is about a new security policy, a new security policy in
which a militarized empire seeks the last resources of the poorest
person and wants to use the worst form of violence to appropriate the
resources that people need for living.

And across the world, people are saying, "No. We want peace. We want
democracy. We want sustainability. We will live in a different way."
And those alternatives are growing. Our work, in Navdanya, we are
saving seeds that can tolerate the salt after cyclones, seeds that
can survive the floods, in which we have lost 2,000 people in India
this particular extreme monsoon. And around the world people are
creating alternatives, so we really have these two trends right now:
one, a declining trend, but very visible trend because it's so
violent, and violent is always visible; and the other, a peaceful
trend and nonviolent trend, quiet, but much more pervasive.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Vandana Shiva, you've been a spokesperson for years
over the impact on the world's agriculture, of this corporate
dominance. A new battleground has developed recently in Burma with
Bayer and Bayer's efforts, the German giant, in terms of rice. Could
you talk about that?

VANDANA SHIVA: Yeah, but it's not just the German giant in Burma.
It's the American giant, Monsanto, literally killing Indian farmers.
Since 1997, I've been doing studies in every area where farmer
suicides have happened. These happen to be the cotton belt, the
cotton areas where Monsanto has now gained total monopoly. The Bt
cotton seeds that Monsanto is selling have pushed farmers to the
edge, because of the high prices, because of the high levels of
failure and the high requirements, exactly like the rice of Bayer for
Burma will be.

As the corporations that came out of warfare gained control over the
chemical industry for warfare, they became agrichemical giants,
because they deployed chemicals used for war into agriculture. Over
time, they bought up the seed industry. Over time, they bought up the
biotech industry. And, of course, these guys are the same people who
sell us the medicine in pharmaceuticals. So what we've got, a
convergence of death. We've got a convergence of destruction.

And in India, we are witnessing this destruction from the seed end
through Monsanto's monopolies on seed, and that is why I have been
working with Indian farmers, both to save our native seeds and save
our freedom, and do the seed Satyagraha, like Gandhi a hundred years
ago in South Africa -- and we're remembering Steve Biko today -- when
Gandhi started the Satyagraha, the non-cooperation with an unjust
brutal regime. But the global economy has become an unjust brutal
regime. And everywhere -- we are defending the Yamana, because they
want to even use the land where the rivers flow for real estate. I
don't know why land becomes real estate when it moves into the hands
of the rich, and it's treated as nobody's land, no man's land, when
it's generating survival for the poor. So India is definitely at the
heart of the new debate about the real democracy.

AMY GOODMAN: Vandana Shiva and David Korten, I want to thank you for
being with us. Vandana Shiva's latest book is Earth Democracy:
Justice, Sustainability, and Peace. David Korten's latest book is
called The Great Turning: From Empire to Earth Community. They're
both part of the International Forum on Globalization that is holding
a conference this weekend in Washington, D.C. at George Washington
University at the Lisner Auditorium.

When we come back, we'll be joined from two others who are
participating: the author and professor Michael Klare and the British
climate change activist Simon Retallack.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/14/1422203

Michael Klare on the Internal War For Control of Iraq's Oil

Listen to Segment || Download Show mp3
Watch 128k stream Watch 256k stream Read Transcript
Help Printer-friendly version Email to a friend
Purchase Video/CD

----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
We speak with Michael Klare, author of "Blood and Oil: The Dangers
and Consequences of America's Growing Dependency on Imported
Petroleum." Klare says, "There's a second war underway in Iraq that's
a war for the control of the oil wealth. That's a war that is pitting
Kurds against the Arabs of the country, Shiites against Sunnis, and
Shiite against Shiite. Because eventually the Americans are going to
leave and the people of Iraq know this." [includes rush transcript]

Michael Klare, Professor of Peace and World Security Studies at
Hampshire College. He is author of several books including "Blood and
Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America's Growing Dependency on
Imported Petroleum."

----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
RUSH TRANSCRIPT
This transcript is available free of charge. However, donations help
us provide closed captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing on our
TV broadcast. Thank you for your generous contribution.
Donate - $25, $50, $100, more...

AMY GOODMAN: Last week, tens of thousands of people attended Farm Aid
here in New York City. It's an annual concert to raise support for
family farmers. This is the musician Neil Young, one of the
organizers of Farm Aid.

NEIL YOUNG: Transporting food around the world to other countries and
using all of that fuel and all of that packaging and all of that air-
conditioning fuel and all of those things that need to happen to get,
say, a tomato -- since that's on our mind today, we're coming with a
tomato now -- from Chile to California, it costs a lot of
environmental damage just getting that one tomato up there.

And so, if you look at the world and you figure one of the things
about our big agriculture is that we want to feed the world --
doesn't that sound great? You know? We're going to help everybody.
OK, you know, that's great. But I don't think it's really that way. I
think we ought to feed ourselves, the people that are close to us,
and we ought to let the people around the world feed themselves with
their own crops so that we don't go in there and take their food crop
away and give them a cash crop and then say we're going to give you
food. And that's what we do. We have people growing textile materials
and cotton and things in third world countries, and we do business
with them through China, and we do all of these things with our
economics. And we undermine the sustainability of the countries that
we say we're helping. And then, if these countries don't cooperate
with us, we control their food supply.

AMY GOODMAN: Musician Neil Young at the Farm Aid concert this past
weekend.

As we continue looking at issues of climate change, energy and the
environment, we're joined by two more guest speakers at this
weekend's International Forum on Globalization in D.C.: Michael
Klare, professor of Peace and World Security Studies at Hampshire
College, author of a number of books, including Blood and Oil: The
Dangers and Consequences of America's Growing Dependency on Imported
Petroleum; and Simon Retallack, head of the climate change team at
the Institute for Public Policy Research in Britain, coauthor of the
new report, "Positive Energy: Harnessing People Power to Prevent
Climate Change."

We're going to turn first to Michael Klare. President Bush spoke last
night, addressed the nation, talked about why we continue the war in
Iraq. Can you talk about the connections between war and oil or, as
you put it, the title your book, Blood and Oil.

MICHAEL KLARE: Well, Amy, good to talk with you. There are really two
wars now underway, I think, in Iraq, maybe more than two. There's the
US effort to retain, as what President Bush said last night, an
enduring presence in Iraq. And I believe that's connected to our,
that is America's, long-lasting geopolitical imperative of being the
dominant power in the Persian Gulf. And, of course, he also refers a
lot to Iran, now the next threat perceived on the horizon to American
dominance. So one part of the war in Iraq, I believe, have always
believed, is part of this long-standing US effort to dominate the
region geopolitically and control the oil spigot from the Gulf, where
two-thirds of the world's oil is located.

But there's a second war underway, and that's a war for the control
of Iraq's oil wealth. And that's a war that is pitting Kurds against
the Arabs of the country and Shiites against Sunnis, and Shiite
against Shiite, because eventually the Americans are going to leave,
and the people of Iraq know this, and they are now fighting amongst
themselves for who's going to control that territory. And I believe a
lot of the violence in Iraq today is really about that struggle for
control of Iraq's oil wealth. And American soldiers are caught in the
middle of this.

And I think, frankly, that American military leaders have come to
understand that the prospect of an Iraq, of a national Iraq, has been
lost. That war has been lost. What's left is the fighting over the
remains, the carcass of Iraq.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Michael, on the issue of Iran, especially with all the
saber rattling, and even among many of the Democratic candidates for
president you find some of the same saber rattling toward Iran. Iran
is a huge nation. It is not only oil rich, but considerably
developed, with a huge population. What kind of -- your analysis of
the sense among military people about even talking about any kind of
military action or extension of what's happened in Iraq into Iran?

MICHAEL KLARE: Well, we tend to forget that the US military is not a
monolithic organization. I'm sure if you ask the ground forces, the
Army and the Marine Corps who are baring the brunt of the fighting in
Iraq, they'll say, you know, "Not over my dead body do we want to go
to war with Iran." They are stretched to the limit. They couldn't
take on another single mission anywhere in the world. So they're
saying, "Please don't start any trouble in Iran."

But if you ask the Air Force or the Navy, they feel differently.
They're not overstretched in Iraq. They might feel very differently
about it. They might be looking for missions And I think, in fact,
that the military is divided on this, as is the administration.

It's clear that Condoleezza Rice, I believe, and others of a more
realistic nature, I suppose you'd say, think that attacking Iran
would be a tremendous mistake. But there are clearly ideologues,
neoconservatives, led by the Vice President, who are strongly
committed to attacking Iran. And I fear that they're prevailing in
this debate and that before the administration leaves office that we
will see an attack on Iran.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to turn to Simon Retallack, who is just in from
Britain for the International Forum on Globalization conference. What
is "climate porn"?

SIMON RETALLACK: Good question. It's a phrase that authors of a
report that we commissioned in London came up with to describe the
way in which some journalists, some environmentalists and even some
politicians use alarmist language to talk about climate change, in a
way that you might see headlined, certainly in British newspapers,
saying almost "the end is nigh," using biblical terms to describe the
impacts of climate change. It's a phrase that is certainly not used
to undermine the science. It certainly doesn't mean to do that. What
it seeks to do is try to encourage people to think about what sort of
language will be necessary to motivate the public to take action.

If we talk about climate change in a way that makes it appear that
there's nothing we can do anymore about it, that it's too late, that
it's happening, it's going to be devastating on a global scale,
without giving people the option and making the solutions clear to
act, then I think we're going to turn people off. So it's part of
some research and a long-running project that we're engaged with to
try to find ways of simulating climate-friendly behavior amongst the
public.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Simon, in the previous segment, Vandana Shiva talked
about what she called a fallacy of using fixes like trading in
pollution credits in the United States. So you've analyzed what the
EU is doing in terms of this kind of approach. Could you talk about
that?

SIMON RETALLACK: Yes, certainly. I mean, one of the most commonly
adopted solutions in the world for dealing with climate change has
been the support for cap and trade schemes, where there's a cap
placed on emissions and companies get given quotas, and they can
trade them to meet their reductions. The big problem with the
European scheme, and I foresee a problem with potential US-wide
schemes in the future, is that the caps placed on industry have been
far too weak. Governments have over-allocated pollution permits to
industry, which has meant that the cost of a ton of carbon on the
European markets is far too low, and it isn't delivering the step
change in investments that we need to see in renewable energy and
energy efficiency to do our bit to avoid dangerous climate change.

We're at a critical point, not just in the EU, about here in the US
now, where finally, with a Democratically controlled Congress, we're
going to see this full attempt to pass a cap and trade bill through
Congress. We've got to make sure, and anyone who's listening to this
and watching this needs to do their part to ensure, that the right
caps are put in place. At the moment, most of the bills before
Congress only envisage far too little emission reductions by 2050. We
need to see at least 80% cuts in emissions, at least, by 2050, with
early action being critically important, too, if we're to avoid the
most dangerous impacts from climate change. And we need to put
pressure on our representatives and senators in the US to ensure that
adequate action is taken at this critically important point.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to go back to Michael Klare and ask you a
question about the research in global climate change. I was just at
Stanford University. They have the GCEP program, that is Global
Climate Environment Program, that got something like $225 million
from ExxonMobil, General Electric, Shlumberger and Toyota. You have
University of California, Berkeley, got something like half-a-billion
dollars from BP. They call it "Beyond Petroleum" now, British
Petroleum. How is this corporate control of academia or funding of
academia affecting the research? Are you concerned about this?

MICHAEL KLARE: Well, I think everybody should be concerned. What I
think is going on is that the oil companies themselves have realized
what we'll be talking about tonight, which is that we're coming to
the end of conventional petroleum -- that is, liquid petroleum, the
stuff that you stick a drill in the ground, and it comes gushing out.
The days of easy-to-find liquid petroleum are over.

And the oil companies understand this, even if their propaganda says
otherwise. And they want to control whatever is going to replace it,
whatever new liquid fuels come online. So they want to invest
billions of dollars into the research, into whatever new fuels are
going take the place of conventional petroleum, whether it's biofuels
or synthetic liquids from tar sands or shell oil or whatever the next
fuels will be, so that their companies can dominate the production
and the marketing and the retailing of these liquids and retain the
monopoly on our energy, as they have now.

So, of course, we should be very deeply worried about it, because it
could foreclose other solutions that probably would be healthier for
all of us, in the sense that David Korten was speaking about earlier,
of a more egalitarian, a more healthy form of energy system.

AMY GOODMAN: Michael Klare and Simon Retallack, I want to thank you
for being with us. Both will be speaking this weekend, beginning
tonight, at George Washington University at Lisner Auditorium, part
of the International Forum on Globalization. Michael Klare's latest
book, Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America's
Growing Dependency on Imported Petroleum. Simon Retallack is with the
Climate Change Team at the Institute for Public Policy Research in
Britain, just in for this conference. Thanks so much for being there.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/14/1422209

"Climate Porn" - Simon Retallack on the Dangers of Using Alarmist
Language to Talk About Climate Change

Listen to Segment || Download Show mp3
Watch 128k stream Watch 256k stream Read Transcript
Help Printer-friendly version Email to a friend
Purchase Video/CD

----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
We speak with British climate change expert, Simon Retallack about so-
called "climate porn." Retallack says, "It's a phrase that's
certainly not used to undermine the science...But if we talk about
climate change in a way that makes it appear that there's nothing we
can do anymore about it, that it's too late, that it's going to be
devastating on a global scale...I think we're going to turn people
off." [includes rush transcript]

Simon Retallack, head of the Climate Change Team at the Institute for
Public Policy Research in Britain. He is the co-author of the new
report "Positive Energy: Harnessing People Power to Prevent Climate
Change."

----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
RUSH TRANSCRIPT
This transcript is available free of charge. However, donations help
us provide closed captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing on our
TV broadcast. Thank you for your generous contribution.
Donate - $25, $50, $100, more...

AMY GOODMAN: Last week, tens of thousands of people attended Farm Aid
here in New York City. It's an annual concert to raise support for
family farmers. This is the musician Neil Young, one of the
organizers of Farm Aid.

NEIL YOUNG: Transporting food around the world to other countries and
using all of that fuel and all of that packaging and all of that air-
conditioning fuel and all of those things that need to happen to get,
say, a tomato -- since that's on our mind today, we're coming with a
tomato now -- from Chile to California, it costs a lot of
environmental damage just getting that one tomato up there.

And so, if you look at the world and you figure one of the things
about our big agriculture is that we want to feed the world --
doesn't that sound great? You know? We're going to help everybody.
OK, you know, that's great. But I don't think it's really that way. I
think we ought to feed ourselves, the people that are close to us,
and we ought to let the people around the world feed themselves with
their own crops so that we don't go in there and take their food crop
away and give them a cash crop and then say we're going to give you
food. And that's what we do. We have people growing textile materials
and cotton and things in third world countries, and we do business
with them through China, and we do all of these things with our
economics. And we undermine the sustainability of the countries that
we say we're helping. And then, if these countries don't cooperate
with us, we control their food supply.

AMY GOODMAN: Musician Neil Young at the Farm Aid concert this past
weekend.

As we continue looking at issues of climate change, energy and the
environment, we're joined by two more guest speakers at this
weekend's International Forum on Globalization in D.C.: Michael
Klare, professor of Peace and World Security Studies at Hampshire
College, author of a number of books, including Blood and Oil: The
Dangers and Consequences of America's Growing Dependency on Imported
Petroleum; and Simon Retallack, head of the climate change team at
the Institute for Public Policy Research in Britain, coauthor of the
new report, "Positive Energy: Harnessing People Power to Prevent
Climate Change."

We're going to turn first to Michael Klare. President Bush spoke last
night, addressed the nation, talked about why we continue the war in
Iraq. Can you talk about the connections between war and oil or, as
you put it, the title your book, Blood and Oil.

MICHAEL KLARE: Well, Amy, good to talk with you. There are really two
wars now underway, I think, in Iraq, maybe more than two. There's the
US effort to retain, as what President Bush said last night, an
enduring presence in Iraq. And I believe that's connected to our,
that is America's, long-lasting geopolitical imperative of being the
dominant power in the Persian Gulf. And, of course, he also refers a
lot to Iran, now the next threat perceived on the horizon to American
dominance. So one part of the war in Iraq, I believe, have always
believed, is part of this long-standing US effort to dominate the
region geopolitically and control the oil spigot from the Gulf, where
two-thirds of the world's oil is located.

But there's a second war underway, and that's a war for the control
of Iraq's oil wealth. And that's a war that is pitting Kurds against
the Arabs of the country and Shiites against Sunnis, and Shiite
against Shiite, because eventually the Americans are going to leave,
and the people of Iraq know this, and they are now fighting amongst
themselves for who's going to control that territory. And I believe a
lot of the violence in Iraq today is really about that struggle for
control of Iraq's oil wealth. And American soldiers are caught in the
middle of this.

And I think, frankly, that American military leaders have come to
understand that the prospect of an Iraq, of a national Iraq, has been
lost. That war has been lost. What's left is the fighting over the
remains, the carcass of Iraq.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Michael, on the issue of Iran, especially with all the
saber rattling, and even among many of the Democratic candidates for
president you find some of the same saber rattling toward Iran. Iran
is a huge nation. It is not only oil rich, but considerably
developed, with a huge population. What kind of -- your analysis of
the sense among military people about even talking about any kind of
military action or extension of what's happened in Iraq into Iran?

MICHAEL KLARE: Well, we tend to forget that the US military is not a
monolithic organization. I'm sure if you ask the ground forces, the
Army and the Marine Corps who are baring the brunt of the fighting in
Iraq, they'll say, you know, "Not over my dead body do we want to go
to war with Iran." They are stretched to the limit. They couldn't
take on another single mission anywhere in the world. So they're
saying, "Please don't start any trouble in Iran."

But if you ask the Air Force or the Navy, they feel differently.
They're not overstretched in Iraq. They might feel very differently
about it. They might be looking for missions And I think, in fact,
that the military is divided on this, as is the administration.

It's clear that Condoleezza Rice, I believe, and others of a more
realistic nature, I suppose you'd say, think that attacking Iran
would be a tremendous mistake. But there are clearly ideologues,
neoconservatives, led by the Vice President, who are strongly
committed to attacking Iran. And I fear that they're prevailing in
this debate and that before the administration leaves office that we
will see an attack on Iran.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to turn to Simon Retallack, who is just in from
Britain for the International Forum on Globalization conference. What
is "climate porn"?

SIMON RETALLACK: Good question. It's a phrase that authors of a
report that we commissioned in London came up with to describe the
way in which some journalists, some environmentalists and even some
politicians use alarmist language to talk about climate change, in a
way that you might see headlined, certainly in British newspapers,
saying almost "the end is nigh," using biblical terms to describe the
impacts of climate change. It's a phrase that is certainly not used
to undermine the science. It certainly doesn't mean to do that. What
it seeks to do is try to encourage people to think about what sort of
language will be necessary to motivate the public to take action.

If we talk about climate change in a way that makes it appear that
there's nothing we can do anymore about it, that it's too late, that
it's happening, it's going to be devastating on a global scale,
without giving people the option and making the solutions clear to
act, then I think we're going to turn people off. So it's part of
some research and a long-running project that we're engaged with to
try to find ways of simulating climate-friendly behavior amongst the
public.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Simon, in the previous segment, Vandana Shiva talked
about what she called a fallacy of using fixes like trading in
pollution credits in the United States. So you've analyzed what the
EU is doing in terms of this kind of approach. Could you talk about
that?

SIMON RETALLACK: Yes, certainly. I mean, one of the most commonly
adopted solutions in the world for dealing with climate change has
been the support for cap and trade schemes, where there's a cap
placed on emissions and companies get given quotas, and they can
trade them to meet their reductions. The big problem with the
European scheme, and I foresee a problem with potential US-wide
schemes in the future, is that the caps placed on industry have been
far too weak. Governments have over-allocated pollution permits to
industry, which has meant that the cost of a ton of carbon on the
European markets is far too low, and it isn't delivering the step
change in investments that we need to see in renewable energy and
energy efficiency to do our bit to avoid dangerous climate change.

We're at a critical point, not just in the EU, about here in the US
now, where finally, with a Democratically controlled Congress, we're
going to see this full attempt to pass a cap and trade bill through
Congress. We've got to make sure, and anyone who's listening to this
and watching this needs to do their part to ensure, that the right
caps are put in place. At the moment, most of the bills before
Congress only envisage far too little emission reductions by 2050. We
need to see at least 80% cuts in emissions, at least, by 2050, with
early action being critically important, too, if we're to avoid the
most dangerous impacts from climate change. And we need to put
pressure on our representatives and senators in the US to ensure that
adequate action is taken at this critically important point.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to go back to Michael Klare and ask you a
question about the research in global climate change. I was just at
Stanford University. They have the GCEP program, that is Global
Climate Environment Program, that got something like $225 million
from ExxonMobil, General Electric, Shlumberger and Toyota. You have
University of California, Berkeley, got something like half-a-billion
dollars from BP. They call it "Beyond Petroleum" now, British
Petroleum. How is this corporate control of academia or funding of
academia affecting the research? Are you concerned about this?

MICHAEL KLARE: Well, I think everybody should be concerned. What I
think is going on is that the oil companies themselves have realized
what we'll be talking about tonight, which is that we're coming to
the end of conventional petroleum -- that is, liquid petroleum, the
stuff that you stick a drill in the ground, and it comes gushing out.
The days of easy-to-find liquid petroleum are over.

And the oil companies understand this, even if their propaganda says
otherwise. And they want to control whatever is going to replace it,
whatever new liquid fuels come online. So they want to invest
billions of dollars into the research, into whatever new fuels are
going take the place of conventional petroleum, whether it's biofuels
or synthetic liquids from tar sands or shell oil or whatever the next
fuels will be, so that their companies can dominate the production
and the marketing and the retailing of these liquids and retain the
monopoly on our energy, as they have now.

So, of course, we should be very deeply worried about it, because it
could foreclose other solutions that probably would be healthier for
all of us, in the sense that David Korten was speaking about earlier,
of a more egalitarian, a more healthy form of energy system.

AMY GOODMAN: Michael Klare and Simon Retallack, I want to thank you
for being with us. Both will be speaking this weekend, beginning
tonight, at George Washington University at Lisner Auditorium, part
of the International Forum on Globalization. Michael Klare's latest
book, Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America's
Growing Dependency on Imported Petroleum. Simon Retallack is with the
Climate Change Team at the Institute for Public Policy Research in
Britain, just in for this conference. Thanks so much for being there.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/14/1422224

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

How do you feel about transplants?

Daniel — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 15:07:41 GMT

I'm a Floridian that moved up here about a year and a half ago for two reasons: 1) I've always had a fascination and desire to live in a place that had a much better climate (I hate 90 degree heat 6 months of the year) and much more similar political and religious views and tolerance to my own. 2) I'm an aerospace engineer. You can guess the other reason.

Since then I've completely fallen in love with the entire area. Well, maybe not all of it, but definitely most of it. So my question is pretty straight forward: How do you, as a group, feel about non-californian transplants? I get the Californian thing.. It's very similar to Floridian views of snow birds and transplants from New York, Ontario, and Quebec.

Floridians generally have a weird but tolerant view of them since most people in Florida weren't born there. (I was born in Illinois for example)

Oh, and for the record, don't blame me. I didn't vote for the Shrub either election. *grin*

posted in Cascadians - 11 replies

Ask Kulongoski to Stop the Nuking of Portland

Alexander — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 12:37:06 GMT

Ask Kulongoski to Stop the Nuking of Portland

Call on Gov Ted Kulongoski to cancel Operation Noble Resolve

Call on Gov Ted Kulongoski to cancel Operation Noble Resolve at least until some major issues are cleared up over the Presidential Directive 51 and the habit of some strategic games becoming simultaneous real events is fully investigated.

Congressman Peter DeFazio has been blocked in his investigations on the issues surrounding the planned event and its relationship to National Security Presidential Directive 51 which would give Bush dictatorial powers if such a real event like a nuclear attack on Portland did happen. Governor Kulongoski could address this issue and demand that state employees not comply or work with FEMA and other organizations planning Operation Noble Resolve until major issues and questions are satisfactorily answered. On July 20th of 2007 after refusal to have access to documents related to Presidential Directive 5, DeFazio "Maybe the people who think there's a conspiracy out there are right." The fear is that like the Tube Bombing in London on 7/7 2005 and the 9/11 tragedy there were simultaneous mock events that were similar to the actual events taking place.

contacting Oregon Governor Kulongoski:

Please use one of the following methods if you would like to share an opinion or if the Governor´s Office can be of assistance:

MAIL Governor Kulongoski 160 State Capitol 900 Court Street Salem, Oregon 97301-4047 
PHONE Governor’s Citizens’ Representative Message Line 503.378.4582
FAX 503.378.6827

POSSIBLE STATE ALTERNATIVES TO OPERATION NOBLE RESOLVE

Governor Ted Kulongoski and Governor Christine Gregoire could propose alternatives to Operation Noble Resolve. One alternative could be to have strategic simulations on counter-dictatorial usuption of our federal system. This could be done by having mass teach-ins on administrative noncooperation, civil disobedience and other nonviolent actions as well as civics with mock events simulating a coups d'état in our federal system. In 1983, Dr. Gene Sharp had proposed that creating a civillian based defense using nonviolent tactics would be far more effective against invading and anti democratic forces as well as much more economically sustainable.
http://www.fragmentsweb.org/fourtx/sharplec.html

The two sister states of Oregon and Washington could host a training and implimentation of a civillian based defense in complete cooperation with the Oregon and Washington State National Guards. We could give such a civics training and mock events even a name like Operation Evergreen. This could be done with the cooperation of the various states’ educational systems, liberaries and other organizations both governmental and non-governmental.

Gene Sharp, Civilian-Based Defense: A Post-Military Weapons System (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1990).

Gene Sharp Lecture on Civilian-Based Defense (audio of the 1983 lecture on creating a nonviolent civillian system to counter tryanny) http://www.fragmentsweb.org/fourtx/sharplec.html

NSPD 51 FROM WHITEHOUSE WEBSITE (for those not familiar with the Presidential Directive)

White House News

NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD 51

HOMELAND SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/HSPD-20

Subject: National Continuity Policy

Purpose

(1) This directive establishes a comprehensive national policy on the continuity of Federal Government structures and operations and a single National Continuity Coordinator responsible for coordinating the development and implementation of Federal continuity policies. This policy establishes "National Essential Functions," prescribes continuity requirements for all executive departments and agencies, and provides guidance for State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector organizations in order to ensure a comprehensive and integrated national continuity program that will enhance the credibility of our national security posture and enable a more rapid and effective response to and recovery from a national emergency.

Definitions

(2) In this directive:

(a) "Category" refers to the categories of executive departments and agencies listed in Annex A to this directive;

(b) "Catastrophic Emergency" means any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions;

(c) "Continuity of Government," or "COG," means a coordinated effort within the Federal Government's executive branch to ensure that National Essential Functions continue to be performed during a Catastrophic Emergency;

(d) "Continuity of Operations," or "COOP," means an effort within individual executive departments and agencies to ensure that Primary Mission-Essential Functions continue to be performed during a wide range of emergencies, including localized acts of nature, accidents, and technological or attack-related emergencies;

(e) "Enduring Constitutional Government," or "ECG," means a cooperative effort among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government, coordinated by the President, as a matter of comity with respect to the legislative and judicial branches and with proper respect for the constitutional separation of powers among the branches, to preserve the constitutional framework under which the Nation is governed and the capability of all three branches of government to execute constitutional responsibilities and provide for orderly succession, appropriate transition of leadership, and interoperability and support of the National Essential Functions during a catastrophic emergency;

(f) "Executive Departments and Agencies" means the executive departments enumerated in 5 U.S.C. 101, independent establishments as defined by 5 U.S.C. 104(1), Government corporations as defined by 5 U.S.C. 103(1), and the United States Postal Service;

(g) "Government Functions" means the collective functions of the heads of executive departments and agencies as defined by statute, regulation, presidential direction, or other legal authority, and the functions of the legislative and judicial branches;

(h) "National Essential Functions," or "NEFs," means that subset of Government Functions that are necessary to lead and sustain the Nation during a catastrophic emergency and that, therefore, must be supported through COOP and COG capabilities; and

(i) "Primary Mission Essential Functions," or "PMEFs," means those Government Functions that must be performed in order to support or implement the performance of NEFs before, during, and in the aftermath of an emergency.

Policy

(3) It is the policy of the United States to maintain a comprehensive and effective continuity capability composed of Continuity of Operations and Continuity of Government programs in order to ensure the preservation of our form of government under the Constitution and the continuing performance of National Essential Functions under all conditions.

Implementation Actions

(4) Continuity requirements shall be incorporated into daily operations of all executive departments and agencies. As a result of the asymmetric threat environment, adequate warning of potential emergencies that could pose a significant risk to the homeland might not be available, and therefore all continuity planning shall be based on the assumption that no such warning will be received. Emphasis will be placed upon geographic dispersion of leadership, staff, and infrastructure in order to increase survivability and maintain uninterrupted Government Functions. Risk management principles shall be applied to ensure that appropriate operational readiness decisions are based on the probability of an attack or other incident and its consequences.

(5) The following NEFs are the foundation for all continuity programs and capabilities and represent the overarching responsibilities of the Federal Government to lead and sustain the Nation during a crisis, and therefore sustaining the following NEFs shall be the primary focus of

the Federal Government leadership during and in the aftermath of an emergency that adversely affects the performance of Government Functions:

(a) Ensuring the continued functioning of our form of government under the Constitution, including the functioning of the three separate branches of government;

(b) Providing leadership visible to the Nation and the world and maintaining the trust and confidence of the American people;

(c) Defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and preventing or interdicting attacks against the United States or its people, property, or interests;

(d) Maintaining and fostering effective relationships with foreign nations;

(e) Protecting against threats to the homeland and bringing to justice perpetrators of crimes or attacks against the United States or its people, property, or interests;

(f) Providing rapid and effective response to and recovery from the domestic consequences of an attack or other incident;

(g) Protecting and stabilizing the Nation's economy and ensuring public confidence in its financial systems; and

(h) Providing for critical Federal Government services that address the national health, safety, and welfare needs of the United States.

(6) The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government. In order to advise and assist the President in that function, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism (APHS/CT) is hereby designated as the National Continuity Coordinator. The National Continuity Coordinator, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for National

Security Affairs (APNSA), without exercising directive authority, shall coordinate the development and implementation of continuity policy for executive departments and agencies. The Continuity Policy Coordination Committee (CPCC), chaired by a Senior Director from the Homeland Security Council staff, designated by the National Continuity Coordinator, shall be the main day-to-day forum for such policy coordination.

(7) For continuity purposes, each executive department and agency is assigned to a category in accordance with the nature and characteristics of its national security roles and

responsibilities in support of the Federal Government's ability to sustain the NEFs. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall serve as the President's lead agent for coordinating overall

continuity operations and activities of executive departments and agencies, and in such role shall perform the responsibilities set forth for the Secretary in sections 10 and 16 of this directive.

(8) The National Continuity Coordinator, in consultation with the heads of appropriate executive departments and agencies, will lead the development of a National Continuity Implementation Plan (Plan), which shall include prioritized goals and objectives, a concept of operations, performance metrics by which to measure continuity readiness, procedures for continuity and incident management activities, and clear direction to executive department and agency continuity coordinators, as well as guidance to promote interoperability of Federal Government continuity programs and procedures with State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate. The Plan shall be submitted to the President for approval not later than 90 days after the date of this directive.

(9) Recognizing that each branch of the Federal Government is responsible for its own continuity programs, an official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President shall ensure that the executive branch's COOP and COG policies in support of ECG efforts are appropriately coordinated with those of

the legislative and judicial branches in order to ensure interoperability and allocate national assets efficiently to maintain a functioning Federal Government.

(10) Federal Government COOP, COG, and ECG plans and operations shall be appropriately integrated with the emergency plans and capabilities of State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate, in order to promote interoperability and to prevent redundancies and conflicting lines of authority. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall coordinate the integration of Federal continuity plans and operations with State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate, in order to provide for the delivery of essential services during an emergency.

(11) Continuity requirements for the Executive Office of the President (EOP) and executive departments and agencies shall include the following:

(a) The continuation of the performance of PMEFs during any emergency must be for a period up to 30 days or until normal operations can be resumed, and the capability to be fully operational at alternate sites as soon as possible after the occurrence of an emergency, but not later than 12 hours after COOP activation;

(b) Succession orders and pre-planned devolution of authorities that ensure the emergency delegation of authority must be planned and documented in advance in accordance with applicable law;

(c) Vital resources, facilities, and records must be safeguarded, and official access to them must be provided;

(d) Provision must be made for the acquisition of the resources necessary for continuity operations on an emergency basis;

(e) Provision must be made for the availability and redundancy of critical communications capabilities at alternate sites in order to support connectivity between

and among key government leadership, internal elements, other executive departments and agencies, critical partners, and the public;

(f) Provision must be made for reconstitution capabilities that allow for recovery from a catastrophic emergency and resumption of normal operations; and

(g) Provision must be made for the identification, training, and preparedness of personnel capable of relocating to alternate facilities to support the continuation of the performance of PMEFs.

(12) In order to provide a coordinated response to escalating threat levels or actual emergencies, the Continuity of Government Readiness Conditions (COGCON) system establishes executive branch continuity program readiness levels, focusing

on possible threats to the National Capital Region. The President will determine and issue the COGCON Level. Executive departments and agencies shall comply with the requirements and

assigned responsibilities under the COGCON program. During COOP activation, executive departments and agencies shall report their readiness status to the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Secretary's designee.

(13) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall:

(a) Conduct an annual assessment of executive department and agency continuity funding requests and performance data that are submitted by executive departments and agencies as part of the annual budget request process, in order to monitor progress in the implementation of the Plan and the execution of continuity budgets;

(b) In coordination with the National Continuity Coordinator, issue annual continuity planning guidance for the development of continuity budget requests; and

(c) Ensure that heads of executive departments and agencies prioritize budget resources for continuity capabilities, consistent with this directive.

(14) The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall:

(a) Define and issue minimum requirements for continuity communications for executive departments and agencies, in consultation with the APHS/CT, the APNSA, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Chief of Staff to the President;

(b) Establish requirements for, and monitor the development, implementation, and maintenance of, a comprehensive communications architecture to integrate continuity components, in consultation with the APHS/CT, the APNSA, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Chief of Staff to the President; and

(c) Review quarterly and annual assessments of continuity communications capabilities, as prepared pursuant to section 16(d) of this directive or otherwise, and report the results and recommended remedial actions to the National Continuity Coordinator.

(15) An official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President shall:

(a) Advise the President, the Chief of Staff to the President, the APHS/CT, and the APNSA on COGCON operational execution options; and

(b) Consult with the Secretary of Homeland Security in order to ensure synchronization and integration of continuity activities among the four categories of executive departments and agencies.

(16) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall:

(a) Coordinate the implementation, execution, and assessment of continuity operations and activities;

(b) Develop and promulgate Federal Continuity Directives in order to establish continuity planning requirements for executive departments and agencies;

(c) Conduct biennial assessments of individual department and agency continuity capabilities as prescribed by the Plan and report the results to the President through the APHS/CT;

(d) Conduct quarterly and annual assessments of continuity communications capabilities in consultation with an official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President;

(e) Develop, lead, and conduct a Federal continuity training and exercise program, which shall be incorporated into the National Exercise Program developed pursuant to Homeland Security Presidential Directive-8 of December 17, 2003 ("National Preparedness"), in consultation with an

official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President;

(f) Develop and promulgate continuity planning guidance to State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector critical infrastructure owners and operators;

(g) Make available continuity planning and exercise funding, in the form of grants as provided by law, to State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector critical infrastructure owners and operators; and

(h) As Executive Agent of the National Communications System, develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive continuity communications architecture.

(17) The Director of National Intelligence, in coordination with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall produce a biennial assessment of the foreign and domestic threats to the Nation's continuity of government.

(18) The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall provide secure, integrated, Continuity of Government communications to the President, the Vice President, and, at a minimum, Category I executive departments and agencies.

(19) Heads of executive departments and agencies shall execute their respective department or agency COOP plans in response to a localized emergency and shall:

(a) Appoint a senior accountable official, at the Assistant Secretary level, as the Continuity Coordinator for the department or agency;

(b) Identify and submit to the National Continuity Coordinator the list of PMEFs for the department or agency and develop continuity plans in support of the NEFs and the continuation of essential functions under all conditions;

(c) Plan, program, and budget for continuity capabilities consistent with this directive;

(d) Plan, conduct, and support annual tests and training, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, in order to evaluate program readiness and ensure adequacy and viability of continuity plans and communications systems; and

(e) Support other continuity requirements, as assigned by category, in accordance with the nature and characteristics of its national security roles and responsibilities

General Provisions

(20) This directive shall be implemented in a manner that is consistent with, and facilitates effective implementation of, provisions of the Constitution concerning succession to the Presidency or the exercise of its powers, and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (3 U.S.C. 19), with consultation of the Vice President and, as appropriate, others involved. Heads of executive departments and agencies shall ensure that appropriate

support is available to the Vice President and others involved as necessary to be prepared at all times to implement those provisions.

(21) This directive:

(a) Shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and the authorities of agencies, or heads of agencies, vested by law, and subject to the availability of appropriations;

(b) Shall not be construed to impair or otherwise affect (i) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budget, administrative, and legislative proposals, or (ii) the authority of the Secretary of Defense over the Department of Defense, including the chain of command for military forces from the President, to the Secretary of Defense, to the commander of military forces, or military command and control procedures; and

(c) Is not intended to, and does not, create any rights or benefits, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by a party against the United States, its

agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(22) Revocation. Presidential Decision Directive 67 of October 21, 1998 ("Enduring Constitutional Government and Continuity of Government Operations"), including all Annexes thereto, is hereby revoked.

(23) Annex A and the classified Continuity Annexes, attached hereto, are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this directive.

(24) Security. This directive and the information contained herein shall be protected from unauthorized disclosure, provided that, except for Annex A, the Annexes attached to this directive are classified and shall be accorded appropriate handling, consistent with applicable Executive Orders.

GEORGE W. BUSH

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html

posted in Cascadians - 4 replies

Protest the North American Union!!!

walkthespiral — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 00:46:48 GMT

Come and protest the "amero" AUGUST 18th at 1 p.m. at Seattle Center!!!

Read below for more information...

Opposition Builds to the North American Union
author: onthewingsofhelios
August 20-21, 2007 the leaders of Canada, the United States, and Mexico will meet in Montebello, Quebec to attend their semi-secret third Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America summit meeting to advance the North American Union that is already rapidly being established without the involvement of congress or the knowledge of citizens.
Connie Fogal of the Canadian Action Party was on the Alex Jones Radio Show at infowars.com yesterday to discuss the upcoming meeting in Montebello, Quebec, and where the press and public are NOT welcome.

A 25 km (18 mile) security perimeter will be established around the town of Montebello to keep reporters and demonstrators from bringing attention to what is going on; however, many reporters and protesters plan to go there anyway, at least to the perimeter.

A demonstration protesting the meeting and the North American Union will also be held in the United States at the Seattle Center in Seattle on Saturday, August 18, at 1 PM.

In March 2005 George W. Bush and the leaders of Canada and Mexico signed an agreement to form a security and prosperity partnership for a North American "Community." In other words, they agreed to build a North American Union, but while the agreement received little media coverage at the time, it would take another year for even those following the news closely to begin to the significance and scope of the agreement. Every one of our governmental departments was joined with an appointed spp.gov working group that is rewriting regulations and laws to merge the three governmental systems into a regional government. Congress will serve largely to rubber stamp laws as they are presented by these unelected committees, as is now the case for legislatures in the European Union countries.

According to Connie Fogal of the Canadian Action Party, the spp.gov agreement was a political coup d'etat. It was a take over of the executive government of North America with a transfer of power into private unelected committees following the Soviet model. It was, as radio talk show host Alex Jones says, "Red Dawn in slow motion."

The idea of a North American Union might sound innocent enough or even like a nice idea unless you understand the form of government being set in place. It is worth setting aside time to study what is going on and the difference between the Soviet-style system of appointed committees being set up as opposed to the constitutional system set up by the Founding Fathers with elected government and representatives that serve the people, separation of powers between those who make the laws and those who administer the country, and separation of power between the federal government and the states. The American system was set up to insure that the power remained with the people and could not be taken over by a group who might seize control of government. Of course, the ultra-rich and their self-serving think tanks and agents would prefer to simply take over and have their self-appointed committees decide how we will all live. It will be the middle class and average citizen who will have to make sacrifices of freedoms, rights, and their standard of living.

It is worth noting that without the helpful event of September 11 and the pretext of a lurking enemy, these changes necessary for the North American Union such as the umbrella government of Homeland Security, the Patriot Act, the National ID Card (internal passport), "North American Community", which have long been planned could never could have been justified.

Thanks to the effort of activists such as Connie Fogal in Canada, CNN's Lou Dobbs, investigative reporter Dr. Jerome Corsi and his book the Late Great USA, and Alex Jones' documentaries and radio show in the United States, the word is starting to getting out about the take over of our executive branch by the private interests who control the Council on Foreign Relations. We need to see the larger picture of the events of September 11 and how they have been used to justify take over plans that have long been in the works.

The North American Union did not just spring from September 11 as some kind of sudden bust of inspiration. It was planned and plotted for years by a small group of ultra rich who want to run the world. It's up to the people to speak up for their own selfish interests and to support the US Constitution and Bill of Rights and a government that represents and serves the people.

Banker David Rockefeller, honorary chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations, the private think tank that planned the North American Union, with a model of his early project: his Twin Towers.
PICTURE tinyurl.com/2flkue

REFERENCES:

CAP/PAC Leader calls the SPP a "hostile takeover" of the apparatus of democracy
August 2, 2007 tinyurl.com/23t7wt

Discussion of North American Union

Jerome Corsi, writer of the book, The Late Great USA
October 2, 2006
AUDIO tinyurl.com/yvfot2
Start at 5 minutes for Dr. Jerome Corsi and his analysis of the plans for the North American Union.

Interview with Dr. Jerome Corsi
VIDEO
youtube.com/watch

THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS (CFR) PLANNED THE NORTH AMERICAN UNION

VP Dick Cheney talks to David Rockefeller and the Council on Foreign Relations
VIDEO tinyurl.com/2wkcbl

New World Order Chieftains Openly Discuss Dismantling US Border and Bringing Us into the Pan-American Union
June 10, 2005 Links to other articles tinyurl.com/2z6nab

THE CANADIAN COUNCIL OF CHIEF EXECUTIVES (CCE)

The Canadian Council of Chief Executives, a council of the top 150 corporations in Canada ,is dominated by the Council on Foreign Relations in the United States.

Dismantle the border, CEOs say
Make it an 'internal checkpoint,' council argues in citing security and trade concerns
January 14, 2003 tinyurl.com/2x2z97

SECURITY AND PROSPERITY PARTNERSHIP OF NORTH AMERICA (SPP)
It has been described as a hostile take over of the executive branches of the three countries of North America.
www.spp.gov/

Task force urges creation of 'Fortress America'
Increase police, security co-operation, create common external tariff
March 14, 2005 tinyurl.com/funao

President Quietly Creating 'NAFTA Plus'
May 24, 2006
gothinkblog.com/

The American Union is Already Here
June 20, 2006 tinyurl.com/2a9fhh

Canada, the United States, and Mexico... a possible merger?
June 20, 2006 tinyurl.com/ruh9u

A SUPER HIGHWAY WILL BRING GOOD OFF-LOADED IN MEXICO TO THE US AND CANADA

NAFTA Super Highway Map
October 2, 2006
PICTURE tinyurl.com/23xy8o

Bush Administration Quietly Plans NAFTA Super Highway
June 12, 2006 tinyurl.com/hakrn

THE CURRENCY WILL BE THE AMERO

The Plan to Replace the Dollar With the 'Amero'
May 22, 2006 tinyurl.com/gjt24

London stock trader urges move to 'amero'
Says many unaware of plan to replace dollar with N. American currency
November 2, 2006 tinyurl.com/yu6nuc

LOU DOBBS IS ONE OF THE FEW IN THE MEDIA REPORTING ABOUT THE NAU

Lou Dobbs Discusses CFR Plans for a North American Union
Week of July 19, 2005
VIDEO (4:08 min )
tinyurl.com/2sgath

CANADIAN, US, AND MEXICO POLICE AND MILITARY ARE MERGING

Canada-US troop deal 'close'
August 29, 2002 tinyurl.com/2zmlta

Cop wins RCMP settlement after highway search
Jan 28 2005 tinyurl.com/3k347

Armed Mexican Troops Invade US
Eyewitnesses: Under cover of aid, combat ready soldiers roll into Texas
September 8, 2005 tinyurl.com/c23mv

OPPOSITION TO THE NORTH AMERICAN UNION PLANS

Stop the Security and Prosperity Partnership
stopspp.com/stopspp/

Stop the North American Union
www.stopthenau.org/

Canadian Action Party
tinyurl.com/25obxs

contact phone: 604-872-2128

Corridor Watch www.corridorwatch.org

Texas Toll Party www.texastollparty.com

U.S.-Mexico merger opposition intensifies
July 10, 2006 tinyurl.com/pb4nq

THE ULTIMATE GOAL IS A SOVIET-STYLE GLOBAL GOVERNMENT

The Creation of the Global Union
March 13, 2006
VIDEO tinyurl.com/m9d7n

What is wrong with merging the three countries of North America into one regional government? Those in the know, such as a former Soviet dissident warn of an EU Dictatorship, and the North American Union will follow the same model.

Former Soviet Dissident Warns Of EU Socialist Dictatorship
March 2, 2006
tinyurl.com/jgl3d

This might be an explanation of Communism that you have not heard before: a plan by the super-rich for taking over large regions and their resources.

Book: None Dare Call It Conspiracy
reactor-core.org/none-dare.html

found at portland.indymedia.org/en/200...6.shtml

posted in Cascadians - 1 reply

Will Canada become the 51st state?

Alexander — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 12:25:06 GMT

So as the North American Union (NAU) and Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) become increasingly reported in the news and more events are used as an excuse to forge such an axis (or union) we will see a hell of a lot of British Columbian Cascadians realized that a Bioregional Cooperative Commonwealth of Cascadia (or some other form) is in our best interest for the whole region. Especially given that Harper is merely a Canadian NeoCon only looking out for NeoLiberal Interests.

the article:

Will Canada become the 51st state?

The Security and Prosperity Partnership: what it's all about and what it could mean for Canadians

Kelly Patterson, CanWest News Service

Published: Saturday, August 18, 2007
To some, it is a "corporate coup d'etat," a conspiracy by big business to turn Canada into the 51st state by stealth. Others see it as a plot to destroy the U.S. by forcing it into a North American union with "socialist Canada" and "corrupt Mexico."

It is the Security and Prosperity Partnership, a sprawling effort to forge closer ties among the three nations in everything from anti-terrorism measures to energy strategies to food-safety and pesticide rules.

Launched two years ago by then prime minister Paul Martin, President George W. Bush and his Mexican counterpart, Vicente Fox, at the so-called Three Amigos summit in Waco, Tex., the SPP grew out of concerns that security crackdowns would cripple cross-border trade.

Email to a friend

Printer friendly
Font: ****With juggernauts such as China and India looming on the horizon, the three countries agreed they had to act fast to stay competitive. Now the SPP has grown into a mind-boggling array of some 300 initiatives, involving 19 teams of bureaucrats from all three countries.

INTEGRATION BY STEALTH

Its stated mission is "to keep our borders closed to terrorism yet open to trade" by fostering "greater co-operation and information-sharing" in security protocols and economic areas such as product safety.

Little known in Canada, the accord, if implemented, could affect almost every aspect of Canadian life, from what drugs you can access to whether you can board a plane and even what ingredients go into your morning cornflakes.

While you may not have heard of the SPP, you may have heard about some of the controversies it has sparked: Canada's adoption of a no-fly list, negotiations to lower Canada's pesticide standards to U.S. levels or fears the deal will lead to bulk-water exports.

Liberal leader Stephane Dion charged Friday that, "under the veil of secrecy," Harper has let the Americans run roughshod over Canada, covertly using the SPP to impose a U.S. agenda on Canada. That's not what the Liberals intended when they signed the deal, which was meant to give Canada a stronger voice in Washington, not turn it into an"imitation" of the U.S., he says.

Maude Barlow of the Council of Canadians says it is big business that is calling the shots, pushing aggressively for the harmonization -- and downgrading -- of everything from security norms to food standards, in a move that will lead to the "integration by stealth" of the three nations.

"Canadians would be shocked" if they knew the true scope of the SPP, says Barlow, whose Ottawa-based organization represents about 100,000 members.

Fringe groups such as the Canadian Action Party and the Minutemen in the U.S. go further, arguing the SPP is a plot to sweep all three nations into a North American union.

"Where are they getting this stuff?" says Thomas d'Aquino, head of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, which helped launch the SPP.

"This is a very nitty-gritty, workaday initiative" to make trade safer and more efficient through such steps as expanding border crossings and information-sharing programs on plant and animal safety, he says.

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=4b1bc1a3-32be-4aac-af56-5636db7ef5a3

continued:

Will Canada become the 51st state?
The Security and Prosperity Partnership: what it's all about and what it could mean for Canadians
Kelly Patterson, CanWest News Service
Published: Saturday, August 18, 2007
Other SPP projects are no-brainers, such as plans to cooperate in fighting West Nile virus and flu pandemics.

As for fears of a North American union, "anyone who believes that is smoking something," says d'Aquino.

This weekend, the debate hits the headlines across the nation as the three heads of state and their advisers converge on Montebello, Que., 60 kilometres east of Ottawa, for the SPP's third annual summit.

Email to a friend

Printer friendly
Font: ****Thousands of protesters are also expected to descend on the area, hoping to confront the "Three Banditos" about a deal they say is a secretive sellout to the cowboy capitalism and militarism of the superpower to Canada's south.

"We always hoped from the outset we could broaden it beyond security," says Roland Paris, a University of Ottawa professor who worked as an adviser in the Privy Council Office when the SPP was launched. He adds that the SPP's architects hoped the "regular high-level meetings" would help "overcome bureaucratic inertia."

SOVEREIGNTY UNDER FIRE

But they also helped big business and its government allies bypass both the public and Parliament to push through a host of controversial changes without debate or scrutiny, critics charge. They say the accord has enshrined and fast-tracked a longstanding effort to quietly harmonize Canadian programs with those of the U.S. in everything from military policy to food and drug standards.

"The SPP is an unacceptable, closed-door process with enormous implications for Canadians," says NDP trade critic Peter Julian.

Roland Paris scoffs at charges the SPP is a grand design. If anything, he says, it is a timid collection of piddling efforts that has become bogged down in bureaucratic red tape.

"This is not a political vision of the future of the continent. If it were, it would be worth the fuss."

Defenders of the SPP dismiss concerns about regulatory change as fear-mongering, saying the accord aims only to cut out minor, needless variations between the three countries.

The goal is to end the "tyranny of small differences" that can turn the border into a theatre of the absurd, says John Kirton, a University of Toronto professor and expert in the environmental effects of free trade.

If fact, the SPP could dramatically raise standards across North America, proponents say, because it promotes information-sharing among the three countries.

Scientists would swap data on everything from car safety to new chemicals, enabling regulators to better evaluate products and react more quickly to public health threats.

The SPP also includes projects with obvious benefits for all three nations, such as reducing sulphur in fuel and air pollution from ships, and coordinating efforts to curb plant and animal diseases.

All three governments insist that the three nations remain sovereign under the SPP: If Canada doesn't like the way the U.S. does something, it can go its own way.

But NDP trade critic Julian is not so sure. He worries about the effect regulatory convergence will have in the future.

If, for example, Canada wants to pass new rules to deal with greenhouse gases, it could mean "Canada would have to go to Washington and lobby for the kinds of standards and protections they want," he says.

© The Vancouver Sun 2007

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Canadian Broadcaster Avi Lewis on Maher Arar, the North American Security and Prosperity Partnership, Canadian Healthcare, and Argentina's Worker Run Factories

Alexander — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 12:04:33 GMT

Canadian Broadcaster Avi Lewis on Maher Arar, the North American Security and Prosperity Partnership, Canadian Healthcare, and Argentina's Worker Run Factories

From DemocracyNow.org

Listen to Segment || Download Show mp3
Watch 128k stream Watch 256k stream Read Transcript
Help Printer-friendly version Email to a friend Purchase Video/CD

Beginning on August 20, thousands of activists plan to converge in Montebello, Quebec to protest a meeting between President Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon. Canadian broadcaster Avi Lewis discusses the "Security and Prosperity Partnership" and its connection to the rendition of Maher Arar. [includes rush transcript]
Avi Lewis is the host of a new international news analysis show on a mainstream Canadian television channel - CBC - Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. This unapologetically politically progressive daily show is called "On the Map." Avi is also an author and a documentary filmmaker. Earlier this summer Avi, along with award-winning journalist Naomi Klein, co-wrote the forward to a new book on the inside story of Argentina's remarkable movement to create worker-run factories.
"Sin Patron: Stories from Argentina's Worker Run Factories" was published by Haymarket Books in June. The book was compiled by Lavaca, an Argentine editorial and activist collective. Three years ago Avi and Naomi had worked together to produce "The Take" a documentary about the workers in Argentina's reclaimed spaces. Avi Lewis now joins us in our firehouse studio in New York.

Avi Lewis, Host of "On the Map" a new international affairs news and analysis show on CBC Newsworld in Canada. He is also a documentary filmmaker and co-wrote the preface to a new book on Argentina's worker-run factories with Naomi Klein. The book is called "Sin Patron: Stories from Argentina's Worker-Run Factories."
Related Links:

"Sin Patron: Stories from Argentina's Worker-Run Factories by the Lavaca collective, foreword by Naomi Klein and Avi Lewis
The Take (DVD)

On The Map with Avi Lewis

RUSH TRANSCRIPT
This transcript is available free of charge. However, donations help us provide closed captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing on our TV broadcast. Thank you for your generous contribution.
Donate - $25, $50, $100, more...

JUAN GONZALEZ: Avi Lewis is the host of a new international news analysis show on a mainstream Canadian television channel, CBC, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. This unapologetically politically progressive daily show is called On the Map. Avi is also an author and a documentary filmmaker. Earlier this summer, he, along with award-winning journalist Naomi Klein, co-wrote the forward to a new book on the inside story of Argentina's remarkable movement to create worker-run factories.

AMY GOODMAN: Sin Patron: Stories from Argentina's Worker-Run Factories was published by Haymarket Books in June. The book was compiled by Lavaca, an Argentine editorial and activist collective. Three years ago, Avi and Naomi had worked together to produce The Take, a documentary about the workers in Argentina's reclaimed spaces.

Avi Lewis now joins us in our firehouse studio to talk about corporate media, to talk about independent media, to talk about doing independent documentaries, and also talk about this late breaking news about around Maher Arar that we read in headlines, which is the story of this Canadian citizen -- and you can tell us the rest -- who came to our country, the United States, JFK Airport, and was sent off to Syria by US authorities.

AVI LEWIS: This news is astonishing. And when -- you've done great coverage here on Democracy Now! of Maher Arar’s case, and it gripped Canada for months and months on end as this commission went forward and tried to get to the bottom of what happened. Of course, he was completely exonerated. He was given an apology and a settlement, the biggest settlement we’ve ever seen for any case like this.

AMY GOODMAN: It was something like $10 million?

AVI LEWIS: $12.5 million in Canadian terms at that time, but let’s not get confused with the exchange rate. It was over $10 million. When they released the commission report, there were 1,500 words that were blacked out that the government said, “National security, we can't let the public see these words.” And yesterday, those -- the black was removed from most of those words. And what we know now is that it was what we always suspected: it was absolutely a case of CIA rendition. There was a rented Gulfstream jet and everything. Canadian authorities knew within two days of Maher Arar's rendition that he was likely to be tortured in Syria. This is really some of the smoking gun material, in terms of the integration and harmonization of Canadian and US security approaches after 9/11.

But there's another part of the story that is not going to be told in the mainstream coverage, and it's part of a broader context of integration which has been happening since 9/11 in the NAFTA countries. There's something called the Security and Prosperity Partnership. And in ten days, the leaders of the three NAFTA countries will be gathering in ten days in Montebello, Quebec to meet at the latest summit around integration. The SPP has been called NAFTA on steroids. It's a deep integration project that reaches into every aspect of policy, health and immigration and food safety. It's about access to the tar sands in Alberta, this massive and dirty source of energy. And it's happening without any public debate, like NAFTA. It's happening without any legislation, all at the level of regulation and bureaucratic harmonization. Two weeks --

JUAN GONZALEZ: In other words, what you're saying is that there won't -- this won’t be another treaty that will have to be approved by the various parliaments or --

AMY GOODMAN: Elected bodies?

JUAN GONZALEZ: -- elected bodies of the governments?

AVI LEWIS: Precisely. And it's actually been designed that way. And various declassified documents from the SPP meetings over the last couple of years have specifically said that the time is not right for another big public debate, and this should be done by stealth.

The connection between the SPP and Maher Arar is a really deep one. Two weeks after 9/11, the head of the business lobby in Canada, a guy named Tom d’Aquino, called immediately for deep harmonization and integration of US and Canadian policies in order to keep the border open and the trade flowing. Two months later, without any debate or without any legislative debate or really public involvement, they announced this “smart border” initiative for harmonizing the border. And, well, you know, it was a piece of spin, the “smart border” initiative. Nine months later, they announced that they had synchronized and harmonized Canada and the US's approach to passenger screening of international passengers. And one year after 9/11, based on that precise harmonization, Maher Arar was taken and subjected to extraordinary rendition and began his yearlong odyssey in hell in a Syrian prison. So the connection between this mobilization that’s going on in ten days in Quebec around the SPP and the situation of Maher Arar is one that won't be made broadly in Canadian or US media. But for people who care about sovereignty of nations and civil liberties, it's at the heart of it all.

JUAN GONZALEZ: But I’d like to get back to whether they can legally do this, given the fact that, by your description of it, this would require all kinds of federal agencies at all levels with these governments to implement new rules of procedure, or they'd have to have a rulemaking process, at least, that would bring it into the public sphere.

AVI LEWIS: Well, these discussions aren't public, so we don't actually know what -- that's the problem fundamentally. We don't know what rule changes are being proposed or even being made. But they're specifically being made at the level of regulation and not at legislation, so that they can be altered by the government without, you know, disclosure of the kind that you get when you have a full public debate around legislation.

AMY GOODMAN: Avi, this program that you're doing -- we just did this piece on high-power, on full-power FM stations and the importance of community media. We've been talking a lot about Rupert Murdoch, as he takes over the Wall Street Journal and Dow Jones Corporation. Can you talk about media consolidation in Canada and your own media moguls?

AVI LEWIS: Well, most people don’t know -- I mean, I think there's a tendency in the United States and progressive communities to have a little bit of Canada envy. And I don't think -- around issues like healthcare, I think some of it is justified. In terms of media consolidation, Canada actually has a more consolidated media environment than the United States, and this is a largely untold story. But there have been huge mergers just in the last year and a half in Canada and over the past ten years, tremendous consolidation.

One of the big waves of it took place in the late ’90s with a man named Conrad Black at the helm. Now, you folks probably know of Conrad Black, because he had a somewhat publicized fraud trial in Chicago. He was convicted on multiple counts of fraud for $3.5 million of defrauding his company. But Conrad Black in Canada is our sort of Rupert Murdoch. And I think it's something that Americans don't really know. It was treated, to the extent that it was covered, as one of these celebrity corporate scandals.

Conrad Black in 1998 launched a newspaper called The National Post in Canada, with the explicit and stated intention of changing a political landscape of Canada. At that time, Canada had two rightwing parties. And there was a -- he would really champion the campaign with this national newspaper in an unapologetic political, ideological way to unite the right in Canada. And ten years later, we have a conservative government in Canada, because they managed to unite these two rightwing parties. And the shift in the media landscape had a very direct role in that. So Conrad Black is not just a convicted fraudster, as he's been reported in the United States, he really is one of the architects of the neoconservative success in Canada.

AMY GOODMAN: And did that trial have any effect on him, on that power and media control in Canada?

AVI LEWIS: He sold that paper a couple of years later to some other media moguls in Canada that are even more rightwing on some issues. And I don’t think that -- I mean, I think it has to do with -- we need to make the connection between the ideological interest of media barons and how they play out in our public discourse, if these -- in the same way that Enron needed to be seen as a policy and political phenomenon and not just a scandal. If we see them as just corruption trials, then all of a sudden they don't have political consequences. So we have to make those connections.

JUAN GONZALEZ: And what's been the impact of media consolidation on the public space in media? Obviously, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation still exists.

AVI LEWIS: Yeah.

JUAN GONZALEZ: I don't know to what level it is still a major force in Canada.

AVI LEWIS: It's a major force in Canada. And things like the way that we cover elections on public broadcasting in Canada, things like the way we cover things like the Arar commission, there is an independent space within public media. Now, it's subject to huge pressures, and there are huge pressures to privatize the CBC, and there always have been. We're constantly being told that the CBC, that we're a hotbed of leftists by the rightwing corporate media. In fact, the CBC is a bastion of classic journalism of the old school, a very rigorous news environment.

But the CBC recognizes that as a public broadcaster it needs to represent a broad spectrum of views. So they'll give a show to a person like me, whose politics are well known in Canada, and I’m allowed to do point-of-view journalism, where the point of view isn't hidden or, you know, there's no subterfuge where when a guest starts making a point that I don't agree with, all of the sudden I go to a commercial, you know, the [inaudible] resort to passive-aggressive techniques, when they can’t just put their views on the table. And the CBC has rightwing hosts on some shows and some radio shows and commentators on the national news, so it's a real spectrum that we have.

AMY GOODMAN: So what's On the Map?

AVI LEWIS: On the Map is a show that I did in June. Cbc.ca/onthemap has an archive where all the shows that we did in June, a daily international news analysis show, they’re all archived there. And we're going to launch it again in early 2008. And it was an attempt to cover stories that are off the map. A lot of what we do is inspired by what you guys do and have been doing for many years and to try to cover some of the critical stories of the day that for various reasons, political and otherwise, just don't get the attention they deserve.

JUAN GONZALEZ: To get back to the issue of the CBC, for our American audience who’s not familiar with the Canadian system, how is the CBC funded? Is it subject to the same kind of political pressures, for instance, from the rightwing forces that the PBS is in this country?

AVI LEWIS: Well, first of all, I should clarify that I work at CBC Newsworld, which is our all-news network. It's the premiere all-news network in Canada. It really is our CNN for the mainstream audience. It is not publicly funded. It survives on cable revenues. So, you know, cable subscribers pay, and cable operators pass on the revenues for CBC Newsworld. It operates completely independently of the public purse.

But CBC Radio and Television, the main networks, the terrestrial channels, are publicly funded. There's intense independence from government interference. But there are perennial debates about, you know, how much the government is subtly sending messages to the CBC. And what the real story is, is over the past fifteen years a slow starvation by cuts and cutbacks, which is increasing the arguments of those who are in favor of privatization, hobbling the CBC in its ability to cover the world the way that it always has and do programs that are real hits.

AMY GOODMAN: You've just come out with a book on Argentine worker struggles, and that's a companion to the documentary that you and your wife Naomi Klein did in Argentina. Can you talk about the significance of this today?

AVI LEWIS: So delighted to talk about this book. I did not -- we didn't really organize a product shot, but it's called Sin Patron, and this is a book that -- I just wrote the forward with my partner Naomi Klein. It's a book written by the Lavaca collective about Argentina's extraordinary movement of recovered companies.

In the economic crisis that melted down Argentina in 2001, which many of your viewers and listeners will remember, out of that uprising, as Argentina threw out presidents and had a massive upheaval of hundreds and thousands of people in the street, new social movements were born. And one of them were these workers who recovered their bankrupt companies, companies that were pushed out of business by their versions of Conrad Black and Rupert Murdoch and other corporate fraudsters -- actually, Murdoch hasn't been convicted of anything; I should really take that back -- who heavily indebted companies drove them out of business, took the money and ran, when the crisis hit. And these workers were left, literally in the most industrialized country in Latin America, in the strongest middle class in Latin America, all of a sudden they were left in a wasteland of abandoned factories.

And so, what workers started to do was simply get together, form cooperatives and put their factories back into operation. It’s an extraordinary movement. And six years later -- seven years later for some of these companies -- they're still flourishing. They have, in some cases, complete workplace democracy. Decisions are made in assemblies, and the workers all have a single vote. They make all of their struggle decisions, their political decisions, their production decisions democratically. And they have proof that this is, you know -- the managerial class in a lot of industrial settings is a huge burden on businesses. The perks and the chauffeurs and the trips and the consultants were weighing these companies down. And workers are running them very successfully, very democratically, and in solidarity with each other.

This book is an extraordinary work, because it is the definitive work on this inspiring new movement, which has really gripped the imagination of activists around the world in the past few years. And the collective, Lavaca, that wrote it are a worker cooperative inspired by the people whose stories they tell. The book is -- the bulk of the book is in the words of the workers themselves.

JUAN GONZALEZ: And what has happened to that workers cooperative movement once a more sympathetic or progressive government, Kirschner, came to power?

AVI LEWIS: A-ha.

JUAN GONZALEZ: What's been the fate of that movement, continuing to thrive or develop?

AVI LEWIS: You know, in truth, the Kirschner government has not helped this movement in the slightest, and it appears to be almost entirely unaware of it. The movement has thrived without any real assistance from anything in the state in Argentina. And, in fact, the threats continue.

I mean, just this week, the Bauen Hotel, an extraordinarily symbolic place, because it was opened in 1978 by the military, under the military dictatorship, with a huge state loan from the dictatorship to a friendly businessman, a loan that was never paid back, a debt that finally crippled the business -- the workers took it over in 2001. It has become a meeting place for the movement in the center of Buenos Aires, and they’ve been fighting eviction attempts for years. They started with forty or so employees and an empty building, and they now have 150 employees and a beautiful, flourishing hotel, which is also a meeting space, which is also a space of political action. And this week they're facing another eviction threat from a hostile city government.

The Zanon factory, the biggest ceramic tile factory in all of Latin America, which has some 450 employees now -- they make something like 500,000 square meters of tile a month -- are now facing another eviction threat. Despite the fact that they had a court give them a three-year mandate to run the company as a cooperative, the former owner from Italy is launching a separate attempt to get back the business that he drove under. So the movement still has to fight for every little gain that it makes. But it is flourishing.

AMY GOODMAN: Before you leave, Avi, we have to ask you about Canadian healthcare. I’m going to play a clip of Michael Moore's SiCKO, because it has put it certainly on the map here in the United States.

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: We’ve got an issue in America: too many good docs are getting out of business. Too many OB/GYNs aren’t able to practice their love with women all across this country.

NARRATOR: When Michael Moore decided to make a movie on the healthcare industry, top-level executives were on the defensive. What were they hiding?

SECURITY GUARD: That’s not on, right?

MICHAEL MOORE: No.

SECURITY GUARD: OK.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: The intent is to maximize profits.

MICHAEL MOORE: If you denied more people healthcare, you got a bonus?

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: When you do not spend money on somebody, it’s a savings to the company.

PRESIDENT RICHARD NIXON: I want America to have the finest healthcare in the world.

MICHAEL MOORE: Four healthcare lobbyists for every member of Congress. Here’s what it cost to buy these men, and this woman, this guy and this guy.

And the United States slipped to thirty-seven in healthcare around the world, just slightly ahead of Slovenia.

DR. LINDA PEENO: I denied a man a necessary operation and thus caused his death. This secured my reputation, and it ensured my continued advancement in the healthcare field.

NARRATOR: In the world's richest country.

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: I work three jobs.

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: You work three jobs?

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: Yes.

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Uniquely American, isn’t it? I mean, that is fantastic!

NARRATOR: Laughter isn’t the best medicine.

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: I get a bill from my insurance company telling me that the ambulance ride wasn’t pre-approved. I don’t know when I was supposed to pre-approve it -- after I gained consciousness in the car, before I got in the ambulance?

NARRATOR: It’s the only medicine.

MICHAEL MOORE: There was actually one place on American soil that had free universal healthcare.

Which way to Guantanamo Bay?

REP. DUNCAN HUNTER: Detainees representing a threat to our national security are given access to top-notch medical facilities.

MICHAEL MOORE: Permission to enter. I have three 9/11 rescue workers. They just want some medical attention, the same kind that the evil-doers are getting. Hello?

NARRATOR: Michael Moore’s SiCKO.

AMY GOODMAN: That, a trailer of Michael Moore's SiCKO. It has put Canadian healthcare on the map here, and industry fighting back: “What do you mean? You want to stand on those long lines?” Avi?

AVI LEWIS: Yeah, well, you know, yeah, we do have some long wait times in the Canadian healthcare system.

AMY GOODMAN: So, do we.

AVI LEWIS: Yeah, I think you guys do, too. You know, the people who complain about waiting times are rarely the people who have had surgeries. There's a sub-industry in Canada, too, of finding those people who have been waiting two years for a hip or whatever else. Look, the truth is that I think that Michael Moore unduly romanticizes Canada. We have a complicated, problematic healthcare system, like every country in the world. We don't have a fully public healthcare system. There's a huge amount of private insurance and private delivery of services in the Canadian market, the healthcare market, which is increasingly referred to as a market.

But fundamentally, we have universal coverage. And you don't have to be rich to get sick. You know, it's a system, which is -- it really is at the heart of our national identity in Canada, and we argue about it constantly. But the fact is -- like just a quick personal story: I had a huge accident when I was about twenty years old. I took a bad fall. My tibia was split in two pieces, my ankle was shattered. I had major reconstructive surgery: three plates, twenty-four screws, skin grafts, bone grafts. I was a month in the hospital. And when we left the hospital, they gave me a bill for $79 for a pair of crutches that wasn't covered by public insurance. That is also the Canadian healthcare system.

But you have to say that like any public service, people of privilege, people with white skin, people of a certain socioeconomic class, have an advantage, because you have to work the system in order to get the best care. And so, definitely healthcare and its quality is racialized, and it's a matter of class and gender, as well. But fundamentally, we have a belief in our society that we pay, you know, 35%, 45% in personal income taxes, and we are taken care of when we fall down.

JUAN GONZALEZ: In terms of the impact, not only on the individual citizen, but on companies and corporations, as well, I think one of the things that's created the increasing debate in the United States is that major corporations now are facing huge problems in being able to pay for the healthcare insurance of their own employees. What's been the impact in terms of companies in Canada to have this kind of healthcare system that’s basically government-subsidized?

AVI LEWIS: One of the biggest drivers of the Canadian economy is the auto industry on the Detroit-Windsor border. And for many, many years, there were two things that kept it going. One was the Auto Pact, which said if America wants to build a car in Canada, sell a car in Canada, they have to build one there. That was made illegal by NAFTA, and so we don't have those basic trade protections and agreements anymore. But the other thing was that the Canadian healthcare system is a huge subsidy to industries, and along with a low dollar and some of those other policies that we had, Canadian healthcare was seen as -- you know, made Canada a great place to invest, which is why there’s -- well, but there's also huge money at stake. And big healthcare corporations are looking at Canada's market and just going, like, “We’ve got to get in.”

AMY GOODMAN: Well, we're going to have to leave it there. But you can report back to us on how that all pans out.

AVI LEWIS: We're fighting this privatization of healthcare thing in Canada.

AMY GOODMAN: Avi Lewis, host of the new CBC program On the Map, also co-wrote the preface to the new book, Sin Patron: Stories from Argentina's Worker-Run Factories.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/10/142241

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Opposition Builds to the North American Union

Alexander — Sun, 05 Aug 2007 00:05:36 GMT

Opposition Builds to the North American Union
author: onthewingsofhelios
August 20-21, 2007 the leaders of Canada, the United States, and Mexico will meet in Montebello, Quebec to attend their semi-secret third Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America summit meeting to advance the North American Union that is already rapidly being established without the involvement of congress or the knowledge of citizens.
Connie Fogal of the Canadian Action Party was on the Alex Jones Radio Show at infowars.com yesterday to discuss the upcoming meeting in Montebello, Quebec, and where the press and public are NOT welcome.

A 25 km (18 mile) security perimeter will be established around the town of Montebello to keep reporters and demonstrators from bringing attention to what is going on; however, many reporters and protesters plan to go there anyway, at least to the perimeter.

A demonstration protesting the meeting and the North American Union will also be held in the United States at the Seattle Center in Seattle on Saturday, August 18, at 1 PM.

In March 2005 George W. Bush and the leaders of Canada and Mexico signed an agreement to form a security and prosperity partnership for a North American "Community." In other words, they agreed to build a North American Union, but while the agreement received little media coverage at the time, it would take another year for even those following the news closely to begin to the significance and scope of the agreement. Every one of our governmental departments was joined with an appointed spp.gov working group that is rewriting regulations and laws to merge the three governmental systems into a regional government. Congress will serve largely to rubber stamp laws as they are presented by these unelected committees, as is now the case for legislatures in the European Union countries.

According to Connie Fogal of the Canadian Action Party, the spp.gov agreement was a political coup d'etat. It was a take over of the executive government of North America with a transfer of power into private unelected committees following the Soviet model. It was, as radio talk show host Alex Jones says, "Red Dawn in slow motion."

The idea of a North American Union might sound innocent enough or even like a nice idea unless you understand the form of government being set in place. It is worth setting aside time to study what is going on and the difference between the Soviet-style system of appointed committees being set up as opposed to the constitutional system set up by the Founding Fathers with elected government and representatives that serve the people, separation of powers between those who make the laws and those who administer the country, and separation of power between the federal government and the states. The American system was set up to insure that the power remained with the people and could not be taken over by a group who might seize control of government. Of course, the ultra-rich and their self-serving think tanks and agents would prefer to simply take over and have their self-appointed committees decide how we will all live. It will be the middle class and average citizen who will have to make sacrifices of freedoms, rights, and their standard of living.

It is worth noting that without the helpful event of September 11 and the pretext of a lurking enemy, these changes necessary for the North American Union such as the umbrella government of Homeland Security, the Patriot Act, the National ID Card (internal passport), "North American Community", which have long been planned could never could have been justified.

Thanks to the effort of activists such as Connie Fogal in Canada, CNN's Lou Dobbs, investigative reporter Dr. Jerome Corsi and his book the Late Great USA, and Alex Jones' documentaries and radio show in the United States, the word is starting to getting out about the take over of our executive branch by the private interests who control the Council on Foreign Relations. We need to see the larger picture of the events of September 11 and how they have been used to justify take over plans that have long been in the works.

The North American Union did not just spring from September 11 as some kind of sudden bust of inspiration. It was planned and plotted for years by a small group of ultra rich who want to run the world. It's up to the people to speak up for their own selfish interests and to support the US Constitution and Bill of Rights and a government that represents and serves the people.

Banker David Rockefeller, honorary chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations, the private think tank that planned the North American Union, with a model of his early project: his Twin Towers.
PICTURE http://tinyurl.com/2flkue

REFERENCES:

CAP/PAC Leader calls the SPP a "hostile takeover" of the apparatus of democracy
August 2, 2007 http://tinyurl.com/23t7wt

Discussion of North American Union

Jerome Corsi, writer of the book, The Late Great USA
October 2, 2006
AUDIO http://tinyurl.com/yvfot2
Start at 5 minutes for Dr. Jerome Corsi and his analysis of the plans for the North American Union.

Interview with Dr. Jerome Corsi
VIDEO
http://youtube.com/watch?v=cxzs46Nxohk

THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS (CFR) PLANNED THE NORTH AMERICAN UNION

VP Dick Cheney talks to David Rockefeller and the Council on Foreign Relations
VIDEO http://tinyurl.com/2wkcbl

New World Order Chieftains Openly Discuss Dismantling US Border and Bringing Us into the Pan-American Union
June 10, 2005 Links to other articles http://tinyurl.com/2z6nab

THE CANADIAN COUNCIL OF CHIEF EXECUTIVES (CCE)

The Canadian Council of Chief Executives, a council of the top 150 corporations in Canada ,is dominated by the Council on Foreign Relations in the United States.

Dismantle the border, CEOs say
Make it an 'internal checkpoint,' council argues in citing security and trade concerns
January 14, 2003 http://tinyurl.com/2x2z97

SECURITY AND PROSPERITY PARTNERSHIP OF NORTH AMERICA (SPP)
It has been described as a hostile take over of the executive branches of the three countries of North America.
http://www.spp.gov/

Task force urges creation of 'Fortress America'
Increase police, security co-operation, create common external tariff
March 14, 2005 http://tinyurl.com/funao

President Quietly Creating 'NAFTA Plus'
May 24, 2006
http://gothinkblog.com/?p=289

The American Union is Already Here
June 20, 2006 http://tinyurl.com/2a9fhh

Canada, the United States, and Mexico... a possible merger?
June 20, 2006 http://tinyurl.com/ruh9u

A SUPER HIGHWAY WILL BRING GOOD OFF-LOADED IN MEXICO TO THE US AND CANADA

NAFTA Super Highway Map
October 2, 2006
PICTURE http://tinyurl.com/23xy8o

Bush Administration Quietly Plans NAFTA Super Highway
June 12, 2006 http://tinyurl.com/hakrn

THE CURRENCY WILL BE THE AMERO

The Plan to Replace the Dollar With the 'Amero'
May 22, 2006 http://tinyurl.com/gjt24

London stock trader urges move to 'amero'
Says many unaware of plan to replace dollar with N. American currency
November 2, 2006 http://tinyurl.com/yu6nuc

LOU DOBBS IS ONE OF THE FEW IN THE MEDIA REPORTING ABOUT THE NAU

Lou Dobbs Discusses CFR Plans for a North American Union
Week of July 19, 2005
VIDEO (4:08 min )
http://tinyurl.com/2sgath

CANADIAN, US, AND MEXICO POLICE AND MILITARY ARE MERGING

Canada-US troop deal 'close'
August 29, 2002 http://tinyurl.com/2zmlta

Cop wins RCMP settlement after highway search
Jan 28 2005 http://tinyurl.com/3k347

Armed Mexican Troops Invade US
Eyewitnesses: Under cover of aid, combat ready soldiers roll into Texas
September 8, 2005 http://tinyurl.com/c23mv

OPPOSITION TO THE NORTH AMERICAN UNION PLANS

Stop the Security and Prosperity Partnership
http://stopspp.com/stopspp/?p=236

Stop the North American Union
http://www.stopthenau.org/

Canadian Action Party
http://tinyurl.com/25obxs

contact phone: 604-872-2128

Corridor Watch http://www.corridorwatch.org

Texas Toll Party http://www.texastollparty.com

U.S.-Mexico merger opposition intensifies
July 10, 2006 http://tinyurl.com/pb4nq

THE ULTIMATE GOAL IS A SOVIET-STYLE GLOBAL GOVERNMENT

The Creation of the Global Union
March 13, 2006
VIDEO http://tinyurl.com/m9d7n

What is wrong with merging the three countries of North America into one regional government? Those in the know, such as a former Soviet dissident warn of an EU Dictatorship, and the North American Union will follow the same model.

Former Soviet Dissident Warns Of EU Socialist Dictatorship
March 2, 2006
http://tinyurl.com/jgl3d

This might be an explanation of Communism that you have not heard before: a plan by the super-rich for taking over large regions and their resources.

Book: None Dare Call It Conspiracy
http://reactor-core.org/none-dare.html

found at http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2007/08/363036.shtml

posted in Cascadians - 1 reply

the NeoLiberal agenda for you (debt and servitude the NeoFeudal World to come)

Alexander — Sun, 05 Aug 2007 23:12:54 GMT

I was reading parts of Mike Ruppert's "Crossing the Rubicon" and
wanted to post this nice little paragraph about Mr Al Gore's
involvement in the rape and pillage of the former Soviet empire.
Before reading remember that Clinton and Al Gore and most Democrats
adn Republicans are not "liberal" or "conservative", but are
NeoLiberal (wiki definition below of NeoLiberal). Some have
speculated that the real goal of the elite and their paid puppet
politicians are to create debt, both national and private, so as to
push an economic collapse greater than the Great Depression while
before their companies reinvest in China, UAE (Halliburton just
moved there) and other potential safe economic holdouts. Then after
the economic crash these Corporatists will buy out your property,
because most people would rather eat than own property if there is
mass starvation. Here is an example of the all humanitarian
Democrat when they are in positions of power:

"Though the seeds had been planted by the outgoing first Bush
administration, the US assistance program to facilitate Russia's
transition to capitalism took off under the new Clinton
administration in 1993. A task force headed by Vice President Al
Gore, Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, Deputy Secretary of State
Strobe Talbot and involving exclusive US Treasury contracts with
Goldman Sachs, the Harvard Institute for International Development,
the IMF, and the World Bank worked in partnership with the
government of Boris Yeltsin to remake the Russian economy. What
happened was that Russia, in the words of Yeltsin himself, became
a "mafiocracy" and was looted of more than $500 billion in assets;
its economy was ruined, its currency destroyed, its population
rendered desperate, and its ability to support a world-class
military establishment smashed."

from Crossing the Rubicon (page 88) by Mike Ruppert and:

"Journalist Anne Williamson was for many years a leading expert on
Russian and Soviet affairs, spoke to Congress in 1999, and that
record is available. She pulled no punches in describing the rape of
a country and of a people who had already been victimized by seven
decades of Soviet communism:

And there is no mistake as to who the victims are, i.e., Western,
principally US, taxpayers and Russian citizens whose national legacy
was stolen only to be squandered and/or invested in Western real
estate and equities markets.

Western assistance, IMF lending, and the targeted division of
national assets are what provided Boris Yeltsin the initial
wherewithal to purchase his constituency of ex-Komsomol [Communist
Youth League, bank chiefs, who were given the freedom and the
mechanisms to plunder their own country in tandem with a resurgent
and more economically competent criminal class. The new elite
learned everything about the confiscation of wealth, but nothing
about its creation."

Crossing the Rubicon (continued from page 88) by Mike Ruppert

NeoLiberal from Wikipedia:

Neoliberalism refers to a political movement that espouses economic
liberalism as a means of promoting economic development and securing
political liberty. The movement is sometimes described as an effort
to revert to the economic policies of the 18th and 19th centuries
classical liberalism.[1] Strictly in the context of English-language
usage the term is an abbreviation of "neoclassical liberalism",
since in other languages liberalism has more or less retained its
classical meaning.

Overview
Neoliberalism refers to a historically-specific reemergence of
economic liberalism's influence among economic scholars and policy-
makers during the 1970s and through at least the late-1990s, and
possibly into the present (its continuity is a matter of dispute).
In many respects, the term is used to denote a group of neoclassical-
influenced economic theories, right-wing libertarian political
philosophies, and political rhetoric that portrayed government
control over the economy as inefficient, corrupt or otherwise
undesirable. Neoliberalism is not a unified economic theory or
political philosophy -- it is a label denoting an apparent shift in
social-scientific and political sentiments that manifested
themselves in theories and political platforms supporting a reform
of largely centralized postwar economic institutions in favor of
decentralized ones -- and few supporters of neoliberal policies use
the word itself. Neoliberal arguments gained a great deal of
currency after the Stagflation Crisis of the 1970s, the Developing
World Debt Crisis of the 1980s (which primarily affected Latin
America but was felt elsewhere[2]),and the Soviet Collapse of the
early-1990s.

Policies Advanced by Neoliberalism
The definitive statement of the concrete policies advocated by
neoliberalism is often taken to be John Williamson's[3] "Washington
Consensus" , a list of policy proposals that appeared to have gained
consensus approval among the Washington-based international economic
organizations (like the IMF and World Bank). These reforms are
described by Dani Rodrik[4] as:

Fiscal rectitude, meaning that governments would cut expenditures
and/or raise taxes to maintain a budget surplus
Competitive exchange rates, whereby governments would accept market-
determined exchange rates, as opposed to implemented government-
fixed exchange rates, as had prevailed under the Bretton Woods
System
Free Trade, which means the selected removal of trade barriers, like
tariffs, subsidies, and regulatory trade barriers
Privatization, which means the transfer of previously-public-owned
enterprises, goods, and services to the private sector.
Undistorted Market Prices, meaning that governments would
selectively refrain from policies that would alter market prices.
Limited Intervention, which the exception of intervention designed
to promote exports, some kinds of education or infrastructural
development.[5]

Before Neoliberalism
With few exceptions, the economies of most European countries during
Middle Ages were under a considerable degree of state control due to
adherence to Mercantilism ideas and the predominance of the
Feudalism system.

With the coming of the Enlightenment, this system came increasingly
under attack. Arguments that stress the economic benefits of
unfettered markets first began to appear with Adam Smith's (1776)
Wealth of Nations and David Hume's writings on commerce.

These ideas served to guide the policies of governments throughout
much of the 19th century. Notwithstanding the broad intellectual and
popular support for laissez-faire capitalism that existed during
that time, statist ideas slowly began to regain a following amongst
the intellectuals that had rejected them during the early
Enlightenment. While state interventionism increased towards the end
of the 19th century, the Progressive Era saw an accelerated movement
to re-institutionalize government controls over the economy.

With an intellectual and political foundation in place, the onset of
the Great Depression and the rapid industrialization of the Soviet
Union increased support support for government economic control as a
means of securing rapid industrialization.[6] By the end of World
War II, many countries decided to expand their governments
dramatically.[1]

Across much of the world, the economics of John Maynard Keynes,
which sought to formulate the means by which governments could
stabilize and fine-tune free markets, became a highly-influential
ideology. Within the developing world, several developments - among
them decolonization, a desire for national independence and the
destruction of the pre-war global economy[7], and the view that
countries could not effectively industrialize under free market
systems (e.g., the Prebisch-Singer hypothesis) - encouraged economic
policies that were influenced by communist, socialist and import
substitution precepts.

An Economic Golden Age
The rise of government intervention in the 1950s and 1960s brought
an exceptional economic prosperity, in which economic growth was
generally high, inflation was contained[8], and economic
distribution was comparatively equalized[9].

The System Collapses
By the late-1960s, however, the corporatist system that had been
instituted during the 1930s showed strains. Some of these strains
can be located in the international financial system.[10][11], and
culminated in the dissolution of the Bretton Woods system, which
some argue had set the stage for the Stagflation crisis that would
discredit Keynesianism in the English-speaking world. In addition,
some argue that the postwar economic system was premised on a
society that excluded women and minorities from economic
opportunities, and the political and economic integration won by
these groups strained the postwar system.[12]

Neoliberalism's Monetarist Foundation
Neoliberalism is associated with Friedrich Hayek and the Austrian
School of economics, economics departments such as that at the
University of Chicago (and such professors as Milton Friedman and
Arnold Harberger), and international organizations such as the
International Monetary Fund and The World Bank. None of these
parties uses the typically-critical label "neoliberal"; but some
have identified with monetarism. Neoliberalism was founded in the
movement away from the Keynesian economics that were dominant
immediately after World War II in such countries as the U.S. and
England, although it has spread to countries without Keynesian
policies, as disparate as Sweden, South Africa, Argentina, and
Russia. The philosophy promotes a "liberalization" of capital
markets (thus called "neoliberal reform").

A Critical Approach to Neoliberalism
"The standard neoliberal policy package includes cutting back on
taxes and government social spending; eliminating tariffs and other
barriers to free trade; reducing regulations of labor markets,
financial markets, and the environment; and focusing macroeconomic
policies on controlling inflation rather than stimulating the growth
of jobs," reports economist Robert Pollin (2003).[13] Arising out of
a rejection of the class compromises embedded in previous liberal
political-economic policies, including Keynesian and Active Labour
Market Policies (ALMPs), neoliberal theory, institutions, policies,
and practices are not regarded as politically neutral by their
opponents.

Economists remind us that free markets are theoretically efficient,
not fair,[14] and this distinction is a foundation of the critique
of neoliberalism. Opponents critique neoliberalism's effects on
wages, working class institutions, inequality, social mobility,
working class well-being, health, the environment, and democracy.
Notable opponents to neoliberalism in theory or practice include
economists Joseph Stiglitz, Amartya Sen, and Robert Pollin,[15]
linguist Noam Chomsky,[16] geographer David Harvey,[17] the anti-
globalization movement, including ATTAC ((Association pour la
Taxation des Transactions pour l'Aide aux Citoyens, or the
Association for the Taxation of Financial Transactions for the Aid
of Citizens, which began by agitating for the Tobin Tax on foreign
exchange transactions) in Europe. The economists and policy analysts
at the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) offer
progressive policy alternatives to neoliberal policies. In addition,
a significant opposition to neoliberalism has grown in Latin
America, a target of neoliberal policies. Prominent Latin American
opponents include the Zapatista rebellion, and the governments of
Venezuela, and Cuba.

Critics of neoliberalism view neoliberalism as both an economic and
political project aimed at reconfiguring class relations in
societies. Not only have many core countries' labor aristocracy
families been forced to have more than one income-earner, but
workers have been so heavily disciplined by capital and the
capitalist state that, as Alan Greenspan said, they
are "traumatized". [18] Daniel Brook's "The Trap: Selling Out to
Stay Afloat in Winner-Take-All America" (2007) describes the anti-
democratic political effect of decreased middle class welfare.[19]
The massive U.S. military-industrial complex adds an extra layer of
repression to working class "traumatization," according to David
Harvey (2005), making resistance seem unfeasible to most workers.
A "traumatized" working class allows the capitalist class absolute
reign, which Harvey claims--citing the economic crises of 1873 and
the 1920s--to be disastrous for economies around the globe, states,
and working class people; though, he points out, on average
capitalists were not negatively impacted by these crises.[20]

Critics of neoliberalism sometimes refer to it as the "American
Model", which they find promotes low wages and high inequality.[21]
According to the economists Howell and Diallo (2007), neoliberal
policies have contributed to a U.S. economy in which 30% of workers
earn "low wages" (less than two-thirds the median wage for full-time
workers), and 35% of the labor force is "underemployed"; only 40% of
the working age population in the U.S. is considered adequately
employed. The Center for Economic Policy Research's (CEPR) Dean
Baker (2006) has shown that the driving force behind rising
inequality in the United States has been a series of deliberate,
neoliberal policy choices including anti-inflationary bias, anti-
unionism, and profiteering in the health industry.[22] However,
countries have applied neoliberal policies at varying levels of
intensity; for example, the OECD has calculated that only 6% of
Swedish workers are beset with low wages.[23] John Schmitt and Ben
Zipperer (2006) of the CEPR have analyzed the effects of intensive
Anglo-American neoliberal policies in comparison to continental
European neoliberalism, concluding "The U.S. economic and social
model is associated with substantial levels of social exclusion,
including high levels of income inequality, high relative and
absolute poverty rates, poor and unequal educational outcomes, poor
health outcomes, and high rates of crime and incarceration. At the
same time, the available evidence provides little support for the
view that U.S.-style labor-market flexibility dramatically improves
labor-market outcomes. Despite popular prejudices to the contrary,
the U.S. economy consistently affords a lower level of economic
mobility" than all the continental European countries for which data
is available.[24]

Critics of neoliberalism examine the political foundations of the
neoliberal project as well as its economic foundations. One of the
most famous moments in neoliberal political history occurred when
then-U.S. President Ronald Reagan's advisors had him deregulate the
thrift industry. This was promoted with the claim that a gigantic
bonanza of growth and investment was sure to follow. Reagan signed
the deregulation bill in 1982, grinning, "All in all, I think we've
hit the jackpot." The best reckoning is that deregulation bomb
redistributed a trillion dollars from the public upward to
capitalists' private holdings.[25] While Reagan and the United
Kingdom's Margaret Thatcher laid the groundwork for what Alan
Greenspan called working class "traumatization", through eliminating
collective assets by sales to the private sector, enacting policies
to diminish labor unions, and promoting militarization, other
politicians have steadily continued the neoliberal tradition.

According to Pollin (2003), neoliberalism under the U.S. Clinton
administration--steered by Alan Greenspan and Robert Rubin-- was the
temporary and unstable policy inducement of economic growth via
government-supported financial and housing market speculation, with
low unemployment, but also with low inflation. This unusual
coincidence was made possible by the disorganization and
dispossession of the American working class.[26] Berkeley
sociologist Angela Davis has argued and Princeton sociologist Bruce
Western has shown that the astonishingly high rate of incarceration
in the U.S. (1 out of every 37 American adults is in the prison
system), heavily promoted by the Clinton administration, is the
neoliberal U.S. policy tool for keeping unemployment statistics low,
and stimulating economic growth through maintaining a contemporary
slave population within the U.S. and promoting prison construction
and militarized policing.[27]

Harvey (2005) sums up neoliberalism as a global capitalist class
power restoration project. Neoliberalism, he explains, is a theory
of political-economic practices that dedicates the state to
championing private property rights, free markets, and free trade,
while deregulating business and privatizing collective assets.
Ideologically, neoliberals promote entrepreneurialism as the
normative source of human happiness. Harvey also considers
neoliberalization a form of capitalist "creative destruction", a
Schumpeterian concept.[28] This indicates that while neoliberalism
is a critical concept with a critique of capitalist class relations,
it is not strictly a Marxist concept; the Marxist term for
neoliberalism is "primitive accumulation."

Harvey (2000) observes that neoliberalism has become hegemonic world-
wide, sometimes by coercion. Opponents of neoliberalism argue that
neoliberalism is the implementation of global capitalism through
government/military interventionism to protect the interests of
multinational corporations. Even neoliberal proponent Thomas
Friedman has argued approvingly, "The hidden hand of the market will
never work without a hidden fist."[29] In its commitment to
belligerent capitalism, neoliberalism is linked to neoconservatism.

The State-centric Approach to Neoliberalism
The state-centric approach to neoliberalism concurs with the
critical approach that neoliberal ideas are really just laissez-
faire liberal prescriptions that overthrew Keynesianism. State-
centric theorists hold that neoliberalism is "the attempt to reduce
the role of the state in the market through tax cuts, decreases in
social spending, deregulation, and privatization."[30] However, the
state-centric approach argues that state actors were the political
entrepreneurs who formulated neoliberalism--rather than, as critics
of neoliberalism would claim, capitalist political organizations,
and economists and economic departments, think tanks, and
politicians all supported by class-conscious capitalists. State-
centric theorists argue that neoliberalism spread because it fit the
voters' preferences best; they disagree in this with the critical
approach, which maintains that neoliberal framing and policies were
propagated by well-heeled, highly organized political machines that
insisted to the public, "There is no alternative". State-centric
sociologist Monica Prasad (2006) futher argues that neoliberalism
became dominant where labor institutions were too strong and
confrontative; she claims that labor organizations and the welfare
state were the strongest in the U.S. and England.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism

posted in Cascadians - 1 reply

tribal cross-posting of "NW postcards"

LanSing — Sat, 21 Jul 2007 11:15:43 GMT

Today I found these writings about one of my old college professors, David Mason, a biologist/ecologist (among many other things) living in Bellingham. I thought my fellow Cascadians might find it of interest:
http://fairhaven.tribe.net/thread/9ed954cd-4b4f-4e73-89e7-69dbe260865f

posted in Cascadians - 2 replies

Impeachment Debate in Grays Harbor

Alexander — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 23:08:27 GMT

Impeachment Debate in Grays Harbor
author: Mollie e-mail: impeachbush@riseup.net
About 45 people attended the Democrat's meeting in Aberdeen to hear arguments for and against impeachment. Here are the basic arguments that were presented.
Impeachment Objections and Rebuttals
August 2, 2007

Impeachment of Bush/Cheney is hopeless; there isn't time
So the problem I have with impeachment is that there really isn't time. It'll be a long, drawn-out affair, and by the time he's actually nailed, it'll be irrelevant

o Karl Rove Spin: if he can get us to believe that we are helpless to do anything, then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and his boy is safe.
o But the truth is that impeachment does not take long. Nixon, despite having won a landslide victory in 1972, resigned in August 1974 after 3 months of hearings by the Judiciary Committee—before the House could vote on articles of impeachment.
o Clinton—which felt like forever, took a total of 4 months—and that was not full-time work for the Congress. The House began in October 1998 but did not do much because everyone was running for reelection. They passed articles of impeachment without much debate on December 19th. The trial in the Senate lasted 21 days—and that did not consume them—there was no testimony given. They debated for three days and then voted on February 12th, 1999.
o Impeachment of Bush/Cheney will be even quicker because he has already been found guilty of illegal wiretapping and no one disputes his use of unconstitutional signing statements. The evidence for fraud to take us into Iraq is OVERWHELMING. And Rep. John Conyers has already conducted an investigation and issued a report in August 2006.

Impeachment is unnecessary, since they'll be out of office in 2009
But look, Bush and Cheney will be out of office in January, 2009. What's the big deal. Let's just let their terms run out, and they're history? I mean, the things you object to have already been done, haven't they? Why belabor them?

o I see you have been talking with Representative Adam Smith. He believes that the actions of Bush/Cheney will be repudiated in the 2008 election. Of course, this argument would have some weight if Bush and Cheney were actually running.
0 The reason impeachment matters is simply this:
Every President who follows will feel they have the authority to lie to Congress to take us into illegal wars, to spy on anyone without obtaining a warrant -disregarding the 4th amendment, arrest and jail anyone without due process and habeas corpus (5 and 6th amendments), use torture (8th amendment as well as the Geneva Conventions), and refuse to obey provisions of any law passed by Congress by using signing statements.
0 A precedent will be set if they leave office without these actions being repudiated. This will destroy the Constitution and our system of checks and balances.
0 Let me be clear—impeachment is not about whether we like Bush and Cheney, it is not about punishing them, and it is not a referendum on their policies. It is about holding them to account for their abuses of power.
Impeachment is about restoring the Constitution.
Impeachment is about restoring the rights of the citizens
Impeachment is about restoring the balance of power between three co-equal branches of government.

Impeachment would be a distraction from the important work of Congress
But why bother with impeachment, when the Democrats now have a majority in Congress, with a progressive agenda. Impeachment will simply detract from those efforts. Why not get on with the real work of stopping the war, mending the safety net, solidifying electoral gains? Wouldn't impeachment suck all the oxygen out of Congress?

o Given the braindead actions of Congress, it seems like the oxygen has already been sucked out. Their approval rating is lower than Bush's.
o But seriously--when did defending the Constitution become defined as a distraction?
o They all take an oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution. That is the primary job.
o It is also a myth that all action would stop if impeachment begins. The committee that hears the evidence is composed of 20 Representatives: 10 Dems, 10 Reps. So, we are talking 20 people out of 435. It is hard to believe that Congress would come to a screeching halt because 20 Reps are looking at impeachment.
o Again—impeachment does not take long, as I just mentioned.
o While we can argue about how progressive the agenda is—clearly, Kucinich decided to support impeachment when it became clear that the majority of Democrats voted to support funding for the Iraq occupation.
o But for me, the bottom line is this: If I am not safe in my home from government spying without a warrant, if I can be arrested and jailed indefinitely without a trial—then a minimum wage that is less than Washington's is really irrelevant.
o For me, freedom and liberty trumps the so called progressive agenda.

Impeachment will endanger Democratic electoral prospects
Ok, so impeachment is important; impeachment is mandated by the constitution. But the Democrats have to think about elections; they don't have the luxury of doing impeachment.

o Politicians need to stand for something besides reelection.
o But it is also not true that they would be harmed by pursuing impeachment. The Democrats won a huge majority in the 1974 Congressional elections—they were not harmed by impeachment.
o Bush is just as unpopular as Nixon at this point.
o The Democrats may actually do worse by not standing up for impeachment—they look like cowards. And many people like myself will not support any candidate who does not have the courage to oppose the Iraq occupation and who does not sign on for impeachment.

If Bush is impeached, Cheney will be president
If you push for impeaching Bush, I have just two words for you: Dick Cheney. Surely, surely you can't wish him on this country—or are you a closet admirer of our Veep? envious of his charm and affability?

o Patty Murray shares your concern.
o I am not a fan of Darth Cheney but this concern is unfounded.
o Kucinich has a resolution calling for Cheney's impeachment—House Resolution 333. It is the first step. The evidence is overwhelming that he used fraudulent evidence about Iraq. I would not have chosen to go after Cheney separately but all roads lead to Bush.
o Cheney will go first and the Republicans will select a new VP.
o And then Bush will be impeached.

Impeachment is not supported by a majority in Congress
But how in the world can you expect impeachment to take place when only 15 people have signed on to Kucinich's resolution? I mean, I don't see any grand groundswell in Congress for impeachment, no stampede to be first in line to jump on the bandwagon.

o Go back to Nixon: The Democrats had a majority—56 Senators-- in the Senate but did not have the 66 needed to vote for impeachment. There was not much support for impeachment when the hearings started. But as the evidence came out, the Republicans on the committee were persuaded—and all 20 committee members voted for articles of impeachment to go to the full House.
o No one could have predicted that then.
o And certainly no one could have predicted that Nixon would step down rather than tough it out in the House and Senate.
o And no one can predict what will happen once the evidence is on the table about Bush and Cheney.
o There is also now a resolution calling for censure for lying and spying, among other things. So, things may be moving forward in ways we cannot see yet. Censure, however, has no force.

Other presidents have violated the constitution
All right, so this president has violated the constitution. But Bush didn't invent signing statements, the term "imperial presidency" was coined long before Dubya came on the scene. Other presidents have lied to get us into war, run roughshod over people's rights. And look, torture has been going on for decades, people being spied on is nothing new.

o OK—now I know you have been talking to Rep. Smith.
o I don't care what others have done. This is like saying we cannot hold anyone accountable for murder because some people who have committed murder have gotten off.
0 The Nixon impeachment panel dealth with this issue. Here is what Elizabeth Holtzman had to say.

"This committee has firmly rejected the notion that because other Presidents may have abused their powers, the abuses of President Nixon are acceptable. We should make it clear that Presidential lying and deception, in derogation of the Constitutional powers of Congress, are intolerable... ..The sole remedy which Congress can employ to bring a President to account for usurpation of the war-making and appropriations powers is impeachment."
Elizabeth Holtzman, member of the Nixon Impeachment Panel

o Again, this is not about Bush/Cheney. It is about restoring the Constitution. I, like Barbara Jordan, refuse to sit by and watch the Constitution be destroyed.
"My faith in the Constitution is whole; it is complete; it is total. And I am not going to sit here and be an idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the destruction, of the Constitution." Statement on the Articles of Impeachment by Barbara Jordan, July 25, 1974, The House Judiciary Committee.
o At what point, do we say "enough is enough."
o Our actions define who we are as a country and a people. Are we a people who support illegal wars and occupations of other countries? Do we support torture? Do we think people should be arrested and thrown in jail without a trial? Who are we and what do we stand for?

o I stole Elizabeth de la Vega's line:

I miss the Constitution and I want it back!

Impeachment is extreme, divisive, traumatic, unsettling
Ok, so you've made the points that impeachment is doable in the available time frame, that it could actually help the Democrats pass some of their priority legislation. But the process would be traumatic and unsettling; it would divide a country that desperately needs healing, don't you think?

o Our Congressional Representatives have all repeated this Karl Rove line—he is a master of framing issues. Like any abuser, he wants the victims to fear that if they tell the truth, all hell would break loose.
o But there is nothing extreme, divisive or traumatic in standing up for justice and speaking up about what matters.
o Far from dividing us, it will heal us. Impeachment will restore our Constitution and our faith in a system of government that can check presidential abuse through a peaceful process.

"Congressional proceedings for impeachment can bring about open, fearless consideration of the most dangerous acts and threats ever committed by an American President. If courageously pursued, they can save our Constitution, the United Nations, the rule of law, the lives of countless people and leave open the possibility of peace on earth. Each of us must take a stand on impeachment now, or bear the burden of having failed to speak in this hour of maximum peril."
Ramsey Clark, January 15, 2003

Impeachment is not supported by the people of the U. S.
Well, I don't think the American people support impeachment. What evidence do you have that they'd get behind this effort? I mean, we've done street demonstrations focused on impeachment, and half a dozen people show up. Can you impeach with that kind of diffidence?

o The polls are running around 45-50% to impeach Bush if he lied about the reasons for the Iraq war, and running 50-55% for Cheney's impeachment.
o But—about 70% of self-identified Democrats support impeachment and over 60% of the independents support impeachment.
o As the impeachment process reveals more of the information about the lies and abuses of power, more people will support impeachment

The president has the inherent right to do anything necessary to fight terrorism
But look, this country was attacked on 9/11, by people whose interests go directly against ours. Is the president supposed to settle for business as usual? I think he has the inherent right to take extraordinary measures to keep the country safe.

o These is nothing in the Constitution that gives the President extraordinary authority and there was nothing in authorization for war that gave him additional powers.
o The key question that we need to answer is:
§ Does the President have the right to violate laws whenever he deems necessary?
o The Founders of this country said NO. And provided impeachment as a way to reign in an abusive President, especially in times of war. They knew that perpetual war would provide the opportunity for Presidents to become elected despots.

"A state of war is not a blank check for the president when it comes to the rights of the nation's citizens."
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor
"There are no hereditary Kings in America and no powers not created by the Constitution. So all 'inherent powers' must derive from that Constitution."
Federal Judge, District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor

Ok, I'm convinced; now what do I do?

0 Get involved in the Process. Use Your Voice. "If not, America is going to be in for a really bad hair day."—Elle Woods, Legally Blonde II.

What you can do:

1. Tell your US Representative that you want him to sign on to HRes 333—to impeach Cheney, as a first step.
Email, call, write, meet with and get in his face at every chance to let him know your views.
Call toll free: You will speak to their staff but they will still register your views. Call often.

Toll free DC switchboard: 1-800-828-0498, 1-800-614-2803

2. Educate others: show the "How to Impeach a President" DVD and/or the "Our Constitution in Crisis" DVD—to friends, family, neighbors and the community. (see www.citizensimpeach.org to find out how to get copies)

3. Organize: to get petitions signed, to get local governments to pass Impeachment resolutions, get local political groups to support impeachment resolutions.

4. Write letters to the editor supporting impeachment.

5. Demonstrate, hold rallies, hold forums on impeachment.

6. Be ready to go back to the Washington Legislature next year if Congress does not impeach. We will once again seek an impeachment resolution from the State Legislature and this time, we know more and be better organized.

7. Stay informed. Sources can be found at our website: www.citizensimpeach.org

homepage: http://www.citizensimpeach.org

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2007/08/363015.shtml

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Sustainable Cascadian Economics

rorybowman — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 19:56:16 GMT

I am a huge fan of sustainable economics, which is a bit of a buzzword now but has some clear models for us to emulate, from small sole-proprietor businesses to hugely successful cooperatives such as REI or PCC Natural Markets in Puget Sound. What are some good models for folks to look to, going forward? I list a few that come immediately to mind but I know there are dozens of others. What are your favorites?

http://www.tillamookcheese.com/OurStory/
http://pacsac.org/
http://www.oregoncountrybeef.com/
http://burgerville.com/html/about_us/index.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.E.I.
http://vancouverfood.org/weblog/2007/07/pnw_food_cooperatives.html

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

"The Idol Market" or Ten Dogmas of Neoliberalism

Alexander — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 15:44:53 GMT

"The Idol Market" or Ten Dogmas of Neoliberalism
author: Willy Spieler e-mail: mbatko@lycos.com
Neoliberalism refuses any social or ecological limitation and has all the attributes of a dogmatic religion. For neoliberalism, there is only an ethic of individuals, not a social ethic that judges according to a standard of social justice.
"THE IDOL MARKET"
OR TEN DOGMAS OF NEOLIBERALISM

By Willy Spieler

[This article by the editor of the Swiss "Neue Wege" is translated from the German in: Neue Wege 93, July/Aug 1999.]

Once "neoliberalism" was not identified with the pure market ideology. The "social market economy" was initially included in this term. What appears today as "neoliberal" outlaws the term social. Only a "market economy without adjective" is sought!

The ideology of a pure market economy goes back to Friedrich August von Hayek (1899-1992) who as a professor of economics was even honored with the Nobel Prize for economics. His best known book "The Way to Serfdom" appeared in 1944 in England and was dedicated to "socialists in all parties." This dedication was directed to middle class representatives of a social market economy intent on social balance.

This ideology of a "pure" market economy unconcerned about social or ecological criteria is made absolute. No other authority is endured beside or over itself. As a result, it becomes an idol like everything finite that absolutizes itself, whether called state, nation, party or church. "The Idol Market" is also the title of a liberation theology book by Franz J. Hinkelammert and Hugo Assmann. Idols have their own magic and fascination. They are overthrown when their absurd exhibitionism is unmasked. This essay seeks to contribute to that unmasking.

Neoliberalism refuses any social or ecological limitation or qualification and has all the attributes of a dogmatic religion. Without claiming completeness, its dogmas are 1. The more the market develops unrestrained, the more it leads the economy to the good. 2. There is no alternative to the global and total market. 3. The market is our fate. 4. This fate demands sacrifice for a better future. 5. The laws of the market are valid absolutely. 6. If the market is in conflict with democracy, the market can demand democracy's abolition. 7. No social ethic can set limits to the market. 8. There is also no business ethic since the only social responsibility of a business consists in increasing profits. 9. The highest criterion of the market is its efficiency. 10. Efficiency presupposes business decisions only oriented in the logic of the market that enforces this logic with the necessary severity.

1. The more unrestrained and free is the market, the more it leads the economy to the good

For neoliberalism, the market economy is a spontaneous order arising by itself by itself according to the mechanism of supply and demand. Assets are exchangeable for other assets, products for money and labor for wages. The suppliers are in competition with each other which produces the best and most reasonable goods and services for as many people as possible. In this idealized characterization, the market always produces social balance. No social market economy is necessary since the market economy always turns out to be social.

According to the neoliberal interpretation, the market can only fulfill its social function when it is free from state bonds. The function of the state is to advance de-regulation in economic and social policy, in other words to become an "anti-state." The more freely economic subjects pursue their own interest on the market, the more they serve the goal of the economy, providing people with goods and services.

That the market constantly coordinates individual self-interests into the well-being of the whole is a dogma, not an empirically verifiable statement today. Adam Smith (1723-1790), the founder of "classical" economic liberalism, believed in an "invisible hand" that brings all interests of economic subjects into a constantly new balance. Following the bee fable of the English philosopher and contemporary Bernard de Mandeville (d. 1773), a community thrives best when its members strive for nothing but the realization of their interests which can be selfish interests. The "invisible hand" even molds these egoisms into the welfare of the whole. Private vices become public good deeds. "Private vices equal public benefits."

The following sentence hurled by a German economics professor Hermann Sauter against his leftist rival Ulrich Duchrow (in: Okumenische Rundschau January 1995) shows that the blind trust in the "invisible hand" rises from the ashes or rears its ugly head again. "The market is concerned objectively for solidarity even if individuals do not see this." Thus solidarity does not rest on ethics but is produced by itself, quasi-sacramentally (ex opera operato) through the market. Sauter is a member of the board for church development service of the Evangelical church in Germany.

2. There is no alternative to the global and total market

Neoliberalism presents itself as an ideology without alternative. As every dogma is exclusive, the dogma of the pure market economy also raises a claim to exclusivity. Outside the market there is no salvation! Many of our "economic leaders" as they describe themselves also defend this dogma of a market economy. The merger of Novaris and UBS is an example. The marriage of the two Basel chemical giants on March 7, 1996 was not necessary since Ciba and Sandoz set record profits the previous year. The president of the Novaris governing board Alex Kramer justified the merger with the pithy words: "Being good is not good enough. Only the best takes everything... " "Only the best" is the goal; the others are consecrated to destruction. The market economy without adjective is also a market economy without alternative.

In zealous obedience toward the demands of the world market, the fusionists of Novaris and UBS chose the "right moment" for their project in order not to be "forced" later to a merger out of weakness. The economics editor of the "Neue Zurich Zeitung" (NZZ), Gerhard Schwarz, summarized "no firm can evade the dictation of worldwide competition unpunished in the long run" (March 9/10, 1996).

What is true for the freedom of the market was also true in days of yore for freedom in dialectical materialism. Dialectical materialism confined itself to "insight in necessity." The market is a coercive mechanism. Whoever refuses does this at the price of economic downfall. As Mr. Schwarz formulated, "Whoever wants to be competitive must consistently join in. Otherwise the market quickly shows him the red card." "There is no alternative from a total social perspective, the vantage point of the public interest."

"The Man without Alternative" was the title of a book by the young Polish Marxist Leszek Kolakowski widely discussed in the 1960s. He leveled powerful criticism as a Marxist scholasticism that also allowed no alternative since it claimed to be the absolute truth about the course of history and a kind of end time promise. In a famous essay, Pierre Bourdieu pointed to the parallels between modern neoliberalism and vulgar Marxist determinations of the past. The French sociologist was surprised about the "new faith in historical inevitability grounded on the primacy of productive forces (and technology), a new form of economism that at other times and in the ranks of the same believers spread under the banner of Marxism" (Tages-Anzeiger, No.6, 1996). The parallels are striking.

3. The market is our fate

The market is our fate; neoliberalism is a religion of fate. Novaris president Kramer described the demolition of 10,000 jobs as "regrettable but unavoidable in the interest of the future." Staff reductions are only unavoidable because the capital profit had to rise 20 percent. The fusionists deny they only consider shareholder interests and accept even more unemployment in return. In the Sonntags Zeitung (March 17, 1996), the Novaris president said: "This argument comes from the last century. A conflict of goals between capital and labor is constructed. This is no longer in keeping with the times. Global competition occurs today on one side between locations and on the other side between communities of fate. The Basel region as a location is a community of fate."

The "community of fate" with its "esteemed co-workers" also belongs to the fate religion of corporate functionaries. However this is not a community of equals. The extolled "shareholder democracy" only exists on paper. Fate religion creates its own hierarchies.

The workers have nothing to say. The social-ethical priority of labor leftist capital is turned upside down. Profit maximization is more important than the preservation or creation of jobs. Businesses are property objects that capital can control as it likes, merging, selling or exploiting according to the style of raiders. There is no evidence of "association of persons" with vested rights of co-determination as the social ethic of Christian churches envisions. Such structures were not agreeable to capital but were almost a positional disadvantage on the world market. Its fatefulness allows no space for social-ethical "idealism."

4. The market demands sacrifice for a better future

People must suffer under the laws of the free market. For neoliberalism, they have to make this sacrifice for the sake of the freedom of the market which promises a brilliant future to humanity as a whole, if not to them as individuals.

That jobs "must" be destroyed to be preserved is part of this sacrifice religion. Sacrifice is proclaimed to them in a language reminiscent of George Orwell. If it is bad for you today, it is only so you can survive t6omorrow. You are handed over to shareholder interests come what may. When these are satisfied even at your expense, you have a future. But be comforted, this future will bring work and prosperity to everyone. The "dictation of worldwide competition" causes conflicts and hardships to largely dissolve on the aggregate social plane and in the long term," the NZZ comforts us. Novaris head Vasella, a former surgeon, formulated this in a somewhat less reserved way. To the "Financial Times," he said: "Job reduction is like a surgical operation. You know it hurts but it is in your best interest. To cut slowly and not deep enough is the worst."

These rationalizations never end. They justify the dismissals of tomorrow, not only the dismissals of today. "What is true for tomorrow is also true for the day after tomorrow," the social ethicist Peter Ulrich objected (TA, Dec 29, 1996). The prognosis that one-fifth of the world population able to work can keep the whole world economy going is already widespread. What will happen with the remaining 80 percent? What befell "command socialism" will also befall capitalism. The good end of history suffers under "parousia delay." The promise of a bright future will never be honored and the sacrifices will become greater and more senseless.

5. The laws of the market are valid absolutely

Neoliberalism is defined by belief in an absolute authority of the laws of the naturally growing "total" and "global market" left to itself. When the rich become richer and richer and the poor become poorer and poorer, the market cannot be responsible, only the state which hinders the market with too many regulations. Since a self-healing power starts from market forces, there can never be a market failure, only a state failure. This is obviously a circular argument but this deficient logic does not worry the priests of the free market economy and exorcists of all state interventionism. Allowing the "visible hand" of the state to intervene against the "invisible hand" of the market would be a lack of humility.

The liberal German politician Otto Graf Lambsdorff writes in the NZZ (Oct 29, 1995) the prohibition of child labor in the third world would have "catastrophic consequences," not child labor itself. "Such a prohibition would mean hunger, child prostitution and distress." This is similarly true for ecology. Only "free trade" can create prosperity since it enables people to have a sufficient environmental consciousness. Conversely, does this environmental consciousness result from the damages inflicted on the environment by deregulated free trade?

Neoliberalism shows all the characteristics of a fundamentalist religion. It does not fall back on the "absolute truths" of a "revelation" but on the "worldly" laws of the market for which it claims absolute obligation. Therefore liberation theologians like Hugo Assmann and Franz J. Hinkelammert speak of a "powerful process of idolatry" and "its conspicuous expression in the supposed self-regulation of the mechanisms of the market."

On every dollar, we read "mammon" guides the "invisible hand." Besides money, the "fetishism of goods" analyzed by Marx is rated positively by a new perverse "sales culture." The prophetesses and prophets of advertising no longer praise goods but sacraments. The products offered for sale need not correspond to genuine needs but satisfy the insatiable longings of customers. "Advertising assumes the function of evangelization and the proclamation of the Good News of salvation," writes Leonardo Boff.

The Gottfried Duttweiler Institute, an institute studying trends, held a meeting in June 1994 on the marvelous mutation of goods into "cult products." In the invitation prospectus, the question was raised: "How do sacred products arise?" "Cult marketing" and "spiritual selling" are the new marketing trends. A "religious affection" for products must be awakened against the "moralization of consumption and demonization of pleasure." "Consumer rituals" and "tribal membership of the `like-minded' define shopping today, not simply experiences or prices. "The spiritualization of markets and the creation of cult products occur along with a revaluation of brand-name articles into fetishes." Advertising today has the function of providing an "explanation of the world" "through strong metaphors." "The goods themselves become the strongest of all religions," declared a satisfied GDI representative after the meeting (TA, June 18, 1994).

6. If the market is in conflict with democracy, the market is entitled to abolish democracy.

"The economy was never a democratic process," the Novaris head and former Trotskyite Vasella said (Weltwoche, March 19, 1999). This is a problem of politics, not only of the economy. The more an undemocratic economy is deregulated, the more powerful it becomes and the more it begins to regulate politics. This is shows in the manner and way that the economy forces policies to a murderous (suicidal) struggle for location advantage. The goal of politics is what keeps happy the large investors and taxpayers, not what public interest requires.

Contempt for democracy has an ideological explanation in neoliberalism. As every fundamentalism is anti-democratic since absolute truths avoid democratic decision, the "fundamentalism of the market" is anti-democratic. In the case of conflict, the market claims precedence over democracy. If democracy no longer serves or offers sacrifice to the market, then dictatorship is justified.

Several years ago the NZZ described Chile's military dictatorship under general Pinochet as an "economic model" (Jan 11/12, 1992). Economics editor Gerhard Schwarz bid farewell to the "convenient" thesis that "market economy and democracy belong together like twins." He referred to examples like Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan and especially Chile where "brutal dictatorship led to the market economy and growth." Mr. Schwarz also recommended this brutal dictatorship as an "economic model" to former "command socialist" countries. Otherwise "system change" runs the "permanent danger" of leading to a third way between planning and the market that is condemned to failure."

Why should this "third way" inevitably fail? "Practical logic" is the reason, said Mr. Schwarz. "Practical logic" is the fundamentalism that forces people to their happiness. "Practical logic" also underlay the "socialist relations of production" that followed the "iron" laws of historical materialism. "Practical logic" does not agree with democracy but leaves decisions to others accepted by the guardians of absolute truth.

Whoever was so naďve to hope for the beginning of a world-embracing democratic culture with the end of the Cold War is now taught something else. The good purpose of the total market also sanctifies the means of "authoritarian dictatorship." Neoliberalism is no longer forced by system competition to appear on the democratic human rights side in politics. The NZZ (Dec 28/29, 1996) even rejoices that "the social challenges launched by the Soviets" have now become "invalid." Capital no longer needs to fear that its victims will turn to the other system. During the time of the Cold War, the world power could never have said so openly that the "market economy" is more important for capital than democracy.

"Globalization and its social consequences help authoritarian more than democratic constitutions," Ralf Dahrendorf said (DIE ZEIT, Nr 14, 1997). This pessimistic liberal who imagines humanity is "at the threshold to the authoritarian century" is doubtlessly right insofar as globalization stands under a neoliberal sign.

7. There is no social ethic that can set limits to the market

The apologists of the "free market economy" reject the reproach of fundamentalism. For them, their theory of the deregulated or total market is not fundamentalist but a criticism that measures the market and its results by social justice.

For neoliberalism, there is only an ethic of individuals, not a social ethic that judges social structures according to a standard of social justice. For Hayek, justice is only an individual virtue and conforming to the system requires only respect for property and fulfillment of contracts. This is also true for the foreign indebtedness of third world countries. Neoliberal ethics requires keeping agreements and paying debts even if the poorest must be sacrificed. Giving alms is in order. However combating the social causes of poverty would be interventionism. Roberto Campos, planning minister under the Brazilian military government and Hayek's admirer, mocks the "option for the poor." "Strictly speaking, no one can opt for the poor. The option that can be made is for the investor who creates jobs for the poor."

That the Biblical message is completely reversed by changing private vices into social virtues does not trouble this neoliberalism. It is convinced that interventionism is of the devil and that the good can only occur in the form of the market and never in the form of social justice. Hayek describes the word "social" as a "weasel word." A weasel is the little animal that sucks out an egg leaving the shell empty. When the word "social" is connected with the market economy, constitutional state, conscience or justice, it sucks dry these terms and kills their meaning.

Hayek declares flatly "a social market economy is not a market economy, a social constitutional state is not a constitutional state, a social conscience is not a conscience, social justice is not justice and social democracy is not democracy." As a result, the "amorality" of the market is sanctioned whatever its consequences may be, even unemployment, poverty or ecological destruction.

Hayek also opposes the social ethic of the churches that supports "social justice," this "slogan of socialism." "A heavenly promise of justice is replaced by a worldly promise." The reproach is directed "particularly at the Roman Catholic church" that "makes the goal of social justice into part of its official doctrine."

8. There is also no business ethic since the only responsibility of a business consists in increasing profits.

Whoever dislikes social ethics cannot usually accept business ethics. He reinterprets and limits it to the interpersonal "charitable" sphere. The denial of all social responsibility of business is also typical for neoliberalism. When the "social responsibility" of business is mentioned at all, it is reduced to profit maximization. Neoliberal "business ethics" follows the famous notorious axiom of Milton Friedman "the social responsibility of business is to increase its profits" (the title of a 1970 essay for Time magazine). Economics professor Walter Wittman writes similarly, "In the market economy, a firm has no social obligation. Social policy is a state problem" (TA, Dec 16, 1977). The former Zurich financial director Eric Honegger reiterates: "Realizing profit is the only economic duty of a business" (NZZ, Oct 5/6, 1996). Such sentences move on the same plane as if unions would say the duty of workers is to receive wages, not to do work.

When shareholder value triumphs, ethics resigns as if is said "Greed is good, sharing is harmful." This development can lead to dramatic conflicts of conscience. There are top managers who want to take ethical responsibility for their actions and see themselves exposed to a vast pressure of capital interests, especially from powerful investment funds. In "Spiegel" March 8, 1999, Hubertus von Grunberg, head of the Continental tire company, told of his fears of a hostile takeover. Pirelli already made such an attempt. "Today we can only defend ourselves from a takeover through a high stock price. Our investors want to see profits. Otherwise they will bale out, the price will fall and the danger of a takeover will increase." Therefore he had to shut down a whole factory. "This is cynical: the distress of my employees brought me success with my shareholders." Investors want to reduce jobs even more. His reply that he is not a "job killer" is pointless. "This is my problem, the investors think. Their duty is to seek higher earning power and prices of the business shares."

9. The highest criterion of the market is efficiency

The only criterion allowed by the ideology of the "free market economy" is efficiency. According to this criterion, it believes it has won the system competition with "command socialism." But what really is the criterion of efficiency? Work for everyone? Liberation from poverty? The end of the worldwide problem of hunger? No, the criterion is "business success" which according to the economics editorial staff of the NZZ "should be measured by the economic value created for the owners" (Aug 24/25, 1996). In the 1996 New Year edition, the paper raved about "international capital" "that travels the globe, searching for the `best host,' comparing, evaluating and gaining worldwide efficiency and speed from its homelessness."

This system is so efficient that it endangers its own prerequisites, social peace, sustainable relations with natural resources and so forth. It is blind by closing itself to all questions about the meaning and limits of economic efficiency. It is amorous in its downfall. This is part of the sacrifice we owe to the idol market. As Hinkelammert explains, "an invisible hand" leads to a result as though following a uniform plan of destruction" (Neue Wege 1993, p.253). "Visible hands" are replaced with faith in the "invisible hand."

10. Efficiency is implied in business decisions oriented only in the logic of the market that enforces this logic with the necessary severity.

Whoever follows the language of this efficiency or shareholder fetishism encounters astonishing arguments. The chemical manager and FDP member of the National Assembly Johannes R. Randegger teaches us in "Weltwoche" (Nov 7, 1996): "The economy argues with its own logic. Whoever does not decide brutally quickly loses his chips." "In their personnel, businesses must create a feeling of urgency and defense," Arthur Andersen counsels. Whoever does not have enough efficiency becomes "affluent waste," the 1997 non-word of the year coined by Helmut Maucher. Waste is worthless and is one of the things that disgust us...

The "killer instinct" is regarded as a special mark of quality of a manager. One manager, Helmut Maucher, said in 1991 he was grieved by "ethical and social murmuring." Managers with a "will to battle" and "killer instinct" are demanded (Arbeitgeber I/1991). An offspring of the British Rothschild banking house was described as a "family man" who lacked the "necessary killer instinct" to successfully manage the business (TA, July 12, 1996). A business consultant Werner Halter found a striking argument for the freedom of movement of persons between Switzerland and the European Union (EU). According to NZZ (March 28, 1996), he recommended several "killer fish" to "fish tank Switzerland" for strengthening the remaining stock. Sexist language against women is also not lacking with all this verbal violence...

Neoliberalism has made a reality out of an ideology and shamelessly exaggerates its one-sidedness. The poor become poorer and the rich richer because of a gigantic redistribution from bottom to the top is charged to its account. In the meantime capitalists doubt "their" system. For example, the US financial guru Georges Soros said: "The global freedom of movement of capital that evades taxation worries me. This reduces states' capacity to offer social benefits. The poor must pay more since the rich run away" (Spiegel, April 6, 1998). Elsewhere he said: "The most important enemy of the open society is no longer the communist but the capitalist threat" (ZEIT-Punkte 6/97). I would not go so far as the social ethicist Peter Ulrich who declared to "Tages-Anzeiger" (Dec 29, 1998) "neoliberalism strictly speaking is already almost dead." Then this essay would be unnecessary. Neoliberalism does not give up so quickly.

homepage: http://www.mbtranslations.com
address: http://www.commondreams.org

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2007/08/362893.shtml

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

the war for control of our water

Alexander — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 15:04:45 GMT

DemocracyNow just did an episode devoted to the privatization of water. As bioregionalists (I assume most of us are that) water should be one of the major focuses of this group.

DemocracyNow:

The Bottled Water Lie: As Soft Drink Giant Admits Product is Tap
Water, New Scrutiny Falls on the Economic and Environmental Costs of
a Billion Dollar Industry

Listen to Segment || Download Show mp3
Watch 128k stream Watch 256k stream
Help Printer-friendly version Email to a friend
Purchase Video/CD

---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
The soft drink giant Pepsi has been forced to make an embarrassing
admission – its best-selling Aquafina bottled water is nothing more
than tap water. Pepsi has agreed to change its label under pressure
from the advocacy group Corporate Accountability International (CAI)
which has been leading an increasingly successful campaign against
bottled water. We look at the economic and environmental costs of
the bottled water industry with CAI's Gigi Kellett and freelance
journalist Michael Blanding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
The soft drink giant Pepsi has been forced to make an embarrassing
admission – its best-selling Aquafina bottled water is nothing more
than tap water. Last week Pepsi agreed to change the labels of
Aquafina to indicate that the water comes from a public water
source. Pepsi agreed to change its label under pressure from the
advocacy group Corporate Accountability International which has been
leading an increasingly successful campaign against bottled water.
In San Francisco, Mayor Gavin Newsom recently banned city
departments from using city money to buy any kind of bottled water.
In New York, local residents are being urged to drink tap water.The
U.S. Conference of Mayors has passed a resolution that highlighted
the importance of municipal water and called for more scrutiny of
the impact of bottled water on city waste.

The environmental impact of the country's obsession with bottled
water has been staggering. Each day an estimated 60 million plastic
water bottles are thrown away. Most are not recycled. The Pacific
Institute has estimated 20 million barrels of oil are used each year
to make the plastic for water bottles.

Economically it makes sense to stop buying bottled water as well.
The Arizona Daily Star recently examined the cost difference between
bottled water and water from the city's municipal supply. A half
liter of Pepsi's Aquafina at a Tucson convenience store costs one
dollar and thirty nine cents. The bottle contains purified water
from the Tucson water supply. From the tap, you can pour over six
point four gallons for a penny. That makes the bottled stuff about
7,000 times more expensive even though Aquafina is using the same
source of water.

Two guests joins us from Boston:

Gigi Kellett. Associate Campaigns Director at Corporate
Accountability International joins us in Boston. The group is
spearheading the Think Outside the Bottle Campaign.

Michael Blanding. Freelance journalist and author of the article for
Alternet.org "The Bottled Water Lie."

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/01/1435240

Salvadorans Face Terror Charges for Opposing Water Privatization

Listen to Segment || Download Show mp3
Watch 128k stream Watch 256k stream
Help Printer-friendly version Email to a friend
Purchase Video/CD

---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
A protest against water privatization in El Salvador last month
resulted in 13 demonstrators charged with committing acts of
terrorism. If found guilty they could face up to 60 years of prison
time under laws modeled on the USA Patriot Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
We turn now to El Salvador where a protest against water
privatization early last month ended with the arrest of fourteen
protestors, thirteen of whom were subsequently charged with
committing acts of terrorism.
On July 2, hundreds of people had gathered in the Suchitoto
municipality to protest President Antonio Saca's plan to
decentralize water distribution. They saw the plan as an attempt to
privatize municipal water resources as stipulated in a 1998 World
Bank loan. The protestors were met with heavily armed riot police
who fired rubber bullets and tear gas on the crowd and detained
fourteen people. Among those arrested was a journalist covering the
protest and members of CRIPDES, the Association of Rural Communities
for the Development of El Salvador. They were on their way to attend
the rally in Suchitoto.

Last week the prisoners were released on bail as a result of
national and international pressure. But the charges of terrorism
remain and if found guilty they could face up to 60 years of prison
time. El Salvador's anti-terrorism law came into effect last year
and is modeled on the USA Patriot Act. Human rights groups have
condemned the government's response and application of this
draconian law. Human Rights Watch said yesterday that the law
criminalizes a wide variety of acts most of which "do not fall
within any reasonable definition of terrorism."

Krista Hanson. Program Director of Committee in Solidarity with the
People of El Salvador. Website: Cispes.org.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/01/1435246

Stockton, California City Council Reverses Water Privatization It
Passed Over Widespread Local Opposition

Listen to Segment || Download Show mp3
Watch 128k stream Watch 256k stream
Help Printer-friendly version Email to a friend
Purchase Video/CD

---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
We end with a major victory for the opponents of water
privatization. In 2003, the City Council of Stockton, California
ignored overwhelming public opposition to approve a $600 million
dollar, 20-year water privatization agreement. The deal gave a
multinational consortium full control over the city's water, sewage,
and stormwater systems. But two weeks the council reversed the
position and voted unanimously to resume control of its water
utilities. We speak with Alan Snitow, co-director of an award-
winning PBS documentary on water privatization and co-author
of "Thirst: Fighting the Corporate Theft of our Water."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
We end today's show with a major victory for the opponents of water
privatization. I'm talking about Stockton, California – a place that
has long been at the center of California's water wars.
In late 2003, despite concerted efforts by a wide coalition of
groups, the City Council voted in favor of a 600 million dollar 20
year water privatization agreement. The deal gave a multinational
consortium made up of the Colorado based OMI and the London-based
Thames Water full control over the city's water, sewage, and
stormwater systems.

Two weeks ago the city of Stockton reversed its earlier position and
voted unanimously to undo the privatization deal and resume control
of its water utilities. Before we discuss the current victory, let's
go back to the city council vote in favor of privatization in
February 2003. I want to play a clip from the 2004 PBS
documentary "Thirst" - that brought national attention to the
struggle in Stockton.

Excerpt of "Thirst."
Alan Snitow joins us now from San Francisco.

Alan Snitow. Co-director of "Thirst" – the award-winning 2004 PBS
documentary on water privatization in Bolivia, India, and the United
States. He is also a board member of Food and Water Watch and co-
author of "Thirst: Fighting the Corporate Theft of Our Water."

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/01/1435253

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Respond to the Portland Terror Drill - With Your Own! At REWILD CAMP

Alexander — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 14:37:16 GMT

Respond to the Portland Terror Drill - With Your Own! At REWILD CAMP
author: Urban Scout
Rewild Camp - emergency preparedness, and primitivism!
Come to REWILD CAMP, a free weeklong come-as-you-please event of meetings, skillshares, and celebrations with a primitivist slant. At this event we plan to have a "prepare for the terror drill by planning your own 'escape from an irradiated portland strategy!'.

More info: http://www.rewild.info/fieldguide/index.php?title=Rewild_Camp_Portland_2007

And get in on the discussion: WWW.REWILD.INFO

homepage: http://www.rewild.info/fieldguide/index.php?title=Rewild_Camp_Portland_2007

found at http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2007/08/362888.shtml

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Krist Novoselic, Catherine Thomasson, Earl Kingik, and Starhawk @ Climate Convergence!

Alexander — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 14:30:26 GMT

Krist Novoselic, Catherine Thomasson, Earl Kingik, and Starhawk @ Climate Convergence!
author: Climate Convergence e-mail: westcoast --- at --- climateconvergence.org
August 8-14th
West Coast Convergence for Climate Action
6 Days of Low Impact Living, High Impact Action, and multi-issue organizing.
www.climateconvergence.org

Climate Convergence - August 8-14 in SW Washington
Featured Presentations and Performers:
(schedule online at www.climateconvergence.org/west/activities.html)
A picture lecture of The Beehive Design Collective's DISMANTLING MONOCULTURE: Tales of Ants and Economics in the America.
Karen Coulter, the Program on Corporations, Law and Democracy - Ending Corporate Dominance, regaining power over power.
Eva Dale and Scott Winn, Coalition of Anti-Racist Whites - anti-racism in organizing.
Dr. Alder Fuller, Ph.D. in Ecology - Climate Change 101, Potential effects of climate change in our region, considerations for survival & adaptation to climate change
Mike Hudema, co-founder of No War, No Warming and author of "An Action a Day Keeps Global Capitalism Away" - Creative Action Planning; Alberta's Tar Sands Development; Anti-corporate campaigning; No War, No Warming.
Earl Kingik of REDOIL (Resisting Environmental Destruction On Indigenous Lands), Inupiat subsistence hunter, member of the Native Village of Point Hope, Alaska - Climate Change in Alaska, the Environmental Consequences of Oil Drilling, Indigenous Peoples and the Environment
East Valley Liberation Army (debut performance!), featuring Krist Novoselic (formerly of Nirvana) and more of Wahkiakum county's finest musicians.
Rainforest Action Network - Organizing against the coal industry and its financial backers.
Pat Rasmussen, World Temperate Rainforest Network - Forests and Climate Change.
Rising Tide North America - Action planning; international climate policy and energy imperialism in the Africa and the Americas
Brenna Sahatjian, folk singer, member of the Riot Folk Collective.
Yalonda Sind? and Jeri Sundvall Williams, regional environmental justice leaders - "The Environment as We See It: An Introduction to Environmental Racism"
The Sprocketts, Portland's Original Minibike Dance Troupe.
Starhawk, global justice activist and organizer, author of The Spiral Dance and The Fifth Sacred Thing.
Catherine Thomasson, President of Physicians for Social Responsibility - Global Warming and Public Health; Connecting War and Climate Change.
Jorge Tadeo Vargas, La Red Fronteriza de Salud y Ambiente (Border Health and Environment Network) ? Liquefied Natural Gas and unsustainable hydroelectric development on the west coast of Mexico.
Various presenters - The struggle for energy justice on the Columbia River, voices from the local movement against Liquefied Natural Gas, natural history of the Columbia River.
Shelly Vendiola, Community Coalition for Environmental Justice - Alliance building and cross cultural organizing
Willapa Hills - Traditional folk music from the hills of Wahkiakum County (where the Convergence is taking place)
JD Williams, Tribal Lawyer - Working for environmental justice across cultural and race boundaries.

homepage: http://www.climateconvergence.org
phone: 541-521-1832

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2007/07/362862.shtml

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Providence Bridge Pedal in Portland, OR, Cascadia is scheduled for August 12th, 2007

Alexander — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 00:57:44 GMT

Providence Bridge Pedal in Portland, OR, Cascadia is scheduled for August 12th, 2007, and TEAM CASCADIA is forming again to take the race by TAMANASS WIND! Please email savepac17@yahoo.com to join us for the 10 bridge race. Team Cascadia seeks to promote Cascadian ideals and other Cascadian events happening in the month of August and the remainder of 2007.

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Sustainable Cascadia; Cascadia Convergence and Green October 2007

syddishes — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 08:42:39 GMT

Please see these resources about events of interest....

www.SustainableCascadia.org

and

www.GreenOctober2007.org

I'm part of the coordination of each, so you can send additions/suggestions or ask me questions. Also, please feel free to spread the word!

posted in Cascadians - 1 reply

Rising Tide West Coast Convergence for Climate Action

LugNut — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 08:54:20 GMT

You might have seen the Rising Tide and Beehive Design Collective Tour in the Spring, and this is continuation of the work we all do and need your support.

http://risingtidenorthamerica.org/wordpress/2007/05/03/west-coast-convergence-for-climate-action/

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Doug Honours Ceremony July 7th at Champoeg (BE THERE!)

Alexander — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 22:57:03 GMT

Doug Honours Ceremony July 7th at Champoeg (BE THERE!)

The Activism for a better Cascadia begins 7/07/2007:
Join us for the Doug Honours Ceremony were we will gather to honour local/northwest activists and philanthropists by awarding them Doug Flags. This event is the start of the movement, and where else than where it all started 164 years ago at Champoeg (pronounced sham-POO-ee), Oregon. Champoeg features a unique combination of history, nature, and recreation. This is the site where Oregon's (i.e. Cascadia) first provisional government was formed by a historical vote in 1843.
At the event we will discuss future goals and initiatives, networking, participate in history tours, enjoy a potluck picnic, and enjoy a wonderful ceremony.
Reservation is for Riverside lot #3 and our event begins at 8am and ends at 8pm.
Discussion will begin at 11:30am History Tour will begin at 1pm
Potluck Dinner at 5pm
Ceremony will begin at 7pm

Reservation ends at 8pm.
For those who wish to come to the park early you can enjoy swimming,
disc golf, biking, hiking, bird watching, etc.

Directions:
Take I-5 South if traveling form North Cascadia, or take I-5 North if traveling from South Cascadia to exit 278, and then follow these directions:

1. Take exit 278 toward Donald/Aurora National Historic District 0.2 mi
2. Turn right at Ehlen Rd NE 2.5 mi 3 mins

3. Continue on Yergen Rd NE 1.0 mi 1 min

4. Turn right at Case Rd NE 1.4 mi 2 mins

5. Slight left at Champoeg Rd NE 0.9 mi 2 mins

6. To: Champoeg State Heritage Area: 7679 Champoeg Rd NE, St. Paul, OR 97137.
Where would you rather be on a Saturday Afternoon? Come to Champoeg Park on 7/7/07 for the Doug Honours Ceremony. If you wish to attend please send an email to savepac17@yahoo.com. Please RSVP ASAP as space is limited! Please bring food and drink (beer in cans or bottles-- no kegs!) for the Potluck. Everyone is responsible for their own lunch.

Again, please RSVP ASAP!

Onward Cascadia!

P.S. Stay tuned for updates and check the Calendar on the Yahoo Group
regularly for possible changes.
P.S.P.S. RSVP ASAP!
Doug Honours!

Just a reminder to everyone to come to Champoeg on July 7, and please vote for your favorite Cascadian person/institution/politician to get an honourary Doug flag. They were just delivered today, and they are beautiful. Just click on the link below, click on "Add Record", and fill out the form with the numbers of your choices in your prefered order.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Cascadian_Bioregionalism/database?method=reportRow\ s&tbl=2

1: Cascadia Green Building Council (3 offices: PDX,SEA,VAN)
2: Discovery Institute
3: Sightline Institute
4. Futurewise
5: The Tyee
6: Mercy Corps
7: Save the Redwood League
8: Pacific Crest Biodiversity Project
9: Whidbey Institute
10: Ecotrust
11: Cascadia Wildlands Project
12: Opal Creek Ancient Forest Center
13: Village Design Institute
14: Governor Christine Gregoire
15: Governor Ted Kulongoski
16: Lieutenant-Governor Iona Campognola
17: Steve Novick (after the election)
18: Tom McCall (posthumous, to family)
19: Ernest Callenbach
20: Portland Freeskool
21: Lost Valley Nature Center
22: Breitenbush Hot Springs
23: Northwest Intentional Communities Association
24: Cascadia Commons Cohousing
25: Tryon Life Community Farm
26: Portland Peak Oil
27: 1000 Friends of Oregon
28: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
29: Emmanuel Brunet-Jailly
30: Lorry Lokey

click the following link to vote:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Cascadian_Bioregionalism/database?method=reportRows&tbl=2

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Just finished reading Ecotopia

Thu, 17 May 2007 22:40:40 GMT

I can't believe this book has been out for so long and I hadn't heard about until a friend mentioned the idea of Cascadia to me and I saw a reference to it on this tribe.

I am so grateful that there is this level of consciousness about this part of the world that I cherish and feel so connected to.

**inspirational**

posted in Cascadians - 6 replies

online bioregional animism education coarse

Fri, 08 Jun 2007 19:26:12 GMT

hi...
i am providing an online bioregional animism education coarse. if your unfamilure with this topic but are interested please come and check out our tribe here...
tribes.tribe.net/bioregionalanimism
as well as the blog...
bioregionalanimism.blogspot.com/
we are working to co-create new regional based animist cosmologies so that the emerging shamans and animist communities can re-ground in the spirit of place, much like they allways have been.
if you find this work interesting and would like to participate in the coarse please PM me dirrectly. there is no limit on enrollment as of yet but soon there when i feel we have enough people to start we will get started. so come ASAP and join us if you wish.
many blessings
LLB

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Vermont Secession grows, but what about Cascadia?

Alexander — Wed, 06 Jun 2007 13:21:13 GMT

Vermont secessionist movement gains support
Published: Monday, June 4, 2007 | 10:10 PM ET
Canadian Press: JOHN CURRAN

MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) - Disillusioned by what they call an empire about to fall, a small cadre of writers and academics in Vermont want the state to secede from the United States.

The secessionists hope to put the question before citizens in March. Eventually, they want to persuade state legislators to declare independence, returning Vermont to the status it held from 1777 to 1791.

Neither the state nor the U.S. Constitution explicitly forbids secession but few people think it is politically viable.

"I always thought the Civil War settled that," said Russell Wheeler, a constitutional law expert at the Brookings Institution in Washington.

If Vermont fought and won a war with the U.S. government, "then you could say Vermont proved the point."

"But that's not going to happen," Wheeler said.

Still, the idea has found plenty of sympathetic ears in Vermont, a left-leaning state that said yes to civil unions, no to slavery (before any other) and last year elected a socialist to the U.S. Senate.

Supporters have published a "Green Mountain Manifesto" subtitled "Why and How Tiny Vermont Might Help Save America From Itself by Seceding from the Union."

In 2005, about 300 people turned out for a secession convention in the Statehouse and plans for a second one are in the works. A poll this year by the University of Vermont's Center for Rural Studies found 13 per cent of those surveyed support secession, up from eight per cent a year before.

"The argument for secession is that the U.S. has become an empire that is essentially ungovernable - it's too big, it's too corrupt and it no longer serves the needs of its citizens," said Rob Williams, editor of Vermont Commons, a quarterly newspaper dedicated to secession.

"We have electoral fraud, rampant corporate corruption, a culture of militarism and war," Williams said.

"If you care about democracy and self-governance and any kind of representative system, the only constitutional way to preserve what's left of the Republic is to peaceably take apart the empire."

Vermont, which was historically conservative, has evolved into one of the country's most liberal states since the latter part of the 20th century, a bastion of countercultural dissent and New England self-reliance, where folks wear their hearts - and their anti-war stickers - on their Subaru station wagon bumpers.

Secession movements have a long history. Key West, Fla., staged a mock secession in the 1980s. In Vermont, the town Killington tried to break away and join New Hampshire in 2004 and Hawaii, Alaska, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Texas all have some form of secession organizations.

The Vermont movement has been simmering for years but gained new traction because of the Iraq war, rising oil prices and the formation of several pro-secession groups.

Secession supporters hope to have the question considered in March on Town Meeting Day, when voters gather to discuss state and local issues.

Thomas Naylor, 70, a retired Duke University economics professor and author, wrote the manifesto and founded a secession group called Second Vermont Republic.

His 112-page manifesto contains little explanation of how Vermont would make do without federal aid for security, education and social programs. Some in the movement foresee a Vermont with its own currency and passports, for example, and some form of representative government formed once the secession has taken place.

Frank Bryan, a professor at the University of Vermont who has championed the cause for years, said the cachet of secession would make the new republic a magnet.

"People would obviously relish coming to the Republic of Vermont, the Switzerland of North America," he said.

"Christ, you couldn't keep them away."

The Middlebury Institute, a Cold Spring, N.Y., think-tank, hosted a North American Separatist Convention last fall in Burlington that drew representatives from 16 organizations. The group is co-sponsoring another conference in October in Chattanooga, Tenn.

Of course, skeptics abound.

"It doesn't make economic sense, it doesn't make political sense, it doesn't make historical sense," said Paul Gillies, a lawyer and Vermont historian.

"Other than that, it's a good idea."

For now, the would-be secessionists are hoping to draw enough support to put the question on Town Meeting Day agendas.

"We're normal human beings," said Williams, 39, a history professor at Champlain College.

"But we're serious about this. We want people in Vermont to think about the options going forward."

"Do you want to stay in an empire that's in deep trouble?"

http://www.cbc.ca/cp/Oddities/070604/K060421AU.html

posted in Cascadians - 1 reply

Doug Honours Ceremony 7/7/07

UniversalStar — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 15:25:21 GMT

The Activism for a better Cascadia begins 7/07/2007 :

Join us for the Doug Honours Ceremony were we will gather to honour local/northwest activists and philanthropists by awarding them Doug Flags.

This event is the start of the movement, and where else than where it all started 164 years ago at Champoeg (pronounced sham-POO-ee), Oregon . Champoeg features a unique combination of history, nature, and recreation. This is the site where Oregon 's (i.e. Cascadia) first provisional government was formed by a historical vote in 1843.

At the event we will discuss future goals and initiatives, networking, participate in history tours, enjoy a potluck picnic, and enjoy a wonderful ceremony.

Reservation is for Riverside lot #3 and our event begins at 8am and ends at 8pm .

Discussion will begin at 11:30am
History Tour will begin at 1pm
Potluck Dinner at 5pm
Ceremony will begin at 7pm
Reservation ends at 8pm .

For those who wish to come to the park early you can enjoy swimming, disc golf, biking, hiking, bird watching, etc.

Directions:
Take I-5 South if traveling form North Cascadia , or take I-5 North if traveling from South Cascadia to exit 278, and then follow these directions:
1. Take exit 278 toward Donald/Aurora National Historic District 0.2 mi
2. Turn right at Ehlen Rd NE 2.5 mi 3 mins
3. Continue on Yergen Rd NE 1.0 mi 1 min
4. Turn right at Case Rd NE 1.4 mi 2 mins
5. Slight left at Champoeg Rd NE 0.9 mi 2 mins
6. To: Champoeg State Heritage Area: 7679 Champoeg Rd NE , St. Paul , OR 97137 .

Where would you rather be on a Saturday Afternoon? Come to Champoeg Park on 7/7/07 for the Doug Honours Ceremony. If you wish to attend please send an email to savepac17@yahoo.com. Please RSVP ASAP as space is limited! Please bring food and drink (beer in cans or bottles-- no kegs!) for the Potluck. Everyone is responsible for their own lunch.

Again, please RSVP ASAP!

Onward Cascadia!

P.S. Stay tuned for updates and check the Calendar on the Cascadia Bioregionalism Yahoo Group regularly for possible changes.

P.S.P.S. RSVP ASAP!

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Oregon and Washington Secession Poll at the Thom Hartmann Show

Alexander — Wed, 06 Jun 2007 12:44:13 GMT

There's talk in Vermont of seceding from the U.S. Are you in favor of Oregon or Washington seceding as well?
Yes

87.56 %

No

12.44 %

http://www.620kpoj.com/pages/thom_hartmann.html

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Cascadian_Bioregionalism/

http://republic-of-cascadia.tripod.com/

get a locally produced Doug (Cascadian Flag) here
http://www.smallflags.com/FLG/Cascadia.htm

Cascadian (CAS) oval car sticker
http://www.cafepress.com/cp/customize/product.aspx?clear=true&number=104981041

Viva Cascadia! (Kwanesum Chinook Illahee)

homepage: http://www.620kpoj.com/pages/thom_hartmann.html

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

separatism

fossilosopher — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 18:51:24 GMT

a report in canadian media about vermont separatist sentiment:

http://www.cbc.ca/cp/Oddities/070604/K060421AU.html

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Chinook Jargon (Chinuk wawa) tonight May 24 in Portland

Alexander — Thu, 24 May 2007 10:37:46 GMT

the following is a Portland Indy Meida announcement

(added note I would say Chinuk wawa was spokan west of the Rockies .. not just west of the Cascades)

Morgan Millar's and Portland Indy's announcement:

May 24th 2007 forum/speaker
Time 8:00 pm - 10:00 pm
Title Chinuk-wawa
Portland, OR
Location 3120 N Williams Avenue
Speaker Morgan Miller
Topic / Issue Other
Sponsor The Waypost
Morgan Miller presents: "Chinuk-wawa"

Synopsis:
The language of chinuk-wawa is a local, cross racial language which was spoken by most folks on the western side of the Cascades back in the 1800s - early 1900s. It's a mixture of tribal, french and english words, with words and structure of its own. It is comprised of perhaps 700-800 words and is fairly easy to learn and get by in. As one becomes fluent, chinuk becomes more and more poetic as new words are developed as combinations of older ones.
There are many local terms one might see around the Northwest which are chinuk, and there are efforts in "cascadian" circles to revive the language as a local street language.

*Part of the ongoing series: Live Journalism and Experts.
http://www.thewaypost.com

http://www.protest.net/pdxindymedia/calendrome.cgi?span=event&ID=811706

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

presidential directive at whitehouse.gov gives Bush imperial powers

Alexander — Tue, 22 May 2007 17:40:24 GMT

Just heard about this presidential directive from their own website. This means any event that is considered a disruption of the nation or its normal routine (from the mega-quake in Cascadia to the even a computer virus) then Mr Bush can declare this emergency with 90s imperial rule. They can even take over Native American Reservations or anything else deemed important for military stragedy. Add to this this week's ruling on environmentalism as possibly ecoterrorism.

One news report with the actualy whitehouse.gov announcement:

Bush Anoints Himself as the Insurer of Constitutional Government in Emergency
By Matthew Rothschild
May 18, 2007

With scarcely a mention in the mainstream media, President Bush has ordered up a plan for responding to a catastrophic attack.

In a new National Security Presidential Directive, Bush lays out his plans for dealing with a “catastrophic emergency.”Under that plan, he entrusts himself with leading the entire federal government, not just the Executive Branch. And he gives himself the responsibility “for ensuring constitutional government.”

He laid this all out in a document entitled “National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51” and “Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD-20.”

http://progressive.org/mag_wx051807

The White House released it on May 9.

Other than a discussion on Daily Kos led off by a posting by Leo Fender, and a pro-forma notice in a couple of mainstream newspapers, this document has gone unremarked upon.

The subject of the document is entitled “National Continuity Policy.”

It defines a “catastrophic emergency” as “any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government function.”

This could mean another 9/11, or another Katrina, or a major earthquake in California, I imagine, since it says it would include “localized acts of nature, accidents, and technological or attack-related emergencies.”

The document emphasizes the need to ensure “the continued function of our form of government under the Constitution, including the functioning of the three separate branches of government,” it states.

But it says flat out: “The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government.”

The document waves at the need to work closely with the other two branches, saying there will be “a cooperative effort among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government.” But this effort will be “coordinated by the President, as a matter of comity with respect to the legislative and judicial
branches and with proper respect for the constitutional separation of powers.”

Among the efforts coordinated by the President would ensuring the capability of the three branches of government to “provide for orderly succession” and “appropriate transition of leadership.”

The document designates a National Continuity Coordinator, who would be the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism.

Currently holding that post is Frances Fragos Townsend.

She is required to develop a National Continuity Implementation Plan and submit it within 90 days.

As part of that plan, she is not only to devise procedures for the Executive Branch but also give guidance to “state, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure.”

The secretary of Homeland Security is also directed to develop planning guidance for “private sector critical infrastructure owners and operators,” as well as state, local, territorial, and tribal governments.

The document gives the Vice President a role in implementing the provisions of the contingency plans.

“This directive shall be implanted in a manner that is consistent with, and facilitates effective implementation of, provisions of the Constitution concerning succession to the Presidency or the exercise of its powers, and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (3 USC 19), with the consultation of the Vice President and, as appropriate, others involved.”

The document also contains “classified Continuity Annexes.”

from http://progressive.org/mag_wx051807

___ actual presidential directive from whitehouse.gov:

National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive

White House News

NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD 51

HOMELAND SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/HSPD-20

Subject: National Continuity Policy

Purpose

(1) This directive establishes a comprehensive national policy on the continuity of Federal Government structures and operations and a single National Continuity Coordinator responsible for coordinating the development and implementation of Federal continuity policies. This policy establishes "National Essential Functions," prescribes continuity requirements for all executive departments and agencies, and provides guidance for State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector organizations in order to ensure a comprehensive and integrated national continuity program that will enhance the credibility of our national security posture and enable a more rapid and effective response to and recovery from a national emergency.

Definitions

(2) In this directive:

(a) "Category" refers to the categories of executive departments and agencies listed in Annex A to this directive;

(b) "Catastrophic Emergency" means any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions;

(c) "Continuity of Government," or "COG," means a coordinated effort within the Federal Government's executive branch to ensure that National Essential Functions continue to be performed during a Catastrophic Emergency;

(d) "Continuity of Operations," or "COOP," means an effort within individual executive departments and agencies to ensure that Primary Mission-Essential Functions continue to be performed during a wide range of emergencies, including localized acts of nature, accidents, and technological or attack-related emergencies;

(e) "Enduring Constitutional Government," or "ECG," means a cooperative effort among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government, coordinated by the President, as a matter of comity with respect to the legislative and judicial branches and with proper respect for the constitutional separation of powers among the branches, to preserve the constitutional framework under which the Nation is governed and the capability of all three branches of government to execute constitutional responsibilities and provide for orderly succession, appropriate transition of leadership, and interoperability and support of the National Essential Functions during a catastrophic emergency;

(f) "Executive Departments and Agencies" means the executive departments enumerated in 5 U.S.C. 101, independent establishments as defined by 5 U.S.C. 104(1), Government corporations as defined by 5 U.S.C. 103(1), and the United States Postal Service;

(g) "Government Functions" means the collective functions of the heads of executive departments and agencies as defined by statute, regulation, presidential direction, or other legal authority, and the functions of the legislative and judicial branches;

(h) "National Essential Functions," or "NEFs," means that subset of Government Functions that are necessary to lead and sustain the Nation during a catastrophic emergency and that, therefore, must be supported through COOP and COG capabilities; and

(i) "Primary Mission Essential Functions," or "PMEFs," means those Government Functions that must be performed in order to support or implement the performance of NEFs before, during, and in the aftermath of an emergency.

Policy

(3) It is the policy of the United States to maintain a comprehensive and effective continuity capability composed of Continuity of Operations and Continuity of Government programs in order to ensure the preservation of our form of government under the Constitution and the continuing performance of National Essential Functions under all conditions.

Implementation Actions

(4) Continuity requirements shall be incorporated into daily operations of all executive departments and agencies. As a result of the asymmetric threat environment, adequate warning of potential emergencies that could pose a significant risk to the homeland might not be available, and therefore all continuity planning shall be based on the assumption that no such warning will be received. Emphasis will be placed upon geographic dispersion of leadership, staff, and infrastructure in order to increase survivability and maintain uninterrupted Government Functions. Risk management principles shall be applied to ensure that appropriate operational readiness decisions are based on the probability of an attack or other incident and its consequences.

(5) The following NEFs are the foundation for all continuity programs and capabilities and represent the overarching responsibilities of the Federal Government to lead and sustain the Nation during a crisis, and therefore sustaining the following NEFs shall be the primary focus of

the Federal Government leadership during and in the aftermath of an emergency that adversely affects the performance of Government Functions:

(a) Ensuring the continued functioning of our form of government under the Constitution, including the functioning of the three separate branches of government;

(b) Providing leadership visible to the Nation and the world and maintaining the trust and confidence of the American people;

(c) Defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and preventing or interdicting attacks against the United States or its people, property, or interests;

(d) Maintaining and fostering effective relationships with foreign nations;

(e) Protecting against threats to the homeland and bringing to justice perpetrators of crimes or attacks against the United States or its people, property, or interests;

(f) Providing rapid and effective response to and recovery from the domestic consequences of an attack or other incident;

(g) Protecting and stabilizing the Nation's economy and ensuring public confidence in its financial systems; and

(h) Providing for critical Federal Government services that address the national health, safety, and welfare needs of the United States.

(6) The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government. In order to advise and assist the President in that function, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism (APHS/CT) is hereby designated as the National Continuity Coordinator. The National Continuity Coordinator, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for National

Security Affairs (APNSA), without exercising directive authority, shall coordinate the development and implementation of continuity policy for executive departments and agencies. The Continuity Policy Coordination Committee (CPCC), chaired by a Senior Director from the Homeland Security Council staff, designated by the National Continuity Coordinator, shall be the main day-to-day forum for such policy coordination.

(7) For continuity purposes, each executive department and agency is assigned to a category in accordance with the nature and characteristics of its national security roles and

responsibilities in support of the Federal Government's ability to sustain the NEFs. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall serve as the President's lead agent for coordinating overall

continuity operations and activities of executive departments and agencies, and in such role shall perform the responsibilities set forth for the Secretary in sections 10 and 16 of this directive.

(8) The National Continuity Coordinator, in consultation with the heads of appropriate executive departments and agencies, will lead the development of a National Continuity Implementation Plan (Plan), which shall include prioritized goals and objectives, a concept of operations, performance metrics by which to measure continuity readiness, procedures for continuity and incident management activities, and clear direction to executive department and agency continuity coordinators, as well as guidance to promote interoperability of Federal Government continuity programs and procedures with State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate. The Plan shall be submitted to the President for approval not later than 90 days after the date of this directive.

(9) Recognizing that each branch of the Federal Government is responsible for its own continuity programs, an official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President shall ensure that the executive branch's COOP and COG policies in support of ECG efforts are appropriately coordinated with those of

the legislative and judicial branches in order to ensure interoperability and allocate national assets efficiently to maintain a functioning Federal Government.

(10) Federal Government COOP, COG, and ECG plans and operations shall be appropriately integrated with the emergency plans and capabilities of State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate, in order to promote interoperability and to prevent redundancies and conflicting lines of authority. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall coordinate the integration of Federal continuity plans and operations with State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate, in order to provide for the delivery of essential services during an emergency.

(11) Continuity requirements for the Executive Office of the President (EOP) and executive departments and agencies shall include the following:

(a) The continuation of the performance of PMEFs during any emergency must be for a period up to 30 days or until normal operations can be resumed, and the capability to be fully operational at alternate sites as soon as possible after the occurrence of an emergency, but not later than 12 hours after COOP activation;

(b) Succession orders and pre-planned devolution of authorities that ensure the emergency delegation of authority must be planned and documented in advance in accordance with applicable law;

(c) Vital resources, facilities, and records must be safeguarded, and official access to them must be provided;

(d) Provision must be made for the acquisition of the resources necessary for continuity operations on an emergency basis;

(e) Provision must be made for the availability and redundancy of critical communications capabilities at alternate sites in order to support connectivity between

and among key government leadership, internal elements, other executive departments and agencies, critical partners, and the public;

(f) Provision must be made for reconstitution capabilities that allow for recovery from a catastrophic emergency and resumption of normal operations; and

(g) Provision must be made for the identification, training, and preparedness of personnel capable of relocating to alternate facilities to support the continuation of the performance of PMEFs.

(12) In order to provide a coordinated response to escalating threat levels or actual emergencies, the Continuity of Government Readiness Conditions (COGCON) system establishes executive branch continuity program readiness levels, focusing

on possible threats to the National Capital Region. The President will determine and issue the COGCON Level. Executive departments and agencies shall comply with the requirements and

assigned responsibilities under the COGCON program. During COOP activation, executive departments and agencies shall report their readiness status to the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Secretary's designee.

(13) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall:

(a) Conduct an annual assessment of executive department and agency continuity funding requests and performance data that are submitted by executive departments and agencies as part of the annual budget request process, in order to monitor progress in the implementation of the Plan and the execution of continuity budgets;

(b) In coordination with the National Continuity Coordinator, issue annual continuity planning guidance for the development of continuity budget requests; and

(c) Ensure that heads of executive departments and agencies prioritize budget resources for continuity capabilities, consistent with this directive.

(14) The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall:

(a) Define and issue minimum requirements for continuity communications for executive departments and agencies, in consultation with the APHS/CT, the APNSA, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Chief of Staff to the President;

(b) Establish requirements for, and monitor the development, implementation, and maintenance of, a comprehensive communications architecture to integrate continuity components, in consultation with the APHS/CT, the APNSA, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Chief of Staff to the President; and

(c) Review quarterly and annual assessments of continuity communications capabilities, as prepared pursuant to section 16(d) of this directive or otherwise, and report the results and recommended remedial actions to the National Continuity Coordinator.

(15) An official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President shall:

(a) Advise the President, the Chief of Staff to the President, the APHS/CT, and the APNSA on COGCON operational execution options; and

(b) Consult with the Secretary of Homeland Security in order to ensure synchronization and integration of continuity activities among the four categories of executive departments and agencies.

(16) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall:

(a) Coordinate the implementation, execution, and assessment of continuity operations and activities;

(b) Develop and promulgate Federal Continuity Directives in order to establish continuity planning requirements for executive departments and agencies;

(c) Conduct biennial assessments of individual department and agency continuity capabilities as prescribed by the Plan and report the results to the President through the APHS/CT;

(d) Conduct quarterly and annual assessments of continuity communications capabilities in consultation with an official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President;

(e) Develop, lead, and conduct a Federal continuity training and exercise program, which shall be incorporated into the National Exercise Program developed pursuant to Homeland Security Presidential Directive-8 of December 17, 2003 ("National Preparedness"), in consultation with an

official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President;

(f) Develop and promulgate continuity planning guidance to State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector critical infrastructure owners and operators;

(g) Make available continuity planning and exercise funding, in the form of grants as provided by law, to State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector critical infrastructure owners and operators; and

(h) As Executive Agent of the National Communications System, develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive continuity communications architecture.

(17) The Director of National Intelligence, in coordination with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall produce a biennial assessment of the foreign and domestic threats to the Nation's continuity of government.

(18) The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall provide secure, integrated, Continuity of Government communications to the President, the Vice President, and, at a minimum, Category I executive departments and agencies.

(19) Heads of executive departments and agencies shall execute their respective department or agency COOP plans in response to a localized emergency and shall:

(a) Appoint a senior accountable official, at the Assistant Secretary level, as the Continuity Coordinator for the department or agency;

(b) Identify and submit to the National Continuity Coordinator the list of PMEFs for the department or agency and develop continuity plans in support of the NEFs and the continuation of essential functions under all conditions;

(c) Plan, program, and budget for continuity capabilities consistent with this directive;

(d) Plan, conduct, and support annual tests and training, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, in order to evaluate program readiness and ensure adequacy and viability of continuity plans and communications systems; and

(e) Support other continuity requirements, as assigned by category, in accordance with the nature and characteristics of its national security roles and responsibilities

General Provisions

(20) This directive shall be implemented in a manner that is consistent with, and facilitates effective implementation of, provisions of the Constitution concerning succession to the Presidency or the exercise of its powers, and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (3 U.S.C. 19), with consultation of the Vice President and, as appropriate, others involved. Heads of executive departments and agencies shall ensure that appropriate

support is available to the Vice President and others involved as necessary to be prepared at all times to implement those provisions.

(21) This directive:

(a) Shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and the authorities of agencies, or heads of agencies, vested by law, and subject to the availability of appropriations;

(b) Shall not be construed to impair or otherwise affect (i) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budget, administrative, and legislative proposals, or (ii) the authority of the Secretary of Defense over the Department of Defense, including the chain of command for military forces from the President, to the Secretary of Defense, to the commander of military forces, or military command and control procedures; and

(c) Is not intended to, and does not, create any rights or benefits, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by a party against the United States, its

agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(22) Revocation. Presidential Decision Directive 67 of October 21, 1998 ("Enduring Constitutional Government and Continuity of Government Operations"), including all Annexes thereto, is hereby revoked.

(23) Annex A and the classified Continuity Annexes, attached hereto, are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this directive.

(24) Security. This directive and the information contained herein shall be protected from unauthorized disclosure, provided that, except for Annex A, the Annexes attached to this directive are classified and shall be accorded appropriate handling, consistent with applicable Executive Orders.

GEORGE W. BUSH

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Neo Feudalism and Cascadia

Alexander — Sat, 19 May 2007 10:14:38 GMT

If we are to restore our harmony with Nature and ourselves we will need to address issues that are profoundly private, too frequently neglected and often looked upon with shame
___

If you look at the growing debt (both personal and national) I believe we are in or entering a form of Neo-Feudalism where there is a gap between the Corporate Elite and the indebted ruled classes. I believe that as Cascadians one of the potential reasons we will need to establish a free,indepenedent and reunited Cascadia is to destroy the yoke of slavery due to debt. I believe the Corporatists are moving their headquarters, stock, investments, and the like offshore so that when there is an economic collapse they will return to buy up property, debt, bankrupt companies and even entire states. Recent examples of companies moving out is Halliburton to the UAE. Though I ma not of the Male Monotheistic religions (Abrahamic religions like Islam, Judaism and Christianity) that have laws (often not followed) forbidding usary (the adding of interest on loans) I believe that usary or even debt can and should be view as a human rights violation because it can take advantage of somene during dire times. Debt slavery is the source for much of the world1s prostitution and sweet shop labour. As a Cascadian I believe like our struggle for ecological harmony we will need to also address debt. For a people in desperation (be it due to famine, poverty, debt or war) will never be able to create or live in ecological balance with their surroundings. We, as Cascadians, MUST address the causes of poverty, homelessness, imperial war, class desparity, racism, gender chauvanism, issues of civil rights, the rights of sexuality, migration and all these are truly connected in this economic war to keep a divide.

The folowing are articles and wikipedia entries on issues related to this issue:

Debt bondage
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt_bondage
___

Thom Hartmann reads for free some of his book "Screwed: The Undeclared War Against the Middle Class"
http://a1135.g.akamai.net/f/1135/18227/1h/cchannel.download.akamai.com/18227/podcast/PORTLAND-OR/KPOJ-AM/screwed_sp_chapter_7.mp3

__

More debt for Americans is 'normal'
BY JOHN LELAND, The New York Times
Article Last Updated: 05/18/2007 09:21:45 PM PDT

YPSILANTI, Mich. - On a recent evening, Christine Moellering, 40, sorted through the plastic laundry basket where she keeps the family bills, statements and coupons.

"The Sears one is 32.24 percent," Moellering said, reading a credit card statement with a balance of $5,955, including $155 in monthly finance charges. The high interest rate took her by surprise. "That's nice," she said sarcastically.

Shuffle credit cards

Moellering and her husband, Mark, 39, earn average salaries for their age (together about $66,000 a year), live in an average-priced home and have an average cost of living. But like many other households these days, they have found that their day-to-day economic life has come to depend not just on how much they earn or spend, but also on how well they shuffle what they owe among a broad array of credit cards, home equity loans and other lines of credit.

Americans spent 1 in 7 of their take-home dollars on debt payments last year, up from 1 in 9 in 1980. Experts say few consumers are able to calculate the true costs of such payments.

Behind closed doors, the decisions that families like the Moellerings make about their debt - when to pay it off, when to shuffle it to lower-interest sources and when to let it revolve and build - can determine how much their salaries are worth. Like many others, the Moellerings have run up avoidable penalties and occasionally spent themselves into more debt or higher interest rates, even as they have tried to juggle other balances to bring down their monthly payments.
This spring, they allowed a reporter to see how they struggled with these choices. Christine Moellering's laundry basket recently included more unwelcome news: $2,693 due on a Visa card through her credit union, including finance charges of $25, and $13,680 on a CashBuilder Elite Visa, including a monthly finance charge of $200.

Their credit card debt came to $22,228, including $380 in monthly finance charges. Interest varied from 12.1 percent to 32.24 percent. The Moellerings also have a mortgage of $93,000 and a home equity loan balance of $68,574, at 8 percent interest.

"We have friends in the same position," said Christine Moellering, who earns $30,000 a year as an administrative assistant. "One was off his insurance for a couple weeks and he broke his arm, and they're out $25,000 or $30,000. We've talked to them about it. It doesn't matter what you do, you always have that credit card debt."

Credit widespread

Just a generation ago, financial profiles like the Moellerings' would have been unusual. But changes in federal regulations since the 1980s, along with consolidation in the banking industry and changed consumer attitudes toward borrowing and saving, have made credit more widespread, more heavily marketed and more confusing, with offers of more credit - at low rates - extending to even the least reliable risk. In 2006, the industry mailed out nearly 8 billion credit card offers, up from 3.5 billion in 2000.

Credit card debt, less than $8 billion in 1968 (in current dollars), now exceeds $880 billion, more than tripling since 1988, adjusting for inflation, according to the Federal Reserve Bank. Penalty fees alone cost consumers $17.1 billion in 2006 - up from $12.8 billion in 2003, adjusted for inflation, according to R.K. Hammer, a bank card advisory firm.

At the same time, as banks have moved from fixed interest rates to variable rates, the ability of borrowers like the Moellerings to move balances from one card to another, or from credit cards to lower-interest home equity loans, can have as much impact on their finances as whether they get a raise or trim household expenses, said Greg McBride, senior financial analyst at Bankrate.com. Especially since 2001, McBride said, as home values have increased and interest rates have dropped, home equity loans have enabled families to carry more debt - to buy more things - at lower cost.

"It's a whole change in what we consider normal now," said Vanessa G. Perry, an assistant professor of marketing at the George Washington University School of Business. "Not only has the total amount people borrow increased, but the number of instruments we borrow on has increased. An average family has a mortgage, home equity loan, various credit cards, a car loan, maybe a student loan."

http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_5933213

____

Consumer Debt: Not an American Monopoly
by Gary North

The sheer scale of consumer debt has made millions of households extremely vulnerable to shocks in the economy, both from fiscal mismanagement and external factors such as oil price rises, acts of terrorism and wars. A downturn in the economy would create serious economic and social problems for the fifteen million people who struggle with debt repayments. Debt is a time-bomb which could be triggered by any number of shocks to the economy, at any time.

~ Griffiths Commission on Personal Debt (March 21, 2005)

In a story released to the press on March 21 and published on Yahoo and in English-speaking outlets around the world, the Conservative Party warned of rising consumer debt in Great Britain. What caught my eye was the author: Lord Brian Griffiths. Before he became a peer, Dr. Griffiths was Dean of the Business School at the City University of London until 1985, the year he became the head of Mrs. Thatcher’s policy unit.

I remember this all too well. I was sitting in his office on the day he got the offer. That cost me an important taped interview that I had flown to London to conduct. One day earlier, and I would have recorded a classic – "the one that got away." From that day on, he became too famous to give interviews as explicit as the one I would have conducted. He had to turn me down. I saw him again in the late 1980s. My parting words were, "Let me know when you’re a nobody again. I still want that interview." So far, he’s still a somebody. No interview.

UK faces consumer debt "time bomb"

The UK faces a potential consumer debt time bomb that could be triggered by an external "shock" such as rising oil prices or from rising interest rates, a report from the UK’s Conservative Party said.

Britain’s consumer borrowing has reached the 1 trillion pound mark and a sudden shock could impact on 15 million people, the report said.

The report, compiled by Goldman Sachs International vice-chairman and Conservative Brian Griffiths, said credit in the UK has been "too easily available and marketed far too aggressively."

Griffiths called for the voluntary Banking Code to be replaced with a statutory "customers charter" to help tackle the spiraling household debt problem. This would outlaw aggressive marketing practices and increase transparency of credit card charges.

"There is a real need to improve the quality of information made available to borrowers (who) need better support once they get into financial difficulties and independent advice to restore their financial stability," Griffiths said.

He told a news conference that the sheer scale of consumer debt has made millions of households vulnerable to external economic shocks such as rising oil prices, wars and terrorism.

He also criticized the Bank of England for being "too sanguine" about the level of debt, adding that as the debt-to-income ratio had gone from just under 100pc to 140pc in recent years it had become a "time-bomb which could be triggered by any number of shocks to the economy at any time."

Griffiths is not just an academic economist. He oversaw much of Mrs. Thatcher’s de-regulation program, which transferred many of the state-run monopolies to the private sector. She made him a life peer in 1990.

He then became Vice-Chairman of Goldman Sachs International. This is one of the major investment banking houses in the world. In the United States, Goldman Sachs is considered one of the Establishment investment banking firms.

That is why I regard his authorship of the report as important. This is not simply a policy paper issued by a party out of power that may be facing an election in May, if Blair calls one, as is expected. Griffiths is putting his reputation on the line: academically and professionally.

Unlike most economists, Griffiths brings an explicitly moral perspective to his economic analyses. He is the author of two books, Morality and the Market Place and The Creation of Wealth: A Christian’s Case for Capitalism. It was these that I had hoped to interview him about. He told me at the time that my 1973 book, An Introduction to Christian Economics, was the first one he had read on the topic.

Having followed his career from a distance for over two decades, I conclude that he is not raising a false alarm for publicity’s sake. The threat of a debt crisis is real.

POSITIVE FEEDBACK AND MASS INFLATION

Under a gold coin standard, there is negative feedback on the expansion of credit. If bankers create too much money, depositors will come down and demand gold coins for their checks or banknotes. A bank that cannot redeem these notes is declared bankrupt.

Without a commodity standard with redemption on demand, the monetary system moves into positive feedback. Here is an example. During the French Revolution, the government confiscated the church’s lands. Then it issued paper money against the value of these lands. The bills were called assignats. No one could redeem assignats for a specified piece of land. But the government promised to restrict the issue of assignats by the value of the land.

This created a positive feedback condition. The price of land was measured in assignats. The more assignats the government issued, the higher the price of the land went. But the higher the price of the land went, the more assignats this authorized the government to issue. Within two years, all prices were soaring. The economy went to barter or black marketing. The currency was ultimately destroyed. The story of this disaster was written almost a century ago by Cornell University’s Andrew Dickson White, "Fiat Money Inflation in France." You can get in free online.

When the dollar was removed from the citizen’s gold standard in 1933, abolishing citizens’ right to own gold, and again in 1971, when convertibility on demand at $35/oz was abolished for central banks, the interest rate, especially in the bond markets, became the only major limiting factor on the Federal Reserve System’s ability to inflate the money supply. Fear of interest rate increases, meaning fear of falling bond prices, became the restraining factor. This fear kept Bill Clinton’s spending plans tightly in check – a fact he learned in his first few days as President.

In the housing market, there is a positive feedback condition. The size of the loan is limited by the appraised value of the house. But if mortgage interest rates drop, then a borrower can afford to borrow more money and still make his monthly mortgage payments. More borrowers show up for loans because more people become eligible at the entry level.

They start bidding against each other. Up go home prices. Appraisers tell lenders that prices are up. Lenders are then willing to loan more money to buy these more expensive houses. The spiral begins.

Now there is evidence that some appraisers have committed fraud, reporting higher than market prices to lenders, so that lenders could extend even more credit to home buyers and re-financing owners. This has placed lenders and borrowers at risk during an economic recession.

How high can it go? The median price of a home in California is $465,000. Incomes did not rise to keep pace with these prices. Marginal buyers are driving up the price of those few homes that are offered for sale. The high price received by these marginal homes is imputed to all homes by the appraisers. All home prices go up, not just those offered for sale.

The two negative factors are these: (1) the number of people who can afford to buy an entry-level home; (2) interest rates, which affect #1. Until these kick in, a region can experience a housing boom. It can become a mania.

In the United States, housing on the two coasts have been bid up beyond the ability of most entry-level couples to buy. Florida housing is also appreciating fast. A man I know has equity profits of well over half a million dollars in three years. He is taking his money and running. He will move to Kerrville, the hill country of Texas, which was cheap a decade ago, but not now.

People not in these boom areas are locked out from them. They cannot afford to move in. Population will flow out, especially among younger workers. Businesses will locate in the heartland, where housing prices are lower. They will be able to hire talent cheaper.

But in high-priced areas, housing prices will not fall back to what they were a decade ago unless mortgage interest rates soar. The ratchet will have its effect.

THE RATCHET

We know what a ratchet is: a geared cog with teeth that are designed to be locked in place by a lever. A spring is attached to the cog. The tighter the spring, the more tension is on the cog. As you turn the cog against the spring, it gets more resistant. Raise the lever above the teeth, or else let go of the cog’s crank handle before you lock in the next tooth, and the cog will whirl in the opposite direction. Woe unto whatever is on the pulley that is attached to the cog. The higher it is up the pulley, the farther its fall to the earth.

The commercial banking system is the cog. The central bank keeps cranking this cog: buying T-bills.

As with any ratchet, there are two ultimate limits: the tension on the spring and the resistance of the spring’s metal. At some point, the spring snaps. In monetary affairs, this is mass inflation. Ludwig von Mises called this the crack-up boom, when money dies. The other limit is tension – in the case, interest rates. At some point, the spring can’t be cranked any tighter without driving short-term rates up and causing recession.

Move the cog up one more notch, and the lever may break loose mid-lock. The cog will spin backward like a propeller. That’s called depression/deflation. That’s what happened 1929–33.

Short of a gridlocked banking system, where leveraged debts cannot be paid off, the greater risk today is inflation. The FED keeps cranking the cog. Debts keep getting agreed to at ever-higher prices.

THE COILED SPRING

Most people have entered into multiple debt agreements. They think that prices will not fall. If prices do fall, owners’ equity will disappear. The appraisers will then have to report lower prices, which will lower the loan value of property.

The entire economy today is way up the pulley. Contracts are made at one level up the pulley, and then it rises higher. What if this process reverses? It did in Tokyo real estate, 1990–2005.

The FED has created a boom by expanding the money supply. Now it is trying to unwind the boom’s low-interest foundations without jeopardizing the boom. It is slowing the creation of money. But it does not want to create an unsprung ratchet.

The FED is tightening money. A handy way to follow this is to go to a newly created blog site, created by one of my readers. This blog site serves as a good model. It is run for free on blogspot.com.

He offers several handy links on the right-hand side. Click MZM, money of zero maturity. MZM is down at an annual rate of almost 3% since mid-January. Since early June, 2004, it is up 0.9%.

Using the Median CPI figure, price inflation is up 2.4% for the last 12 months.

There is a ratchet. Prices do not fall. But by slowing the creation of money by restricting its purchases of T-bills, the FED has restricted this upward ratchet move.

But remember: this ratchet never falls here. When it threatens to fall, the FED inflates money. Look at the adjusted monetary base since late January. It is now in the 10% range, despite some backing off over the last few weeks. (Adj. Monetary Base 2) Over the last four years, the move is relentlessly upward. (Adj. Monetary Base #1)

THE CONSUMER DEBT RATCHET

Consumers have bid up the prices of goods with fiat money. Then they go into further debt to buy more of these goodies. This is a ratchet phenomenon. The restraining factor is upward interest rates. This process has begun in the short-term debt markets in the United States, but it has not yet affected consumers’ desire to buy more goodies by going into more debt.

The decisions of millions of consumers, all over the world, to raise their level of debt has created what the Griffiths Committee calls time-bomb conditions. England is not alone. Consider this report from Canada.

Some finance experts are warning Canadians must wean themselves off debt, otherwise they face a major shock if interest rates rise.

"It could be catastrophic in terms of the whole economy," says financial counselor Allen MacLeod.

Interest rates have been quite low in Canada for the past several years.

But Canadian paycheques have grown very slowly. To prop up their standard of living, many Canadians have resorted to cheap credit and stopped saving money.

Lines of credit have grown at a record pace in Canada, up 30 per in 2004 alone.

Holly McIntosh and Frank Lestage’s bank offered them a line of credit a few years ago.

"They just give you the money and people spend and spend," Lestage said. "It doesn’t take long to get it under control, but you have to realize what you’re doing and that takes a while. You have to get in trouble to realize what’s going on." . . .

"I think as things have gotten more expensive, we’ve (become) a need-to-have-now generation," says Cindy Cassidy.

And that’s part of the problem, says consumer advocate Mel Fruitman: "Consumer debt as a whole in Canada exceeds consumer assets. That means we’re on the brink."

MacLeod says personal bankruptcies are up more than 10 per cent since January.

The article goes on to say that TD bank says there is no problem. Obviously, not many bankers are going to sound the alarm.

CONCLUSION

Consumers worldwide are being lured into more and more debt. They will have to reduce spending. This has not happened yet. But as the FED tightens money, allowing short-term demand for loans to push up rates, the traditional response is a falling stock market.

I think we’re there.

March 31, 2005
http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north356.html

___

Debt: An Inescapable Concept
Part 2: Personal Debt
by Gary North
by Gary North

DIGG THIS

Debt is an inescapable concept. It is never a question of debt or no debt. It is always a question of which kind of debt, owed to whom, when.

In my previous chapter, I covered the issue of social debt. I showed why it is inescapable. Personal debt is as inescapable as social debt.

Let’s say that you are hired for a new job. Normally, you must work until the next scheduled payday before you are paid. You therefore must extend credit to your employer for the monetary value of your work. The more you earn per hour, the more credit you must extend. The longer you must wait until payday, the more credit you must extend.

Here is the irony: You, who are not rich, must extend credit to a company you believe is economically successful. In such arrangements, which are universal in the job market, the relatively poor person is required to become a creditor to the relatively rich organization.

On the other hand, what if the employer pays you immediately, as soon as you begin work? The paycheck is for your salary after taxes until the next payday. The employer extends credit to a new, untried worker. You probably have never heard of such an arrangement. If I were an employer, it is the one I would use.

Maybe the employer abides by the Mosaic law governing employment. "Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbour, neither rob him: the wages of him that is hired shall not abide with thee all night until the morning" (Leviticus 19:13). Still, you must extend credit to your new employer for at least one work day.

Debt/credit is inescapable. There must be some degree of trust operating for an exchange of labor for money to take place.

There are critics of personal debt who issue universal condemnations of the debt/credit relationship. They have not thought through the logic of their position. If there were a universal cessation of debt, civilization would collapse within days. The division of labor would cease.

RISK AND TRUST

For the person who sells his labor, there is a risk that he will not be paid at the end of the payment period. This risk is low, because employers who want to stay in business must pay their workers. A bad reputation here will dry up the supply of future laborers. But there must be an extension of trust by the employee.

For a company hiring a new employee, there is always a risk that he will not show up on time, or he may perform poorly, or he may steal things. There must be an extension of trust by the employer.

Both parties must deal with risk. Both parties must extend trust. This risk may be low, and this trust may be low, but both are mandatory in a society that has a division of labor.

When an exchange of labor for money takes place, there is an almost inescapable element of time involved. Where there is time involved, there are both risk and trust.

In Elia Kazan’s little-known 1963 movie, "America, America," there is a scene where a young Greek, who has been defrauded repeatedly, buys a ticket from Greece to America, sometime around 1920. He is using money he obtained through fraud. He tells the ticket salesman to hold out the ticket. He in turn holds out a wad of money. He extends the money to the ticket seller, while he reaches out to take hold of the ticket. Only when he has the ticket in his hand does he let go of the money. The salesman also lets go of the ticket. There is no time element and therefore no extension of trust.

We cannot run an economy based on simultaneous transactions like this one. They take too much time to arrange and execute. A ticket salesman will do it one time for a peculiar, fearful, distrustful buyer, but not all day long.

The debt/credit relationship is therefore an aspect of the time/trust relationship. The latter cannot exist without the former. Civilization cannot exist without both.

INTEREST PAYMENTS

When you sell your labor until the next paycheck, you are selling present goods (labor right now) for future goods (money later on).

Would you deposit money in your employer’s bank account in order to receive the same amount of money in a month? You might if you had currency, and there had been a wave of robberies recently. Your employer is providing a service to you: safe storage. But without some external risk that you regard as a great threat to your money, you will not voluntarily surrender money today for the same amount of money tomorrow or next month or next year.

This is because you discount the value of future money in relation to the value of today’s money. This principle applies to every scarce resource, not just money. You are responsible in the present. You have assets in the present. You have alternative uses for these assets in the present. So, the present is more valuable to you than the future is. It is close at hand; the future isn’t. The present is real; your future is problematic. The value of a good owned in the present is greater than the value of the same good owned in the future.

This is a matter of comparative risk: safety now vs. safety later. It is also a matter of time preference: the benefits of now vs. the benefits of later.

To persuade people to surrender their lawful control over some good, a borrower must offer an increased quantity of goods in the future. We call this the rate of interest. It is the result of the discount that people place on future goods vs. present goods. The borrower must overcome this discount by offering more in the future for a good borrowed now and not returned until a future date.

The critics of the debt/credit relationship acknowledge neither the risk factor nor the time-preference factor in every transaction involving the surrender of control over an economic resource. They treat transactions involving surrender and return over time as if time and trust were free goods. But there are no free lunches and no free time.

Whenever a valuable scarce resource is treated as if it were a free good, there will be an analytical error in the discussion of economic cause and effect.

When any critic of the free market calls for the intervention of the state to prohibit transactions that charge for inescapable costs of human action, he is calling for one or both parties to the transaction to extend a free good to the other. Perhaps this call is self-conscious. If it is, then the critic owes it to his listeners or readers to spell out in detail the effects of this call for a mandatory transfer of wealth to others.

Usually, the critic is unaware of the implications of his call for a ban on full payment for a transaction. He is unaware of his conceptual error: his treatment of something valuable as if it were a free good. He therefore fails to assess the outcome of political intervention into the market. He blames economic effects that he does not like on something other than his erroneous assessment of economic cause and effect.

RISING LEVELS OF DEBT

There is an economic law that states: "When the price of something falls, more of the item is demanded." This law is an extension of the concept of scarcity: "At zero price, there will be greater demand than supply." So, the closer to zero the price is, the greater the quantity demanded.

There has been a great increase in consumer debt in the United States over the past quarter century. There is a reason for this, one which is rarely mentioned: falling interest rates. The price of loans has been declining since the credit squeeze of 1980–81. Therefore, the quantity of loans demanded has risen.

Borrowers estimate how much debt they can afford to buy (carry). They look at their after-tax disposable income. Then they look at the price of debt: the interest rate. They borrow to finance their lifestyles.

The significant figure for both creditors and debtors is the household debt service ratio (DSR). This is the ratio of debt payments to disposable (after-tax) income.

In early 1980, the DSR for house renters was 24.5. In late 2006, it was 25.5. In other words, there has been no significant change. Renters know how much debt they can handle.

In early 1980, the DSR total for home owners was 15.9. In late 2006, it was 19.4. This was an increase of 22%. This increase came after 1984, after the Reagan recession (1981–82) was clearly over. Borrowers carefully estimated what level of debt they could handle and slowly and cautiously increased it.

This is not an example of what is sometimes called irrational exuberance. This was a careful long-term response to new economic conditions. The recessions of the 1970’s (1970–71; 1975) were behind them. Home-owning borrowers responded accordingly. They concluded that they could handle more debt. They were correct.

So, the household debt level increased among homeowners, but the debt service ratio did not significantly increase. Among renters, it did not increase at all.

DEBT AND CLASS POSITION

The significant change came in the reasons for this indebtedness. The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis publishes a chart showing the level of personal savings, 1947 to 2006. From 1947 to 1960, the increase was slow. It climbed in the 1970’s, but no faster than the dollar declined in purchasing power. It peaked in 1986 at about $340 billion a year, fell to $240 billion in 1987, rose until 1993 to almost $323 billion. Then it began to fall. It was under $170 billion in 2000, just before the recession of 2001. During the recession, it fell to $131 billion. It went back up to about $175 billion in 2004.

Then, in 2005, it fell sharply in the first quarter. By the second quarter of 2005, it went negative. For the year, it was negative $35 billion. Rarely does any economic chart show a decline this steep. Americans are today net borrowers in the $100 billion a year range. Individual Americans have not only ceased to save, they have fallen into considerable debt.

[Note: To obtain any year’s figure, use the View Data table. Add the four quarterly figures and divide by four.]

Rising home values have allowed this: assets to borrow against. So have falling interest rates. But why in 2005?

I offer this explanation. The Chinese central bank’s policy of monetary inflation and buying dollars to lend to Americans finally produced an unprecedented effect. A fundamental change in Americans’ attitude toward the future took place. Americans’ attitudes toward time shifted from a mild future-orientation to historically unprecedented present-orientation.

There may be a better explanation. I am willing to consider it. When we see a shift this widespread and this rapid, no explanation makes much sense. To use the term of a recent best-selling book, 2005 was a tipping point.

The practical question now is: What might tip it back? If nothing does, Americans will not recover the attitude toward the future that marked them from the beginning of the English-speaking nation in 1607 at Jamestown.

We have moved from future orientation to present orientation. Edward Banfield, a Harvard political scientist, four decades ago re-defined class position in terms of time orientation. Present-oriented people are lower class.

Using his definition, in 2005 Americans visibly moved from middle class to lower class. I regard this as significant for the nation’s economic future.

CLAIMS ON FUTURE INCOME

As far as consumers are concerned, it doesn’t matter who owns the capital inside the nation or the region where they spend their money. The free market sets the rate of return on capital. The process pays no attention to specific ownership within the private capital markets.

As far as consumers are concerned, it also doesn’t matter who loaned them the money they used to purchase goods and services. The free market sets prices, including interest rates.

It matters greatly – or should – to consumers what their future status as consumers will be. If they refuse to purchase assets that are likely to produce a positive rate of return over time, they are deciding to do one or more the following:

Remain in the work force much longer than their parents did;

Become much more dependent on their children than their parents did;

Accept a standard of living much lower as a percentage of their income as labor force members than their parents did.

As present net borrowers rather than present net savers, Americans are purchasing the future which they value most highly. They have recently elevated their estimation of the value of present consumption far above the present discounted value of future consumption. They are not only consuming their seed corn, they are borrowing more corn to consume. This is a voluntary decision. The free market allows them to make this decision.

This is the significance of the balance of payments deficit of about $800 billion a year. It points to an American mindset that discounts the future at a high rate.

Asian exporters, financed by Asian central bank inflation which keeps their currencies at price below what an unregulated free market would produce, are selling more consumer goods to Americans than Americans are buying from Asians. The Asians are lending Americans the difference – or in some cases, buying the capital assets that employ American workers.

Asians are buying legal title to future streams of income generated by American employees and taxpayers. American employees will not own any share of future income that is owned by Asian investors.

What is significant here is the time and trust aspect of this arrangement. Americans imagine that they will get something for nothing when they grow old. They believe they will receive future income streams despite the fact that they are selling capital or refusing to buy it today. They no longer believe that there is a relationship between the ownership of capital and future income.

In 2005, Americans finally bought the party line of the U.S. government: There will be something for nothing. "Social Security and Medicare will deliver the goods, irrespective of who owns capital that employs American labor and produces goods purchased by Americans."

From 1935, with the passage of the Social Security Act, until 1965, with the passage of Medicare, the American public mentally bought the government’s official line: something for nothing. In 2005, the American public finally bought it emotionally.

THE THEFT MENTALITY

There is no tooth fairy. There is no retirement fairy. There will be no streams of income for the vast majority of old Americans. There will probably be monthly checks. They will not buy much.

The rational basis of high expectations of future income can be only two things: (1) ownership of capital or (2) theft from people who own capital. Voters accepted theft as a legitimate source of retirement income in 1935 and 1965. As their faith in the productivity of theft increased, their faith in capital investment as the source of retirement wealth waned. In 2005, the tipping point occurred. Americans finally accepted emotionally the worldview of the drunkards in the days of the prophet Isaiah.

Come ye, say they, I will fetch wine, and we will fill ourselves with strong drink; and to morrow shall be as this day, and much more abundant (Isaiah 56:12).

Americans will wake up with a gigantic hangover in their golden years.

CREDIT CARDS

Once you understand that debt is basic to civilization, you should ask yourself: "What is good debt? What is bad debt? How can I avoid bad debt?"

There are financial counsellors who recommend that people tear up their credit cards. Some people should do this. They are addicted to debt. They need to go cold turkey.

This advice is specific, not universal. Credit cards are a bad idea generally. Their rates are too high. People are easily sucked in to years of high-interest debt. But this is not an argument against debt. It is an argument against subprime, high-interest debt.

If you pay off your credit card bill every month, the card is not a liability. It can be an emergency tool, such as on the road when your car breaks down. The point is, the card becomes a liability only if you have a problem with debt. You’re the liability, not the card. Don’t confuse cause with effect.

CONCLUSION

Debt and trust go together. President Reagan said of nuclear disarmament, "Trust, but verify." This is good advice. Limit your extension of trust. Limit also your extension of credit.

Don’t ask for too much trust. Limit what you expect. Limit also your debt.

If you can get a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage at a low interest rate, and you really want the home, take the mortgage if you have an expected stream of income to pay it off, such as Social Security. Paying off the mortgage is a good use of a stream of income denominated in dollars. They will depreciate.

The home will appreciate.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north529.html

____

Debt: An Inescapable Concept
Part 3: Business Debt
by Gary North
by Gary North

DIGG THIS

Debt is an inescapable concept. It is never a question of debt or no debt. It is always a question of which kind of debt, owed to whom, when.

I have previously covered the related issues of social debt and personal debt. Business debt is different, because a business is not biological. A business survives or perishes ("lives" or "dies") in terms of decisions made by people outside the business: customers.

This can also be said of individuals. We are all dependent on others. Then what are the economic differences between a human being and a business?

First, a business does not have a moral claim on the charity of others, unlike the members of a family. It exists to serve customers. The customers’ hammer over a business is money: the most marketable commodity. A business cannot survive if it does not earn a return on the investments made by owners. So, customers determine the fate of every business.

Second, unlike an individual, a business is not self-conscious. A business is not an acting individual. It is a tool of acting individuals.

Third, it does not produce in order to consume. It produces in order to make a profit from its assets. These profits are either transferred to business owners or reinvested to produce more profits.

Fourth and decisively, a business has no soul. It faces no eternal sanctions.

FIVE WAYS TO FINANCE A BUSINESS

A business has five sources of capital: (1) invested time and/or money from its founders; (2) money from passive investors who purchase part ownership; (3) loans from individuals, banks, or other financial organizations; (4) loans from its customers; (5) reinvested profits. Capital comes from owners, lenders, and customers.

Entrepreneurs have great confidence in their business vision. They prefer not to share ownership.

A small group of outside owners will often attempt to substitute their vision for the entrepreneur’s vision. The organization can take on the characteristics of a committee – a divided committee. Committees are notoriously ineffective as entrepreneurial institutions. It is too difficult to establish the blame for bad decisions. "Success has a hundred fathers, but failure is an orphan."

In contrast, lenders want only a guaranteed rate of return on their money. They do not want to exercise control over the business. They have no legal control over the business. This is ideal for an innovator. As long as the business meets its payment schedule, lenders stay out of management.

This is why debt is the preferred path for founders. Until the business is up and running and growing fast, founders do not want to bring in new owners. Until the business is so successful that so many owners will want to invest that their decision-making authority is diffused and therefore de-fused, the founder does not want to sell shares to the public.

Sometimes, customers are asked to become lenders, although they do not perceive their position as lenders. The best example of this arrangement is a subscription. Subscribers provide money in advance to receive published materials. The owner has an obligation to deliver the subscription, but he surrenders no control to subscribers. They can cancel their subscriptions or fail to renew, but they have no legal authority to tell the publisher’s owner or editor what to write about.

TRANSACTIONS

Prior to 1945, most people bought with cash: coins or currency. They did not have checking accounts. Most businesses were operated in terms of instant transactions. At a retail market, you picked up items you wanted to buy, went to the counter, and paid cash for them. The clerk deposited the money in a cash register. There was very little time or trust involved at the point of sale, other than the customer’s trust in the product’s quality.

Checks take time to clear the banks. In a week, the check clears, and the transaction is over. During this time, the seller extends credit to the buyer. He trusts the buyer.

Credit cards appear to be close to instantaneous. This is deceptive. There are multiple debt and trust relationships involved. The seller’s merchant account (bank) extends credit to him for a transaction fee. If the buyer is using a stolen card, the seller will not lose any money. On the other side of the transaction, the buyer’s bank extends credit to him, which its owners dearly hope he will not pay off soon – not at 10% to 33% per annum.

Debit cards are basically digital currency. There is no credit involved. The money spent is immediately deducted from the buyer’s account.

At a Dollar General store, you can purchase anything with a debit card. You cannot purchase anything with a credit card. The seller saves money by not paying for the credit side of the operation.

So, it is possible to stay in business without debt by insisting on currency or a debit card, but I know of few conventional businesses that operate solely in terms of currency. The illegal drug trade operates with currency only. So do gun shows. But these are not conventional operations.

In business, debt is not quite inescapable, but it is close.

DEBT-TO-EQUITY RATIO

The solvency of businesses, especially publicly traded corporations, are rated in part in terms of their debt to equity ratio.

The simplest concept of equity is the net value of the business if sold for cash. This is established by dividing its net income per year by the rate of interest. A business generating a million dollars a year, net, in an economy where the 10-year interest rate is 5% is worth $20 million.

Money in the bank is considered equity. There are variations of this. Credit in the form of 90-day loans extended to customers is considered close to money in the bank. This money probably earns a higher rate of return than money in a bank. There is a greater risk of default, but when spread over many customers in boom times, this form of credit was considered positive. It is equity.

Debt is legally a liability. It is a legal claim on the stream of income generated by the business. So, these payments reduce the stream of income. They therefore reduce equity.

There was a time when the debt-to-equity ratio was supposed to be low in order to gain a high credit rating. It is not taken nearly so seriously today.

Debt for the expansion of production facilities is considered positive, though not unlimited. Credit rating services look at the internal rate of return on the plant and equipment, and then evaluate the effect of rising debt. It is generally assumed that a growing business with positive cash flow and rising equity could sustain an increase in the debt-to-equity ratio. This is a way to finance expansion, meaning market share. Rising market share allows greater price competition. Wal-Mart is the great example of this process in our era.

The United States in the late nineteenth century ran a balance of payments deficit. Foreign investment flowed in to take advantage of perceived opportunities. Railroads were a major growth area of the economy. So was real estate. The debt was used to expand output, not finance consumption. Consumer debt grew rapidly only in the 1920’s, when the country was running balance of payments surpluses.

Today, debt is used increasingly to finance mergers and acquisitions. Companies buy their competitors. They also buy unrelated businesses as a way to diversify. This is common in boom phases of the economy. When recession hits, the companies sell off their component parts at a loss and return to the core business.

Another major use of debt is to finance stock repurchases from the public. This reduces the supply of shares available for investors. This drives up stock prices. Senior managers, because of American tax law, prefer to be compensated by the use of stock options. Salaries over a million dollars a year may not be deducted from pre-tax corporate expenses.

Management’s performance is commonly measured by stock prices. So, by using corporation money that could have gone for capital expansion, senior management uses it to increase the share price: reduced supply, increasing demand (from the corporation). The top managers are usually in senior management for under ten years, so they must make hay while the sun shines. This policy is hit hard when a recession hits. The company’s share prices fall. Meanwhile, the firm does not own capital to increase market share at the expense of competitors in a down market.

This strategy is used to fend off corporate raiders, who buy up shares to gain control over a firm. Successful raiders then fire existing managers. The managers don’t want this, so they use corporate income to defend their careers.

Corporate debt has risen for a generation in the United States, but consumer debt has risen faster. In the early 1970’s, the ratio of business debt to total debt was in the range of one-third. Today, it is closer to 20%.

Business debt has a much greater chance of being productive than consumer debt. It can be misused. Buying up company shares is surely a misuse of corporate profits in the long run, although it is good for senior managers and short-term holders of the shares. But business debt for expansion still goes on. Consumer debt is present-oriented. It is not spent to increase wealth except in the case of housing debt, which can be used as a way to unload depreciating future dollars onto creditors in exchange for an appreciating asset.

When a company can borrow at 7% in order to earn 10%, debt is a good strategy, depending on the phase of the business cycle. But debt is relentless. It is a ticking meter. It must be serviced in good times and bad.

A company is not a human being. It does not exist to consume. It exists only to produce. Anything that turns it into a means of consumption for its employees threatens its survival in a competitive market, unless the form of consumption – subsidized cafeterias, gyms, and limousines – is a means of retaining employees by offering tax-free compensation.

So, if it were not for the business cycle, it would not matter whether the company raises money by selling new stock, taking on more debt, or retaining more earnings. It is when the downturn comes that it matters. Debt is a legal liability irrespective of the company’s performance. It drains the company’s income in the down phase. A company can cease paying dividends. It cannot cease paying interest.

The policy of the Federal Reserve has been to forestall the liquidation of malinvested capital (recession) by pumping in new fiat money. This has created a false sense of security among business managers. Increasing corporate debt seems to be a better policy than increasing ownership through the issue of new stock. This policy is good for senior managers, who are compensated mainly by stock options. They want less stock available to investors. But in the down phase of the cycle, the policy of a higher debt-to-equity ratio places the company’s survival in jeopardy.

WHEN RECESSION HITS

Investors should look for companies that are surviving the recession, but just barely, due to their high debt-to-equity ratio. When it becomes clear that the FED has begun its policy of reinflating, high-debt companies are better candidates for purchase because of their leverage. Increasing revenues have a more powerful effect in a high debt-to-equity company than a low debt-to-equity company.

The opposite is true in the early phase of a recession. You don’t want to own shares of high debt-to-equity companies in any industry. That’s when steady-Eddie companies are the wise fund manager’s choice. Leverage will kill you in the down phase of the economy.

If the FED would stay out of the capital markets, refusing to buy or sell T-bills or other assets, then the American economy could begin to escape home-brew recessions.

This does not solve the problem of Asian central banks, whose purchases of T-bills can affect interest rates in the United States. By creating a massive inflation-driven boom in China, the Bank of China has created a situation in which the boom-bust cycle spreads from China to its trading partners. By making capital available to Western consumers, China’s central bank has fanned the West’s consumer boom. Americans take advantage of the bargains, while Chinese workers do without. This is mercantilism, and it leads to misallocated capital. It is now an international phenomenon.

CONCLUSION

Debt has legitimate uses in business. It allows senior managers to finance their companies without having to retain earnings or issue more shares of stock. But when tax laws favor capital gains (lower rates) and also punish companies that pay senior managers over a million dollars a year, fiscal policy skews investment in favor of debt to fund stock repurchases. The debt/equity ratio increases, leaving companies far more vulnerable to recessions.

This in turn calls forth the Federal Reserve, which once again stimulates the economy through money creation and lowering short-term interest rates. This leads to a steady-Eddie depreciation of the dollar.

Price inflation harms creditors and benefits debtors. The taxing policies and central bank policies of the United States favor the long-term destruction of the dollar.

May 16, 2007

http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north530.html

____

Debt: An Inescapable Concept
Part 4: Government Debt
by Gary North
by Gary North

DIGG THIS

Debt is an inescapable concept. It is never a question of debt or no debt. It is always a question of which kind of debt, owed to whom, when.

In theory, civil governments do not need to issue debt. Yet they do, century after century. In the history of the United States, the national government was debt-free only in 1835, in the midst of an economic boom during the second term of the presidency of Andrew Jackson, who had campaigned on a platform of reducing government debt. He fulfilled his promise. He even went beyond his promise. He also refused to re-charter the Second Bank of the United States, which lost its monopolistic Federal charter in 1836. It went bankrupt five years later, unable to compete in a free market.

Governments in the West have been going heavily into debt ever since the fifteenth century, beginning with the Italian city-states. They have worked hand in hand with government-licensed fractional reserve banks, which then buy the debt instruments of the governments. Eventually, all of the governments of the Italian city-states defaulted, taking down the banks with them.

Governments see that they can gain political support from the rich when they owe great sums of money to the rich. The rich in turn regard governments as solvent borrowers because governments possess the power to tax. Investors assume that governments will not default because governments do not have to face a competitive market. Investors believe that the power to tax is more reliable than market competition. They buy government bonds in preference to corporate bonds.

This assumption holds good for most periods. But when it doesn’t hold good, investors lose everything. In times of war, governments build up debt. In times of peace, they are supposed to reduce the level of debt. But in the twentieth century, governments did not reduce debt in peacetime, while accelerating it in wartime.

The modern world is a world built on government debt. Government debt is the economic foundation for the central banks of the world. Government debt in the coffers of central banks establishes the legal reserves for fractional reserve commercial banks. When debt becomes the legal basis of money, there can be no reduction of debt without universal bankruptcy: massive deflation. No government is willing to accept this outcome. This is the great curse of modern banking. The world has marched into a lobster trap.

THE LOBSTER TRAP

A lobster trap is an ingenious device. A lobster enters the trap in search of some alluring goodie to eat. The trap is a one-way device. The further into the trap the lobster pushes, the tighter it gets. It cannot back out, so it pushes forward, on the assumption that relief lies ahead. In fact, complete entrapment lies ahead.

This is how government debt works. Those who lend to the government see that the debt is not going to be repaid. The modern theory of government explicitly states that government debt should not be repaid. So does the modern theory of debt-based money. There is no income-producing sinking fund that will enable the government to reduce its debt. No matter how large the debt moves along its one-way street, there are investors who think they will be paid interest. They will then roll over the debt when it matures.

So great is men’s confidence in the power of government coercion to produce rabbits out of fiscal hats that investors continue to buy the debt. They recognize that corporations can become so indebted that they are at risk of default. They do not often recognize this with respect to national governments.

There are debt-rating services that make public assessments of the credit-worthiness of corporations and governments. But they rarely announce that a national government is on the verge of default. This is because national governments do not openly default. Instead, a national government turns to the nation’s central bank to buy its debt, and the central bank does so, inflating the money supply, thereby lowering the market value of the bonds. The default is indirect.

The ultimate debt lobster is therefore the central banking system. National central banks buy bonds with money they create, to be held as legal reserves for the nation’s commercial banks to use in the multiplying of accounts. Central bankers do not invest their own money. They invest money which their own institutions create. They want the interest received to be worth something, but their primary goal is to avoid seeing these bonds redeemed by the government. They hold government bonds as their main source of revenue. Modern monetary and tax theory agree: governments need not and should not repay debt.

PROMISES AS BONDS

"A man’s word is his bond." This is an ancient and once-familiar slogan in the United States. A bond is a relationship initiated by trust in someone’s promise to fulfill an obligation. This is what a debt is.

The politicians in Washington have sold far more bonds of this kind than there are T-bills and T-bonds in existence. The official on-budget debt of the United States, which does not count Social Security and Medicare, is in the range of $9 trillion. You can monitor this on one of the debt clocks that are on the Web.

The cost of the long-run promises made by politicians and signed into law cannot be calculated directly. This is an advantage for the politicians. The national government’s main promises in the United States are these: Medicare, Social Security, other Federal pensions, the ERISA private pension default insurance fund, the legally implied future bailout of banks and savings & loans (which cost the government hundreds of billions of dollars in the late 1980’s), and mortgage-issuing non-government agencies: Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.

Medicare and Social Security are legal liabilities, but it is not clear what their magnitude is. This depends on statistical assumptions regarding birthrates, personal health, price inflation, average lifespans, medical costs, immigration rates, and numerous other factors. Of course, the crucial assumption does not appear in the statistical summaries produced by the Social Security Trust Fund. That assumption is that future taxpayers will abide by prior legislation guaranteeing payments to retirees.

The most frightening estimates place the unfunded liability of Medicare and Social Security combined above $70 trillion.

Because the Trust Funds are filled with nothing but non-marketable U.S. government bonds, there are no funded liabilities at all. So, who will pay off these debts? The official answer is "the government of the United States." But that is a legal entity which has existence only insofar as it can tax, borrow, or create fiat money through the Federal Reserve System.

Every other Western industrial nation is in a similar situation. None of them has taken steps to use tax revenue to invest in productive capital that will be used to pay future beneficiaries. The entire Western economy is awash in debt – not just on-budget debt with specific payment dates, but open-ended debt that is based on yesterday’s promises and today’s reassurances.

WHEN PROMISES ARE BROKEN

A bankrupt corporation may or may not revive. Its shareholders are ruined. They bear the brunt of the loss. Creditors also suffer major losses.

A bankrupt nation has no creditors who can demand payment if the nation’s courts do not grant relief to creditors. The bankrupt nation runs the court system.

So, the bankruptcy only rarely results in the permanent demise of the government. The USSR did disappear, but there is nothing to match this in human history. A giant empire simply folded without bloodshed. It was a smart move for the Russian bureaucrats. Today, instead of being $60 billion in debt to the West, as it was in 1991, it has $350+ billion in foreign reserves, thanks to income from oil and gas sales. It is third internationally behind Japan and Communist China in official reserves.

The promises of dead politicians do not cause problems for the deceased. They do cause immense problems for politicians who reassured older voters that the government would never default on its obligations. They also cause immense problems for all those oldsters who trusted the official reassurances.

DEFAULT THROUGH INFLATION

Incumbent politicians do not want default to occur while their careers are still at stake. So, they seek ways to postpone default. In the case of retirement programs, they increase the age limit at which benefits begin. This violates the promise of earlier politicians, but because this is piecemeal default, there is no well-organized opposition. This has already happened to Social Security.

Another way to default is to impose a means test. If you have an income above a specific level, you must pay more into the system in premiums or receive less in return. This policy has begun this year with Medicare.

At some point, piecemeal default becomes politically risky. The opposition party, on the outside, will hold incumbents’ feet to the fire. "Vote for us if you want your promised money." This brings the economically unsustainable promises into prominence.

The point is, current budgets are hard political realities. They are not promises. They are immediate liabilities. The politicians cannot announce, "Let them eat promises."

The least controversial way to default is to create money to send to the beneficiaries, as promised. The central bank can do this easily enough. It buys the government’s debts. This provides money for the government to send checks to beneficiaries.

One result is rising prices. This unwanted result can be blamed on speculators or on greedy businessmen. The public is unfamiliar with economic theory. Voters are ready to accept the official explanations. They do not monitor central bank statistics.

When default takes place through monetary inflation, default affects not just the government’s budget. It affects every debt-credit relationship. Investors in corporate bonds see their rate of real return fall. The same is true of investors in mortgages.

As prices increase, long-term interest rates rise. Lenders demand an inflation protection premium in their promised interest rate. Borrowers see that price inflation will enable them to pay off with a cheaper currency unit, so they agree to the higher rate of interest.

As long-term rates rise, the present market value of existing long-term promises falls. This has negative effects in the capital markets.

So, default through monetary inflation has negative effects outside the government promises market. If continued, this policy becomes default through the destruction of currency. It becomes universal.

MACROECONOMIC DEFAULT

When sons default on their implied social contracts by refusing to support aged parents, this is microeconomic default. It happens, of course, but the practice is not widespread. Social pressures against such default are applied to those who break these unofficial contracts.

The parents usually have warnings in advance. Sons may not be reliable. They may not be productive. Parents can search for other agents to accept the role of "reliable sons." They can transfer the inheritance to these new agents. They can buy an annuity from an insurance company. They can go to other relatives and create a trust where the trustee will direct the inheritance to those who support the aging parents.

In other words, there are ways to reallocate responsibility when the government is not the promisor. But when the state has issued promises and then taxes workers to fund the government’s promises, the ability of the dependents to find alternative arrangements falls dramatically. No one outside the government except expensive tax lawyers and tax professionals can find ways to reallocate the risk of default. The default then becomes macroeconomic. It applies to everyone in the economy who pays taxes or receives the promised tax benefits.

This is the situation which Western taxpayers and oldsters are facing over the next two decades. Economist Ludwig von Mises was once asked what his inflation hedge was. He had a one-word answer: "Age." It paid off. He died in 1973, before the decade’s inflation had done its corrosive work.

The free market decentralizes defaults of all kinds. A few people are harmed. This sends signals to others to pay closer attention to the details relating to the default. There is strong economic incentive to find solutions to the problem.

In contrast, when a government defaults, the default is centralized. The default affects people throughout the society. The grand experiment fails in full public view. Government agents then blame others. There is no quest for cause and effect, for such a quest must eventually identify the culprit: the state. The state’s agents do not want this. Neither do most of the victims.

Most voters do not want to admit that they were sucked into voting for a doomed program of coercive wealth redistribution. That would call into question their morals as well as their wisdom in trusting elected thieves and liars. This would make them unidicted co-conspirators. They resist such a suggestion. They do not want a thorough investigation of failed government programs generally, let alone one in which they became victims – first as taxpayers, then as dependent recipients of tax revenues.

So, unlike private defaults, not only is the default universal, it is not self-correcting. Like investors in Latin American bonds since the 1820’s, voters return again and again to be sheared. They refuse to accept this lesson of history:

"Government promises are not safe to trust long-term."

In rare and extreme cases, the public does identify the culprit. This can lead to a political revolution. The most famous is the French Revolution, which took place because Louis XVI could no longer pay his debts in 1789. He had to call the long-dormant Estates General into session to approve new taxes. Newly elected lawyers then took over the government and created a far more oppressive system of default through inflation. They confiscated church property and then issued bonds against this property. These bonds became the country’s currency.

When the reign of the lawyers failed, there was another revolution. Napoleon was the winner, but only until 1815. Again and again since then, political revolutions have replaced bankrupt regimes. Inflation has marked the rise and fall of these regimes.

CONCLUSION

Western industrial countries became enamored of government promises in the twentieth century. These regimes issued promises to the working population. The government promised to tax future generations if existing generations would just consent to mild taxes today. The result is familiar. The outcome is reported in I Kings 12, the story of King Rehoboam’s tax increases in Israel.

And he said unto them, What counsel give ye that we may answer this people, who have spoken to me, saying, Make the yoke which thy father did put upon us lighter? And the young men that were grown up with him spake unto him, saying, Thus shalt thou speak unto this people that spake unto thee, saying, Thy father made our yoke heavy, but make thou it lighter unto us; thus shalt thou say unto them, My little finger shall be thicker than my father’s loins. And now whereas my father did lade you with a heavy yoke, I will add to your yoke: my father hath chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions (1 Kings 12:9–11).

The result was a successful political revolt. The ten northern tribes separated from the king’s rule.

Political rulers never seem to learn this lesson. Neither do their counsellors. But in today’s world, the victims – taxpayers – are also very slow to learn this lesson. They wind up stung by scorpions.

There will be a tax revolt at some point. There always is. But the damage to the economy between now and then will be substantial. The school of hard knocks imposes high tuition.

May 17, 2007

http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north531.html

__

Debt: An Inescapable Concept
Part 5: Central Banking
by Gary North
by Gary North

DIGG THIS

Debt is an inescapable concept. It is never a question of debt or no debt. It is always a question of which kind of debt, owed to whom, when.

The modern economy is addicted to government debt by way of central banking debt. The system is self-reinforcing. Governments spend more money and make more unfunded promises than taxes can fund. So, governments turn to debt as a way to make up the shortfall. To keep interest rates low, governments license privately owned central banks to create money in order to buy government debt. This has been the pattern ever since the creation of the Bank of England in 1694.

Central banks create money when they purchase government debt, which is mainly what they invest in. This adds new money to the economy: monetary inflation. To eliminate all government debt, as the United States did in only one year, 1835, the central bank would have to sell government debt and purchase some other asset to replace it. Otherwise, the bank’s sale of government debt to the public or to the government (debt reduction) would shrink the money supply.

For a central bank to fold up shop and go away, it would have to sell all of its assets. This would create price deflation on a massive scale. It would create a depression far worse than the Great Depression of the 1930’s. This is why, once begun, the central banking system is self-reinforcing. It is like an addictive drug. It means lifetime employment for the pushers: central bankers.

The modern system of debt-based money is therefore as close to politically inescapable as anything in the modern world – even the welfare state. The modern world is addicted to central bank debt. In theory, central bank debt is not inescapable. Once begun, however, it is politically inescapable. The organization of debt into money is politically irreversible short of what Ludwig von Mises called the crack-up boom: the breakdown of money in mass inflation. It leads to ever-greater monetary inflation.

This is a worldwide phenomenon. Around the world, central banks control national monetary systems. A free market in money is universally opposed by politicians, academics, and of course commercial bankers, who want a lender of last resort to protect them from bank runs by their depositors.

DEBT WITHOUT END

The United States government is the largest debtor in history. From all over the world, but especially from Asia, money is flowing in to buy Treasury debt. This money is from central banks, mainly – money created by government-licensed counterfeiting operations.

If this money were going into the U.S. stock market, Americans would at least be the beneficiaries of better tools of production. They would not be laying up wealth in their old age. Instead, foreign central banks would be doing that: establishing ownership of wealth-producing assets. But central bankers are not investing their own money or depositors’ money. They are investing recently counterfeited money. They buy government promises to pay. It is a gigantic con job between government-licensed counterfeiters and elected liars who know the debts will never be paid off.

You and I are caught in the middle.

Here is how the system works. Foreign central bank-produced counterfeit money is used by foreign central banks to buy Federal Reserve-produced counterfeit money, which is then used to buy a large chunk of the U.S. government’s debt. No one expects the debt to be paid off. All that anyone expects is interest payments.

The #1 principle of national government debt is this: "Old debt must be rolled over, not repaid." The idea that national government debt must ever be repaid is considered ludicrous – by bankers, voters, politicians, and academic economists. This assumption lies at the heart of the modern political order. We have bet the political order on this assumption. It is a false assumption. As King David wrote 3,000 years ago: "The wicked borroweth, and payeth not again" (Psalm 37:21a).

What is legitimate in one realm – private debt – is not legitimate in another realm: government debt. Private debt gets paid off by individual debtors. Government debt is perpetual.

Let me explain the logic of the two realms. First, debt is correctly seen as the engine of wealth creation in the private markets, which it can be when it is used to purchase tools of production. Second, debt is also regarded as the engine of prosperity in private markets when it is used to purchase consumer goods. This position is much less defendable than the first, but if consumers want to do this, there is nothing morally wrong, so long as they repay the debt.

Then the defense of productive debt in private markets is applied to the government. Here, the logic of debt breaks down. Would you loan money to a known counterfeiter? Only if the counterfeiter is the government. To lend money to a counterfeiter is to guarantee repayment in depreciating currency.

The fact is, the modern economy is based on money lent to a debtor who is in league with the largest counterfeiter on earth: the Federal Reserve System. These days, the FED is not cranking the digital printing press at a high rate to buy U.S. government debt. This is because other counterfeiters are doing it for the FED. The Bank of China is producing fiat money at a rate above 15% per annum. It is then taking billions of dollars worth of this newly created money to buy the debts of its trading partners’ governments, including the United States.

The world’s economy runs on officially counterfeit money. Technological innovation is accelerating worldwide, but this innovation does not require counterfeit money. Hundreds of millions of Chinese and Indians are moving off the once collectivized farms and heading for cities. They are moving out of the world of 1950’s-era socialism. This is highly productive for them and for consumers all over the world, but it did not require counterfeit money to make possible this transition. It required only a reduction of government control over the economy.

Asian central bankers are well aware that the U.S. government has no intention to pay off its debt. They also know that the Federal Reserve System stands ready to fund the U.S. government’s budget by creating fiat money. But Asian bankers seem not to care. Why should they? They are buying this debt with fiat money. They buy dollars. They then buy T-bills. This money is then spent by the U.S. government. The recipients of the U.S. government’s money then buy Asian currencies to buy Asian products. This helps the Asian economies to grow.

But couldn’t the Asian central bankers just buy the government debt of their own nations? Couldn’t they eliminate the middlemen, namely, the U.S. government and U.S. consumers? Of course they could. But we are still living in a world of mercantilist economics. It is as if Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations had never been written. In the world of Asian central banking and politics, mercantilist economics rules supreme. The way to wealth, they believe, is by letting foreign governments run up huge debts that will never be repaid in order for foreigners to buy consumer goods exported from Asia.

You may think: "Wait a minute. This means giving away valuable consumer goods to foreigners today as a way to get rich in future depreciated money. This is nutty." If so, you have obviously been influenced by the logic of the free market. Asian policy-makers haven’t.

While the world is getting rich through the efforts of inventors, entrepreneurs, savers, and day laborers who are not part of governments, it is operated in terms of digits – counterfeit money – that are controlled by an alliance of national politicians and private central bankers. These digits keep multiplying, and every one of them represents a debt.

Money today is based on debt. To repay this debt would require a massive contraction of money back to gold and silver. This process would create a massive depression. So, government debts are not intended to be repaid.

"The wicked borroweth, and payeth not again."

But to keep the game going, there must be the illusion of repayment. There must be debt rollovers. There must be prompt payment of interest. There must be official solvency.

In short, there must be widespread acceptance of an illusion.

WHEN THE DEBTOR CONTROLS THE CURRENCY

Governments deal in illusion. This is their two-fold specialty: illusion and force.

Individuals monitor their own level of debt. They are careful not to let their debt load get beyond their ability to repay. They do not let themselves get into a position of having to default. They know that bankruptcy is a painful option. They know that creditors can repossess every mortgaged item they own. This is why the household debt payment/disposable income ratio has risen very slowly since 1980.

In contrast is the United States government. It keeps rolling up massive debts, year by year. It has on on-budget debt of almost $9 trillion, plus an off-budget debt in the range of $70 trillion.

There is no way that this can be paid off with money that possesses today’s purchasing power unless political steps are taken today to stop the expansion of debt. But no such steps are ever taken. Politicians have no incentive to stop making promises. The unfunded liability keeps growing.

Because nobody can foreclose on the U.S. government, politicians have no incentive to create a schedule for repaying the government’s debt. They would be thrown out of office if they suggested that the expansion of future obligations must cease until a means of repayment is set up. Remember the rule:

"Old debt must be rolled over, not repaid."

The illusion of repayment must be maintained. It will be maintained, nation by nation, all over the world. It will be maintained by the creation of more counterfeit money. Your check will be in the mail – or deposited directly into your account. You will get paid. Have no fear.

The illusion of solvency of the government will be maintained by the insolvency of the currency.

In the Soviet Union, there was a common saying among the workers: "The government pretends to pay us, and we pretend to work." The result was the nation’s bankruptcy in 1991. The USSR could no longer service its debt of about $60 billion to the West. Today, Russia’s central bank has something in the range of $350 billion in IOU’s from Western governments. That’s what oil and natural gas can do for a government.

Russia’s central bankers are now caught in the absurdity of mercantilist economics. The government has sold off Russia’s energy assets in exchange for Western governments’ promise to pay counterfeit money. Dumb.

And so it goes, nation by nation. The politicians and central bankers finance the sale of valuable present goods in exchange for promises to pay counterfeit money years in the future.

How will all this end? Poorly. In what form? There are various possible scenarios.

When there is an interbank payments crisis – gridlock – due to an unforeseen event, such as an airborne anthrax attack on New York City or London or both.
When the government’s bills come due and tax revenues don’t.
When interest rates soar, causing a depression and widespread private bankruptcies.
When mass inflation depreciates the major nations’ currency systems.
When old people cannot survive on the income they have been promised, and must return to their children’s households for relief.
The international currency system is based on two primary factors: (1) central banks’ counterfeiting operations; (2) debt-based money. The first guarantees long-term price inflation: debt servicing with depreciating money. The second prevents any long-term reduction of government debt that serves as central bank reserves, i.e., monetary deflation. This is a ratchet upward in the government debt markets of the world.

DEBTORS AND CREDITORS

We are all debtors. We are all creditors. The political question is: Which way will we vote? As debtors or creditors?

I think most voters vote as debtors. They feel the pressure of debt right now. They do not think of themselves as long-term creditors: pensioners, Social Security members, future Medicare recipients. In a choice between a little inflation vs. deflation (personal bankruptcy), they will choose inflation. They want to be able to meet their monthly payments, even if this means accepting long-term depreciating money. They fear next month more than they fear age 65.

One way to defend yourself against depreciating money is by accepting long-term debt. Consider your mortgage. Depending on your age, you probably still owe money for the home you live in. If you sell it, you will probably buy another one. You will use debt to purchase it. If you buy a nicer home, you will owe more on it than you owe on the one you are living in now.

You may have made a decision to spend your life in debt. Tens of millions of people do. I know I have. I am not a net debtor, but I plan always to have a mortgage. Why? Because I do not trust the U.S. dollar. I am a creditor: Social Security. I have been promised a lifetime of income in dollars. I want to be able to do something useful with these dollars. Paying off a fixed-interest mortgage is something useful.

In other words, I have seen that I am both a creditor and a debtor. I would like to break even on the deal. A fixed-rate mortgage should allow me to do better than break even. Of course, I will be a lifetime net loser. I paid into a retirement system that is a gigantic chain letter. I would be far better off today if I had invested the money that I paid into Social Security. But what’s gone is gone. I must make my decision today based on conditions today. I think I will be better off using my Social Security income to pay off a mortgage.

There are people my age or older who own their homes debt-free. These people grew up in a different generation from those starting families today. They either remember the Great Depression, as my parents do, or they grew up in households run by people who remember it, as I did. They know the stories of families that were evicted from their homes for non-payment of their mortgages. They may even know the true horror stories: families that were evicted from their farms for non-payment, yet who simultaneously lost everything they had in the bank when the local bank went bankrupt. They were wiped out as debtors, and they were also wiped out as creditors. These people learned that debt can be destructive. They decided early to avoid all but mortgage debt, and to pay off their mortgages rapidly.

They learned the wrong lesson. They should have bought one or two rental houses per year, using debt. They would now own 40 to 80 homes, mostly debt-free, each worth $250,000. They did not recognize that a new era had dawned after 1940: an era of irreversible price inflation. They did not buy appreciating assets using borrowed money.

CONCLUSION

Like addicts, we are trapped in the modern debt-based economy. Every institution is part of this web of debt. Some debt is productive. Government debt is unproductive. Central bank debt is addictive.

With governments and central banks in charge of money, monetary inflation is inevitable. This would not be true in a free market for money, where banks would not be allowed to violate contracts with their depositors and suspend payment in gold or silver coins.

We therefore seek ways to protect ourselves against the guaranteed inflation of central banking. Yet the obvious way to protect ourselves from depreciating money is to take on long-term, fixed-rate debt. This is why the organization of debt into money is self-reinforcing. The individual’s best defense – long-term debt – extends the central banking system.

In 1949, Ludwig von Mises identified the end result of the policy of central banking: mass inflation. Prices rise, and this gets built into the economy’s long-term contracts: a price premium. He wrote:

It is necessary to realize that the price premium is the outgrowth of speculations anticipating changes in the money relation. What induces it, in the case of the expectation that an inflationary trend will keep on going, is already the first sign of that phenomenon which later, when it becomes general, is called "flight into real values" and finally produces the crack-up boom and the crash of the monetary system concerned.

The destruction of purchasing power through monetary inflation, as well as the boom-bust cycle, is the product of the government-central bank alliance. There is no pain-free way out of the addiction to fiat money. This is why neither politicians nor central bankers have any intention of paying off the national debt. They see debt as forever.

I do not. Debts can be paid off through mass inflation. I think this is the way they will be paid off. Conclusion: don’t be a long-term creditor for very long.

May 18, 2007

http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north532.html

Martin Luther King preaches against war
A speech originally directed against the war in Vietnam, as relevant today as ever, now remixed over a hiphop beat and photos of today's Bush administration.
Video remixed by Eric Blumrich www.ericblumrich.com
http://www.mlkonline.net/video-martin-luther-king-anti-war.html

Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence
By Rev. Martin Luther King
4 April 1967
Speech delivered by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., on April 4, 1967, at a meeting of Clergy and Laity Concerned at Riverside Church in New York City
[Please put links to this speech on your respective web sites and if possible, place the text itself there. This is the least well known of Dr. King's speeches among the masses, and it needs to be read by all]
http://www.ssc.msu.edu/~sw/mlk/brkslnc.htm
________________________________________
I come to this magnificent house of worship tonight because my conscience leaves me no other choice. I join with you in this meeting because I am in deepest agreement with the aims and work of the organization which has brought us together: Clergy and Laymen Concerned about Vietnam. The recent statement of your executive committee are the sentiments of my own heart and I found myself in full accord when I read its opening lines: "A time comes when silence is betrayal." That time has come for us in relation to Vietnam.
The truth of these words is beyond doubt but the mission to which they call us is a most difficult one. Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government's policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one's own bosom and in the surrounding world. Moreover when the issues at hand seem as perplexed as they often do in the case of this dreadful conflict we are always on the verge of being mesmerized by uncertainty; but we must move on.
Some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak. And we must rejoice as well, for surely this is the first time in our nation's history that a significant number of its religious leaders have chosen to move beyond the prophesying of smooth patriotism to the high grounds of a firm dissent based upon the mandates of conscience and the reading of history. Perhaps a new spirit is rising among us. If it is, let us trace its movement well and pray that our own inner being may be sensitive to its guidance, for we are deeply in need of a new way beyond the darkness that seems so close around us.
Over the past two years, as I have moved to break the betrayal of my own silences and to speak from the burnings of my own heart, as I have called for radical departures from the destruction of Vietnam, many persons have questioned me about the wisdom of my path. At the heart of their concerns this query has often loomed large and loud: Why are you speaking about war, Dr. King? Why are you joining the voices of dissent? Peace and civil rights don't mix, they say. Aren't you hurting the cause of your people, they ask? And when I hear them, though I often understand the source of their concern, I am nevertheless greatly saddened, for such questions mean that the inquirers have not really known me, my commitment or my calling. Indeed, their questions suggest that they do not know the world in which they live.
In the light of such tragic misunderstandings, I deem it of signal importance to try to state clearly, and I trust concisely, why I believe that the path from Dexter Avenue Baptist Church -- the church in Montgomery, Alabama, where I began my pastorate -- leads clearly to this sanctuary tonight.
I come to this platform tonight to make a passionate plea to my beloved nation. This speech is not addressed to Hanoi or to the National Liberation Front. It is not addressed to China or to Russia.
Nor is it an attempt to overlook the ambiguity of the total situation and the need for a collective solution to the tragedy of Vietnam. Neither is it an attempt to make North Vietnam or the National Liberation Front paragons of virtue, nor to overlook the role they can play in a successful resolution of the problem. While they both may have justifiable reason to be suspicious of the good faith of the United States, life and history give eloquent testimony to the fact that conflicts are never resolved without trustful give and take on both sides.
Tonight, however, I wish not to speak with Hanoi and the NLF, but rather to my fellow Americans, who, with me, bear the greatest responsibility in ending a conflict that has exacted a heavy price on both continents.
The Importance of Vietnam
Since I am a preacher by trade, I suppose it is not surprising that I have seven major reasons for bringing Vietnam into the field of my moral vision. There is at the outset a very obvious and almost facile connection between the war in Vietnam and the struggle I, and others, have been waging in America. A few years ago there was a shining moment in that struggle. It seemed as if there was a real promise of hope for the poor -- both black and white -- through the poverty program. There were experiments, hopes, new beginnings. Then came the buildup in Vietnam and I watched the program broken and eviscerated as if it were some idle political plaything of a society gone mad on war, and I knew that America would never invest the necessary funds or energies in rehabilitation of its poor so long as adventures like Vietnam continued to draw men and skills and money like some demonic destructive suction tube. So I was increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor and to attack it as such.
Perhaps the more tragic recognition of reality took place when it became clear to me that the war was doing far more than devastating the hopes of the poor at home. It was sending their sons and their brothers and their husbands to fight and to die in extraordinarily high proportions relative to the rest of the population. We were taking the black young men who had been crippled by our society and sending them eight thousand miles away to guarantee liberties in Southeast Asia which they had not found in southwest Georgia and East Harlem. So we have been repeatedly faced with the cruel irony of watching Negro and white boys on TV screens as they kill and die together for a nation that has been unable to seat them together in the same schools. So we watch them in brutal solidarity burning the huts of a poor village, but we realize that they would never live on the same block in Detroit. I could not be silent in the face of such cruel manipulation of the poor.
My third reason moves to an even deeper level of awareness, for it grows out of my experience in the ghettoes of the North over the last three years -- especially the last three summers. As I have walked among the desperate, rejected and angry young men I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they asked -- and rightly so -- what about Vietnam? They asked if our own nation wasn't using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today -- my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent.
For those who ask the question, "Aren't you a civil rights leader?" and thereby mean to exclude me from the movement for peace, I have this further answer. In 1957 when a group of us formed the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, we chose as our motto: "To save the soul of America." We were convinced that we could not limit our vision to certain rights for black people, but instead affirmed the conviction that America would never be free or saved from itself unless the descendants of its slaves were loosed completely from the shackles they still wear. In a way we were agreeing with Langston Hughes, that black bard of Harlem, who had written earlier:
O, yes,
I say it plain,
America never was America to me,
And yet I swear this oath--
America will be!
Now, it should be incandescently clear that no one who has any concern for the integrity and life of America today can ignore the present war. If America's soul becomes totally poisoned, part of the autopsy must read Vietnam. It can never be saved so long as it destroys the deepest hopes of men the world over. So it is that those of us who are yet determined that America will be are led down the path of protest and dissent, working for the health of our land.
As if the weight of such a commitment to the life and health of America were not enough, another burden of responsibility was placed upon me in 1964; and I cannot forget that the Nobel Prize for Peace was also a commission -- a commission to work harder than I had ever worked before for "the brotherhood of man." This is a calling that takes me beyond national allegiances, but even if it were not present I would yet have to live with the meaning of my commitment to the ministry of Jesus Christ. To me the relationship of this ministry to the making of peace is so obvious that I sometimes marvel at those who ask me why I am speaking against the war. Could it be that they do not know that the good news was meant for all men -- for Communist and capitalist, for their children and ours, for black and for white, for revolutionary and conservative? Have they forgotten that my ministry is in obedience to the one who loved his enemies so fully that he died for them? What then can I say to the "Vietcong" or to Castro or to Mao as a faithful minister of this one? Can I threaten them with death or must I not share with them my life?
Finally, as I try to delineate for you and for myself the road that leads from Montgomery to this place I would have offered all that was most valid if I simply said that I must be true to my conviction that I share with all men the calling to be a son of the living God. Beyond the calling of race or nation or creed is this vocation of sonship and brotherhood, and because I believe that the Father is deeply concerned especially for his suffering and helpless and outcast children, I come tonight to speak for them.
This I believe to be the privilege and the burden of all of us who deem ourselves bound by allegiances and loyalties which are broader and deeper than nationalism and which go beyond our nation's self-defined goals and positions. We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy, for no document from human hands can make these humans any less our brothers.
Strange Liberators
And as I ponder the madness of Vietnam and search within myself for ways to understand and respond to compassion my mind goes constantly to the people of that peninsula. I speak now not of the soldiers of each side, not of the junta in Saigon, but simply of the people who have been living under the curse of war for almost three continuous decades now. I think of them too because it is clear to me that there will be no meaningful solution there until some attempt is made to know them and hear their broken cries.
They must see Americans as strange liberators. The Vietnamese people proclaimed their own independence in 1945 after a combined French and Japanese occupation, and before the Communist revolution in China. They were led by Ho Chi Minh. Even though they quoted the American Declaration of Independence in their own document of freedom, we refused to recognize them. Instead, we decided to support France in its reconquest of her former colony.
Our government felt then that the Vietnamese people were not "ready" for independence, and we again fell victim to the deadly Western arrogance that has poisoned the international atmosphere for so long. With that tragic decision we rejected a revolutionary government seeking self-determination, and a government that had been established not by China (for whom the Vietnamese have no great love) but by clearly indigenous forces that included some Communists. For the peasants this new government meant real land reform, one of the most important needs in their lives.
For nine years following 1945 we denied the people of Vietnam the right of independence. For nine years we vigorously supported the French in their abortive effort to recolonize Vietnam.
Before the end of the war we were meeting eighty percent of the French war costs. Even before the French were defeated at Dien Bien Phu, they began to despair of the reckless action, but we did not. We encouraged them with our huge financial and military supplies to continue the war even after they had lost the will. Soon we would be paying almost the full costs of this tragic attempt at recolonization.
After the French were defeated it looked as if independence and land reform would come again through the Geneva agreements. But instead there came the United States, determined that Ho should not unify the temporarily divided nation, and the peasants watched again as we supported one of the most vicious modern dictators -- our chosen man, Premier Diem. The peasants watched and cringed as Diem ruthlessly routed out all opposition, supported their extortionist landlords and refused even to discuss reunification with the north. The peasants watched as all this was presided over by U.S. influence and then by increasing numbers of U.S. troops who came to help quell the insurgency that Diem's methods had aroused. When Diem was overthrown they may have been happy, but the long line of military dictatorships seemed to offer no real change -- especially in terms of their need for land and peace.
The only change came from America as we increased our troop commitments in support of governments which were singularly corrupt, inept and without popular support. All the while the people read our leaflets and received regular promises of peace and democracy -- and land reform. Now they languish under our bombs and consider us -- not their fellow Vietnamese --the real enemy. They move sadly and apathetically as we herd them off the land of their fathers into concentration camps where minimal social needs are rarely met. They know they must move or be destroyed by our bombs. So they go -- primarily women and children and the aged.
They watch as we poison their water, as we kill a million acres of their crops. They must weep as the bulldozers roar through their areas preparing to destroy the precious trees. They wander into the hospitals, with at least twenty casualties from American firepower for one "Vietcong"-inflicted injury. So far we may have killed a million of them -- mostly children. They wander into the towns and see thousands of the children, homeless, without clothes, running in packs on the streets like animals. They see the children, degraded by our soldiers as they beg for food. They see the children selling their sisters to our soldiers, soliciting for their mothers.
What do the peasants think as we ally ourselves with the landlords and as we refuse to put any action into our many words concerning land reform? What do they think as we test our latest weapons on them, just as the Germans tested out new medicine and new tortures in the concentration camps of Europe? Where are the roots of the independent Vietnam we claim to be building? Is it among these voiceless ones?
We have destroyed their two most cherished institutions: the family and the village. We have destroyed their land and their crops. We have cooperated in the crushing of the nation's only non-Communist revolutionary political force -- the unified Buddhist church. We have supported the enemies of the peasants of Saigon. We have corrupted their women and children and killed their men. What liberators?
Now there is little left to build on -- save bitterness. Soon the only solid physical foundations remaining will be found at our military bases and in the concrete of the concentration camps we call fortified hamlets. The peasants may well wonder if we plan to build our new Vietnam on such grounds as these? Could we blame them for such thoughts? We must speak for them and raise the questions they cannot raise. These too are our brothers.
Perhaps the more difficult but no less necessary task is to speak for those who have been designated as our enemies. What of the National Liberation Front -- that strangely anonymous group we call VC or Communists? What must they think of us in America when they realize that we permitted the repression and cruelty of Diem which helped to bring them into being as a resistance group in the south? What do they think of our condoning the violence which led to their own taking up of arms? How can they believe in our integrity when now we speak of "aggression from the north" as if there were nothing more essential to the war? How can they trust us when now we charge them with violence after the murderous reign of Diem and charge them with violence while we pour every new weapon of death into their land? Surely we must understand their feelings even if we do not condone their actions. Surely we must see that the men we supported pressed them to their violence. Surely we must see that our own computerized plans of destruction simply dwarf their greatest acts.
How do they judge us when our officials know that their membership is less than twenty-five percent Communist and yet insist on giving them the blanket name? What must they be thinking when they know that we are aware of their control of major sections of Vietnam and yet we appear ready to allow national elections in which this highly organized political parallel government will have no part? They ask how we can speak of free elections when the Saigon press is censored and controlled by the military junta. And they are surely right to wonder what kind of new government we plan to help form without them -- the only party in real touch with the peasants. They question our political goals and they deny the reality of a peace settlement from which they will be excluded. Their questions are frighteningly relevant. Is our nation planning to build on political myth again and then shore it up with the power of new violence?
Here is the true meaning and value of compassion and nonviolence when it helps us to see the enemy's point of view, to hear his questions, to know his assessment of ourselves. For from his view we may indeed see the basic weaknesses of our own condition, and if we are mature, we may learn and grow and profit from the wisdom of the brothers who are called the opposition.
So, too, with Hanoi. In the north, where our bombs now pummel the land, and our mines endanger the waterways, we are met by a deep but understandable mistrust. To speak for them is to explain this lack of confidence in Western words, and especially their distrust of American intentions now. In Hanoi are the men who led the nation to independence against the Japanese and the French, the men who sought membership in the French commonwealth and were betrayed by the weakness of Paris and the willfulness of the colonial armies. It was they who led a second struggle against French domination at tremendous costs, and then were persuaded to give up the land they controlled between the thirteenth and seventeenth parallel as a temporary measure at Geneva. After 1954 they watched us conspire with Diem to prevent elections which would have surely brought Ho Chi Minh to power over a united Vietnam, and they realized they had been betrayed again.
When we ask why they do not leap to negotiate, these things must be remembered. Also it must be clear that the leaders of Hanoi considered the presence of American troops in support of the Diem regime to have been the initial military breach of the Geneva agreements concerning foreign troops, and they remind us that they did not begin to send in any large number of supplies or men until American forces had moved into the tens of thousands.
Hanoi remembers how our leaders refused to tell us the truth about the earlier North Vietnamese overtures for peace, how the president claimed that none existed when they had clearly been made. Ho Chi Minh has watched as America has spoken of peace and built up its forces, and now he has surely heard of the increasing international rumors of American plans for an invasion of the north. He knows the bombing and shelling and mining we are doing are part of traditional pre-invasion strategy. Perhaps only his sense of humor and of irony can save him when he hears the most powerful nation of the world speaking of aggression as it drops thousands of bombs on a poor weak nation more than eight thousand miles away from its shores.
At this point I should make it clear that while I have tried in these last few minutes to give a voice to the voiceless on Vietnam and to understand the arguments of those who are called enemy, I am as deeply concerned about our troops there as anything else. For it occurs to me that what we are submitting them to in Vietnam is not simply the brutalizing process that goes on in any war where armies face each other and seek to destroy. We are adding cynicism to the process of death, for they must know after a short period there that none of the things we claim to be fighting for are really involved. Before long they must know that their government has sent them into a struggle among Vietnamese, and the more sophisticated surely realize that we are on the side of the wealthy and the secure while we create hell for the poor.
This Madness Must Cease
Somehow this madness must cease. We must stop now. I speak as a child of God and brother to the suffering poor of Vietnam. I speak for those whose land is being laid waste, whose homes are being destroyed, whose culture is being subverted. I speak for the poor of America who are paying the double price of smashed hopes at home and death and corruption in Vietnam. I speak as a citizen of the world, for the world as it stands aghast at the path we have taken. I speak as an American to the leaders of my own nation. The great initiative in this war is ours. The initiative to stop it must be ours.
This is the message of the great Buddhist leaders of Vietnam. Recently one of them wrote these words:
"Each day the war goes on the hatred increases in the heart of the Vietnamese and in the hearts of those of humanitarian instinct. The Americans are forcing even their friends into becoming their enemies. It is curious that the Americans, who calculate so carefully on the possibilities of military victory, do not realize that in the process they are incurring deep psychological and political defeat. The image of America will never again be the image of revolution, freedom and democracy, but the image of violence and militarism."
If we continue, there will be no doubt in my mind and in the mind of the world that we have no honorable intentions in Vietnam. It will become clear that our minimal expectation is to occupy it as an American colony and men will not refrain from thinking that our maximum hope is to goad China into a war so that we may bomb her nuclear installations. If we do not stop our war against the people of Vietnam immediately the world will be left with no other alternative than to see this as some horribly clumsy and deadly game we have decided to play.
The world now demands a maturity of America that we may not be able to achieve. It demands that we admit that we have been wrong from the beginning of our adventure in Vietnam, that we have been detrimental to the life of the Vietnamese people. The situation is one in which we must be ready to turn sharply from our present ways.
In order to atone for our sins and errors in Vietnam, we should take the initiative in bringing a halt to this tragic war. I would like to suggest five concrete things that our government should do immediately to begin the long and difficult process of extricating ourselves from this nightmarish conflict:
1. End all bombing in North and South Vietnam.
2. Declare a unilateral cease-fire in the hope that such action will create the atmosphere for negotiation.
3. Take immediate steps to prevent other battlegrounds in Southeast Asia by curtailing our military buildup in Thailand and our interference in Laos.
4. Realistically accept the fact that the National Liberation Front has substantial support in South Vietnam and must thereby play a role in any meaningful negotiations and in any future Vietnam government.
5. Set a date that we will remove all foreign troops from Vietnam in accordance with the 1954 Geneva agreement.
Part of our ongoing commitment might well express itself in an offer to grant asylum to any Vietnamese who fears for his life under a new regime which included the Liberation Front. Then we must make what reparations we can for the damage we have done. We most provide the medical aid that is badly needed, making it available in this country if necessary.
Protesting The War
Meanwhile we in the churches and synagogues have a continuing task while we urge our government to disengage itself from a disgraceful commitment. We must continue to raise our voices if our nation persists in its perverse ways in Vietnam. We must be prepared to match actions with words by seeking out every creative means of protest possible.
As we counsel young men concerning military service we must clarify for them our nation's role in Vietnam and challenge them with the alternative of conscientious objection. I am pleased to say that this is the path now being chosen by more than seventy students at my own alma mater, Morehouse College, and I recommend it to all who find the American course in Vietnam a dishonorable and unjust one. Moreover I would encourage all ministers of draft age to give up their ministerial exemptions and seek status as conscientious objectors. These are the times for real choices and not false ones. We are at the moment when our lives must be placed on the line if our nation is to survive its own folly. Every man of humane convictions must decide on the protest that best suits his convictions, but we must all protest.
There is something seductively tempting about stopping there and sending us all off on what in some circles has become a popular crusade against the war in Vietnam. I say we must enter the struggle, but I wish to go on now to say something even more disturbing. The war in Vietnam is but a symptom of a far deeper malady within the American spirit, and if we ignore this sobering reality we will find ourselves organizing clergy- and laymen-concerned committees for the next generation. They will be concerned about Guatemala and Peru. They will be concerned about Thailand and Cambodia. They will be concerned about Mozambique and South Africa. We will be marching for these and a dozen other names and attending rallies without end unless there is a significant and profound change in American life and policy. Such thoughts take us beyond Vietnam, but not beyond our calling as sons of the living God.
In 1957 a sensitive American official overseas said that it seemed to him that our nation was on the wrong side of a world revolution. During the past ten years we have seen emerge a pattern of suppression which now has justified the presence of U.S. military "advisors" in Venezuela. This need to maintain social stability for our investments accounts for the counter-revolutionary action of American forces in Guatemala. It tells why American helicopters are being used against guerrillas in Colombia and why American napalm and green beret forces have already been active against rebels in Peru. It is with such activity in mind that the words of the late John F. Kennedy come back to haunt us. Five years ago he said, "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
Increasingly, by choice or by accident, this is the role our nation has taken -- the role of those who make peaceful revolution impossible by refusing to give up the privileges and the pleasures that come from the immense profits of overseas investment.
I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin the shift from a "thing-oriented" society to a "person-oriented" society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.
A true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present policies. n the one hand we are called to play the good Samaritan on life's roadside; but that will be only an initial act. One day we must come to see that the whole Jericho road must be transformed so that men and women will not be constantly beaten and robbed as they make their journey on life's highway. True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar; it is not haphazard and superficial. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring. A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth. With righteous indignation, it will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say: "This is not just." It will look at our alliance with the landed gentry of Latin America and say: "This is not just." The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just. A true revolution of values will lay hands on the world order and say of war: "This way of settling differences is not just." This business of burning human beings with napalm, of filling our nation's homes with orphans and widows, of injecting poisonous drugs of hate into veins of people normally humane, of sending men home from dark and bloody battlefields physically handicapped and psychologically deranged, cannot be reconciled with wisdom, justice and love. A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.
America, the richest and most powerful nation in the world, can well lead the way in this revolution of values. There is nothing, except a tragic death wish, to prevent us from reordering our priorities, so that the pursuit of peace will take precedence over the pursuit of war. There is nothing to keep us from molding a recalcitrant status quo with bruised hands until we have fashioned it into a brotherhood.
This kind of positive revolution of values is our best defense against communism. War is not the answer. Communism will never be defeated by the use of atomic bombs or nuclear weapons. Let us not join those who shout war and through their misguided passions urge the United States to relinquish its participation in the United Nations. These are days which demand wise restraint and calm reasonableness. We must not call everyone a Communist or an appeaser who advocates the seating of Red China in the United Nations and who recognizes that hate and hysteria are not the final answers to the problem of these turbulent days. We must not engage in a negative anti-communism, but rather in a positive thrust for democracy, realizing that our greatest defense against communism is to take offensive action in behalf of justice. We must with positive action seek to remove thosse conditions of poverty, insecurity and injustice which are the fertile soil in which the seed of communism grows and develops.
The People Are Important
These are revolutionary times. All over the globe men are revolting against old systems of exploitation and oppression and out of the wombs of a frail world new systems of justice and equality are being born. The shirtless and barefoot people of the land are rising up as never before. "The people who sat in darkness have seen a great light." We in the West must support these revolutions. It is a sad fact that, because of comfort, complacency, a morbid fear of communism, and our proneness to adjust to injustice, the Western nations that initiated so much of the revolutionary spirit of the modern world have now become the arch anti-revolutionaries. This has driven many to feel that only Marxism has the revolutionary spirit. Therefore, communism is a judgement against our failure to make democracy real and follow through on the revolutions we initiated. Our only hope today lies in our ability to recapture the revolutionary spirit and go out into a sometimes hostile world declaring eternal hostility to poverty, racism, and militarism. With this powerful commitment we shall boldly challenge the status quo and unjust mores and thereby speed the day when "every valley shall be exalted, and every moutain and hill shall be made low, and the crooked shall be made straight and the rough places plain."
A genuine revolution of values means in the final analysis that our loyalties must become ecumenical rather than sectional. Every nation must now develop an overriding loyalty to mankind as a whole in order to preserve the best in their individual societies.
This call for a world-wide fellowship that lifts neighborly concern beyond one's tribe, race, class and nation is in reality a call for an all-embracing and unconditional love for all men. This oft misunderstood and misinterpreted concept -- so readily dismissed by the Nietzsches of the world as a weak and cowardly force -- has now become an absolute necessity for the survival of man. When I speak of love I am not speaking of some sentimental and weak response. I am speaking of that force which all of the great religions have seen as the supreme unifying principle of life. Love is somehow the key that unlocks the door which leads to ultimate reality. This Hindu-Moslem-Christian-Jewish-Buddhist belief about ultimate reality is beautifully summed up in the first epistle of Saint John:
Let us love one another; for love is God and everyone that loveth is born of God and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love. If we love one another God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.
Let us hope that this spirit will become the order of the day. We can no longer afford to worship the god of hate or bow before the altar of retaliation. The oceans of history are made turbulent by the ever-rising tides of hate. History is cluttered with the wreckage of nations and individuals that pursued this self-defeating path of hate. As Arnold Toynbee says : "Love is the ultimate force that makes for the saving choice of life and good against the damning choice of death and evil. Therefore the first hope in our inventory must be the hope that love is going to have the last word."
We are now faced with the fact that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history there is such a thing as being too late. Procrastination is still the thief of time. Life often leaves us standing bare, naked and dejected with a lost opportunity. The "tide in the affairs of men" does not remain at the flood; it ebbs. We may cry out deperately for time to pause in her passage, but time is deaf to every plea and rushes on. Over the bleached bones and jumbled residue of numerous civilizations are written the pathetic words: "Too late." There is an invisible book of life that faithfully records our vigilance or our neglect. "The moving finger writes, and having writ moves on..." We still have a choice today; nonviolent coexistence or violent co-annihilation.
We must move past indecision to action. We must find new ways to speak for peace in Vietnam and justice throughout the developing world -- a world that borders on our doors. If we do not act we shall surely be dragged down the long dark and shameful corridors of time reserved for those who possess power without compassion, might without morality, and strength without sight.
Now let us begin. Now let us rededicate ourselves to the long and bitter -- but beautiful -- struggle for a new world. This is the callling of the sons of God, and our brothers wait eagerly for our response. Shall we say the odds are too great? Shall we tell them the struggle is too hard? Will our message be that the forces of American life militate against their arrival as full men, and we send our deepest regrets? Or will there be another message, of longing, of hope, of solidarity with their yearnings, of commitment to their cause, whatever the cost? The choice is ours, and though we might prefer it otherwise we must choose in this crucial moment of human history.
As that noble bard of yesterday, James Russell Lowell, eloquently stated:
Once to every man and nation
Comes the moment to decide,
In the strife of truth and falsehood,
For the good or evil side;
Some great cause, God's new Messiah,
Off'ring each the bloom or blight,
And the choice goes by forever
Twixt that darkness and that light.
Though the cause of evil prosper,
Yet 'tis truth alone is strong;
Though her portion be the scaffold,
And upon the throne be wrong:
Yet that scaffold sways the future,
And behind the dim unknown,
Standeth God within the shadow
Keeping watch above his own.
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45a/058.html

http://www.stanford.edu/group/King/popular_requests/quotes.htm

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

On this day .. May 18th 1980

Alexander — Fri, 18 May 2007 14:54:36 GMT

On this day (May 18th) Mount St Helens (Loowit to many of the Native people in the area) erupted in 1980. I remember that day well it was a Sunday (morning) and I was in high school and my mother woke me to say "She has finally erupted". I quickly went to the backyard and saw a huge nuclear bomb-like plume surrounded by lightning. That event is carved in my mind .. sublime ... the beauty and the destruction wrapped into one. As Robert Oppenheimer watched the first nuclear test remembered the quote about Lord Shiva from the Bagavad Gita: "Now I am become death, the destroyer of Worlds." As a teenager deeply into Goddess literature, Hinduism, Shamanism and Asatru and other worldviews I looked at Loowit thinking of the Goddess Kali with a garland of severed heads and a skirt of dismembered limbs dancing on the "corpse" of Shiva. From destruction comes creation for from fire consuming wood comes ashes and from flood water comes new fertile soil.

This event is now part of Cascadian mythology as much as Bigfoot, Japanese paper balloon bombs, DB Cooper, the CCC and every Coyote and Raven story. This is where the border-realms of real and imagination transcends you and I the individual and move us into a collective realm of being.

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

e-mails and events

Alexander — Thu, 17 May 2007 20:39:18 GMT

hello all

I have a list going for creating some events if anyone is interested in the brainstorming and planning then please e-mail me at a_cascadian@yahoo.com

One of these events is to have a ceremony about the Doug flag

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

What are the most noteworthy sustainability and...

Alexander — Sun, 29 Apr 2007 07:35:23 GMT

I think this is an important even that could also raise awareness of our bioregion and Cascadian bioregional identity. Any comments?

Tribe Alert: Cascadians
From: Bryan
Title: What are the most noteworthy sustainability and...
I'm helping to organize and will be taking part in a bike tour from Vancouver, BC to Berkeley, CA, to help build awareness of and live out the ideals of the organization BALLE, the Business Alliance for Local Living Economies. Our trip will take us through Oregon along the coast on Highway 101 (we may also be detouring through Portland for a day). I'd appreciate any recommendations for projects, businesses, and sites that are worth stopping for--independent, local businesses making a mark for their practices or promotion of local living economies, great sustainability and self-sufficiency demonstration sites, and the like. We are especially looking for places right along Hwy 101, as it is difficult for us to make our schedule while detouring much from our route.

The trip begins May 14 in Vancouver and ends May 31 in Berkeley. We expect to ride the Oregon coast May 18 - 24.

For more information on the bike ride (which is open to and seeking new participants!):
balleseattle.org/projects/balle-on

posted in Cascadians - 6 replies

Aberdeen: Not in Our Harbor

Alexander — Sat, 05 May 2007 17:52:45 GMT

Aberdeen: Not in Our Harbor

found at Portland Indy Media:

Aberdeen: Not in Our Harbor
author: Mollie
The military has turned to Gray's Harbor after meeting resistance in Olympia Port last year and Tacoma Port this past March. Peace activists are gathering in Aberdeen to raise their voices against military shipments to Iraq at 2 p.m. Saturday and Sunday at 28th Street and John Stevens Way in Hoquiam at the Port's viewing tower and then walk to the public assembly area identified by police near The Home Depot. Please join them!
Aberdeen: No To Military Shipments
For the people of Aberdeen area, the war has come to their backyard and they are saying, "Not in Our Harbor." The ship is due to arrive this weekend and there is a sense that it will take up to two weeks before the supplies ship out. This action is intended to also put pressure on the Port Commissioners to stop making money from the Iraq war.

The Grannies hold a peace vigil every Friday at 3:30 p.m. in Zalesko Park. Yesterday, over two-dozen people joined them. The police presence was noticeable. Police cars from the neighboring towns circled many times along with police in unmarked cars and the county sheriffs cars. Why anyone thought this was a good use of their time or tax dollars is a mystery.

Like the demonstrations in Olympia and Tacoma, the argument centers on how best to support the troops. The pro-war people believe that stopping the shipments hurts the troops and believe that we have to stay until we win. The peace people believe that by speaking out against this war and demanding that it end is the best way to support the troops. One of the peace grannies told about her experience working in a local hospital and meeting a family there whose husband had served several tours of duty in Iraq and had attempted suicide. We barely hear about those killed in Iraq and virtually nothing about those who have been injured or who suffer from the war. These are the real costs of the war. Others pointed out many of the troops do not want to be there and want to come home. They are tired of being sent there many times and having their time extended again and again.

Friday's Peace vigil: story on the Daily World
http://www.thedailyworld.com/articles/2007/05/05/local_news/02news.txt

portland indy media link:
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2007/05/358923.shtml

posted in Cascadians - 5 replies

The IWW and the limits of inter-ethnic organizing: Reds, Whites, and Greeks in Grays Harbor, Washington, 1912 - International Workers of the World

Alexander — Sun, 06 May 2007 13:17:07 GMT

For those who think Aberdeen is just a group of logging hicks... well my family was one of the early European settlers in the region and many of those mix ethnic migrants were anarchists and IWW members fighting for our basic human rights. Here is a brief historical event left out of the whitewashed (Anglo-Saxon white washed) history of my family:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0348/is_n4_v38/ai_20535757

The IWW and the limits of inter-ethnic organizing: Reds, Whites, and Greeks in Grays Harbor, Washington, 1912 - International Workers of the World

Racial and ethnic divisions played a major role in shaping the direction of the American labor movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Modem historians are acutely aware of the racial exclusivity of the American Federation of Labor as well as the prevalence of racist and nativist sentiments among a large segment of the native-born "white" working class. David Brody, for example, has commented that

since Reconstruction, relentless pressures had forced blacks out of their

traditional Southern jobs as artisans and down into menial and segregated

work in both North and South . . . By the time the A.F.L. faced the issue,

blacks were so confined economically as to pose no present danger to the

trade unions . . . Craft unions had always tried to restrict access and control labor markets. What more efficacious way than along the color

line?(1)

One should understand, of course, that it was efficacious because it could be shown to serve the interests of "white workers" to discriminate on racial lines. Brody went on to note that at the turn of the century, labor faced a more significant crisis from eastern and southern European immigration than from the excluded blacks: "It was a telling commentary that a Welsh miner, himself by no means certain that he would remain in America, referred derisively to Slavs and Italians entering the mines as `foreigners'."(2) Organized labor's response to the "new" immigration both drew upon and helped solidify American racial definitions. As Brody points out,

The A.F.L.... claimed much of the credit for the Chinese Exclusion

Act of 1882, and during the 1890s the Federation became a fervent

advocate of a literacy test for entering immigrants. This, Gompers

argued in 1902, "would exclude hardly any natives of Great Britain,

Ireland, Germany, France, or Scandinavia. It will shut out a

considerable number of South Italians and of Slavs and other[s]

equally or more undesirable and injurious.(3)

Other historians, while recognizing "white" labor racism, have found that such racism was often reconciled with "progressive" labor goals. Such is the case with Daniel Cornford's study of Humbolt County, California lumber workers in the Gilded Age, where the author sees Sinophobia coexisting with a "radical democratic-republican ideology" and a "labor theory of value."(4) The same may be said of Michael Kazin's work on the San Francisco Building Trades Council. Kazin comments that two impulses, "the inclusive, optimistic faith in class solidarity and the appeal to racial fears and hatred, did not pose an agonizing contradiction either for white labor leaders or for most of their followers."(5) "White" American workers essentially saw racism as a part of a legitimate defense of their interests. One might add that racism and nativism were essential components of a strategy to defend the particular prerogatives of white labor in a segmented labor market.

Some historians have justly attempted to balance this picture of racial disunion by describing instances of inter-racial or inter-ethnic cooperation among workers, instances which shed important light on the possible, but which nonetheless appear as the products of rather specific demographic circumstances. In a recent article, Lisa McGirr chronicled the cooperative efforts of "blacks" and "whites" in the IWW-affiliated Marine Transport Workers Industrial Union Local 8. While such cooperation was notable, it is significant that it took place in the context of a labor force comprised of an African-American majority and a minority consisting of recently arrived Eastern Europeans.(6) A similar demographic situation applied to Birmingham, Alabama's mine districts at the turn of the century in a study by Paul Worthman which stressed the inter-racial successes of the United Mine Workers Union in that locality.(7) Additionally, in one of the most notable polyglot organizing efforts of the pre-World War I period, the IWW conducted a successful textile strike in Lawrence, Massachusetts in 1912 which required forging a unitary movement among workers of at least two dozen different nationalities. Notably, however, all were foreign-born.(8)

Unlike most AFL affiliates, the IWW did profess a doctrine of racial equality and worker internationalism, but its efforts were generally limited by the human beings it sought to represent. In the midst of West Coast anti-Asian agitation, the IWW played a role in the development of the Fresno Labor League from 1908 onward. Yuji Ichioka has indicated, though, in his study of the Issei, that the league's membership was essentially Japanese.(9) Few white workers could be attracted to its ranks. The IWW's internationalist vision and professions were sorely tested by American racial realities.

The above examples clearly indicate that it was possible to organize African-American workers, immigrant Japanese workers, immigrant Eastern European or Middle Eastern workers, and even to organize some of these groups in combination with one another. The most intractable problem faced by the early 20th-century U.S. labor movement, however, was that of bridging the chasm between workers who saw themselves as "Americans" or "whites" and those whom they identified as "others." This problem is especially significant in light of the fact that some of the more seemingly Marxist scenarios of class conflict and consciousness emanated from segments of this "white" working class in isolation from the internationalizing effects of the period's global migration patterns.

Melvyn Dubofsky once commented that "class war in the West created a class ideology, and that ... ideology was Marxist because the Mountain West from 1890 to 1905 followed the classic Marxian pattern of development" Citing the examples of class struggle in Leadville and Cripple Creek (Colorado), Coeur D'Alene (Idaho), and Butte (Montana), Dubofsky went on to claim that "Western corporations encountered a labor force less tractable than the uprooted and ethnically-divided immigrants of the East." And further, "while in some mining districts the foreign-born outnumbered the native Americans, no great ethnic division separated foreigners from natives. In most mining communities the dominant foreign nationalities were of Irish, English, and Canadian extraction."(10) This suggests that whatever working class solidarity was forged under the conditions of Western capitalist expansion was at least not disrupted by ethnic or racial division and perhaps at most strengthened by a sense of racial familiarity. But this was only because of the racial solidarity manifested among workers who considered each other "white" This fact is crucial to understanding the limited success of interracial or inter-ethnic labor organizing in the U.S., especially on the part of its most vocal and determined proponent, and an offspring of the American West, the Industrial Workers of the World.

Consider the conduct of the "Greek strike" of 1912 which took place under IWW auspices in Hoquiam, WA, a major timber products center situated in the Grays Harbor region about 90 miles southwest of Seattle. The strike involved a unique and revealing alliance of IWW and AFL-affiliated unions, a substantial episode of open class warfare, and a bitter electoral contest. Its resolution offers some insight into the relationship of class to nationality in the U.S. and into the significance of race in the great Northwestern woods.

At the turn of the century Hoquiam and its sister city Aberdeen comprised a major timber products center in Grays Harbor or Chehalis County, Washington. The "twin" cities were home to 3000 inhabitants in 1890 and grew to 22,000 by 1910. Between 1890 and 1905, the largely working class population was heavily native-born, consisting of many workers who had followed the timber industry from the north woods of the upper Great Lakes to the yet unharvested stands of Douglas fir in the trans-Cascadian West. The Americans were joined in labor by some Canadians and recent northern European immigrants. And although men typically outnumbered women in northwestern industrial towns, by 1900 married men made up half the labor force in Hoquiam mills and two-thirds in Aberdeen. Marriage and home-ownership, which were frequently linked, were achieved with different degrees of success by workers at different levels of skill and in different occupations. Shingle mill workers were the most Rely to possess home and family. Common laborers in the lumber mills were less likely to be married homeowners, no doubt because of their significantly lower wages, and lumberjacks were rarely family men on account of their transiency and isolation in the lumber camps.(11) Craft, skill and status distinctions within this working class do not however appear to have produced any deep or abiding hostilities between various groups of workers. Only the inattention of the unionized minority to the fate of the unorganized presaged any potential intra-class animosity.

At the turn of the century Hoquiam and its sister city Aberdeen comprised a major timber products center in Grays Harbor or Chehalis County, Washington. The "twin" cities were home to 3000 inhabitants in 1890 and grew to 22,000 by 1910. Between 1890 and 1905, the largely working class population was heavily native-born, consisting of many workers who had followed the timber industry from the north woods of the upper Great Lakes to the yet unharvested stands of Douglas fir in the trans-Cascadian West. The Americans were joined in labor by some Canadians and recent northern European immigrants. And although men typically outnumbered women in northwestern industrial towns, by 1900 married men made up half the labor force in Hoquiam mills and two-thirds in Aberdeen. Marriage and home-ownership, which were frequently linked, were achieved with different degrees of success by workers at different levels of skill and in different occupations. Shingle mill workers were the most Rely to possess home and family. Common laborers in the lumber mills were less likely to be married homeowners, no doubt because of their significantly lower wages, and lumberjacks were rarely family men on account of their transiency and isolation in the lumber camps.(11) Craft, skill and status distinctions within this working class do not however appear to have produced any deep or abiding hostilities between various groups of workers. Only the inattention of the unionized minority to the fate of the unorganized presaged any potential intra-class animosity.

At the turn of the century Hoquiam and its sister city Aberdeen comprised a major timber products center in Grays Harbor or Chehalis County, Washington. The "twin" cities were home to 3000 inhabitants in 1890 and grew to 22,000 by 1910. Between 1890 and 1905, the largely working class population was heavily native-born, consisting of many workers who had followed the timber industry from the north woods of the upper Great Lakes to the yet unharvested stands of Douglas fir in the trans-Cascadian West. The Americans were joined in labor by some Canadians and recent northern European immigrants. And although men typically outnumbered women in northwestern industrial towns, by 1900 married men made up half the labor force in Hoquiam mills and two-thirds in Aberdeen. Marriage and home-ownership, which were frequently linked, were achieved with different degrees of success by workers at different levels of skill and in different occupations. Shingle mill workers were the most Rely to possess home and family. Common laborers in the lumber mills were less likely to be married homeowners, no doubt because of their significantly lower wages, and lumberjacks were rarely family men on account of their transiency and isolation in the lumber camps.(11) Craft, skill and status distinctions within this working class do not however appear to have produced any deep or abiding hostilities between various groups of workers. Only the inattention of the unionized minority to the fate of the unorganized presaged any potential intra-class animosity.

Americans, Canadians, and Englishmen found the most ready concord as they were all English-speaking Protestants, but even the growing number of recent Scandinavian immigrants were integrated with relative ease into the local working class. A. E. Johnson, immigration promoter for James Hill's Great Northern Railroad, had nothing but praise for the Scandinavians.

We claim the Scandinavian countries as first choice from which to secure the

best foreign immigration, for the reason that the best class of foreigners

already located in the Northwest are from Sweden, Norway and Denmark,

and by proper effort and intelligent work, this class of immigrants

can be very materially increased. . . .(12)

Swedes and Norwegians, although occasionally treated with the disdain accorded to non-English speakers in the U.S., were not met with the same vicious invective reserved for non-Protestants, southern and eastern Europeans, and Asians. In fact, ethnic impulses often drew Scandinavians into nativist alliances with other "white" workers. A racial construction binding "Anglo-Saxon" and "Nordic" workers into a common tribal stock produced powerful alliances against workers of other "races." When workers in Anacortes turned back an attempted landing of 100 Japanese there in June 1900, the Norwegian-language newspaper Tacoma Tidende editorialized that:

We do not hold with the mishandling of either Japanese or Chinese, or

people of other nations, because we do not ourselves wish to be mishandled

on account of our nationality; but the workers in Anacortes would be dumb

indeed if with open arms and cheers they should welcome their Asiatic

brothers who come in large numbers to take bread from the mouths of the

white man.(13)

The Tidende displayed an ambivalence suggestive of the Scandinavians' vulnerability to nativist attacks, but also their ultimate acceptance of American racial definitions.

In short, national distinctions between Americans and European immigrants during the first wave of immigration to the Pacific Northwest were not substantial enough to cause serious ethnic cleavages among workers in the timber industry. In his description of early 20th-century Everett, Norman Clark could just as easily have been speaking of Hoquiam, Aberdeen, and other similar timber towns when he stated: "Despite its initial linguistic multiformity, Everett was essentially white and Anglo-Saxon in its values. The native American was clearly the dominant culture."(14) This muting of ethnic divisions was not to last, however, due to a quantitative and qualitative change in immigration patterns after 1905. The old working class in timber would be confronted in subsequent years with a substantial migration of "unassimilable" immigrants whose presence would complicate inter-class and inter-ethnic relations in the Northwestern milltowns. Between 1901 and 1910, the growth of Grays Harbor County and of its working class was partly the result of a second wave of immigration that brought a new crop of strangers -- Finns, Russians, Greeks, Croats, Slovenes and Dalmatians -- into the mills.(15) One of the most noteworthy conflicts deriving from this new state of affairs occurred in Hoquiam in 1912.

R. F. Lytle, president of the Hoquiam Lumber and Shingle Company and a tireless advocate of the open shop, fired the opening salvo of a protracted conflict in early October 1911. Lytle fired all his union workers and on November 1 he announced a general wage reduction of 10% for all categories of labor. Those non-unionized workers who were dissatisfied with the new terms of employment were replaced by Greeks.(16) The firing of union men affected only the company's shingle operations, since the only union of timber workers at the time was the International Shingle Weavers' Union of America, which had been engaged in a wage struggle with Lytle since 1910. The ISWUA, as a consequence of its control of a skilled craft, was a union of native-born men, many of whom were old-stock Americans, and some of whom were the native children of Irish, German or Scandinavian immigrants.(17) Immigration from southern and eastern European sources had little actual or potential impact on the monopoly that such workers held over shingle production. In fact, shingle manufacturers typically found it very difficult to find adequate replacements for striking or locked-out shingle weavers and usually engaged them in battle only at times of market glut. It was therefore in Lytle's lumber mill that the greatest potential for inter-ethnic conflict existed as it was here that the unskilled or semi-skilled children of the "old" working class mingled increasingly with non-English-speakers from Finland, Greece, or the Balkans. Lytle's actions in the late fall of 1911 ignited a conflict that produced an odd and shifting alliance of workers of varied skill, craft, and ethnicity, and which produced a prominent role for a new arrival on the Grays Harbor scene, the Industrial Workers of the World.

The IWW launched an organizing chive and free speech fight in neighboring Aberdeen from November 1911 into early 1912, with the intention of establishing its regional headquarters on Grays Harbor.(18) By February 1912, the Wobblies had succeeded in organizing a large number of the area's unskilled and previously nonunionized millhands, including Lytle's Greeks. Hoping to deflect the IWW's new-found popularity and to benefit from the mill workers' mobilization, the ISWUA, which had rarely demonstrated any concern for unskilled timber workers outside of the shingle mills, began to address, at least rhetorically, the predicament of the millhands.

Lytle wishes it understood among the unorganized that he will punish

anybody who dares oppose his will. He gives the unorganized to understand

that he has punished them for the audacity of the Shingle Weavers in daring

to show him up and fight back.... To punish the Four Hundred employees in

the Lumber Mill because he is mad at a few Shingle Weavers who defy his

attempts to destroy their Union, will only drive the Four Hundred themselves

to organize in self-protection.... And that is what is happening. Many of

the old employees in the Lytle Mill refused to accept the 10 per cent cut

and left. Their places have been filled by Greeks. . . . Does R. F. Lytle

encourage ["family-men"] when he drives them away and imports Greeks to

take their places?(19)

The ISWUA discovered the potential solidarity of the unskilled millhands through the appeal of the IWW, and was not to turn away potential allies in a joint struggle against a common enemy in the person of R. F. Lytle. Yet the union's rhetoric also revealed a determination to promote the leadership of trade unionists in the larger struggle, as evidenced by the emphasis on the weavers' audacity and fighting spirit and the key role they occupied in Lytle's anti-labor machinations. Furthermore, the weavers' new interest in unskilled workers clearly did not extend as far as the Wobblies' commitment to recognize the foreigners as "class comrades" of the American-born. If anything, the ISWUA's combative strategy relied heavily now on a broadened class struggle from which the foreign-born were both excluded and transformed into the objects of battle. In March, the foreigners would call this strategy into question by their actions.

On Thursday, March 14, 1912 the unskilled millhands of the North Western Lumber Company went on strike for higher wages. Common laborers who had been paid $1.75 per day now demanded from $2.50 to $3.50. Organized under IWW auspices, workers from North Western marched on the Lytle mill, calling out all the men there as well.(20) This was the first concerted labor struggle to include workers of all of Hoquiam's "new" nationalities, and was consequently dubbed, with some derogatory intent, the "Greek strike." While middle-class Hoquiam and the trade unionists appear to have been caught off guard by the strike, the ISWUA nonetheless wasted no time in joining the fray. The first night of the strike, workers held a meeting at Hoquiam's Finn Hall at which the IWW affiliates appointed a strike committee of two Greeks, two Finns, two Scandinavians, and two English-speakers. The shingle weavers contributed two prominent speakers. One was J. G. Brown, the International's president and an active Socialist. The other was Dr. Hermon Titus, a former Socialist Party leader who had been called to Hoquiam in February by the weavers to help settle the lockout against them. This nascent united labor front was aided as well by the sympathy of Hoquiam's mayor, Reverend Harry Ferguson, a clerical advocate of social harmony who initially rejected the mill owners' appeals for police intervention in the strike.(21)

Faced with a surprisingly broad opposition, the mill operators chose to make nationality the main focus of the conflict. The biggest employer of until-now cheap foreign-born labor, the Lytle mill, refused to meet with the strike committee on the preposterous grounds that the Hoquiam Lumber and Shingle Company would have nothing to do with anyone save Americans and American citizens.(22) The Aberdeen Herald subsequently reported that "it seems certain that the foreigners will be replaced in the mills by American men of families ... [and possibly at] an increase in wages" The newspaper's ethnically divisive appeals were reinforced by a tendency to lump all of the new immigrants into a general category of "other" as it described the events on the Harbor as "the strike of Greek and other Slavic laborers."(23) Clearly, racial or ethnic categories were being drawn to define a broad pool of un-American stock. The IWW strike committee responded by demanding that "in the event of a settlement of this matter, all men are to be reinstated in their former positions. No men are to be discriminated against for reasons of color, nationality or union affiliations."(24)

By March 23, nine days after the onset of the strike, workers had succeeded in closing several additional mills in Hoquiam and Aberdeen, the Grays Harbor longshoremen had joined the strike, and the mills of the E. K. Wood and Grays Harbor Lumber companies maintained operations only by promptly granting their employees' demands. Mill managers fought back by creating a special force of mill police, appointed by Hoquiam Police Chief Quinn and confirmed by the city commission, but serving on company payroll. Mayor Ferguson stood alone on the commission in opposing the alliance of millmen and publicly wielded power, but he was consistently outvoted on these matters.(25)

As the conflict mushroomed and the sides became more clearly drawn, the ISWUA engaged itself more actively in the labor alliance. But since this rebellion was neither of their making nor under their control, the shingle weavers would have to give their role some justifiable public definition. Without elaboration, the union described the walkout of common laborers as "indirectly due to the lockout against the shingle weavers in Hoquiam." The weavers blamed "a few business men," who were members of the Hoquiam Commercial Club.(26) The ISWUA was careful not to alienate the entire business community of the city, as it worked to split Hoquiam's middle and small mercantile classes from the millmen.

The union posited the division of Hoquiam, into three social classes. First, "the mill owners, the very rich and their immediate dependents, their superintendents, bosses, clerks, lawyers, journalists. . . . They want large profits and low wages and consequently less money to be spent in Hoquiam." Second, "the small business men, the storekeepers and all those dependent on them. They must sell their goods or go to the wall . . . It is the thousands and thousands of men employed by the Lumber Industries . . . who keep the stores prosperous." Third, "the wage class -- practically the only class in this city, 80 per cent of all the population . . . THEY ARE THE RULING CLAM OF HOQUIAM. . . . They are the city."(27) ISWUA propaganda was aimed at generating a community struggle against the millmen based upon an alliance of economic self-interest between the small merchants and the workers.(28) The union also promoted an awareness of the potential political power of the city's working class.

The ISWUA made great efforts to emphasize the unity of labor in this

struggle, a circumstance that they clearly had not anticipated.

The most astonishing and gratifying feature of this uprising is the hearty

cooperation among the different unions. The Central Labor Council,

composed of delegates from the various unions affiliated with the American

Federation of Labor . . . enthusiastically endorsed this great Lumber

Workers' strike, which is being conducted by the organizers of the

Industrial Workers of the World. . . . The I.W.W. has now enrolled several

hundred Lumber Workers, BOTH SKILLED AND UNSKILLED, into one Industrial

Union. . . . One of the best organizers in the I.W.W. advised the

longshoremen in the ranks of the I.W.W. to join the I.L.A. . . . so as to

have no divisions in the ranks of strikers. The representatives of the

Shingle Weavers' Union, the Longshoremen's Union and I.W.W. have met in

common conference and have practically joined forces to win this strike.(29)

The ISWUA, confronted with a substantial strike against some of its own most stubborn enemies, readily made common cause with its natural allies. Nonetheless, the union's willingness to join in struggle with the IWW was unusual for an AFL union and was even a risky gamble in light of the dangers of inflaming middle class public opinion. But the weavers had few better options in this strike and could justify their position to other AFL workers by noting the lack of bitter jurisdictional disputes between the labor organizations involved in the conflict.(30)

An even thornier matter was that of race and nationality. On this, the ISWUA adopted a seemingly rational position that addressed the issue of foreign labor as a material rather than as a racial concern.

What was the real complaint against the Greeks when they came here five

years ago? . . . Why they lowered wages. . . . They made "white men" work

for less .... But these very greeks are leading the fight for higher wages

and better conditions.... And business men blindly take up the old cry when

the occasion of the old cry is gone and when the Greeks have learned

enough to demand better conditions for themselves and their fellow

workers.... The Greeks are fighting for the best interests of Hoquiam.(31)

This shift from the union's initial nativist stance regarding the Greeks was notable, and was perhaps a realistic and palatable shift in the minds of the ISWUA's Socialist leadership, given the course of events in Hoquiam, but it was as risky as the IWW alliance. It remained to be seen how the ethnic issue would play out among the workers and businessmen of Grays Harbor as the strike progressed.

By March 27, every mill in Aberdeen was closed and the strike had spread to Raymond and South Bend on Willapa Harbor. 19 Grays Harbor millmen issued a statement proclaiming the impossibility of raising wages "under present conditions of the lumber market." Rumors circulated that the Greeks were arming themselves with revolvers. On March 29, about 100 members of the Hoquiam middle class convened a citizens' committee and enrolled about half its number in a voluntary "committee of public safety." Mayor Ferguson, who had opposed confirmation of the mill police, gave his approval to this new "special police" force and asked that volunteers register with the Chief of Police. It is not clear whether the mayor had finally come to fear the retribution of the middle class electorate, whether he genuinely wished to create a police force that was beholden to neither worker nor boss, or whether he wished to exert some municipal control over a middle-class response to the strike that he viewed as inevitable. The result of his concession, however, was that the original force of 50 "specials" grew to 100 within two days, and construed itself as a middle-class vigilante organization dedicated to the forcible reopening of the Lytle mill on Monday morning. April 1.(32)

On March 30, P.J. Mourant, ex-mayor, Commercial Club officer and chairman of the "committee of public safety," appealed for the arrest of the strike leaders. City Attorney Callahan complied with the issuance of warrants against ISWUA organizer Titus and IWW organizers Anderson, Newell and Yager. Chief Quinn and Sergeant Hardwick proceeded with the arrests. That night, six police officers spirited the four men out of the city jail and drove them under cover of darkness to the county jail in Montesano, where striking workers would presumably be less likely to stage a jail break. Dr. Titus, who was successfully bailed out by his wife on the following day, was promptly rearrested under a federal warrant prepared by one of Lytle's attorneys and was transported to Tacoma, far from the Grays Harbor events, to await grand jury proceedings over a month away. The charge?--violating the constitutional rights of strike-breakers by intimidating them from going to work. The complaint was ultimately dismissed by U.S. District Attorney Todd in Seattle.(33)

At dawn on April 1, with the strike leaders under arrest, over 100 businessmen armed with shotguns, rifles, revolvers, and clubs congregated on the Lytle mill in Hoquiam. They wore the white ribbon badges of the "special police" As workers approached the mill along Monroe Street, each was halted and asked "Going to work?" If one said "No," he was arrested and held in a big "stable" opposite the "bull-pen" constructed for scab labor. The vigilantes warned the detainees "that any attempt to break out would result fatally." 250 strikers were rounded up in this way and then herded into box cars waiting on the Northern Pacific tracks

. . . eighty in one car, sixty-four in another, and so on, till they were

packed like sardines, the doors shut tight and spiked, with only cracks

for air, and run down the main line ready to be shipped out of town.(34)

Only the intervention of Sheriff Payette secured their release and prevented a wholesale deportation. Having successfully forced the reopening of the Lytle mill, albeit short-handed, the citizens' police proceeded to the North Western mill, which was started up that afternoon under similar circumstances.

Meanwhile in Aberdeen, 50 special police and a dozen mill guards opened the Slade mill with a show of weaponry as daunting as that in Hoquiam. Strikers who resisted orders to move on were promptly arrested. Aberdeen Chief of Police Templeman sent out a dragnet for the IWW leaders, resulting in the arrests of organizers W.A. Thorne, John Roderick, and Carl Conrad. A "mechanized division" of vigilantes combed city streets by car, sweeping up 26 "others who appeared disposed to . . . incite riot or a breach of peace" 100 citizens' police in Raymond swept through the Finnish boarding houses and the Greek settlement there, rounding up 50 Finns and 100 Greeks who had refused to report for work. All were deported--the Finns by boat and the Greeks by rail--with transportation paid by the Raymond citizens' committee. In Bellingham, the trustees of the Chamber of Commerce called upon the mayor to swear in 300 special officers to support "the cause of law and order."(35) This intimidating display of force, death threats, deportations, and arrests succeeded in reopening the mills. Lumber concerns were unable, however, to secure full crews for many weeks. Despite the absence of pickets, workers were scarce, prompting plant manager McGlauflin of the North Western Company to estimate that the crews he had been engaging "were only 60 per cent efficient."(36) It was important, however, that once the strike organizers had been disposed of, the vigilance committees directed their most ardent persecutions at specific categories of workers--Greeks, Slavs and "Red" Finns. What message were they sending to "American" workmen? What ultimate resolution of the strike did they envision? What was to be offered to the striking Anglo-Americans, Irish-Americans, German-Americans, Norwegian-Americans, Swedish-Americans, Danish-Americans--the "white" workers who had thus far stood in common struggle with the "new" immigrant workers? The answer was soon delivered.

On April 4 and 5, the citizens' executive committee in Hoquiain and committees organized by the AFL Central Trades Council and striking workers met frequently with the mill operators in order to achieve an agreement that would allow work to resume. The mill owners' compromise proposal appeared in the Daily Washingtonian on Saturday, April 6 emblazoned with the headline, "HOQUIAM is TO BE A WHITE MAN'S TOWN" The proposal, authored jointly by the executive officers of the citizens' committee and of the big mills, provided for the exclusion of the IWW and any of its members from the mills, nondiscrimination against members of other unions, the creation of a Citizens' Labor Bureau with exclusive control over the recruitment and screening of workers for positions on Grays Harbor, and a minimum wage of $2.25 per day to white labor as of April 1, 1912.(37)

On April 2, organizers and former prisoners Titus, Anderson, and Yager pleaded for continued labor unity. Titus particularly seemed to fear that the mill owners' offer would weaken the resolve of the shingle weavers to maintain their role in the labor alliance. He consequently vowed to offer his services to the IWW should the weavers lose their will to fight.(38) Titus and the Wobbly organizers proceeded to organize pickets to slow the return to work beginning on Monday morning, April 8. If the local press can be believed, the "white labor" agreement had a marked effect on the ethnicity of the pickets, while a new strategy on the part of the strike leadership had a marked effect on their gender.

About 150 women, almost all the wives of "Red" Finns, gathered at

the Slade mill Tuesday and were dispersed by the application of the

water cure, via fire hose. A number of them were accompanied by baby

buggies. ... the insults of this bunch of unsexed women is becoming

unbearable.(39)

From this point onward, the Grays Harbor press launched a propaganda barrage apparently designed to isolate a large majority of workers from the union leaders and from a dispensable few of their fellows who could be blamed for the entire debacle. The IWW became the most obvious and appealing target of attack as it could be most effectively linked in the public mind to the "racially undesirable" Greeks and the politically "un-American" Finnish Socialists.

The I.W.W. agitators. . . purpose is to OBSTRUCT and DESTROY.... Every hour

these anarchists become more insolent and insulting, yet put a few of them

in jail and they become martyrs. If they "rough house" the jail and are

restrained, are they entitled to the sympathy of any one. If they can shut

that mill down so that 800 to 1000 men who want to work will be forced to

remain idle, who is entitled to protection, the 800 working men, or the

I.W.W. hordes? Have they the right to demand that the flag of the United

States shall protect them when they do all that they can to tear down that

flag?(40)

The press further attempted to inflame nationalist passions against the IWW and its allies and the workers they represented with reports such as the following:

Chief Examiner John Speed Smith of the U.S. naturalization bureau ... and

the different judges before whom the applicants [for citizenship] come have

decided that the recent outbreaks on the part of the socialists and the

Industrial Workers of the World demand a stringent test on the part of Uncle

Sam before new voters are admitted in the future. "The courts and our bureau

have agreed that any man who would countenance the supplanting of the

star-spangled banner by the red or any other flag should not be allowed to

become a citizen," said Examiner Smith. "Further, it is possible that

persons who are citizens and who make seditious utterances will lose their

citizenship rights."(41)

Given the fact that many workers were returning to their jobs by mid-April, and that powerful propaganda was driving home the liabilities of IWW-affiliation, the ISWUA made a seemingly surprising move. On April 13, the union's official organ printed the following remarks:

The Shingle Weavers, the Longshoremen and the Central Labor Council are

all "identified" with the I.W.W. in this strike in spite of strenuous

efforts by the capitalist press to split them up into rival factions.

LABOR IS UNITED IN HOQUIAM. The only settlement which can be permanent

is a settlement with organized labor, INCLUDING THE I.W.W . . . . All

branches of wage workers are standing together in this strike .... They

all recognize that the next battle to be won is THE RECOGNITION OF THE

UNIONS BY THE MILL OWNERS, not of one union by itself, but of all

unions.... CONSOLIDATED LABOR IN HOQUIAM WILL WIN THIS SECOND BATTLE FOR

DIRECT RECOGNITION AS IT HAS WON ITS FIRST BATTLE FOR ADVANCED WAGES, EVEN

IF IT TAKES ALL SUMMER AND FALL.(42)

Why would the ISWUA continue to risk identification with the IWW in such a hostile climate if the wage battle had been won? It must be remembered that the weavers had been engaged in their own struggle with millman R.F. Lytle before the onset of the "Greek strike." The minimum wage settlement in the millhands' strike may have been a victory for unskilled "white" labor but it had no effect on improving the wages of the more highly skilled and higher-paid weavers. The settlement also required a return to work on the basis of non-discrimination toward "individual" workers. There was no advantage gained by the ISWUA in its efforts to gain recognition as a collective bargaining agent. The ISWUA was consequently still deprived of the power to enforce union scale for its members.

While one should not utterly dismiss the socialist affiliation of many ISWUA officers as a factor in its tolerance of the IWW, it seems more likely that the two organizations' marriage in Hoquiam was viewed as a tactical necessity. By 1912, shingle weavers were becoming a smaller and smaller minority of timber workers. Skilled jobs were shrinking in proportion to the total number of jobs in the industry as new technologies reshaped the shop floor. As more dangerous "upright machines" replaced the old "ten-blocks" more and more shingle sawyers were disabled or maimed and entire categories of labor were eroded. The old ten-block machines were operated by a sawyer, four packers, and five knot sawyers; the new uprights by a sole sawyer. Consequently, the men were separated from one another, teamwork diminished, the union weakened, and jobs that might have been filled by the sawyers' sons faded from view.(43)

Since the ISWUA was making little headway in preserving union control in shops like Lytles, it was now seeking to ally itself with the lumber mill workers it had once ignored. Unfortunately for the union, the willingness by mid-April of many unskilled "white" laborers to return to their jobs at an advance in wages, but without union-affiliation, and without Wobblies and Greeks, left the weavers with few allies to carry on their own fight. This produced the ironic situation of a skilled, native-born and once nativist union fighting a recognition campaign in the shingle mills alongside some of the most unpopular cast-offs of the multiethnic struggle that the IWW had tried to lead in the lumber mills.

If the shingle weavers might have considered other options, these were no doubt narrowed by the behavior of the millmen's political allies. On April 10, Hoquiam. City Clerk Harry Kress, a shingle weaver, secretary of the Trades Council, and strike supporter, was removed from office by Commissioners Ogden and Willis over Mayor Ferguson's objections.(44) This was the beginning of a middle-class campaign to weaken the political power of the weavers in city government. The Commercial Club's "Upholders of Good Government" campaign now also sought the recall of centrist Mayor Ferguson for failure to offer more determined and diligent protection of property rights. A primary date for the selection of Fergusons opponent was set at May 20, with the recall election slated for June 3.(45) From this point onward, the attention of Grays Harbor residents increasingly shifted from the "Greek strike" to the upcoming political campaign.

As far as the strike in the lumber mills was concerned, most millhands returned to work by the end of April, attracted by higher pay and unwilling to struggle any longer for union recognition. The IWW found itself increasingly handicapped by the success of the employers' racist appeals, bolstered by wage incentives. Further IWW strike efforts were thwarted as well by local governments' attacks on strike-related speech and assembly. In Aberdeen, for example, Police Chief Templeman forcibly closed the Finn Hall to prevent its use for Wobbly meetings. When the Finnish Socialist club failed to win a court restraining order against Aberdeen authorities, club president and secretary Charles Kauppi and John Likkanen accepted Superior Court Judge Irwin's decision to reopen the hall on the condition that the IWW be barred from it. The Finnish Socialists in effect decided that support for the IWW strike did not warrant their own organizational demise. Isolated and without a sufficient workplace following, the IWW called off its strike on April 27.(46)

The ISWUA continued its own efforts to resolve the shingle weavers' grievances throughout the month of May, and linked its strike to the impending elections. The union threw its support to Mayor Ferguson, describing the mayoral contest as a "continuation ... of the industrial contest ... waged the last two months by all organized Labor and for the last two years by the Shingle Weavers Union."(47) While the weavers' concern for their political representation was understandable, it should be noted that the politicization of the Grays Harbor labor struggle would exclude the workers who had initiated the lumber strike in March. Most of the foreign-born workers in the region were not naturalized and consequently would have no access to the ballot box. The theatre of battle now shifted entirely to a stage dominated by native-born Americans, and here the weavers' efforts would founder.

The ISWUA continued its own efforts to resolve the shingle weavers' grievances throughout the month of May, and linked its strike to the impending elections. The union threw its support to Mayor Ferguson, describing the mayoral contest as a "continuation ... of the industrial contest ... waged the last two months by all organized Labor and for the last two years by the Shingle Weavers Union."(47) While the weavers' concern for their political representation was understandable, it should be noted that the politicization of the Grays Harbor labor struggle would exclude the workers who had initiated the lumber strike in March. Most of the foreign-born workers in the region were not naturalized and consequently would have no access to the ballot box. The theatre of battle now shifted entirely to a stage dominated by native-born Americans, and here the weavers' efforts would founder.

On May 20, Chris Knoell, a retired butcher, won the primary election, and received pledges of support from the other eight candidates who had hoped to fill Ferguson's seat. Knoell had no political experience at all in politics or public life, but committed himself to a platform framed by the citizens' committee. Its most notable elements were a ringing condemnation of the sitting mayor and a pledge "to stamp out by every means ... riot and sedition in whatever guise or form."(48) With the IWW out of the picture, what could these words have meant? Although there was some political utility to keeping alive the memory of the Wobbly "hordes," it also appears that the Socialist-affiliation of the ISWUA served as a straw man for the political campaign. Throughout May, local press reports focused extensively and approvingly on physical attacks launched against individual Socialists as well as against Socialist meetings and offices by members of the Grays Harbor Commercial Club, the Grand Army of the Republic and the Spanish War Veterans. Much discussion centered on the formation of a Loyal Legion of Loyalists to defend patriotism and the flag.(49) The weavers' union's response to these nationalist stirrings was very interesting considering the earlier evolution of its position on the "Greek strike":

The American flag is being used just now for all it is worth. . . . The national emblem was used to hide the perfidy of the millmen. For

though it was announced that only American men with families would

be given employment, many of the mills began hiring Hindus and

Italians, while flags and signs reading "I.W.W. Keep Out" acted as a

warning to any one wanting living wages.(50)

The fact that the ISWUA could revert so quickly to a nativist stance is an indication that the union never really abandoned its Americanist position or its perception that its primary audience and constituency would be essentially "American." The Greeks had been embraced for short-term tactical reasons but clearly not from a committed sense of worker internationalism. The weavers were perfectly comfortable with the common language of racial difference, and the political campaign in which they were engaged was essentially a debate over different versions of Americanism.

Election day, Monday, June 3, came and went. The final vote count was Knoell, 1363, Ferguson, 870--a Knoell victory by almost 500 votes. The ISWUA blamed Ferguson's defeat on propaganda, strong-arming, and subterfuge. Labor officials said that the churches had defamed Ferguson, the pimps had financed Knoell, and that the lumber barons had threatened to fire workers who opposed their candidate.(51) While this may have been true, the unionists overlooked the role of nationality in the election results. There were at least 6000 voting-age persons in Hoquiam. At least one-third of these were unnaturalized immigrants who certainly had a stake in the political contest, but who could not exercise political power. This left 4000 or so potential voters. Only 2600 of these registered. Was this by reason of indifference, despair, or lack of durable residency? We do not know. But we do know that this reduced substantially the pool of actual voters, and that almost all of the nonregistrants were workers. Voter registration levels in the two distinctly middle class wards was so high as to include virtually every adult man and woman. Although registered workers turned out to vote with almost the same regularity as their middle class counterparts, they were at best half as likely to register in the first place. In fact, more native-born and naturalized workers did not vote in this municipal contest than did. Knoell did, however, carry every ward. In the predominantly middle class districts, he did so by landslides in excess of two to one, while he polled simple majorities in the working class neighborhoods.(52)

Although the shingle weavers were surprised and disappointed by the results, especially in light of the sheer numerical superiority of Hoquiam's working class, there is a plausible explanation for the outcome of the election. First of all, the middle class citizens were most determined to have a government that offered no quarter to "revolutionists" and "rabble-rousers." At best, Ferguson had been too soft on the radicals for middle-class tastes. Second, those workers most likely to suffer under the employment terms offered by the millmen and supported by the citizens' committee mayor could not vote. Third, many American or "white" workers stood to gain materially from the millmen's offer. This could have explained both the working-class pro-Knoell votes and the fence-sitting of those who voluntarily stayed away from the polls. This latter group may have consisted of "white" workers who lacked enthusiasm for middle class vigilantism but preferred a wage increase to further unemployment and violence. Besides, without a determined effort by most "white" workers to maintain their solidarity with the foreigners, and given the political leanings of the city commission, even a Ferguson victory would effect no positive change in the differential treatment now to be meted out to "non-white" workers in the mills. In fact, with the demise of the IWW campaign and the re-emergent nativism of the weavers, so-called non-white workers no longer had any American allies to count on.

To what life, then, did the people of Hoquiam return in the aftermath of the elections? The conduct of business in the mills returned to normal. The shingle weavers remained locked out and on strike. No mills of any sort agreed to recognize unions of any sort. The citizens' committee had their preferred mayor and their favored city commission. The IWW, which had planned to locate its regional headquarters in Hoquiam, walked away from Grays Harbor in disappointment and chose Centralia as its northwestern hub. The lumber barons felt themselves to be masters of their mills, having beaten back the threat of union prerogatives. The middle class felt themselves to be masters of their city, having forcibly driven off the "revolutionary hordes." The American flag was everywhere in evidence, and the "traitors' mayor" had gone down to an ignominious defeat.

But something else had happened as well. Wages were higher for "white" labor in the lumber mills and yet Hoquiam did not become a "white man's town." The vigilantes did not deport or even attempt to deport all of the foreigners in town. How could they have? How would business have functioned? No, the immigrants, even the "racially undesirable ones," were now a fact of daily life. The mills needed them, as did the grocers, doctors, and publicans. By 1912 they had become indispensable to the city's very existence. A market glut may have allowed employers to seek a temporary constriction of their labor force, perhaps of sufficient proportions to cover increased wages for some workers, but the industry could not realistically operate on an "all-American" basis. What the mill owners accomplished, however, was cross-class agreement on who would suffer the brunt of cost-reduction ("non-white" workers) and who would reap the benefits ("white" workers and millmen). The millmen's April Fool's Day offer turned out not to be a plan to "whiten" the city, but to be precisely and narrowly what it had been represented to be: a minimum wage of $2.25 a day to "white" labor. Ironically, these were to be the fruits of the IWW's struggle.

What is so notable about this entire episode is that the inter-ethnic cooperation which appeared at the onset of the "Greek strike could prove to be so shallow. The fragility of the multi-ethnic coalition which the IWW had helped to forge and to which the ISWUA temporarily adhered merits examination. This fragility is perhaps best explained by viewing most native-born workers' attachment to the IWW as a situational radicalism, motivated by short-term concerns such as the wage rather than ideological affinity, and driven as well by the general neglect of unskilled laborers by AFL-affiliated craft unions. If this is the case, then the IWW's campaign was from the very beginning vulnerable to disruption along ethnic lines as a result of the presence of an American majority in the lumber mills. In addition, one of the most promising aspects of this labor struggle as it got underway was the skilled/unskilled coalition reflected in the ISWUA-IWW alliance. This was particularly notable since the AFL and the Wobblies were typically and mutually inimical. But if one understands the ISWUA's position as equally situational, the ultimate decision by Grays Harbor workers to turn over the "non-whites" among them as sacrificial Iambs becomes more fathomable.

What evidence do we have that nationality and "race" were more powerful factors in the thinking of "white" workers than radical appeals for working class unity? One piece of evidence is that the AFL Trades Council in Hoquiam's neighboring city of Aberdeen refused to grant its endorsement to the Hoquiam strike from the very beginning. The Aberdeen Trades Council was very explicit in indicating that it viewed foreign workers as scabs and that it viewed its responsibility as the defense of "American" workers' jobs.(53) Since the local shingle weavers had chosen to locate their merged Grays Harbor union in Hoquiam in 1906, they exerted no influence over the Aberdeen Council but substantial influence in Hoquiam.(54) Therefore it clearly appears that the special situation of the weavers in relation to their employers in 1910-12 caused their union to adopt a stance toward the IWW strike that was entirely out of keeping with the bulk of organized labor. It may be added that even in Hoquiam itself, the Building Trades Council refused to endorse the strike for the same reasons as the AFL unions in Aberdeen.(55)

Why then, did the ISWUA behave as it did? As already mentioned, the union had by 1912 been struggling for two years to gain recognition from R.F. Lytle and other open-shop employers. The unexpected strike of lumber mill workers might have exerted just enough pressure on labor's common enemies to bring about a resolution favorable to the weavers. But ISWUA support for the so-called Greek strike required some intellectual gymnastics on the weavers' part. On the one hand, the weavers' union had shared the generally negative view of "cheap and passive" immigrant labor that characterized American unionists. On the other hand, such foreign labor was not and would never become a threat to shingle weavers' jobs. The weavers could afford, if tactical needs dictated, to demonstrate some verbal largesse toward immigrant labor without fearing any disruption of the essentially "while" monopoly over employment in the shingle mills. This fact leads to the important conclusion that the ISWUA had never attempted nor ever construed its role as to organize the unorganized in the timber industry--American or foreign-born. When presented with an uprising of the workers that its history, structure and orientation had caused it to neglect. the ISWUA, even under Socialist leadership, became the tail to the IWW's dog while trying to cloak itself in some semblance of a leadership role. But the weavers' ability to turn their participation to advantage was severely constrained by a need to keep up with the shifting loyalties of the non-ISWUA lumber mill workers within the IWW-led movement. When it first appeared that the IWW's multi-ethnic coalition would hold together, the ISWUA turned the Greeks into "white" men. When it began to disintegrate, the weavers found it difficult to reverse their new-found racial acceptance of the Greeks, but found Italians and Hindus to replace them in labor's racial hierarchy. The ISWUA's need to maintain some influence over unskilled workers outside of its organization made it difficult for the union to stick to a position on ethnicity and race that was out of keeping with prevailing rank-and-file sentiment. If the IWW's failure can be linked to its determination to lead on the issue of worker solidarity, the ISWUA's can be linked to its awkward vacillation attendant to the attitudes of the rank-and-file. Both unions' efforts foundered on the rocky shoals of race.

What can the unions' failures teach us about the ordinary workers of Grays Harbor? Were their best efforts at real class solidarity thwarted by powerful lumber barons, aggressive middle-class vigilantism, propagandistic press and hostile governmental power? The answer is, in part, yes. One cannot ignore the size of the stick wielded against the labor coalition of spring 1912. But one should also not ignore the readiness of so many workers to grab the carrot, especially when this carrot reflected and promoted racial sentiments that had a long history--a history which permitted a fluid adaptation of racial "whiteness" to justify privilege for some and restricted opportunity for others. In the final analysis, American workers on Grays Harbor, and those Europeans they deemed equally "white," accepted a role as their employers' partners in enforcing a "racial" segmentation of the labor market in their mills. If this could be done to African-Americans and Asians, why not to Greeks, South Slavs or Finns? If even nominal Socialists could comfortably lead unions whose structure was premised on exclusion, what might one expect from "ordinary" Americans? And if "white" racial consciousness was so powerful because there were economic gains to be derived from it, organizations like the IWW had a formidable task ahead of them indeed.

(1) David Brody, In Labor's Cause (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1993), 115.

(2) Ibid., 116.

(3) Ibid., 117.

(4) Daniel Cornford, Workers and Dissent in the Redwood Empire (Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press, 1987).

(5) Michael Kazin, "Reform, Utopia, and Racism," in Daniel Cornford, ed., Working People of California (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1995).

(6) Lisa McGirr, "Black and White Longshoremen in the I.W.W.," Labor History, 35 (1995), 95-119.

(7) Paul Worthman, "Black Workers and Labor Unions in Birmingham, Alabama, 1897-1904," Labor History, 10 (1969), 173-194.

(8) See Melvyn Dubofsky, We Shall Be All (Chicago: Quadrangle, 1969) or Philip Foner, History of the Labor Movement of the United States, Vol. IV, The Industrial Workers of the World, 1905-1917 (New York: International Publishers, 1965).

(9) Yuji Ichioka, Issei: The World of the First Generation Japanese Immigrants, 1885-1924 (New York: Free Press, 1988).

(10) Melvyn Dubofsky, "The Origins of Western Working Class Radicalism, 1890-1905," Labor History, 6 (1966), 103-120.

(11) U.S. Bureau of the Census, 11th Census, 1890; 12th Census, 1900, Population, Part 1. pp. 402-8; 13th Census, 1910, v. III, pp. 969-1009; manuscript census schedules, 11th Census, 1890, and 12th Census, 1900, Chehalis County, cities of Aberdeen and Hoquiam.

(12) Jorgen Dahlie, A Social History of Scandinavian Immigration, Washington State, 1895-1910 (New York: Arno Press, 1980), 17; quoted from "The New Immigration Movement," the Northwest Illinois Monthly Magazine, Jan. 1896, 7.

(13) Ibid., 110; quoted from Tacoma Tidende, June 16, 1900, 4.

(14) Norman Clark, Mill Town. A Social History of Everett (Seattle: Univ. of Washington Press. 1970), 79.

(15) U.S. Bureau of the Census, manuscript census schedules. 13th Census. 1910. Chehalis County, cities of Aberdeen and Hoquiam.

(16) Shingle Weaver (hereafter SW), Feb. 22, 1912, 1.

(17) U.S. Bureau of the Census, manuscript census schedules, 13th Census. 1910. Chehalis County, cities of Aberdeen and Hoquiam, and Snohomish County, city of Everett.

(18) Vernon Jensen, Lumber and Labor (New York: Farrar & Rinehart, 1945), 121: and Aberdeen Herald (hereafter AH). Jan. 8, 1912, 1, and Jan. 11, 1912, 1.

(19) SW, Feb. 22, 1912, 1.

(20) AH, Mar. 18, 1912, 1.

(21) (Hoquiam) Daily Washingtonian (hereafter DW), Mar. 15. 1912, 1. and Mar. 16. 1912, 2.

(22) DW, Mar. 16, 1912, 2.

(23) AH, Mar. 18, 1912, 1.

(24) Ibid., 4.

(25) DW, Mar. 21, 1912, 6; SW, Mar. 23, 1912, 4.

(26) SW, Mar. 23, 1912, 2.

(27) Ibid., 1.

(28) Herbert Gutman pointed out that merchants and shopkeepers often played pivotal roles in the labor/capital struggles of 19th century industrial communities. Both workers and industrialists vied for the allegiance of this segment of the middle class, and its loyalty to "big capital" was by no means assured. The shingle weavers' position and strategy consequently had its antecedents. See for example Gutman's "Trouble on the Railroads in 1873-1974," and "Two Lockouts in Pennsylvania, 1873-74," in Work, Culture & Society in Industrializing America (New York: Random House, 1979), especially pp. 311, 328, 340-1.

(29) SW, Mar. 23, 1912, 1.

(30) Ibid.

(31) Ibid.

(32) DW, Mar. 31, 1912, 1.

(33) Ibid.; SW, April 6, 1912, 1.

(34) AH, April 1, 1912, 1.

(35) AH, April 1, 1912, 4; DW, April 2, 1912, 1; SW. April 6. 1912. 1. 4.

(36) AH, April 4, 1912, 1.

(37) DW. April 6, 1912, 1.

(38) DW. April 17, 1912, 1.

(39) All, April 11, 1912, 1, 8.

(40) DW, April 9, 1912, 1.

(41) DW, April 6, 1912, 1.

(42) SW, April 13, 1912, 1, 4.

(43) SW, March 2, 1912, 1.

(44) DW, April 11, 1912, 1.

(45) DW, April 25, 1912, 1.

(46) DW, May 3, 1912.

(47) SW, April 20, 1912, 1.

(48) DW, May 26, 1912, 1.

(49) See DW and AH from April 25, 1912 through the month of May.

(50) SW, May 11, 1912, 1.

(51) SW, June 8, 1912, 1.

(52) Election data are drawn from DW, May 19, 1912, 1, and June 4. 1912, 1. Population statistics are drawn from the closest census to the election. 13th Census. U.S. 1910, vol. III, 969-1009. Since all indications in this analysis are of an increase in both population and immigration between 1910 and 1912, the points made here would be strengthened by 1912 demographic information.

(53) Timber Worker, March-April 1912.

(54) SW, November 12, 1906, 2.

(55) DW, April 4, 1912, 1.

COPYRIGHT 1997 Carfax Publishing Co.
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group

Discovering the Women in Slavery: Emancipating Perspectives on the American Past. - book reviews
by James Sidbury
Mexicans in the Midwest: 1900-1932. - book reviews
by Rodolfo F. Acuna
The New African American Urban History. - book reviews
by James Sidbury
Anything But Mexican: Chicanos in Contemporary Los Angeles. - book reviews
by Juan R. Garcia
Indispensable outcasts: harvest laborers in the wheat belt of the Middle West, 1890-1925
by Toby Higbie
The Female Economy: The Millinery and Dressmaking Trades, 1860-1930. - book reviews
by Lois W. Banner
Unionism in Modern Ireland: New Perspectives on Politics and Culture. - book reviews
by Dermot Quinn
Labor, the law, and economics: the organization of the Chicago Flat Janitors' Union, 1902-1917
by John B. Jentz
The Fruits of Their Labor: Atlantic Coast Farmworkers and the Making of Migrant Poverty, 1870-1945. - book reviews
by Craig R. Prentiss
Unruly Women of Paris: Images of the Commune. - book reviews
by Steve Kale
Keeping it in the family: Mother Jones and the Pennsylvania Silk Strike of 1900-1901
by Bonnie Stepenoff
Where Is Our Responsibility? Unions and Economic Change in the New England Textile Industry, 1870-1960. - book reviews
by Philip T. Silvia, Jr.
Widerstand und Verweigerung im Saarland: 1935-1945, 3 vols. - book reviews
by Walter Struve
The IWW and the limits of inter-ethnic organizing: Reds, Whites, and Greeks in Grays Harbor, Washington, 1912 - International Workers of the World
by Philip J. Dreyfus
Mining Cultures: Men, Women, and Leisure in Butte, 1914-41. - book reviews
by Sally Zanjani
Peripheral Migrants: Haitians and Dominican Republic Sugar Plantations. - book reviews
by Roderick A. McDonald
Labor history bibliography: 1996 - Bibliography
by Peter Meyer Filardo
Turning Points in Social Security: From "Cruel Hoax" to "Sacred Entitlement." - book reviews
by Julian Zelizer
Packinghouse workers face the Cold War: a memoir
by Norman Dolnick
Power Plays: Critical Events in the Institutionalization of the Tennessee Valley Authority. - book reviews
by Steven M. Neuse
Milton Rogovin: seeing the forgotten ones - photography of the working class
by Holly Metz
Confronting Southern Poverty in the Great Depression: The Report on Economic Conditions of the South with Related Documents. - book reviews
by Alex Lichtenstein
The Workplace Before the Factory: Artisans and Proletarians, 1500-1800. - book reviews
by Immanuel Wallerstein
Studebaker: The Life and Death of an American Corporation. - book reviews
by Elizabeth Fones-Wolf

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

May 2nd 1843 Oregon Country

Alexander — Thu, 03 May 2007 12:16:20 GMT

From 1843 to 1849 Oregon was a country. Of course before the Europeans it was a "country" too, but 1843 was the first Anglo American recognition of that republic.

Today (well yesterday was) is the anniversary of the day there was an election to create
a European style republic in the Pacific Northwest. The country was
called Oregon and even minted its own money called beaver money.
The "beaver" side of the Oregon state flag maybe the original flag
of the country that included the current state of Washington, Idaho,
western Montana (west of the Rockies), a small portion of western
Wyoming (west of the Rockies) and British Columbia. The settlers
casting that vote were a mix of French, American (Bostans), British
and Metis males (most were married Native women). There is
arguement as to there goal of the "provisional government".
Obviously the pro American expansists were modivated by the idea of
manifest destiny for the US while the employees of the Hudson Bay
Company were ordered to cast votes to stop American interest in the
area, but what is often left out of that history are individuals
like Osborne Russell who favored (was even on one of the first
executive committees and ran as first governor) total independence
of the country of Oregon. Another aspect that is totally neglected
by historians we the development of a new grouping population that
was a mix of Native peoples with the new settlers (not all
were "Anglo American" settlers like the American National mythology
will suggest). This new population spoke as their "mother tongue"
Chinook Jargon (literally from their mothers and fathers who were of
mixed cultures) and for these people this region was not just
called "Oregon", but Chinook Illahee (the land of the Chinook Jargon
speakers). The ethnologist Hortatio Hale of the US Exploring
Expedition of 1841 described the use of Chinook Jargon during his
stay at Fort Vancouver by a new emerging culture of Chinook Illahee
in the 1840s:

"These are Canadians and half-breeds married to Chinook women, who
can only converse with their wives in this speech, and it is the
fact, strange as it may seem, that many young children are growing
up to whom this factitious language is really the mother tongue, and
who speak it with more readiness and perfection than any other."

some links of interest:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Oregon_Lyceum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Champoeg_ Meetings
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Executive_ Committee_(Oregon_Territory)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Osborne_Russell
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Provisional_ Government_ of_Oregon
http://www.oregonpioneers.com/ govt.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Oregon_Country
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Beaver_Coins

Dr. McLoughlin advocated for an independant country

I just want to stress this one note in one link( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Lyceum) about the Oregon Lyceum:

During these debates in Oregon City the European settlers argued about whether an independent country should be formed, or if a provisional government should be formed.[5]

The group advocating an independent country tended to be British, including Dr. McLoughlin and the his HBC employees.[5] The Catholic block that consisted of mainly former French-Canadian trappers also sided with McLoughlin on this issue.[5] Their goal was to prevent the territory from becoming a part of the United States by forming a new country.[5] McLoughlin's attorney , introduced a resolution on his behalf to the Lyceum as follows:

"Resolved, That it is expedient for the settlers of the coast to organize an independent government."[5]
That resolution was adopted by the Oregon Lyceum.[5]

cited from
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/calbk:@field(DOCID+@lit(calbk056div10))

all posted at
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2007/05/358782.shtml?discuss

further down in the thread of the Portland Indy Media post:

More rousing Cascadian independence precedent 03.May.2007 00:24
citizen joe link

In reasearching a lecture on Cascadia I gave in January at Reed College, I uncovered some interesting bits of information regarding the Oregon Republic. Contemporary sources discussed the topic of an independent nation, but by the 1890's there was no mention of the subject. Joe Meek's line in the sand at Champoeg was drawn to divide those for organizing a government, from those opposed to a government, not to divide those for the American side from those for the British side. The government formed was independent, as Meek himself said on his trip to Washington DC in 1848 following the Whitman massacre "I am Envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary from the Republic of Oregon to the Court of the United States"

A few more rousing words about Cascadia on our national holiday:
"In the legislative committee for 1844, and in the executive committee also, who were revolving in their minds the question of an independent government; that is a government owning no allegiance either to the U.S. or Great Britain, but which should lay the foundations of an empire on the Pacific Coast... as strong as any state or power on the American continent"
Fuller Victor, Frances, River of the West 114, 116

And of course Thomas Jefferson "One Day I see a free great and independent empire on the banks of the Columbia River," 1813

Tear down the stars and stripes and hoist up the Doug flag of Cascadia

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

WEDNESDAYS SPRING TRAINING: STENCIL AND BANNER MAKING! GET READY FOR MAYDAY!!! the there is Impeachment May 5

Alexander — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 16:53:08 GMT

There are two current political events happening that has had a call out for banner drops and stenciling: MayDay adnd a Day for calling Impeachment of the current Fascists in power (below are two posts on them). Added to this is the anniverary of the creation of the Oregon Independence Government back in 1843 at Champoeg. It would be nice to see a week of Cascadian activism in honor of that moment in time when the Oregon Country (bascially most of the bioregion of Cascadia) briefly was an independant country (third post below).

CASCADIA NOW OR WA BC UNITED . FREE (banner drop)
http://media.portland.indymedia.org/images/2007/04/358162.jpg

WEDNESDAYS SPRING TRAINING: STENCIL AND BANNER MAKING! GET READY FOR MAYDAY!!!
author: Mb e-mail:e-mail: mb(at)resist(dot)ca
Wiether you just wanna accesorize your affinity, or play with the spray this ones for the artist in you.

This is a spring training workshop. "SPRING TRAINING" is a month of workshops focused on educating and empowering the broad community to act for social justice!
The fun never stops at blue heron infoshop

Wednesday at 7PM
in the blue heron infohop (formerly the SAO, GCC 34, Reed College)

Wednesday's spring training workshop! Get ready for mayday! Or just plain "accesorize" your affinity with some rockin banners and signs! Sound fun? Well check this workshop out!

STENCIL MAKING WORKSHOP

Thomas will be doing a workshop on DIY stencil fun. Make shirts, make friends, remake the boring-as-fuck corporate aesthetic! All materials will be provided, just bring your beautiful selves and some dirty clothes.

This is a spring training workshop. "SPRING TRAINING" is a month of workshops focused on educating and empowering the broad community to act for social justice!

--------------------------------

Stick around the basement of GCC cause after the workshop...

ADELIT@S, NICKTAB, AND FLY THE COOP JUG BAND
WEDNESDAY-8pm-PING PONG ROOM (down the hall from blue heron)

Mexican folk influenced punk outfit Adelit@s is playing a show Wednesday
in the Ping Pong room with acoustic rocker Niktab, and the old timey
favorites, Fly the Coop Jug Band, starting at 8pm. This is a benefit for the Sin Fronteras paper that we'll be printing for Mayday. There is also a show at the Portland Collective Housing (PCH House) on Saturday, April 28, with Adelit@s, Rag and Bone Men, Smile Whiskey, and DJ Dimon (of Gogol Bordello). If you're going to miss them on Saturday, hear them for free on Wednesday.

Come find out about the amazing work Sin Fronteras Portland is doing and hear some kick ass music.

Sin Fronteras Mission Statement
Sin Fronteras Portland formed to confront the growing violence, and economic disparity caused by the U.S./Mexico Border (and all national borders) and U.S. Imperialism. The movement for immigrant rights and border justice has been focused on pandering to politicians, and trying to "reform" blatantly racist laws. We do not believe white supremacy can be "reformed". Where we see the left in the United States has failed, we seek to participate in the building of popular social movements towards economic and social justice; here in the belly of the beast.

Portland Sin Fronteras is committed to bringing the popular resistance struggles of Latin America across the U.S. border into the heart of the global capitalist empire. We seek to educate, mobilize and empower people by disseminating the radical ideas and culture from these struggles. We seek to inspire and build with others, towards taking action in our lives and our communities against racism, militarization, liberalism and build our vision of another world. A world driven by needs and not profit, a world where freedom of movement is about people not global financial interests.

Our focus as a group lies in building and understanding the border and in fighting white supremacy; and our aim is to combat capitalism as a system of domination and to link the anticapitalist struggles of Latin America toour own struggles here at home.
LIBERTAD PARA TOD@S!

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2007/04/358263.shtml

May 5 this Sat on I-205 Freeway Overpass Banner Blitz
author: Joe Anybdy (reposting) e-mail:e-mail: iam@joe-anybody.com
Reposting From An Email I Just Recieved
Sounds Like A Good Idea To Me
"I-205 Freeway Banner Blitz"
MAY 5th ANTI-WAR PROTESTS

PLANNED ON SERIES OF I-205/CLACKAMAS OVERPASSES

Well, there we were, "Shivering in the rain again", yesterday at our
anti-war protest on Sunnyside Road at I-205. We had our family of
four on one side of the overpass with 'BRING THEM HOME", "END THE
WAR', AND "HONK TO END THE WAR". On the other side of the overpass
was about 5 from the PDX911TRUTH group, with their '9/11 WAS AN INSIDE
JOB"; "BUSH LIED", AND "GOOGLE WTC7". It was very effective to have
one side focused on one message for each of our groups.

There weren't alot of us out there. But, the reactions from passersby
was very reactive -- lots of honking with thumbs up and peace -- and
lots of "the bird". A wadded up bag was thrown at David's back.
But by far, we usually get 10 to 1 honks in favor of our protest.

But, we need more folks out there with us -- on a regular basis. It
is only one hour a week. Would you please commit to being there with
us? Bring family and friends. Bribe them with a treat afterwards!
It's a great way to release pent up stress about the war. You feel
great after doing it. Plus, you meet new friends! Shivering in the
rain is nothing compared to what our troops are doing in Iraq. We do
this in our support for them, to get them home!

But, on May 5th, we are going to need an extra lot of people. We're
planning to do several overpasses in a row -- BAM! BAM! BAM! with
giant "SUPPORT THE TROOPS - BRING THEM HOME!" and 'UNJUST WAR IS
MURDER', 'IMPEACH BUSH!" etc. -- our message will not be ignored
this way. So come out to one of these protest sites along I-205, near
Clackamas, on Saturday, May 5th at 1pm-2pm. Bring large signs. You
can print out super large letters on a 8-1/2 x 11" paper (one letter
per page), cut them out and paste to a white or black painted
cardboard. Then, seal it with a sprayed or brushed on lacquer. Or
paint huge letters onto a large sheet and drape over the fence (not
over traffic, though). Remember not to obstruct vehicle or pedestrian
traffic in any way.

Protests at these I-205 Exits, between 1pm-2pm

Johnson Creek (need contact person)
SE Otty Road (need contact person)
SE Monterey Avenue @ I-205 (Keith Humphrey wayimp@yahoo.com)
SE Sunnyside (David Brownlow 503-307-3851 dave@davebrownlow.com and
Tim Titrud 503-701-3481mailto: 503-701-3481SixLeaves@aol.com )
SE Sunnybrook (Mark Pritchard 503-631-2507 harpy@ccwebster.net)

Thank you!

Suzanne Brownlow
Believers Against The War
http://www.believersagainstthewar.org/

homepage: homepage: http://www.joe-anybody.com

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2007/04/358158.shtml

May 2nd 1843 Founders Day Champoeg
author: Ecotopian Yeti
May 2nd marks Founders Day which in 1843 was the first western style democracy west of the Rockies. Maybe for Cascadians this should mark a day to honor our Bioregion. Today Founders Day is honored on May 6th with events at Champoeg State Park

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Cascadian_Bioregionalism/

For many Cascadians the first days of May should hold a value for several different reasons. For those conscious of labour movements (workers and the politally left) May Day was the international workers day marked with historical tragedies. This should be a history everyone should learn and honor those that fought and still fight for the rights and safety of all of us. For those Cascadians who honor various religious or spiritual paths associated with changing seasons and Nature then May Day marks an ancient holiday often celebrated as Beltaine. Also the day following May Day should have historical signifigance for Cascadians, Oregonians and the people of the various states and provinces that were the Old Oregon County. May 2nd marks the anniversary of "Founders' Day" the day in 1843 when European and mixed settlers in the French Prairie (within the Willamette Valley) at town of Champoeg voted to create the first independent western style democratic government. Those dedicated to preserving American national mythology about those events often simply claim it was an election decide on whether the Oregon Country should join the USA. The reality as in many cases with nation-state mythology is that the situation was far more complex that Amerikan nationalists would have people believe. Almost half voted against formation of an independent government for various reasons. For some because they were employed by the Hudson Bay Company that already managed for British citizens (including French Canadians and Metis) juridical matters in the region. For some it was fear that the US Americans were quickly spreading across North America using Anglo-American immigration to change the political landscape and therefore challenge any and all other residence of the region (Texas, California and the rest of the Mexican Cession where in the process of Amerikanization at the time). Some voted in favor of the formation of a government because of the lack of legal status for some residents that migrated from the US (the Ewing Young case was the prime legal case for that reason). Others voted for establishment of a government with the idea of a Republic of the Pacific in mind independent of the US (Osborne Russell even ran for the first Provisional Governor position in 1845 from the Independents stance). Thomas Jefferson himself sent the Corp of Discovery as a scientific exploration and deplomatic mission to the lands west of the Stony Mountains (the Rockies) not as US Amerikan national mythology suggests as exploring future conquest or annexation, but originally Jefferson envisioned the region as a future Republic of the Pacific independent and on its own path to a parallel democratic tradition. It was American expansionists like president Polk with a the campaign slogan "Fifty-four Forty or Fight!" and American nationalist journalist John Louis O'Sullivan with his concept of Divine American Imperialism in the concept of "Manifest Destiny" that drove the idea that the Oregon Country was the "property" of American Empire. Of course all this ignored what Native People and other residents thought in the region.

In Chinook Jargon the land west of the Rockies was called Chinook Illahee meaning land of the Chinook Jargon Speakers.

Using historical and civil events to deconstruct our shared history maybe one method to getting the meme out about Cascadia.

Unfortunately today the park system does not celebrate Founders Day on its origianl May 2nd, but does honor that historic event on May 6th at Champoeg (near Wilsonville).

www.champoeg.org/

homepage: homepage: http://republic-of-cascadia.tripod.com/

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/05/338582.shtml

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Cascadian Sovereignty Network

Christopher — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 01:40:21 GMT

Hi, everyone...I started a social network on Ning for Cascadians. It is at http://cascadia.ning.com

I would love everyone to check out the platform. It's pretty amazing and the navigation is intuitive and comprehensive.

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Cascadia: More than a dream

Alexander — Sun, 15 Apr 2007 08:43:02 GMT

Cascadia: More than a dream
The notion that the continent's west forms a natural bloc has deep roots -- now powerful forces are joining to make it true
Miro Cernetig, Vancouver Sun
Published: Saturday, April 14, 2007
It's always been more a state of mind than a tangible place on a map. Yet the empire of Cascadia, what some dreamers have long believed the westernmost states and provinces of North America might one day be called if they ever banded together, may not be quite the fantasy it once seemed.
Cascadia will never involve the loopy idea of provinces or states splitting off from their countries, as some western separatists once hoped. There won't ever be a seat for Cascadians at the United Nations. Cascadia won't ever be on a map any time soon.
Where you will find Cascadia, though, is in the mindset of the millions of people who live on the continent's western edge. For them it's a concept, an increasingly real regional abstraction -- one backed by some rich and influential people, including Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates who has supported a think-tank that tries to breathe life into an idea that goes back from the time Europeans explored the continent's western wilderness.
Cascadia's guiding principle today isn't nationhood but what might be best called regionhood -- the sense that Alaska, the Yukon, B.C., Alberta and the states of Washington, Oregon, Montana and Idaho -- often share similar regional goals and ambitions. Cascadians may be in separate countries, states and provinces. They often have different national agendas. But, the thinking goes, in an age when centralized governments are often devolving their powers, they often share similar agendas. In Cascadia, these range from environmental issues, a heightened sense that their collective futures are tied to the Asia-Pacific and a desire for more autonomy from federal governments that are thousands of kilometres to the east, in Ottawa and Washington, D.C., and often out of touch with the big questions to the west.
In fact, when taken as a whole, Cascadia has evolved into a powerful economic entity with clout its members alone can never hope to wield.
If you add up the states' and provinces' individual GDPs and populations, Cascadia is a significant geographic area and market: It comprises a market of more than 20 million people and what would be the world's eighth-richest nation, with a GDP of about $848 billion US, according to the Pacific Northwest Economic Region, the entity that was formed in 1991 by the legislators of Cascadia's provinces and states. Those same leaders will be in Anchorage, Alaska, from July 22 to 26, to continue their work to foster regional cooperation and the idea of an economic bloc.
Some, however, even look at Cascadia as bigger than that. If you add California to the concept, as Premier Gordon Campbell was wont to do in a recent interview when he discussed Cascadia, you would get an entity that would include about 60 million people and a GDP of more than $2 trillion, about the size of China.
"I think there is a very strong, natural pull of the region called Cascadia," he said.
Campbell isn't suggesting that there could ever be a full integration of the region, one that could ever challenge the sovereignty of either Canada's or the United States' federal governments. That is the pipe dream of a small band of separatists who hijacked the name years ago. But on issues such as climate change, Campbell suggests, looking at the region as a whole makes good political and economic sense.
Shortly after meeting with California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Campbell said they both agreed the region could push their respective national leaders to take aggressive approaches on fighting climate change. "I think the fact of the matter is that, as the governor said, sometimes you can't wait for the rest of the continent to catch up."
Here's one way, Campbell believes, Cascadia might lead the way.
The premier is touting the creation of a Cascadia-wide carbon market. The U.S. western states have already signed initiatives to join in the creation of a carbon trading market involving the western states. But B.C.'s premier also sees his province, and perhaps Alberta and others, as natural members of such a market. Campbell promised as much in the latest throne speech, which borrowed much of California's climate-change agenda.
"We think there's a real potential for a regional carbon market," Campbell said after his meeting with Schwarzenegger. "We [Schwarzenegger and Campbell] also both agree that the larger the market the better it is. From California's perspective, B.C. offers some real opportunities to help them meet their goals [to reduce greenhouse gas emissions]. I think there's some real synergy that California and B.C. offers. I think the Pacific Coast can set an example that will grab both the imagination and inspire the rest of the continent."
To make that idea happen, Campbell is doing something never before tried by a B.C. premier. He is trying to meet with the governors of Alaska, Oregon and Washington to create a consensus on tackling climate change, and perhaps eventually a summit of the region's leaders in British Columbia.
"I'm going to be meeting the governors of Washington and Oregon and the governor of Alaska in the last half of April," he says. "There's lots of room for cooperation."
n Cascadia is hardly new as a concept. U.S. president Thomas Jefferson initially thought the region, still unmapped by explorers about two centuries ago, as potentially a separate country. He even called it -- what might be described as the land west of the Louisiana Purchase -- the Republic of the Pacific.
That was never to be, of course. But the idea of Cascadia as a distinct region has had remarkable staying power. It's been called Ecotopia, Ernest Callenbach's fanciful name for part of the region in a novel that imagines northern California, Oregon and Washington breaking away from the U.S. to form an environmentally integrated country.
Cascadia was further defined in a more continentalist way by Joel Garreau, whose book The Nine Nations of North America saw the region's common traits as based in market and lifestyle. The idea seemed to take on more concreteness in the early 1990s, when the region's leaders even formed PNWER. That is not unlike some international regional blocs, such as APEC, except that it exists within a continent.
Cascadia, however, has never really caught on as a mainstream concept. Its states and provinces don't always share the same agendas or the same national interest. They compete for Asian trade, they exist within different nation states. Yet, there are undeniably increasing examples where there is cooperation. Consider a few of them:
n After the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, B.C. teamed up with Washington and Oregon to press the U.S. government to loosen its demands for passports when crossing the Canadian border. That fight is continuing, but both Ottawa and Washington have taken note and contemplated ways to shift border policy.
n Alberta and B.C. have recently teamed up with an unprecedented agreement to create a common market by 2009, one that essentially eliminates economic barriers. Called the Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility agreement, it seeks to create an integrated regional economy within Canada, a first that some say will accelerate the Canadian West's power in Confederation.
n There are attempts underway to create a unified ports strategy on the West Coast to ensure similar standards and equipment for handling shipping. While the plan does not eliminate competition for Asian shipping between U.S. and Canadian ports, it is meant to ensure North America's West Coast -- that is Cascadia -- can be a seamless destination for Pacific Rim trade.
n Efforts are underway to create a viable carbon market, for clean industries to sell their "carbon credits" to those that are polluters. California, Washington, Oregon, New Mexico and Arizona have already signed a deal to create that regional market and B.C. is expected to try and join that new "carbon bloc."
n There are plans for the West Coast to create an integrated "hydrogen highway" from California to Whistler to prove the possibility of using hydrogen fuel-cell technology in cars. There are also plans to increase rail traffic between Washington state and B.C., a promise that has been made for years but is now happening with recent rail upgrades.
n And community leaders and Seattle and Vancouver have even put forward the idea of Seattle and Vancouver cooperating on a joint bid to hold future international events such as a Summer Olympics, a World Cup or a World's Fair.
"I think at long last the idea of Cascadia is beginning to get some real traction," said Bruce Agnew, who heads the Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based think-tank that counts the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation as one of its benefactors. "It was the people in Ottawa, who said it was just a western separatist thing, part of that old Ecotopia thing. But Cascadia is an idea that has staying power. In terms of trade, regional transportation, tourism, climate change and alternative energy, there are common interests in this region that make Cascadia a real thing."
mcernetig@png.canwest.com
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ECONOMIC REGION
In economic terms Cascadia would be the world's eighth-richest nation, with a GDP of $848 billion US
PNWER Region (GDP/Pop.)
State/Prov. GDP* Population Alberta 180,300 3,413,464 B.C. 139,377 4,327,431 Yukon 1,255 31,151 Alaska 39,314 670,053 Idaho 47,189 1,466,465 Montana 29,885 944,632 Oregon 144,278 3,700,758 Wash. 267,308 6,395,798 Total 848,906 20,949,752
If PNWER were a separate country, it would rank ninth in total GDP, just ahead of Canada.
Country GDP*
1. US 11,927,094 2. Japan 4,505,912 3. Germany 2,781,900 4. China 2,228,862 5. U.K. 2,192,553 6. France 2,110,185 7. Italy 1,723,044 8. Spain 1,123,691 9. PNWER 848,906 10. Canada 794,260 11. Brazil 794,098
Source: PNWER/Urban Futures
CASCADIA ODD AND ENDS:
B.C.:
Capital: Victoria
Official flower: Pacific Dogwood
Official animal: Spirit Bear
Motto: Splendor without diminishmnent
Notweorthy Company: Electronic Arts, Jim Pattison Group
Home-grown celebrities: Bryan Adams, Sarah McLachlan, Steve Nash, Pamela Anderson
ALBERTA:
Edmonton
Wild Rose
Big horn sheep
Strong and free
Petro-Canada
Michael J. Fox, k.d. Lang, Arthur Hiller, Rae Dawn Chong
YUKON:
Whitehorse
Fireweed
Raven
No motto
Minto Copper Mines
Pierre Berton
Oregon:
Salem
Oregon Grape
Beaver
She Flies with her own wings
Nike
Michael Cassidy, Margaux
Hemingway
WASHINGTON:
Olympia
Coast Rhododendron
Willow Goldfinch
Alki "by and by"
Microsoft, Boeing, Starbucks
Bill Gates, Jimi Hendrix, Kurt Cobain
ALASKA:
Anchorage, Forget-me-not
Moose
North to the future
Arco Alaska, Alaska Airlines
Jewel

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/westcoastnews/story.html?id=61227128-02b5-4cdd-89e8-70b5bbc5ea89&p=1
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/westcoastnews/story.html?id=61227128-02b5-4cdd-89e8-70b5bbc5ea89&p=2
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/westcoastnews/story.html?id=61227128-02b5-4cdd-89e8-70b5bbc5ea89&p=3
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/westcoastnews/story.html?id=61227128-02b5-4cdd-89e8-70b5bbc5ea89&p=4

posted in Cascadians - 10 replies

Beavers, Firs, Salmon, and Falling Water

Alexander — Thu, 19 Apr 2007 21:36:24 GMT

Beavers, Firs, Salmon, and Falling Water
Pacific Northwest Regionalism and the Environment
by William L. Lang

The idea of the Pacific Northwest as region has long been associated with two related phenomena: geographical isolation and natural wealth. The descriptions have changed over time, for isolation and natural wealth have been strikingly affected by historical events, but they nonetheless seem to have maintained an importance that until very recently has been the typology for understanding the Pacific Northwest. Isolation might be translated here into distance from the metropolis and lucrative markets or into an absence of efficient transportation for goods and people. Natural wealth might be defined as the part of the environment that human communities — both resident and alien — have coveted for material gain. It is the second of these characteristics that is the subject of this essay.
The idea of region is contested terrain.1 At once assumed to be the antithesis of national commonality and the affirmation of the peculiarities of local place, region is measured in ways as important and diverse as language dialect, architecture, cuisine, and even jokes. More important perhaps, as David Wrobel and Michael Steiner recently advised, the idea of region in the West is dynamic. It is an idea "in a constant state of flux," in which chronology is fundamental. When a region is called "region" is as important as what geography it encompasses. Referring to the Pacific Northwest as a place and region meant different things in 1850, 1880, 1930, and 1950. Its scope is different, and what the term includes in physiographic and cultural elements is different. In Donald Meinig's magisterial The Shaping of America, the Pacific Northwest in 1850 is a slivered "domain" set near the river in the lower Willamette Valley, remote from the metropolis and hardly the essence of a region as we might understand it today. Yet, in this "Oregon Country," as Bill Robbins has explained, the newly settled population stood on the crest of a "great divide" of significant ecological change that would soon begin to characterize the place as a region. There was shape to this region, if only in its potential and in the transformative power of subsequent events.2
A century later, in 1948, maps produced by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers presented a dramatically different portrait of the region. The Pacific Northwest looks like a developed metropolis of engineered connections across thousands of square miles, including transportation, communication, and alterations to the landform — the kind of depiction that seems to contradict geography. The flux of change from the Oregon Country in 1850 and the engineers' Northwest in 1950 is evident in new and increased population, new relationships between humans and the environment they inhabit, and new constructions of place through economic and political mediation. The difference a century made in the definition of region is not surprising, but what should we make of it? This is where we face the most dynamic aspect of change in the definition of region: the role of perception and the assignment of meaning.3
A profound connection between geography and history is embedded in the questions posed about the definition of region. The subjects and perspectives of historical studies change over time, but their most important focus is the study of human actions and perceptions. Without human creativity as a point of focus, philosopher of history Leonard Guelke argues, historical inquiry loses its unique characteristic. Human perception and the meanings people have ascribed to their perceptions is the heart of the historical enterprise. In R.G. Collingwood's terms, "all history is the history of thought," and that enormous tent of inquiry includes, as Guelke explains, "human use and habitation of the earth as a function of human thought." 4
Cultural geographers probe this realm, even as they caution us that the construction of place and region are highly contingent and relational. In short, what we call region and place are constructs that describe, as geographer Robert David Sack puts it, relationships among "forces, perspectives, place and space, and self." Grand Coulee Dam, for instance, would qualify as a place because of its physical action on the Columbia River, its popular image as a great engineering achievement, and the effect it has on the individual. The relationships among these elements, Sack argues, defines what Grand Coulee is as a place and provides the basis for understanding it as a part of a larger area we designate as region. Sack's calculus helps, because it reminds us that places — and thereby regions — are never defined by one characteristic or element. It also raises more contingent questions. Do forces, perspectives, place, or self dominate in defining place and region? Is it the Columbia River backed up behind Grand Coulee, the complexity of the engineered dam, or the personal experience at the spot that rules our understanding? What difference does it make if our fathers worked to build the dam or if we arrived ten years ago as farm workers from Sonora, Mexico? Cultural geographer E.V. Walter provides some help here. What he calls "topistic reality" defines a place as an amalgam of sensory perceptions, moral judgments, passions, ideas, and geographic orientations.
... a place is a location of experience. It evokes and organizes memories, images, feelings, sentiments, meanings, and the work of imagination. The feelings of a place are indeed the mental projections of individuals, but they come from collective experience and they do not happen anywhere else. They belong to the place.
These categorical guidelines on describing and explaining place and region are helpful, but we are still left with what many would call an ethereal, perhaps even a gossamer, set of parameters. John Findlay's recent critique of Pacific Northwest regional identity in Wrobel and Steiner's Many Wests collection of essays is a good place to continue this discussion, because it asks some pertinent questions. It is also an opportunity to apply some of the geographers' analytical tools to the subjects of region and environment.
Findlay calls into question the Pacific Northwest as the "place of the salmon" by labeling it a "fishy proposition." He has several reasons for questioning the validity of salmon as a regional icon, but his most telling point is his comment on the orientation of the interpreter of region. The Pacific Northwest, Findlay argues, is defined more by the people and groups from outside the region than by Northwest residents. He writes:
The Pacific Northwest has generally not been a place people come from; it has been neither a major source for internal migration within the United States nor a significant cultural hearth. Rather, it has been a destination to which other Americans have gone. This fact looms large for explaining regional identity. 6
Migrants to the Pacific Northwest, Findlay maintains, came with ideas about the region already "imprinted" through booster propaganda and other advertisements characterizing the natural and fecund qualities of the place. In short, the Northwest's regional identity — especially the iconographic representation of the region as the "place of salmon" — fails the legitimacy test, as Findlay sees it, because it is not indigenous.
A survey of hyperbolic descriptions of the Willamette Valley during the great mid-nineteenth-century rush to Oregon, of late-nineteenth-century railroad blandishments on the region's opportunities in agriculture, fishing, timber, and other natural resource economies, of the beckoning language in recruiting brochures for high-tech industries in Boise, Portland, Bellevue, Redmond, and Bend make Findlay's point. The Pacific Northwest has long been promoted — to borrow Ernest Callenbach's phrase — as "Ecotopia," regardless of the era. But applying E.V. Walter's earlier quoted explanation that the identifications of place "come from the collective experience and they do not happen anywhere else," we might ask — and not rhetorically — where else might such descriptions of a fecund, natural, and intrinsically ecological region that listed its icons as beavers, firs, salmon, and falling waters be placed? What I am suggesting is that Findlay is only half-right about the origins and maintenance of regional identity and that his dismissal of an essentialist argument — that Pacific Northwest regional identity arises from the place itself — is not borne out in the relationships between residents of the region and their environment. In short, Pacific Northwest regional identity is part of the social ecology of the place, and it grows out of and is nurtured by the environment.
The dynamic relationship between people and environment over time leaves telling imprints. No idea of place or experience of place exists beyond this relationship, just as no idea of place is any more free of its temporal setting than it is free of its geographical setting. The interaction between human activity and environment, as geographers Donald Parkes and Nigel Thrift argue, happens continuously, but our idea of place is specific and feels solid and grounded. "Place," Parkes and Thrift maintain, is "time made visible." Yet our full understanding of place is cumulative, as poet Wendell Berry and ecologist Wes Jackson have insisted. The power of place is in its deep representation of people on the land, layer upon layer of those grounded understandings that are like historical snapshots. So it is that Grand Coulee is understood from many descriptions and representations through time, from its nascent beginnings in human labor and poured concrete to its promise voiced in Woody Guthrie's songs and even to its decimation of salmon runs and inundation of Indian places. In search of the reality of region, we must recognize how we have understood the making of places in the past.7
We should begin our review of the origins of regional identity with the recognition, as anthropologist Richard Daugherty explains in his contribution to Alvin Josephy's America in 1492, that the Pacific Northwest populations at the time of the Columbian contact with the "New World" were "People of the Salmon." From the Tlingit on the Northwest Coast to the Nez Perce and interior Salish on the Columbia Plateau, Daugherty argues, the connective cultural commonalities related to a prime environmental resource: salmonid fisheries. There were enormous differences among tribal groups in the region, but Daugherty and anthropologist Eugene Hunn argue persuasively that in technology, spiritual life, social organization, and artistic expression the centrality of salmon is difficult to miss. In Hunn's studies of mid-Columbia River groups, the list of sacred foods included more flora than fauna, but salmon stood as "the single food item that is foremost in their thoughts" because of its spiritual significance, its dietary importance, and its power as a metaphor for the complexity of living in the salmon's environment. 8
If geographers are correct about the composition of place, then indigenous people in the Pacific Northwest may have lived out a truly profound sense of regional identity. They lived in what we should understand as an enchanted environment, one that had meaning embedded in interrelationships between humans and the non-human world that included cohabitation with spiritual forces and beings. Specific places lived in the names people gave them, names that functioned in practical rather than abstract ways. They signified, as Hunn puts it, "where things happened," as contrasted with European place names that function as cartographic markers. Among the Colville and Yakama, for example, the names of riverplaces carried descriptions of salmon's history on the river and the role Coyote played in bringing fish to the people. At the great Columbia River fishing location — Celilo Falls — names described places where specific families fished from rock ledges and where they later built scaffolds. In what was an enchanted landscape, the identification of the environment and place fused spirit with work, family, history, and social duties. This is a powerful component of an indigenous regional identity.9
Using Robert David Sack's interpretive guide, it is clear that regional identity in the indigenous Northwest powerfully integrated "forces, perspectives, place and space, and self." The forces emanated from fishing for salmon, the seasonal rhythms of movement, and the physical power of the river. Cultural perspectives on human purpose and the meaning of the environment were inherent in this enchanted world, where there was no separation of the sustaining flesh of salmon from its spirituality. The relationship of place and space for the "People of the Salmon" focused on the great fishing locations, such as Celilo Falls and Kettle Falls on the Columbia, on the rivers in Puget Sound, and on the Fraser, Okanagan, and Snake rivers. At some of these locations, thousands of people gathered to trade and thereby made connections between places local and distant, the essence of the linkage between place and space. Digging out the function of self in the indigenous world is difficult, because the cultures were dominantly communal and collective, but vision quests and places that exuded power mixed with sacredness to put individuals in palpable contact with place in significant ways. Tony Garcia of the Nez Perce people described the relationship clearly and powerfully: "I can't remember historically of ever hearing of a time when the Nez Perce were hungry. The Creator gave them an abundance in this land that perhaps people in other places didn't have."10 The identity of place and the meaning of region in the indigenous Northwest, I would argue, are resident in the environment in profound ways.
The emblem of the region, when the outside world first learned about the Pacific Northwest, came directly from the enchanted environment that so powerfully mediated the world for indigenous people; but regional identity for Europeans and Americans focused on a disenchanting image, one epitomized in the power of exchange. Sea otters and later beavers made the region synonymous with aggressive exploitation of the environment and exorbitant gain. Nearly all historians who have analyzed the maritime and land-based fur trade in the Pacific Northwest emphasize the relatively single-minded character of the enterprise. As a basis for regional identity, trading for furs is narrow and limited, but it incorporates larger ideas and social mechanisms. It is colonial and imported. As such, it offers a viewpoint on region that is in social conflict with indigenous culture, that diminishes tribal people and represents a distant and absentee force that seeks power and control over the landscape. Cole Harris argues, for example, that the Hudson's Bay Company melded the commodification of nature with the regulation of time, the construction of work, and the predictability of commercial production. The HBC transformed space in the Pacific Northwest by enclosing landscapes behind post stockades, marking out trade corridors, and extending their sphere of control through brigade incursions that penetrated the entire Columbia River Basin.11
During the nineteenth century and much of the twentieth, the Pacific Northwest carried a mixed identity for outsiders. For HBC and other trading enterprises, the region was a productive source of gain where resources abounded, Natives were tractable, or the land was open for settlement and use. For land-hungry and enterprising American settlers, the environment — as Bob Bunting has explained — offered an Edenic locale for capitalistic development. Although entrepreneurs capitalized on wheat farming, stock-raising, and fishing, timber became the iconographic natural resource economy, a symbol of the region's environmental wealth. The largest of the timber capitalists to invade the region — Weyerhaeuser — is perhaps the best known symbol of the possessive capture of a distinctive regional landscape. In northern Idaho and in the Washington and Oregon Cascades, Weyerhaeuser and other timber companies brought a powerful transformative perspective to the region that, in Bunting's words, "culturally and ecologically altered [the] landscape [and] recast life for everyone in the Pacific Northwest."12
The iconographic geography that the timber industry created — what Robert Michael Pyle calls "The Sack of the Woods" — is a mixture of technologies and perspectives from earlier timber regions and engagement in the Pacific Northwest. The forces inherent in timber economies created new places in northern Idaho's white pine forest, central Oregon's ponderosa cutting fields, and the Cascade and Coast ranges' great fir and spruce conifer stands. Timber towns, river log drives, millponds, and teepee burners became Pacific Northwest symbols. The work of logging and milling created a relationship between place and space through the environmental market that made big nature into big money. In Norman Clark's Everett, Keith Petersen's Potlatch, and Bill Robbins's Coos Bay, no one mistook the region's identity. It came from the forest, met the saw in the mill, and moved out by ship, rail, and truck.13
The same might be said for fishing towns on the Columbia, in Puget Sound, and along the Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia coasts. There is not one regional icon but several, among them beavers, firs, salmon, and falling water. Regional identity can be particularistic and collective, resonant with an individual or a group. What is significant in the construction of regional identity in the Pacific Northwest is its consistent environmental content, regardless of the era.
In the late twentieth century, the dominant environmental force and identity in the Pacific Northwest was falling water, especially as manifested in the massive generative power and the regional environmental alteration created by the Columbia River Basin's 250 major hydroelectric dams. Richard White has argued effectively that the "Columbia River dams made the Pacific Northwest a region." In "making the region," White means that the dams created a new economic and social reality that literally powered the Northwest into a new era. He also means that the Northwest would hew to a new vision that New Deal planners conferred on their projected alteration of the river. Specifically, it is Lewis Mumford's vision of a new Northwest built environment — one with small industrial towns unlike the smokestack cities in the Northeast — that White characterizes as both Promethean and doomed to failure. The seeds of failure are embedded in the federalization of the Columbia, which White correctly marks as the face of a new regional identity. But what kind of identity was it and why did it fail?14
The engineered Columbia became the symbol of the region's future, a new environmental image that emphasized the human alteration and even the control of nature. The power demands after World War II and the devastating floods in 1948 prompted the Corps of Engineers to speed up their aggressive dam-building program, which transformed the Columbia–Snake system into a gigantic manipulated riverine environment. Clarence Dill, the U.S. senator from Washington who had promoted the building of Grand Coulee, called the Columbia system "the future Eldorado of the Pacific Northwest." By 1975, the river had become rationalized, its seasonal fluctuations flattened out to provide maximum hydroelectric benefits, and its reservoirs amenable to slackwater transportation to Lewiston, Idaho, making that inland city a potentially significant port. 15 It was a brave new world that promised benefits to everyone in the region and parity with other regions in the nation, but with an ironic twist. At last, the historic isolation of the Pacific Northwest would be a blessing, because it would have low-cost electricity and a massive delivery system provided by the Bonneville Power Administration that was second to none in the world. It was an environment wondrously turned to the work of human progress, a region literally plugged into the river. In "Roll on Columbia," Woody Guthrie wrote:
Now river you can ramble where the sun sets in the sea, But while you're rambling river you can do some work for me.16
Guthrie's songs prosaically rendered the New Deal's quasi-utopian, new Pacific Northwest identity. His and other hopeful expressions of a new world in the region rested on the combination of three of Robert David Sack's calculations of place — forces, place and space, and perspective. Impounded and falling water in run-of-the-river dams and storage dams made environmental energy a dominant image of force. The Columbia's generative power created connections of place and space between region and nation that resulted in immense economic and social consequences. An industrialized Pacific Northwest became a demographically different place, transforming, as Carl Abbott has explained, Seattle and Portland from "regional cities" to "national cities." The Pacific Northwest became nationally known as an "ecotopia" and increasingly as a location of industrial and technological innovation founded on access to low-cost electricity and water.17
In many ways, by 1980 the Pacific Northwest as a region had arrived on the national stage as a recognized place. Its image was environmental, even as it boasted its transmogrification of a great river. The seeds of failure in that revolutionary remaking of the Columbia became more and more difficult to ignore. More significant than the spotted owl controversy in Northwest forests, the decline of anadromous fish on the Columbia–Snake system and throughout the Pacific Northwest created a new image of the region, one that had dystopian shades and the suggestion of failure. The older images and regional identity associated with salmon crowding up the Columbia seemed to be in a fateful clinch with the brave new world identity of the electrified, technological "organic machine," as Richard White calls the river. Salmon were again in the spotlight and iconic. And that brings us back to the Northwest as the "place of the salmon." Although the region has changed dramatically since maritime traders and Lewis and Clark first described the Columbia River for the larger world, the centrality of salmon continues to get our attention in ways we cannot ignore.
Salmon have always been in the Pacific Northwest as a resource and as an object of cultural reference and reverence. There are no other contenders as an icon of the Pacific Northwest. There are none with salmon's longevity. There are none that exist as both symbol and living reality. Salmon's power resides in its interactive relationship with people in the Pacific Northwest. The "First Salmon" ceremony among river Indians is an example. Each year the first fish caught in the spring is treated with special care, cooked and eaten in ceremony, and its bones deposited in the earth. From the ritual killing of this first fish and the collection of its blood to its mid-river burial, the ceremony communicates the people's respect for salmon and counts as insurance that a strong run would ensue and repeat itself in future years. The ceremony, as Nez Perce elder Horace Axtell explains, is a powerful connector of people to environment, an anointment of place:
In our family we had a feast of the first salmon, and the people would tell fishing stories or other stories. My Grandmother would bury the bones in the ground after the feast, which we were taught to do with a lot of things. It was a way of giving things back to Mother Earth.18
Among non-Natives, salmon attracted great attention, but for mostly economic reasons. Still, the interaction was important and powerful, because it reflected efforts to conserve and even preserve salmon in the rivers, which documents the importance salmon had on the general population. State legislation in Oregon and Washington and ballot initiatives during the first four decades of this century, for example, forced restrictions on fishing operations on the Columbia River. The restrictions applied mostly to fixed gear, such as fishwheels and traps, but they also set seasonal and territorial limits to fishing. Like other attempts to block overfishing, the regulations on the Columbia failed, even as these efforts underscore the importance salmon had to the general public.19
The effort to keep salmon plentiful in the region's rivers has a long history. Early on — even before the certainty of diminishing runs was apparent — salmon canners promulgated hatcheries to artificially rescue a dwindling population. By the onset of federal dam-building, hatcheries had been in business more than fifty years and had become an acceptable means of maintaining salmon, even as engineers constructed salmon-killing dams.20 Since the listing of specific Snake River runs as endangered under the Endangered Species Act, saving salmon has become the region's most dominating political issue. Millions of dollars have been expended to dodge an unthinkable fate — rivers without salmon in the Northwest. Political polling data document public support for the effort, making clear that these fish have a hold on people. In many ways, the fate of salmon is a living metaphor for a contended regionalism, as it is an example of how history, place, and the layers of meaning we have attached to this animal reflects our broader understanding of where we live. What happens to them matters, and their fate seems to be tied to humans in the region. Along with beavers, falling water, and firs, salmon represent the Pacific Northwest. In this place and in essentialist ways, Salmon R Us.
Notes
1. On this point, see particularly Patricia Limerick, "Region and Reason," in All Over the Map: Rethinking American Regions, ed. Edward L. Ayers et al. (Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996), 83–104; and Susan Rhodes Neel, "A Place of Extremes: Nature, History, and the American West," in Clyde A. Milner II, ed., A New Significance: Re-Envisioning the History of the American West (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996), 105–11. 2. David M. Wrobel and Michael C. Steiner, eds., Many Wests: Place, Culture and Regional Identity (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1997), 17–18; Donald Meinig, The Shaping of America, vol. 2, Continental America, 1800–1867 (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1993), 424; William G. Robbins, Landscapes of Promise: The Oregon Story, 1800–1840 (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1997), 76–7. Robbins uses Fernand Braudel's definitions of geographical space as economic place to interpret what happened in Oregon. This paper relies on cultural geographical definitions of space and place, definitions that factor in perspective and relationships between social and material forces in landscapes to define place. 3. J.A. Krug, The Columbia River: A Comprehensive Departmental Report on the Development of the Water Resources of the Columbia River Basin for Review Prior to Submission to the Congress (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, February 1947), 16–18. 4. Leonard Guelke, "The Relations between Geography and History Reconsidered," History and Theory 36:2 (May 1997): 227–9. 5. Robert David Sack, Homo Geographicus (Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997), 27, 156–60; E.V. Walter, Placeways (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1988), 21. 6. John Findlay, "A Fishy Proposition: Regional Identity in the Pacific Northwest," in Wrobel and Steiner, eds., Many Wests, 45. 7. Donald Parkes and Nigel Thrift, Times, Spaces, and Places: A Chronogeographic Perspective (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1980), 28; Wendell Berry, Home Economics: Fourteen Essays (San Francisco: North Point Press, 1987); Wes Jackson, Becoming Native to This Place (Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1994). 8. Richard D. Daugherty, "People of the Salmon," in Alvin Josephy, ed., America in 1492: The World of the Indian Peoples before the Arrival of Columbus (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1992), 49–83; Eugene S. Hunn, Nich'I Wána "The Big River": Mid-Columbia Indians and Their Land (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1990), 209. 9. Hunn, Nich'I Wána, 93–4. 10. Tony Garcia, quoted in Dan Landeen and Allen Pinkham, Salmon and His People: Fish and Fishing in Nez Perce Culture (Lewiston, Idaho: Confluence Press, 1999), 93. 11. R. Cole Harris, The Resettlement of British Columbia: Essays on Colonialism and Geographic Change (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1997), 31–67. 12. Robert Bunting, The Pacific Raincoast: Environment and Culture in an American Eden, 1778–1900 (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1997), 158. 13. Robert Michael Pyle, Wintergreen: Rambles in a Ravaged Land (New York: Scribners, 1986), 141–71; Norman H. Clark; Mill Town: A Social History of Everett, Washington, from Its Earliest Beginnings of the Shores of Puget Sounds to the Tragic and Infamous Event Known as the Everett Massacre (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1970); Keith C. Petersen, Company Town: Potlach, Idaho, and the Potlach Lumber Company (Pullman: Washington State University Press, 1987); William G. Robbins, Hard Times in Paradise: Coos Bay, Oregon, 1850–1986 (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1988). 14. Richard White, The Organic Machine: The Remaking of the Columbia River (New York: Hill & Wang, 1995), 64. 15. Clarence Dill, Where Water Falls (Spokane: C.W. Hill, 1970), 246–58. 16. Woody Guthrie, "Roll On Columbia," Woody Guthrie Publications, Inc. (1941). 17. Carl Abbott, The Metropolitan Frontier: Cities in the Modern American West (Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1993), 53–75. 18. Hunn, Nich'I Wana, 152–4; Horace Axtell quoted in Landeen and Pinkham, Salmon and His People, 93. 19. For listing and discussion of the fishing restriction legislation and initiatives, see Joseph Cone and Sandy Ridlington, eds., The Northwest Salmon Crisis: A Documentary History (Corvallis: Oregon State University Press, 1996), 125–8. 20. On salmon hatcheries, see Joseph E.Taylor III, Making Salmon: An Environmental History of the Northwest Fisheries Crisis (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1999).

http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/ohq/104.2/lang.html

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Continentalism of a Different Stripe

Alexander — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 22:46:15 GMT

Continentalism of a Different Stripe

Are Canadian provinces and the blue states in the U.S. quietly forging a radical new North American Union ? This American says, “Yes.”

by Jeremy Rifkin
Illustrations by R.O. Jones
Published in the March 2005 issue

There is an old saying in real estate—location, location, location. No sooner had the 2004 presidential election been decided than maps began appearing all over the Internet, recasting the North American landscape into two distinct political and cultural regions, with Canada and the Northeast, upper Midwest, and West coast states all coloured in blue, and the rest of the continental United States coloured in red. Although the intent was sardonic, what if the jest did indeed have political legs and there was a very real possibility of redrawing the political map of the continent?

In fact, it is already happening, behind the scenes, in myriad subtle ways, and the long-term implications for the future of North America are profound and far-reaching. Welcome to the incipient rise of the first regional transnational space—a grouping of Canadian provinces and American states whose commercial and political interests and shared vision make them increasingly more compatible with each other than the blue states are with their own neighbours in the American heartland. What is beginning to emerge is a North American Union, combining Canada and the so-called blue states of the US that, in time, may become more semi-autonomous and detached from the rest of America, at least de facto, if not formally.

Of course, trade liberalization advocates (on both sides of the border) have long maintained that Canada, the US, and Mexico ought to expand and deepen the North American Free Trade Agreement (nafta), further integrating their respective economies while maintaining their national sovereignties. However, many Canadians deeply oppose strengthening nafta, arguing that Canada is already being absorbed into the larger US economy and is losing its political sovereignty in the process. These Canadians also worry that “nafta+” will mean having to go along with the dominant American ideology, with its emphasis on an older American Dream, the central tenets of which are at odds with Canada’s deeply held cultural and social values. They fear that the new “continentalism” is merely coded language for erasing the forty-ninth parallel, having a customs union, a common currency, and a fully integrated economy protected by continental security agreements, including President Bush’s missile defence initiative. In short, they fear that it is a front for a twenty-first-century high-tech American colonialism designed to grab hold of Canada’s rich resources and remake its citizenry in the American image.

Critics of nafta, and of international trade-liberalization treaties in general, argue that such mega-initiatives often overlook particulars, and cite the ongoing softwood lumber and “mad cow” disputes as examples of the clumsy and often unjust consequences of such agreements. Opponents of the “one container fits all” approach to continentalism also worry that Canada is becoming so dependent on exports to the US (currently 86 percent of Canadian exports flow south) that the country may eventually be forced to accept whatever commercial and political terms the US chooses to impose. This is why Canada’s nafta critics insist on trade, investment, and fiscal policies that encourage the growth of a robust internal market and overseas trade, on reforms to safeguard Canadian industries from US protectionism, and on measures to redress the current trade imbalance between Canada and the US.

There is, however, another option. According to former Canadian Minister of External Affairs Lloyd Axworthy, the 1990s saw the emergence of a spider’s web of regional cross-border networks. In the US, owing to both its tradition of states’ rights and a Supreme Court looking askance at “commandeering” (i.e., the use of state legislatures for the implementation of federal initiatives), states are mostly free to determine economic agreements. And during the 1990s, significant steps were taken by border states to increase ties with Canadian provinces—a development that found a receptive audience in the north. In 1999, then-Ontario Premier Mike Harris, in a speech to American governors, said, “We really see you as very strong allies, more so than many parts of Canada, something far more significant than perhaps my national government understands.” Indeed, regional associations from coast to coast (e.g., the Conference of New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers; Ontario and Quebec and the Council of Great Lakes Governors; the Pacific NorthWest Economic Region) have all signed mutually beneficial memoranda of understanding covering issues such as trade, border security, and the environment, all with an eye to harmonization.

The aftermath of 9/11 placed a temporary chill on this activity. With Canada being wrongfully accused of having porous borders and being a safe haven for terrorists, and with Washington asserting its authority over all aspects of domestic life, state administrations felt hamstrung and more deferential to the central government. At the same time, power in Canada was devolving from the centre to the provinces, a trend, based on statements by provincial premiers following Canada’s new health care accord, that appears now to be accelerating. In a November speech to his provincial Liberal party, Quebec Premier Jean Charest stated flatly, “If Alberta can get rich selling oil, why not Quebec with its hydroelectricity?”

While Canadian nationalists may bristle at such an assertion of provincial rights—to say nothing of Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams’ insistence on maintaining full equalization payments on top of 100 percent of the revenues from offshore oil—Charest’s statement clearly resonates through the halls of US state administrations, especially in those states hungry for energy security. The irony of the current situation, however, is that as Prime Minister Martin awaits the next salvo from this or that provincial premier, in his second term President Bush is consolidating power in Washington. US citizens can look forward to a national sales tax, an ultra-conservative judiciary and, in Alberto Gonzales and Condoleezza Rice, an approach to justice and national security that places Washington’s interests at the top of the heap. Despite the diplomatic niceties uttered by Bush during his Canadian visit last December, he is unmistakably a man on a mission, and foreign countries, as well as blue-state governors, are expected to fall in line.

Within hours of President Bush’s re-election, Canadian immigration offices were flooded with inquiries from Americans seeking information on Canadian citizenship requirements. On November 3, 2004, Immigration Canada’s website registered 116,000 hits from the US, up from a daily average of roughly 20,000. While traffic on the Web site returned to normal by mid- to late November, a series of December 2004 seminars in Seattle, San Francisco, and Los Angeles conducted by Vancouver immigration lawyers Rudolf Kischer and Joshua Sohn on how to move to Canada, attracted hundreds. Reports from these meetings suggest that the election produced a new kind of refugee in search of “cultural asylum,” people hoping to escape the clutches of a heartland way of life that makes them feel like aliens in their own land.

Indeed, the US election results provided a stark picture of two Americas: one whose views about human nature, morality, and political beliefs are locked into an older frontier past; another whose perspective is more cosmopolitan and tied to a global consciousness. The latter group is concentrated almost exclusively in the clusters of Northeastern, Great Lakes, and Pacific states that border on, or are near, Canada.

For the most part, the anti-Bush voters share a greater cultural camaraderie with their Canadian neighbours than with heartland America. Canada’s Supreme Court ruling allowing for gay-marriage legislation came shortly after the US election, and one of the subgroups attending the seminars were gay Americans whose partners happened to be foreigners. As it currently stands—and with voters in eleven states favouring a constitutional ban on same-sex unions, there is no reason to anticipate any change—such foreigners cannot claim “family ties” in order to gain permanent U.S. residency status. Intriguingly, only two blue states (Michigan and Oregon) passed the anti-gay-marriage initiative. Polls also suggest general blue-state support for the other hot-button social issue, the legalization of marijuana for medical purposes, an area in which Canada is again taking a progressive position.

George Bush was re-elected in part because he promised a safer America. But blue-state skeptics see US unilateralism and aggressive military adventures, including pre-emptive strikes, as creating a situation that will only provoke further attacks on Americans. American liberals prefer multilateral initiatives and international covenants—the Kyoto Protocol, the International Criminal Court, and the United Nations rules on what is considered acceptable military intervention—i.e., positions such as those adopted by the Canadian government.

Recall that just after the presidential election, political pundits were quick to jump on values issues ranging from human-embryo research to gay marriage as the reason why President Bush won. What’s clear, however, is that, on a deeper level Bush supporters saw the president as the keeper of the American Dream, which has long been regarded as the social glue that has united the country. The American Dream, with its emphasis on individual opportunity, the pursuit of self-interest and personal success in an unfettered marketplace, faith in God and love of country, and belief in a strong military presence in the world, is what brought droves of Americans to the polls to re-elect the president. But many of the voters who cast their ballots for Senator John Kerry have lost the faith. First, there are the millions of Americans who, despite hard work and sacrifice, have failed to advance in a society that increasingly favours the interests of its wealthiest families. The US currently ranks a dismal twenty-fourth among industrial nations in income inequality. (Only Mexico and Russia rank lower.) Then there are the many other Americans who are upwardly mobile but find that US society’s overemphasis on individual self-interest and material success is far too limited to fulfill their deeper needs and aspirations.

Although they have not abandoned the American penchant for individualism, many supporters of Senator Kerry realize that even the most self-reliant American is vulnerable to foes such as a sars epidemic, a computer virus, a terrorist attack, a stock-market scandal, or global warming. These Americans seek a broader global vision more compatible with an increasingly interconnected and interdependent world. While much of the American heartland is blind to events north of the border, a growing number of disenfranchised Americans in the blue states are looking north and cocking their ears to the fact that “liberal” is not a dirty word in Canada.

Not since the Vietnam War, when, between 1970 and 1975, roughly 120,000 Americans fled north, has there been such sustained interest in the Canadian option. Currently, fewer than 6,000 US citizens take up residency in Canada each year, but with America on a permanent war footing, the spectre of a draft being raised, and President Bush set to nominate more conservative Supreme Court judges, many are predicting a spike in US emigration north. One result from such an influx into Canada will be the growth of associational ties between our two countries.

an opposite dream
While for the majority of Americans Canada still remains an unacknowledged alternative, the US is witnessing the emergence of a model across the Atlantic that is proving the “American way” is not the only way. In Europe, twenty-five nations, representing 455 million people, have joined together to create a “United States of Europe.” The European Union’s gdp now rivals that of the US, making it the world’s other great superpower. The EU is already the world’s leading exporter and largest internal trading market, and the euro is now stronger than the dollar. Moreover, much of Europe enjoys a longer lifespan and greater literacy rate, and has less poverty and crime, less blight and sprawl, longer vacations, and shorter commutes to work than Americans experience. In terms of what makes a people great and what constitutes a better way of life, Europe is now surpassing America.

Equally important is the European Dream. While the American version emphasizes unrestrained economic growth, personal wealth, and the pursuit of individual self-interest, the European Dream focuses more on sustainable development, quality of life, and the nurturing of community. We Americans live (and die) by the work ethic and the dictates of efficiency. Europeans place more attention on balancing work and leisure. America has always seen itself as a great melting pot. Europeans prefer to preserve their rich multicultural diversity. Americans place a premium on property rights and civil rights. Europeans favour social rights and universal human rights. Americans put their faith in God and country. Europeans put their faith in social welfare and civil society. Americans believe in maintaining an unrivalled military presence in the world. Europeans, by contrast, emphasize co-operation and consensus over go-it-alone approaches to foreign policy. The European Dream is the first attempt at creating a global consciousness for a shrinking world.

All of this does not suggest that Europe has suddenly become a utopia. Its problems are complex and its weaknesses are glaringly transparent. And, of course, Europeans’ high-mindedness is often riddled with hypocrisy. The point, however, is not whether Europeans are living up to the dream they have for themselves. We have never fully lived up to the American Dream. Rather, what’s crucial is that Europe is articulating a bold new vision for the future of humanity that differs in many of its most fundamental aspects from America’s.

During my recent travels in Canada, I was struck by how Canadian values resemble those of the new Europe. Indeed, the European Dream could just as easily be called the Canadian Dream. The more global dream that many Canadians and Americans in the blue states share with Europeans is likely going to propel Canada and the blue states closer together in the decades to come, transforming the region into a new transnational configuration—a North American Union—with ever closer ties to the European Union. The process is already well advanced, although woefully unacknowledged in both public-policy circles and the media.

regional autonomy: follow the money
The commercial ties between the blue states and Canada, already strong, are increasing with each passing day. Six of the ten states leading in exports to Canada are blue states, while eight out of the ten states leading in imports of Canadian goods and services are blue states. These statistics become even more significant when we consider that Canada is the US’s major trading partner and accounts for one-fifth of all US exports and imports. In 2003, the US sold $203 billion (Cdn.) worth of goods and services to Canada and received $326 billion worth of goods and services from Canada. The blue states make up much of the US commercial relationship with Canada.

Some of the commercial relationships between Canada and the blue states have become nearly seamless. For example, although threatened by the rise of the Canadian dollar and a resentful US-based lobby, Vancouver and Toronto are still known as “Hollywood North,” with a large percentage of the US industry reliant on Canadian shooting, editing, and processing talent. The centre of the North American automobile industry now runs from Detroit to Oshawa, Ontario. Most of the electricity exported by Canada is used in the northeastern US, the upper midwest, and the Pacific coast states. And although Americans are certainly worried about the prospects of oil supplies being cut off from the Persian Gulf, few realize that Canada is America’s third-largest supplier of crude oil. In 2003, Canada shipped $53.5 billion in energy exports and more petroleum products than Saudi Arabia to the US. Canada is also America’s main supplier of natural gas, most of it going to blue-state economies.

The close commercial relationship between blue states and Canada has been accompanied by ever closer political ties. In fact, the political integration of northeastern, upper midwest, and Pacific coast states with Canada has, in many ways, begun to eclipse the blue states’ traditional political links with some of America’s heartland red states.

The Conference of New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers (neg/ecp), founded in 1973 and made up of six blue states and five Canadian provinces, has been steadily moving toward a regional transnational approach. The governors and premiers meet annually to “discuss issues of common interest and concern and enact policy resolutions that call on actions by the state and provincial governments, as well as by the two national governments.” Between these summits, the neg/ecp convenes meetings of state and provincial officials to implement policies, organize workshops, and prepare studies and reports on issues of regional impact. The conference’s many accomplishments include “the expansion of economic ties among the states and provinces; the fostering of energy exchanges; the forceful advocacy of environmental issues and sustainable development; and the coordination of numerous policies and programs in such areas as transportation, forest management, tourism, small-scale agriculture, and fisheries.” Current neg/ecp initiatives include tightening cross-border security and creating an information technology corridor that would improve broadband connectivity, link regional and educational networks, and bolster the IT skills of the region’s workforce in order to establish a world-class IT commercial zone.

In 1998, New England governors and Canadian premiers passed a resolution creating the International Northeast Biotechnology Corridor (inbc), a non-profit corporation with the goal of turning the region into the largest biotechnology centre in the world. Judging by the level of activity (e.g., international trade missions advancing its biotechnology interests, collaboration between university researchers and student exchanges between Canadian and US institutions, the growth of the industry, and an impressive array of conferences scheduled for 2005), the inbc is clearly realizing its mandate. Embedded in its “vision statement” is “the creation of a regional identity,” something that the neg/ecp will also promote as they work towards establishing the IT commercial zone and the entire region as a knowledge-based economy.

Recently, another cross-border political group, the Council of Great Lakes Governors, representing eight states, plus Ontario and Quebec, has proposed rules to regulate water use in the Great Lakes which, critics argue, could open the door to massive diversion schemes. While the group insists that its proposal will protect and improve this “precious natural resource” for the region’s 45 million people, others believe that, in toto, it represents a “water for sale” agreement. Meetings are scheduled over the next few months in what might be a test case of cross-border governance.

A similar transnational political region to the neg/ecp exists in the Pacific Northwest and includes five US states and two Canadian provinces. Established in 1991, the Pacific North-West Economic Region’s (pnwer) mission is “to increase the economic well-being and quality of life for all citizens of the region.” The pnwer website boasts an annual “gross regional product” of nearly $700 billion (US), and supposes, somewhat provocatively, that “if it were a nation,” it would rank tenth amongst the world’s leading economies.

At least as active as its eastern counterparts, the pnwer group is attempting to harmonize approaches in the fields of agriculture, environmental technology, forest production, government procurement, recycling, telecommunications, tourism, trade and finance, and transportation. pnwer subcommittees are looking at a regional energy strategy, methods for states and provinces to reduce soaring health-care costs, best practices for sustainable development, border-security issues, foreign investment, and sharing information to upgrade workforce skills. The group lobbied hard for an end to the Alberta beef ban and all member states supported Vancouver’s Olympic bid.

Fast on the heels of a similar arrangement between Ontario and New York State, in 2002 Michigan and Ontario signed a memorandum of understanding that calls for close co-operation in the crucial areas of trade, tourism, transportation, border issues, and the environment. The Ontario/Michigan Tourism Action Group has been set up to “explore new tourism products and marketing opportunities for the Ontario/ Michigan area.”

All three of these transnational political groupings represent a new chapter in North American governance, with both Canada and the blue states bringing powerful assets to the partnership. Canada’s vast energy reserves (including hydro, natural gas, oil from the Alberta tar sands, and, potentially, Newfoundland’s offshore reserves, as well as wind power across the Prairies) provide the kind of energy security that is essential to make transnational political regions semi-autonomous.

A wealth of natural resources give provincial governments considerable leverage, but the bargaining chips don’t end there. Canada also sports a highly educated workforce and relatively low production costs. For example, American employers save on health-care costs by locating production facilities in Canada or outsourcing to Canadian firms because workers in Canada are covered by national health-care insurance.
The blue states, in turn, have some of the best universities and research facilities on the planet. With world-class business schools like Wharton, Harvard, Kellogg, and Stanford, and research universities like mit, Carnegie Mellon, and the California Institute of Technology, the blue states’ vast intellectual resources, combined with Canada’s university centres of excellence and groups like the Toronto-based Canadian Institute for Advanced Research, give the budding partnerships a leg up on other regions of the world in cutting-edge commercial development. Silicon Valley, Route 128 in Boston, and the Washington-Baltimore corridor—i.e., the most advanced high-tech industrial clusters anywhere—are all located in blue states eager to establish cross-border zones of commercial and intellectual activity.

If such a transnational regional political entity were to mature, it would likely seek closer commercial and political ties with the European Union, whose values and vision it shares. The European Union would provide an emerging North American Union with an alternative economic arena that has commercial clout approaching that of the U.S., thus giving the region the leverage it would need to establish at least a partial breakaway from the iron grip of the American market. The EU and Canada have already laid the foundation for such a union in the 1996 Joint Political Declaration on EU-Canada Relations. The declaration was designed to create a relationship between the EU and Canada in economic and trade relations, foreign security issues, and other transnational issues.

The EU’s success is, in no small measure, attributable to the distributive nature of power exercised in Europe. Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger is said to have remarked, “If I pick up the phone and call Europe, who answers the line?” The EU represents a new network form of governance, a non-hierarchical governing model made up of myriad interests including nation states, regions, civil society organizations, and transnational corporations, in which no single player is powerful enough to completely dominate the game. It’s pure “process politics,” a continuous dialogue among all of the interests in which compromise and consensus between all of the parties is integral to success.

The North American transborder governing experiments share much in common with the EU model. But what makes these new political arrangements so attractive is that their respective citizens tend to have a shared world view and a common dream about the kind of future they would like to have for themselves. Like many Canadians, blue-state citizens worry about being absorbed into an agenda increasingly at odds with their own values, beliefs, and hopes for the future. And, I should add, they are becoming increasingly angry about their taxes being redistributed to support what they perceive to be a flawed and faded American Dream.

The American people are deeply and irreconcilably polarized—like partners in a marriage who have drifted apart over the years and now find they have little in common. Meanwhile, people of the blue states and Canada are beginning to pursue the making of a new romance, born of shared values and mutual interests. Is it possible that a new North American Union might be in the offing in the not-so-distant future.

Jeremy Rifkin is the author of The European Dream: How Europe's Vision of the Future is Quietly Eclipsing the American Dream (Penguin Canada, 2004).

http://www.walrusmagazine.com/articles/2005.03-politics-continentalism-of-a-different-stripe/

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Chee Savish and Dancing Hawk Native Lifeways

Alexander — Mon, 16 Apr 2007 13:08:55 GMT

Chee Savish and Dancing Hawk Native Lifeways

The following are two groups that I think are very very valubale:

http://www.cheesiwa sh.net/

This is so so SKOOKUM (cool), I just stumbled across this site and its
exactly what I would like Cascadians to return to be. Take a look at
their recipes and basic ideas.

Chee Siwash
Portland Aboriginal Lifeways
http://www.cheesiwa sh.net/

The word "chee" is Chinook Wawa for "new" and "siwash" is Chinook Wawa
for "Indiginous Person" (meaning "American Indian") derrived from the
French word for "savage". Ok Chinook Jargon is not up to modern
Cascadian English political correctness standards, but I believe if we
can re-incorporate Chinook Wawa into our daily language we will end up
with a new synthesis of Chee Chinook or a very very distinct Cascadian
English.

__________

http://www.dancingh awk.com/

This is another site that seems to be connected with "Chee Siwash"

Dancing Hawk Native Lifeways
http://www.dancingh awk.com/

about the school

Dancing Hawk School of Simple Living is a school dedicated to
helping people learn to capture happiness, and live in tune with the
world around them. We are in the process of becoming a 501c(3) non-
profit institution.

Our primary focus is running native living programs and classes. We
have several different types of classes, from workshops a few hours
long to longer-term primitive projects.

Dancing Hawk also likes to bring the joy and wisdom found in the
wilderness to the greater community. We do outreach talks and events
both formal and festive.

Last, but not least, be sure to see the photos in our gallery.
Nothing tells the story of experience like our photos do.

Your wild guides, past and present: Kiliii Yu & Troy Julian
kiliii@dancinghawk. com

Kiliii has taught primitive skills and indigenous cultural teachings
at the Rabbitstick and Wintercount Rendezvous, the Falling Leaves
Rendezvous and Oberlin University. He has also spent time among the
Haida of the Northwest Coast, Aborigines of Central Australia, and
several indigenous peoples of Ecuador's highlands and rainforest. He
considers his mentors: Lynx Vilden, Jon Young, David Jagamarra, and
Margaret Matthewson.

Troy has been a longtime field instructor at the Outback (formerly
Walkabout) program in Salt Lake City as well as Outward Bound in
North Carolina. He has also taught at the Rabbitstick Rendezvous.

posted in Cascadians - 1 reply

Appeals Court Slams Bush "Sleight of Hand" in Pacific NW Salmon Recovery

Alexander — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 17:34:21 GMT

Appeals Court Slams Bush "Sleight of Hand" in Pacific NW Salmon Recovery

On Monday, April 9, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals smacked down the Bush administration's "sleight of hand" in claiming to aid in the recovery of Pacific Northwest salmon. Among other actions slammed by the court was the administration's statistical counting of dead fish as living. The court rebuked Bush policy under which "a listed species could gradually be destroyed, so long as each step on the path to destruction is sufficiently modest".

The ruling leaves open the possibility that four hydroelectric dams on the lower Snake River may be breached to prevent salmon from becoming extinct.

http://www.bluefish.org/fourdams.htm

Here are some mainstream media articles on the ruling:

Court Finds Feds No Help to Fish
link to www.oregonlive.com

Appeals Court Rejects Bush Salmon Plan for Columbia Dams.
link to www.oregonlive.com

I have posted a PDF of the Court's opinion. You can open it by clicking on the logo at the top of the article.

http://stream.paranode.com/imc/portland/media/2007/04/357427.pdf

found at http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2007/04/357426.shtml

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

State might need new nickname

Alexander — Sat, 07 Apr 2007 00:20:04 GMT

State might need new nickname
Commercial development trend accelerates

SUSAN GORDON; The News Tribune
Published: April 1st, 2007 01:00 AM

Hundreds of thousands of acres of Western Washington forests are being converted to home sites, hobby farms and commercial developments.
The sell-off of commercial timberland is changing the regional landscape in ways residents and government officials never anticipated. The result is not only suburban sprawl but also what some decry as a permanent scar on the face of the Evergreen State.

“We’re dismantling the forest, tearing it up, breaking it down into little parcels. It isn’t the forest it used to be,” said Brian Boyle, a former state lands commissioner and now part-time leader of a University of Washington College of Forest Resources think tank.

Since the 1930s, Washington state has lost 2 million acres of timberland to other uses. But the trend has accelerated, particularly in the 1990s and along the Interstate 5 corridor, land-use experts said.

Over the next several years, 300,000 acres of Western Washington timberland is likely to be converted to other uses, according to a recent UW estimate. That’s an area nearly a third the size of Pierce County.

Put another way, it’s like building 200 developments the size of Sunrise, a 1,500-acre subdivision between Puyallup and Orting.

OUR VANISHING FORESTS

Boyle and the forestry professors who endorse that prediction say the total could go even higher.

A more conservative forecast by one of the nation’s leading land-use economists suggests about 200,000 acres of Western Washington forest will be converted. Ralph Alig, who works in Corvallis, Ore., for the U.S. Forest Service’s Pacific Northwest Research Station, said his estimate could miss the mark, but the trend is consistent: more forests lost.

Experts give these reasons:

• The booming population has driven up land prices and provided an incentive to sell.

• Timberland owners have found other places – including other continents – where it’s cheaper and faster to grow trees.

• Limited land-use controls allowed it to happen.

In Pierce County, development has occurred on ground that once belonged to Weyerhaeuser, Pope Resources, Plum Creek and other commercial timberland owners.

Examples include the proposed 4,086-acre Cascadia development in East Pierce County and the 450-acre Falling Water development near Bonney Lake, both on former Weyerhaeuser land; and the Gig Harbor North commercial development and portions of the Sunrise development, which once belonged to Pope Resources.

Besides those high-profile developments, timber companies are selling lands on the South Sound’s distant outskirts, what some call the forest interface. People who hanker for their own piece of ground are buying 5-, 10, and 20-acre lots, some eligible for the same low tax rate as commercial tree farms.

Bonney Lake resident Marian Betzer said forests shouldn’t be allowed to disappear.

“Are we going to balance growth with preservation or grade it all over and fill it all in to create buildable lands?” Betzer said. “We don’t live in Nebraska. We live in Puget Sound.”

Weyerhaeuser and other timber companies say they operate within their rights to manage the land as they see fit.

The sell-offs have attracted the attention of environmental activists who have traditionally fought the industry over clearcut logging. Now, some are working closely with timber companies to try to conserve remaining private forests, many of them adjacent to public preserves.

And while Washington’s forest industry remains lucrative, fewer logs are being sold. Some worry that continued forest conversion and a shift to foreign log sources will take a toll on local mills.

CONCERNS PROMPTED STATE STUDY
Washington Public Lands Commissioner Doug Sutherland says the rationale is simple.

“When the value of the land exceeds the value of the timber, it’s hard to convince stockholders to manage for timber purposes. So what they try to do is to develop it or sell it to somebody that will,” he said of timber companies.

Sutherland’s agency, the Department of Natural Resources, manages about 2.1 million acres of public timberland statewide. Its mission is to earn money for public purposes. Unlike companies that buy or manage timber out of state, the DNR can’t relocate.

“The timberland you have, you have. You can’t grow trees in parking lots, darn it,” Sutherland said.

Around the state, people are buying 20-acre chunks as hideaways. Social scientists call them “amenity migrants.” It’s even happening in distant Okanogan County, Sutherland said. “They’re selling off 20s, they’re selling off 40s, they’re selling off 80s,” he said of landowners.

The resource losses are one of the reasons the Legislature in 2005 gave the UW $1 million to look into the future of the state’s commercial forests. Besides conversion to other uses, UW experts have studied economic trends and other statewide forestry issues. The final report is due in June, but the UW unveiled the land forecast at a fall forum.

The UW predicts about 300,000 acres will be converted to other uses by about 2010 or 2012. The forecast is based on past trends. Between 1978 and 2001, an estimated 648,000 acres of industrial timberland in Western Washington were converted to other uses, according to the U.S. Forest Service.

UW research analyst Ara Erickson has looked into past conversions. Most of the Western Washington forest that has recently disappeared was once industrial timberland, sold to other private buyers, she and others found.

Alig, the Oregon economist, came up with his 200,000-acre conversion forecast based on a different data set. Instead of Forest Service numbers, he looked at the Natural Resources Conservation Service’s National Resources Inventory. It is based on 800,000 sample points located throughout the Lower 48 states. Although focused on farmland, it also tracks forests, developed lands, highways and infrastructure.

Alig and Erickson said it’s hard to pinpoint precisely how much land has or will be converted, in part because existing land-use inventories are inexact and provide little detail about changes in urbanizing areas.

GLOBAL SHIFT, INVESTOR PRESSURES

Washington’s forest products industry remains lucrative, according to UW forest economists. Even so, some operators worry about potential mill closures.

“If they can’t buy logs, they won’t stay in business,” said John Davis, regional manager of Hancock Timber Resource Group.

Hancock, a subsidiary of Toronto-based Manulife Financial Corp., is the largest timberland manager in Pierce County, with 187,000 acres. In all, Hancock manages 458,346 acres in Western Washington and 541,590 acres statewide.

“Our investment in those properties is predicated on having a market to sell into,” Davis said.

Weyerhaeuser, founded in Tacoma, no longer owns commercial timberland in King, Pierce or Snohomish counties. Instead, it manages timberland in Southwest Washington, the southeastern United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Uruguay.

Port Blakely, a private company founded in 1864 on Bainbridge Island, also has moved out of the central Puget Sound area to Lewis, Grays Harbor, Mason and Pacific counties, and Oregon and New Zealand.

Timber business competition is now global.

Although Washington has among the most productive lowland softwood forests in the world, companies have gone elsewhere, said Jerry Franklin, a UW forestry professor.

“It’s not profitable to grow wood. It’s not the way to make your money – certainly not in North America,” he said.

He has visited the subtropical and temperate Southern Hemisphere plantations where Weyerhaeuser and others grow eucalyptus and pine. The trees grow faster than in Western Washington. Labor is cheaper. Government regulation isn’t as stringent.

Weyerhaeuser is one of the only remaining publicly traded timberland owners still managing timberland to produce raw material for its own processing plants.

Instead, real estate investment trusts or timber management organizations oversee hundreds of thousands of acres. The businesses are set up to benefit owners who might or might not care whether profit comes from timber or land sales.

Hancock, for example, is a timber management organization. It is now responsible for most of Weyerhaeuser’s former Snoqualmie and White River tree farms, plus the Kapowsin Tree Farm near Eatonville, once owned by timber company Champion.

“We’re guided by financial returns in making land-use decisions,” said Davis, the regional Hancock manager.

LAND-USE LAWS DIDN’T STOP IT

The state’s 1990 Growth Management Act required Puget Sound-area counties to conserve “forest lands of long-term commercial significance.”

But the population boom had begun and farsighted timberland managers didn’t want to be boxed in.

In 1990, three big timber companies – Weyerhaeuser, Champion and Plum Creek – along with the DNR identified 500 square miles in the foothills of Mount Rainier that they wanted Pierce County to protect. Four years later, when the county adopted its growth plan, it limited forest conservation to that area.

Left out were timberlands in developing areas, such as Puyallup’s South Hill and the outskirts of Gig Harbor. Also omitted were thousands of acres north of the Nisqually River between Eatonville and Fort Lewis.

Sutherland, who was Pierce County executive when the county adopted its growth plan, said timber companies wanted the option to grow trees or develop their properties.

Even land-use planning advocates failed to recognize the omissions permitted subdivisions on the forests’ edge.

“It used to be that nobody would think of living way out beyond Orting in Pierce County. Now it’s not unusual at all,” said Tim Trohimovich, planning director of Futurewise, which opposes suburban sprawl. “The value of forestland for development has increased dramatically over the last 10 years and zoning regulations haven’t been updated to address that.”

The Growth Management Act also allows counties to set the size of forest lots. To help small-family tree farmers, commercial forest zoning typically allows a single residence per parcel. In Pierce County, it’s one house for every 80 acres.

Under those rules, timber companies have divided large sections of land into 80-acre lots, conservation advocates said. Off Interstate 90 in Kittitas County, six such lots are going for between $300,000 and $400,000, said Charlie Raines, who works for the Cascade Land Conservancy.

LOSS OF RECREATION, HABITAT

When subdivisions take the place of forests, the loss is more than aesthetic.

Trees take excess nutrients out of the soil, provide shade, reduce erosion, filter water and help regulate climate. They take in carbon dioxide, convert it to carbon and release oxygen.

Washington’s commercial timberlands have traditionally been playgrounds for outdoors enthusiasts, typically at least open to foot traffic and widely used by hunters and horseback riders, among others.

“We’re losing all these places,” said Louise Caywood, a lifelong Spanaway resident, now 55, who has ridden horses since childhood and belongs to Backcountry Horsemen of Washington. As a girl, she would take off for the day and ride from home across parts of Fort Lewis and out to what was once Weyerhaeuser land near the Nisqually River.

In the late 1980s, Caywood could see that things were starting to change. People left trash on what was still Weyerhaeuser property. Gates went up. Survey markers appeared.

“I didn’t cry, but almost” when the land was subdivided, Caywood recalled. As a former construction business owner, she understands the logic of the bottom line, although she doesn’t like what happened to the woods, she said.

“They got quite a bit of money for this land they sold,” she said. “That was a lot more profitable than waiting for the timber to grow.”

Skip Simmons lives in a subdivision built in the area where Caywood once rode horseback. Sunset Acres, a gated community of 5-acre lots and paved roads, was cut from a swath of former Weyerhaeuser timberland.

Some Sunset Acres residents have cleared land for horses. They let kids roam in the woods. Simmons and his wife Doris moved here four years ago to be closer to their children and grandchildren.

But it’s also the kind of place where peoples’ dreams intrude on wildlife habitat and risk the dangers of wildfire.

“This is a firefighter’s nightmare because there’s so much fuel,” Simmons said, pointing to the dense growth behind his house.

On weekends, he and his wife often labor outside. They lop off low limbs and clear out brush to create a fire break that will protect the couple’s manufactured home. Simmons, a former career firefighter and wildland fire expert, said he has urged neighbors to safeguard themselves.

Rocky Spencer spends a lot of time around places like Sunset Acres. The state Department of Fish and Wildlife biologist helps people cope with bears, cougars and coyotes.

People don’t realize that human development in wildlife habitat doesn’t simply displace animals, Spencer said.

“It doesn’t work that way,” he said. “Most often, those animals die.”

Also, the altered landscape might make people vulnerable. For example, landscaping with ornamentals attracts deer. They, in turn, are prey for predators such as cougars.

IS IT SPRAWL OR LIFESTYLE?

In Pierce County, Weyerhaeuser recently sold the last of 5,000 acres the company marketed as 20-acre plots, called forest reserves. They’re eligible for the same low tax assessment as commercial forestland.

Pierce County Executive John Ladenburg said that undermines efforts to contain suburban sprawl.

“No one actually envisioned people would pay for a big piece of forest to go live in the woods,” said Ladenburg, who said he was dismayed when he looked at aerial photos of the former Weyerhaeuser lands. “There’s no rhyme or reason to why they’re putting housing in these areas.”

Weyerhaeuser Co. officials disagree, saying they were selling a lifestyle.

“It’s still timberland. It’s not sprawl,” said spokesman Frank Mendizabal.

Priced between $150,000 and $450,000, the nearly 200 lots are connected by gravel roads in a remote area of south Pierce County between Eatonville and McKenna. Although Weyerhaeuser historically managed the land for timber, Pierce County zoning allows 10-acre residential lots.

Weyerhaeuser packaged each parcel with a tree-farm plan that makes it easy for owners of the lots to qualify for the same low property tax assessment – $200 an acre – claimed by commercial timber producers.

The per-acre rate is about $8,500 less than otherwise would be assessed against undeveloped land in the same area, county officials said.

Some well-heeled buyers have built mansion-scale homes on the lots. A company official described others as investors, willing to carry the debt.

In the words of Weyerhaeuser spokesman Mendizabal, the forest reserve “idea was one that had legs.” The last Pierce County lot sold March 19.

Ladenburg, who doubts the new owners ever will log, said the forest reserves will be a drain on public monies, especially if wildland fires break out near homes.

“The list is endless the kinds of urban services people will demand living out in the woods,” Ladenburg said. “They will absolutely demand police, fire protection, ambulance services. It’s something that is going to be very expensive for the rest of us to accommodate.”

‘FEVERISH’ PRESERVATION EFFORTS

No one can turn back the clock on past developments, Ladenburg said, “but we can save the rest of it.”

There are a number of efforts under way:

• In 2004, Ladenburg, Sutherland and others signed onto a Cascade Land Conservancy campaign to use conservation easements and land acquisitions to discourage housing development in 600,000 acres of timberland in the Cascade Mountain foothills of Pierce, King and Snohomish counties.

• Also in 2004, the state spent $6.7 million to buy 1,230 acres of Weyerhaeuser land for the future Mashel State Park near Eatonville.

• In 2005, King County bought the development rights to 90,000 acres of former Weyerhaeuser land, now managed for Hancock timberland investors.

• In 2006, Pierce County officials issued Conservation Futures bonds and bought 462 acres of Plum Creek timberland along the Carbon River for $1.4 million.

• Also in 2006, using a $1.4 million federal wildlife habitat preservation grant, the Nisqually Land Trust bought 404 acres of Pope Resources land near Mount Rainier National Park.

“There is a feverish effort by the land trusts to work with some of these companies to acquire some of the developable lands when they’re environmentally significant,” said Boyle, the former state lands commissioner and now part-time leader of the Northwest Environmental Forum, a UW think tank.

Gov. Chris Gregoire also weighed in this year. The Legislature is considering her “high-risk forest conservation program,” which would spend $4 million to buy or lease rights to develop family-owned forestland. That could conserve up to 5,000 acres, said Michelle Conner, Cascade Land Conservancy lobbyist and vice president.

Even so, conservation advocates say timberland conversion is happening so quickly and at such a scale that there’s not enough local, federal or state money to protect forests at risk.

And, in the face of population growth, they don’t trust land-use regulations to provide permanent protection.

“We’ve got to find ways to keep forestry profitable for these landowners,” said Raines, the Cascade Land Conservancy strategy director. A longtime Sierra Club activist, Raines now views commercial timberland as a regional resource.

Alig, the land-use economist, said incentive programs such as conservation easements or the purchase of development rights might work in some places.

But where development pressure is strong, people would be hard-pressed to pay timberland owners enough to conserve forests, he said.

“The subsidy would have to be so large it probably wouldn’t make social sense,” Alig said.

The Cascade Land Conservancy is now trying to use market forces to save timberland. On the state level, the group backs legislation, such as House Bill 1636, to create a regional marketplace transferring development rights in Pierce, King, Snohomish and Kitsap counties. The mechanism would promote intensified development in urban areas in exchange for rural land conservation. The bill passed the House and is in the Senate.

The conservancy also has proposed a public development authority to buy and manage timberlands, using municipal bond financing. But Sutherland, whose agency manages timberlands, has doubts.

“It’s an interesting idea, but they’ve got to be careful if they want to make it pencil, he said. Returns are unlikely to cover borrowing costs, he said.

Besides the timber, there’s no market for the benefits forests provide. That’s unfortunate, said Boyle and others.

“The public is paying for the loss,” he said. Good water quality, for example, is one uncompensated forest value.

Some people have proposed that forests earn their keep as climate regulators. Trees absorb potentially harmful carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas. While there’s talk of creating an international carbon market to trade credits in avoided deforestation, it’s still just a concept. In 10 years, perhaps that will change, Raines said.

In the meantime, people who seek to keep forests are looking for ways to shore up the business side.

“This is really the best place to grow trees. We need to figure out ways to protect that productivity,” Sutherland said.

found at http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/story/6442278p-5739856c.html

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Food Not Lawns events in Portland this weekend

Alexander — Fri, 06 Apr 2007 21:47:42 GMT

Food Not Lawns events in Portland this weekend
This is something that should be happening everywhere within the
bioregion. If it was up to me most of those herbicide-pesticide
treated and chemically enduced lawns as well as parking lots would
be ploughed under for organic (ideally native) plants either for
food, clothing, biofuels or nitrogen restoration or just to suck up
carbon dioxide.

Food Not Lawns events in Portland this weekend
author: HC Flores
Food Not Lawns!
Turn your Yard into a Garden and your Neighborhood into a Community
with author/activist Heather C. Flores
Saturday, April 7 thru Monday, April 9
The goal of these events is to start an autonomous Portland chapter
of Food not Lawns, for the purpose of starting and supporting more
front-yard gardens and other ecological projects around the city.

SATURDAY
10 am,
Portland Farmer's Market
Opening Celebration
Getting Free Plants: Guerrilla Plant Propagation and other ways to
revegetate your neighborhood.

7 pm, St. John's Books
Food Not Lawns; Grassroots Gardening Toward a Proactive Ecology
In this colorful, dynamic, and interactive slideshow Heather will
demonstrate a wide variety of projects and share over a decade of
hands-on experience in ecological gardening, permaculture design,
and community organizing. Free/donations accepted.

SUNDAY
Noon, Proper Eats
Community Seed Swap
Heather will be there with her mobile seed library.

2 pm, St. John's Books
Urban Paradise Gardening:
How to Turn Your Neighborhood Into a Food Forest.
Learn the ways and means of turning any urban yard into a food
producing paradise, including:
Urban land access, microclimates, and
site assessment
Maximizing small spaces
Soil and compost building
Water wise gardening
Plant stacking
Seed saving
Finding free resources
Distributing the surplus
Intensive workshop, $25.

MONDAY
7pm PSU, Food for Thought Cafe
Building Sustainable Community through Food Not Lawns
Slides, Discussion, and Interactive Games.
While the Saturday slideshow will focus on project examples and
general visions of an edible urban paradise, this presentation will
emphasize the logistics of organizing events, cultivating functional
working groups, and creating and directing the flow of surplus
plants, seeds, and other resources. We will focus on whole system
design and project planning, but will not cover gardening technique
in any detail. If you need a gardening workshop, please attend the
one at St. John's Books on Sunday.

homepage: http://www.foodnotl awns.com

found at http://portland. indymedia. org/en/2007/ 04/357100. shtml

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Immigration

Mish — Mon, 26 Mar 2007 17:39:13 GMT

In the wake of recent developments in US migratory policy (the wall alon g the US-Mexico border being the most vile), I've started wondering about the role of the growing population of (mainly) mexican and central american immigrants in Cascadia. As growing demographic, consistently threatened by both the US government and social system, it is quite likely an important group to try and integrate into the movement for a free and indepent Cascadia. I don't know if there has been much thought on this topic, but it seems like an interesting thing to explore. As a Cascadian chicana, I have a very personal interest in the topic. I'd love to hear any opinions or thoughts on this and hope to get a good discussion rolling... Peace!

posted in Cascadians - 13 replies

Wild Earth 2007: The Wild and the Human

Alexander — Thu, 05 Apr 2007 00:18:10 GMT

Wild Earth 2007: The Wild and the Human
author: Zoe Blunt
Activists share skills at eco-action "boot camp," June 1 - 7
What started as a one-week campout on Vancouver Island in 1999 has grown to include more than 800 people and 75 workshops on tree-sitting techniques, blockade tactics, indigenous rights and campaigns, herbal first aid, green anarchy, and more. Operating on a shoestring budget - in some years, no budget at all - a few volunteers put on an event that participants call "amazing."

Old growth forest, Vancouver Island, BC
http://media.portland.indymedia.org/images/2007/04/357016.jpg

In the growing twilight, two dozen plump deer are grazing at the far edge of a meadow. Suddenly they look up, alert. Two humans are sneaking along the edge of the forest pretending to stalk the deer, playing a game of predator and prey.

Welcome to the Wild Earth Rendezvous. This gathering, set for the first week of June, is similar to activist training camps hosted by the Ruckus Society and Rainforest Action Network, but with a do-it-yourself flavour. The gathering is close to endangered old-growth forests but far from the nearest paved road, in a low-impact wilderness camp. (Folks bring their own tents.) The Food Not Bombs crew prepares vegetarian meals with ingredients brought in from dumpsters in nearby cities. All kinds of people swap stories at night around the campfire: native and non-native environmentalists, anarchists, liberals, grizzled old campaigners and eager young volunteers. Everyone gets the chance to plot the next forest defense action, which is typically just a short drive up the road.

Wild Earth 2006 was held at Newcastle Island Provincial Park, which is managed by the Snuneymuxw First Nation. It's not a wilderness site, although most of the island is old-growth forest. Wild Earthlings met with the staff ahead of time and reserved a large group campsite and the barn-like pavilion for the rendezvous and the BC Environmental Network's annual members meeting. The Snuneymuxw folks were happy to meet with us and pleased we'd chosen the park for the action training.

The government, however, was not pleased at all. The local Ministry of the Environment office got a tip from an anti-environmental informer about the upcoming rendezvous. The bureaucrat in charge laid into us with a series of harsh emails and stern phone calls. He threatened to evict the group from the park if we climbed a single tree or picked one edible plant. A tremendous amount of negotiation and diplomacy was required to convince him the gathering was non-commercial and wouldn't harm the environment. (It was hard keeping a straight face during some of these discussions, since the same Ministry presides over clearcuts, mining, and all kinds of commercial mayhem.)

The climbing trainers from Oregon faced a tougher adversary: Canadian border guards. It seems the customs service has a problem with activists coming to visit, and the Oregonians' attempts to negotiate their way in failed. The crew was forced to turn back. Fortunately, Canadian climbers came to the rescue and filled in for the missing Americans. The tree climbing training went ahead as scheduled.

This summer's gathering is June 1st through 7th, somewhere in BC. Twenty grassroots environmentalists have already signed on, and leading the pack is Earth First! co-founder Mike Roselle. Mike agreed to give a special presentation about direct action - but he also faces the hurdle of the Canadian border. Mike's been arrested more times than he can count, and the immigration lawyer he hired says getting into Canada may be impossible. The Wild Earthlings haven't given up on him though, and the legal manueverings continue.

Chief Qwatsinas (Ed Moody), a hereditary leader of the Nuxalk Nation in Bella Coola, will deliver a special report on the Great Bear Rainforest and indigenous rights. Qwatsinas and the House of Smayusta, Nuxalk traditionalists, have led blockades and actions to press for rainforest protection since 1997, but they do not support last year's Great Bear Rainforest agreement. "It's talk and log," says Qwatsinas.

Those of us living in BC are blessed with magnificence: old-growth cedars dipping curved limbs into the ocean, mammoth Douglas firs big as cathedrals, grey whales basking in the warm shallows. We also get to watch it all go down. Clearcuts, mudslides, floods, drought, wildfires, rising seas - it's all here. The government and major enviro groups say "the war in the woods" is over, thanks to compromise deals in the Great Bear Rainforest and Clayoquot Sound. But their press releases don't mention that chainsaws are rapidly leveling the forests that were left out of the protection zones. Indigenous land rights are disregarded as the province plays legal games with land transfers, development, and mining at the expense of wildlife and fish habitat.

The Wild Earthlings know that grassroots direct action levels the playing field. People working together can stop business as usual on stolen land. Forest defense consists of dozens of different tactics and strategies in tandem, and we're here to make sure folks can use every tool in the box.

For one week a year, Wild Earth creates an activist community based on unity and solidarity. This is an opportunity to start relationships that can last a lifetime. Take a moment now to sign up, and join us this June. Send an email to earth_first (at) resist (dot) ca.

Workshops for Wild Earth 2007:
Non-violence Training
Tree-climbing and Tree-sitting
Grassy Narrows First Nation vs. Weyerhaeuser
Legal Rights for Arrestees
Secwepemc Nation vs. Sun Peaks
Mt. Elphinstone campaign
Rising Tide Climate Action
Banner-making
Anarchist Action
First Nations and Environment (music performance)
Safe Harvest
Chant to be Heard
Natural Selection Forestry
Activist Security 101

Volunteer presenters needed for:
Indigenous Land and Rights
Intro to Environmental Racism
Guerrilla Media
Assistance with Non-violence Training
Action Support and Solidarity
Green Scare Update
Wild Womyn's Circle
Other topics (suggestions welcome)

Volunteers also needed for:
Kitchen
Childcare
Car-pooling
Set-up
Take-down
Promotion

Suggested donation for the week-long camp: $20 to $50 (sliding scale) Low-income and volunteers free. Travel scholarships may be available for presenters. Suggestions, ideas and questions are welcome - email earth_first (at) resist (dot) ca. More info, history and photos are on the Wild Earth blog: http://wildearth2007.blogspot.com.

homepage: http://wildearth2007.blogspot.com

from http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2007/04/357015.shtml

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

SPRING TRAINING IS HERE!

Alexander — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 20:06:08 GMT

SPRING TRAINING IS HERE!
author: Michael e-mail: mb@resist.ca
What is a 'SPRING TRAINING?"

SPRING TRAINING is a month of workshops to educate and empower the broad community to act for social justice.

It's spring! A time of year when life renews itself, hopes take wing, and movements get moving.

With that in mind members of the activist community gathered to bring together workshops and trainings from a diverse array of activist groups. The idea being that there should be a time each year that local social justice groups have set aside to work together. Spring being the beginning of the year seemed a sound choice.

Why April? April is the month before Mayday. Mayday is the international workers holiday, a day of action, a day renowned for solidarity between workers, and across struggles. Many people see it as the start of the activist "season."

When we think about the challenges our community faces common themes appear. Themes like fighting between groups, competition between focuses, difficulties engaging new people, and a host of interpersonal issues arise. These themes are so common they're almost anecdotal. This needs to change.

Shortly after WCW's October 22nd protest last year a room full of activists gathered to discuss what we can do to move past our frustrations and address these challenges proactively.

We crossed a gulf of ideas and agreed that if we are going to build a more cohesive activist community, education and empowerment is where we could start. Simply put, it's what we could agree upon.

What is spring training?

"SPRING TRAINING" is a month of workshops to educate and empower the broad community to act for social justice.

LOOK TO THE INDY CALANDAR FOR UP TO THE DATE INFO ON THESE EXCITING WORKSHOPS!

WORKSHOP CALENDAR

(Workshops with asterisks before them are still being confirmed.)

TUESDAY APRIL 3RD, INDIGENOUS HISTORY, AND SOLIDARITY 7PM TO 9 Student Activist Office (SAO) Gray Campus Room 034

THURSDAY APRIL 5TH, STREET VIDEOGRAPHY @ PSU, Smith Memorial Union room 296 4:30-7:30 pm

FRIDAY, APRIL 6TH, BASIC VIDEO EDITING @ Reed College Student Activist Office (SAO) Gray Campus Room 034 4:30 to 7:30 PM

**Date TBA 7pm @ Laughing horse. Emily Webb Learn the basic communication and mediation skills to facilitate dynamic meetings.

THURSDAY APRIL 12TH, BASIC UNDERCOVER REASERCH
7 PM @ Laughing Horse Books off 10th and Burnside.
An animal rights activist, a labor organizer, and an anti-Klan/OCA organizer discuss their experiences and basic tactics for undercover research.

FRIDAY APRIL 13TH, CONSENT AND PREVENTING SEXUAL ASSAULT 7PM @ LAUGHING HORSE BOOKS off 10th and Burnside

SATURDAY DAY APRIL 14TH, HUMAN NEEDS AND ORGANIZING, 7PM @ Reed College SAO Gray Campus Room 034

SUNDAY APRIL 15TH, PORTLAND STREET MEDICS TRAINING at
People's community room 3029 SE 21st on April 15th and the room will be available from 2:45 till 4:45pm

TUESDAY APRIL 17TH, 7PM OPENING HEARTS AND MINDS @ REED COLLEGE, Student Activist Office (SAO) Gray Campus Room 034 Workshop trainer: Bonnie Tinker

FRIDAY APRIL 20TH, INTERGENERATIONAL ORGANIZING PANEL DISCUSSION @ REED Psych hall room 105
Kent Ford, Bonnie Tinker, Sasha and Karen Koulter, Loyd Marbett, Dot Fishersmith and more...

SATURDAY APRIL 21ST, SELF DEFENSE FOR ACTIVISTS 11AM till 2PM @ PSU, Peter W Scott Center RM 203

SUNDAY APRIL 22ND, SELF DEFENSE FOR IMIGRANTS & ALLIES 1PM till 4PM @ PSU Peter W Scott Center RM 203

MONDAY APRIL 23RD, THE SAFE AND DEFENSIVE USE OF FIREARMS @ PSU, Smith Memorial Union 6-9:30 pm room 328

TUESDAY APRIL 24TH, STREET TACTICS @ REED COLLEGE IN THE STUDENT UNION BY PARADOX CAFÉ ON CAMPUS

WEDNESDAY APRIL 25TH, STENCIL AND BANNER MAKING AT REED COLLEGE Student Activist Office (SAO) Gray Campus Room 034

**SATURDAY APRIL 28TH, DIRECT ACTION WORKSHOP WITH CRAIG ROSEBRAUGH

SUNDAY APRIL 29TH, PANEL DISCUSSION ON CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE PSU, Smith Memorial Union, room 238 @ 2-5 pm

MONDAY APRIL 30TH, FOREST DEFENSE WORKSHOP, MEET AT PIONEER SQUARE DOWNTOWN AT 11AM. THE PEOPLES BUS LEAVES AT 11:30 AM TO THE FOREST DEFENSE TRAINING, RETURNS AROUND 5PM

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2007/04/356903.shtml

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

environmental determinism

fossilosopher — Mon, 02 Apr 2007 18:52:16 GMT

i think of environmental determinism like that of jerrod diamond as a philosophical foundation for bioregionalism. it says that the reason the middle east became the "cradle of civilisation" is not that the people there are smarter than hottentots or salish people, but that the middle east just had lots of species of plants and animals that were all ready to domesticate, with all their physical and social traits set up to mesh with the human. geography also set middle eastern people up to develop larger and larger scale social organisations.

i would love to carry this idea to the extreme position that it was the land that got some nations talking about one god.

one reason i am fascinated by salish culture is that the archaeological record seems to show that it developed with great ecological integrity, uninterrupted by migrations or invasions from the time of first ice age settlements, whereas the cultural history of eurasia shows all kinds of folk movements and upheavals that created an eclectic compostite tradition. the salish peoples developed art and ritual as a response to one place and its resonances and natural forms.

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

provinces of cascadian bioregion

fossilosopher — Mon, 26 Mar 2007 21:56:42 GMT

what do you think constitute the provinces of cascadia? for all the time of the partition of cascadia into bostonili'i and kinchochili'i halves at 49N, many people have thought of these divisions as highly important. Some people make maps of cascadia out of three or four modern jurisdictions and include pieces of other bioregions, for example NE BC is part of the prairies and SE oregon is in the Great Basin, isnt it? do you think these are parts of cascadia? would you use river drainage basins as subdivisions? would you include whatcom county washington with the fraser river? ethnographically and linguistically the georgia strait and puget sound basins are a unit. the cultures are central coast salish and the languages are also classified with that name. salish territory extends to southern washington but maybe not all the way to the columbia. i think the lower columbia and willamette form a natural unit. i feel that the siskiyou mountains are a natural southern boundary for cascadia.

posted in Cascadians - 16 replies

"WTR Workshop" The Nonviolent Action Community of Cascadia

Alexander — Sat, 31 Mar 2007 20:31:02 GMT

Just came across this event or training in Seattle:

"WTR Workshop" The Nonviolent Action Community of Cascadia
author: Cascadians Rise Up! e-mail: nacc@drizzle.com
Nonviolent Action Community of Cascadia. 4554 12. th. Ave. NE, Seattle, WA 98105; (206) 547-0952; nacc@drizzle.com; http://seanacc.org
The Nonviolent Action Community of Cascadia

4554-12th Ave NE, Seattle, WA 98105. An affiliate of the War Resisters League and National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee
Tel: (206) 547-0952, Fax: (206) 547-2631. E-mail: nacc (at) drizzle (dot) com

Upcoming Events
WTR Workshop
Don't want war? Don't pay for it! NACC will be holding a War Tax Resistance Workshop on Saturday, March 31st, from 10:00 am until 1:00 pm, at the University Friends Meeting House in the U-District.

We'll discuss the philosophy and history of WTR, as well as different methods, and possible and likely consequences. There'll be plenty of time for questions and answers. The workshop is geared toward those who are new to WTR and/or considering resisting for the first time, but all comers are welcome!

The Friends Meeting is located at 4001 9th Ave. NE. For directions and a map http://www.scn.org/spiritual/friends/meetinghouse.html

Hope to see you there!

For those who would like to help spread the word (thanks!), a basic half-page flyer is available. http://seanacc.org/wtrworkshop.pdf

http://seanacc.org/

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

hi,new here

Wendy — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 10:10:15 GMT

Hi all new to this tribe, just wished to say hello and hope to meet you all in the near future.
A.C the reason this tribe hit me was, a few months ago had a dream of 5 thunder beings, (on my blog)
Then the other night felt to get off the comp and turn on T.V . What a goose bump thing. lol
The show was on the Cascadian fault, but talking at the time i turned it on was a Native woman of the Hoo people telling of thier Ancient story of how when they see the Thunder Birds/beings they know there is going to be an earthquake and tidal wave!
Now i do not believe in coincedence, (cant even spell it:)
Is this tribe cascadians to do with that area??
goose bumps lol
Blessings xxxxxxxxxxxxx

posted in Cascadians - 3 replies

BIOREGIONAL ANIMISM!!!

Sat, 31 Mar 2007 20:11:48 GMT

the land gives us every thing to live... it gives us our very body and it gives us our spirituality...
http://tribes.tribe.net/bioregionalanimism?_click_path=Application%5Btribe%5D.Tribe%5Bb769fdf9-7c51-4158-97fd-ff3e5ae8cc47%5D
join our tribe...

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

MayDay

Mish — Sat, 31 Mar 2007 19:54:39 GMT

This could be a good opportunity to get cascadian memes out and start reaching out to other groups, check it out!

http://www.mayday2007.org/

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Joules Graves and Peter Wilde

Mish — Fri, 30 Mar 2007 23:06:14 GMT

Does anyone have mp3s of Joules Graves or Peter Wilde they would be kind of enough to e-mail me? I'm specifically looking for the songs on the PickAxe soundtrack, but anything is much appreciated. I've looked around like crazy without finding anything online, and getting their CD's in Mexico is literally impossible (considering that ordering online is way out of my budget). Their music has touched me deeply and above all I want to share it and get it's message out here in MesoAmerica. Much thanks and blessings,

m

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

bumper stickers

Sun, 19 Jun 2005 19:29:44 GMT

Why all the american flag stickers and yellow ribbon stickers? This is Cascadia ... just yesterday I saw a car with a US flag sticker, two yellow ribbon stickers, and a new one to me - a camouflaged ribbon with the saying "home of the free, because of the brave"

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks" (Hamlet) ... or as more popularly quoted today ... "methinks [they] doth protesteth too much." Like the Queen in Hamlet, the neo-cons and their supporters hold all the power, and yet something is amiss. They too know that "Something is rotton in the state of Denmark [or rather here in the "good old US of A"]. Perhaps they wrap themselves in the flag and yellow ribbons so that they can believe or so that they can't see or hear the truth around them.

As a challenge to them, I placed my first bumper sticker on my car. ... a Cascadian flag and reference to The Republic of Cascadia. Maybe somebody will see it and wake up ... I won't hold my breath for it. Yes, I know a more poignant statement would be to forgo the car, but I'm not there yet.

On a lighter note, I did see a combination of bumper stickers that made me smile. A middle aged woman in her SUV with a US flag and just below it a sticker that read "I smile because I DON'T know what's going on" ... the irony of it all.

posted in Cascadians - 7 replies

Doug Flags, can you help spread the meme?

Alexander — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 13:12:44 GMT

posted in the Cascadian Bioregionalism yahoo group from Van Anderson:

Doug Flags, can you help spread the meme?
Ok, one more time folks. This time, I've got a bit of a request, or an
offer if you like. In addition to getting your own Doug Flag (in the
$40 range - email DougFlag@hotmail. com) I'm also looking for some
volunteers. Just wait, it gets better.

What I am lookin for is people who would be willing to take Dougs to
Peak Oil meetings, Freeskool activities, music festivals, whatever,
and offer them for sale. I will send you a package of a half dozen or
so, and each time you sell a Doug, just send the money back to me (or
if we can find a good charity, to them) - on the honor system. I'm
not looking for a set up a booth sort of commitment, just a hang one
up or carry one around and offer them to people sort of commitment.
The only way I can invest the windfall in this is if I have the
cooperation and commitment of several people, so I need to know
whether people are willing. I can't get these flags distributed to
people in Cascadia, because I'm not there for more than a few weeks a
year; I need your help to do it. If nobody wants to get involved, I
will just go with my original plan of getting a few extras, and send
my windfall to the White Pass Community Food Bank.

So whadya think? Discuss here, or send me an email, either at
DougFlag@hotmail. com or my personal email - just click on my profile.

Also, I still need ideas for where to send donated flags. Please, if
you know of any place(s) that should have the Doug, send me a message.

About the flags:
They are 3'x5' polyester flags, made in Pennsylvania, screen printed,
and will be ordered April 2. Delivery will probably be in May sometime.

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Rising Tide / Beehive Collective Cascadia Climate Action Tour!

Alexander — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 03:05:59 GMT

ok fellow Cascadians.. . "its time to drop your linen and start your
grinnin" (from Aliens).. if we do not sieze this oppertunity to use
a blantant tour for Cascadia by the Beehive Collective then we are
total fools. How about bring the Doug and other Cascadian memes to
the Beehive Collect directly and get them to help.

announcement:

Rising Tide / Beehive Collective Cascadia Climate Action Tour!

Many hearty greetings from Rising Tide and the Beehive Design
Collective!

We hope you'll join us for an interactive, multi-media, combined
presentation that celebrates fossil fuel resistance from around the
globe AND embarks on a visual tour of the Beehive Collective's
Graphic Trilogy about corporate globalization in the Americas
(FEATURING a behind-the-scenes look at the long-anticipated
MESOAMERICA RESISTE graphic, currently on the cusp of completion!)

Together we will expound upon the interrelated ecological and social
crises threatening the hemisphere, making links between global
economic structures, militarization, and resource and energy
consumption, while also highlighting grassroots resistance struggles
and what YOU can do to participate in active change.

The fun start March 22nd and runs till April 7th. We'll be speaking
throughout Cascadia: from Victoria, BC to Ashland, Oregon!

Check out our complete set of presentation dates here!

dates are also way down below…
D I S M A N T L I N G M O N O C U L T U R E:
TALES OF ANTS AND ECONOMICS IN THE AMERICAS

The Beehive is a wildly motivated all-volunteer, art-activist
collective that has gained international attention and participation
for its collaboratively produced graphics campaigns.

With three giant illustrated portable murals, a six foot tall fabric
storybook, and an engaging narrative, the Bees take audiences on an
interactive VISUAL tour of the connections between COLONIZATION,
MILITARIZATION, and RESOURCE EXTRACTION in the Americas. We will be
exposing the agendas of the Free Trade Area of the Americas and Plan
Colombia, and celebrating resistance to Plan Puebla Panama in
Mesoamerica.

It's a picture-lecture to be understood by anyone – not just the
experts and political analysts JOIN IN as we de-construct the
complex and overwhelming issues that are shaping our world, using
bio-regionally accurate depictions of animals and insects as
metaphors to link cultural and ecological diversity.

RISING TIDE ROADSHOW:
CONFRONTING THE ROOT CAUSE OF CLIMATE CHANGE

Rising Tide is an international grassroots network of groups and
individuals who take direct action to confront the roots causes of
climate change and promote local, community-based solutions to the
climate crisis.

Rising Tide will bring home the global struggle for climate justice,
connecting the dots between the overarching crisis of climate change
and the grassroots struggles of communities resisting the fossil
fuel industry's assault on their land and culture.

In a multi-media presentation celebrating fossil fuel resistance
from around the globe, we will highlight the diversity of creative
tactics that are taking a bottom-up approach to connecting the dots
between OIL, WAR CORPORATE POWER, COAL and the De-STABILIZATION of
the GLOBAL CLIMATE. ...with voices from the front lines of the
struggle for ecological justice in the Pacific Northwest.

Your help in spreading the word to other potential hosts is much-
appreciated. Please forward this message and download some flyers or
handbills.

THANK YOU!

contact us at pollinators@ beehivecollectiv e.org or
cascadia@risingtide northamerica. org for more information.

Thursday 3/22/2007 in Portland
Reed College @ 8pm
Kaul Auditorium, 3203 SE Woodstock Boulevard

Sunday 3/25/2007 in Portland.
The Watershed Collective @ 4pm
5040 SE Milwaukie Ave

Monday 3/26/2007 in Seattle
NOVA High School (in class presentation)

Tuesday 3/27/2007 in Seattle
Odyssey High School (in class presentation)

Wednesday 3/28/2007 in Tacoma
University of Washington (in class presentations)

Wednesday 3/28/2007 in Vancouver, BC
Langara College TBA

Thursday 3/29/2007 in Victoria
VARC TBA

Friday 3/30/2007 in Vancouver, BC
Spartacus Books TBA

Saturday 3/31/2007 in Seattle
University of Washington TBA

Monday 4/2/2007 in Tacoma
Highline High School (in class presentation)
Monday 4/2/2007 in Seattle
Seattle University @ 6pm
The Hearth in the Student Center
12th St and E. Cherry St

Tuesday 4/3/2007 in Olympia
Evergreen State College @ 6pm
Room TBA

Wednesday 4/4/2007 in Eugene
University of Oregon TBA

Thursday Afternoon 4/5/2007 in Portland
Portland Community College Sylvania @ 3pm
The Upper CC Mall, 12000 SW 49th Ave
&
Portland State University @ 7pm
Smith Student Union Room 328
1825 SW Broadway

Friday 4/6/2007 in Bend
Central Oregon Community College TBA

Saturday 4/7/2007 in Ashland
TBA

4/8/2007 or 4/9/2007 Northern California??
contact pollinators@ beehivecollectiv e.org to book the tour!

found at
http://shiftshapers .gnn.tv/blogs/ 22313/Rising_ Tide_Beehive_ Collective_Cascadia_Climate_ Action_Tour

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Native Plants and Permaculture: A gathering of plant enthusiasts

nathaniel — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 05:39:55 GMT

Native Plants & Permaculture
May 11-13, 2007 (Friday afternoon-Sunday)

Event details at www.lostvalley. org/nature2007ma y
Online registration form at www.lostvalley. org/nativeplants pc/registrationo nline
Mailable/emailable registration form at www.lostvalley. org/nativeplants pc/registration

We will be seeking common ground between the Native Plant and Permaculture communities in developing ecologically- integrated self-sustenance and native habitat preservation in the Pacific Northwest.

• Presentations about various perspectives on indigenous and exotic plants, including human uses and ecological relationships
• Facilitated panel discussions and discussion circles
• Guided plant walks
• Garden and Permaculture tours
• Resource tables and networking opportunities
• Music, games, and community-building
• Hands-on projects
• Meals made from organic, homegrown, and wildcrafted food
• Overnight lodging and camping available

Schedule overview:
Friday afternoon and evening, 3 pm on: informal tours, socializing, discussion circles, and activities.
Saturday and Sunday, 9 am-6 pm: scheduled walks, talks, discussions and activities related to the roles of native and nonnative plants in our cultivated and noncultivated landscapes.
Saturday evening, 8 pm: concert with Laura Kemp (see www.laurakemp. com) (by donation).

Topics:
• Native Plant-Animal Interactions and Relationships
• Indigenous Land Management
• Bringing Back Native Food Crops
• The Challenges of Native Habitat Conservation and Restoration
• What Is the Role of Nonnatives?
• Wildflower, Tree, and Shrub Walks
• Substituting Natives for Nonnatives in Home Landscapes
• Responsible Control of Exotics
• Economic Uses of Native Plants
• Ecologically Sustainable Foodsheds
• Invasion Biology: A Closer Look
• Preserving Diversity in Times of Environmental Change
• Evolving a Bioregional Permaculture
• and more.

Presenters:
• Ed Alverson (The Nature Conservancy)
• Rhoda Love (Native Plant Society of Oregon)
• David Theodoropoulos (author, Invasion Biology)
• Michael Pilarski (Friends of the Trees)
• Stephanie Schroeder (Walama Restoration Project)
• Toby Hemenway (author, Gaia’s Garden)
• Jude Hobbs (Agroecology Northwest)
• Rick Valley (Lost Valley Educational Center)
• Marcia Cutler (Native Plant Society of Oregon)
• Bill Burwell (Kalapuya researcher)
• Heiko Koester (Eugene Permaculture Guild)
• Sharon Blick (School Garden Project)
• Dave Bontrager (Lane County Audubon Society)
• Joshua Smith (Ecoscape Environmental Design)
• Pat French (Willamalane Parks and Recreation District)
• Nick Routledge (Seed Ambassadors Project)
• Tobias Policha (Institute of Contemporary Ethnobotany)
• and more.

This event is supported in part by Lost Valley Nature Center, Eugene Permaculture Guild, Friends of the Trees, Walama Restoration Project, Institute of Contemporary Ethnobotany, Mt. Pisgah Arboretum, Fern Hill Nursery, Living Tree Paper Company, and others. We are seeking additional groups to co-sponsor, as well as individuals willing to contribute financially to help this event happen.

Contact: Lost Valley Nature Center, attn.: Chris Roth, 81868 Lost Valley Lane, Dexter, OR, 97431, (541) 937-2567 ext. 116, nature AT (replace with @) lostvalley.org.

Why This Conference?

For many years, plant lovers have held widely varying opinions about the appropriate roles of native and nonnative plants in our ecosystems and cultivated landscapes. Native plant enthusiasts list some nonnative plants as dangerous invaders, while Permaculturalists may advocate the cultivation and spread of those same species. Some native botanists endorse the selective application of herbicides to eradicate aggressive weedy species, while Permaculturally- inclined gardeners seem more apt to embrace “weeds” and reject chemical means of control. Meanwhile, whatever our attitudes towards natives and exotics, all of our diets and many facets of our economy depend heavily on nonnative plants. Before the arrival of Europeans, however, native plants provided sustenance to indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest for thousands of years.

This weekend gathering will bring together plant enthusiasts of all stripes to learn from one another and explore common ground. We will examine current and potential ecological and economic roles of native plants, effects of exotics on ecosystems and how best to respond to those impacts, indigenous land management techniques, and more. We will use the 87-acre living laboratory of Lost Valley Educational Center, whose Nature Center features native flora restoration projects and extensive interpretive trails through largely native habitat, and whose Permaculture gardens and projects include both native and nonnative plants. We will assess how (and whether) the different outlooks and activities represented both at this gathering and on this land can form practical syntheses which will guide us into more sustainable ways of inhabiting our region. Please join us!

posted in Cascadians - 1 reply

Celilo

wayusa-warmi — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 06:01:41 GMT

I just returned from the commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the murder of Wyam aka Celilo Falls. So powerful. A day I will never forget.

The gates on The Dalles Dam were closed on the morning of March 20, 1957, and by afternoon the falls were gone. It took only six hours.
At one point, all the elders who remembered the falls stood up -- those who watched the falls drown right before their eyes, along with their cemeteries, petroglyphs, etc., 50 years ago today.

Celilo has been continuously inhabited for 11,000 years, and the Wy-Kan-Ush-Pum people (People of the Salmon) continue to survive in spite of everything.

posted in Cascadians - 5 replies

It could happen here

Alexander — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:00:23 GMT

It could happen here
In an excerpt from his new book, Salon's columnist explains why, for the first time since the resignation of Richard M. Nixon, Americans have reason to doubt the future of their democracy.

By Joe Conason

Feb. 19, 2007 | Can it happen here? Is it happening here already? That depends, as a recent president might have said, on what the meaning of "it" is.

To Sinclair Lewis, who sardonically titled his 1935 dystopian novel "It Can't Happen Here," "it" plainly meant an American version of the totalitarian dictatorships that had seized power in Germany and Italy. Married at the time to the pioneering reporter Dorothy Thompson, who had been expelled from Berlin by the Nazis a year earlier and quickly became one of America's most outspoken critics of fascism, Lewis was acutely aware of the domestic and foreign threats to American freedom. So often did he and Thompson discuss the crisis in Europe and the implications of Europe's fate for the Depression-wracked United States that, according to his biographer, Mark Schorer, Lewis referred to the entire topic somewhat contemptuously as "it."

If "it" denotes the police state American-style as imagined and satirized by Lewis, complete with concentration camps, martial law, and mass executions of strikers and other dissidents, then "it" hasn't happened here and isn't likely to happen anytime soon.

For contemporary Americans, however, "it" could signify our own more gradual and insidious turn toward authoritarian rule. That is why Lewis's darkly funny but grim fable of an authoritarian coup achieved through a democratic election still resonates today -- along with all the eerie parallels between what he imagined then and what we live with now.

For the first time since the resignation of Richard M. Nixon more than three decades ago, Americans have had reason to doubt the future of democracy and the rule of law in our own country. Today we live in a state of tension between the enjoyment of traditional freedoms, including the protections afforded to speech and person by the Bill of Rights, and the disturbing realization that those freedoms have been undermined and may be abrogated at any moment.

Such foreboding, which would have been dismissed as paranoia not so long ago, has been intensified by the unfolding crisis of political legitimacy in the capital. George W. Bush has repeatedly asserted and exercised authority that he does not possess under the Constitution he swore to uphold. He has announced that he intends to continue exercising power according to his claim of a mandate that erases the separation and balancing of power among the branches of government, frees him from any real obligation to obey laws passed by Congress, and permits him to ignore any provisions of the Bill of Rights that may prove inconvenient.

Whether his fellow Americans understand exactly what Bush is doing or not, his six years in office have created intense public anxiety. Much of that anxiety can be attributed to fear of terrorism, which Bush has exacerbated to suit his own purposes -- as well as to increasing concern that the world is threatened by global warming, pandemic diseases, economic insecurity, nuclear proliferation, and other perils with which this presidency cannot begin to cope.

As the midterm election showed, more and more Americans realize that something has gone far wrong at the highest levels of government and politics -- that Washington's one-party regime had created a daily spectacle of stunning incompetence and dishonesty. Pollsters have found large majorities of voters worrying that the country is on the wrong track. At this writing, two of every three voters give that answer, and they are not just anxious but furious. Almost half are willing to endorse the censure of the president.

Suspicion and alienation extend beyond the usual disgruntled Democrats to independents and even a significant minority of Republicans. A surprisingly large segment of the electorate is willing to contemplate the possibility of impeaching the president, unappetizing though that prospect should be to anyone who can recall the destructive impeachment of Bush's predecessor.

The reasons for popular disenchantment with the Republican regime are well known -- from the misbegotten, horrifically mismanaged war in Iraq to the heartless mishandling of the Hurricane Katrina disaster. In both instances, growing anger over the damage done to the national interest and the loss of life and treasure has been exacerbated by evidence of bad faith -- by lies, cronyism, and corruption.

Everyone knows -- although not everyone necessarily wishes to acknowledge -- that the Bush administration misled the American people about the true purposes and likely costs of invading Iraq. It invented a mortal threat to the nation in order to justify illegal aggression. It has repeatedly sought, from the beginning, to exploit the state of war for partisan advantage and presidential image management. It has wasted billions of dollars, and probably tens of billions, on Pentagon contractors with patronage connections to the Republican Party.

Everyone knows, too, that the administration dissembled about the events leading up to the destruction of New Orleans. Its negligence and obliviousness in the wake of the storm were shocking, as was its attempt to conceal its errors. It has yet to explain why a person with few discernible qualifications, other than his status as a crony and business associate of his predecessor, was directing the Federal Emergency Management Agency. By elevating ethically dubious, inexperienced, and ineffectual management the administration compromised a critical agency that had functioned brilliantly during the Clinton administration.

To date, however, we do not know the full dimensions of the scandals behind Iraq and Katrina, because the Republican leaders of the Senate and the House of Representatives abdicated the traditional congressional duties of oversight and investigation. It is due to their dereliction that neither the president nor any of his associates have seemed even mildly chastened in the wake of catastrophe. With a single party monopolizing power yet evading responsibility, there was nobody with the constitutional power to hold the White House accountable.

Bolstered by political impunity, especially in a time of war, perhaps any group of politicians would be tempted to abuse power. But this party and these politicians, unchecked by normal democratic constraints, proved to be particularly dangerous. The name for what is wrong with them -- the threat embedded within the Bush administration, the Republican congressional leadership, and the current leaders of the Republican Party -- is authoritarianism.

The most obvious symptoms can be observed in the regime's style, which features an almost casual contempt for democratic and lawful norms; an expanding appetite for executive control at the expense of constitutional balances; a reckless impulse to corrupt national institutions with partisan ideology; and an ugly tendency to smear dissent as disloyalty. The most troubling effects are matters of substance, including the suspension of traditional legal rights for certain citizens; the imposition of secrecy and the inhibition of the free flow of information; the extension of domestic spying without legal sanction or warrant; the promotion of torture and other barbaric practices, in defiance of American and international law; and the collusion of government and party with corporate interests and religious fundamentalists.

What worries many Americans even more is that the authoritarians can excuse their excesses as the necessary response to an enemy that every American knows to be real. For the past five years, the Republican leadership has argued that the attacks of September 11, 2001 -- and the continuing threat from jihadist groups such as al Qaeda -- demand permanent changes in American government, society, and foreign policy. Are those changes essential to preserve our survival -- or merely useful for unscrupulous politicians who still hope to achieve permanent domination by their own narrowly ideological party? Not only liberals and leftists, but centrists, libertarians, and conservatives, of every party and no party, have come to distrust the answers given by those in power.

The most salient dissent to be heard in recent years, and especially since Bush's reelection in 2004, has been voiced not by the liberals and moderates who never trusted the Republican leadership, but by conservatives who once did.

Former Republican congressman Bob Barr of Georgia, who served as one of the managers of the impeachment of Bill Clinton in the House of Representatives, has joined the American Civil Liberties Union he once detested. In the measures taken by the Bush administration and approved by his former colleagues, Barr sees the potential for "a totalitarian type regime." Paul Craig Roberts, a longtime contributor to the Wall Street Journal and a former Treasury official under Reagan, perceives the "main components of a police state" in the Bush administration's declaration of plenary powers to deny fundamental rights to suspected terrorists. Bruce Fein, who served as associate attorney general in the Reagan Justice Department, believes that the Bush White House is "a clear and present danger to the rule of law," and that the president "cannot be trusted to conduct the war against global terrorism with a decent respect for civil liberties and checks against executive abuses." Syndicated columnist George Will accuses the administration of pursuing a "monarchical doctrine" in its assertion of extraordinary war powers.

In the 2006 midterm election, disenchanted conservatives joined with liberals and centrists to deliver a stinging rebuke to the regime by overturning Republican domination in both houses of Congress. For the first time since 1994, Democrats control the Senate and the House of Representatives. But the Democratic majority in the upper chamber is as narrow as possible, depending on the whims of Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, a Republican-leaning Democrat elected on an independent ballot line, who has supported the White House on the occupation of Iraq, abuse of prisoners of war, domestic spying, the suspension of habeas corpus, military tribunals, far-right judicial nominations, and other critical constitutional issues. Nor is Lieberman alone among the Senate Democrats in his supine acquiescence to the abuses of the White House.

Even if the Democrats had won a stronger majority in the Senate, it would be naive to expect that a single election victory could mend the damage inflicted on America's constitutional fabric during the past six years. While the Bush administration has enjoyed an extraordinary immunity from Congressional oversight until now, the deepest implication of its actions and statements, as explored in the pages that follow, is that neither legislators nor courts can thwart the will of the unitary executive. When Congress challenges that presidential claim, as inevitably it will, then what seems almost certain to follow is not "bipartisanship" but confrontation. The election of 2006 was not an end but another beginning.

The question that we face in the era of terror alerts, religious fundamentalism, and endless warfare is whether we are still the brave nation preserved and rebuilt by the generation of Sinclair Lewis -- or whether our courage, and our luck, have finally run out. America is not yet on the verge of fascism, but democracy is again in danger. The striking resemblance between Buzz Windrip [the demagogic villain of Lewis's novel] and George W. Bush and the similarity of the political forces behind them is more than a literary curiosity. It is a warning on yellowed pages from those to whom we owe everything.

From "It Can Happen Here" by Joe Conason. Copyright (c) 2007 by the author and reprinted by permission of Thomas Dunne Books, an imprint of St. Martin's Press.

found at http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2007/02/19/conason/

IT CAN'T HAPPEN HERE
1935 by Sinclair Lewis
http://reactor-core.org/cant-happen.html

wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_Can't_Happen_Here

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Conversation Week 2007, March 25-31 (Portland, Oregon, Cascadia)

Alexander — Fri, 09 Mar 2007 23:39:16 GMT

From: "Heather Carver" <tierrabodhi@gmail.com>
Date: March 8, 2007 10:17:59 PM PST
To: earthcharterportland@lists.riseup.net
Subject: [earthcharterportland] Conversation Week

Fellow Earthlings,

I thought you might be interested to know about Conversation Week,
March 25-31. The idea is to get people together and talk about what
matters most. The suggested discussion questions sound like some of
the things we've talked about at Earth Charter meetings -- how do we
change the world? what actions can we take personally? For more
information, please read the message below.

And speaking of Earth Charter discussions, please join us this
Saturday, March 10, 1:00-2:30pm at the Belmont Library, 1038 SE 39th
Ave., Portland.

peace
Heather

* * * * *
Dear friends, activists, social change agents and dreamers,

Please join us, the Conversation Week
<http://www.conversationweek.org> team, in the exciting, innovative
work of building the capacity for the people of the world to sit down
together and talk about what matters most.
http://www.conversationweek.org/register-to-host/

Through Conversation Week 2007, March 25-31, we are rapidly developing
the know-how and networks to host simultaneous face-to-face
conversations globally, interconnected by sharing key questions
crucial to our common future and a website where key insights from
conversation can be shared and synthesized. We will be able to hear
ourselves think. Experience our shared humanity and shared concerns.
Discover new approaches to rote and tired ideas. Listen, learn and
think together. It will reveal the intelligence of the "second global
superpower".

Dialogue and sustainability experts around the world have helped us
develop the ten Conversation Week Questions at the end of this email.
We need hosts to select their favorite and invite people to consider
it with them during CW.

We need your help today. This Conversation Week experiment rests on
250 people around the planet having the courage and love to host a
conversation in their home, community or workplace during CW.

Hosts receive training, support from mentors, a method that's been
proven over five years to work for small group inquiry and materials.
This is an extraordinary opportunity for anyone who wants to learn a
new skill that will increase their intelligence and compassion in
their social change strategies.

Please sign up http://www.conversationweek.org/register-to-host/
<http://www.conversationweek.org/register-to-host/> , and send this
invitation on to your networks to help us achieve our goal of
recruiting 250 hosts around the world!

1) If you have a blog, please post this week about Conversation Week
and invite others to consider being a host.
2) Invite 3 people in your personal network to become a host for CW.
3) Post an invitation to email lists you're a member of, especially
those that would appreciate a CW invite!
4) Use the tags conversationweek and conversationcafe on your blog,
Flickr, del.icio.us, and other social networking sites if you use
them.
5) If you have other ideas about spreading the word, please do tell.

talk to you - or someone you know - soon!
Vicki for the CW team
TheTeam@ConversationWeek.org

------ THE QUESTIONS -------

What do you think is the most important question in the world now?
This was the top pick, perhaps because every reviewer found our
request to find "the most important question" so stimulating.
Questions direct our attention and focus our creativity. What do we
need to ask ourselves now? It can be a philosophical question or a
pragmatic one. It can be political or personal. You don't need to come
to consensus about the most important question. You only need to
explore the range, and see what's behind each one, what they suggest,
what they tell you about yourself, others and life, where they point.

What's the highest leverage action you or anyone could take towards a
just, peaceful, and sustainable world by 2025?
Sustainability is both a buzzword and the key word of our times. We
are at a turning point. Actions that made sense in a less populous,
polluted and technologically advanced time don't make sense anymore,
but our habits, customs, lifestyles, laws and politics don't allow us
to easily change. Common sense says we can all live well within the
earth's means, but getting there is a big challenge. How do you feel
about where we are now? What changes do you see that give you hope?
You don't have to agree, just put what has heart and meaning for each
of you on the table and follow where your interest takes you.

How are we making life better for our children - and what else can we be doing?
Our children are our future. They are our love and our hope. What
child inspires you to care for the future? What might be a better
future for them? How can we create that better future now by how we
care for our own children, others' children and the generations to
come? Following the thread of this question might inspire you to
appreciate the children in your life, to act in new ways on their
behalf, to be grateful for those who gave you the world you live in –
or something else entirely.

What do you think we can do now to make life better here?
If a better life isn't happening in your home, neighborhood or
community, it isn't happening. Actions elsewhere – in halls of power,
in other places – can inspire you to make a better life where you are,
but in the end, all concrete action is local. Whether you've just made
something wonderful happen, are in the middle of a great project, have
plans for the future or have given up on making life better, this
question prods your imagination and asks you see what could be better
right where you are – and what you might do to make it so.

What do you believe freedom is for?
We do so much in this world in the name of freedom, hoping to be free
from oppression, and to be free to have the life we want. We wage wars
in the name of freedom. We struggle against the prisons of our lives,
be they tyrannical leaders or difficult circumstances. Beyond that
wonderful feeling of release, however, what do we want to use this
freedom for? What are we truly free to do? What responsibilities do we
have in exercising this freedom? What influence do others have over
our freedoms? America has developed one understanding of freedom – are
there others? When in your life have you felt free, and what did you
use this freedom for? This question asks us to explore one of the key
values guiding our own lives – and global conflicts.

What does it mean to you to be a human?
When have you felt most human? Who inspires you with their humanity?
Is there a universal definition of being human? Is it human to be
inhumane – is our dark side part of what it means to be human? This
rich question can lead many directions – history, politics,
compassionate action, religion, cultural differences and more. Follow
it together with no need to establish a shared understanding, only to
understand yourself, others and the world better.

How can we heal the wounds of violence and war?
Histories of nations as well as histories of families suggest that
violence begets violence. Rape and war, bullying and battering are
often skirmishes in longer wars of words and weapons, sometimes going
back centuries. Through violence and war, we suffer injuries to our
pride, our confidence, our security, our bodies, our property and our
lives. How can we heal that? What do we owe one another, whether
friend or foe? When have you experienced or seen forgiving the
unforgivable? What understanding do you have of war and violence that
gives you hope – or at least direction? What can we do collectively to
heal these wounds?

What is one of the most important things you have learned in your life so far?
Each person's two minutes of wisdom will naturally lead to other life
lessons to share and new insights from what others say. Include, if
you like, what led you to that gem or how it has helped you through a
difficult time. By listening to one another's life-lesson without
anyone trying to convince or impress others, everyone can expand their
store of wisdom. Consider, too, who you would like to hear and heed
your life lesson. We often wonder why mates, bosses or leaders don't
understand what is so clear to us. What do you want to say – and to
whom?

How much is enough? For you? For others?
What is enough anyway? Is it having what you need? Want? What others
have? Everything? When have you felt full, satisfied and relaxed with
no need for more? What else do you need – materially or spiritually -
to feel happy? What are those basics we should all have enough of?
Whose responsibility is it to make sure we all have our basic needs
met? What makes people who have plenty dissatisfied with their lot in
life? What do we owe the poor? What happens to people's souls,
families, communities and the world when wealth is distributed
unfairly? How can we have a world where there is enough for everyone,
and everyone has enough? Who knows - you might discover something by
following the thread of this question that creates a breakthrough.

When do you feel most alive?
African American preacher and ethicist Howard Thurman said "Don't ask
what the world needs. Ask what makes you come alive, and go do it.
Because what the world needs is people who have come alive." Do you
agree with this? When have you felt that being "most alive" has also
been what the world needs? Where did that feeling take you? When did
it leave you? What might make you come alive now? Who in your life
exemplifies this aliveness? The world needs a lot right now – are
there other sources of right action than "aliveness."? This question
can help everyone explore what motivates and inspires them – and bring
that to whatever is theirs to do.

* * * * * * * * *
Discouraged about the state of the world? There is hope. The Earth
Charter is a bold, courageously optimistic declaration of
interdependence lighting the way to a sustainable and peaceful future.
Read the document at www.eccommunities.org and you will find that
people all over want the same kind of world that you do. The work of
building our global community has already begun.

Heather Carver
Portland, Oregon
503-233-8452
tierrabodhi@gmail.com

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

Global Climate Change changes everything

Alexander — Tue, 06 Mar 2007 13:29:47 GMT

I think this is a pretty good video and really should be a message for the Evergreen Revolution.. global climate change chages everything.. to hope that in several decades we are to expect us to change our behavior or practices is totally foolish .. that change of our behavior, relations and practices MUST happen now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY7875_rv1s&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fpeople%2Etribe%2Enet%2Fflowflower

I think we need a video on YouTube for Cascadia that states what we, the global human population, is up against... the resource wars (water, energy, minerals and skills), global climatic change, population impact, globalization, imperialism, corporatism, class warfare, ersoion of human rights, total refusal of ecological rights, the systematic undermining of any democracy and so on and so on.

Nagasaki has in the past suggested a green (evergreen) screen with the word (s) Cascadia or maybe Evergreen Revolution or something to that idea fading onto the screen and just that. I think this is a brilliant idea and I would like to see some volunteer with multimedia background pick up this task. My suggestion would also suggest we do this and post it in google, youtube and other online video streaming as well if a animated gif could be made and posted (seeded) throughout the internet. Then follow this up with a video much like what is in the GreenPeace video that I have put the link to.

So any volunteers?

posted in Cascadians - 2 replies

A Wetter Cascadia in the Age of Chinese Mega-Industrialization and Global Climatic Change

Alexander — Tue, 06 Mar 2007 21:41:17 GMT

Ok this is one of those mixed messages things. On one hand all the research I have seen about "global warming" shows continuing drught for Cascadia, but now with the super industrialization and added output in China the pollutants (dust particals, soot and sulphates) are floating over the Pacific ocean and is now seeding our clouds to release more moisture in the form of heavier rains and more snowfall. If this is the case then this alters many projections for the bioregion in regards to climate change. Another direct effect of the Chinese unfettered pollution from industry is that higher levels of mercury is being found in our streams and rivers and that mercury can be tracked back to Chinese industry.

This is one of the senarios I could imagine in the novel of Ecotopia, where the Ecotopian military would view a heavy polluting country as a threat to "national security" (or bioregional continuity). So how do Cascadians respond to this one will be interesting.. must will stay in their slumber... but it is another reason to out right close down Wal-Marts and any other company importing Chinese industrial goods.

Two articles:

China's dirty air threatens darker days for Northwest

Research suggests pollution over the Pacific will make Oregon wetter, cooler

RICHARD L. HILL
Severe air pollution from Asia is expanding the winter cloud cover over the north Pacific Ocean and could bring cooler, wetter weather to the Northwest, a new study suggests.

The booming industrial age in China and India has fired up factories, cook stoves, diesel engines and coal plants, sending gritty particles blowing over the Pacific Ocean toward North America. Those particles have expanded clouds in the storm track that sweeps west to east across the Pacific each winter, researchers say. Those changes ultimately could alter weather patterns in the U.S. and even globally.

"The bottom line from our study is that if you change the Pacific storm system, then you're going to change the weather in some places," said Renyi Zhang, a professor of atmospheric chemistry at Texas A&M. "This is definitely going to change the weather system over the United States."

The pollutants sweep into the Northwest with storms and prevailing wind, bringing dust, salt, soot and fine particles of mercury, arsenic, copper, lead and zinc across the Pacific in a few days. The particles can alter the size of the water droplets that form clouds. The larger, deeper clouds that result would reflect more sunlight back into space, cooling the surface, as well as boosting the chance of precipitation, Zhang said.

The researchers looked only at the cloud changes -- mostly brought on by soot and sulfate particles from such activities as coal burning -- not what specific weather changes resulted. "But this is the first study that demonstrates that pollution can change a part of the weather system, which in turn can change the climate," Zhang said.

The Texas A&M researchers used a combination of satellite measurements and computer models to study the pollutants. They compared the deep clouds in January between two decades: 1984-94 and 1995-2005.

They found that the average amount of deep clouds in the north Pacific had increased by 20 percent to 50 percent during the most recent decade compared with the previous 10 years.

The study findings are reported today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Though the study measured only cloud cover and not the changes in temperature and rainfall that might result, some towns along the Oregon Coast recorded an impressive increase in rainfall during the last years of the study. For example, January rainfall in Newport totaled 89 inches in 1984-1994 but hit 128 inches for 1995-2005.

Some scientists with expertise in clouds and climate are skeptical about the findings. They say that the change in winter clouds may be connected to varying regional climate cycles and other dynamic weather processes rather than Asian pollutants.

They say the cloud changes may be linked to the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, a little-understood phenomenon in which the climate flip-flops between wet-cool and dry-warm phases about every 10 to 30 years. A shift to a wetter, cooler phase in the Northwest occurred in the mid-1990s, which coincides with the most recent years studied.

James A. Coakley, an atmospheric science professor and cloud expert at Oregon State University, said the study authors didn't show a clear link between pollutants and clouds. He said other factors may be triggering the change, perhaps global warming or the Pacific Decadal Oscillation. "What they've found may have little to do with increases in pollution from Asia."

David Covert, a research professor and atmospheric chemist at the University of Washington, agrees. Pollution sources "are a minor player in the clouds, storms and storm track," he said. "This is not to say that the effects are insignificant but that they are very hard to detect" above typical variations in weather and climate.

Zhang emphasized that the study looked only at the changing storm track over the Pacific Ocean. "But I think other regions are going to be affected. That needs to be further studied."

The Arctic especially may be susceptible to the pollutants and their effects on the weather, Zhang said, with black soot absorbing more heat from the sun and increasing the melting of ice.

"There's a lot of unanswered questions about the changes to the large weather systems that these pollutants may be bringing," Zhang said. "The scientific community needs to look at this a lot closer."

Richard L. Hill: 503-221-8238; richardhill@news.oregonian.com

found at http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/11731587094011.xml&coll=7

____

China's dirty exports: Mercury and soot
Dust plumes blow across the Pacific from cities and factories and dump pollutants on the Northwest

Friday, November 24, 2006RICHARD READ
The enormous dust clouds gather in the Gobi Desert. They sail on Siberian winds to China. They pick up mercury, aerosols and carbon monoxide spewed by Chinese coal plants and factories.

Then every five or six days in spring, eastern China flushes like a gigantic toilet. The dust plumes, now as large as countries, ride high over the Pacific Ocean, pushing hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides and ozone.

They reach Oregon in less than a week, sullying springtime views at Crater Lake and scattering dust as far as Maine. Researchers climb an ice-encrusted ladder atop Mount Bachelor's Summit Express ski-lift tower and collect the evidence.

Beyond the views, China's contaminants affect Oregon in two key ways:

A growing amount of the greenhouse gases that trap heat, shrink Northwest glaciers and raise ocean levels comes from China.

A substantial share of the mercury that pollutes the Willamette River, making fish unsafe to eat, has traveled thousands of miles across the Pacific.

"It's kind of frustrating because it's limiting our choices here," says Bruce Hope, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality researcher who estimated the share of global mercury reaching the Willamette. "As long as these foreign sources are there -- and God forbid that they should get any bigger -- we'll be hard-pressed."

But China's emissions are getting bigger. It plans to add at least 500 coal plants to more than 2,000 operating already. It spews more soot than any other country.

Yet it's all too easy to blame China for the mess. U.S. consumers, who buy China's goods and use far more resources than the Chinese, share responsibility.

"Americans in our cleverness are not good Boy Scouts," says Greg Carmichael, a University of Iowa atmospheric chemist, "because we've put the latrine upstream of the campsites."

found at http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/1164009308157330.xml&coll=7

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies

what we are up against

Alexander — Tue, 06 Mar 2007 08:45:19 GMT

please add any comment or other news articles as to what we are facing to this thread.

posted in Cascadians - 1 reply

"the Must-Do List" from the NY Times

Alexander — Mon, 05 Mar 2007 13:49:20 GMT

This list from th NY Times called the Must-Do List reads like a
Declaration of Independence or a declaration of Human Rights .. and
I think it could actually be incorporated into a Declaration of
Reunification and Autonomy of Bioregional Cooperative Commonwealth
of Cascadia.

Some "declarations" to look back at:

the Declaration of Independence by the 13 colonies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Declaration_of_Independenc
e
the 12 Points from the Hungarian 1848 Revoltion for Independence
http://home.flash.net/~igazda/dms_hist_1848.htm
Declaration of the Independence of New Zealand (United Tribes of New
Zealand)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_the_Independence_of_New_Z
ealand
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (my personal favorite.. needs
some little additions)
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html

the NY Times post:

The Must-Do List
Sign In to E-Mail or Save This Print Single Page Share
DiggFacebookNewsvinePermalink

Published: March 4, 2007
The Bush administration's assault on some of the founding principles
of American democracy marches onward despite the Democratic victory
in the 2006 elections. The new Democratic majorities in Congress can
block the sort of noxious measures that the Republican majority
rubber-stamped. But preventing new assaults on civil liberties is
not nearly enough.

Five years of presidential overreaching and Congressional
collaboration continue to exact a high toll in human lives,
America's global reputation and the architecture of democracy.
Brutality toward prisoners, and the denial of their human rights,
have been institutionalized; unlawful spying on Americans continues;
and the courts are being closed to legal challenges of these
practices.

It will require forceful steps by this Congress to undo the damage.
A few lawmakers are offering bills intended to do just that, but
they are only a start. Taking on this task is a moral imperative
that will show the world the United States can be tough on terrorism
without sacrificing its humanity and the rule of law.

Today we're offering a list — which, sadly, is hardly exhaustive —
of things that need to be done to reverse the unwise and lawless
policies of President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Many will
require a rewrite of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, an
atrocious measure pushed through Congress with the help of three
Republican senators, Arlen Specter, Lindsey Graham and John McCain;
Senator McCain lent his moral authority to improving one part of the
bill and thus obscured its many other problems.

•

Our list starts with three fundamental tasks:

Restore Habeas Corpus

One of the new act's most indecent provisions denies anyone Mr. Bush
labels an "illegal enemy combatant" the ancient right to challenge
his imprisonment in court. The arguments for doing this were
specious. Habeas corpus is nothing remotely like a get-out-of-jail-
free card for terrorists, as supporters would have you believe. It
is a way to sort out those justly detained from those unjustly
detained. It will not "clog the courts," as Senator Graham claims.
Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the Democratic chairman of the
Judiciary Committee, has a worthy bill that would restore habeas
corpus. It is essential to bringing integrity to the detention
system and reviving the United States' credibility.

Stop Illegal Spying

Mr. Bush's program of intercepting Americans' international calls
and e-mail messages without a warrant has not ceased. The agreement
announced recently — under which a secret court supposedly gave its
blessing to the program — did nothing to restore judicial process or
ensure that Americans' rights are preserved. Congress needs to pass
a measure, like one proposed by Senator Dianne Feinstein, to force
Mr. Bush to obey the law that requires warrants for electronic
surveillance.

Ban Torture, Really

The provisions in the Military Commissions Act that Senator McCain
trumpeted as a ban on torture are hardly that. It is still largely
up to the president to decide what constitutes torture and abuse for
the purpose of prosecuting anyone who breaks the rules. This amounts
to rewriting the Geneva Conventions and puts every American soldier
at far greater risk if captured. It allows the president to decide
in secret what kinds of treatment he will permit at the Central
Intelligence Agency's prisons. The law absolves American
intelligence agents and their bosses of any acts of torture and
abuse they have already committed.

•

Many of the tasks facing Congress involve the way the United States
takes prisoners, and how it treats them. There are two sets of
prisons in the war on terror. The military runs one set in Iraq,
Afghanistan and Guantánamo Bay. The other is even more shadowy, run
by the C.I.A. at secret places.

Close the C.I.A. Prisons

When the Military Commissions Act passed, Mr. Bush triumphantly
announced that he now had the power to keep the secret prisons open.
He cast this as a great victory for national security. It was a
defeat for America's image around the world. The prisons should be
closed.

Account for `Ghost Prisoners'

The United States has to come clean on all of the "ghost prisoners"
it has in the secret camps. Holding prisoners without any accounting
violates human rights norms. Human Rights Watch says it has
identified nearly 40 men and women who have disappeared into secret
American-run prisons.

Ban Extraordinary Rendition

This is the odious practice of abducting foreign citizens and
secretly flying them to countries where everyone knows they will be
tortured. It is already illegal to send a prisoner to a country if
there is reason to believe he will be tortured. The administration's
claim that it got "diplomatic assurances" that prisoners would not
be abused is laughable.

A bill by Representative Edward Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts,
would require the executive branch to list countries known to abuse
and torture prisoners. No prisoner could be sent to any of them
unless the secretary of state certified that the country's
government no longer abused its prisoners or offered a way to verify
that a prisoner will not be mistreated. It says "diplomatic
assurances" are not sufficient.

•

Congress needs to completely overhaul the military prisons for
terrorist suspects, starting with the way prisoners are classified.
Shortly after 9/11, Mr. Bush declared all members of Al Qaeda and
the Taliban to be "illegal enemy combatants" not entitled to the
protections of the Geneva Conventions or American justice. Over
time, the designation was applied to anyone the administration
chose, including some United States citizens and the entire detainee
population of Gitmo.

To address this mess, the government must:

Tighten the Definition of Combatant

"Illegal enemy combatant" is assigned a dangerously broad definition
in the Military Commissions Act. It allows Mr. Bush — or for that
matter anyone he chooses to designate to do the job — to apply this
label to virtually any foreigner anywhere, including those living
legally in the United States.

Screen Prisoners Fairly and Effectively

When the administration began taking prisoners in Afghanistan, it
did not much bother to screen them. Hundreds of innocent men were
sent to Gitmo, where far too many remain to this day. The vast
majority will never even be brought before tribunals and still face
indefinite detention without charges.

Under legal pressure, Mr. Bush created "combatant status review
tribunals," but they are a mockery of any civilized legal
proceeding. They take place thousands of miles from the point of
capture, and often years later. Evidence obtained by coercion and
torture is permitted. The inmates do not get to challenge this
evidence. They usually do not see it.

The Bush administration uses the hoary "fog of war" dodge to justify
the failure to screen prisoners, saying it is not practical to do
that on the battlefield. That's nonsense. It did not happen in
Afghanistan, and often in Iraq, because Mr. Bush decided just to
ship the prisoners off to Gitmo.

•

Prisoners designated as illegal combatants are subject to trial
rules out of the Red Queen's playbook. The administration refuses to
allow lawyers access to 14 terrorism suspects transferred in
September from C.I.A. prisons to Guantánamo. It says that if they
had a lawyer, they might say that they were tortured or abused at
the C.I.A. prisons, and anything that happened at those prisons is
secret.

At first, Mr. Bush provided no system of trial at the Guantánamo
camp. Then he invented his own military tribunals, which were
rightly overturned by the Supreme Court. Congress then passed the
Military Commissions Act, which did not fix the problem. Some tasks
now for Congress:

Ban Tainted Evidence

The Military Commissions Act and the regulations drawn up by the
Pentagon to put it into action, are far too permissive on evidence
obtained through physical abuse or coercion. This evidence is
unreliable. The method of obtaining it is an affront.

Ban Secret Evidence

Under the Pentagon's new rules for military tribunals, judges are
allowed to keep evidence secret from a prisoner's lawyer if the
government persuades the judge it is classified. The information
that may be withheld can include interrogation methods, which would
make it hard, if not impossible, to prove torture or abuse.

Better Define `Classified' Evidence

The military commission rules define this sort of secret evidence
as "any information or material that has been determined by the
United States government pursuant to statute, executive order or
regulation to require protection against unauthorized disclosure for
reasons of national security." This is too broad, even if a
president can be trusted to exercise the power fairly and carefully.
Mr. Bush has shown he cannot be trusted to do that.

Respect the Right to Counsel

Soon after 9/11, the Bush administration allowed the government to
listen to conversations and intercept mail between some prisoners
and their lawyers. This had the effect of suspending their right to
effective legal representation. Since then, the administration has
been unceasingly hostile to any lawyers who defend detainees. The
right to legal counsel does not exist to coddle serial terrorists or
snarl legal proceedings. It exists to protect innocent people from
illegal imprisonment.

•

Beyond all these huge tasks, Congress should halt the federal
government's race to classify documents to avoid public scrutiny —
15.6 million in 2005, nearly double the 2001 number. It should also
reverse the grievous harm this administration has done to the
Freedom of Information Act by encouraging agencies to reject
requests for documents whenever possible. Congress should curtail
F.B.I. spying on nonviolent antiwar groups and revisit parts of the
Patriot Act that allow this practice.

The United States should apologize to a Canadian citizen and a
German citizen, both innocent, who were kidnapped and tortured by
American agents.

Oh yes, and it is time to close the Guantánamo camp. It is a
despicable symbol of the abuses committed by this administration
(with Congress's complicity) in the name of fighting terrorism.

found at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/04/opinion/04sun1.html

posted in Cascadians - 1 reply

California Split article from the NY Times

Alexander — Tue, 20 Feb 2007 15:41:05 GMT

Imagine what a liberated Republic of California would do geopolitically to Cascadia. Cascadia's future is deeply tied to California and California's future is deeply tied to Cascadia.

From the New York Times:

February 10, 2007

California Split By GAR ALPEROVITZ

SOMETHING interesting is happening in California. Gov. Arnold
Schwarzenegger seems to have grasped the essential truth that no
nation — not even the United States — can be managed successfully from
the center once it reaches a certain scale. Moreover, the bold
proposals that Mr. Schwarzenegger is now making for everything from
universal health care to global warming point to the kind of
decentralization of power which, once started, could easily shake up
America's fundamental political structure.

Governor Schwarzenegger is quite clear that California is not simply
another state. "We are the modern equivalent of the ancient
city-states of Athens and Sparta," he recently declared. "We have the
economic strength, we have the population and the technological force
of a nation-state." In his inaugural address, Mr. Schwarzenegger
proclaimed, "We are a good and global commonwealth."

Political rhetoric? Maybe. But California's governor has also put his
finger on a little discussed flaw in America's constitutional formula.
The United States is almost certainly too big to be a meaningful
democracy. What does "participatory democracy" mean in a continent?
Sooner or later, a profound, probably regional, decentralization of
the federal system may be all but inevitable.

A recent study by the economists Alberto Alesina of Harvard and Enrico
Spolaore of Tufts demonstrates that the bigger the nation, the harder
it becomes for the government to meet the needs of its dispersed
population. Regions that don't feel well served by the government's
distribution of goods and services then have an incentive to take
independent action, the economists note.

Scale also determines who has privileged access to the country's news
media and who can shape its political discourse. In very large
nations, television and other forms of political communication are
extremely costly. President Bush alone spent $345 million in his 2004
election campaign. This gives added leverage to elites, who have
better corporate connections and greater resources than non-elites.
The priorities of those elites often differ from state and regional
priorities.

James Madison, the architect of the United States Constitution,
understood these problems all too well. Madison is usually viewed as
favoring constructing the nation on a large scale. What he urged, in
fact, was that a nation of reasonable size had advantages over a very
small one. But writing to Jefferson at a time when the population of
the United States was a mere four million, Madison expressed concern
that if the nation grew too big, elites at the center would divide and
conquer a widely dispersed population, producing "tyranny."

Few Americans realize just how huge this nation is. Germany could fit
within the borders of Montana. France is smaller than Texas. Leaving
aside three nations with large, unpopulated land masses (Russia,
Canada and Australia), the United States is geographically larger than
all the other advanced industrial countries taken together.
Critically, the American population, now roughly 300 million, is
projected to reach more than 400 million by the middle of this
century. A high Census Bureau estimate suggests it could reach 1.2
billion by 2100.

If the scale of a country renders it unmanageable, there are two
possible responses. One is a breakup of the nation; the other is a
radical decentralization of power. More than half of the world's 200
nations formed as breakaways after 1946. These days, many nations —
including Brazil, Britain, Canada, China, France, Italy and Spain,
just to name a few — are devolving power to regions in various ways.

Decades before President Bush decided to teach Iraq a lesson, George
F. Kennan worried that what he called our "monster country" would,
through the "hubris of inordinate size," inevitably become a menace,
intervening all too often in other nations' affairs: "There is a real
question as to whether `bigness' in a body politic is not an evil in
itself, quite aside from the policies pursued in its name."

Kennan proposed that devolution, "while retaining certain of the
rudiments of a federal government," might yield a "dozen constituent
republics, absorbing not only the powers of the existing states but a
considerable part of those of the present federal establishment."

Regional devolution would most likely be initiated by a very large
state with a distinct sense of itself and aspirations greater than
Washington can handle. The obvious candidate is California, a state
that has the eighth-largest economy in the world.

If such a state decided to get serious about determining its own fate,
other states would have little choice but to act, too. One response
might be for an area like New England, which already has many regional
interstate arrangements, to follow California's initiative — as it
already has on some environmental measures. And if one or two large
regions began to take action, other state groupings in the Northwest,
Southwest and elsewhere would be likely to follow.

A new wave of regional devolution could also build on the more than
200 compacts that now allow groups of states to cooperate on
environmental, economic, transportation and other problems. Most
likely, regional empowerment would be popular: when the Appalachian
Regional Commission was established in 1965, senators from across the
country rushed to demand commissions to help the economies and
constituencies of their regions, too.

Governor Schwarzenegger may not have thought through the implications
of continuing to assert forcefully his "nation-state" ambitions. But
he appears to have an expansive sense of the possibilities: this is
the governor, after all, who brought Prime Minister Tony Blair of
Britain to the Port of Long Beach last year to sign an accord between
California and Britain on global warming. And he may be closer to the
mark than he knows with his dream that "California, the nation-state,
the harmonious state, the prosperous state, the cutting-edge state,
becomes a model, not just for the 21st-century American society, but
for the larger world."

Gar Alperovitz, a professor of political economy at the University of
Maryland, College Park, is the author of "America Beyond Capitalism."

If they can talk about this nationally could it be the start of
something important?

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F10710FB355B0C738DDDAB0894DF404482

posted in Cascadians - 3 replies

Life's Harder in Seattle

Tue, 20 Feb 2007 16:50:40 GMT

By Crawford Kilian
Published: February 13, 2007
TheTyee.ca

We like to pay lip service to our healthcare and social programs, without really knowing much about them. They distinguish us from our American cousins, and give us something to argue about.

But how much difference do those programs actually make in our lives? Middle-class American life looks a lot like ours. Our right wing tends to scorn our social safety net and the long wait times for medical care. Our left tends to defend them -- but in emotional and nationalist terms, not in the bottom-line terms that the right understands.

Now Dan Zuberi, a UBC sociology professor, has made a meticulous comparison of social policies in two similar cities -- Vancouver and Seattle. He's published his findings as Differences That Matter: Social Policy and the Working Poor in the United States and Canada. Those findings are astonishing: for the working poor, and for others, Vancouver is a far, far better place than its sister city.

Zuberi chose the cities because they're very similar in size, and they share a region. The hospitality industry is typical of the new service economy that's replaced manufacturing in the past 30 or 40 years. So he studied workers in four hotels run by the same two multi-national corporations in both countries. One hotel in each city has unionized workers; one does not.

Similar cities, different conditions

By interviewing management and staff in the four hotels, Zuberi learned a great deal about working and living conditions for the people who change the sheets and wipe the hairs off the toilets. If you think those conditions are pretty much the same everywhere in the global economy, you're wrong.

Unionization was surprisingly different. While union memberships in Canada and the U.S. were roughly the same in the 1970s, membership has fallen sharply in the U.S. while holding its own here in Canada. Zuberi traces that to Reagan's destruction of the air traffic controllers in the early '80s. American unions never recovered. Canadian unions, however, continued to flourish.

So relatively few hotel workers in Seattle work under collective agreements. The union there has to hammer out individual contracts with each hotel, in a long and awkward process. In Vancouver, most hotels operate under a single collective agreement. Choosing to unionize is much easier here.

This doesn't mean non-union hotel workers earn less. Zuberi found that non-union hotels must match union pay scales just to stay competitive. But unionized hotels hold on to their workers, while the non-unionized endure rapid employee turnover.

Vancouver hotels therefore have more experienced and professional employees, needing little training and inspection. Whether their workers are locals or recent immigrants, they settle in quickly and are rarely off the job. In the winter they can take their legally mandated paid vacation time instead of being laid off. If they do lose their jobs, they can get training while out of work. They like the neighbourhoods they live in, which have little crime, good access to transit, and plenty of amenities like parks and community centres.

A host of problems

In Seattle, by contrast, hotel workers struggle with a host of problems. Public transit isn't as good, so they have to cluster in high-crime neighbourhoods that at least have some kind of bus service to their downtown workplaces. In the slow winter season they scramble for alternative jobs, or borrow from relatives. Seattle has far fewer community resources to help workers to ride out a spell of unemployment.

Health care is critical. Zuberi's Vancouver interviewees reported plenty of ailments, but routinely saw their doctors without worrying about financial consequences—even when they were laid off.

In Seattle, hotels offer health insurance plans once workers complete their probationary period. With so much turnover, many workers never get the insurance. Those who do may still face disaster: one worker kept changing credit cards to cover $2,500 in monthly medical payments on a $2,600 monthly wage. Few workers see their doctors until they absolutely have to, which may be too late for timely intervention.

In Vancouver, 100 per cent of the workers' children had regular doctors; in Seattle, only 56 per cent did. Workers' compensation scarcely exists in Seattle, while it saves injured Vancouver workers from disaster.

So life for the working poor in Seattle is strikingly harder and more stressful than for their neighbours here in Vancouver. It's not because folks in Seattle are lazier or dumber than folks in Vancouver. It's because laws have created wildly different environments in the two cities and the two nations.

Taken for granted?

Zuberi's well-written book offers plenty of food for thought. As one who rarely travels to the U.S., I take Vancouver for granted. Of course we've got parks and community centres and medicare. Of course our schools are good on both sides of town. Of course you go to your doctor, or a walk-in clinic, as soon as you feel bad. Doesn't everyone in the industrial world?

Evidently not. And having read Zuberi's account, I feel unexpected gratitude to our politicians. The NDP made unionization easy. Bill Bennett's Socreds equalized school funding. If Campbell's Liberals have made life tougher for the working poor, at least they haven't dragged us down to Seattle's level.

Differences That Matter deserves careful reading by everyone in the province. Business managers will realize how costly it would be to follow the American model. Young people will be grateful that their entry-level jobs aren't as crappy as those in the U.S. Even those who damn and blast government on general principles will see that political decisions really do make a difference, and a big one.

Zuberi teaches us that we've made a lot of good decisions. This is no time to start making bad ones just because the Americans have.

posted in Cascadians - 6 replies

New Energy Needed!!

Alexander — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 16:04:58 GMT

New Energy Needed!!
Portland Freeskool Seeks New Energy

The spring session starts soon and we want to teach you how to organize
and
run the Freeskool. Currently only 2 people are organizing this project
and
we are looking for a new group, new ideas, new energy! During the last
two
years the Portland Freeskool has brought together many great free
learning
experiences all over Portland. If you want to see this awesome project
continue, come be apart of the free education revolution!

Meeting Mondays at 7pm @ 3736 n Gantenbien st.
Starting February 5th
I your interested contact us @ info-pfs@riseup.net

posted in Cascadians - 0 replies