The Sitch

Bill O’Reilly is an Asshole on FunnyOrDie.com

Update:

You know after posting this video I felt like watching other videos of O’Reilly. And if you surf YouTube you’ll find countless videos of O’Reilly’s logic and ideology being dismantled by the number of other shows he goes on and believes he’ll have the upper hand. Fox News, yes, is the worst of the corporate media outlets mainly because its the one that actually fabricates news and perpetuates ridiculous ideas that were no where close to their original meaning.

If you’d like to see one I thought was sweet, check out this one where David Letterman just sizes up O’Reilly in the end:

Yes I love super-hero movies. However I’m very picky with throwing around the word love. Batman Begins… loved. V for Vendetta… loved. X-Men 2… loved. Iron Man… loved.

Iron Man came out this Friday May 2nd, and it was actually a good movie. The trailer was less than stellar but the reviews for the film were drawing some nice comparisons, notably with Batman Begins. By no means is it of the caliber of Christopher Nolan’s reinvention of the dark knight, but it does stand on its own as a film with a good origin story, tight acting, and really flawless CGI.

I don’t want to give much away, but one of the contemporary issues the movie covers is war profiteering. Also stick around till the end of the credits. It is totally worth it if you understand your Marvel comics.

Highly recommended.

There’s no doubt in my mind that a person is entitled to determine where he or she ends up. This freedom to control one’s own destiny and make choices is what people in Iraq are fighting for everyday. When it comes to long term relationships (I know, what a jump), our culture has limited the ability for us to think that this idea of self-determination or actualization applies. In our society relationships are forged and come apart all the time. What I think is significantly interesting is this idea of investment and returns. A capitalist approach to relationships, that frankly is engraved in most of our heads based on the ideas of what a relationship should look like. Perhaps this is true for people, that they mutually agree on this idea of investments and return.

By investments and returns, the idea is that if you invest time, energy, or even resources into a relationship you should see some sort of reciprocal investment, or return. However, how do you deal with moments of conflict of interests? Does the investments/returns thing fail? Is it not significant? Yes and no. Of course if you mutually agree on something like monogamous relations or that what one puts into it should be mutually met, then you have your set of rules to go by. If from the beginning the idea is that relations are open to varying individuals, well… actually I don’t know what that would be like at all.

It usually gets to a point depending on the person and their needs, that requires them to either look else where or determine for themselves what’s really at stake. Is the investment made worth it? What are you getting out of it? Will it last and why should it? I mean these are just a few questions, but I’m sure depending on the couple the questions can be anything. So what do you do then? Investing in something gives you the idea that you own it. But no one really owns a person. People are free. They are free to be and do what they’d like. Of course, again, you determine a system of values and rules for yourself but eventually that systems needs to be checked.

So its during this system check up where things enter this stage of limbo. What if the way things have been working aren’t sufficient? All sorts of questions about how the relationship has been functioning enters the brain. What happens to this idea of love? Can you love someone and still need someone else? It seems far fetched. We have specific terms for that… slut, whore, player, and all sorts of others. How, as the person who is having to take a step back to allow for the other to determine their needs, does one deal with that? What if love is involved? Can love be sidelined?

Ultimately there’s nothing one can really do but sit around and wait. The reality is that fighting a decision that another makes based on their needs to better understand themselves is a lost battle. A person does not own the mind of another. A person cannot possibly understand or meet all the needs of another. One can only hope that at the end of the day, the investment is considered. That it is worth it. That it is worth fighting for and sticking to. That the cost of reinvesting in someone else would not be cost-effective, because with life there are no refunds.

May Day, celebrated on May 1st around the world is a celebration of worker’s rights and stems from the United States working class of the 19th century. They fought for shorter hours, most notably the 8 hour day, and this struggle sparked movements around the world in which workers demanded from their employers. Unfortunately the United States chooses to ignore May Day unlike the rest of the world. Today thousands march across the country for immigrant rights…some of the hardest working people in this country. And most notably the workers controlling the ports of Iraq, whom today issued a shut down of a number of ports in solidarity with a US labor union that was doing the same on the West Coast. Below is an email circulating in which the Iraqi workers union issued a statement of solidarity with the union in the US.

April 28, 2008

BREAKING NEWS: Members of the Port Workers Union of Iraq plan to shutdown the ports of Umm Qasr and Khor Alzubair for one hour on May Day in solidarity with the shutdown of all West Coast ports by members of ILWU in opposition to the occupation of Iraq.

The second message is a May Day greeting from a broad cross-section of union leaders from many different unions and labor federations in Iraq as an expression of their appreciation for the solidarity demonstrated by organized labor, working people and all peace-loving people of the world in support of their efforts to end the foreign occupation of Iraq and the sectarian violence that occupation has spawned.

[This statement continues to be circulated in Iraq and as additional signers become known, their names will be added to the copy posted on the USLAW website.]

May Day Message

From: The General Union of Port Workers in Iraq

To: The International Longshore and Warehouse Union in the United States

Dear Brothers and Sisters of ILWU in California:

The courageous decision you made to carry out a strike on May Day to protest against the war and occupation of Iraq advances our struggle against occupation to bring a better future for us and for the rest of the world as well.

We are certain that a better world will only be created by the workers and what you are doing is an example and proof of what we say. The labor movement is the only element in the society that is able to change the political equations for the benefit of mankind. We in Iraq are looking up to you and support you until the victory over the US administration’s barbarism is achieved.

Over the past five years the sectarian gangs who are the product of the occupation, have been trying to transfer their conflicts into our ranks. Targeting workers, including their residential and shopping areas, indiscriminately using all sorts of explosive devices, mortar shells, and random shooting, were part of a bigger scheme that was aiming to tear up the society but they miserably failed to achieve their hellish goal. We are struggling today to defeat both the occupation and sectarian militias’ agenda.

The pro-occupation government has been attempting to intervene into the workers affairs by imposing a single government-certified labor union. Furthermore it has been promoting privatization and an oil and gas law to use the occupation against the interests of the workers.

We the port workers view that our interests are inseparable from the interests of workers in Iraq and the world; therefore we are determined to continue our struggle to improve the living conditions of the workers and overpower all plots of the occupation, its economic and political projects.

Let us hold hands for the victory of our struggle.

Long live the port workers in California!

Long live May Day!

Long live International solidarity!

The General Union of Port Workers in Iraq An Affiliate Union with General Federation of Workers Councils and Unions in Iraq (GFWCUI)

28-4-2008 EMPHASIS ADDED

May Day 2008 Statement

From: The Iraqi Labour Movement

To: The Workers and All Peace Loving People of the World

On this day of international labour solidarity we call on our fellow trade unionists and all those worldwide who have stood against war and occupation to increase support for our struggle for freedom from occupation - both the military and economic.

We call upon the governments, corporations and institutions behind the ongoing occupation of Iraq to respond to our demands for real democracy, true sovereignty and self-determination free of all foreign interference.

Five years of invasion, war and occupation have brought nothing but death, destruction, misery and suffering to our people. In the name of our “liberation,” the invaders have destroyed our nation’s infrastructure, bombed our neighbourhoods, broken into our homes, traumatized our children, assaulted and arrested many of our family members and neighbours, permitted the looting of our national treasures, and turned nearly twenty percent of our people into refugees.

The invaders helped to foment and then exploit sectarian divisions and terror attacks where there had been none. Our union offices have been raided. Union property has been seized and destroyed. Our bank accounts have been frozen. Our leaders have been beaten, arrested, abducted and assassinated. Our rights as workers have been routinely violated.

The Ba’athist legislation of 1987, which banned trade unions in the public sector and public enterprises (80% of all workers), is still in effect, enforced by Paul Bremer’s post-invasion Occupation Authority and then by all subsequent Iraqi administrations. This is an attack on our rights and basic precepts of a democratic society, and is a grim reminder of the shadow of dictatorship still stalking our country.

Despite the horrific conditions in our country, we continue to organise and protest against the occupation, against workplaces abuses, and for better treatment and safer conditions.

Despite the sectarian plots around us, we believe in unity and solidarity and a common aim of public service, equality, and freedom to organise without external intrusions and coercion.

Our legitimacy comes from our members. Our principles of organisation are based on transparent and internationally recognised International Labour Organisation standards.

We call upon our allies and all the world’s peace-loving peoples to help us to end the nightmare of occupation and restore our sovereignty and national independence so that we can chart our own course to the future.

1) We demand an immediate withdrawal of all foreign troops from our country, and utterly reject the agreement being negotiated with the USA for long-term bases and a military presence. The continued occupation fuels the violence in Iraq rather than alleviating it. Iraq must be returned to full sovereignty.
2) We demand the passage of a labour law promised by our Constitution, which adheres to ILO principles and on which Iraqi trade unionists have been fully consulted, to protect the rights of workers to organize, bargain and strike, independent of state control and interference.

3) We demand an end to meddling in our sovereign economic affairs by the International Monetary Fund, USA and UK. We demand withdrawal of all economic conditionalities attached to the IMF’s agreements with Iraq, removal of US and UK economic “advisers” from the corridors of Iraqi government, and a recognition by those bodies that no major economic decisions concerning our services and resources can be made while foreign troops occupy the country.

4) We demand that the US government and others immediately cease lobbying for the oil law, which would fracture the country and hand control over our oil to multinational companies like Exxon, BP and Shell. We demand that all oil companies be prevented from entering into any long-term agreement concerning oil while Iraq remains occupied. We demand that the Iraqi government tear up the current draft of the oil law, and begin to develop a legitimate oil policy based on full and genuine consultation with the Iraqi people. Only after all occupation forces are gone should a long term plan for the development of our oil resources be adopted.

We seek your support and solidarity to help us end the military and economic occupation of our country. We ask for your solidarity for our right to organise and strike in defence of our interests as workers and of our public services and resources. Our public services are the legacy of generations before us and the inheritance of all future generations and must not be privatised.

We thank you for standing by us. We too stand with you in your own struggles for real democracy which we know you also struggle for, and against privatisation, exploitation and daily disempowerment in your workplaces and lives.

We commend those of you who have organised strikes and demonstrations to end the occupation in solidarity with us and we hope these actions will continue.

We look forward to the day when we have a world based on co-operation and solidarity. We look forward to a world free from war, sectarianism, competition and exploitation.

Endorsed by:

Hassan Juma’a Awad, President, Iraqi Federation of Oil Unions (IFOU)
Faleh Abood Umara, Deputy, Central Council, Iraqi Federation of Oil Unions (IFOU)
Falah Alwan, President, Federation of Workers Councils and Unions in Iraq (FWCUI)
Subhi Albadri, President, General Federation of Workers Councils and Unions in Iraq (GFWCUI)
Nathim Rathi, President, Iraqi Port Workers Trade Union
Samir Almuawi, President, Engineering Professionals Trade Union
Ghzi Mushatat, President, Mechanic and Print Shop Trade Union
Waleed Alamiri, President, Electricity Trade Union
Ilham Talabani, President, Banking Services Trade Union
Abdullah Ubaid, President, Railway Trade Union Ammar Ali, President, Transportation Trade Union
Abdalzahra Abdilhassan, President, Service Employees Trade Union
Sundus Sabeeh, President, Barber Shop Workers Trade Union
Kareem Lefta Sindan, President, Lumber and Construction Trade Union, General Federation of Iraqi Workers (GFIW)
Sabah Almusawi, President, Wasit Independent Trade Union
Shakir Hameed, President, Lumber And Construction Trade Union (GFWCUI)
Awad Ahmed, President, Teachers Federation of Salahideen Alaa
Ghazi Mushatat, President, Agricultural And Food Substance Industries Adnan
Rathi Shakir, President, Water Resources Trade Union
Nahrawan Yas, President, Woman Affairs Bureau
Sabah Alyasiri, President (GFWCUI) Babil
Ali Tahi, President (GFWCUI)
Najaf Ali Abbas, President (GFWCUI) Basra
Muhi Abdalhussien, President (GFWCUI), Wasit
Ali Hashim Abdilhussien, President (GFWCUI) Kerbala
Ali Hussien, President (GFWCUI) Anbar
Mustafa Ameen, President, Arab Workers Bureau (GFWCUI)
Thameer Mzeail, Health Services, Union Committee
Khadija Saeed Abdullah, Teachers Federation, Member
Asmahan, Khudair, Woman Affairs, Textile Trade Unions Adil
Aljabiri, Oil Workers Trade Union Executive Bureau Member
Muhi Abdalhussien, Nadia Flaih, Service Employees Trade Unions
Rawneq Mohammed, Member, Media and Print Shop Trade Union
Abdlakareem Abdalsada, Vice President (GFWCUI)
Saeed Nima, Vice President (GFWCUI)
Sabri Abdalkareem, Member, (GFWCUI) Babil
Amjad Aljawhary, Representative of GFWCUI in North America

The power to progressive and radical change for the benefit of human need and not profit lies in the hands of the working class. Today, the world and I celebrate in solidarity!

No justice. No Peace. US Out of the Middle East!

A month ago I wrote a report on here about the East Coast Campus Antiwar Network Conference. It got some positive buzz so I decided to submit it to Socialist Worker newspaper. It’s a newspaper I read on a weekly basis that publishes radical and revolutionary left and socialist commentary and analysis of different struggles across the globe. The newspaper is published by the International Socialist Organization. In an effort to expand its audience and provide a daily, rather than weekly, radical coverage of current events, the Socialist Worker website has been fully revamped and the newspaper will live on a bi-weekly schedule. My refined report of the conference can be found on the new website under Activist News. Check out the website.

Socialist Worker - newspaper of the International Socialist Organization (ISO)

“THE SINGLE-PAYER SOLUTION” BY AMY GOODMAN

Amy Goodman is an independent journalist and host of Democracy Now! on Pacifica Radio and Free Speech TV. This entry is from Amy Goodman’s Weekly Column dated April 23, 2008

As the media coverage of the Democratic presidential race continues to focus on lapel pins and pastors, America is ailing. As I travel around the country, I find people are angry and motivated. Like Dr. Rocky White, a physician from a conservative, evangelical background who practices in rural Alamosa, Colo. A tall, gray-haired Westerner in black jeans, a crisp white shirt and a bolo tie, Dr. White is a leading advocate for single-payer health care. He wasn’t always.

He told me in a recent interview: “Here I am, a Republican, thinking about nationalizing health care. It just went against the grain of everything that I stood for. But you have to remember: I didn’t come to those conclusions with lofty ideals of social justice.”

In the early 1990s, his medical group started falling apart. White, a keen student of economics and the business of medicine, determined that it wasn’t just his practice but the system that was broken.

“You’re seeing an ever-increasing number of people starting to support a national health program. In fact, 59 percent of practicing physicians today believe that we need to have a national health program. I mean, that’s unheard of, even 10 years ago. It’s amazing to see a new generation of physicians coming up who are disgusted with our current health-care system. You know, we’re trained to be advocates of patients, we’re trained to save lives, we’re trained to practice medicine. And instead, what we’re doing is we’re practicing Wall Street economics.”

Single-payer is not to be confused with universal coverage, which Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both support. In fact, in a recent debate, when Clinton raised the issue of single-payer, the audience interrupted with applause. She immediately countered, “I know a lot of people favor [it], but for many reasons [it] is difficult to achieve.”

Why? One of the most powerful industries in the country opposes it—the insurance industry. Under universal coverage, insurance profits are preserved. Under single-payer, they are not. Dr. Rocky White, who now sits on the board of the nonprofit Health Care for All Colorado, has switched his political affiliation. He also has updated and reissued Dr. Robert LeBow’s book on single-payer called “Health Care Meltdown: Confronting the Myths and Fixing Our Failing System.”

He described possible solutions: “There are a lot of different types of single-payer systems—you could have purely socialized medicine. That’s kind of like what England has. The government owns the hospitals, the government owns the clinics, the government finances all the health care, and all the doctors work for the government. That is truly socialized medicine, as opposed to the Canadian system, where the financing comes through their Medicare program, but all the doctors are in private practice.”

The economics are complex, but this plain-spoken country doctor explains it clearly:

“You know, this industry is a $2-trillion industry, and the profits in the for-profit insurance industry are so huge and it’s so deeply entrenched into Wall Street … but until we move to a single-payer system and get rid of the profit motive in financing of health care, we will not be able to fix the problems that we have.”

What would it take? Dr. White has spent his life dealing with the high winds on the high plains, from Nebraska to Colorado, and describes the challenge the country faces in familiar terms:

“I think that our current presidential candidates understand that ideally single-payer would be the best, but they don’t have the political will to move that forward. Their job is to feel which way the wind is blowing. Our job is to turn that wind.” 

There is no question about it… our healthcare system is flawed. Excuse me, perverse. No, no, it’s a disaster. Perhaps maybe even a little bit of very corrupt. These were some of the many words used to describe a healthcare system that has taken in a majority of the people in this country. Yet, also designed to leave out an ever increasing amount people in order to secure grotesque profits. Last night, the Rochester, NY chapter of the International Socialist Organization, held a public meeting on the health issues we face today in this country, titled “Healthcare in Crisis: How Can We Fix This Broken System?”

Unlike normal public meetings, where a member of the ISO will give a political argument supported by historical context, the healthcare meeting featured a panel of speakers. Each speaker gave about 5-10 minute speeches supporting the need for healthcare reform based on their individual reasoning/perspective. In attendence were Ed Bender (physician, Physicians for A National Health Program), Frank S. (president, RIT College Democrats), Tim Engstrom (professor of Philosophy, RIT), and Brian Erway (socialist, ISO).

Ed Bender

Mr. Bender was able to clarify how single-pay universal healthcare works. He used examples of how systems manage to provide care for all in countries where there is a national healthcare program.

Franks S.

Frank (Mr. S sounds weird), contributed by explaining the health plan Barack Obama proposes. He described it as a promising upgrade to what we have now. Comparisons were made with current health management and Hillary Clinton’s plan.

Tim Engstrom

Mr. Engstrom, eloquently was able to debunk some arguments against single-payer healthcare and sort of unite the political spectrum under this one issue. He gave reasons for why the right and the left would benefit from universal healthcare.

Brian Erway

Mr. Erway did his best to unravel the socialist case for single-payer universal healthcare to a crowd filled with a number of new faces. He identified the underlying issue: distribution of wealth/resources. The result was an analysis of how a profit system reduces healthcare to a luxury.

With nearly 50 people in attendance, the audience was hungry for discussion. Those Obama/Hillary debates haven’t been satisfying people’s desire for “change.” You could tell within the angry stories of those in the crowd that they already knew the ‘08 Election wasn’t going to deliver on this front. At one point Mr. Engstrom turned to Frank S. and said ‘With all due respect to Mr. Obama and his representative, his plan is half-assed…’ Mr. Erway, I believe, provided us with a story about local school fundraising that aimed to help provide funds for health coverage for an ailing boy. He expressed his disgust with a system that placed school children in a position to hold a “bake sale” to cover healthcare costs. Children doing the government’s job.

Many questions came from the floor:

Will a socialized program look anything like today’s Medicaid?

Realistically, how severe is the healthcare crisis?

Will socializing healthcare lead to socialism?

Why isn’t our goal a global healthcare relief program?

Are there any initiatives for volunteer hospitals?

Will we have a choice of whether to choose a national system or seek private insurance?

What will happen to jobs if we get rid of insurance companies?

 

Why are we the one modern country that has yet to make the transition to universal healthcare?

and many many more.

Some questions were answered very well. In fact all of the one’s listed above were answered except the one that mentions if universal healthcare would lead to socialism. I’d imagine that that question alone merits its own discussion. The military is one institution that has socialized medicine and we all know it provides free universal healthcare to detainees at Guantanamo Bay… tortured or not.

How do we make this change happen!?

Besides the nitty-gritty of what single-payer is, people wanted to know how to get it here. Seeing as our current and future leadership offer what we don’t want, is there a way to convince the leadership? It was suggested a couple of times that we write to our representative in Congress. As pretty as that may sound, these are the same people we’re talking about that for the last couple of decades haven’t listened to their constituency’s phone calls, mail, and email. If ever they cared it was because a massive amount of the voters really demanded it and beat down their door. These are also the same people who continue to keep us in Iraq murdering people every single day. Two members of the ISO placed things in historical context (kind of a habit with these guys), by giving us numerous examples where specific struggles swelled so much that they fought for years to demand justice. It’s the examples of 1968 that Brian L. listed, there were able to remind us that night that during one decade alone movements for justice and equality made significant advances. And Jeff T. added with ideas of what an organized labor force can demand with its power to produce. Unionizing and organizing were the key ideas here. Even the union’s with corrupt leadership and ineffective agendas need to stay in the fight because people within can take the reigns and demand from their union what they expect them to do in the first place.

The meeting was a total success and congratulations are in order. However, I think the goal was to plant the seed for future participation in the healthcare struggle and perhaps even the overall struggle for peace and justice. After the meeting finished, many stayed to speak with panelists, members of the ISO, and student activists of the Campus Antiwar Network and the Global Awareness group. It’s meetings like these that have a diversity of attendance and participation that really get people thinking. Especially for the challenges and goals that the ISO faces, this meeting worked to its benefit as well in being able to show that socialists (not stalinists) work for the same class interests of the working poor.

In solidarity.

“A Torture Debate Among Healers” by Amy Goodman

Amy Goodman is an independent journalist and host of Democracy Now! on Pacifica Radio and Free Speech TV. This entry is from Amy Goodman’s Weekly Column dated April 9, 2008

Imagine, a candidate for president who, a year or so ago, no one would have considered electable. Now the person is the front-runner, with a groundswell of grass-roots support, threatening the sense of inevitability of the Establishment candidates. No, I’m not talking about the U.S. presidential race, but the race for president of the largest association of psychologists in the world, the American Psychological Association (APA). At the heart of the election is a raging debate over torture and interrogations. While the other healing professions, including the American Medical Association and the American Psychiatric Association, bar their members from participating in interrogations, the APA leadership has fought against such a restriction.

Frustrated with the APA, a New York psychoanalyst, Dr. Steven Reisner, has thrown his hat into the ring. Last year, Reisner and other dissident psychologists formed the Coalition for an Ethical Psychology in an attempt to force a moratorium against participation by APA members in harsh interrogations. During the initial phase of this year’s selection process, Reisner received the most nominating votes. He is running on a platform opposing the use of psychologists to oversee abusive and coercive interrogations of prisoners at Guantanamo, secret CIA black sites or anywhere else international law or the Geneva Conventions are said not to apply.

The issue came to a head at the 2007 APA annual convention. After days of late-night negotiations, the moratorium came up for a climactic vote. We saw a surreal scene on the convention floor: Uniformed military were out in force. Men and women in desert camo and Navy whites worked the APA Council of Representatives, and officers in crisp dress uniforms stepped to the microphones.

Military psychologists insisted that they help make interrogations safe, ethical and legal, and cited instances where psychologists allegedly intervened to stop abuse. “If we remove psychologists from these facilities, people are going to die!” boomed Col. Larry James of the U.S. Army, chief psychologist at Guantanamo Bay and a member of the APA governing body. Dr. Laurie Wagner, a Dallas psychologist, shot back, “If psychologists have to be there in order to keep detainees from being killed, then those conditions are so horrendous that the only moral and ethical thing to do is to protest by leaving.”

The moratorium failed, and instead a watered-down resolution passed, outlining 19 harsh interrogation techniques that were banned, but only if “used in a manner that represents significant pain or suffering or in a manner that a reasonable person would judge to cause lasting harm.” In other words, this loophole allowed, you can rough people up, just don’t do permanent harm.

Immediately after the vote, Reisner spoke out at a packed town hall meeting: “If we cannot say, ‘No, we will not participate in enhanced interrogations at CIA black sites,’ I think we have to seriously question what we are as an organization and, for me, what my allegiance is to this organization, or whether we might have to criticize it from outside the organization at this point.”

Reisner and others began withholding dues. Prominent APA members resigned, and the best-selling author of “Reviving Ophelia,” Mary Pipher, returned her APA Presidential Citation award. After several months of bad publicity and internal negotiations, an emergency committee redrafted that resolution, removing the loopholes and affirming the outright prohibition of 19 techniques, like mock executions and waterboarding.

When I asked Dr. Reisner, the son of Holocaust survivors, why he would want to head the organization that he has battled for several years, he told me: “If I have this opportunity to make a change, I have a responsibility to do it. I never had the intention of being involved, but the only way to ensure this be changed was by claiming the democratic process in the name of human rights and social-justice issues. I was hoping that mass withholding of dues and mass resignations would shame the APA to come to its senses. It made them take a big step but didn’t go far enough.”

He expanded: “American people are sick of the reputation of the United States as torturers, as people who abuse prisoners. American people want to see a restoration of values from war to health care. I think what happens in the APA should point to a direction for the whole country.”

The APA’s annual meeting is this summer, in Boston. Expect interrogation to be the major issue confronting the members gathered there. Final voting for the APA president starts in October. The APA and the United States will determine their next presidents at about the same time. In both elections, a thorough debate on torture should be central.

The Rochester, NY chapter of IVAW now has an official website. It is updated frequently with blog entries by members of IVAW. They encourage allies to fill out the Ally application form in order to stay connected with the chapter and help out with any of their organizational efforts. The site also allows you to request a speaker and includes directions on how to donate to the chapter.

Please help support these guys by visiting their site, donating, or becoming an ally.

IVAW: Rochester

Over 20 chapters of the Campus Antiwar Network gathered at Hunter College in New York City this past weekend. Organized by students for students, “Their War. Our World: Building the Student Resistance” consisted of various educational and organizational workshops. Helping to solidify an understanding of CAN, student resistance, and the goals of US imperialism the conference also incorporated forums on GI resistance, US goals in the Middle East, building the student movement, and a history of student protest during Vietnam.

Many thanks to the Conference Coordinating Committee for making the trip to NYC worthwhile. Below’s an account of my experience. Here are some

pictures

.

Friday, April 4

Leaving Rochester, NY

We left Rochester very early in the morning in order to give ourselves time to hang out in New York City. Thanks to traffic that time was cut short, but we managed to devour sinful amounts of Chinese food, let the MTA rape us with its subway fares, and I bought a Dead Kennedy’s vinyl (Bedtime for Democracy).

Registration Party

“What’s your name, again?” That was perhaps the most asked question of the night (at least it felt that way to me). For 2 good reasons: 1) Beer and 2) CAN members from around the country uniting under one roof is very rare. The party was fun and as always political discussions were going on in every corner of the house. Registration parties are always the best for catching up on what other CAN chapters have succeeded and not succeeded in doing. My chapter (RIT Antiwar) last Monday held a meeting on the truth about the surge and the only people that came to the meeting were 7 members of ROTC/military. While the surge really took a backseat, the topic of immediate withdrawal consumed discussions because they disagreed with CAN’s fundamental point of unity. Thanks to some A-game by our membership and the participation of one of our local IVAW members, we were able to defend the need for immediate withdrawal despite the Rumsfeld-reasoning of the attendees.

Saturday

Opening Plenary

The opening plenary was “Student Protest During the Vietnam War” held by Michael Letwin (NYC Labor Against the War) and Professor Franklin. It was an interesting plenary that focused on the role of resistance by students and the rest of the civilian population. Letwin in particular expressed the need for the student/civilian movement in supporting the GI resistance movement and also the Iraqi resistance. Perhaps the most interesting and simplest thing he said in regards to building the student movement was

“People are most open to change in ideas when involved in struggle.”

Educational Workshops

There were a number of workshops to attend (Afghanistan, Palestine, Immediate Withdrawal, Racism In a Time of War, and GI Resistance). I attended The Case for Immediate Withdrawal that was given by the UMASS-Amherst chapter of CAN. The presentation was good. It covered a number of questions that people usually have such as, “What do we mean by Troops Out Now?”, “Will there be civil war?”, and “Who should rebuild Iraq?” The case for immediate withdrawal was driven by debunking the lies of the justification for war. The racist portrayal of Arabs and Muslims, Al Qaeda presence, bringing democracy, regional stability, and oil. Despite a number of interruptions by the elitists members of The Internationalists (a “with us or against us” minded group that claimed to be “socialists” just because they threw around the words “bolshevik revolution” “labor strikes” and “imperialism”), discussion was able to answer many questions and sharpen arguments for new and old CAN members.

The Case of Immediate Lunch!

Delicious cream of broccoli soup! $5 for soup, but what the heck… I was only on the Upper East Side and time’s limited!

Building the Student Antiwar Movement

This forum on building the student movement was interesting because the main debate came down to what was more important, spending most of our time and resources on educating members or becoming the media. Several people were inclined to want CAN to focus more on becoming the media because they believed that selling our ideas and arguments in smart and effective ways would be the main the way of getting the movement to grow. The other side argued that setting a political foundation within each CAN member would help draw more people. Ultimately, the agreement was that an educational foundation or political confidence was essential in providing strong arguments, but that we do need to take on the role of the media and make people aware of what’s not being said. Not only that, arguments were made about “masturbation”… that we needed to start taking more action instead of talking about it and clapping at each other for saying things we already agree with. Cheers to the chair for handling an anxious bunch of students.

Organizational Workshops

The organizational workshop I attended was the Columbia/UVM/Wesleyan workshop on Divestment. Each school had their share of experience presently and in the past with trying to divest against the investments of university endowments in the military-industrial-complex. It was a really popular workshop with a third (40-45) of the conference attendees in that one classroom. Most of RIT CAN was at the Divestment workshop because our university has such strong ties with the DoD, lockheed martin, and other war profiteers. Those presenting were able to provide steps to starting a divestment campaign. While no one has been able to successfully change a university’s investment plans, each school is different in the way it’s tied to these war profiteers. The most attractive thing about a divestment campaign is the fact that its a closer to home type of struggle where as the fight to bring the troops home seems so big and sometimes out of our hands. Divestment also can work as a good way to get people who wouldn’t normally organize against the war, to organize or just be open to the idea. This workshop provided not only details on divestment, but the panelists provided a number of sources and helpful organizations that can aid a campaign.

Dinner Was Fine, But Michael Schwartz Is Better

I heart Michael Schwartz. There’s something about the way he presents thats just very welcoming. Its not hard to get lost. Things make sense the first time around and he’s constantly moving arond the podium. Schwartz has one of the best breakdowns of the US’s goals in the Middle East and especially Iraq. He incorporates historical events debating back to the late 1800’s and places them into perspective. All of the puzzle pieces come together in his lecture. By the time he’s done you have one the clearest pictures of what’s going on in Iraq. At times I could not keep track with the man as I wrote all the notes I possibly could. It wasn’t the first time I heard him speak, but I’m never able to remember everything that he said. Schwartz addressed the intentions of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, the roles of Jimmy Carter, Reagan, FDR, Cheney, Bill Clinton and many other previous administrations in seeking out the supply of oil in the middle east. He linked today’s economy to other points in time which the United States was in the same situation. Schwartz also talked about the crisis within Iraq and the fight of the resistance in Basra. We all wanted a piece Schwartz’s time after the panel and our chapter might consider bringing him to speak at RIT. Everyone’s gotta hear him!

No Party Like A CAN Party

Down in the east village CAN members gathered for drinks and music. It was awesome to see so many people just busting a couple of moves on the dance floor without any reservations. Can’t complain about the variety of music. There was all sorts of music playing and even Son of Nun who attended the conference was cranking up his own tune. Sadly the party was over in the blink of an eye, but we needed to sleep if we wanted to get up in time for the last conference forum featuring members of IVAW.

Sunday

Winter Soldier

Members of IVAW spoke about the healthcare crisis, racism, sexism, and war crimes committed while in Iraq.

RIT Antiwar is a project of the RIT Social Action Group and one of the founding chapters of the Campus Antiwar Network.