TODAY, you have the chance to make your voice heard around the world -- and have a direct impact on the ground in Darfur. Join DarfurFast to raise awareness about the crisis in Darfur and support an immediate and robust protection force to end the genocide. Find events in your area.



Activists and students around the world -- on four continents! -- will join Hotel Rwanda star Don Cheadle, New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, West Wing stars Allison Janney and Janel Maloney, US Envoy to Sudan Andrew Natsios, authors Dave Eggers and Samantha Power, former National Security Advisor Anthony Lake, Olympic Gold Medalist Joey Cheek and others in pledging their solidarity with the victims of genocide in Darfur.

In a single day, activists in hundreds of cities are joining together in solidarity with the victims of genocide in Darfur. Participants will "fast" from a luxury item for the day -- but this is no symbolic protest. Anti-genocide activists will take the money they save in fasting and donate it to civilian protection for Darfur.

Please join me, and help fund the peacekeepers that are so desperately needed to stem the violence!

Reuters, Oct. 4: U.S. special envoy to Sudan Andrew Natsios said on Wednesday he would join thousands of U.S. students in a fast to raise money to support victims of war-torn Darfur. ... Natsios said in a conference call he would give up meat and dessert and make a donation to the cause. He urged students to follow the call to fast and said the money would go to helping people on the ground in Darfur, particularly women who faced rape and daily attacks.

Remember that every dollar counts for Darfur! As an added bonus, your donation will be doubled by a donor, who will match all pledges up to $100,000! No amount is too small!

Want to contribute even more? Consider hosting a fundraiser in the near future -- the Genocide Intervention Network will help you with publicity, materials and planning.

In addition to the Genocide Intervention Network and STAND, the DarfurFast is being supported by the Save Darfur Coalition and a national coalition of Muslim and Darfurian communities, who will be holding traditional meals around the country to break the day's fast.

Add your support for the DarfurFast!

An op-ed published today in the Wall Street Journal by Genocide Intervention Network Representative and UNICEF Spokesperson Ronan Farrow.

I'm not going to offer any specific commentary, I'm just posting it here because I thought there would be interest in reading it.

China's Crude Conscience
By RONAN FARROW
August 10, 2006

EL FASHER, Sudan -- In a squalid hut in Zam Zam refugee camp, 16-year-old Salim Adam swats flies from the livid scar where a bullet tore through his leg. Two years ago, Mr. Adam was farming with his father when the Janjaweed, a Sudanese government-backed militia who have executed a brutal campaign of ethnic cleansing in Darfur, surrounded his village, firing rifles. "They grabbed my father. They demanded money and, when we had none, they shot him here" he says, smacking his palm against his forehead. Mr. Adam fled, gunfire at his back. Somehow, he dragged himself to a donkey. He cannot remember how long he rode across the desert before reaching Zam Zam.

The bullet that shattered Salim Adam's leg and the gun that fired it were almost certainly manufactured in China. The militiaman who pulled the trigger was likely compensated with revenues from Chinese oil purchases, which fund a majority of Khartoum's military actions. And the reason no help has come to Darfur is, in large part, because China has blocked every attempt to deploy a United Nations peacekeeping force. Though estimates vary, most data suggest that the death toll in Darfur has reached around 450,000, and is still rising.

By the time the world awakened to the slaughter here, China was already funneling money into Khartoum. Beijing's investments in Sudan now total around $4 billion. With a 40% stake each in the Greater Nile Petroleum Operating Co. and Petrodar, state-owned China National Petroleum Corp. owns the largest shares of both of Sudan's national oil consortia. And in 2005, Beijing purchased more than half of Sudan's oil exports. China now relies on Khartoum for about one-tenth of its massive oil needs, placing Sudan just behind Saudi Arabia and Iran as China's largest energy supplier by volume.

It is an unholy alliance. The U.N. imposed an arms embargo when it became apparent that the Government of Sudan's military actions in Darfur were overwhelmingly directed against helpless civilians. And yet China continues to supply Khartoum with assault helicopters, armored vehicles and small arms. Last August, Beijing sold 212 military trucks to Khartoum. Chinese oil company airstrips in southern Sudan have been used by government forces to conduct bombing raids on villages and hospitals. A U.N. investigation conducted this year determined that the vast majority of weaponry used to attack civilians across Darfur is of Chinese origin.

Thanks to this relationship, Sudan has purchased the best protection in the world: a veto-wielding member on the U.N. Security Council willing to ensure that Khartoum's campaign of human destruction in Darfur can continue.

The U.N. measures that have been passed have been hopelessly enfeebled by Beijing. In July 2004, China watered down a bill that would have demanded that Khartoum prosecute militiamen accused of atrocities, removing language that threatened sanctions. They did so again in September 2004, when -- in a U.S.-sponsored resolution -- a commitment that the U.N. "will take" punitive action was replaced with an impotent "shall consider" wording. In April, when the Security Council considered targeted sanctions on Khartoum's leadership, China withdrew their strenuous veto threats in the face of mounting international pressure, but only after ensuring that the list was stripped of all high-level officials.

On May 16, the Security Council finally voted on a resolution that compelled Sudan to admit a U.N. peacekeeping assessment mission. China withdrew its veto threat only after the resolution had been gutted of key language that would have allowed some U.N. peacekeepers from a force already in southern Sudan to move to Darfur. And they did so with an explicit declaration from China's Deputy Permanent Representative to the U.N., Zhang Yishan, that their vote "should not be construed as a precedent for the Security Council's future discussion or the adoption of new resolutions against Sudan."

That promise has given Khartoum virtual immunity from any repercussions as it proceeds with its genocidal ambitions in Darfur. China is underwriting the first genocide of the 21st Century, and using their political weight to ensure that it is not stopped. How can we accept that?

Last week, the United States' Congressional Commission on U.S.-China Relations convened hearings on China's role in the world. Among the testimony was a damning account from Sudan expert Eric Reeves. He said of China's support for Sudan: "There is in all of Africa no more destructive bilateral relationship." When it makes its annual policy recommendations later this year, the commission needs to urge the U.S. State Department to call China to task for its complicity in the slaughter in Darfur. Beijing, in turn, must use its tremendous leverage with Khartoum to help halt the killing. If China wants to be included in the ranks of powerful, responsible nations, it's time for it to start acting like one.

Mr. Farrow, currently a student at Yale Law School, recently took his second trip to Darfur as a Unicef spokesperson for youth.

This morning, Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick -- who coordinated the Bush administration's efforts to stop genocide in Darfur, Sudan -- announced his resignation. Zoellick's resignation leaves a huge hole in the United States' response to a situation declared by President Bush to be "clearly genocide" in which "the human cost is beyond calculation."

Please tell the president to take the next steps toward protecting civilians in Darfur by appointing a special envoy to Darfur.

www.GenocideIntervention.net/DarfurEnvoy

Last month, Deputy Secretary Zoellick helped broker a peace agreement in Darfur, an important first step. Yet with hundreds of thousands in Darfur already dead, millions more displaced and many more at risk every day, we must continue to press for a protection force that can disarm the militias, maintain the ceasefire and enforce the peace.

Tell President Bush to appoint a special envoy to Darfur and press for a UN peacekeeping force on the ground no later than October. We cannot wait any longer!

www.GenocideIntervention.net/DarfurEnvoy

There is no better person for the special envoy to Darfur than Michael Gerson, the president's chief speechwriter and one of the "25 most influential evangelicals in America," according to Time magazine. Gerson will soon be leaving the White House, where he has been a notable force for strong involvement in Darfur. Rarely do we find such a passionate advocate for peace so close to the president -- we must do what we can to make sure he stays involved on this issue.

Please encourage the president to retain Gerson as the United States' voice in Darfur, pressing for civilian protection from genocide as a special envoy.

www.GenocideIntervention.net/DarfurEnvoy

The people of Darfur cannot wait any longer. With their most influential advocate in Washington gone, the United States must recommit itself to stopping genocide.

Last Friday, more than 850 students from 46 states around the country came to Washington for the Power to Protect: D.C. to Darfur conference, sponsored by the Genocide Intervention Network and Students Taking Action Now: Darfur.

They made more than 300 appointments with the staffs of their representatives and senators, in each case pushing for support of the African Union peacekeepers in Darfur and a larger, stronger multinational force with the power to protect civilians from genocide.

On Saturday, students gathered at George Washington University for training in community organizing. This summer, these high school and college students will serve as the catalyst to start local anti-genocide groups in their communities — groups that will continue long after they return to school in the fall.

And on Sunday, these students joined 25,000 people in Washington, rallying alongside people in dozens of other cities in the United States and Canada, demanding a commitment to stopping the atrocities that both Congress and President Bush have declared to be genocide.
   Read More »

The Genocide Intervention Network is a small, non-profit organization located in Washington, D.C., that works to mobilize an anti-genocide constituency in the United States and Canada to raise the costs for inaction by politicians in the face of genocide. GI-Net empowers its members with the tools to support initiatives that prevent and stop genocidal violence, in particular by protecting civilians in Darfur, Sudan.

We are accepting applications for eight internship positions this summer -- deadline April 10

Last summer, GI-Net Representative Stephanie Nyombayire introduced President Bill Clinton at the Campus Progress National Student Conference (pictures).

Last spring, GI-Net organized more than 300 students in a national lobby day for Darfur as part of our 100 Days of Action -- commemorating the 100 days of the Rwandan genocide when the United States did nothing. At the end of this month, even more student activists will be coming to Washington for a three-day conference, Power to Protect, culminating in the Million Voices for Darfur rally on April 30.

In the past six months, GI-Net has sponsored a 21-day webcast from Darfur, mobilized members to successfully call for the firing of Sudan's lobbyist and facilitated in-person meetings with representatives in their home districts.

Want to be a part of stopping genocide in Darfur and around the world this summer? Apply for an internship by April 10!

At military and religious colleges around the nation bans on gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender enrollment force students into closets of fear and self-hate. These bans devalue the life of GLBT people and they slam the door on academic freedom. The Equality Ride empowers young adults to challenge these college bans.

In the process the members of Equality Ride will bring hope and healing to gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender students who are forced to live and suffer in closets of fear on their college campus. The Equality Riders will reveal to the public the hardship these students face and make clear the need for change.

Civil rights leader Rodney Powell on the Equality Ride: The Equality Ride is an incredible example of what's possible if our youth ... oppose America's consent to our oppression.

LYNCHBURG, Va. -- More than 20 gay rights activists were arrested on trespassing charges Friday when they stepped onto the campus of Liberty University, the school founded by the Rev. Jerry Falwell.

Many of the activists were part of Soulforce, a Lynchburg-based group on its first stop of a nationwide "Equality Ride" tour to promote gay rights at the nation's conservative Christian universities and military academies. Most of those arrested were members of the tour, but the group also included supporters from other colleges and the community.

Invoking the memory of the civil rights movement, Soulforce member Jacob Reitan said: "We want to come to the school today to say, 'learn from history.'"

"We have a right to be here, because this school teaches that being gay is being sick and sinful," said Reitan, co-director of Equality Ride. "We have a right to question and to show how we are children of God."

Reitan and other Soulforce members said they did not intend to be arrested at the campus, but just hoped to talk to Liberty students.

"If you put a face on a gay or lesbian person, it's harder to discriminate," said Haven Herrin, the tour's other leader.

Some 60 people, including 35 members of the Equality Ride bus tour, gathered for the late morning rally on a sidewalk outside the school's main entrance. A music group played guitars and sang 1960s peace songs.

The 20 activists who actually entered the campus were arrested immediately. [source]

Powell: They're going to oppose it by going to the source of the oppression, starting with the least-protected among our community, the children of fundamentalist Christians who send them to schools where there's no redress and there's no sanctuary, where they are subjected to scorn, condemnation and rejection.

Equality Ride leader Jacob Reitan said one goal is to raise public awareness of the colleges' policies by using the media.

"We also hope to send out a clear message to gay-lesbian-bisexual-transgender students that God loves them as they are," Reitan said. "Today, it's gay and lesbian people who are the outcasts of the church, and later the church will have to repent from it."

Reitan also wants to convince administrators to allow for biblically based dissent of school policies.

"When Paul was writing in the New Testament, he didn't have an understanding of homosexuality as we know it today," he said. "We believe that Christ is our best defense, because the message of Christ was always to embrace people and love them."

Reitan, 24, who graduated from Northwestern University (Ill.), was raised in a Lutheran home. He decided to form the Equality Ride after he met a closeted Wheaton College student in Chicago who spoke of his difficulty in reconciling sexuality with Christianity at a Christian institution. [source]

Powell: And to the military academies, who seek our sons and daughters to serve, to put their lives on the line, but who persecute them if they stand up and say who they really are.

Upon our arrival at the Naval Academy, numerous news outlets were waiting. As a group we got off the bus that had transported us from HRC headquarters in DC and lined the side walk in front of the Academy. For a half an hour we stood in silent vigil, holding up signs that read "Lift the Ban" and "Hear Us Out." After the Vigil, we held a press conference to explain to the assembled media why we had come to the Academy. Speaking at the press conference was Rev. Tommie Watkins, a former midshipmen, who the Academy discharged in 1997, when it was discovered he was gay.

After the press conference, the group lined up at Gate 1 to enter the Academy like any other visitor. At this point, we all assumed it would be just a few short minutes before we were taken off to jail, but instead, after consulting with the Department of Defense, the marines guarding Gate 1 allowed us to enter onto Academy grounds.

It was a rainy day but at that point it felt like the sun was shinning down on us. As a group we assembled together, to talk about our plan for the remainder of our day at the Academy. It was clear that dialogue we hoped for would indeed take place. The reality that for one day there would be out GLBT people at the Academy and midshipmen would know about it was enough to make us consider the day a success. [source]

I am writing to you concerning your visit to the Naval Academy this Friday, October 21. I wanted to let you know the stir that you've caused at our institution. First off, as masculine as this school is, rumor spreads faster than in a girls bathroom at a middle school. So as you might have guessed, your visit is THE topic of conversation on the mouths of Mids.

I respect what you do and I'd like you to know that it takes more courage to lead a group such as equality ride every day than some of these Midshipmen will ever have to muster up in a combat zone. [source]

The Equality Ride is traveling throughout the United States, to 20 different colleges and universities. At each stop along the ride, local students, activists and allies are encouraged to demonstrate with the Equality Ride.

You can also financially support the Equality Ride by making a donation or sponsoring a rider (or encouraging others to do so).

Finally, if you're purchasing books at Amazon.com, use the link on the Equality Ride website, and a portion of the purchase will be sent to the Equality Ride -- at no additional cost.

Powell: I think we're going to have to be jolted by taking it to the streets in a nonviolent manner, and I think only youth can achieve that.

A big victory today as the Genocide Intervention Network announces that Sudan's lobbyist to the United States has resigned after sustained pressure from Darfur Internet activists.

Thousands of members of the Genocide Intervention Network urged U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to fire Sudan's lobbyist in light of the ongoing crisis in Sudan that has been declared a genocide by both President Bush and the U.S. Congress. Pressure from GI-Net members and many other individuals and organizations in the Darfur activist community led to the lobbyist's departure.

The lesson here is clear -- governments who will not protect their own people do not deserve the privilege of doing business in the United States. Concerned Americans -- you -- will not stand for it.

Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.) was a leading sponsor [read statement] in pressing for the State Department to revoke the license of Sudan's lobbyist. Please call Rep. Wolf at 202.225.5136, and thank him for bringing this issue to everyone's attention.

"The United States might like to bestow privileges on the government of Sudan for a number of reasons," said GI-Net Director of Advocacy Sam Bell. "But as long as the government of Sudan cannot or will not protect its own people, the United States should resist the temptation."

Despite initial claims by the State Department that Sudan's lobbyist would aid in communication between the two governments, the United Nations reported last fall that civilian deaths due to attacks by the Sudanese government had nearly doubled -- a clear sign that the United States' message was not getting through.

Genocide Intervention Network
Power to Protect Campaign
Million Voices for Darfur

Some lesser-known quotes from Martin Luther King Jr., to combat the dominant "dreamer/reformer" idea that will be sold by the media tomorrow. King was nothing less than a radical revolutionary -- which you know if you've read his most important speech (but if you don't believe me, you can hear him say it himself).




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.

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.

Martin Luther King Jr.
"Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence"
Riverside Church, New York City, 4 April 1967

A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.

Martin Luther King Jr.
"Beyond Vietnam"

True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar; it comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring.

Martin Luther King Jr.
"Beyond Vietnam"
Quoted in "The Martin Luther King You Don't See on TV"
FAIR: Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting

I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality ... I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word.

Martin Luther King Jr.
Acceptance Speech for the Nobel Peace Prize
Oslo, 10 December 1964

We will not build a peaceful world by following a negative path. It is not enough to say we must not wage war. It is necessary to love peace and sacrifice for it. We must concentrate not merely on the negative expulsion of war but the postive affirmation of peace. We must see that peace represents a sweeter music, a cosmic melody, that is far superior to the dischords of war. Somehow, we must transform the dynamics of the world power struggle from the negative nuclear arms race, which no one can win, to a positive contest to harness humanity's creative genius for the purpose of making peace and prosperity a reality for all the nations of the world. In short, we must shift the arms race into a peace race. If we have a will -- and determination -- to mount such a peace offensive, we will unlock hitherto tightly sealed doors of hope and transform our imminent cosmic elegy into a psalm of creative fulfillment.

Martin Luther King Jr.
Acceptance Speech for the Nobel Peace Prize

I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law.

Martin Luther King Jr.
"Letter from Birmingham Jail"
Birmingham, Alabama, 16 April 1963

Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. My citing the creation of tension may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension." I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth.

Martin Luther King Jr.
"Letter from Birmingham Jail"

We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct-action campaign that was "well timed" in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. ... Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The yearning for freedom eventually manifests itself, and that is what has happened to the American Negro. Something within has reminded him of his birthright of freedom, and something without has reminded him that it can be gained.

Martin Luther King Jr.
"Letter from Birmingham Jail"

We cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws, because noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. Throw us in jail, and we shall still love you. Bomb our homes and threaten our children, and we shall still love you. Send your hooded perpetrators of violence into our community at the midnight hour and beat us and leave us half dead, and we shall still love you. But be ye assured that we will wear you down by our capacity to suffer. One day we shall win freedom, but not only for ourselves. We shall so appeal to your heart and conscience that we shall win you in the process, and our victory will be a double victory.

Martin Luther King Jr.
"Loving Your Enemies"
Dexter Avenue Baptist Church, Montgomery, Alabama, 17 November 1957

In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.

Martin Luther King Jr.
"The Trumpet of Conscience"
Steeler Lecture, November 1967

Anatole France once said, "The law in its majestic equality forbids all men to sleep under benches -- the rich as well as the poor." ... France's sardonic jest expresses a bitter truth. Despite new laws, little has changed ... The Negro is still the poorest American -- walled in by color and poverty. The law pronounces him equal -- abstractly -- but his conditions of life are still far from equal.

Martin Luther King Jr.
"Negroes Are Not Moving Too Fast"
Saturday Evening Post, 7 November 1964

It is an unhappy truth that racism is a way of life for the vast majority of white Americans, spoken and unspoken, acknowledged and denied, subtle and sometimes not so subtle -- the disease of racism permeates and poisons a whole body politic. And I can see nothing more urgent than for America to work passionately and unrelentingly -- to get rid of the disease of racism. ... Somewhere we must come to see that human progress never rolls in on the wheels of inevitability. It comes through the tireless efforts and the persistent work of dedicated individuals who are willing to be co-workers with God. And without this hard work, time itself becomes an ally of the primitive forces of social stagnation.

Martin Luther King Jr.
"Remaining Awake Through a Great Revolution"
National Cathedral, Washington, DC, 31 March 1968

In a few weeks some of us are coming to Washington to see if the will is still alive or if it is alive in this nation. We are coming to Washington in a Poor People's Campaign. Yes, we are going to bring the tired, the poor, the huddled masses. ... We are not coming to engage in any histrionic gesture. We are not coming to tear up Washington. We are coming to demand that the government address itself to the problem of poverty. ... We are coming to ask America to be true to the huge promissory note that it signed years ago. And we are coming to engage in dramatic nonviolent action, to call attention to the gulf between promise and fulfillment; to make the invisible visible. Why do we do it this way? We do it this way because it is our experience that the nation doesn't move around questions of genuine equality for the poor and for black people until it is confronted massively, dramatically in terms of direct action.

Martin Luther King Jr.
"Remaining Awake Through a Great Revolution"

Anyone who feels, and there are still a lot of people who feel that way, that war can solve the social problems facing mankind is sleeping through a great revolution. ... This day we are spending five hundred thousand dollars to kill every Vietcong soldier. Every time we kill one we spend about five hundred thousand dollars while we spend only fifty-three dollars a year for every person characterized as poverty-stricken in the so-called poverty program, which is not even a good skirmish against poverty.

Martin Luther King Jr.
"Remaining Awake Through a Great Revolution"

It is no longer a choice, my friends, between violence and nonviolence. It is either nonviolence or nonexistence. And the alternative to disarmament, the alternative to a greater suspension of nuclear tests, the alternative to strengthening the United Nations and thereby disarming the whole world, may well be a civilization plunged into the abyss of annihilation, and our earthly habitat would be transformed into an inferno that even the mind of Dante could not imagine.

Martin Luther King Jr.
"Remaining Awake Through a Great Revolution"

It may be true that the law cannot make a man love me, but it can keep him from lynching me, and I think that's pretty important.

Martin Luther King Jr.
Wall Street Journal, 13 November 1962

White Americans must recognize that justice for black people cannot be achieved without radical changes in the structure of our society. The comfortable, entrenched, the privileged cannot continue to tremble at the prospect of change of the status quo. ... There is no separate white path to power and fulfillment, short of social disaster, that does not share power with black aspirations for freedom and human dignity.

Martin Luther King Jr.
"Where Do We Go From Here?"
Southern Christian Leadership Conference Address, 1967

Let us realize the arc of the moral universe is long but it bends toward justice.

Martin Luther King Jr.
"Where Do We Go From Here?"

I must confess, my friends, the road ahead will not always be smooth. There will be still rocky places of frustration and meandering points of bewilderment. There will be inevitable setbacks here and there. There will be those moments when the buoyancy of hope will be transformed into the fatigue of despair. Our dreams will sometimes be shattered and our ethereal hopes blasted. We may again with tear-drenched eyes have to stand before the bier of some courageous civil rights worker whose life will be snuffed out by the dastardly acts of bloodthirsty mobs. Difficult and painful as it is, we must walk on in the days ahead with an audacious faith in the future.

Martin Luther King Jr.
"Where Do We Go From Here?"

there's an extremely important article in slate right now that discusses the ways in which the clinton administration set the groundwork for the current guantánamo concentration camp with their own legal manueverings.

quick summary: in 1991, haitians fleeing the military coup that ousted aristide were intercepted on the high seas. because of their credible claims for asylum, they should have been flown to the mainland. but bush sr. learned that many of them were infected with hiv and balked. clinton inherited this situation and, despite campaign promises, went to court to defend the status quo.

The Clinton White House justified this atrocious conduct in terms that sound strikingly familiar today. Justice Department attorneys maintained that foreigners held by the United States at Guantanamo Bay have absolutely no legal rights, whether under the Constitution, federal statutes, or international law.

a judge ruled that clinton's arguments were bullshit, and the justice department entered into negotiations with lawyers for the refugees. here's the critical part: in exchange for allowing the refugees in, the clinton administration required the court's decision be erased.

Why did the Clinton Justice Department insist on snuffing out the precedential value of the Guantanamo ruling? In later interviews, Clinton national security officials explained that they feared future refugee crises in the Caribbean and couldn't afford a court precedent that might limit their options for handling the situation. Using words that have a prophetic ring today, one official commented that White House advisers wanted "maximum flexibility" on Guantanamo, "confident that they would do the right thing but not wanting to be forced by the law to have to do so."

as the author notes, both clinton and bush jr. misjudged the leanings of the supreme court, who clearly were not in favor of such indefinite, extralegal imprisonment.

The great irony is that both the Bush administration in 2001 and the Haitians' lawyers in 1993 seem to have guessed incorrectly about the Supreme Court. Indeed, a majority of the justices apparently agree with the district court in the Haitian case that at least some elements of the Constitution apply on Guantanamo. In 2004, the court ruled in Rasul v. Bush that terrorist suspects confined at Guantanamo do have the right to challenge their detention (under the federal habeas corpus statute). And in a striking footnote that may be the most important part of the opinion, the court wrote that it is "unquestionably" a "violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States" to use Guantanamo to indefinitely detain people who aren't trying to blow us to pieces. In short, President Bush cannot lock up people on Guantanamo based on unsubstantiated claims that they're terrorists, and President Clinton shouldn't have warehoused innocent HIV-positive Haitians there, either.

so, how about it, center for american progress Partisan Hack in Residence Paul Begala, what the fuck were you thinking? do you or clinton feel bad about the torture for which you so skillfully laid the groundwork?

ramsey clark, who briefly held the post of u.s. attorney general, is holding a little media fest at saddam hussein's trial.

from this article: Link

Clark used to be Lyndon Johnson's attorney general and in that capacity tried to send Dr. Benjamin Spock, Marcus Raskin, and others to jail for their advocacy of resistance to the war in Vietnam. (In a bizarre 2002 interview in the Washington Post, he took the view that he was still right to have attempted this, even though Raskin was eventually exonerated.) From bullying prosecutor he mutated into vagrant and floating defense counsel, offering himself to the génocideurs of Rwanda and to Slobodan Milosevic, and using up the spare time in apologetics for North Korea.

i'm posting this to emphasize a few things:

1. i don't agree with everyone on the left. and i know this sort of thing will come up around here to smear the entire far-left wing of progressives (meaning everyone to the left of joe's mentum).

2. ramsey clark is an idiot. see earlier post and comments on his front groups international answer and the international action center.

3. frontpage.com posted a decent article (though it was written by christopher hitchens, who is a good but misguided writer, and originally published in slate). i guess even a stopped clock is right twice a day...

progressivism, at least my version of it, is willing to make big changes. in that way it's a kind of radicalism — and although it's always tiresome to go through this explanation, "radical" comes from the latin "rad" which means "to get at the root of." liberalism is content with the status quo, allowing small social programs to serve as band-aids for larger social malaise.

for instance: social security and related programs were the some of the first true "progressive" policies enacted on the federal level. up to that point liberals had been content with faith-based charity, almshouses, orphanages, soup kitchens, etc. but the progressives in the 1930s, drawing on the socialist and communist movements in that and earlier decades, decided that people in a community had a responsibility to support each other over and above what the wealthiest members' philanthropy could support.

similarly, the fight for the eight-hour workday, the weekend and the right to collective bargaining that was undertaken by labor unions, socialists and anarchists at the end of the nineteenth century pressured state and eventually the federal government to enact progressive law codifying these rights.

what we are searching for, however, is a new kind of progressivism. we shouldn't be flip about the shortcomings of progressivism in the twentieth century. woodrow wilson had a vision in the league of nations, but he was also an avowed racist. teddy roosevelt broke up the big combines and monopolies, but he also led an imperialist war that had lasting effects for nearly a century. these aren't just character flaws, either. this understanding of the world as something that needed to be "saved," "civilized," "pacified," etc. was a defining element of progressivism, from william jennings bryan on up to john f. kennedy.

what we're searching for — or at least, what i hope we're searching for — is a kind of progressivism that seeks to empower people rather than simply doling out charity. (it's important to note that the progenitors of corporate welfare and social darwinism can be traced directly to the current "centrist" beliefs in faith-based philanthropy and self-regulating business.)

at times, of course, it will be necessary to enact laws and protect rights: preserving environmental laws, shoring up affirmative action, opposing the same-sex marriage ban, finally passing an equal rights amendment including the right to an abortion, etc.

most of what we should be spending our time focusing on, however, is creating programs and — more importantly — communities that seek to empower those who are systematically disempowered in our society. we need to endorse, for instance:

* volunteer health clinics
* community arts programs
* sustainable farms and agriculture
* job-training programs
* after-school tutoring
* women's self-defense classes
* reliable sex education
* conflict resolution/alternative to violence programs (avp)
* workers' collectives
* community-based community development projects

i come from the rocky mountain west, where libertarianism is a strong force. today it mostly shows up manifested in republican-party affiliation, but it wasn't always that way. progressivism was born in the west — wyoming was the first place in the united states to allow women to vote, in 1869. the example of "bleeding kansas" you already know. and the western-state system of easily-established citizen initiatives, referendums and resolutions — the kind that got gray davis kicked out of office — were traditionally used for progressive ends, such as medical marijuana and euthanasia statutes in oregon.

there are times when government, insofar as it is our current community of people, needs to be able to protect basic rights through law and basic life through funding. but by and large people are willing to take care of each other, if given the chance. programs like the ones i outlined above have been started all over the united states (not to mention the world) to great success. if progressives began collectively working toward developing these sorts of things — with or without federal funding — i think that we could increase the quality of life, especially in disempowered communities, quite regardless of whether the state is "red" or "blue."

that's where i'd like to see progressivism head.

The revolution isn't finished yet.



"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." —Benjamin Franklin

"Strike against war, for without you no battles can be fought. Strike against manufacturing shrapnel and gas bombs and all other tools of murder. Strike against preparedness that means death and misery to millions of human beings. Be not dumb, obedient slaves in an army of destruction. Be heroes in an army of construction." —Helen Keller

"If there be one principle more deeply written than any other in the mind of every American, it is that we should have nothing to do with conquest." —Thomas Jefferson

As the United States stumbles toward the Fourth of July — marking our own independent break from tyranny (recall who the insurgents were in that war) — progressives seem to be besieged on all sides. A president who willfully ignores the analysis of military officials, intelligence agencies and academics in pursuing a murderous occupation; a Congress that concerns itself with outlawing flag-burning and same-sex marriage but refuses to address crushing poverty in the United States or genocide in Africa; state governments grinding to a halt as federal tax cuts force states to choose between balancing their budget and funding education, health care and social services; and vigilante racists being tacitly endorsed by local governments and a media twisted in the pursuit of a mythic "national security."

In the face of all this, what is a conscientious progressive to do on the most blisteringly patriotic of all holidays, the Fourth of July? How to confront empire on its own terms — how to speak truth to power?   Read More »

Of the 15 senators who have refused to co-sponsor the anti-lynching bill, my less-well-known home senator, Jon Kyl (R) was among them. He argued that he never co-sponsors "sense of the Senate" resolutions. Below is the text of the letter I wrote that was published in The Arizona Republic and sent to Sen. Kyl.

I read with disgust Sen. John Kyl's excuse as to why he, like 85 other senators to date, felt it beneath him to co-sponsor Senate Resolution 39 ("Senate plans lynching apology," Monday).

This bipartisan resolution officially apologized for the Senate's refusal to pass anti-lynching bills proposed in hundreds of House bills and by seven different presidents.

To say with a single voice that the Senate was in error for its gross misconduct in failing to protect the lives of thousands of Americans in the 19th and 20th centuries — as the resolution puts it, failing the Senate's "minimum and most basic of federal responsibilities" — seems a bit higher in priority than adhering to some abstract principle about not endorsing "sense of the Senate" resolutions.

On some issues I disagree with Kyl's votes and take solace in the democratic process. In this case, I am ashamed that he purports to represent the people of Arizona.

For the past few months (and for the rest of the summer), I've been in charge of the website for the Genocide Intervention Fund, an initiative begun by Swarthmore students to raise private donations to fund African Union peacekeepers in Darfur, Sudan [background info, PDF report]. Ultimately the GIF may establish itself as a long-term foundation to raise similar kinds of funds for local peacekeepers in genocide situations throughout the world. Currently the GIF is well on its way to raising $1 million.

Some of you might find this ironic, that I'm employed by a foundation designed to fund armed peacekeepers, when I've just completed a thesis arguing for the viability of unarmed peacekeeping.

For me, there are two reasons why I see the GIF and other such initiatives as important despite the promise of third-party nonviolent intervention.

First, the nature of the GIF is such that it is not forever committed to one model of peacekeeping. Currently we're dealing with genocide in a central African state, and the African Union peacekeeping force is the most credible and effective option. Simply by patrolling refugee camps and monitoring the delivery of humanitarian aid, AU forces will be able to prevent thousands of deaths. Sustained military intervention by any external force is indeed problematic — and not minimized simply because it is not the United States or the United Nations involved — but currently the AU is the only body capable of intervening effectively.

Which brings me to my second point. I hope that in ten years — or five or two — I will be able to present to the GIF a successful model of nonviolent genocide intervention through an organization like the Nonviolent Peaceforce. As I discuss in the epilogue to my thesis, however, this and other third-party intervention forces are still developing the principles and practice of large-scale unarmed peacekeeping and peacemaking. They are not yet up to the task of preventing genocide, by their own or anyone else's assessment.

I hope that someday they will be. But the lessons of Rwanda, Srebrenica, the Kurds under the Anfal campaign and others demonstrate that we cannot wait for an ideal in the face of mass slaughter. The lesson of Kosovo, on the other hand, demonstrates that we cannot simply go in with a fleet of bombers if the objective is ultimately to stop the genocide and remove the genocidal powerholders — the war on Kosovo waged by NATO strengthened, rather than diminished, Slobodan Milosevic's hold on power. Intervention must be on-the-ground, and must be centered on prevention of acts of murder and the delivery of humanitarian aid; anything less will engender the rage of both the tyrannical government and the population under what quickly becomes a two-pronged assault. In this respect the AU's forces are at an advantage in their limited capabilities; they cannot occupy the country or foment a military coup.

When the UN Special Advisor on the Prevention of Genocide Juan Méndez spoke at Swarthmore last fall, he recounted stories of women in Darfurian refugee camps being systematically raped when they left the camps to gather firewood. One audience member asked why, barring regular patrols, the UN could not provide the refugees with cooked food or, at least, a supply of firewood. Méndez answered that the UN was wary of creating a "dependency" in the refugees, and that any act of autonomy — in this case, gathering firewood — was to be encouraged.

I fully respect the desire to preserve autonomy and promote empowerment; indeed, it's what my thesis is all about. The argument, however, that such ideals should be adhered to even in the face of massive and systematic crimes against humanity is both legally egregious and morally reprehensible.

It is in this vein, then, that I argue for AU peacekeepers in Darfur. Would a large, fully-trained, multiethnic nonviolent peacekeeping force be better? Absolutely. But I am unwilling to sacrifice the lives of thousands of Darfurians for my abstract principles. The dangers of military intervention and its consequences can be mediated. The loss of one single additional life cannot be.