June, 30 2021, 12:56pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Jennifer Falcon, jennifer@ienearth.org
Karthik Ganapathy, karthik@mvmtcomms.com
Activists Block White House Entrances to Demand Biden Act Immediately on Climate, Fossil Fuels, and Indigenous Rights
Hundreds risked arrest blocking entrances to the White House grounds.
WASHINGTON
Hundreds of Indigenous, climate justice, and racial justice advocates rallied in front of the White House, and many peacefully blocked entrances to the building today to demand President Biden immediately stop fossil fuel projects like the Line 3 pipeline and center climate justice in any infrastructure package that moves forward in Congress.
The demonstration was led by the Indigenous Environmental Network and supported by climate, racial, and economic justice groups including Arm in Arm, Center for Biological Diversity, Climate Justice Alliance, Friends of the Earth, Public Citizen, Right to the City, and ShutDownDC.
"As Indigenous peoples on the frontline of the climate crisis, we knew it was only a matter of time before Biden's neoliberal agenda was revealed for what it truly is. The truth is, neoliberalism is a tool to maintain the status quo, to perpetuate white supremacy, and to kick the can of problems down the road. We are here to say that is unacceptable and we will continue to stand for Unci Maka, our communities, and future generations by any means necessary," said Ashley (McCray) Engle, Absentee Shawnee Tribe Of Oklahoma/Oglala Lakota Nation, Indigenous Environmental Network Green New Deal Organizer.
Hundreds of people took part in the sit-ins that shut down six White House entrances for multiple hours on Wednesday morning, while many more rallied in support. As of 12pm ET, two people had been detained and released. It was the second major climate protest at the White House this week.
Participants in Wednesday's demonstration included advocates who had come from as far away as Alaska, Minnesota, and Louisiana to testify about the damage being done to their communities by the fossil fuel industry and climate emergency.
"Biden promised climate justice, yet again BIPOC communities are being sacrificed for the U.S. energy dominance. Our villages are washing away into the ocean, our children are developing rare cancers, and birds are falling from our sky dead," said Siqiniq Maupin, Co-Founder & Director, Sovereign Inupiat for a Living Arctic. "This is genocide, and we will fight back. We will be heard. Biden will be called forward to be on the right side of history, to take action now before more humans die in the name of oil and corruption."
"The Mountain Valley Pipeline is going through a lot of sacred places. They are taking people's land. The federal government is supposed to protect people and sacred spaces, but they're not doing their job. President Biden campaigned on the environment and protecting people. Letting all these pipelines like Line 3, DAPL, and MVP come through: that's not helping the public, that's not helping the people he campaigned for," said Crystal Cavalier-Keck, a member of the Occoneechee Band of the Saponi Nation and leader in the fight against the Mountain Valley Pipeline in North Carolina. "If we can stop these pipelines, stop our dependence on oil and gas, and change to cleaner types of energy that are sustainable, it will protect the future. We're trying to do this for the next seven generations. We can't unite people if pipelines are killing our children. It's not a sustainable way to live."
The group included water protectors who are opposing the Line 3 pipeline in Minnesota, which has become a major controversy for the Biden Administration. Last Thursday, Biden's Justice Department continued to defend the project in court despite the administration's pledge to support Indigenous rights and climate justice.
"As Indigenous Women we face higher statistics of sexual violence than any other demographic. The ongoing epidemic of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women is exacerbated by these corporations," said Taysha Martineau, a water protector of the Fond du Lac tribe who is opposing the Line 3 pipeline. "As a mother of four children, three of whom are female, it is my family that faces those statistics. If the Biden Administration allows this corporation to build this unnecessary and harmful project, not only are they violating treaty rights, they are placing the lives of Indigenous children at risk. One in three Indigenous women go missing or are murdered, raped or sexually assaulted before the age of 15. I ask the Biden Administration to take a look at my children, and answer a question I have to ask myself every single day, 'Which one?'"
With temperatures topping 90 degrees, part of a brutal, climate change-fueled heatwave gripping much of the country, demonstrators carried a 100-ft black pipeline, giant cut-outs of an oil derrick and a wind turbine, and hundreds of recycled cardboard cutouts designed to look like burning flames, a symbol of the literal wildfires burning across the West, as well as the fierce urgency of the present moment.
"We are out here because our communities are suffering from the climate crisis and the extractive economy. It is an act of desperation, but also an act of hope that brings us out in the heat again and again to demand President Biden Stop Line 3, and prioritize an infrastructure package that secures climate justice, Indigenous rights, transit justice, housing justice, and racial justice," said Keya Chatterjee, a coordinator of Arm in Arm, a national mobilization for climate justice.
"We're fighting to push the issue of climate justice," said LaDon Love, the Executive Director of SPACEs In Action, a multi-ethnic membership based community organization in Washington, D.C. "When communities are under attack and we see pipelines being built and eminent domain being used to remove people from their lands, we're not taking care of the people who are voting, we're not taking care of the communities that matter. We're making a choice to put profit over people. We need to make sure we're unifying our fights. We need to stand together to make sure that we have one united voice saying that we have to take care of the lands on which we stand because if not we will all die."
The demonstrators at the White House, supported by hundreds of organizations around the country, are demanding that President Biden stop weakening his climate plans to please Republicans and instead use his executive authority to stop all new fossil fuel projects and "build back fossil free." They also want to see the President use his bully pulpit to make sure Congress includes strong climate, Indigenous rights, housing justice, racial justice, and transit justice commitments in any infrastructure bill.
"To be the climate president we need, President Biden can use his executive authority today to stop approving fossil fuel projects and declare a national climate emergency," said Kassie Siegel, director of the Center for Biological Diversity's Climate Law Institute. "With the stroke of a pen, Biden can take key actions to end the fossil fuel era and jumpstart a 100% renewable and just energy future. We're starting to suffer a climate meltdown, and Biden has to seize the moment to build back fossil free."
Fossil Free Media is a nonprofit media lab that supports the movement to end fossil fuels and address the climate emergency.
LATEST NEWS
As Senate Prepares for NDAA Vote, Progressive Caucus Says It Is 'Past Time' to Slash Pentagon Budget
"This legislation on balance moves our country and our national priorities in the wrong direction," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal.
Dec 12, 2024
As Senate Democrats prepared to move forward with a procedural vote on the annual defense budget package that passed in the House earlier this week, the Congressional Progressive Caucus outlined its objections to the legislation and called for the Pentagon budget to be cut, with military funding freed up to "reinvest in critical human needs."
CPC Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) said following the passage of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 2025 (H.R. 5009) that "it should alarm every American taxpayer that we are nearing a trillion-dollar annual budget for an agency rampant with waste, fraud, and abuse."
Jayapal, who was one of 140 lawmakers to oppose the package, emphasized that the Pentagon has failed seven consecutive annual audits.
Despite being the only federal agency to never have passed a federal audit, said Jayapal, the Department of Defense "continues to receive huge boosts to funding every year. Our constituents deserve better."
As Common Dreams reported last month, more than half of the department's annual budget now goes to military contractors that consistently overcharge the government, contributing to the Pentagon's inability to fully account for trillions of taxpayer dollars.
The $883.7 billion legislation that was advanced by the House on Wednesday would pour more money into the Pentagon's coffers. The package includes more than $500 million in Israeli military aid and two $357 million nuclear-powered attack submarine despite the Pentagon requesting only one, and would cut more than $621 million from President Joe Biden's budget request for climate action initiatives.
Jayapal noted that the legislation—which was passed with the support of 81 Democrats and 200 Republicans—also includes anti-transgender provisions, barring the children of military service members from receiving gender-affirming healthcare in "the first federal statute targeting LGBTQ people since the 1990s when Congress adopted 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' and the Defense of Marriage Act."
"This dangerous bigotry cannot be tolerated, let alone codified into federal law," said Jayapal.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Thursday that the legislation "has some very good things we Democrats wanted in it, it has some bad things we wouldn't have put in there, and some things that were left out," and indicated that he had filed cloture for the first procedural vote on the NDAA.
The vote is expected to take place early next week, and 60 votes are needed to begin debate on the package.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a longtime critic of exorbitant U.S. military spending, said in a floor speech on Wednesday that he plans to vote no on the budget.
"While middle-class and working-class families are struggling to survive, we supposedly just don't have the financial resources to help them," he said. "We just cannot afford to build more housing, we just cannot afford to provide quality childcare to our kids or to support public education, or to provide healthcare to all."
"But when the military industrial complex and all of their well-paid lobbyists come marching in to Capitol Hill," he continued, "somehow or another, there is more than enough money for Congress to provide them with virtually everything that they need."
Jayapal noted that the funding package includes substantive pay raises for service members and new investments in housing, healthcare, childcare, and other support for their families.
"Progressives will always fight to increase pay for our service members and ensure that our veterans are well taken care of," said Jayapal. "However, this legislation on balance moves our country and our national priorities in the wrong direction."
By cutting military spending, she said, the federal government could invest in the needs of all Americans, not just members of the military, "without sacrificing our national security or service member wages."
"It's past time we stop padding the pockets of price gouging military contractors who benefit from corporate consolidation," said Jayapal, "and reallocate that money to domestic needs."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Dems Urge Biden to Limit Presidential Authority to Launch Nuclear War Before Trump Takes Charge
"As Donald Trump prepares to return to the Oval Office, it is more important than ever to take the power to start a nuclear war out of the hands of a single individual and ensure that Congress's constitutional role is respected and fulfilled," wrote Sen. Edward Markey and Rep. Ted Lieu.
Dec 12, 2024
Two Democratic lawmakers sent a letter to outgoing U.S. President Joe Biden Thursday, urging him to place more checks on potential nuclear weapons use by mandating that a president must obtain authorization from Congress before initiating a nuclear first strike.
The letter writers, Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), argue that "such a policy would provide clear directives for the military to follow: A president could order a nuclear launch only if (1) Congress had approved the decision, providing a constitutional check on executive power or (2) the United States had already been attacked with a nuclear weapon. This would be infinitely safer than our current doctrine."
The two write that time is of the essence: "As Donald Trump prepares to return to the Oval Office, it is more important than ever to take the power to start a nuclear war out of the hands of a single individual and ensure that Congress's constitutional role is respected and fulfilled."
The Constitution vests Congress, not the president, with the power to declare war (though presidents have used military force without getting the OK from Congress on multiple occasions in modern history, according to the National Constitution Center).
During the Cold War, when nuclear weapons policy was produced, speed was seen as essential to deterrence, according to Jon Wolfsthal, the director of global risk at the Federation of American Scientists, who wrote an op-ed for The Washington Post last year that makes a similar argument to Markey and Lieu.
"There is no reason today to rely on speedy decision-making during situations in which the United States might launch first. Even as relations with Moscow are at historic lows, we are worlds removed from the Cold War's dominant knife's-edge logic," he wrote.
While nuclear tensions today may not be quite as high as they were during the apex of the Cold War, fears of nuclear confrontation have been heightened due to poor relations between the United States and Russia over the ongoing war in Ukraine, among other issues. Last month, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a decree lowering the threshold for potential nuclear weapons use not long after the U.S. greenlit Ukraine's use of U.S.-supplied long range weapons in its fight against Russia.
This is not the first time Markey and Lieu have pushed for greater guardrails on nuclear first-use. The two are the authors of the Restricting First Use of Nuclear Weapons Act, a proposed bill first introduced in 2017 that would bar a U.S. president from launching a nuclear first strike without the consent of Congress.
"We first introduced this act during the Obama administration not as a partisan effort, but to make the larger point that current U.S. policy, which gives the president sole authority to launch nuclear weapons without any input from Congress, is dangerous," they wrote.
In their letter, Markey and Lieu also recount an episode from the first Trump presidency when, shortly after the January 6 insurrection, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley ordered his staff to come to him if they received a nuclear strike order from Trump.
But Milley's ability to intervene was limited, according to Lieu and Markey, because his role is advisory and "the president can unilaterally make a launch decision and implement it directly without informing senior leaders." They argue this episode is a sign that the rules themselves must change.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Amnesty Urges War Crimes Probe of 'Indiscriminate' Israeli Attacks on Lebanon
"The latest evidence of unlawful airstrikes during Israel's most recent offensive in Lebanon underscores the urgent need for all states, especially the United States, to suspend arms transfers," said one campaigner.
Dec 12, 2024
Amnesty International on Thursday called for a war crimes investigation into recent Israeli airstrikes in Lebanon that killed dozens of civilians, as well as a suspension of arms transfers to Israel as it attacks Gaza, the West Bank, and Syria.
In a briefing paper titled The Sky Rained Missiles, Amnesty "documented four illustrative cases in which unlawful Israeli strikes killed at least 49 civilians" in Lebanon in September and October amid an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) campaign of invasion and bombardment that Lebanese officials say has killed or wounded more than 20,000 people.
"Amnesty International found that Israeli forces unlawfully struck residential buildings in the village of al-Ain in northern Bekaa on September 29, the village of Aitou in northern Lebanon on October 14, and in Baalbeck city on October 21," the rights group said. "Israeli forces also unlawfully attacked the municipal headquarters in Nabatieh in southern Lebanon on October 16."
Erika Guevara Rosas, Amnesty's senior director for research, advocacy, policy, and campaigns, said in a statement that "these four attacks are emblematic of Israel's shocking disregard for civilian lives in Lebanon and their willingness to flout international law."
The September 29 attack "destroyed the house of the Syrian al-Shaar family, killing all nine members of the family who were sleeping inside," the report states.
"This is a civilian house, there is no military target in it whatsoever," village mukhtar, or leader, Youssef Jaafar told Amnesty. "It is full of kids. This family is well-known in town."
On October 16, Israel bombed the Nabatieh municipal complex, killing Mayor Ahmad Khalil and 10 other people.
"The airstrike took place without warning, just as the municipality's crisis unit was meeting to coordinate deliveries of aid, including food, water, and medicine, to residents and internally displaced people who had fled bombardment in other parts of southern Lebanon," Amnesty said, adding that there was no apparent military target in the immediate area.
In the deadliest single strike detailed in the Amnesty report, IDF bombardment believed to be targeting a suspected Hezbollah member killed 23 civilians forcibly displaced from southern Lebanon in Aitou on October 14.
"The youngest casualty was Aline, a 5-month-old baby who was flung from the house into a pickup truck nearby and was found by rescue workers the day after the strike," Amnesty said.
Survivor Jinane Hijazi told Amnesty: "I've lost everything; my entire family, my parents, my siblings, my daughter. I wish I had died that day too."
As the report notes:
A fragment of the munition found at the site of the attack was analyzed by an Amnesty International weapons expert and based upon its size, shape, and the scalloped edges of the heavy metal casing, identified as most likely a MK-80 series aerial bomb, which would mean it was at least a 500-pound bomb. The United States is the primary supplier of these types of munitions to Israel.
"The means and method of this attack on a house full of civilians likely would make this an indiscriminate attack and it also may have been disproportionate given the presence of a large number of civilians at the time of the strike," Amnesty stressed. "It should be investigated as a war crime."
The October 21 strike destroyed a building housing 13 members of the Othman family, killing two women and four children and wounding seven others.
"My son woke me up; he was thirsty and wanted to drink. I gave him water and he went back to sleep, hugging his brother," survivor Fatima Drai—who lost her two sons Hassan, 5, and Hussein, 3, in the attack—told Amnesty.
"When he hugged his brother, I smiled and thought, I'll tell his father how our son is when he comes back," she added. "I went to pray, and then everything around me exploded. A gas canister exploded, burning my feet, and within seconds, it consumed my kids' room."
Guevara Rosas said: "These attacks must be investigated as war crimes. The Lebanese government must urgently call for a special session at the U.N. Human Rights Council to establish an independent investigative mechanism into the alleged violations and crimes committed by all parties in this conflict. It must also grant the International Criminal Court jurisdiction over Rome Statute crimes committed on Lebanese territory."
"Israel has an appalling track record of carrying out unlawful airstrikes in Gaza and past wars in Lebanon taking a devastating toll on civilians."
Last month, the court issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in connection with Israel's 433-day Gaza onslaught, which has left more than 162,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing in the embattled enclave.
The tribunal also issued a warrant for the arrest of Hamas leader Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri for alleged crimes committed during and after the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, in which more than 1,100 people were killed and over 240 others were kidnapped.
Meanwhile, the International Court of Justice is weighing a genocide case brought by South Africa against Israel. Last week, Amnesty published a report accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza.
The United States—which provides Israel with tens of billions of dollars in military aid and diplomatic cover—has also been accused of complicity in Israeli war crimes in Palestine and Lebanon.
"Israel has an appalling track record of carrying out unlawful airstrikes in Gaza and past wars in Lebanon taking a devastating toll on civilians," Guevara Rosas said. "The latest evidence of unlawful air strikes during Israel's most recent offensive in Lebanon underscores the urgent need for all states, especially the United States, to suspend arms transfers to Israel due to the risk they will be used to commit serious violations of international humanitarian law."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular