

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"We must stop this madness before it's too late!" said climate organizers. "For the sake of future life on this planet, we urge you to initiate peace talks to end this war now."
From greenhouse gas emissions stemming from rocket attacks to the threat of "the ultimate environmental crime" of nuclear war, U.S anti-war and climate action groups on Thursday told President Joe Biden and members of Congress that the long-standing call for peace talks in Ukraine is "all the more urgent" as the damage the Russian invasion has done to the planet so far becomes clearer.
CodePink led more than 2,300 "people of conscience" and groups including Amazon Watch, Rainforest Action Network, and Extinction Rebellion DC in a letter to Biden saying that "based on climate justice reasons alone," the U.S. government can and must use its power to ensure that peace talks between Russia and Ukraine happen swiftly.
The groups detailed a number of harmful effects the war has had on the planet in its first 14 months, including the apparent sabotage of the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines, which the United Nations Environment Program said may have caused the largest-ever single leak of methane, the potent greenhouse gas that can trap 87 times more heat than carbon dioxide in its first two decades in the atmosphere.
On a day-to-day basis, the war is contributing to further fossil fuel emissions as hundreds of thousands of soldiers, their munitions, and people who have been forced to flee their homes make millions of trips across Ukraine. The conflict has also had a considerable impact on public health as communities face the long-lasting byproducts of war even after soldiers retreat from their cities and towns.
"As the fighting has now gone on for a year with no end in sight, Ukraine braces itself for further disruption of local ecosystems, forest fires, blackened trees, air pollution, sewage leaks, and chemical contamination of rivers and groundwater in Ukraine," said the groups in the letter.
"If any leader of a nation is even remotely serious about protecting the sanctity of life, they would push for a cease-fire and use their influence to establish peace talks."
Lennard de Klerk, a Dutch carbon accounting expert who is preparing a report on the war's climate impact that's expected to be presented to the U.N. in June, told Time in February that the carbon footprint of the conflict in its first year was an estimated 155 million metric tons—the equivalent of the Netherlands' yearly output—due to explosions, the reconstruction of buildings, transportation, forest fires, and other factors.
The Thursday letter also points out that Western sanctions on Russian oil have led the U.S. to increase its energy exports to Europe, doubling liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports from 2021 to 2022 and sending 1.75 million barrels of crude oil across the Atlantic Ocean daily—a 70% increase from 2021.
CodePink reported that when organizers delivered the letter to congressional offices on Thursday, they encountered Capitol Hill staffers who "were unaware of the deadly environmental consequences of militarism and active war."
"We will continue to educate, organize, and disrupt until not only the connection is made but action is taken to save people and the planet," said CodePink organizer Teddy Ogborn. "War can no longer be a policy option for nations. If any leader of a nation is even remotely serious about protecting the sanctity of life, they would push for a cease-fire and use their influence to establish peace talks."
The more than $100 billion the U.S. has spent on aid to Ukraine in the last year—and billions more spent by European countries—has come with an opportunity cost, said the groups, as the Global South has been left waiting for wealthy countries to fulfill "their 2009 promise to invest $100 billion a year to help poorer countries adapt to climate change."
"Now the world is looking to the wealthier nations for a loss and damage fund," they wrote. "Instead of pouring our resources into war, we should be investing these resources into seriously addressing the climate crisis."
The letter was delivered to the White House and Congress a day after CodePink co-founder Diane Wilson received the Goldman Environmental Prize for her work to hold petrochemical giant Formosa Plastics accountable for illegally dumping toxic waste on the Gulf Coast of Texas.
During the award ceremony at the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C., CodePink organizer Olivia DiNucci walked onto the stage as Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) addressed the crowd. DiNucci carried a sign that read, "War Is Not Green," while other activists chanted: "Stop the war in Ukraine. We need peace talks."
"It's a huge hypocrisy to have Nancy Pelosi speak at an environmental ceremony," said DiNucci. "Pelosi voted for almost a trillion-dollar Pentagon budget. That money should go for climate justice. The people awarded today represent communities that have been devastated by our war machine."
Prior to the event Pelosi had explicitly told CodePink co-founder Medea Benjamin, "We don't need peace talks. We need victory."
U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency documents leaked earlier this month showed that American officials believe that "negotiations to end the conflict are unlikely during 2023 in all considered scenarios."
"We must stop this madness before it's too late!" said the groups in their letter on Thursday. "For the sake of future life on this
planet, we urge you to initiate peace talks to end this war now."
Update: This article has been adjusted to correctly identify some of the backers of the letter.
One Goldman Environmental Prize recipient was Diane Wilson, who won a historic $50 million settlement in a case against Formosa Plastics.
Activists from Zambia, Indonesia, Turkey, Finland, Brazil, and the United States were awarded the 2023 Goldman Environmental Prize on Monday for fighting destructive mining projects, working to protect imperiled marine ecosystems, shielding Indigenous land from corporate plunder, and holding a powerful plastics company accountable for dumping toxic waste on Texas' Gulf Coast.
"Now that the world has awakened to acute environmental crises like climate change, fossil fuel extraction, and pollution of our air and water, we are much more aware of our connections to each other and to all life on the planet," said John Goldman, president of the Goldman Environmental Foundation. "A grassroots activist in Malawi working to combat plastic pollution in her own country is directly connected to us, and vice versa; and she has much to teach us about how we can do that work at home, where we live. This work, and our fates, are all intertwined."
This year's recipients of the prize, awarded annually to grassroots campaigners from the world's six inhabited continents, were Chilekwa Mumba of Zambia, Zafer Kizilkaya of Turkey, Tero Mustonen of Finland, Delima Silalahi of Indonesia, Alessandra Korap Munduruku of Brazil, and Diane Wilson of the United States.
In 2019, Wilson—a fourth-generation shrimper—won a $50 million settlement in a landmark case against the petrochemical behemoth and notorious polluter Formosa Plastics. The Texas Tribune noted that the 2019 settlement, which a judge ordered the company to place in a trust devoted to habitat restoration and other efforts on the Texas Gulf Coast, was "the largest in U.S. history involving a private citizen's lawsuit against an industrial polluter under federal clean air and water laws."
Other Goldman prize recipients helped score victories against powerful companies.
Alessandra Korap Munduruku of Brazil "organized community efforts to stop mining development by British mining company Anglo American in Brazil's Amazon rainforest," forcing the firm to "withdraw 27 approved research applications to mine inside Indigenous territories," the Goldman Environmental Foundation noted.
Chilekwa Mumba of Zambia, for his part, coordinated legal action against Vedanta Resources, the United Kingdom-based parent company of a massively polluting mining operation in the African nation's Copperbelt Province.
"Chilekwa's victory in the U.K. Supreme Court set a legal precedent—it was the first time an English court ruled that a British company could be held liable for the environmental damage caused by subsidiary-run operations in another country," the Goldman Environmental Foundation said. "This precedent has since been applied to hold Shell Global—one of the world's 10 largest corporations by revenue—liable for its pollution in Nigeria."
A formal award ceremony will be held in Washington, D.C. on Monday at 8:30 pm ET.
Watch live:
Environmental activist Diane Wilson on Tuesday celebrated the approval of a settlement with plastics giant Formosa Plastics Corp. that will see the company devote $50 million to remediating areas of the Texas Gulf Coast it polluted.
U.S. District Judge Kenneth M. Hoyt approved the settlement (pdf), which was reached in October.
"If this isn't a David-and-Goliath story, I don't know what is," tweeted Texas Tribune reporter Kiah Collier.
Wilson and a coalition of environmental groups sued Formosa for its Point Comfort plant's pollution of Lavaca Bay area, about 125 miles east-southeast of Houston
Collier's reporting in the Tribune Tuesday about the settlement detailed the way the money will be used:
TRLA said the $50 million settlement is the largest in U.S. history involving a private citizen's lawsuit against anindustrial polluter under federal clean air and water laws. The money will be poured into a trust over the next five years and used to pay for programs supporting pollution mitigation, habitat restoration, public education and other environmental efforts on the middle Texas Gulf Coast.
In a statement, Wilson expressed her satisfaction with the settlement's approval.
"Having the $50 million settlement go to local environmental projects feels like justice," said Wilson. "Formosa polluted Lavaca Bay and nearby waterways for years. Now it will pay for strong community projects that will improve the health and welfare of our waterways and beaches."
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, took to Twitter to congratulate Wilson and remembered their shared activism from decades ago.
"So proud of Diane Wilson, a fantastic activist who just won $50 million settlement against Formosa for illegal dumping into Lavaca Bay," said Jayapal. "I went on hunger strike with Diane almost 20 years ago against Dow Chemical for dumping--she has not stopped. Congrats, Diane!"
Wilson's lawyer, Erin Gaines, said that the agreement is an example of how the public can fight for the environment--and win.
"This is a standard that citizens all over the country are fighting to get enforced in their communities," said Gaines. "Another key point is that Formosa must clean up illegally discharged plastics. This comprehensive settlement means that the natural resources in the Point Comfort area will not only be protected, they will also be revitalized."
Canadian scientists are becoming progressively alarmed at the increasing rate of melting of the country's glaciers, warning that climate change is having a severe impact on the region.
Anyone concerned about climate change and sea level rise often thinks about melting glaciers in Antarctica and Greenland. But after these two, Canada has the largest amount of glacial ice: some 200,000 square kilometres.
One of the scientists who is increasingly concerned is Gwenn Flowers, a glaciologist from Simon Fraser University in British Columbia, who has been researching glacial retreat and melting in the Yukon for over a decade.
Her team is currently mapping the ice retreat on the Kaskawulsh glacier in the St. Elias mountain range, which is 70 kilometres long and 5 kilometres wide, with ice some 800 feet deep at some places. Flowers calls glaciers "fantastic barometers of climate change."
However, Flowers says: "The thinning is really dramatic here" and adds that she believes that the ice is currently melting at about half a metre a year. Indeed from 1977 to 2007, the Kaskawulsh glacier is reported to have lost 17 square kilometres of ice.
Speaking to CBC she says: "We as Canadians are stewards of about a third of the world's mountain glaciers and ice caps, so this is our responsibility".
She adds: "As Canadians, given our responsibility to be stewards of this ice, I think we could be doing better. I think Arctic science should be a priority. I think understanding our terrestrial and marine ice should be a national priority."
Her colleague from Simon Fraser University, David Hik said: "The magnitude of the changes is dramatic. The region is one of the hotspots for warming, which is something we've come to realize over the last 15 years."
Another person concerned about the rapid glacial loss in the region is Diane Wilson, from Parks Canada: "We're seeing a 20 per cent difference in area coverage of the glaciers in Kluane National Park and Reserve and the rest of the UNESCO World Heritage site [over a 60-year period]. We've never seen that. It's outside the scope of normal."
This is not the first time the Kaskawulsh glacier has made the news. Research published last year in the journal, Nature Geoscience, outlined what was called "river piracy", in which one huge river suddenly flows into another. For centuries, the Slims river had flowed north carrying meltwater from the Kaskawulsh glacier towards the Bering sea.
However the unusually hot spring in 2016 caused an intense melting of the glacier that cut a new channel through the ice to the Alsek river, which flows southwards and on to Pacific. Where once the two rivers were comparable in size, the Slims was reduced to a trickle and the Alsek became 60-70 times larger.
At the time, Professor Dan Shugar, the paper's lead author and a geoscientist at the University of Washington Tacoma said: "We were pretty shocked. We had no idea what was really in store." He added "Day by day we could see the water level dropping."
Earlier this year, the Alpine Club of Canada issued its annual State of the Mountains report and warned that "the beheading of Slims River" is likely to be "permanent," and argued that phenomenon could happen elsewhere as the world's glaciers retreat.
They noted: "recent history has shown that river reorganization due to climate change can, in some cases, have large consequences for people and ecosystems ... As we move toward a world with far fewer glaciers and smaller ice sheets, land that has been covered continuously by ice for many tens of thousands of years will become ice-free."
As it does so, they contended "many rivers in high mountains will be redirected via more hydrologically expedient paths to the sea. In most instances, the redirection will be inconsequential. In other cases, however, the changes might have more significance."
On January 17, 2017, a congressional hearing to confirm Scott Pruitt, Donald Trump's chosen appointee to head the Environmental Protection Agency, was held in Washington, D.C. Now, anybody who knows anything about fracking or oil well drilling knows that wherever there's a roomful of well-dressed executives, oil probably ain't far behind. So, I figured there was going to be a lot of oil in that room just listening to themselves talking to each other. I also thought they needed a little education from someone who also knows a lot about oil but from a somewhat different perspective.
On January 17, 2017, a congressional hearing to confirm Scott Pruitt, Donald Trump's chosen appointee to head the Environmental Protection Agency, was held in Washington, D.C. Now, anybody who knows anything about fracking or oil well drilling knows that wherever there's a roomful of well-dressed executives, oil probably ain't far behind. So, I figured there was going to be a lot of oil in that room just listening to themselves talking to each other. I also thought they needed a little education from someone who also knows a lot about oil but from a somewhat different perspective. Namely, me.
Wearing a BP (British Petroleum) jumpsuit and a white hard hat, with a black rubber hose slung over my shoulder, I entered the confirmation hearing. I used yellow crime tape to mark off my dirty oil claim, and then I attempted to set up a 'fracking operation' within the hearing.
While I succeeded in disrupting the congressional hearing of Scott Pruitt to become the head of the EPA , I didn't get very far. I was arrested and taken to jail while Pruitt went on to be confirmed to lead the very agency he has spent years trying to dismantle.
A few days after Pruitt's February 17 confirmation, over 6,000 pages of his emails were made public. They proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the new head of the EPA had been working hand-in-glove with big oil and gas producers, electric utilities and political groups with links to the billionaire Koch brothers to gut environmental regulations.
For me, this affront is personal. Here's why.
I am a fourth generation shrimper, born and bred in a small Texas fishing village. For the last twenty-five years, I have been tracking the comings and goings of the oil and petrochemical industries impacting my small Calhoun County.
In 1989, Calhoun County was Number One in the country, as documented by the EPA Toxic Release Inventory, for industry generated toxic waste . My county had half the toxic waste in Texas - more specifically, in a landfill near Lavaca Bay. A couple years later, Matagorda Bay (adjoining Lavaca Bay) was considered the largest underwater mercury Superfund site in the United States. Alcoa's personal internal documents reported approximately 1,200,000 pounds of mercury was 'lost' to the environment. In 2001, Texas A&M studies documented DNA damage in the local oysters and the cattle downwind of our petrochemical industry. In the interim years, an entire community was bought out by a petrochemical giant, and my own fishing community that once supported five fish houses and 120 shrimp boats was reduced to two shrimp boats and zero fish houses.
The devastation wasn't limited to just Calhoun County. Similar sacrificial communities on the Gulf Coast have been inundated by the chemical and oil industries.
Try to wrap your mind around these sobering facts: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) reported 4,800 Americans are killed every year by industrial accidents, and another 55,000 die from occupational diseases. In addition, the US has about 90 facilities--including chemical factories, refineries and water-treatment plants--that, in a worst-case scenario, would pose risks to more than one million people. About 400 other facilities could pose risks to more than 100,000 people.
Now, this is a lot of trust to place in an EPA head who doesn't see the value of regulations and who used most of his energy as Oklahoma's Attorney General fighting the very agency he is now leading. He repeatedly sued the EPA during the Obama administration, challenging the agency's legal authority to regulate toxic mercury pollution, smog, carbon emissions from power plants, and the quality of wetland and other waters. He has proudly described himself as "a leading advocate against the EPA's activist agenda."
I have no illusions about Pruitt doing the right thing. I may have disrupted his hearing, but he has consistently used his power to disrupt and destroy our communities and the environment. Thanks to all the Senators who are also beholden to big oil, Pruitt is now poised to do even more damage. It will take a lot more citizen disruptors to stop him. Who's with me?
The CODEPINK Tribunal taking place December 1 and 2, and
The CODEPINK Tribunal taking place December 1 and 2, and live streamed by The Real News, is a historic collection of testimonies about the lies and costs of the Iraq war. It takes on new meaning with the incoming Trump administration, and the hawks who are flocking to join that administration with their sights set on starting yet another war in the Middle East, this time in Iran.
My testimony started with the first CODEPINK action against the war that took place in Congress. It was September 18, 2002, the day Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld testified before the House Armed Services Committee about why the US military should invade Iraq. He accused Saddam Hussein of having and hiding weapons of mass destruction, raised the specter of an Iraqi-initiated September 11-style attack and told the Committee that Iraq under Saddam Hussein was a global threat.
The fact that no one was held accountable means that today, many of the very same architects of the Iraq invasion, from General David Petraeus to John Bolton, may join the Trump administration and take us into a new war with Iran. My colleague Diane Wilson and I were in the audience, just behind Rumsfeld and a row of generals. It was the first time we had ever attended a Congressional hearing. Shaking, I got up and belted out: "Mr. Rumsfeld, we need weapons inspections, not war. Why are you obstructing the inspections? Isn't this really about oil? How many civilians will be killed? How many Iraqis will be killed?" We unfurled banners that said: UN Weapons Inspection, Not US War" and repeated that chant over and over until the police came to forcibly remove us.
Once we were out of the room, Rumsfeld joked about us and said: "Of course, the country that threw the inspectors out was not the United States. It was not the United Nations. It was Iraq that threw the inspectors out."
That was a lie. Iraq did not expel the inspectors. In December 1998, the weapons inspectors withdrew for their safety in anticipation of a US-British bombing campaign. But this was just one of so many lies about Saddam Hussein's supposed weapons of mass destruction and his unwillingness to yield to weapons inspections.
In February 2003, just weeks before the US invasion, CODEPINK led a delegation to Iraq. We wanted to see for ourselves what the Iraqis were thinking, particularly the women. We found them terrified at the prospect of a US invasion. Some said to us, in hushed voices, "Yes, Saddam is a dictator, but we don't want the U.S. military to liberate us. That is something we must do ourselves."
We also wanted to meet with the UN weapons inspectors, and we did. They told us there were no weapons of mass destruction and that even if there were, the very presence of so many inspectors in the country guaranteed that they would not be used.
Two weeks after we returned, on March 7, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported to the UN Security Council. Based on more than a hundred visits to suspect sites and private interviews with a number of individual scientists known to have been involved with WMD programs in the past, IAEA leader ElBaradei stated that the IAEA had "to date found no evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a nuclear weapons program in Iraq."
Hans Blix of the UN Special Commission on Iraq (UNMOVIC) said no stockpiles or active programs had been found, but it had not yet been possible to document destruction of all the weapons known to have been produced prior to the 1991 Gulf War. Blitz predicted that months but not years, would be needed to complete the job.
The Bush administration dismissed the inspectors' findings because their conclusions contradicted the US government allegations. The next day, President George W. Bush delivered a radio address to the American people, arguing that the inspection teams did not need any more time, because Saddam was "still refusing to disarm." The rest is history.
Iraq posed absolutely no threat to the United States. But the US people, traumatized by the 9/11 attack, were easily duped by the Bush administration's propaganda that Iraq was a terrorist state linked to al-Qaeda, and that it was only minutes away from launching attacks on America with weapons of mass destruction.
Americans were the victims of an elaborate public relations campaign, barraged every day with distortions, deceptions and lies. By the start of the war in March 2003, 66% of Americans mistakenly thought Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11 attacks and 79% thought he was close to having a nuclear weapon. Of course, Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks, and had no nuclear weapons and no functional chemical or biological weapons. This massive deception was only achieved with the complicity of the US mainstream press, a press that refused to air the voices of dissenters like us and instead sought to commercialize the Iraq war, embed with the military and profit from the invasion.
At CODEPINK, we worked furiously to stop the invasion and continued to protest the war after it started. We held a daily vigil in front of the White House in the freezing cold for four months, we went on a month-long hunger strike, we organized massive demonstrations, we protested at the homes of VP Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, as well as the offices and homes of Democratic and Republican congresspeople. We interrupted dozens of Congressional hearings to speak out against the war. Over and over again, we were arrested for acts of nonviolent civil disobedience, spending much time in cold, bleak jail cells.
For our work speaking truth to power and confronting an illegal, immoral war, we were attacked viciously for being "unpatriotic" and treated like traitors. Conservative groups began coming out every Wednesday night in Washington DC to picket our CODEPINK DC house and launched a campaign to try to get us evicted. The hate mail, death threats and violent phone calls were a constant. The police on Capitol Hill cracked down on CODEPINK activists and judges issued us "stay-away orders" to keep us away from the Capitol. One of our cofounders, Diane Wilson, was even banned from all of Washington DC for a year. Some of us discovered that our names were put on an FBI criminal database, something that has caused us much hardship as we travel overseas for our peace work.
Speaking at the Heritage Foundation in 2007, when the war had already been dragging on for five devastating years, President George Bush exhorted Congress to spend more time listening to the military commanders on the ground in Iraq and less time "responding to the demands of CODEPINK protesters." We only wish that Congress, and George Bush, had listened to CODEPINK and the millions of protesters back in 2002 when we warned that attacking Iraq would be a disaster.
There is no decision more grave than taking your nation to war. There is nothing more criminal than basing that war on lies. And there is nothing more derelict than failing to prosecute those responsible for taking us to war on the basis of lies.
This is where we stand today: In the face of the Bush administration's colossal deceptions, Barack Obama, before he even officially took office in 2009, said: "We need to look forward, as opposed to looking backwards." In other words, he decided to ignore Bush's unconscionable invasion, an invasion that continues to reverberate in the current bloodshed in the Middle East, including the creation of ISIS. But the fact that no one was held accountable means that today, many of the very same architects of the Iraq invasion, from General David Petraeus to John Bolton, may join the Trump administration and take us into a new war with Iran.
That's why the CODEPINK Tribunal is so critical, because those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it.
Editor's note: The artist's essay that follows accompanies the 'online unveiling'--exclusive to Common Dreams--of Shetterly's latest painting in his "Americans Who Tell the Truth" portrait series, presenting those who have courageously engaged in the social, environmental, or economic issues of their time.
Editor's note: The artist's essay that follows accompanies the 'online unveiling'--exclusive to Common Dreams--of Shetterly's latest painting in his "Americans Who Tell the Truth" portrait series, presenting those who have courageously engaged in the social, environmental, or economic issues of their time. This painting of political activist Kevin Zeeseis his latest portrait of those who have dedicated their life to organizing and agitating in the name of the common good. Posters of this portrait and others are now available at the artist's website.
To explain why I painted Kevin Zeese as part of the Americans Who Tell the Truth portrait project I want to tell two stories that would seem to have nothing to do with Kevin.
The first involves hearing Rev, Joseph Lowery, the great civil rights activist, speak at Camp Casey in Crawford, Texas in April of 2006 -- seven years before I had even heard of Kevin. Camp Casey was established in 2005 to support Cindy Sheehan's heroic struggle, as she camped in a ditch outside President George W. Bush's Crawford ranch, demanding that the president come out and explain to her what "noble cause" her son Casey had died for in Iraq. People came from all over the US to support Cindy. The President refused to appear. It's a sad day when a leader responsible for war cannot tell a grieving parent why her sacrifice was necessary.
The encampment grew and grew, becoming a nexus of anti-war activity, networking, community building, and activist education. A stage had been built at one end of a huge circus tent for speakers & musicians. Over the few days I was there, I heard Cindy speak, as well as Diane Wilson, Ann Wright, Robert Jensen, Eliza Gilkyson, and Rev. Lowery.
When Lowery rose to speak the large crowd gave him a standing ovation before he even began. The applause-- out of appreciation for his making the effort to come there--went on and on. Finally he said, "Sit down, sit down, or I'll take up a collection." And then he said, "But, if this ain't a church, I don't know what is." And he went on, "I'm 84 years old. I'm concerned about the soul of America. It's never been as imperiled as it is today... And the same people who are the war mongers are the sexists, the racists, the homophobes, and the destroyers of the environment. There are forces in this country trying to re-define America in their elitist image... They are theocrats, but their god is the god of wealth and consumption!"
Rev. Lowery called on all of us to understand that we had to unite all our individual causes because we had a common enemy and the only way to have enough political strength to defeat the enemy was together.
The reason I tell this story is because the political left is still divided, still fragmented with each fragment rallied around its single banner and, as a result, failing to build significant constituencies. Kevin Zeese, though, is an activist who personifies that necessary collaborative spirit. Not only does he rail against factionalization, but he joins together diverse causes with his exuberant, eclectic energy. Ever since high school when he was engaged with the anti-Vietnam war effort, civil rights and women's issues he has understood how important it is to join forces. Zeese says, "The reality is that the 'rule of money' rather than rule by the people ensures a government that puts profits before the necessities of the people and protection of the planet. By recognizing how our issues are connected we can build solidarity across issues, a critical step in building a mass movement that cannot be ignored."
Some of you will be aware that it was Kevin Zeese, a co-founder of Occupy Washington, DC, who established the encampment in the past few weeks outside the FCC in protest of the privatization of the internet.
The other story begins much further back than Camp Casey. And it begins in fiction. In Boris Pasternak's novel, Doctor Zhivago, about the Russian Revolution and the years of repression following it there is a character named Strelnikov. This man becomes an ideological monster, a terrible object lesson in the danger of forfeiting one's humanity for the righteousness of a cause. Strelnikov believes the ends justify the means, and in his case this means killing everyone he can who is not ideologically pure. His brutality proves what Martin Luther King, Jr., said about the ends being inherent in the means. Strelnikov's politically fundamentalist anger finally leads to his own self destruction. One would have liked to remind Strelnikov of Emma Goldman's famous statement, "If I can't dance, I don't want to be part of your revolution." The insistence of political purity at the expense of joy leaves us all embittered and meaningless. I tell this story in the context of Kevin Zeese because of his love of life, his commitment to pursuing justice as a means to happiness, and his insistence that the pursuit must also be joyful. The means are the ends.
Another activist aspect of Kevin Zeese that I find so appealing is his taking the long view, a view not populated by a continuum of single leaders with big egos but by a multiplicity of community minded people encouraging each other's joint leadership. He says, "...what we're working on will not be resolved in my lifetime. Part of my job is to help others become their own powerful force that will continue the work after we're gone...Economic democracy and system-wide political change are multi-decade challenges. We are working for major transformations, and that takes time."
I scratched this quote into Kevin's portrait: "To achieve economic, environmental and social justice requires a mass movement that follows a two prong strategy of resistance and creation. It is not sufficient to protest the destructive rule of money; we must also create alternative systems that put people and the planet before profits and show we can replace the existing failed system."

I was so concerned about the pending war that I flew to Washington DC from my home in San Francisco. It was the first congressional hearing I had ever witnessed. My heart was pounding as my colleague Diane Wilson and I pulled out banners that read "UN inspectors, not US war", and proceeded to ask Rumsfeld our own questions: how many innocent Iraqis would die, how many US soldiers, how many of our tax dollars would be poured into this war of choice, and how much money would Halliburton make from the war. We were hauled out of the room by the Capitol police.
Fast forward to September 3, 2013, and I found myself in a hearing with Secretary of State John Kerry telling members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee why it was necessary to invade a country that never attacked us: Syria. By now I'm a pro, having attended countless hearings over the last decade. My CODEPINK colleagues and I came prepared. We took out signs that read "Syria Needs a Ceasefire, Not War" and "No US Attack on Syria", and we rubbed red paint on our hands to signify that the blood of Syrians would be on the administration's hands if it went ahead with the attack.
With an intense feeling of deja vu, I got up to speak right after Secretary Kerry gave his opening remarks. Kerry had said he was proposing limited strikes, not a war. It sounded to me just like the false "cakewalk" argument from the Iraq war sales pitch. I responded that lobbing cruise missiles into another country's sovereign territory was indeed a war, and that the consequences could be devastating. I also insisted that the American people - and the entire global community - did not support US military intervention. I was hauled out by Capitol Police, arrested and charged with "disorderly conduct", a charge I have received many times over the last 11 years.
Kerry responded to my intervention by evoking his youth. "You know, the first time I testified before this committee when I was 27 years old, I had feelings very similar to that protester," he said, referring to when he spoke out against the Vietnam War in 1971 as a member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War. "And I would just say that is exactly why it is so important that we are all here having this debate, talking about these things before the country, and that the Congress itself will act representing the American people."We are telling our elected officials that if they are truly concerned about the violence that has killed more than 100,000 Syrians, they should pressure the administration to invest its considerable influence and energies in brokering a ceasefire and seeking a political settlement.
But what does it mean to represent the American people? In the case of Iraq, the US public had been whipped up by the government and the media to believe that Saddam Hussein played a key role in the 9/11 attacks. That's why a clear majority - 60 percent - supported the Iraq invasion. This time, the public is what some call "war-weary" - but I would call "war-wise". This time, 60 percent of Americans have not bought the government and media hype and are instead opposed to this intervention.
In the congressional vote for the Iraq war, almost all the Republicans lined up to support the war, along with 40 percent of the Democrats. But now that the war is not pushed by a rough-and-tumble Texas Republican but by a more refined, sweet-talking, Nobel Peace Prize-winning Democrat, it's unclear how the votes will shake out. Many of the traditional anti-war Democrats have become pro-war, and we in CODEPINK find ourselves applauding the stand of Tea Party favourites like Kentucky Senator Rand Paul or small-government Republicans like Michigan Congressman Justin Amash. Amash has been outspoken in his criticism of military action, holding town halls across his district to discuss the issue. He tweeted that 95 percent of those he met with opposed US military action in Syria.
There is little time left to stop this new, mad rush to war. Just as the British people put pressure on their members of parliament and insisted they steer clear of this American folly, so, too, the American people are mobilising. We are making our opposition known in town hall meetings throughout the country, and in a flood of calls, petitions, emails and visits to our elected officials. At both the Senate and House hearings, officials mentioned that their constituents were overwhelmingly opposed to intervention.
We are insisting that there are much better ways than cruise missiles to tell the Syrian people that we care. We are calling for increased US support for the more than two million refugees who are overwhelming the neighbouring countries of Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey. With the UN's financial needs only 40 percent fulfilled, the billions of dollars that our government would spend on war would be far better spent addressing the mounting refugee crisis.
We are also telling our elected officials that if they are truly concerned about the violence that has killed more than 100,000 Syrians, they should pressure the administration to invest its considerable influence and energies in brokering a ceasefire and seeking a political settlement. This is obviously no easy task. Neither Syrian President Bashar al-Assad nor the divided rebel forces (including the growing al-Qaeda elements) are eager to sit down for talks, as both sides think they can win through force. Yet in the end, this civil war will end with a political settlement, and the sooner it happens, the more lives saved.
The clock is ticking, with President Obama and Secretary Kerry frantically selling a war that the American people don't want to buy. If Congress goes ahead and approves military action, they - unlike their British counterparts - will fail to represent the people who elected them.
Yesterday, July 1, marked the first day in office for Clifford Sloan, newly appointed Guantanamo closure envoy.

A key first step in closing Guantanamo is releasing the 86 prisoners who have already been cleared for release. This is something the President can do by invoking the waiver system that Congress put in place. The Secretary of Defense must determine that risk of the detainees returning to militant groups is low and that the transfer is in the interest of national security, then notify Congress of the release 30 days in advance. So far, the Obama administration has never exercised this authority.
A particular problem in the transfer of cleared prisoners is the case of Yemen. Of the 86 cleared prisoners, 56 are Yemeni. President Obama banned the release of Yemeni prisoners in 2010 after a man trained by militants in Yemen attempted to blow up a U.S.-bound plane in 2009 with a bomb concealed in his underwear.
In his May speech, President Obama announced that he was lifting this self-imposed ban. Congress immediately tried to block the President by passing an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Bill (NDAA) on June 14 that prohibits using Defense Department funds to transfer detainees to Yemen for one year. The amendment, sponsored by Rep. Jackie Walorski (R-Indiana), passed 236 to 188.
But it is not law, since it has not been passed by the Senate.
Instead, the Senate is trying to ease the way for the President to not only release the cleared prisoners, but close the entire prison. The Senate Armed Services Committee passed a bill on June 13 that would allow the Pentagon to send detainees to the United States for medical treatment, sustained detention, and prosecution. Senator Carl Levin (D-Michigan) inserted the provisions into the Senate version of the 2014 NDAA, and the Senate should be voting on it in the fall.
The senators most strongly opposed to the closure of Guantanamo include Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), Bob Corker (R-TN), Jim Inhofe (R-OK), Mitch McConnell (R-KY), and Jeff Sessions (R-AL). In a press release, Senator Inhofe condemned the efforts to close Guantanamo as "letting the terrorists win."
In a meeting with CODEPINK, Senator Levin's chief of staff David Lyles suggested that activists focus on helping the bill pass the Senate. But he also emphasized that while all of these issues are being played out in Congress, we should not lose sight of the fact that the President still has the executive authority to transfer the detainees cleared for release and that we should pressure him to do so.
Activists throughout the US have been doing just that. Various petitions to the President have gathered more than 400,000 signatures. The most prominent was signed by Lt. Colonel and former Chief Prosecutor at Guantanamo, Morris Davis, and promoted by Witness Against Torture.
People have rallied and held vigils in cities and towns, flooded the White House and Southern Command with phone calls and, by the hundreds, fasted in solidarity with the hunger strikers. The faith community has called Guantanamo a deep moral wound, and 38 senior religious leaders sent the President and Congress a letter calling for the closure of Guantanamo.
Most dramatically, several U.S. citizens -- among them military veterans -- are now deep into open-ended fasts, risking their health and even their lives in their effort to see Guantanamo closed. In a dramatic action at the White House on June 26, Diane Wilson, 57 days into her hunger strike, jumped over the White House fence. Twenty-two others, all dressed in orange jumpsuits, were also arrested by refusing to leave the White House fence.
Amnesty International and other organizations are lobbying senators who are on the fence about closing Guantanamo. CODEPINK is collecting signatures to hand-deliver to the new envoy Clifford Sloan. Witness Against Torture is recruiting new people to join the US solidarity hunger strike. And CloseGitmo.net is keeping people up-to-date on activism around the country.
"Guantanamo has become a symbol around the world for an America that flouts the rule of law," President Obama said. With the hunger strike reaching 150 days on July 6, the lives of these prisoners--along with our nation's reputation, hangs in the balance.
"In Yemen we are close to the bottom in all kinds of measures like income and education, but there's one statistic where we come out on top: the number of prisoners in Guantanamo," laughed Mohammad Naji Allaw, a successful Yemeni lawyer who ploughs his firm's profits into the National Organization for Defending Rights and Freedoms. "Over 90 of 166 Guantanamo prisoners are from Yemen. Most of them, 56 to be exact, have already been cleared by the US government for release but the US government still won't send them back."
"In Yemen we are close to the bottom in all kinds of measures like income and education, but there's one statistic where we come out on top: the number of prisoners in Guantanamo," laughed Mohammad Naji Allaw, a successful Yemeni lawyer who ploughs his firm's profits into the National Organization for Defending Rights and Freedoms. "Over 90 of 166 Guantanamo prisoners are from Yemen. Most of them, 56 to be exact, have already been cleared by the US government for release but the US government still won't send them back."
Our American peace delegation spent the week in Yemen meeting with lawyers, human rights activists, government officials and most importantly, families with loved ones in Guantanamo.

How could we explain this to the mother of Abdulhakeem Ghaleeb, who hasn't seen her son since he was 17 years old in 2002, a mother who can't eat a meal in peace, knowing that her son has been on a hunger strike since February 6 and is now so weak he can't speak? How can we explain this to 12-year-old Awda, who was in her mother's womb when her father Abdulrahman Al Shubati was carted off to the island gulag, and here she was, holding his picture with tears streaming down her cheeks? What could we say to Ameena Yehya, whose brother had been sending home letters with beautiful drawings of flowers and scenes from their village, but stopped even writing five years ago because he is too hopeless to lift his pen? Or to Ali Mohammed, who said that on video call arranged every two months with the Red Cross he barely recognized his brother--a lifeless skeleton with sunken eyes and a big, inflated nose from where the feeding tube is forced down his nostrils?
We couldn't bear to tell them the truth: that their sons, husbands, fathers and brothers are simply pawns in the US game of politics where one party is always trying to "out hawk" the other, where concern about winning the next election far eclipses any respect for the rights of the prisoners. And we didn't have the heart to tell them that most American have become so consumed by fear after 9/11 that they think that holding these prisoners in Guantanamo indefinitely somehow makes them safer?
So instead we hugged and cried together. Our delegation explained that we are totally opposed to this cruel policy. We told them that over 300,000 Americans have signed petitions calling for Guantanamo to be closed. We talked about Americans like CODEPINK co-founder Diane Wilson and Veterans for Peace Elliott Adams who are risking their own lives on a long-term solidarity hunger strike--Diane since May 1 and Elliott since May 17. We showed them photos of our protests outside the White House. I mentioned that I even interrupted President Obama's national security speech on May 23, demanding that he take action to release the 86 prisoners cleared for release. But gnawing constantly on our minds was the fact that we are just not doing enough, not caring enough, not creative enough, not strategic enough to force a change in policy.
In 2009, President Obama had cleared 56 Yemenis for transfer home, 26 immediately with 30 others to follow. But days after Christmas Day attempt to bomb an aircraft as it was landing in Detroit, Obama placed a moratorium on the transfer of Yemeni detainees. The would-be bomber, Nigerian Umar Farouk Abdulmuttalab, who had hidden plastic explosives in his underwear, told U.S. investigators that he'd been recruited for the mission in Yemen by Anwar al Awlaki, the US-born cleric who was later killed in a U.S. drone strike in 2011.
Human Rights Minister Hooria Mashoohouras heard US officials say that Yemeni government is not stable enough or strong enough to make sure the released prisoners don't take up arms against America. They have told her that even if some of the prisoners were totally innocent and unjustly imprisoned, now--after 11 years behind bars--they probably hate the US so much that they'll want revenge. In our meeting with Mashoohourshe threw up her arms in exasperation. "So you abuse these men and then you keep abusing them because they might hate you for your abuse? Is that the way the US justice system works?," she asked.
Mashhour said the Yemeni government has already agreed to assign 10 government ministries to monitor repatriated detainees to ensure they don't threaten the United States. The returnees, she said, would receive counseling, job training and other aid. She also explained how she went to Washington DC in May to sign a Memorandum of Understanding to release the cleared Yemeni prisoners, but left empty handed, complaining that she was never received at the White House.
Now the US government is setting up another obstacle: it wants Yemen to set up a rehabilitation center, but it has not committed money to fund it. Many people we talked to in Yemen believe the US government should not only fund the rehabilitation center, as this is a problem that the US created and Yemen has no money, but that it should also compensate the prisoners who have been wrongly imprisoned.
Instead, the US Congress is trying to cut off funds that could even be used to send the prisoners home. The Congressional amendment passed on June 14 is designed just for Yemen, prohibiting Department of Defense funds from being used to repatriate Yemenis. This doesn't become law unless it is passed by the Senate and signed by the president. So there's still time to stop it.
When we spoke about this amendment to Nadia Sakkof, an extraordinarily talented young women who is one of the key organizers of the National Dialogue Committee, she sprung into action. "Excuse me," she apologized, running over to her computer, "but this is simply unacceptable and I must do something about this right now." She fired off a message of outrage to her contacts in the U.S. Congress and wrote a letter to her colleagues at the National Dialogue Committee, asking them to join her in complaining to the US government about this new affront. By the end of the next day, 136 members of the National Dialogue had signed on and she had delivered the letter to the US Ambassador.
The following day, June 17, we planned the first-ever protest of Yemenis and Americans outside the US Embassy in Sanaa. Our 7-person delegation arrived at 10 am, thinking that perhaps a few dozen Yemenis would join us. After all, it was a weekend, the place was hard to get to, and they had very little notice in advance.
We waited, we heard a commotion. Marching up with street, in bright orange jumpsuits, were several hundred Yemeni families and their supporters. They were chanting "Freedom, freedom, where are you? Human rights, human rights, where are you?"
After the chants and speeches, we brought out a letter to send to President Obama, via the Embassy, in the name of our delegation and the Yemenis. One by one, starting with the women, the Yemenis came up to sign the letter. The ones who couldn't write stamped their fingerprints. Even the children signed. The guards allowed a few of us to cross the barricades so we could deliver the letter to an Embassy representative. We also reiterated to the Embassy staff that earlier in the week, Ambassador Gerald Feierstein had promised to us he would meet with some of the families, and we hoped he would fulfill that promise.
At the end of the rally, we visited the National Dialogue Committee, which has been meeting for several months to co-build the foundations for a more democratic, peaceful nation. We brought orange ribbons for delegates to wear as armbands to show support for the Guantanamo prisoners. Even the security guards and reporters wanted to wear them. The 300 armbands we had quickly disappeared, with people asking for more. The support for the prisoners among the different political parties and independents at the National Dialogue is nearly universal. They say the refusal of the administration to release the Yemenis is an affront to the nation's pride.
Attorney Mohammad Naji Allaw told us he has lost faith in Obama but he still has faith in the American people. We must work together to turn a noble page in American history. These prisoners are nearing death; time is running out. Please, go back and tell your friends in America that these are real human beings with real families, all of whom are suffering every day. The American people must do more to stop this."