Friday, September 24, 2010
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Beijing Express Declaration
Beijing Express Declaration
Created en-route to the UN 4th Global Conference on Women, in Beijing. Still highly relevant in 2010
In 1995 a multinational group of 200 women from the 29 former Soviet Union and satellite nations travelled 8000 kilometres aboard a half-kilometre-long train from Warsaw to Beijing for the UN 4th Global Conference On Women. Trainers came from many nations, including the USA, Canada, Israel, Japan and Turkey. Trainers and experts presented workshops on Human Rights, negotiating skills, conflict mediation and conflict resolution, how to change world trade agreements and create economic policies to suit the world’s women - even courses in English, computer skills and networking through e-mail.
The train was sponsored by the UNDP and became known as ‘The Beijing Express’.
The Beijing Express Working Group was created from the 200 delegates and chaired by the UK delegate Lesley Abdela lesley.abdela@shevolution.com
The UK’s Lesley Abdela was sponsored by the British Council to conduct Democracy skills workshops aboard the Beijing Express
The Delegates affirmed the following Declaration developed by the Working Group.
1) The New '-ism'
Neither Communism nor Capitalism has worked well for the majority of women in the world. We believe the new ‘ism’ will come from a new approach to world economics.
Many economic policies have been disastrous for women. It is often women who bear the brunt of economic restructuring policies made by organisations who too often overlook the way their polices could impact on millions of women.
Under both Communism and Capitalism the quality of people’s lives is all too often sacrificed for the goal of wealth creation. Human development should not be sacrificed in the name of economic growth but rather economic growth should be used as a tool to help people achieve a healthy and creative life.
2) White Scarves, Not Blue Helmets
(This heading is symbolic - in certain Islamic countries, when a woman throws down her white scarf no person must pass. This has been used on occasion to stop men fighting)
The present system of peace-making and negotiations dominated by senior men at governmental levels has patently failed and is now discredited. We want women’s full participation in conflict prevention, resolution and peace-keeping. Therefore we want women’s organisations and Non-Governmental Organisations from all sides in all future peace talks and working with governments on developing and expanding ‘Preventive Diplomacy’.
3) 'Hot Spot' Commission
We want the United Nations’ mandate to be expanded to include preventive diplomacy. As part of this we want a ‘Hot Spot’ Commission set up to try to prevent conflict where trouble is brewing. This Commission, consisting of women and men, would be set up to intervene in conflict prevention, resolution and settlement.
4) Economic and Political Sanctions
We want economic and political sanctions imposed on parties violating Human Rights - but humanitarian aid should be allowed.
5) Rape as a War Crime
We want men who commit rape as a war crime to be brought to justice and prosecuted as war criminals. We believe this will only happen if women are included equally with men on committees responsible for bringing these men to trial.
6) Property Rights As Human Rights
We want property rights recognised as Human Rights, and improved mechanisms for getting back property snatched away in conflicts.
7) Women's Equal Participation
We want systems of national political and public life reformed to include women’s equal participation with men in political, economic and international decision-making at all levels, from local to national to global. This means also providing training and encouragement for women to participate in politics and public life.
8) Favourable Government Policies Towards Women
We want government policies favourable to women. Many policies developed by governments either ignore women’s needs or actually harm women. We want governments in transition economies to show what impact their policies are having on women. This would be a way to get policy-makers to develop policies that are more women-friendly.
9) Gender Neutral Language
We want governments and other entities to use gender-neutral language.
10) Government Financial Support
We want governments to give financial support to women’s groups. These voices must be heard.
11) Recognition of Unpaid Work
We want women’s unpaid work measured and recognised in economic arrangements such as pensions. Nearly 50% of the US$23 Trillion global output is provided by women’s unpaid work. We need fairer sharing of the work and equality in the home. Sakiko Fukuda-Parr of the UNDP says, “When we get world leaders to recognise that 70% of the world’s GDP is unpaid work, they won’t say women working at home can’t qualify for pensions on an equal basis with men.”
Created en-route to the UN 4th Global Conference on Women, in Beijing. Still highly relevant in 2010
In 1995 a multinational group of 200 women from the 29 former Soviet Union and satellite nations travelled 8000 kilometres aboard a half-kilometre-long train from Warsaw to Beijing for the UN 4th Global Conference On Women. Trainers came from many nations, including the USA, Canada, Israel, Japan and Turkey. Trainers and experts presented workshops on Human Rights, negotiating skills, conflict mediation and conflict resolution, how to change world trade agreements and create economic policies to suit the world’s women - even courses in English, computer skills and networking through e-mail.
The train was sponsored by the UNDP and became known as ‘The Beijing Express’.
The Beijing Express Working Group was created from the 200 delegates and chaired by the UK delegate Lesley Abdela lesley.abdela@shevolution.com
The UK’s Lesley Abdela was sponsored by the British Council to conduct Democracy skills workshops aboard the Beijing Express
The Delegates affirmed the following Declaration developed by the Working Group.
1) The New '-ism'
Neither Communism nor Capitalism has worked well for the majority of women in the world. We believe the new ‘ism’ will come from a new approach to world economics.
Many economic policies have been disastrous for women. It is often women who bear the brunt of economic restructuring policies made by organisations who too often overlook the way their polices could impact on millions of women.
Under both Communism and Capitalism the quality of people’s lives is all too often sacrificed for the goal of wealth creation. Human development should not be sacrificed in the name of economic growth but rather economic growth should be used as a tool to help people achieve a healthy and creative life.
2) White Scarves, Not Blue Helmets
(This heading is symbolic - in certain Islamic countries, when a woman throws down her white scarf no person must pass. This has been used on occasion to stop men fighting)
The present system of peace-making and negotiations dominated by senior men at governmental levels has patently failed and is now discredited. We want women’s full participation in conflict prevention, resolution and peace-keeping. Therefore we want women’s organisations and Non-Governmental Organisations from all sides in all future peace talks and working with governments on developing and expanding ‘Preventive Diplomacy’.
3) 'Hot Spot' Commission
We want the United Nations’ mandate to be expanded to include preventive diplomacy. As part of this we want a ‘Hot Spot’ Commission set up to try to prevent conflict where trouble is brewing. This Commission, consisting of women and men, would be set up to intervene in conflict prevention, resolution and settlement.
4) Economic and Political Sanctions
We want economic and political sanctions imposed on parties violating Human Rights - but humanitarian aid should be allowed.
5) Rape as a War Crime
We want men who commit rape as a war crime to be brought to justice and prosecuted as war criminals. We believe this will only happen if women are included equally with men on committees responsible for bringing these men to trial.
6) Property Rights As Human Rights
We want property rights recognised as Human Rights, and improved mechanisms for getting back property snatched away in conflicts.
7) Women's Equal Participation
We want systems of national political and public life reformed to include women’s equal participation with men in political, economic and international decision-making at all levels, from local to national to global. This means also providing training and encouragement for women to participate in politics and public life.
8) Favourable Government Policies Towards Women
We want government policies favourable to women. Many policies developed by governments either ignore women’s needs or actually harm women. We want governments in transition economies to show what impact their policies are having on women. This would be a way to get policy-makers to develop policies that are more women-friendly.
9) Gender Neutral Language
We want governments and other entities to use gender-neutral language.
10) Government Financial Support
We want governments to give financial support to women’s groups. These voices must be heard.
11) Recognition of Unpaid Work
We want women’s unpaid work measured and recognised in economic arrangements such as pensions. Nearly 50% of the US$23 Trillion global output is provided by women’s unpaid work. We need fairer sharing of the work and equality in the home. Sakiko Fukuda-Parr of the UNDP says, “When we get world leaders to recognise that 70% of the world’s GDP is unpaid work, they won’t say women working at home can’t qualify for pensions on an equal basis with men.”
Friday, July 23, 2010
Howard Zinn IS the BOMB!
Howard Zinn's The Bomb
By David Swanson
The late Howard Zinn's new book "The Bomb" is a brilliant little dissection of some of the central myths of our militarized society. Those who've read "A Terrible Mistake: The Murder of Frank Olson and the CIA's Secret Cold War Experiments," by H.P. Albarelli Jr. know that this is a year for publishing the stories of horrible things that the United States has done to French towns. In that case, Albarelli, describes the CIA administering LSD to an entire town, with deadly results. In "The Bomb," Zinn describes the U.S. military making its first use of napalm by dropping it all over another French town, burning anyone and anything it touched. Zinn was in one of the planes, taking part in this horrendous crime.
In mid-April 1945, the war in Europe was essentially over. Everyone knew it was ending. There was no military reason (if that's not an oxymoron) to attack the Germans stationed near Royan, France, much less to burn the French men, women, and children in the town to death. The British had already destroyed the town in January, similarly bombing it because of its vicinity to German troops, in what was widely called a tragic mistake. This tragic mistake was rationalized as an inevitable part of war, just as were the horrific firebombings that successfully reached German targets, just as was the later bombing of Royan with napalm. Zinn blames the Supreme Allied Command for seeking to add a "victory" in the final weeks of a war already won. He blames the local military commanders' ambitions. He blames the American Air Force's desire to test a new weapon. And he blames everyone involved -- which must include himself -- for "the most powerful motive of all: the habit of obedience, the universal teaching of all cultures, not to get out of line, not even to think about that which one has not been assigned to think about, the negative motive of not having either a reason or a will to intercede."
When Zinn returned from the war in Europe, he expected to be sent to the war in the Pacific, until he saw and rejoiced at seeing the news of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, 65 years ago this August. Only years later did Zinn come to understand the inexcusable crime of the greatest proportions that was the dropping of nuclear bombs in Japan, actions similar in some ways to the final bombing of Royan. The war with Japan was already over, the Japanese seeking peace and willing to surrender. Japan asked only that it be permitted to keep its emperor, a request that was later granted. But, like napalm, the nuclear bombs were weapons that needed testing. The second bomb, dropped on Nagasaki, was a different sort of bomb that also needed testing. President Harry Truman wanted to demonstrate nuclear bombs to the world and especially to Russia. And he wanted to end the war with Japan before Russia became part of it. The horrific form of mass murder he employed was in no way justifiable.
Zinn also goes back to dismantle the mythical reasons the United States was in the war to begin with. The United States, England, and France were imperial powers supporting each other's international aggressions in places like the Philippines. They opposed the same from Germany and Japan, but not aggression itself. Most of America's tin and rubber came from the Southwest Pacific. The United States made clear for years its lack of concern for the Jews being attacked in Germany. It also demonstrated its lack of opposition to racism through its treatment of African Americans and Japanese Americans. Franklin D. Roosevelt described fascist bombing campaigns over civilian areas as "inhuman barbarity" but then did the same on a much larger scale to German cities, which was followed up by the destruction on an unprecedented scale of Hiroshima and Nagasaki -- actions that came after years of dehumanizing the Japanese. Zinn points out that "LIFE magazine showed a picture of a Japanese person burning to death and commented: 'This is the only way.'" Aware that the war would end without any more bombing, and aware that U.S. prisoners of war would be killed by the bomb dropped on Nagasaki, the U.S. military went ahead and dropped the bombs.
Americans allowed these things to be done in their name, just as the Germans and Japanese allowed horrible crimes to be committed in their names. Zinn points out, with his trademark clarity, how the use of the word "we" blends governments together with peoples and serves to equate our own people with our military, while we demonize the people of other lands because of actions by their governments. "The Bomb" suggest a better way to think about such matters and firmly establishes that
--what the U.S. military is doing now, today, parallels the crimes of the past and shares their dishonorable motivations;
--the bad wars have a lot in common with the so-called "good war," about which there was little if anything good;
--Howard Zinn did far more in his life for peace than for war, and more for peace than just about anybody else, certainly more than several Nobel Peace Prize winners.
By David Swanson
The late Howard Zinn's new book "The Bomb" is a brilliant little dissection of some of the central myths of our militarized society. Those who've read "A Terrible Mistake: The Murder of Frank Olson and the CIA's Secret Cold War Experiments," by H.P. Albarelli Jr. know that this is a year for publishing the stories of horrible things that the United States has done to French towns. In that case, Albarelli, describes the CIA administering LSD to an entire town, with deadly results. In "The Bomb," Zinn describes the U.S. military making its first use of napalm by dropping it all over another French town, burning anyone and anything it touched. Zinn was in one of the planes, taking part in this horrendous crime.
In mid-April 1945, the war in Europe was essentially over. Everyone knew it was ending. There was no military reason (if that's not an oxymoron) to attack the Germans stationed near Royan, France, much less to burn the French men, women, and children in the town to death. The British had already destroyed the town in January, similarly bombing it because of its vicinity to German troops, in what was widely called a tragic mistake. This tragic mistake was rationalized as an inevitable part of war, just as were the horrific firebombings that successfully reached German targets, just as was the later bombing of Royan with napalm. Zinn blames the Supreme Allied Command for seeking to add a "victory" in the final weeks of a war already won. He blames the local military commanders' ambitions. He blames the American Air Force's desire to test a new weapon. And he blames everyone involved -- which must include himself -- for "the most powerful motive of all: the habit of obedience, the universal teaching of all cultures, not to get out of line, not even to think about that which one has not been assigned to think about, the negative motive of not having either a reason or a will to intercede."
When Zinn returned from the war in Europe, he expected to be sent to the war in the Pacific, until he saw and rejoiced at seeing the news of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, 65 years ago this August. Only years later did Zinn come to understand the inexcusable crime of the greatest proportions that was the dropping of nuclear bombs in Japan, actions similar in some ways to the final bombing of Royan. The war with Japan was already over, the Japanese seeking peace and willing to surrender. Japan asked only that it be permitted to keep its emperor, a request that was later granted. But, like napalm, the nuclear bombs were weapons that needed testing. The second bomb, dropped on Nagasaki, was a different sort of bomb that also needed testing. President Harry Truman wanted to demonstrate nuclear bombs to the world and especially to Russia. And he wanted to end the war with Japan before Russia became part of it. The horrific form of mass murder he employed was in no way justifiable.
Zinn also goes back to dismantle the mythical reasons the United States was in the war to begin with. The United States, England, and France were imperial powers supporting each other's international aggressions in places like the Philippines. They opposed the same from Germany and Japan, but not aggression itself. Most of America's tin and rubber came from the Southwest Pacific. The United States made clear for years its lack of concern for the Jews being attacked in Germany. It also demonstrated its lack of opposition to racism through its treatment of African Americans and Japanese Americans. Franklin D. Roosevelt described fascist bombing campaigns over civilian areas as "inhuman barbarity" but then did the same on a much larger scale to German cities, which was followed up by the destruction on an unprecedented scale of Hiroshima and Nagasaki -- actions that came after years of dehumanizing the Japanese. Zinn points out that "LIFE magazine showed a picture of a Japanese person burning to death and commented: 'This is the only way.'" Aware that the war would end without any more bombing, and aware that U.S. prisoners of war would be killed by the bomb dropped on Nagasaki, the U.S. military went ahead and dropped the bombs.
Americans allowed these things to be done in their name, just as the Germans and Japanese allowed horrible crimes to be committed in their names. Zinn points out, with his trademark clarity, how the use of the word "we" blends governments together with peoples and serves to equate our own people with our military, while we demonize the people of other lands because of actions by their governments. "The Bomb" suggest a better way to think about such matters and firmly establishes that
--what the U.S. military is doing now, today, parallels the crimes of the past and shares their dishonorable motivations;
--the bad wars have a lot in common with the so-called "good war," about which there was little if anything good;
--Howard Zinn did far more in his life for peace than for war, and more for peace than just about anybody else, certainly more than several Nobel Peace Prize winners.
Anti-torture Activists Meet Former Gitmo Detainees
American Anti-Torture Activists Visit Former Guantánamo Prisoners in Bermuda
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Monday, July 19, 2010
Contact: Matt Daloisio, 201-264-4424, daloisio@earthlink.net
Luke Hansen, 605-407-2799, lukejhansen@yahoo.com
New York City — Three Christian activists from Witness Against Torture
traveled to Bermuda on Friday, July 16, 2010 to meet with four Uyghur
men who were detained in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba for more than seven years.
(The Uyghur ethnic group primarily resides in western China.) The Bush
administration conceded that the men are not “enemy combatants,” and in
October 2008 a federal judge ordered their release. Eight months later,
four Uyghurs were resettled in Bermuda. Other Uyghur detainees were
resettled elsewhere while five Uyghurs remain in Guantánamo.
The purpose of the delegation to Bermuda is to build relationships with
the Uyghurs, seek their counsel concerning further advocacy for both
current and former Guantánamo prisoners, and to bring a message of
atonement and reconciliation from the American people to the former
prisoners. “In the United States, public discourse on Guantánamo is
mainly informed by various perspectives from the military, politicians
and the U.S. public,” says John Bambrick, a Chicago youth minister. “We
have come to Bermuda to seek the perspectives of men who have
experienced Guantánamo firsthand.”
“The Uyghur men in Bermuda, like us, are people of faith,” says Jeremy
Kirk, a Ph.D. student in social ethics at Union Theological Seminary in
New York City. “We are practicing our Christian faith by seeking
connection with our Muslim brothers, in whose detention and abuse we
have participated as U.S. taxpayers and citizens.”
On Saturday, the three activists visited the Uyghurs’ apartment, shared
a meal and swam in the ocean with the former prisoners, and swapped
stories about family and religious faith. The Uyghur men shared some of
their experiences of being in Guantánamo and discussed their gratitude
for and challenges associated with resettlement. (They are very grateful
to the Bermudan Government’s support and hospitality.) On Sunday, the
activists will speak with the Uyghurs in further detail about their
experiences at Guantánamo and the conditions currently faced by the men
who remain in detention. Luke Hansen, who is studying to become a Jesuit
priest, states, “One of the many things that has impressed me in our
conversations with these men, whom the Bush administration repeatedly
labeled as the ‘worst of the worst,’ is their gentleness and compassion.
While these men fiercely criticize the rationalizations behind their
detention, they have expressed no resentment towards their captors, but
rather have focused solely on the imperative to release the remaining
Uyghur detainees at Guantánamo.”
The delegation to Bermuda included:
John Bambrick, 31, works as a Catholic youth minister in Chicago and is
a member of the White Rose Catholic Worker. He earned his B.A. at
Marquette University in 2001 and his M.A. in Pastoral Studies from
Loyola University Chicago in 2008.
Luke Hansen, S.J., 28, is part of the Wisconsin Province of the Society
of Jesus (Jesuits). In May, Luke earned an M.A. at Loyola University
Chicago. His thesis is titled, “Countering Terrorism with Justice: A
Catholic Response to Policies of Indefinite Detention in the Fight
Against Terrorism.”
Jeremy Kirk, 32, is a Ph.D. student in social ethics at Union
Theological Seminary in New York City, where he studies interfaith
response to crisis and liberation theology. He has worked as an
organizer with various environmental and human rights groups.
All three are members of Witness Against Torture, a grassroots
organization that formed in December 2005 when twenty-five activists
walked to Guantánamo to visit the prisoners and protest torture
policies. Since then, the group has engaged in public education,
lobbying, demonstrations, and nonviolent civil disobedience.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Monday, July 19, 2010
Contact: Matt Daloisio, 201-264-4424, daloisio@earthlink.net
Luke Hansen, 605-407-2799, lukejhansen@yahoo.com
New York City — Three Christian activists from Witness Against Torture
traveled to Bermuda on Friday, July 16, 2010 to meet with four Uyghur
men who were detained in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba for more than seven years.
(The Uyghur ethnic group primarily resides in western China.) The Bush
administration conceded that the men are not “enemy combatants,” and in
October 2008 a federal judge ordered their release. Eight months later,
four Uyghurs were resettled in Bermuda. Other Uyghur detainees were
resettled elsewhere while five Uyghurs remain in Guantánamo.
The purpose of the delegation to Bermuda is to build relationships with
the Uyghurs, seek their counsel concerning further advocacy for both
current and former Guantánamo prisoners, and to bring a message of
atonement and reconciliation from the American people to the former
prisoners. “In the United States, public discourse on Guantánamo is
mainly informed by various perspectives from the military, politicians
and the U.S. public,” says John Bambrick, a Chicago youth minister. “We
have come to Bermuda to seek the perspectives of men who have
experienced Guantánamo firsthand.”
“The Uyghur men in Bermuda, like us, are people of faith,” says Jeremy
Kirk, a Ph.D. student in social ethics at Union Theological Seminary in
New York City. “We are practicing our Christian faith by seeking
connection with our Muslim brothers, in whose detention and abuse we
have participated as U.S. taxpayers and citizens.”
On Saturday, the three activists visited the Uyghurs’ apartment, shared
a meal and swam in the ocean with the former prisoners, and swapped
stories about family and religious faith. The Uyghur men shared some of
their experiences of being in Guantánamo and discussed their gratitude
for and challenges associated with resettlement. (They are very grateful
to the Bermudan Government’s support and hospitality.) On Sunday, the
activists will speak with the Uyghurs in further detail about their
experiences at Guantánamo and the conditions currently faced by the men
who remain in detention. Luke Hansen, who is studying to become a Jesuit
priest, states, “One of the many things that has impressed me in our
conversations with these men, whom the Bush administration repeatedly
labeled as the ‘worst of the worst,’ is their gentleness and compassion.
While these men fiercely criticize the rationalizations behind their
detention, they have expressed no resentment towards their captors, but
rather have focused solely on the imperative to release the remaining
Uyghur detainees at Guantánamo.”
The delegation to Bermuda included:
John Bambrick, 31, works as a Catholic youth minister in Chicago and is
a member of the White Rose Catholic Worker. He earned his B.A. at
Marquette University in 2001 and his M.A. in Pastoral Studies from
Loyola University Chicago in 2008.
Luke Hansen, S.J., 28, is part of the Wisconsin Province of the Society
of Jesus (Jesuits). In May, Luke earned an M.A. at Loyola University
Chicago. His thesis is titled, “Countering Terrorism with Justice: A
Catholic Response to Policies of Indefinite Detention in the Fight
Against Terrorism.”
Jeremy Kirk, 32, is a Ph.D. student in social ethics at Union
Theological Seminary in New York City, where he studies interfaith
response to crisis and liberation theology. He has worked as an
organizer with various environmental and human rights groups.
All three are members of Witness Against Torture, a grassroots
organization that formed in December 2005 when twenty-five activists
walked to Guantánamo to visit the prisoners and protest torture
policies. Since then, the group has engaged in public education,
lobbying, demonstrations, and nonviolent civil disobedience.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)