January 17, 2007
Stimson's apology to detainee lawyers
"An Apology to Detainees' Attorneys," January 17, 2007. Read why.
January 15, 2007
Talk on MCA on January 24, 2007, in Doylestown
Coalition for Peace Action (Central Bucks) &
Upper Bucks for Democracy
January 24, 7:30 p.m., Celtic Cross Room
Doylestown Presbyterian Church
127 E. Court St., Doylestown, PA 18901
Upper Bucks for Democracy
January 24, 7:30 p.m., Celtic Cross Room
Doylestown Presbyterian Church
127 E. Court St., Doylestown, PA 18901
Coalition for Peace Action (Central Bucks) and Upper Bucks for Democracy co-hosted Shawn Nolan, of the Federal Defender's Office, E.D. Pa., and recently returned from Guantánamo, where he has been working with detainee clients. He spoke about the Military Commissions Act (MCA) of 2006, the denial of habeas corpus, and the dangers they pose for U.S. Constitutional law and basic human rights. Nolan challenges the administration’s claims about who is imprisoned at Guantánamo and whether U.S. treatment of detainees accords with U.S. and international law.
“It’s outrageous. This is a classic study of government out of control. They go on TV and say, ‘We don’t torture,’ but they do!” He also disputes the government’s claim that “these are the worst of the worst.” According to Seton Hall Law School Professor Mark Denbeaux's analysis, “only 5 percent of the detainees were captured by United States forces. 86 percent of the detainees were arrested by either Pakistan or the Northern Alliance.” Many had been turned in by bounty hunters responding to U.S. leaflets dropped over Afghanistan promising “wealth and power beyond your dreams . . . millions of dollars.”
“It’s outrageous. This is a classic study of government out of control. They go on TV and say, ‘We don’t torture,’ but they do!” He also disputes the government’s claim that “these are the worst of the worst.” According to Seton Hall Law School Professor Mark Denbeaux's analysis, “only 5 percent of the detainees were captured by United States forces. 86 percent of the detainees were arrested by either Pakistan or the Northern Alliance.” Many had been turned in by bounty hunters responding to U.S. leaflets dropped over Afghanistan promising “wealth and power beyond your dreams . . . millions of dollars.”
“They’ve been stripped of habeas corpus, and they can’t challenge their detention,” Nolan says. “Some of them have been there five years. There’s no due process. This is Star Chamber litigation. No one can see the light of day.”
Raised in the area, Nolan graduated from Lansdale Catholic High School in 1981. In addition to his work with Federal Community Defender, he is Adjunct Professor of Social Justice with the Great Lakes College Association.
Raised in the area, Nolan graduated from Lansdale Catholic High School in 1981. In addition to his work with Federal Community Defender, he is Adjunct Professor of Social Justice with the Great Lakes College Association.
Letter to the Editor of the Intelligencer, Jan. 10
In "How to keep your job in Congress," Mr. Mullane advises Congressman Murphy to still “bring home the bacon” but not to "go native" down in DC and “sell out” to the “corporate barons.”
Mr. Mullane thinks that the voters don’t want to “lose in Iraq,” don’t want to pay more in taxes, don’t want “nationalized healthcare,” don’t want to impeach the president, neither should Congressman Murphy “follow the advice of committees and study groups.”
This is worse than useless advice. Of course nobody wants to lose, to pay more taxes, to pay for teapot museums, or any other kind of folly and unpleasantness--real or imagined.
Is Mullane trying to help our newly elected congressman keep his job or is he trying to make sure he loses it?
Anyway, if the Democrats have their way, earmark spending will disappear and the problem that his predecessor faced in voting for the teapot museum in order to secure funding for Bucks County won’t exist.
The voters, including many who voted for Patrick Murphy, are looking for serious change. If by “moderation” Mr. Mullane means “bringing home the bacon” and staying away from the big stuff, I think that will leave voters dissatisfied. Voters are fed up with corruption, they want out of Iraq, they want a solution to the healthcare mess, and they recognize that their standard of living is declining. Republicans suffered at the polls because Bush and GOP leadership failed the country.
But if it’s not going to be business as usual it may be difficult for Congressman Murphy to “bring home the bacon” and raise the millions of dollars necessary (by the conventional wisdom) for his reelection in 2008. If it is business as usual then many voters will be disappointed.
America faces serious problems for which Mr. Mullane’s one-liners are not helpful. Congressman Murphy has a tough job ahead and deserves better advice than what’s offered by our columnist.
We at Upper Bucks for Democracy and Bucks County Progressive Democrats of America do, however, join in Mr. Mullane’s final thought: Best of luck, Patrick, in your efforts to make things better.
Jeanne Doyle
Upper Bucks for Democracy
Mr. Mullane thinks that the voters don’t want to “lose in Iraq,” don’t want to pay more in taxes, don’t want “nationalized healthcare,” don’t want to impeach the president, neither should Congressman Murphy “follow the advice of committees and study groups.”
This is worse than useless advice. Of course nobody wants to lose, to pay more taxes, to pay for teapot museums, or any other kind of folly and unpleasantness--real or imagined.
Is Mullane trying to help our newly elected congressman keep his job or is he trying to make sure he loses it?
Anyway, if the Democrats have their way, earmark spending will disappear and the problem that his predecessor faced in voting for the teapot museum in order to secure funding for Bucks County won’t exist.
The voters, including many who voted for Patrick Murphy, are looking for serious change. If by “moderation” Mr. Mullane means “bringing home the bacon” and staying away from the big stuff, I think that will leave voters dissatisfied. Voters are fed up with corruption, they want out of Iraq, they want a solution to the healthcare mess, and they recognize that their standard of living is declining. Republicans suffered at the polls because Bush and GOP leadership failed the country.
But if it’s not going to be business as usual it may be difficult for Congressman Murphy to “bring home the bacon” and raise the millions of dollars necessary (by the conventional wisdom) for his reelection in 2008. If it is business as usual then many voters will be disappointed.
America faces serious problems for which Mr. Mullane’s one-liners are not helpful. Congressman Murphy has a tough job ahead and deserves better advice than what’s offered by our columnist.
We at Upper Bucks for Democracy and Bucks County Progressive Democrats of America do, however, join in Mr. Mullane’s final thought: Best of luck, Patrick, in your efforts to make things better.
Jeanne Doyle
Upper Bucks for Democracy
January 12, 2007
Intelligencer coverage of January 11 talk
Lawyer blasts prison
By Edward Levenson, Intelligencer, January 12, 2007
Foreigners being held for years without charges in the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, are worse off than death row inmates in American jails, according to a lawyer who represents several so-called enemy combatants.
“These conditions (at Guantanamo) really outstrip those on death row. We've got a real damaged population down there,” said Cristi Charpentier, a lawyer with the Federal Defender's Office in Philadelphia.
Charpentier, a graduate of Central Bucks West High School and the City University of New York Law School, spoke to about three dozen people at a meeting in the Plumstead Township building sponsored by Upper Bucks for Democracy, a peace advocacy group.
Her talk, originally scheduled for last week, came the same day as protests against the Guantanamo prison held outside the American base in Cuba, Washington and London.
About 450 detainees are held in the military prison, many of whom were captured in the early stages of the American invasion of Afghanistan launched in October 2001. While the government refuses to let their lawyers see the alleged evidence, Charpentier said the facts show few are al-Qaida fighters and even fewer among the terrorist ringleaders.
“Most of the men at Guantanamo Bay are not going to go to trial,” said Charpentier, whose clients include citizens of Afghanistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Uzbekistan. She and four colleagues in the Philadelphia defender's office were appointed in 2005 to represent detainees. Her regular duties in Philadelphia federal court involve filing appeals on behalf of death row inmates.
Rather than terrorists, the “enemy combatants” may be farmers and villagers who were turned in by neighbors eager to collect a bounty offered by the Americans, according to Charpentier. She passed out a copy of an Afghanistan leaflet that offered, in translation, “wealth and power beyond your dreams” for helping American forces.
After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the detainees were entitled to know why they are being held, Congress last year passed the Military Commissions Act to revoke the fundamental right of habeas corpus for enemy combatants. Charpentier said that flies in the face of America's traditional commitment to the rule of law, and the legislation is being challenged in a federal appeals court.
“Stripping of that right of habeas corpus is important to all of us,” she said. Even accused mass murderers are guaranteed that right in American courts.
Charpentier, who has made three trips to Guantanamo, said the tropical setting, with “wildflowers of every imaginable color,” belies the harsh environment for the prisoners. Lawyers stay in motel-like quarters far from the prison and are subjected by the military to very restrictive conditions in meeting with their clients.
“I'm not being told the truth. I'm being tolerated in the most stressed-out way possible,” she said.
Article's URL:
http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/113-01122007-1052806.html
By Edward Levenson, Intelligencer, January 12, 2007
Foreigners being held for years without charges in the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, are worse off than death row inmates in American jails, according to a lawyer who represents several so-called enemy combatants.
“These conditions (at Guantanamo) really outstrip those on death row. We've got a real damaged population down there,” said Cristi Charpentier, a lawyer with the Federal Defender's Office in Philadelphia.
Charpentier, a graduate of Central Bucks West High School and the City University of New York Law School, spoke to about three dozen people at a meeting in the Plumstead Township building sponsored by Upper Bucks for Democracy, a peace advocacy group.
Her talk, originally scheduled for last week, came the same day as protests against the Guantanamo prison held outside the American base in Cuba, Washington and London.
About 450 detainees are held in the military prison, many of whom were captured in the early stages of the American invasion of Afghanistan launched in October 2001. While the government refuses to let their lawyers see the alleged evidence, Charpentier said the facts show few are al-Qaida fighters and even fewer among the terrorist ringleaders.
“Most of the men at Guantanamo Bay are not going to go to trial,” said Charpentier, whose clients include citizens of Afghanistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Uzbekistan. She and four colleagues in the Philadelphia defender's office were appointed in 2005 to represent detainees. Her regular duties in Philadelphia federal court involve filing appeals on behalf of death row inmates.
Rather than terrorists, the “enemy combatants” may be farmers and villagers who were turned in by neighbors eager to collect a bounty offered by the Americans, according to Charpentier. She passed out a copy of an Afghanistan leaflet that offered, in translation, “wealth and power beyond your dreams” for helping American forces.
After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the detainees were entitled to know why they are being held, Congress last year passed the Military Commissions Act to revoke the fundamental right of habeas corpus for enemy combatants. Charpentier said that flies in the face of America's traditional commitment to the rule of law, and the legislation is being challenged in a federal appeals court.
“Stripping of that right of habeas corpus is important to all of us,” she said. Even accused mass murderers are guaranteed that right in American courts.
Charpentier, who has made three trips to Guantanamo, said the tropical setting, with “wildflowers of every imaginable color,” belies the harsh environment for the prisoners. Lawyers stay in motel-like quarters far from the prison and are subjected by the military to very restrictive conditions in meeting with their clients.
“I'm not being told the truth. I'm being tolerated in the most stressed-out way possible,” she said.
Article's URL:
http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/113-01122007-1052806.html
Guantanamo detainee lawyers attacked
Ms. Charpentier alluded to the interview that prompted this Washington Post editorial in her talk last night:
Unveiled threats
A Bush appointee's crude gambit on detainees' legal rights
January 12, 2007
MOST AMERICANS understand that legal representation for the accused is one of the core principles of the American way. Not, it seems, Cully Stimson, deputy assistant secretary of defense for detainee affairs. In a repellent interview yesterday with Federal News Radio, Mr. Stimson brought up, unprompted, the number of major U.S. law firms that have helped represent detainees at Guantanamo Bay.
"Actually you know I think the news story that you're really going to start seeing in the next couple of weeks is this: As a result of a FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] request through a major news organization, somebody asked, 'Who are the lawyers around this country representing detainees down there,' and you know what, it's shocking," he said.
Mr. Stimson proceeded to reel off the names of these firms, adding, "I think, quite honestly, when corporate CEOs see that those firms are representing the very terrorists who hit their bottom line back in 2001, those CEOs are going to make those law firms choose between representing terrorists or representing reputable firms, and I think that is going to have major play in the next few weeks. And we want to watch that play out."
Asked who was paying the firms, Mr. Stimson hinted of dark doings. "It's not clear, is it?" he said. "Some will maintain that they are doing it out of the goodness of their heart, that they're doing it pro bono, and I suspect they are; others are receiving monies from who knows where, and I'd be curious to have them explain that."
It might be only laughable that Mr. Stimson, during the interview, called Guantanamo "certainly, probably, the most transparent and open location in the world."
But it's offensive -- shocking, to use his word -- that Mr. Stimson, a lawyer, would argue that law firms are doing anything other than upholding the highest ethical traditions of the bar by taking on the most unpopular of defendants. It's shocking that he would seemingly encourage the firms' corporate clients to pressure them to drop this work. And it's shocking -- though perhaps not surprising -- that this is the person the administration has chosen to oversee detainee policy at Guantanamo.
See also the Guardian, January 12, 2007: "How Low Can You Go?" by Clive Stafford Smith.
See also the New York Times, January 13, 2007: "Official Attacks Top Law Firms over Detainees," by Neil A. Lewis, and editorial, "Round Up the Usual Lawyers."
See also OpEdNews.com, January 14, 2007: "Charles 'Cully' Stimson Should Be Fired for Threatening Lawyers Representing Detainees," by Brent Budowsky.
See also OpEdNews.com, January 15, 2007: "Pro Bono Law Firms Threatened by Gitmo Official for Defending Detainees," by Rob Kall.
See also "Law Deans Release Statement on Remarks of Cully Stimson Regarding Lawyers for Detainees," January 16, 2007.
See also the Los Angeles Times January 16, 2007, editorial: "Sliming the defense: A Pentagon official's overboard criticism of Gitmo lawyers is consistent with one bad strain of White House thought."
THE PENTAGON has disavowed some offensive criticism by one of its officials regarding American lawyers who have represented accused terrorists imprisoned at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. But the crankish comments of Charles "Cully" Stimson, the deputy assistant secretary of Defense for detainee affairs, reflect a more pervasive reluctance by the Bush administration to acknowledge that injustices have occurred at Guantanamo.
Sounding more like a first-time caller than a government official, Stimson told a radio interviewer last week that "when corporate CEOs see that those firms are representing the very terrorists who hit their bottom line back in 2001, those CEOs are going to make those law firms choose between representing terrorists or representing reputable firms." Not content to float the idea of a boycott, Stimson, a lawyer too, speculated darkly that although some attorneys representing detainees may be doing so as a public service, "others are receiving monies from who knows where, and I'd be curious to have them explain that." In an earlier period in U.S. history, that sort of hit-and-run insinuation was called McCarthyism.
Amid condemnation of Stimson's remarks from the legal profession, a Pentagon spokesman said they "do not represent the views of the Department of Defense or the thinking of its leadership." (Apparently a deputy assistant secretary is not part of the leadership.) For good measure, Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales said that "good lawyers representing the detainees is the best way to ensure that justice is done in these cases."
But contradicting Stimson — or, even better, firing him — can't alter the fact that his comments in one sense reflect the administration's attitude. Stimson referred not to "accused terrorists" or "suspected terrorists" but to "terrorists." From President Bush on down, the administration has downplayed the possibility that some of the more than 700 people who have been confined at Guantanamo were imprisoned unjustly (not to mention treated inhumanely). Never mind that about half of the original detainees have been released.
Before the U.S. Supreme Court ruled otherwise, the administration insisted that detainees at Guantanamo had no right to challenge their confinement in a U.S. court. The administration devised its own rules for military commissions to try them for alleged war crimes, until the high court ruled that Congress had to be involved. (Even then, the administration was able to convince Congress that detainees shouldn't be allowed to file habeas corpus petitions.)
These policies bespoke an exaggerated understanding of executive power, even in wartime, but they also reflected a certitude bordering on smugness that has characterized too much of the administration's conduct of the war on terror.
Many of the lawyers involved in detainee issues on a pro bono basis are motivated by loyalty to the Constitution, which the administration has sometimes appeared eager to overlook. Advocacy on behalf of due process is a form of patriotism and public service. Criminal prosecutors aren't usually in the business of tarnishing defense attorneys, for good reason, and it's important that the government maintain the same professionalism when prosecuting the war on terror.
"An Apology to Detainees' Attorneys," January 17, 2007.
Unveiled threats
A Bush appointee's crude gambit on detainees' legal rights
January 12, 2007
MOST AMERICANS understand that legal representation for the accused is one of the core principles of the American way. Not, it seems, Cully Stimson, deputy assistant secretary of defense for detainee affairs. In a repellent interview yesterday with Federal News Radio, Mr. Stimson brought up, unprompted, the number of major U.S. law firms that have helped represent detainees at Guantanamo Bay.
"Actually you know I think the news story that you're really going to start seeing in the next couple of weeks is this: As a result of a FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] request through a major news organization, somebody asked, 'Who are the lawyers around this country representing detainees down there,' and you know what, it's shocking," he said.
Mr. Stimson proceeded to reel off the names of these firms, adding, "I think, quite honestly, when corporate CEOs see that those firms are representing the very terrorists who hit their bottom line back in 2001, those CEOs are going to make those law firms choose between representing terrorists or representing reputable firms, and I think that is going to have major play in the next few weeks. And we want to watch that play out."
Asked who was paying the firms, Mr. Stimson hinted of dark doings. "It's not clear, is it?" he said. "Some will maintain that they are doing it out of the goodness of their heart, that they're doing it pro bono, and I suspect they are; others are receiving monies from who knows where, and I'd be curious to have them explain that."
It might be only laughable that Mr. Stimson, during the interview, called Guantanamo "certainly, probably, the most transparent and open location in the world."
But it's offensive -- shocking, to use his word -- that Mr. Stimson, a lawyer, would argue that law firms are doing anything other than upholding the highest ethical traditions of the bar by taking on the most unpopular of defendants. It's shocking that he would seemingly encourage the firms' corporate clients to pressure them to drop this work. And it's shocking -- though perhaps not surprising -- that this is the person the administration has chosen to oversee detainee policy at Guantanamo.
See also the Guardian, January 12, 2007: "How Low Can You Go?" by Clive Stafford Smith.
See also the New York Times, January 13, 2007: "Official Attacks Top Law Firms over Detainees," by Neil A. Lewis, and editorial, "Round Up the Usual Lawyers."
See also OpEdNews.com, January 14, 2007: "Charles 'Cully' Stimson Should Be Fired for Threatening Lawyers Representing Detainees," by Brent Budowsky.
See also OpEdNews.com, January 15, 2007: "Pro Bono Law Firms Threatened by Gitmo Official for Defending Detainees," by Rob Kall.
See also "Law Deans Release Statement on Remarks of Cully Stimson Regarding Lawyers for Detainees," January 16, 2007.
See also the Los Angeles Times January 16, 2007, editorial: "Sliming the defense: A Pentagon official's overboard criticism of Gitmo lawyers is consistent with one bad strain of White House thought."
THE PENTAGON has disavowed some offensive criticism by one of its officials regarding American lawyers who have represented accused terrorists imprisoned at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. But the crankish comments of Charles "Cully" Stimson, the deputy assistant secretary of Defense for detainee affairs, reflect a more pervasive reluctance by the Bush administration to acknowledge that injustices have occurred at Guantanamo.
Sounding more like a first-time caller than a government official, Stimson told a radio interviewer last week that "when corporate CEOs see that those firms are representing the very terrorists who hit their bottom line back in 2001, those CEOs are going to make those law firms choose between representing terrorists or representing reputable firms." Not content to float the idea of a boycott, Stimson, a lawyer too, speculated darkly that although some attorneys representing detainees may be doing so as a public service, "others are receiving monies from who knows where, and I'd be curious to have them explain that." In an earlier period in U.S. history, that sort of hit-and-run insinuation was called McCarthyism.
Amid condemnation of Stimson's remarks from the legal profession, a Pentagon spokesman said they "do not represent the views of the Department of Defense or the thinking of its leadership." (Apparently a deputy assistant secretary is not part of the leadership.) For good measure, Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales said that "good lawyers representing the detainees is the best way to ensure that justice is done in these cases."
But contradicting Stimson — or, even better, firing him — can't alter the fact that his comments in one sense reflect the administration's attitude. Stimson referred not to "accused terrorists" or "suspected terrorists" but to "terrorists." From President Bush on down, the administration has downplayed the possibility that some of the more than 700 people who have been confined at Guantanamo were imprisoned unjustly (not to mention treated inhumanely). Never mind that about half of the original detainees have been released.
Before the U.S. Supreme Court ruled otherwise, the administration insisted that detainees at Guantanamo had no right to challenge their confinement in a U.S. court. The administration devised its own rules for military commissions to try them for alleged war crimes, until the high court ruled that Congress had to be involved. (Even then, the administration was able to convince Congress that detainees shouldn't be allowed to file habeas corpus petitions.)
These policies bespoke an exaggerated understanding of executive power, even in wartime, but they also reflected a certitude bordering on smugness that has characterized too much of the administration's conduct of the war on terror.
Many of the lawyers involved in detainee issues on a pro bono basis are motivated by loyalty to the Constitution, which the administration has sometimes appeared eager to overlook. Advocacy on behalf of due process is a form of patriotism and public service. Criminal prosecutors aren't usually in the business of tarnishing defense attorneys, for good reason, and it's important that the government maintain the same professionalism when prosecuting the war on terror.
"An Apology to Detainees' Attorneys," January 17, 2007.
December 07, 2006
Talks on MCA on January 11 and 24, 2007
"So my answer [to question] is that the Military Commissions Act does not afford the detainees a fair trial, and the Congress would have been better off to take heed from what the Supreme Court was truly telling them in the decision of Hamdan, which is that if you aren't going to use the civil courts, which is where I practice, use the Code of Military Justice. We have things in place. And so you as involved taxpayers—or else you wouldn’t be here, you as involved citizens, you know, should really hear that."
—Cristi Charpentier, January 11, 2007
Coalition for Peace Action (Central Bucks) &
Upper Bucks for Democracy
January 11, 7 p.m., Plumstead Township Building
5186 Stump Road (0.4 mi east of 611 on right)
Plumsteadville, PA 18949
January 24, 7:30 p.m., Celtic Cross Room
Doylestown Presbyterian Church
127 E. Court St., Doylestown, PA 18901
Upper Bucks for Democracy
January 11, 7 p.m., Plumstead Township Building
5186 Stump Road (0.4 mi east of 611 on right)
Plumsteadville, PA 18949
January 24, 7:30 p.m., Celtic Cross Room
Doylestown Presbyterian Church
127 E. Court St., Doylestown, PA 18901
Coalition for Peace Action (Central Bucks) and Upper Bucks for Democracy will co-host Cristi Charpentier and Shawn Nolan, both of the Federal Defender's Office, E.D. Pa., and recently returned from Guantánamo, where they have been working with detainee clients. They will speak about the denial of habeas corpus, the Military Commissions Act (MCA) of 2006, and the dangers they pose for U.S. Constitutional law and basic human rights.
Ms. Charpentier, who grew up in Doylestown and graduated from CB West, will speak on January 11 at 7:00 p.m. in the Plumstead Township Building, 5186 Stump Rd., Plumsteadville, PA 18949, and Mr. Nolan on January 24 at 7:30 p.m. in the Celtic Cross Room of the Doylestown Presbyterian Church, 127 E. Court St., Doylestown, PA 18901.
Ms. Charpentier and Mr. Nolan participated in the Guantánamo teach-in on October 5, 2006, at Temple University's Beasley School of Law. Background on Guantánamo from Legal Times:
When the U.S. military began shipping prisoners from the war on terror to Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, one goal was clear: to keep them outside the reach of the U.S. court system. But nearly five years later, those cases remain stuck exactly where the Bush administration didn't want them to be. [continued]
November 20, 2006
No monthly meeting in December
Upper Bucks for Democracy will not meet in December. See you in 2007!
October 11, 2006
Free screening of Iraq for Sale on Thursday, November 2, 7:30 p.m.
Plumstead Democrats & Upper Bucks for Democracy
Plumstead Township Building
5186 Stump Road (0.4 mi east of 611 on right)
Plumsteadville, PA 18949
Plumstead Township Building
5186 Stump Road (0.4 mi east of 611 on right)
Plumsteadville, PA 18949
Iraq for Sale: The War Profiteers
The Plumstead Democrats and Upper Bucks for Democracy will co-host a free public screening of the documentary Iraq for Sale: The War Profiteers, by Robert Greenwald (Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price, Outfoxed, and Uncovered). Click here to reserve your seat.
September 08, 2006
Meeting on October 5, 2006
Upper Bucks for Democracy will meet at Democratic headquarters, 17 West Court St. in Doylestown, at 7 p.m. to support our candidates by phone banking.
August 03, 2006
Meeting on September 7, 2006
Upper Bucks for Democracy
Plumstead Township Building
5186 Stump Road (0.4 mi east of 611 on right)
Plumsteadville, PA 18949
Plumstead Township Building
5186 Stump Road (0.4 mi east of 611 on right)
Plumsteadville, PA 18949
PA Action, P4P, the 2006 Elections, and the Progressive Movement
Chuck Pennacchio, Jeanne and Mike will lead a discussion of the following questions:
1. What and who is PA Action and how can we work together--locally, regionally, statewide, nationally, and internationally?
2. What can we do through the 2006 elections to advance our shared concerns?
3. How does our coalition building and election activity fit into the larger picture of movement politics in Pennsylvania and beyond?
4. What does the P4P Senate campaign of May 16 offer in the way of resources, model building, and new opportunities?
1. What and who is PA Action and how can we work together--locally, regionally, statewide, nationally, and internationally?
2. What can we do through the 2006 elections to advance our shared concerns?
3. How does our coalition building and election activity fit into the larger picture of movement politics in Pennsylvania and beyond?
4. What does the P4P Senate campaign of May 16 offer in the way of resources, model building, and new opportunities?
PA Action is collecting clothes, books, CDs, DVDs, VHS tapes, and cassettes to raise funds to support their campaigns.
Note: Video of the Middle East War Forum with Scott Ritter and Ray McGovern on July 22 is now available for $12 plus postage. Email UpperBucksforDemocracy@yahoo.com.
July 24, 2006
Meeting on August 3, 2006
Ben Shapiro will talk about America Votes PA, a state PAC working to educate voters on the important issues in Pennsylvania. It is a partner of America Votes, the nation’s largest coalition dedicated to turning out the vote in 2006. Comprised of a historic partnership between many of the largest progressive, membership-based groups in the nation, America Votes is independent of any political party, and is singularly focused on communicating with voters on the issues. This election cycle, America Votes will work in 8 targeted states, including Pennsylvania, Ohio, Minnesota, Michigan, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, and Wisconsin, to raise awareness on a broad range of issues including the economy, health care, the environment, education, and civil and human rights.
July 07, 2006
Middle East War Forum with Scott Ritter and Ray McGovern on July 22
The Middle East War: How We Got into Iraq,
How We Get Out, and How We Stay Out of Iran
How We Get Out, and How We Stay Out of Iran
Guest Speakers: Scott Ritter and Ray McGovern
Saturday, July 22, 7 p.m.
BuxMont Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
2040 Street Road, Warrington, PA (just east of Rt. 611)
2040 Street Road, Warrington, PA (just east of Rt. 611)
Scott Ritter: As a U.S. Marine intelligence officer and the United Nations' top weapons inspector, Scott led 14 inspection missions in Iraq between 1991 and 1998. Ritter also spent several months of the Gulf War serving under General Norman Schwarzkopf with Marine Central Command headquarters in Saudi Arabia. Scott is the author of Iraq Confidential (www.iraqconfidential.com), published in October 2005 by Nation Books. "The important thing to know about Scott Ritter is that he was right." --Seymour Hersh
Ray McGovern: A senior CIA analyst for 27 years, Ray's duties included chairing National Intelligence Estimates and preparing the President' Daily Brief (PDB). These, the most authoritative genres of intelligence reporting, have been the focus of press reporting on "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq and on what the president was told before 9/11. During the mid-eighties, Ray was one of the senior analysts conducting early morning briefings of the PDB one-on-one with the Vice President and other senior administration officials. Ray is in the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity.
Larry Glick, formerly a security inspector at U.S. atomic weapons facilities, will moderate.
The forum is sponsored by Upper Bucks for Democracy and U.S. Tour of Duty. Local co-sponsors are the BuxMont Unitarian Universalist Fellowship Peace Initiative, the Coalition for Peace Action, the Peace Center, the Tikkun Community of Philadelphia, Hunterdon (NJ) for Democracy, Lower Bucks for Democracy, OpEdNews.com, America Votes, and PA Action.
$10 Admission--but no one will be turned away.
For more information, email upperbucksfordemocracy@yahoo.com.
July 03, 2006
Meeting on July 6, 2006
Dani Pere will be our guest. Ms. Pere has been the lead Field Coordinator for the Alliance for Retired Americans since 2002. She has successfully worked to create, build, and politically establish the Oregon, Washington, Nevada, and Pennsylvania Alliance for Retired Americans state chapters. Ms. Pere has successfully led two educational campaigns in Pennsylvania: (1) The Medicare Education Project (2004), which focused on extensive peer to peer education of the senior population concerning the effects of the Medicare Modernization Act and (2) the Social Security Education Project (2005), in which she led the Pennsylvania Alliance for Retired Americans into colleges and universities across the state to create a dialogue between seniors and students on the controversial proposals to privatize the Social Security system.
Currently, Ms. Pere is leading her newest project under the Pennsylvania Alliance for Retired Americans – the Medicare Education Project Phase II: “The Implementation of the Medicare Modernization Act: Assessing the Impact on Pennsylvania Retirees,” a pilot research study she developed with a grant for Indiana University of Pennsylvania. By designing this project to provide first-hand research on how the implementation of Medicare Part D Prescription Drug Benefit legislation is impacting Pennsylvania seniors, Ms. Pere is working to accurately document how the new Medicare Rx benefit is affecting affordability and access to prescription drug coverage for Pennsylvania retirees by utilizing the case study method.
Currently, Ms. Pere is leading her newest project under the Pennsylvania Alliance for Retired Americans – the Medicare Education Project Phase II: “The Implementation of the Medicare Modernization Act: Assessing the Impact on Pennsylvania Retirees,” a pilot research study she developed with a grant for Indiana University of Pennsylvania. By designing this project to provide first-hand research on how the implementation of Medicare Part D Prescription Drug Benefit legislation is impacting Pennsylvania seniors, Ms. Pere is working to accurately document how the new Medicare Rx benefit is affecting affordability and access to prescription drug coverage for Pennsylvania retirees by utilizing the case study method.
Craig Kaufman will also join us. Craig co-founded and co-directs PA Action, a statewide organization centered in Bucks and SE PA, focusing on progressive issues, with current campaigns on Medicare Part D, federal budget/tax issues, and GOTV 2006. PA Action is working to open a long-term community center/books-clothes giveaway space this summer in Bucks. He ran Bucks offices for John Kerry in 2004 (with historic turnout and success) and swept all ten 2005 races as Bristol Democrats' campaign manager. He was an early leader of Student Environmental Action Coalition, the largest student group in the US at the time, helping defeat Hydroquebec and being a delegate to the UNCED preparatory at the UN. He founded and directed a diversity-mediation nonprofit for 8 years and built and ran a New Mexico Greens US Congress campaign in 1998 (Bob Anderson, 1998 --he was hired initially as Carol Miller's campaign manager, who along with Anderson posted the top two third-party national election results in decades). He is proud to have settled in Pennsylvania.
Note: In the wake of the recent flooding, we will be passing the hat for the extremely hard-working Upper Black Eddy Fire Department.
May 22, 2006
Meeting on June 1, 2006
Where do we go from here?
Our June meeting will be a celebration of Chuck Pennacchio's campaign for U.S. Senate and what it represented to the citizens of Pennsylvania. We will talk about how to keep the momentum going across the state of Pennsylvania.
Chuck Pennacchio; Jeanne and Mike Doyle; Roger Balson, Progressive Democrats of America; John Morgan, Berks DFA; and Jon Soden of Lehigh Valley DFA will be hosting.
June is designated Torture Awareness Month by Amnesty International USA and numerous cosponsors. Visit their website TortureAwareness.org for actions you can take. The Road to Guantanamo opens in theaters on June 23. See also AmnestyBucksMont.org.
May 07, 2006
Coalition for Peace Action Voter Guide
The Coalition for Peace Action has published a very helpful and revealing Peace Voter Guide to the Pennsylvania congressional candidates. Check it out.
April 12, 2006
No monthly meeting in May
UpperBucksforDemocracy will not hold a monthly meeting in May in order to focus all our time and energy on the campaigns of Progressive candidates like Chuck Pennacchio for U.S. Senate (Chuck2006.com) and Paul Lang for PA Senate (ElectLang.com), both of whom we strongly endorse. Members are urged to log into DemocracyforAmerica's DFALink and register their support for these candidates. (And please register as a member of our UpperBucksforDemocracy chapter if you have not already done so!)
Our next meeting will be Thursday, June 1, with a couple of steering committee meetings between now and then.
Our next meeting will be Thursday, June 1, with a couple of steering committee meetings between now and then.
March 13, 2006
Meeting on April 6, 2006
Cyril Mychalejko, assistant editor of Upside Down World, www.upsidedownworld.org, will be traveling to Ecuador in April to work as a human rights observer with the Intag Solidarity Network. ISN is an organization formed with the people of the Intag region of Ecuador as they resist efforts by the Ecuadorian government, international financial institutions, and multinational corporations to build a large-scale copper mine near the community of Junin. Cyril will discuss the mining conflict and ISN’s Human Rights Observer Program. He has committed to stay in Ecuador for one year.
Tom Lingengelter will speak about PACleanSweep.
Mike Doyle will speak about the voting machine issue.
Note: We are transitioning from Meetup to the new Democracy for America Link software so we ask old and new members to please register at DFALink.com and help make this work!
February 17, 2006
January 24, 2006
Meeting on February 2, 2006
Marty Schor will discuss Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) legislative initiatives, the status of PDA organization in PA, and ratification of the PDA Spokescouncil Charter.
Dr. Lawrence Davidson, Middle East history professor at West Chester University, and Dr. Janet Amighi, anthropologist at Montgomery County Community College, will present a slide show (Power Point) of their recent trip to Iran and Syria with Conscience International. They will describe their experiences meeting with Iranians and Syrians and discuss the politics of the region. Janet lived in Iran for seven years in the 1970s and has written a book entitled The Zoroastrians of Iran. Lawrence has written three books on the Middle East: A Concise History of the Middle East, America’s Palestine, and Islamic Fundamentalism.
December 20, 2005
Meeting on January 5, 2006
Paul Lang, www.electlang.com, will speak about his campaign for the PA Senate in 2006.
This past November, Det Ansinn delivered a decisive victory for Democrats in Doylestown Borough. He's dedicated to helping fellow Democrats and progressives to do the same. From candidate petition to election day, Det will be sharing his experiences in running an aggressive municipal campaign. Presentation will include slide show, strategies, and open discussion.
As a dual DFA and PDA chapter, Upper Bucks for Democracy will welcome Kathi Ember and Roger Balson.
Kathi is the PDA chapter coordinator for Pennsylvania, and has been identified by National PDA as the Pennsylvania State PDA contact. She is directly involved with the chapter in Berks County, where she lives, and the Kutztown Area Democratic Club. PDA National has encouraged states to utilize either a caucus model, or to at least find ways to coordinate groups through some kind of state organization.
Roger is working with Kathi to organize PDA in PA. He's also organizing a chapter in Delaware County, Delco Progressives, and is the website editor for the PA Progressives, the statewide networking organization helping to facilitate communication and planning between PDA chapters and other progressive organizations in PA.
In addition to their own two chapters, so far Roger and Kathi have visited two of the eight PDA-related organizations in PA: the Chester County Democratic Coalition in Chester County and Pocono Progressives in Monroe County.
As a dual DFA and PDA chapter, Upper Bucks for Democracy will welcome Kathi Ember and Roger Balson.
Kathi is the PDA chapter coordinator for Pennsylvania, and has been identified by National PDA as the Pennsylvania State PDA contact. She is directly involved with the chapter in Berks County, where she lives, and the Kutztown Area Democratic Club. PDA National has encouraged states to utilize either a caucus model, or to at least find ways to coordinate groups through some kind of state organization.
Roger is working with Kathi to organize PDA in PA. He's also organizing a chapter in Delaware County, Delco Progressives, and is the website editor for the PA Progressives, the statewide networking organization helping to facilitate communication and planning between PDA chapters and other progressive organizations in PA.
In addition to their own two chapters, so far Roger and Kathi have visited two of the eight PDA-related organizations in PA: the Chester County Democratic Coalition in Chester County and Pocono Progressives in Monroe County.
Upper Bucks for Democracy will be celebrating our first anniversary. Jeanne and Mike will talk about our first year and our accomplishments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
