[News] ADC-SF attacked in Chronicle

Anti-Imperialist News News at freedomarchives.org
Wed Aug 24 16:26:40 EDT 2005



Below is an editorial in today's chronicle that attack ADC-SF (the link on 
the web version goes to our local website) and others as opposing US 
governement to combat Islamic terrorism (see paragraph below pulled from 
editorial) .

We will be reponding to the email and sending out an action alert. 
Meanwhile feel free to send your own letter.  This person poses as 
progressive person,  proceeds to red-bait, race-bate and attack anyone to 
the left of Diane Feinstein, so it shouldn't be hard to respond. So please 
write a letter.

Rayan Elamine - ADC-SF

Letters to the Editor:

To comment on news stories in the main section of the newspaper or to opine 
on views expressed on the Opinion pages, contact Letters to the Editor.

Please limit your letters to 200 or fewer words ... shorter letters have a 
better chance of being selected for publication.

The editor prefers e-mail. The address is 
<mailto:letters at sfchronicle.com>letters at sfchronicle.com
(Please paste the text into the e-mail; do not send attachments. Our 
virus-detecting software will delete e-mail with attachments.)

Or Fax: (415) 543-7708.

Postal-mail is OK, too:
Letters to the Editor
901 Mission St.
San Francisco, CA 94103



"Groups like <http://www.al-awda.org/sanfrancisco/>Al-Awda (The Palestine 
Right to Return Coalition) and <http://www.mecaforpeace.org/index.html>The 
Middle East Children's Alliance, while having seemingly nothing to do with 
this debate, are in fact organizations whose opposition to Israel's 
existence also includes a fair amount of anti-American sentiment. Then 
there's the <http://www.adcsf.org/>American Arab Anti-Discrimination 
Committee, which has opposed every effort of the U.S. government to combat 
Islamic terrorism, whether at home or abroad."

   <http://oascentral.sfgate.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.sfgate.com/utils/printable/1871833006/Middle1/default/empty.gif/33666338383166613432643832623230?kw=OPI+POL>
[]

<http://www.sfgate.com/>
SF Gate
         <http://www.sfgate.com/>www.sfgate.com 
<http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2005/08/24/cstillwell.DTL>Return 
to regular view

<http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2005/08/24/cstillwell.DTL>OPINION: 
San Francisco Declares Itself a Military-Free Zone
- <mailto:cstillwell at sfgate.com>Cinnamon Stillwell
Wednesday, August 24, 2005

Everyone knows that San Francisco is a focal point for anti-war sentiment. 
Protests, civil disobedience and other acts designed to show opposition to 
the war in Iraq are standard fare in these parts. But now it seems that San 
Francisco anti-war activists have taken their opposition to the war in Iraq 
a step further.

Not content with simply protesting the war, they've trained their sights on 
all things military. In an apparent effort to rid the city of any semblance 
of its military history, various leftist groups, and even some city 
officials, are trying to erase the military's presence altogether. In 
short, San Francisco has declared itself a military-free zone.

Following on the heels of their success in sometimes violently shutting 
down job fairs that include military recruiters on college campuses, the 
<http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2005/05/04/cstillwell.DTL>counterrecruitment 
movement is now looking to broaden its influence. Instead of merely 
protesting the existence of military recruiters on campuses, the movement 
wants to ban them altogether. Proposition I, a measure that will be on the 
ballot this November, seeks to do just that.

Put together by a group called <http://www.collegenotcombat.org/>College 
Not Combat, the <http://www.collegenotcombat.org/initiative.cgi>initiative 
of the same name talks tough on the surface. But it doesn't have any teeth. 
The nonbinding measure simply asks that individual schools and colleges 
consider banning military recruiters and denying recruiters access to their 
student directories, which would violate section 9258 of the 
<http://www.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml?src=pb>No Child Left Behind Act. In 
the process, these schools could very well have to forgo federal funds. 
Given that such institutions are unlikely to want to get off the federal 
gravy train, it's doubtful they will choose to take this action.

The initiative also suggests that colleges create scholarship funds and 
grants to provide alternatives to the so-called economic draft for 
low-income students. Since scholarships and grants already exist for 
low-income students, this request is redundant. In general, the proposition 
amounts to little more than wishful thinking.

Feel-Good Measure

So it seems San Franciscans will be asked to vote on yet another in a 
series of what I like to call "feel-good measures," much like 
<http://www.smartvoter.org/2004/11/02/ca/sf/meas/N/>Proposition N last 
year, which demanded the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. Since city 
governments have no jurisdiction over such matters, the initiative, 
although it passed, had zero effect.

But one can always rely on the majority of San Francisco residents to 
support these symbolic measures, and so the College Not Combat initiative 
may succeed. If it does, San Francisco voters will have blindly exercised 
their anti-military prejudice with little thought for the motivations of 
those behind the measure in question.

When it comes to the College Not Combat initiative, the 
<http://www.collegenotcombat.org/endorsers.cgi>list of endorsers is a 
veritable Who's Who of moderate to radical leftist groups.  Beyond the 
predictable backing of Green Party luminaries such as Supervisor Chris Daly 
and former Board of Supervisors president Matt Gonzalez, endorsers largely 
consist of anti-war, socialist and pro-Palestinian organizations.

Anti-Israel -- and anti-American

Groups like <http://www.al-awda.org/sanfrancisco/>Al-Awda (The Palestine 
Right to Return Coalition) and <http://www.mecaforpeace.org/index.html>The 
Middle East Children's Alliance, while having seemingly nothing to do with 
this debate, are in fact organizations whose opposition to Israel's 
existence also includes a fair amount of anti-American sentiment. Then 
there's the <http://www.adcsf.org/>American Arab Anti-Discrimination 
Committee, which has opposed every effort of the U.S. government to combat 
Islamic terrorism, whether at home or abroad.

While it's obvious what socialist groups would stand to gain from 
undermining the U.S. military and by extension the capitalist system it 
defends, one might wonder at the motivations of the other groups backing 
the measure. Could it be they have some interest in weakening the U.S. 
military?

Navy in a Jam

Continuing their crusade against the military, 
<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/08/09/BAGLJE50C21.DTL>anti-war 
groups have asked San Francisco radio station KMEL-FM not to accept 
sponsorship from the Navy for its annual Summer Jam concert in Mountain 
View. Despite the fact that the Navy has sponsored the concert for at least 
10 of its 19 years, these groups are demanding that it suddenly stop doing 
so now.

Their rationale is based on the ever-present 
<http://www.dod.mil/prhome/poprep2002/chapter2/c2_raceth.htm>canard that 
minorities are disproportionately recruited for the military. They claim 
that the station is "using hip-hop to promote the military to young people 
of color," as if the mere presence of a Navy booth at the concert offering 
young people another choice in life is evidence of a sinister agenda.

The fact that all recruits today, whatever their race, are volunteers seems 
to mean little to anti-war activists, who insist on portraying American 
soldiers either as victims or butchers, depending on the cause at hand. In 
this case, it's simply opposition to the war in Iraq. In 
<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/08/09/BAGLJE50C21.DTL>a 
letter sent to Clear Channel, the company that owns KMEL as well as the 
liberal Air America, activists hysterically equated the Navy's sponsorship 
of the concert with promoting "the Bush administration's pro-war agenda." 
To them, any approach that doesn't automatically demonize the U.S. military 
is somehow amoral.

Radical Pink

This attitude becomes less surprising when its source is considered. At the 
helm of the usual leftist suspects is San Francisco's 
<http://www.globalexchange.org/>Global Exchange and its subsidiary, 
<http://www.codepink4peace.org/index.php>Code Pink Women for Peace. The 
antics of Code Pink members, which mostly consist of members parading 
around in silly pink costumes, disguise a political purpose that is far 
more radical than the surface would suggest.

The group is headed by Medea Benjamin, who, beyond defending various 
dictatorial regimes against "U.S. aggression" and famously disrupting press 
conferences, is best known for 
<http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=16540>spearheading 
the drive to deliver 
<http://www.spacewar.com/2005/041231172536.nm63arjn.html>$600,000 in cash 
and supplies to "the other side" in Fallujah. In other words, her 
organization may have funded the Islamic terrorists who had taken over the 
town, imposed a <http://slate.msn.com/id/2110762/>Taliban-like state on its 
inhabitants, 
<http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/11/22/eveningnews/main657134.shtml>tortured 
and beheaded hostages (both Iraqi and otherwise) and killed American 
soldiers and civilians (remember the lynched contractors?). More recently, 
Code Pink has jumped on the Cindy Sheehan bandwagon, along with the rest of 
the anti-war movement.

With all this experience trying to undercut the U.S. military, it should 
come as no surprise that Benjamin and her buddies were involved in the KMEL 
protest. But despite their efforts, which included a protest in front of 
the radio station, the concert went on as planned, with Navy sponsorship 
intact. Chalk one up for the good guys.

Sinking the Ship

Probably the most blatant example of San Francisco's anti-military bias was 
displayed last month by the city's Board of Supervisors when 
<http://www2.cbs5.com/localwire/localfsnews/bcn/2005/07/12/n/HeadlineNews/SF-SUPERVISORS/resources_bcn_html>they 
voted 3-8 against docking the WWII/Korean War-era USS Iowa as a floating 
museum at the Port of San Francisco. This was after the local Congressional 
delegation secured $3 million to move the Iowa from Rhode Island to San 
Francisco because a study had shown the ship would bring in 500,000 
visitors a year.

But regardless of the benefits the Iowa could have brought to the city in 
increased tourism revenue, the supervisors, in typical knee-jerk fashion, 
wouldn't allow it in San Francisco. Instead, the ship may 
<http://www.tracypress.com/local/2005-07-23-iowa.php>go to Stockton, a port 
city whose officials are obviously much more sensible than their 
counterparts in San Francisco.

Supervisors who voted against the resolution based their decision on 
opposition to the war in Iraq and the military's enforcement of the federal 
"don't ask, don't tell" policy. Once again, these issues are simply being 
used as excuses to cover up anti-military and anti-American sympathies 
across the board.

As Supervisor Chris Daly so forthrightly 
<http://www2.cbs5.com/localwire/localfsnews/bcn/2005/07/12/n/HeadlineNews/SF-SUPERVISORS/resources_bcn_html>put 
it, "I am sad to say I am not proud of the history of the United States of 
America since the 1940s." That's an awful lot of ground to write off, but 
there you have it.

Voice of Moderation

Senator Dianne Feinstein, the former mayor of San Francisco and a voice of 
moderation when it comes to her hometown, was not at all happy about the 
decision.

Feinstein 
<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/07/14/BAGLJDNMCA1.DTL>told 
The Chronicle: "This isn't the San Francisco that I've known and loved and 
grew up in and was born in. I thought that in view of what's going on and 
in view of the loss of lives of our men and women, it was a very petty 
decision." Her comments demonstrate that showing respect for the military 
needn't involve partisanship.

But it seems that many among the supervisors' liberal constituency 
supported the decision, labeling the USS Iowa nothing more than a 
"celebration of war." Such attitudes are an insult to the blood, sweat and 
tears of those generations that fought to retain the freedoms we all enjoy 
today.

Indeed, many of the city's veterans were incensed over the decision and 
rightly took it as a slap in the face, not to mention the nonprofit 
organization Historic Ships at Memorial Square and the USS Iowa Veterans 
Association, both of which tried for years to bring the Iowa to San 
Francisco.

Angels Away

San Francisco's attitude toward the military is evident in other areas as 
well. A group that calls itself the 
<http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/~lcushing/addpages/PN01.html>Bay Area Peace 
Navy has been on a quest to rid the city of Fleet Week and the spectacular, 
albeit loud, air shows of the Blue Angels. So far they've been 
unsuccessful, but give it time.

The relatively 
<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2002/11/09/asparks.DTL>paltry 
funding for San Francisco's Veterans Day Parade and Memorial commemoration 
also speaks volumes about where the city's priorities lie. When 
<http://www.journalism.sfsu.edu/www/pubs/gater/fall95/oct31/01.html>the 
Board of Supervisors renamed Army Street "Cesar Chavez Street" in 1995, it 
was yet another not-so-subtle jab at the military.

If the city truly wanted to rid itself of military symbols, it would have 
to dig up the graves at the San Francisco National Cemetery and raze all 
other evidence of the military's presence at the Presidio (including 
extensive Buffalo Soldier sites), pave over Crissy Field, bulldoze the War 
Memorial complex on Van Ness Avenue and knock down the Lone Sailor statue 
at the north end of the Golden Gate Bridge. Since San Francisco has a long 
and rich military history, there certainly wouldn't be any shortage of 
monuments to destroy.

Lest it be forgotten, the city's relationship with the military is a 
two-way street. After all, many residents would not have survived 
<http://www.sfmuseum.org/1906/navops.html>the 1906 earthquake without the 
Navy's assistance. So let's just say for the sake of argument that San 
Francisco succeeds in cutting off all military ties. Here's what could happen:

-- The next time San Francisco finds itself in need of help from the Coast 
Guard or the National Guard, the city would be on iits own.

-- Were a terrorist attack -- or an earthquake or some other natural 
disaster -- to occur in San Francisco, the federal governnment would just 
ignore all requests for assistance.

-- Should a foreign nation decide to invade and conquer the vulnerable 
coastal city, it would meet with little resistance, especially considering 
the pacifist attitude of many of its residents.

-- All federal funds would be cut off immediately.

Of course, none of this is going to happen, but one can dream.

Cinnamon Stillwell is a Bay Area writer. She can be reached at 
<mailto:cinnamonstillwell at yahoo.com>cinnamonstillwell at yahoo.com


URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2005/08/24/cstillwell.DTL


-------------------------------------------
American Arab Anti Discrimination Committee
San Francisco Bay Area Chapter
522 Valencia Blvd   San Francisco, CA 94110
(415) 861-7444  adcsf at hotmail.com
-------------------------------------------




----------

The Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
(415) 863-9977
www.freedomarchives.org 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20050824/6fb56f0a/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 1b39065.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 706 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20050824/6fb56f0a/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 1b390a3.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3603 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20050824/6fb56f0a/attachment-0001.jpg>


More information about the News mailing list