[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.htm>
-------------- 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