FOUR GIANT REASONS TO REMOVE THE STATUES

By Lee Camp, Consortium News.

July 1, 2020




https://popularresistance.org/four-giant-reasons-to-remove-the-statues/






From A Robert E. Lee Descendant.

We should relocate our racist statues to museums where we can remember our racist history in the appropriate context.

I’m a descendant of General Robert E. Lee.

My family also descends from George Washington and John Marshall, the fourth chief justice of the Supreme Court. (The oligarchy was a rather small club back in the day.) And I, along with many other Lee descendants, say: Remove the statues.

Yet, this week President Donald Trump has made it his mission to catch and prosecute those who have taken down statues. I’m positive he’s not doing it out of any racist ideology, although it doesn’t help that he also retweeted a white power message soon afterwards.

With that said, here are four exceedingly stupid reasons to keep the statues in place, and how to refute them. If you agree with any of these arguments… ummm, stop doing that.

1) Removing statues means we will never again know our history.

YES! One can only learn history from metallic facsimiles which consist of 30 percent copper, 20 perent tin, and 50 percent pigeon shit. Seeing these monuments is the only way to learn about things. I myself had never heard of the existence of long pointy sticks until I saw the Washington Monument. I didn’t know of America’s love affair with beans until I saw the big shiny one in Chicago. And I didn’t know the creator of McDonald’s was a founding father until I saw the giant arch in St. Louis. (They have yet to paint it golden though.)

2) Our statues teach our children what to value in society.

I couldn’t agree more. Judging by the numbers of statue subjects, women and people of color are roughly 95 percent less important than horses. Indeed, our equine friends have exceedingly more representation in the monument world, but that is simply because they have accomplished so very much. Many of our best presidents were horses. A horse invented the light bulb. (You might argue that’s not true, but without a statue about it, you can’t prove it.)

3) The Confederate statues are not racist.

Indeed! They are just large monuments to remind us of the military prowess of brave men who fought… on the losing side of a war to keep black people as their property. Or in the case of Columbus, bravely fought… to claim he landed in India before enslaving and torturing–Let’s not get bogged down in the details. Let’s just leave it at “military prowess.”

Unfortunately, the statues are unequivocally racist. Most of the Confederate ones weren’t even put up immediately following the Civil War. I spoke with professor David Goldfield, one of the top Civil War historians in the country and the author of “America Aflame: How The Civil War Created A Nation.” He told me, “Most of these statues and memorials were put up during the height of the Jim Crow era, much less to commemorate the Confederate dead and the war itself, than to put an exclamation point on white supremacy and declare that African Americans – their past, their present, and their future – don’t matter. They’re invisible.”

And in terms of the Confederate battle flag — the so-called “stars and bars” — it didn’t enjoy much popularity either until it was used as a symbol of support for oppression. Goldfield said, “The battle flag came back in favor in the late 1940s, first as a symbol of the Dixiecrats (the breakaway faction of Southern Democrats opposed to President Harry Truman’s civil rights initiatives), and then in the 1950s when the civil rights movement launched its drive for racial equality.” So basically, the Confederate flag that we’re familiar with today was mainly just a middle finger to equality for African Americans.

4) Yes, America needs to evolve, and American policing needs to change. But don’t tear down the statues. If you do, you’ll be throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Of course, in this case the baby is racist and owns several people as property, but it’s a baby nonetheless. (Gotta be honest — I’ve never understood that expression. You’ve just washed the baby and then you throw it out with the bath water? Why would you throw out a clean baby? If you’re gonna toss a baby, ditch a soiled one. Everyone knows that. Don’t bother cleaning it first.)

Popular Mechanics – which is not as popular as the name suggests (thou doth protest too much) – recently published an article that was not meant to help people tear down statues of American racist icons but happened to be titled “How to Topple a Statue Using Science.” (Science? Ha! As if that’s a real thing. Do you see any statues commemorating it? Don’t think so.)

The article goes on to list how one could bring down a statue if one wanted to (but you totally should not read it and should not tear down a racist statue in what some consider vandalism). The article says you will likely need 70 people pulling on very strong ropes or straps to bring down a statue. (So do not find 70 of your closest friends and have a “topple the racist slave-owning dickwad” party. Do not suggest there will be free pizza there, which will help make sure people show up. Do not make sure to get the ropes or chains around the head of the statue because putting them around the feet will not create nearly enough leverage to accomplish the goal. …if you had such a goal, which you do not because you are not going to do this.)

To sum it up, we should relocate our racist statues to museums where we can remember our racist history with the appropriate context. This will make room in the middle of towns for new statues – of women, black people, Latinx, indigenous, white guys who aren’t slave-owning assholes. There must be some out there. Umm, Justin Timberlake? Um, Sherlock Holmes? How about Bruce Wayne? I think two-thirds of those are fictional, but I’m sure I’m forgetting some.

America may need to be dragged into the 21st century kicking and screaming, but we can do it. Let’s move past this racist shit. Let’s stop behaving as if we’re still twelve. … Nineteen Twelve.

Sanders Files Amendments to Force Pentagon to Pass Clean Audit, Require Mass Production of Free Masks for All

"National security," said Sen. Bernie Sanders, "means doing everything we can to improve the lives of our people, many of whom have been abandoned by our government decade after decade."


by
Jake Johnson, staff writer











https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/07/01/sanders-files-amendments-force-pentagon-pass-clean-audit-require-mass-production








Sen. Bernie Sanders late Tuesday filed a slate of amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act aiming to force the Pentagon to pass an independent audit, require the federal government to mass-produce and deliver free masks to everyone in the U.S., and bar funding for the Saudi-led assault on Yemen.

The amendments came in addition to the Vermont senator's plan to slash the Senate's proposed $740.5 billion Pentagon budget by 10% and redirect the savings toward funding healthcare, housing, education, and jobs in impoverished U.S. communities.


Sanders' amendment (pdf)—introduced alongside Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), and Mike Lee (R-Utah)—would require the Pentagon to pass a clean audit by fiscal year 2025 and would penalize Defense Department agencies that fail to pass an audit by forcing them to return a portion of their budgets to the Treasury."A major reason why there is so much waste, fraud, and abuse at the Pentagon is the fact that the Defense Department remains the only federal agency in America that hasn't been able to pass an independent audit," Sanders said in a speech on the Senate floor Tuesday. "It is time to hold the Defense Department to the same level of accountability as the rest of the government."

The Vermont senator also filed an NDAA amendment (pdf) that would use the Defense Production Act to mass-produce and distribute five free face masks per month to every person in the U.S. through the Postal Service—a proposal Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious disease expert, endorsed during a Senate hearing earlier Tuesday.

"This amendment is about listening to the science and saving lives," Sanders said. "Here is what my amendment will do: It would require the Trump administration to use the Defense Production Act to make hundreds of millions of high-quality masks and deliver five of them, per person, directly to every household in America on a monthly basis, until the pandemic has ended."

"There are so many things we don't know about Covid-19," the Vermont senator continued. "But on this issue, the science is absolutely clear: masks save lives. We must act now to save tens of thousands of lives by forcing the Trump administration to follow basic science and protect the American people—and that's what this amendment is all about."

In addition to the major public health benefits of face masks, a team of economists at Goldman Sachs estimated that a nationwide mask mandate would save the U.S. economy $1 trillion by reducing the need for widespread lockdowns.

"A face mask mandate could potentially substitute for lockdowns that would otherwise subtract nearly 5% from GDP," wrote Jan Hatzius, Goldman Sachs' chief economist.




As the Washington Post's Christopher Ingraham noted, "the authors of the report are economists and not public health experts" and "their primary motivation is to protect the economic interests of Goldman Sachs' investors, which is why they're interested in the effects of federal policy on gross domestic product."

"But their findings are in line with a number of other published studies on the efficacy of masks," Ingraham wrote.


Sanders' office on Tuesday released a summary of the senator's six amendments to the NDAA for fiscal year 2021:
Cut 10% of annual Pentagon spending to invest in education, health care and poverty reduction in America's most marginalized communities. The amendment, cosponsored by Senators Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Representatives Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) and Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), would take $74 billion in annual savings from the Pentagon—exempting salaries and healthcare—to create a domestic federal grant program to fund healthcare, housing, childcare, and educational opportunities for cities and towns experiencing a poverty rate of 25% or more. This amendment garnered the support of more than 60 national organizations fighting for economic, environmental, and racial justice, and peace.
Require the federal government to manufacture and distribute high-quality face masks to every individual in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. In questioning by Sanders during today's Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) hearing, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, expressed support for the proposal. A new study found that nationwide use of face masks would not only fight the virus and save lives, but it would save the U.S. economy $1 trillion. At a time when the Trump administration has failed to respond to the dire coronavirus pandemic, which has killed nearly 130,000 Americans, the amendment would require the president to utilize the Defense Production Act and all available authorities to manufacture and procure face masks and distribute masks via the Postal Service to every household in the country.
Require the Defense Department to pass a clean audit by Fiscal Year 2025. Sanders was joined by Senators Grassley (R-Iowa), Wyden (D-Ore.), and Lee (R-Utah) on the measure, which would penalize Pentagon agencies that fail to pass an independent audit by returning a portion of their annual budgets to the Treasury. The Pentagon is the only federal department in America that hasn't been able to pass an independent audit—30 years after Congress required it to do so.
Prohibit funding for military aid and logistical support for unconstitutional and unauthorized U.S. military participation in the Saudi-led war in Yemen. Senators Lee (R-Utah) and Murphy (D-Conn.) cosponsored the amendment. A bipartisan majority of the U.S. Senate has already voted three times to halt all U.S. military support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen, and in April 2019 a bipartisan, bicameral majority of Congress passed the first-ever War Powers Resolution in our American history to direct the withdrawal of unauthorized U.S. forces from a conflict. Sanders' landmark legislation, was vetoed by Trump in 2019.
Provide statutory authorization for Beyond the Yellow Ribbon programs, which are state grants provided by the Department of Defense for programs which help members of the Armed Forces and their families in preparation for deployment, during deployment, and in reintegration post-deployment. These programs have helped thousands of service members, veterans, and their family members cope with the challenges associated with deployments and military service.
Implement a 0.1% cut to the Pentagon budget and transfer that funding to the State Department for cultural and educational exchange programs between the people of the United States and other countries. These important programs bring young people, students, scholars, and professionals from other countries to the U.S. to see our country, experience what life is like here, meet our people, and send our people to other countries to do the same. These programs promote greater cultural awareness, understanding and cooperation between different countries and emphasizes our common humanity, while decreasing conflict.

"If the horrific pandemic we are now experiencing has taught us anything it is that national security means a lot more than building bombs, missiles, jet fighters, tanks, submarines, nuclear warheads, and other weapons of mass destruction," Sanders said in his floor speech Tuesday. "National security also means doing everything we can to improve the lives of our people, many of whom have been abandoned by our government decade after decade."

Watch the senator's full speech:

'The People Have Spoken': Thwarting GOP Push for Cuts, Oklahoma Voters Approve Medicaid Expansion

"Voters are tired of politicians ignoring the problem or worse, trying to take their healthcare away, and they're rejecting that approach in even the deepest of red states."


by
Jake Johnson, staff writer




https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/07/01/people-have-spoken-thwarting-gop-push-cuts-oklahoma-voters-approve-medicaid







Potentially derailing an effort by Republican Gov. Kevin Stitt and the Trump administration to slash the state's Medicaid funding by turning it into a block grant, Oklahoma voters on Tuesday approved a ballot measure to expand the healthcare program to around 200,000 low-income adults amid a sharp rise in new coronavirus infections.


Jonathan Schleifer, executive director of The Fairness Project, an advocacy group that organized in support of the ballot initiative, said in a statement that "in an election year that will be dominated by healthcare, Oklahomans just delivered the first big win of 2020."The vote makes Oklahoma the first state in the nation to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) by amending its Constitution—a move that could forestall efforts by the Republican-dominated legislature to gut the program. The initiative requires the government of Oklahoma—which has the second-highest uninsured rate in the nation—to submit Medicaid expansion paperwork to the federal government within 90 days.

"Voters are tired of politicians ignoring the problem or worse, trying to take their healthcare away, and they're rejecting that approach in even the deepest of red states," said Schleifer. "Americans want more healthcare—not less. And politicians who fail to heed that message are going to be in for a rude awakening this year."


The ballot initiative succeeded—albeit by an ultra-slim margin of less than 1%—despite opposition from Stitt, who earlier this year made Oklahoma the first state to seek a waiver from the Trump administration to turn its Medicaid funding into a block grant, a longstanding conservative goal. Experts have warned that block-granting Medicaid would hamstring states' ability to increase spending on the program in response to public health needs—flexibility that is desperately needed amid a pandemic.

Politico reported that Oklahomans' decision to enshrine Medicaid expansion in the state Constitution "could bar state leaders from making conservative changes to the program, like adding work requirements or premiums. It's an open question whether the ballot measure would preempt a block grant."

The Medicaid expansion measure passed days after the Trump administration intensified its legal assault on the ACA by asking the Supreme Court to invalidate the entire law. If successful, the effort would end Medicaid coverage for more than 12 million people nationwide.

Oklahoma's Senate Democratic Leader Kay Floyd applauded voters for overriding inaction by the Republican-controlled legislature and approving expansion of "healthcare access to more than 200,000 Oklahomans."

"The people have spoken," Floyd said in a statement. "More than 300,000 citizens signed a petition to place State Question 802 on the ballot and a majority of those who cast ballots voted to approve it. Our caucus has long supported and advocated for Medicaid expansion in Oklahoma. We stand ready to work with our colleagues in the legislature and Governor Stitt to fund the state share so we can implement Medicaid expansion as soon as possible."

Congress Urged to Repeal Program That Transfers 'Weapons of War' to Local Police

"In response to the national outrage, armored vehicles, assault weapons, and military gear once again filled our streets and communities, turning them into war zones."


by
Jake Johnson, staff writer







https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/07/01/congress-urged-repeal-program-transfers-weapons-war-local-police







More than 90 progressive advocacy groups are calling on Congress to repeal a decades-old Pentagon program that facilitates the transfer of surplus military equipment to local police departments, a demand that gained steam in the wake of law enforcement's militaristic crackdown on nationwide protests over the killing of George Floyd.

In a letter (pdf) to members of the House Armed Services Committee Wednesday, a coalition led by Demand Progress urged lawmakers to insert language ending the 1033 Program into the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2021. The letter was delivered as the committee began marking up the sprawling defense policy legislation.


"Since [the 1033 Program's] inception, more than $7.4 billion in surplus military equipment and goods, including armored vehicles, rifles, and aircraft, have been transferred to more than 8,000 law enforcement agencies," the groups wrote. "In response to the national outrage, armored vehicles, assault weapons, and military gear once again filled our streets and communities, turning them into war zones."

"Weapons of war have absolutely no place in our communities," the groups continued. "What's more, evidence has shown that law enforcement agencies that obtain military equipment are more prone to violence."

Lawmakers in both the House and Senate introduced separate bills last month that would either end or sharply curtail the transfer of military equipment to police departments through the 1033 Program, which President Donald Trump fully restored in 2017 by rolling back Obama-era restrictions.

Rep. Nydia Velázquez's (D-N.Y.) Demilitarizing Local Law Enforcement Act, which has 14 co-sponsors in the House, would fully eliminate the 1033 Program. The legislation has been endorsed by dozens of progressive advocacy groups, including Demand Progress, Amnesty International USA, and other signatories of Wednesday's letter.

"When our police forces are equipped like an occupying army, they act like one, treating New Yorkers and the American people as an enemy force," Velázquez said in a statement last month. "The deadly consequences of this policy disproportionately affect people of color and this initiative should be scrapped, completely."

Read the full letter:


Dear House Armed Services Committee Members:




The undersigned civil, human rights, faith, and government accountability organizations,representing millions of our members across the country, write in support of ending the Department of Defense's 1033 Program and associated transfers of all military equipment and vehicles to local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies.

The military surplus equipment transfer program, known as the 1033 Program, was formally established in the 1997 FY National Defense Authorization Act. Since its inception, more than $7.4 billion in surplus military equipment and goods, including armored vehicles, rifles, and aircraft, have been transferred to more than 8,000 law enforcement agencies. The program came to national attention in the aftermath of the killing of Michael Brown in 2014 in Ferguson, Missouri. Since then, Congressional leaders have tried to reform or end this program that has caused an increase in militarized policing particularly in communities of color.

Research studies indicate that the 1033 Program is not only unsafe but ineffective as it fails to reduce crime or improve police safety. In 2015, President Obama issued Executive Order 13688 that provided necessary oversight of the program. The Executive Order has since been rescinded, which only underscores that legislative action—not executive orders—is critical to address the concerns with this program.

In the aftermath of Ferguson, law enforcement agencies across the country have continued to receive military equipment and weapons of war, including "494 mine-resistant vehicles, at least 800 pieces of body armor, more than 6,500 rifles, and at least 76 aircraft."

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have also received enormous amounts of excess military equipment as part of the ​militarization of our border. This is particularly concerning at a time when ICE and CBP units are being deployed in response to peaceful protests and for interior law enforcement programs.

In the aftermath of George Floyd's murder in Minneapolis, millions have demonstrated globally against police brutality and systemic racism. In cities across our country, hundreds of thousands of demonstrators called for justice and accountability for George Floyd and the countless unarmed Black people that have been killed by law enforcement.

In response to the national outrage, armored vehicles, assault weapons, and military gear once again filled our streets and communities, turning them into war zones. Weapons of war have absolutely no place in our communities. What's more, evidence has shown that law enforcement agencies that obtain military equipment are more prone to violence.

There are sincere and aggressive efforts in the House and Senate to severely curtail or end the Department of Defense 1033 Program. Millions of Americans have been calling for the 1033 Program to be shut down, with legislation introduced in both chambers to address these concerns.

Accordingly, we urge you to use the opportunity of the full committee markup of the FY2021 National Defense Authorization Act to support and include language to end the Department of Defense's 1033 Program.

Blood on His Hands: The Nursing Home Covid-19 Crisis is Donald Trump’s Fault

The president is desperate to deflect from the truth: Over 54,000 nursing home residents and workers are dead. Those deaths were preventable. Their deaths are his fault.


by
Alex Lawson




https://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/07/01/blood-his-hands-nursing-home-covid-19-crisis-donald-trumps-fault







The very first COVID-19 outbreak in the US took place in a Kirkland, Washington nursing home more than four months ago, at the end of February. At least 37 people died.

That first outbreak should have been the impetus for the Trump administration to launch a coordinated national response to the COVID-19 pandemic, centered around protecting nursing home residents and workers. Instead, they’ve focused on protecting nursing home corporations from lawsuits.

When the White House brings up the nursing home crisis at all, it’s to seek to shift the blame to Democratic governors. Trump is desperate to deflect from the truth: Over 54,000 nursing home residents and workers are dead. Those deaths were preventable. Their deaths are Donald Trump’s fault.


For months, as nursing home workers faced a devastating shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE) and tests, Trump refused to invoke the Defense Production Act. Nor did he leverage FEMA’s response capabilities to target supplies to nursing homes.A new report from the Senate Aging Committee lays out the Trump administration failures that led to the nursing home crisis. Trump never had a plan to protect nursing home residents. In fact, the actions his administration did take, put seniors and people with disabilities directly in the path of the deadly pandemic.

An opaque and corrupt program, run by the president’s inexperienced, unqualified son-in-law, tasked to deliver critically needed PPE not surprisingly failed miserably to help anybody, except perhaps Trump’s political donors. FEMA continues to deliver broken and unusable equipment to nursing homes even as the unrelenting death toll in nursing homes grows.

Simply telling nursing homes to test workers and residents more often, as the administration has done, is meaningless. What’s needed is an actual plan to procure additional tests and get them to the facilities that need them. This late in the pandemic, that plan is still missing.

In March and April, Congress allocated $175 billion in emergency funding for health care providers in the front lines of the pandemic. It was the Trump administration’s responsibility to distribute that funding as quickly and efficiently as possible. But it took two months for the administration to distribute any of the funding to nursing homes—and then only a paltry $19.5 billion.




Nursing home workers are at the front lines of the crisis. Across the country, nursing homes have seen staffing shortages, forcing them to hire part timers who work in multiple facilities. Employees who remain are often forced to work while experiencing COVID-19 symptoms, further spreading the disease. This is exacerbated by the fact that even before COVID-19, private equity barons had seized on the long term care industry as a sector they could hollow out, carve up and destroy for profit.

We need to increase staffing levels by providing premium hazard pay. We must guarantee paid sick leave for all nursing home workers. Workers who need to quarantine should be provided with temporary housing so they don’t infect their families. The Trump administration has proposed none of this, because their anti-worker ideology takes precedence over public health.

The right-wing deflection operation is well underway. The Trump White House and Senator Mitch McConnell understand that the nursing home crisis is political kryptonite. They don’t care about the lives lost; Indeed, they never mention them. Instead, they care only about the bad headlines and the plummeting support among seniors for Trump and Republicans.

Starting with the official propaganda organ of the Trump White House, FOX News, and filtering down through shadowy networks of dark money used to spread unchecked lies on Facebook, their playbook is clear: Deflect responsibility, blame Democratic governors, and lie about the failures of the president and his administration.

Chief White House strategist and mouthpiece Sean Hannity can be seen in this clip laying out the whole strategy for “dealing with” the nursing home crisis. Hannity heaps praise on Florida Republican Governor DeSantis while blaming, among others, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer for her state’s nursing home crisis. He goes so far as to say that the media needs to apologize to Gov. DeSantis for criticizing his rush to “reopen” the state.

Like so much else Trump does, this strategy is based on a lie. Public health experts and local senior advocacy groups agree that Whitmer did a very effective job in a terrible situation, while Gov. DeSantis’s state of Florida is ineffectively confronting an explosion of new cases and dwindling hospital beds.

To end the nursing home crisis, we need a robust system of testing and tracking. We need a system in place to make sure that every facility has PPE, tests, and adequate staffing. We need measures in place to reduce the overall spread of COVID-19, including a national mandate to wear masks in public places. Most of all, we need an administration that values the lives of people over the profits of corporations.


It’s this cavalier attitude towards seniors’ lives that led to the nursing home crisis. Older people should not have to quarantine themselves forever, cut off from their families and friends, because the Trump administration is too incompetent to contain the pandemic. Nor would it even work for them to do so. Over 64 million Americans live in multi-generational households. And even if no nursing home patient ever left, or had visitors, workers still go in and out. Recently, one of Trump’s top economic advisors, Stephen Moore, suggested that we should allow every business (including high risk environments like bars and gyms) to reopen. He insisted this would be safe so long as we “keep older people in quarantine because they're the ones susceptible from dying.” While Dan Patrick, Trump ally and Lt. Governor of Texas, another state with an exploding epidemic, said that seniors should sacrifice themselves to protect the economy.

What Moore and Patrick are saying, and the philosophy behind Trump’s entire response to the pandemic, is that he thinks that seniors’ lives—as well as the lives of people with disabilities, people who are immunocompromised, and others who are at high risk from COVID-19— are disposable.

Trump’s failure to contain the nursing home crisis is a product of his values. He values nursing home corporations, which don’t want to get sued. He values Wall Street billionaires, who are demanding that every business reopen regardless of public health. He does not value seniors’ lives. He is more than happy to volunteer them to be sacrificed on the altar of Wall Street’s greed.

This is all Donald Trump’s fault. The blood is on his hands.

Corporate Democrats side with Cheney psychopaths on war for profits

Why Are House Democrats Siding With Liz Cheney to Prolong Endless War in Afghanistan?



A small "left-right anti-war coalition," warns The Intercept's Glenn Greenwald, remains "no match for the war machine composed of the establishment wings of both parties."


by
Jake Johnson, staff writer




https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/07/03/why-are-house-democrats-siding-liz-cheney-prolong-endless-war-afghanistan







Democratic members of the House Armed Services Committee teamed up with Republicans this week to pass an amendment co-sponsored by Wyoming Republican Rep. Liz Cheney—daughter of notorious "war on terror" architect Dick Cheney—that prohibits Congress from spending money to pull U.S. troops out of Afghanistan without first meeting a series of vague conditions that critics said appear designed to prevent withdrawal.

The amendment (pdf)—co-sponsored by freshman Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.)—states that before the number of U.S. troops stationed in Afghanistan can be reduced below 8,000, the Pentagon must certify that the withdrawal "will not increase the risk for the expansion of existing or formation of new terrorist safe havens inside Afghanistan" and "is in the best interest of the United States national security and in furtherance of United States policy toward Afghanistan for achieving an enduring diplomatic solution."


Just three Democrats on the Armed Services Committee—Reps. Khanna, Tulsi Gabbard (Hawaii), Anthony Brown (Md.)—voted against the Cheney-Crow amendment, which would also restrict President Donald Trump's attempt to withdraw over 9,000 troops from Germany. The full roll call vote can be viewed in two parts here and here.Despite a small bipartisan effort by Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) to defeat the amendment, the measure easily passed by a vote of 45-11 and was added to the committee's version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The amended $740.5 billion bill then passed out of committee Wednesday by a unanimous vote of 56-0.

"This left-right anti-war coalition is no match for the war machine composed of the establishment wings of both parties and the military and intelligence community," The Intercept's Glenn Greenwald wrote Thursday, referring to the alliance between Khanna and Gaetz as well as outside groups that share their concerns.

"It should come as absolutely no surprise," added Greenwald, "that House Democrats are finding common cause with Liz Cheney and other GOP warmongers to block any efforts to reduce even moderately the footprint of the U.S. military in the world or its decades-long posture of endless war."


Greenwald derided the argument advanced by Cheney, Crow, and other supporters of the amendment that an unconditional withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan would be dangerously "rapid."




"Only the U.S. could malign a troop withdrawal plan after a 19 year-old war as 'rapid,'" Greenwald wrote.


The House Armed Service's Committee's passage of the Cheney-Crow amendment came just after 16 Senate Democrats joined nearly the entire Republican caucus in voting to kill an amendment that would have withdrawn all remaining U.S. troops from Afghanistan within a year and repealed the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force.

In his Too Much Information newsletter Friday, journalist David Sirota—a former speechwriter for Sen. Bernie Sanders' (I-Vt.) 2020 presidential campaign—wrote that "the first rule for every incoming freshman Democrat in Congress should be that you never work with a Cheney on war policy."

"The second rule for every freshman Democrat," Sirota added, "should be: re-read the first rule and make damn sure to follow it."

Sirota warned that the conditions imposed by the Cheney-Crow amendment "are designed to make the Afghanistan deployment permanent."

"In practice, nobody can predict with 100 percent certainty what will ensue once a 19-year military occupation ends. What we can know is that it's a bad idea to continue a policy that isn't working—and there's plenty of evidence that it isn't," Sirota wrote, pointing to the "Afghanistan Papers" investigation published last year by the Washington Post.

"House and Senate Democrats could still use their power to strip the Crow-Cheney amendment out of the final NDAA," Sirota noted. "Keep your eye on whether or not they do."

CUBA’S TWO PANDEMICS: THE CORONAVIRUS AND THE US EMBARGO

By Josefina Vidal Ferreiro, Resumen English.

July 3, 2020




https://popularresistance.org/cubas-two-pandemics-the-coronavirus-and-the-us-embargo/







As soon as the first cases of COVID-19 were detected in Cuba, our country mobilized all its resources to contain the spread of the virus.

Our healthcare workers go door to door checking people for possible symptoms. Those with symptoms are transferred to specially designated centers to receive treatment, mostly with medication developed by Cuba’s own pharmaceutical and biotech industry. The medical examinations and treatments are all provided free of charge.

As of June 20, 85 people have died of COVID-19 in Cuba. Our mortality rate of 3.9 percent is very low compared to the rest of the world. We reached the peak of the disease on April 24, but we are still encouraging people to respect physical distancing, isolation and sanitary measures.

Internationally, Cuba has responded to requests for collaboration from more than 20 countries, mainly in Latin America and the Caribbean, but also in Europe, Africa and the Middle East.

Cuba has a long history and tradition of international solidarity with other countries in the health sector that dates back to the 1960s, when we started sending healthcare workers to help other countries. From then on, more than 400,000 Cuban doctors and health professionals have provided services in 164 countries. We have helped strengthen local healthcare systems, provided services in remote areas and trained doctors.

Based on this long experience, in 2005 Cuba decided to create the Henry Reeve International Medical Brigade to respond to natural disasters and serious epidemics across the world. Since then, this brigade of over 7,000 doctors, nurses and other health specialists has provided services in more than 20 countries.

We sent doctors and nurses to staff 32 field hospitals after the 2005 earthquake in Pakistan. We sent a medical team to Indonesia in 2006 after the devastating tsunami. We sent more than 1,700 health workers to Haiti in 2010 after the catastrophic earthquake and the ensuing cholera epidemic. In 2014, we sent brigades to Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone to combat Ebola.

Even Samantha Power, former US President Barack Obama’s UN Ambassador, praised Cuba for its outstanding role in the fight against Ebola.

We even had brigades ready to assist Louisiana after New Orleans was hit by Hurricane Katrina but the US government rejected our cooperation.

Assisting others has always been part of who we are as a country and part of the ethical training Cuban doctors and health professionals receive.

In response to the current pandemic, Cuba has dispatched 28 contingents of the Henry Reeve Brigade to help 26 countries. This is in addition to the more than 28,000 Cuban doctors, nurses and health professionals who were already overseas before the pandemic.

Unfortunately, Cuban doctors and the Henry Reeve Brigade, in particular, have come under increasing attacks by the Trump administration, which has gone so far as to falsely accuse Cuba of human trafficking through its doctor program.

It is a shame that the United States government has been trying to discredit Cuba’s international assistance, including using pressure and threats against countries to force them to cancel these medical cooperation agreements.

They have even tried to pressure governments to reject Cuba’s help during the coronavirus pandemic. They claim the Cuban government is exploiting these doctors because in the case of countries that can afford to provide monetary compensation, a portion of it is kept by the Cuban government.

However, working overseas is completely voluntary, and the portion the Cuban government keeps goes to pay for Cuba’s universal health system. It goes to purchasing medical supplies, equipment and medication for Cuba’s 11 million people, including for the families of the doctors who are providing their services abroad. This is how we are able to provide free, high-quality healthcare for the Cuban people.

Instead of exacerbating conflict during a pandemic, our countries need to work together to find solutions. For years, Cuba has been developing pharmaceuticals and vaccines to treat different diseases, from psoriasis and cancer to heart attacks. Now we are helping patients recover from COVID-19 with Interferon Alfa2b Recombinant, one of 19 medications being developed or under clinical trial in Cuba by our biotech and pharmaceutical industries to treat different stages of COVID-19. Globally, we have received more than 70 requests for pharmaceuticals developed by Cuba.

This would be a clear avenue for Cuba-US cooperation but unfortunately, the Trump administration is wasting this opportunity by dismantling the limited progress made by Cuba and the US during the Obama administration.

President Trump strengthened the 60-year US blockade against my country, implementing 90 economic measures against Cuba between January 2019 and March 2020 alone. These measures have targeted the main sectors of the Cuban economy, including our financial transactions, tourism industry, energy sector, foreign investments – which are key for the development of the Cuban economy – and the medical cooperation programs with other countries.

These unilateral coercive measures are unprecedented in their level of aggression and scope. They are deliberately trying to deprive Cuba of resources, sources of revenue and income needed for the development of the Cuban economy. The effects of these measures are being felt in Cuba, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. The blockade is stopping Cuba from getting much-needed medical supplies. For example, if more than 10 percent of the components in the medical equipment or medications we want to buy are of US origin, then Cuba is not allowed to purchase them.

In addition, the US has imposed restrictions on banks, airlines and shipping companies to stop Cuba from receiving materials that other countries are donating or sending to Cuba.

In April, the Alibaba Foundation of China tried to donate masks, rapid diagnostic kits and ventilators to Cuba, but the airline contracted by Alibaba to transport those items to Cuba refused to take the goods because they were afraid the US would sanction them.

A ship recently arrived in Cuba with raw materials to produce medications but it decided not to unload because the bank involved in the transaction decided not to make the payment out of fear it would be sanctioned by the US government.

So this is why we say we are suffering from two pandemics: COVID-19 and the US blockade. For that reason, it is so important that people of goodwill around the world continue to raise the demand to end the blockade of Cuba and to forcefully assert that these are times for solidarity and cooperation, not sanctions and blockades. In the meantime, Cuba, as a country that understands the value of solidarity, will continue to do our best to stop the spread of coronavirus at home and globally.