Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation
Tel: (780) 697-3730
Toll-free: 1-888-420-7011
Fax: (780) 697-3500
FIRST NATIONS OFFERED TAINTED BISON MEAT WITH LEAD AT LEVELS ABOVE WHAT IS SAFE FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION
First Nations have been given and offered tainted bison meat from a nearby Industry developer. The communities of Fort McKay and Fort Chipewyan were given and offered Free Bison Meat, only to have the bison meat recalled for lead levels above what is considered safe for human consumption. They claim that the poisonous meat came from one animal and The Fort McKay First Nation, Health Canada, Alberta Health and Alberta Agricultural are suggesting that the rest of the meat is safe. Yet as a precautionary measure, Dr. Brent Friesen, Medical Officer of Health, Alberta Health Services, Fort McMurray, and Dr. Simon Sihota, Regional Environmental Public Health Manager, Health Protection Directorate, First Nation and Inuit Health Branch, Health Canada, Edmonton, advise that any ground meat from the Dec 2009 harvest should be collected and sent for analysis for lead content.
The Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation is now asking how this could happen. Why is our First Nation offered free bison meat that turns out to be unsafe for consumption? “Generating contaminated meat and offering it to the First Nations people is a cruel act of total disrespect to the dignity of the people of Fort Chipewyan” Chief Adam said. This contamination casts a dark cloud upon the claims that the oil sands companies are able to safely reclaim lands destroyed by oil sands mining. This contamination comes after the discovery of heightened rare cancer rates in a 2009 report released by the Alberta Cancer Board and a report released by Dr. Schindler2009 showing Athabasca River contamination is improperly measured.
On a related note, there is a free roaming herd of Bison near the ACFN Reserve lands which our members use for consumption purposes. Yet Alberta chooses not to manage this threatened bison herd in a manner to protect it from development. “The buffalo are not protected and industrial developers are running them off the lands scaring them with helicopters and planes” Chief Adam said. Drilling and Exploration continues where these herds of bison roam and live.
The ACFN members are afraid to hunt traditional foods and consume waterfowl birds for fear they may be contaminated by Development. We fear that ducks and geese which have landed on a tailing pond continue to travel north and are consumed by our members. What does ACFNs’ future hold with regards to health and wellness of our Membership? What does the future hold for ACFN’s continued existence in the face of Alberta’s plans for Development? There is great uncertainty with the safety of the Traditional foods we consume.
For Further Information:
Chief Allan Adam, ACFN, 780-697-3730.
March 24, 2010
George Bush's Nuclear Backdoor Deals
FOIA shows: U.S. has agreed to store enough nuclear reactor waste to fill two Yucca Mountains...or face billions of dollars in new penalites
From: Kevin Kamps: kevin@beyondnuclear.org
EXPERTS: U.S. HAS AGREED TO STORE ENOUGH NUCLEAR REACTOR WASTE TO FILL TWO YUCCA MOUNTAINS … OR FACE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN NEW PENALTIES
“Under the Radar”: Outgoing Bush White House Hiked Likely Penalties Borne by Taxpayers By Inking Deals With Over a Dozen Utilities; 170 Groups in All 50 States Release Principles Urging an Upgrade in Spent Reactor Fuel Storage Safety to Withstand Equivalent of “9/11 Attacks.”
WASHINGTON, D.C. (March 24, 2010) Between the output of existing commercial nuclear reactors and 21 proposed nuclear reactors covered by agreements quietly signed by the outgoing Bush Administration with more than a dozen electric utilities, the United States already has agreed to store enough spent (used) reactor fuel to fill the equivalent of not one, but two, Yucca Mountain high-level radioactive waste repositories, according to documents acquired under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Given that the U.S. is back to square one for the first repository, U.S. taxpayers would be on the hook for potentially tens of billions of dollars in penalties that would have to be paid to utilities if the 21 proposed reactor projects proceed.
This new information about the daunting scale of the challenge that faces the United States in disposing of spent fuel from commercial nuclear reactors comes one day before the first meeting of the Obama Administration’s “Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future.” In addition to highlighting the serious consequences of the eleventh-hour deals stuck by the Bush White House, experts also focused public attention on the fact that the recently cancelled Yucca Mountain repository – even if it were open today, 35 years after the process to create it started – would already be filled to its legal limit of 63,000 metric tons of commercial waste by this spring. A second repository the same size would be filled with the 42,000 additional metric tons of spent fuel yet to be produced by existing nuclear reactors and the 21,000 metric tons that would be produced by the 21 proposed reactors covered under the Bush-industry agreements.
Separately, over 170 groups in all 50 states today released the “Principles for Safeguarding Nuclear Waste at Reactors” calling for specific steps to protect the public from the immediate threats posed by the currently vulnerable storage of commercial spent fuel at nuclear reactor facilities. The principles call for safer on-site storage of spent nuclear fuel through the use of less densely packed reactor pools and “hardened on-site storage” (HOSS) designed to “withstand an attack by air, land, or water from a force at least equal in size and coordination to the 9/11 attacks.” (See below.) Now, after 10 billion dollars of ratepayer money has been wasted and Yucca has rightly been abandoned, even the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has not expressed confidence that a repository will open within ten years of the expiration of the first new reactor. In fact the NRC has not committed to any specific date for a repository; it has no logical or factual basis to come up with one. It was rash for the Bush Administration to sign contracts for new reactors while taxpayers are on the hook for billions due to default on existing waste contracts. These new contracts are likely to add billions more in damages at a time when the federal government is struggling with deficit containment.”
Beyond Nuclear Radioactive Waste Specialist Kevin Kamps: “The bottom line here is that we have an industry and a White House proposing to race ahead with new reactors when we haven’t figured out how to clean up the mess created by the first wave of reactors. Instead, 28 years after passage of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, 35 years after the repository search began, 53 years into commercial nuclear power, and 68 years after Fermi first split the atom during the Manhattan Project, the U.S. still has no safe, sound, permanent storage plan for high-level radioactive waste.”
Diane Curran, Esq., partner, Harmon, Curran, Spielberg & Eisenberg, LLP, said: “There was no apparent justification for the George W. Bush Administration’s rush to sign these spent nuclear fuel disposal contracts for new reactors. Having already paid out hundreds of millions in contract damages on spent fuel disposal agreements it could not fulfill, the government should have waited until it knew whether it could deliver on the contracts, instead of signing up for more liability. These corporations have already reaped tens of millions of dollars in taxpayer-funded contract damages, and stand to get hundreds of millions more. The funds for the damages are coming from the taxpayer-funded Department of Treasury’s Judgment Fund.”
The utilities and the 21 reactor projects covered under the Bush Administration agreements are: Duke Energy in South Carolina (Lee 1&2); Southern Nuclear in Georgia (Vogtle 3&4); South Texas Project in Texas (South Texas 3&4); Nine Mile Point in New York (Nine Mile Point 3); UniStar Nuclear in Maryland (Calvert Cliffs 3); Virginia Electric in Virginia (North Anna 3); Florida Power and Light in Florida (Turkey Point 6&7); South Carolina Electric & Gas in South Carolina (Summer 2&3); Pennsylvania Power and Light in Pennsylvania (Bell Bend); Progress Energy in North Carolina (Shearon Harris 2&3) and Florida (Levy 1&2); Ameren UE in Missouri (Callaway 2); and Luminant in Texas (Comanche Peak 3&4).
A backgrounder outlining the “below the radar” Bush Administration deals with the nuclear industry and the implications of the same for taxpayers is available online at http://www.ieer.org/
.
ABOUT THE PRINCIPLES
Citizens Awareness Network Executive Director Deborah Katz said: “The Principles for Safeguarding Nuclear Waste at Reactors are based on the urgent need to protect the public from the threats posed by the current vulnerable storage of commercial spent fuel. The United States does not currently have a national policy for the permanent storage of high-level nuclear waste. The Obama Administration has determined that the Yucca Mountain site, which has been mired in bad science and mismanagement, is not an option for geologic storage of nuclear waste. Unfortunately, reprocessing proponents have used this opportunity to promote reprocessing as the solution for managing our nuclear waste. Contrary to their claims, however, reprocessing is extremely expensive, highly polluting, and a proliferation threat, and will actually complicate the management of spent fuel.”
Among the steps called for under the Principles are:
· Require a low-density, open-frame layout for fuel pools: “Fuel pools were originally designed for temporary storage of a limited number of irradiated fuel assemblies in a low density, open frame configuration. As the amount of waste generated has increased beyond the designed capacity, the pools have been reorganized so that the concentration of fuel in the pools is nearly the same as that in operating reactor cores. If water is lost from a densely packed pool as the result of an attack or an accident, cooling by ambient air would likely be insufficient to prevent a fire, resulting in the release of large quantities of radioactivity to the environment.”
· Establish hardened on-site storage (HOSS): “Irradiated fuel must be stored as safely as possible as close to the site of generation as possible. Waste moved from fuel pools must be safeguarded in hardened, on-site storage (HOSS) facilities … The overall objective of HOSS should be that the amount of releases projected in even severe attacks should be low enough that the storage system would be unattractive as a terrorist target. Design criteria that would correspond to the overall objective must include: resistance to severe attacks, such as a direct hit by high-explosive or deeply penetrating weapons and munitions or a direct hit by a large aircraft loaded with fuel or a small aircraft loaded with fuel and/or explosives, without major releases.”
· Protect fuel pools: “Irradiated fuel must be kept in pools for several years before it can be stored in a dry facility. The pools must be protected to withstand an attack by air, land, or water from a force at least equal in size and coordination to the 9/11 attacks.”
· Dedicate funding to local and state governments to independently monitor the sites.
· Prohibit reprocessing.
The full text of the Principles is available online at http://www.ieer.org/.
BACKGROUND ON THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION DEALS
In a period of less than three months, the Bush Administration signed contracts to accept irradiated nuclear fuel from 21 new commercial atomic reactors even though at that time, no repository for new sources of irradiated fuel existed or was planned. It also did so even though the U.S. government had already paid out $565 million in contract damages – and faced an additional $790 million of contract damages at that very same time – for its failure to dispose of the existing inventory of irradiated fuel in the United States. And it did so even though it already expected to face around an additional billion dollars of damage payments to nuclear power utilities each and every year for the next decade.
As the backgrounder notes: “Given that after 35 years of searching, the U.S. has failed to license a single repository, it is reasonable to predict that the siting of two new repositories will take at least 50 years, if not 75 or 100 years. Thus, there is a very real potential for defaults on the new irradiated nuclear fuel contracts signed in 2008-2009 ... Barring ‘unavoidable delays,’ DOE would face breach of contract charges for missing these contractual deadlines. Resulting damage awards could cost U.S. taxpayers billions, or even tens of billions, of dollars.”
Between 1983 and 1987, DOE signed radioactive waste disposal contracts with over 100 operating commercial atomic reactors in the U.S. DOE was contractually obliged to begin accepting waste from utilities on Jan. 31, 1998. When this deadline was missed, the first of a current total of 71 lawsuits were filed by nuclear utilities against DOE for breach of contract, seeking damages to compensate them for on-site storage costs. As of July 2009, $565 million in damages had been awarded, and paid, to five nuclear utilities pursuant to settlements, and one trial court judgment that was not appealed. The funding for these damage awards is ultimately coming out of the U.S. Treasury because the courts have ruled that the Nuclear Waste Fund (estimated to have $23.8 billion remaining at the end of Fiscal Year 2009) cannot be used to pay liability to nuclear utility waste contract holders.
DOE has estimated that by 2020, taxpayer liability for breach of contract damages will amount to $12.3 billion – thus, around a billion dollars of damage payments to nuclear power utilities each and every year for the next decade. DOE has not yet estimated liabilities beyond 2020. The nuclear industry itself estimates damages will top $50 billion of taxpayer money. Neither of these estimates reflects the impact of the 21 proposed reactor projects covered under the Bush Administration agreements with major utilities.
The new contracts signed in the waning days of the Bush Administration will add significantly to future liability. In addition to damages, the Department of Justice has, thus far, expended another $154 million of taxpayer money trying to defend DOE against breach of contract charges and damage awards. This “endless litigation,” at taxpayer expense, is expected to continue indefinitely for decades to come, unless Congress intervenes by changing the applicable laws.
Also called spent or used nuclear fuel, irradiated nuclear fuel is the high-level or highly radioactive waste which results when “fresh” nuclear fuel rods become a million times more radioactive after undergoing fissioning in atomic reactor cores.
ABOUT IEER
The Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (http://www.ieer.org/
) provides policy-makers, journalists, and the public with understandable and accurate scientific and technical information on energy and environmental issues. IEER’s aim is to bring scientific excellence to public policy issues in order to promote the democratization of science and a safer, healthier environment.
CONTACT: Ailis Aaron Wolf, for IEER, (703) 276-3265 or aawolf@hastingsgroup.com
EDITOR’S NOTE: A streaming audio recording of the news event will be available on the Web as of 6 p.m. EDT on March 24, 2010 at http://www.ieer.org/
.
Kevin Kamps, Radioactive Waste Watchdog, Beyond Nuclear, 6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite 400, Takoma Park, Maryland 20912 Office: (301) 270-2209 ext. 1 Cell: (240) 462-3216 Fax: (301) 270-4000 kevin@beyondnuclear.org
www.beyondnuclear.org
Beyond Nuclear aims to educate and activate the public about the connections between nuclear power and nuclear weapons and the need to abandon both to safeguard our future. Beyond Nuclear advocates for an energy future that is sustainable, benign and democratic.
From: Kevin Kamps: kevin@beyondnuclear.org
EXPERTS: U.S. HAS AGREED TO STORE ENOUGH NUCLEAR REACTOR WASTE TO FILL TWO YUCCA MOUNTAINS … OR FACE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN NEW PENALTIES
“Under the Radar”: Outgoing Bush White House Hiked Likely Penalties Borne by Taxpayers By Inking Deals With Over a Dozen Utilities; 170 Groups in All 50 States Release Principles Urging an Upgrade in Spent Reactor Fuel Storage Safety to Withstand Equivalent of “9/11 Attacks.”
WASHINGTON, D.C. (March 24, 2010) Between the output of existing commercial nuclear reactors and 21 proposed nuclear reactors covered by agreements quietly signed by the outgoing Bush Administration with more than a dozen electric utilities, the United States already has agreed to store enough spent (used) reactor fuel to fill the equivalent of not one, but two, Yucca Mountain high-level radioactive waste repositories, according to documents acquired under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Given that the U.S. is back to square one for the first repository, U.S. taxpayers would be on the hook for potentially tens of billions of dollars in penalties that would have to be paid to utilities if the 21 proposed reactor projects proceed.
This new information about the daunting scale of the challenge that faces the United States in disposing of spent fuel from commercial nuclear reactors comes one day before the first meeting of the Obama Administration’s “Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future.” In addition to highlighting the serious consequences of the eleventh-hour deals stuck by the Bush White House, experts also focused public attention on the fact that the recently cancelled Yucca Mountain repository – even if it were open today, 35 years after the process to create it started – would already be filled to its legal limit of 63,000 metric tons of commercial waste by this spring. A second repository the same size would be filled with the 42,000 additional metric tons of spent fuel yet to be produced by existing nuclear reactors and the 21,000 metric tons that would be produced by the 21 proposed reactors covered under the Bush-industry agreements.
Separately, over 170 groups in all 50 states today released the “Principles for Safeguarding Nuclear Waste at Reactors” calling for specific steps to protect the public from the immediate threats posed by the currently vulnerable storage of commercial spent fuel at nuclear reactor facilities. The principles call for safer on-site storage of spent nuclear fuel through the use of less densely packed reactor pools and “hardened on-site storage” (HOSS) designed to “withstand an attack by air, land, or water from a force at least equal in size and coordination to the 9/11 attacks.” (See below.) Now, after 10 billion dollars of ratepayer money has been wasted and Yucca has rightly been abandoned, even the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has not expressed confidence that a repository will open within ten years of the expiration of the first new reactor. In fact the NRC has not committed to any specific date for a repository; it has no logical or factual basis to come up with one. It was rash for the Bush Administration to sign contracts for new reactors while taxpayers are on the hook for billions due to default on existing waste contracts. These new contracts are likely to add billions more in damages at a time when the federal government is struggling with deficit containment.”
Beyond Nuclear Radioactive Waste Specialist Kevin Kamps: “The bottom line here is that we have an industry and a White House proposing to race ahead with new reactors when we haven’t figured out how to clean up the mess created by the first wave of reactors. Instead, 28 years after passage of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, 35 years after the repository search began, 53 years into commercial nuclear power, and 68 years after Fermi first split the atom during the Manhattan Project, the U.S. still has no safe, sound, permanent storage plan for high-level radioactive waste.”
Diane Curran, Esq., partner, Harmon, Curran, Spielberg & Eisenberg, LLP, said: “There was no apparent justification for the George W. Bush Administration’s rush to sign these spent nuclear fuel disposal contracts for new reactors. Having already paid out hundreds of millions in contract damages on spent fuel disposal agreements it could not fulfill, the government should have waited until it knew whether it could deliver on the contracts, instead of signing up for more liability. These corporations have already reaped tens of millions of dollars in taxpayer-funded contract damages, and stand to get hundreds of millions more. The funds for the damages are coming from the taxpayer-funded Department of Treasury’s Judgment Fund.”
The utilities and the 21 reactor projects covered under the Bush Administration agreements are: Duke Energy in South Carolina (Lee 1&2); Southern Nuclear in Georgia (Vogtle 3&4); South Texas Project in Texas (South Texas 3&4); Nine Mile Point in New York (Nine Mile Point 3); UniStar Nuclear in Maryland (Calvert Cliffs 3); Virginia Electric in Virginia (North Anna 3); Florida Power and Light in Florida (Turkey Point 6&7); South Carolina Electric & Gas in South Carolina (Summer 2&3); Pennsylvania Power and Light in Pennsylvania (Bell Bend); Progress Energy in North Carolina (Shearon Harris 2&3) and Florida (Levy 1&2); Ameren UE in Missouri (Callaway 2); and Luminant in Texas (Comanche Peak 3&4).
A backgrounder outlining the “below the radar” Bush Administration deals with the nuclear industry and the implications of the same for taxpayers is available online at http://www.ieer.org/
.
ABOUT THE PRINCIPLES
Citizens Awareness Network Executive Director Deborah Katz said: “The Principles for Safeguarding Nuclear Waste at Reactors are based on the urgent need to protect the public from the threats posed by the current vulnerable storage of commercial spent fuel. The United States does not currently have a national policy for the permanent storage of high-level nuclear waste. The Obama Administration has determined that the Yucca Mountain site, which has been mired in bad science and mismanagement, is not an option for geologic storage of nuclear waste. Unfortunately, reprocessing proponents have used this opportunity to promote reprocessing as the solution for managing our nuclear waste. Contrary to their claims, however, reprocessing is extremely expensive, highly polluting, and a proliferation threat, and will actually complicate the management of spent fuel.”
Among the steps called for under the Principles are:
· Require a low-density, open-frame layout for fuel pools: “Fuel pools were originally designed for temporary storage of a limited number of irradiated fuel assemblies in a low density, open frame configuration. As the amount of waste generated has increased beyond the designed capacity, the pools have been reorganized so that the concentration of fuel in the pools is nearly the same as that in operating reactor cores. If water is lost from a densely packed pool as the result of an attack or an accident, cooling by ambient air would likely be insufficient to prevent a fire, resulting in the release of large quantities of radioactivity to the environment.”
· Establish hardened on-site storage (HOSS): “Irradiated fuel must be stored as safely as possible as close to the site of generation as possible. Waste moved from fuel pools must be safeguarded in hardened, on-site storage (HOSS) facilities … The overall objective of HOSS should be that the amount of releases projected in even severe attacks should be low enough that the storage system would be unattractive as a terrorist target. Design criteria that would correspond to the overall objective must include: resistance to severe attacks, such as a direct hit by high-explosive or deeply penetrating weapons and munitions or a direct hit by a large aircraft loaded with fuel or a small aircraft loaded with fuel and/or explosives, without major releases.”
· Protect fuel pools: “Irradiated fuel must be kept in pools for several years before it can be stored in a dry facility. The pools must be protected to withstand an attack by air, land, or water from a force at least equal in size and coordination to the 9/11 attacks.”
· Dedicate funding to local and state governments to independently monitor the sites.
· Prohibit reprocessing.
The full text of the Principles is available online at http://www.ieer.org/.
BACKGROUND ON THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION DEALS
In a period of less than three months, the Bush Administration signed contracts to accept irradiated nuclear fuel from 21 new commercial atomic reactors even though at that time, no repository for new sources of irradiated fuel existed or was planned. It also did so even though the U.S. government had already paid out $565 million in contract damages – and faced an additional $790 million of contract damages at that very same time – for its failure to dispose of the existing inventory of irradiated fuel in the United States. And it did so even though it already expected to face around an additional billion dollars of damage payments to nuclear power utilities each and every year for the next decade.
As the backgrounder notes: “Given that after 35 years of searching, the U.S. has failed to license a single repository, it is reasonable to predict that the siting of two new repositories will take at least 50 years, if not 75 or 100 years. Thus, there is a very real potential for defaults on the new irradiated nuclear fuel contracts signed in 2008-2009 ... Barring ‘unavoidable delays,’ DOE would face breach of contract charges for missing these contractual deadlines. Resulting damage awards could cost U.S. taxpayers billions, or even tens of billions, of dollars.”
Between 1983 and 1987, DOE signed radioactive waste disposal contracts with over 100 operating commercial atomic reactors in the U.S. DOE was contractually obliged to begin accepting waste from utilities on Jan. 31, 1998. When this deadline was missed, the first of a current total of 71 lawsuits were filed by nuclear utilities against DOE for breach of contract, seeking damages to compensate them for on-site storage costs. As of July 2009, $565 million in damages had been awarded, and paid, to five nuclear utilities pursuant to settlements, and one trial court judgment that was not appealed. The funding for these damage awards is ultimately coming out of the U.S. Treasury because the courts have ruled that the Nuclear Waste Fund (estimated to have $23.8 billion remaining at the end of Fiscal Year 2009) cannot be used to pay liability to nuclear utility waste contract holders.
DOE has estimated that by 2020, taxpayer liability for breach of contract damages will amount to $12.3 billion – thus, around a billion dollars of damage payments to nuclear power utilities each and every year for the next decade. DOE has not yet estimated liabilities beyond 2020. The nuclear industry itself estimates damages will top $50 billion of taxpayer money. Neither of these estimates reflects the impact of the 21 proposed reactor projects covered under the Bush Administration agreements with major utilities.
The new contracts signed in the waning days of the Bush Administration will add significantly to future liability. In addition to damages, the Department of Justice has, thus far, expended another $154 million of taxpayer money trying to defend DOE against breach of contract charges and damage awards. This “endless litigation,” at taxpayer expense, is expected to continue indefinitely for decades to come, unless Congress intervenes by changing the applicable laws.
Also called spent or used nuclear fuel, irradiated nuclear fuel is the high-level or highly radioactive waste which results when “fresh” nuclear fuel rods become a million times more radioactive after undergoing fissioning in atomic reactor cores.
ABOUT IEER
The Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (http://www.ieer.org/
) provides policy-makers, journalists, and the public with understandable and accurate scientific and technical information on energy and environmental issues. IEER’s aim is to bring scientific excellence to public policy issues in order to promote the democratization of science and a safer, healthier environment.
CONTACT: Ailis Aaron Wolf, for IEER, (703) 276-3265 or aawolf@hastingsgroup.com
EDITOR’S NOTE: A streaming audio recording of the news event will be available on the Web as of 6 p.m. EDT on March 24, 2010 at http://www.ieer.org/
.
Kevin Kamps, Radioactive Waste Watchdog, Beyond Nuclear, 6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite 400, Takoma Park, Maryland 20912 Office: (301) 270-2209 ext. 1 Cell: (240) 462-3216 Fax: (301) 270-4000 kevin@beyondnuclear.org
www.beyondnuclear.org
Beyond Nuclear aims to educate and activate the public about the connections between nuclear power and nuclear weapons and the need to abandon both to safeguard our future. Beyond Nuclear advocates for an energy future that is sustainable, benign and democratic.
March 23, 2010
Jailing Cindy Sheehan
While Obama was focused on winning the health care
vote, he was failing humanity inside a jail cell
By Brenda Norrell
Censored News
http://www.bsnorrell.blogspot.com
Cindy Sheehan was jailed over the weekend as she rallied against the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq at the White House. What kind of a country jails a mother whose son was killed in an unjust and fraudulent war?
How is it that United States' politicians, with the aid of a morally bankrupt media, turn heroes into criminals and criminals into heroes? How is it that the puppet masters continue to control the president and congress, continuing the deceit and bloodshed in wars based on lies?
Cindy describes her arrest at Cindy Sheehan's Soapbox http://cindysheehanssoapbox.blogspot.com
"As soon as I crossed the barrier, I was slammed by a couple of cops, handcuffed and then actually run around the front of the White House while the cops tried to find a paddy wagon to stick me in—about 50 people were running with the cop and I, yelling: 'Let her go, let her go.'
Cindy also describes the jail cell:
"Well, those two days were some of the most miserable days of my life! We were taken to a lock-up and Elaine and I were put into a freezing room and I had a t-shirt and flip-flops on, being unprepared to be arrested. For four women, our cell had one cement block bench that was about 7-8 feet long, so at least one of us always had to be on the stone-cold floor. Sleeping was fitful as it was very chilly all night—and very noisy!
Thirty-six hours, and eight bologna-like and cheese-substitute sandwiches later, we were taken to the court for our arraignment and stayed in that cell for seven hours and were finally released at 5pm after we all pled 'not-guilty' and were scheduled for a trial on June 9th."
Cindy says, however, that even jail here is better than the conditions many people live in around the world because of the United States' militarization and greed:
"There are literally billions of people suffering all over this planet due to my nation’s militarism and greed and I know many people would have traded places with me in a heartbeat and think the conditions were pretty damn good."
Meanwhile, while President Obama was focused on winning the vote in health care, he was failing humanity inside this jail cell:
Cindy says, "This never happened to me when Bush was president."
Read more at Cindy's Soapbox:
http://cindysheehanssoapbox.blogspot.com
Photo: In memory of Casey Sheehan, 28.
vote, he was failing humanity inside a jail cellBy Brenda Norrell
Censored News
http://www.bsnorrell.blogspot.com
Cindy Sheehan was jailed over the weekend as she rallied against the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq at the White House. What kind of a country jails a mother whose son was killed in an unjust and fraudulent war?
How is it that United States' politicians, with the aid of a morally bankrupt media, turn heroes into criminals and criminals into heroes? How is it that the puppet masters continue to control the president and congress, continuing the deceit and bloodshed in wars based on lies?
Cindy describes her arrest at Cindy Sheehan's Soapbox http://cindysheehanssoapbox.blogspot.com
"As soon as I crossed the barrier, I was slammed by a couple of cops, handcuffed and then actually run around the front of the White House while the cops tried to find a paddy wagon to stick me in—about 50 people were running with the cop and I, yelling: 'Let her go, let her go.'
Cindy also describes the jail cell:
"Well, those two days were some of the most miserable days of my life! We were taken to a lock-up and Elaine and I were put into a freezing room and I had a t-shirt and flip-flops on, being unprepared to be arrested. For four women, our cell had one cement block bench that was about 7-8 feet long, so at least one of us always had to be on the stone-cold floor. Sleeping was fitful as it was very chilly all night—and very noisy!
Thirty-six hours, and eight bologna-like and cheese-substitute sandwiches later, we were taken to the court for our arraignment and stayed in that cell for seven hours and were finally released at 5pm after we all pled 'not-guilty' and were scheduled for a trial on June 9th."
Cindy says, however, that even jail here is better than the conditions many people live in around the world because of the United States' militarization and greed:
"There are literally billions of people suffering all over this planet due to my nation’s militarism and greed and I know many people would have traded places with me in a heartbeat and think the conditions were pretty damn good."
Meanwhile, while President Obama was focused on winning the vote in health care, he was failing humanity inside this jail cell:
Cindy says, "This never happened to me when Bush was president."
Read more at Cindy's Soapbox:
http://cindysheehanssoapbox.blogspot.com
Photo: In memory of Casey Sheehan, 28.
Tsilhqot'in's 'Blue Gold' will not be censored
Public hearings on mine proposal will include Tsilhqot'in documentary
By Andrew MacLeod
March 23, 2010
http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/Aboriginal-Affairs/2010/03/23/FilmPanel
Taseko Mines Ltd. has failed in its bid to prevent a documentary about the Tsilhqot'in people's connection to Teztan Biny, or Fish Lake, from being shown at a public hearing on a mine proposal southwest of Williams Lake.
The federal review panel this morning dismissed Taseko's motion that last week asked that the film Blue Gold: The Tsilhqot'in Fight for Teztan Biny (Fish Lake) not be shown at the public hearing, said Jay Nelson, a Victoria lawyer acting for the TNG, in an email. “It held that its rules of procedure did not prohibit presenting information in this form,” he said.
A lawyer acting for Taseko did not respond to a message by posting time. The submission to the panel said Blue Gold is a “propaganda film, produced to influence the opinions or behaviour of people, by providing deliberately biased content in an emotional context,” the Tyee reported.
The film's director, Susan Smitten, said she laughed when she heard the company's lawyer had called the film “propaganda.”
“The film's power comes in its authenticity,” she said. It was made as a way to help the Tsilhqot'in people express what the threatened lake means to them, she said. “They come from a position of love.”
Views of Blue Gold tripled the day after Taseko asked that the film be kept out of the hearing, she said. Filmed in two days with a budget under $10,000, it has been watched by people around the world, she said.
The film can be seen on the Hook or on Vimeo. It will be shown during the panel's evening hearings on March 24.
Andrew MacLeod is The Tyee’s Legislative Bureau Chief in Victoria.
Blue Gold expresses the Tsilhqot'in peoples' unanimous rejection of Taseko Mines Ltd.'s proposal to drain Teztan Biny (Fish Lake) in order to stockpile mining waste.
"It is not possible for us to agree to the destruction of the land that sustains us." ~ Chief Marilyn Baptiste, Xeni Gwet'in First Nation.
This film was made possible through generous donations from several organizations including: Donner Canadian Foundation, Friends of the Nemaiah Valley and Small Change Fund.
The Tsilhqot'in Nation holds proven Aboriginal hunting and trapping rights in the area where Taseko wants to build its mine. Taseko's plan requires completely draining Fish Lake (which sits at the headwaters of the Taseko River and ultimately the Fraser River, 600 km north of Vancouver, BC) and filling it with waste rock. The company intends to create a reservoir to hold the 80,000+ trout. Much of the watershed to the south including Nabas (Little Fish Lake) would be used as a tailings storage facility. This is all in an area held as sacred by the Tsilhqot'in.
In the place of gorgeous, fish-bearing lakes in a pristine sub-alpine ecosystem, Taseko will leave behind an estimated 700,000,000 tons of tailings and waste materials, including arsenic, mercury, lead, cadmium and other toxic metals. These toxic creations will permanently scar the area, destroy habitat for major species like grizzlies, moose and deer, and potentially contaminate the largest wild salmon run in North America (the Fraser River).
Recent changes to Canada's Fisheries Act allow for the destruction of freshwater bodies - lakes and rivers can now be used as toxic dump sites for mining corporations. Teztan Biny is just one of many lakes slated for destruction.
We are now fighting to convince the federal environmental review panel which must decide on whether to allow Taseko to proceed of the significant and irrefutable impacts the project will have. The permanent destruction of the lake would be an unfathomable cultural and spiritual loss to the Tsilhqot'in people. And it cannot be compensated ecologically.
There is more information and a place to donate on the RAVEN website - http://www.raventrust.com/
By Andrew MacLeod
March 23, 2010
http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/Aboriginal-Affairs/2010/03/23/FilmPanel
Taseko Mines Ltd. has failed in its bid to prevent a documentary about the Tsilhqot'in people's connection to Teztan Biny, or Fish Lake, from being shown at a public hearing on a mine proposal southwest of Williams Lake.
The federal review panel this morning dismissed Taseko's motion that last week asked that the film Blue Gold: The Tsilhqot'in Fight for Teztan Biny (Fish Lake) not be shown at the public hearing, said Jay Nelson, a Victoria lawyer acting for the TNG, in an email. “It held that its rules of procedure did not prohibit presenting information in this form,” he said.
A lawyer acting for Taseko did not respond to a message by posting time. The submission to the panel said Blue Gold is a “propaganda film, produced to influence the opinions or behaviour of people, by providing deliberately biased content in an emotional context,” the Tyee reported.
The film's director, Susan Smitten, said she laughed when she heard the company's lawyer had called the film “propaganda.”
“The film's power comes in its authenticity,” she said. It was made as a way to help the Tsilhqot'in people express what the threatened lake means to them, she said. “They come from a position of love.”
Views of Blue Gold tripled the day after Taseko asked that the film be kept out of the hearing, she said. Filmed in two days with a budget under $10,000, it has been watched by people around the world, she said.
The film can be seen on the Hook or on Vimeo. It will be shown during the panel's evening hearings on March 24.
Andrew MacLeod is The Tyee’s Legislative Bureau Chief in Victoria.
Blue Gold: The Tsilhqot'in Fight for Teztan Biny (Fish Lake) from Susan Smitten on Vimeo.
Blue Gold: The Tsilhqot'in Fight for Teztan BinyBlue Gold expresses the Tsilhqot'in peoples' unanimous rejection of Taseko Mines Ltd.'s proposal to drain Teztan Biny (Fish Lake) in order to stockpile mining waste.
"It is not possible for us to agree to the destruction of the land that sustains us." ~ Chief Marilyn Baptiste, Xeni Gwet'in First Nation.
This film was made possible through generous donations from several organizations including: Donner Canadian Foundation, Friends of the Nemaiah Valley and Small Change Fund.
The Tsilhqot'in Nation holds proven Aboriginal hunting and trapping rights in the area where Taseko wants to build its mine. Taseko's plan requires completely draining Fish Lake (which sits at the headwaters of the Taseko River and ultimately the Fraser River, 600 km north of Vancouver, BC) and filling it with waste rock. The company intends to create a reservoir to hold the 80,000+ trout. Much of the watershed to the south including Nabas (Little Fish Lake) would be used as a tailings storage facility. This is all in an area held as sacred by the Tsilhqot'in.
In the place of gorgeous, fish-bearing lakes in a pristine sub-alpine ecosystem, Taseko will leave behind an estimated 700,000,000 tons of tailings and waste materials, including arsenic, mercury, lead, cadmium and other toxic metals. These toxic creations will permanently scar the area, destroy habitat for major species like grizzlies, moose and deer, and potentially contaminate the largest wild salmon run in North America (the Fraser River).
Recent changes to Canada's Fisheries Act allow for the destruction of freshwater bodies - lakes and rivers can now be used as toxic dump sites for mining corporations. Teztan Biny is just one of many lakes slated for destruction.
We are now fighting to convince the federal environmental review panel which must decide on whether to allow Taseko to proceed of the significant and irrefutable impacts the project will have. The permanent destruction of the lake would be an unfathomable cultural and spiritual loss to the Tsilhqot'in people. And it cannot be compensated ecologically.
There is more information and a place to donate on the RAVEN website - http://www.raventrust.com/
March 22, 2010
Poetry and Art: The FBI, Indian Country and Surveillance
‘Freedom of Information: The FBI, Indian Country, and Surveillance’
By Staci Golar
Image 2: Hoover COINTELPRO fileSANTA FE, NM — Three poets and over 15 visual artists will explore the complex and often violent relationship between Native Americans and the Federal Bureau of Information in the art show, Freedom of Information The FBI, Indian Country, and Surveillance. Their works will examine the volatile times of the 1960s and 1970s, when the FBI’s COINTELPRO program sought to crush Indian activism, up to the present where technology allows intrusion into our personal lives to a previously unimaginable degree.
An opening reception will take place Friday, April 30th, from 6:00 – 9:00 pm at Ahalenia Studios, located at 1422 Second Street at Jay Street in Santa Fe. This event is free and open to the public. Cheyenne and Muscogee activist, policymaker, and author Suzan Shown Harjo will read her poetry at the opening reception. The show will be open to the public from 1:00 – 6:00 pm on the following three weekends:May 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16. During the week,
from May 2 to May 14, the show will be open by appointment, which can be arranged via ahalenia@gmail.com.America Meredith and Ishkoten Dougi are co-curating the show. Meredith’s father, Howard Meredith directed the Indian Office of the Episcopal Church in the early 1970s. Because of his role, Meredith’s father had FBI tails and his phone was tapped. When as a teenager, she asked her father about the early 1970s, he told her to look up his FBI file, using the
Freedom of Information act, giving the show its name.
Ishkoten Dougi, a New Mexico native and prolific artist, has recently dealt with the FBI, which has been investigating the brutal murder of his little brother.
Indian Country has a much more intimate relationship with the Federal Bureau of Investigation than most of America. The Seven Major Crimes Act of 1885 gave the FBI jurisdiction over reservations when dealing with such major crimes as murder – and Indian Country certainly needs law enforcement. However, in the 1960s and 1970s, the FBI also famously launched COINTELPRO, a covert program to undermine activist organizations that the government deemed threatening, and particularly Native American rights organizations. Families, even loosely affiliated with activist organizations, were followed, monitored, and harassed. Ground zero for clashes between the FBI and Native peoples was Pine Ridge, South Dakota, from 1973 to 1975, when hundreds of murders have gone unsolved.
Today the federal government conducts warrantless wiretapping under the Obama administration. The intrusive surveillance familiar to Indian Country is now experienced by all US citizens. Equally disturbing is the amount of information about ourselves that we freely give away to corporations via social networking.
This art show will explore the personal experiences of artists who have been incarcerated, threatened, attacked, or spied upon by the FBI, but also artists who have worked with the FBI as prosecutors and who have been helped by the FBI in investigations. Artists explore the effect of these experiences on their personal lives. We also examine how, due to technological advances, surveillance has become utterly ubiquitous and even accepted in today’s world. Now most photographs and videos are taken by machines, not human beings. What does this lack of privacy mean to us individually and collectively? How does it change our behavior? And where ultimately will it lead us?
Participating poets are:
• Suzan Shown Harjo (Cheyenne and Hodulgee Muscogee), president of the Morning Star Institute in Washington, D.C., a founding trustee of the National Museum of the American Indian, and an award-winning writer.
• Ron Salkin (Oglala Lakota), a San Francisco bike messenger and published author.
• John Trudell (Santee Dakota), poet, national recording artist, actor and activist. Trudell worked with the American Indian Movement (AIM) serving as Chairman of AIM from 1973 to 1979.
Participating visual artists include:
• Marcus Amerman (Choctaw), bead, glass, and video artist, as well as painter as performance artist, whose alter ego is Buffalo Man.
• Ross Chaney (Osage/Cherokee), video artist and 2-D artist, whose drawings are influenced by his formal training in Japanese calligraphy. • Ishkoten Dougi (Jicarilla Apache/Navajo), expressionist and vision painter and printmaker, and show co-curator. This art show is dedicated to the memory of his brother, Naayaitch Friday, who was brutally murdered on 11 April 2009.
• Gina Gray (Osage Nation), painter living in Pawhuska, Oklahoma. Gray left IAIA to join the Wounded Knee Occupation at Pine Ridge in 1973 for six weeks.
• Teri Greeves (Kiowa/Comanche), bead artist whose work is in the British Museum. She was featured in the PBS documentary, Craft in America.
• April Holder (Sauk and Fox/Tonkawa/Wichita), painting on fabric. Her father’s FBI tails actually stayed in the hospital when April was born in 1984.
• Alex Jacobs (Mohawk) painter, installation artist, and musician in Santa Fe.
• Saige LaFountain (Turtle Mountain Chippewa/Navajo) and Samuel LaFountain (Turtle Mountain Chippewa/Navajo) are brothers and award-winning artists. Saige is known for his bronze and stone sculptures and Samuel creates hand-stamped jewelry inlaid with an exotic array of stones; however, both will be creating experimental pieces in new media.
• America Meredith (Cherokee Nation) will exhibit mixed media paintings and sculpture.
• Leonard Peltier (Turtle Mountain Chippewa/Lakota), lithograph prints. The most prominent political prisoner in the United States, Peltier is currently in Lewisburg, Pennsylvania.
• Kevin and Valerie Pourier (Oglala Lakota), who live on the Pine Ridge Reservation, create polished buffalo horn carvings that are channeled inlaid with crushed gemstones. They marry tradition, aesthetics, and social commentary in his unique, utilitarian sculptures.
• Billy Soza Warsoldier (Cahuilla/Apache), Chicago Arts Institute and IAIA alumnus, successfully fought the California Department of Corrections for the right to not cut one’s hair for religious reasons.
• Stephen Wall (White Earth Chippewa-Seneca), creator of Technododems,which merge micro-technological artifacts with natural materials. Currently he is head of IAIA’s Indigenous Liberal Studies program and president of SWAIA’s board.
• Richard Ray Whitman (Yuchi/Pawnee) – a photographer, digital artist, videographer, actor and a longtime outspoken activist for Indigenous rights.
• Dwayne Wilcox (Oglala Lakota). Wilcox grew up on Pine Ridge and his historically informed ledger drawings offer humorous and biting critiques of contemporary society.
Today the federal government conducts warrantless wiretapping under the Obama administration. The intrusive surveillance familiar to Indian Country is now experienced by all US citizens. Equally disturbing is the amount of information about ourselves that we freely give away to corporations via social networking.
This art show will explore the personal experiences of artists who have been incarcerated, threatened, attacked, or spied upon by the FBI, but also artists who have worked with the FBI as prosecutors and who have been helped by the FBI in investigations. Artists explore the effect of these experiences on their personal lives. We also examine how, due to technological advances, surveillance has become utterly ubiquitous and even accepted in today’s world. Now most photographs and videos are taken by machines, not human beings. What does this lack of privacy mean to us individually and collectively? How does it change our behavior? And where ultimately will it lead us?
Participating poets are:
• Suzan Shown Harjo (Cheyenne and Hodulgee Muscogee), president of the Morning Star Institute in Washington, D.C., a founding trustee of the National Museum of the American Indian, and an award-winning writer.
• Ron Salkin (Oglala Lakota), a San Francisco bike messenger and published author.
• John Trudell (Santee Dakota), poet, national recording artist, actor and activist. Trudell worked with the American Indian Movement (AIM) serving as Chairman of AIM from 1973 to 1979.
Participating visual artists include:
• Marcus Amerman (Choctaw), bead, glass, and video artist, as well as painter as performance artist, whose alter ego is Buffalo Man.
• Ross Chaney (Osage/Cherokee), video artist and 2-D artist, whose drawings are influenced by his formal training in Japanese calligraphy. • Ishkoten Dougi (Jicarilla Apache/Navajo), expressionist and vision painter and printmaker, and show co-curator. This art show is dedicated to the memory of his brother, Naayaitch Friday, who was brutally murdered on 11 April 2009.
• Gina Gray (Osage Nation), painter living in Pawhuska, Oklahoma. Gray left IAIA to join the Wounded Knee Occupation at Pine Ridge in 1973 for six weeks.
• Teri Greeves (Kiowa/Comanche), bead artist whose work is in the British Museum. She was featured in the PBS documentary, Craft in America.
• April Holder (Sauk and Fox/Tonkawa/Wichita), painting on fabric. Her father’s FBI tails actually stayed in the hospital when April was born in 1984.
• Alex Jacobs (Mohawk) painter, installation artist, and musician in Santa Fe.
• Saige LaFountain (Turtle Mountain Chippewa/Navajo) and Samuel LaFountain (Turtle Mountain Chippewa/Navajo) are brothers and award-winning artists. Saige is known for his bronze and stone sculptures and Samuel creates hand-stamped jewelry inlaid with an exotic array of stones; however, both will be creating experimental pieces in new media.
• America Meredith (Cherokee Nation) will exhibit mixed media paintings and sculpture.
• Leonard Peltier (Turtle Mountain Chippewa/Lakota), lithograph prints. The most prominent political prisoner in the United States, Peltier is currently in Lewisburg, Pennsylvania.
• Kevin and Valerie Pourier (Oglala Lakota), who live on the Pine Ridge Reservation, create polished buffalo horn carvings that are channeled inlaid with crushed gemstones. They marry tradition, aesthetics, and social commentary in his unique, utilitarian sculptures.
• Billy Soza Warsoldier (Cahuilla/Apache), Chicago Arts Institute and IAIA alumnus, successfully fought the California Department of Corrections for the right to not cut one’s hair for religious reasons.
• Stephen Wall (White Earth Chippewa-Seneca), creator of Technododems,which merge micro-technological artifacts with natural materials. Currently he is head of IAIA’s Indigenous Liberal Studies program and president of SWAIA’s board.
• Richard Ray Whitman (Yuchi/Pawnee) – a photographer, digital artist, videographer, actor and a longtime outspoken activist for Indigenous rights.
• Dwayne Wilcox (Oglala Lakota). Wilcox grew up on Pine Ridge and his historically informed ledger drawings offer humorous and biting critiques of contemporary society.
DESCRIPTION
April 30 - May 6
Indian Country has a much more intimate relationship with the Federal Bureau of Investigation than most of America. The 1885 Seven Major Crimes Act gave the FBI jurisdiction over reservations when dealing with such major crimes as murder. In the 1960s and 1970s, the FBI also famously launched COINTELPRO, a covert program to undermine activist organizations that the government deemed threatening, particularly Native American rights organizations. Families, even loosely affiliated with activist organizations, were followed, monitored, and harassed.
Today the federal government conducts warrantless wiretapping under the Obama administration. The intrusive surveillance familiar to Indian Country is now experienced by all US citizens. Equally disturbing is the amount of information about ourselves that we freely give away to corporations via social networking.
This art show explores the personal experiences of artists who have been incarcerated, threatened, attacked, or spied upon by the FBI, but also artists who have worked with the FBI as prosecutors and who have been helped by the FBI in investigations. Artists explore the effect of these experiences on their personal lives. We also examine how, due to technological advances, surveillance has become utterly ubiquitous and even accepted in today's world. What does this lack of privacy mean to us individually and collectively? How does it change our behavior? And where ultimately will it lead us?
US 'Listening Sessions' Berkeley and San Francisco
United States Government To Conduct Consultations or “Listening Sessions”
On US International Human Rights Obligations
BERKELEY CONSULTATION
The Bancroft Hotel
http://www.bancrofthotel.com/
2680 Bancroft Way, Berkeley, CA 94704
Thursday, March 25, 2010, from 8:30 AM to 12:30 PM
SAN FRANCISCO CONSULTATION
Mclaren Conference Center, University of San Francisco
2130 Fulton Street
San Francisco, CA 94117
Friday, March 26, 2010, from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM
The United Nations Human Rights Council will examine the United States’ compliance with its legally-binding obligations under its signed and ratified Human Rights treaties as well as the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The process of this examination is called, “Universal Periodic Review” or “UPR”, in which the human rights compliance of every UN member state is reviewed every four years. This November will be the United States’ first review since the process’ creation
As part of the UPR process, the U.S. government is required to conduct consultations with stakeholders, including non-governmental organizations, civil society and those facing rights violations, to provide input regarding human rights in the United States. The government selected several cities in the US, including San Francisco and Berkeley, in which to conduct listening sessions or consultations.
The Bay Area consultations will be held on March 25-26th, 2010.
A half day consultation will be held in Berkeley on Thursday, March 25, 2010 from 8:30 AM - 12:30 PM and will focus on Health, Education, and State Accountability followed by an open comment period.
On Friday, March 26, 2010 from 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM, the Mclaren Conference Center at the University of San Francisco will host a discussion on the human rights challenges faced in San Francisco and surrounding communities. Representatives of the U.S. Department of State and other federal agencies will be in attendance to inform their report to the Universal Periodic Review (UPR).
The meetings will be recorded, and a written report of the meeting will be prepared and posted on the U.S. Department of State’s website. This summary may be used as part of the U.S. government’s submission to the Human Rights Council. Organizations are also welcome to submit a 5-page report directly to the UN before April 19th.
In addition, participating organizations are providing a training on the UPR to be held on Wednesday, March 24th from 6:00 PM to 8:00 PM at the Mission Cultural Center, Studio D, 2868 Mission St. San Francisco.
PARTICIPATION
Your input is vital to this process. Accordingly, we have reserved time for public comment and participation on the agenda. To ensure there is time for input from the widest community, comments need to be a maximum of two minutes in length for each topic. Please reference the human rights obligation being violated and provide a recommendation for how the government can improve this situation. We welcome your contribution and encourage you to join us to ensure that the U.S. government representatives attending this meeting receive accurate information on the human rights challenges faced by our communities.
If you are interested in participating, please register on this site. If you know of others who would like to attend, please forward them this invitation and ask them to register as well.
ACCOMMODATIONS FOR SAN FRANCISCO
The email you received with this link included a hotel listing for the University of San Francisco area and instructions on travel to the campus. The Mclaren Center at the University of San Francisco is wheelchair accessible. If you require a disability accommodation such as a Sign Language interpreter or print materials in alternative formats, or have any questions about accommodations, please contact Katelyn Keil. Her telephone number is 510-644-2555 (v/TDD) and her email is kkeil@dredf.org. Please contact Katie by March 12, 2010 if you require an accommodation.
SAN FRANCISCO PROPOSED AGENDA
Friday, March 26th, 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM
-Program Subject To Change-
Schedule:
8:30-9:00 - Registration
9:00-9:30 - Welcome, Introductions, and Overview of UPR Consultation Process
9:30-10:30 - Panel 1 - Race Discrimination
Moderator: Alberto Sadamando (International Indian Treaty Council)
Linda Burnham (Women of Color Resource Center)
Arnoldo Garcia (National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights)
Lakota Harden (Bay Native Circle)
10:30-11:30 - Panel 2 – LGBT rights issues
Moderator: Shannon Minter (National Center for Lesbian Rights) - Hate crimes, employment discrimination, immigration discrimination, and need for health benefits for same-sex partners of federal employees
Sylvia Guerrero - Increasing hate crimes based on sexual orientation and gender identity
Shirley Tan -Lack of recognition of LGBT families in immigration law
Cecilia Chung - Employment discrimination in the U.S. and lack of protections
Henry Pacheco - Workplace discrimination in the federal government
11:30-12:30 - Panel 3 - Criminal justice; Death Penalty; Prison Conditions
Moderator: Professor Connie de la Vega (University of San Francisco School of Law)
Michelle Leighton (Center for Law and Global Justice) –Juvenile Life Sentences Without Possibility of Parole
Alison Parker (Human Rights Watch) –Racial discrimination in anti-drug laws
Don Specter (Prison Law Office) – Prison overcrowding in California
12:30-1:30 Lunch (on your own)
1:30-2:30 - Panel 4 - Disability Rights
Moderator: Professor Connie de la Vega (University of San Francisco School of Law)
Kim Swain (Disability Rights California) - Progress/challenges concerning deinstitutionalization and prevention of institutionalization of people with disabilities in the SF and Northern California areas
Mary Lou Breslin (Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF)) - Healthcare access for people with disabilities
Claudia Center (Disability Rights Programs of the Legal Aid Society) - Employment with a focus on people with pscyhosocial disabilities
2:30-3:30 - Panel 5 - Environmental Justice
Moderator: Morning Star Gali (International Indian Treaty Council)
Rev. Henry Clark (West County Toxics Coalition) - Shell Refinery
Jim Brown (Pomo Nation) - Mercury poisoning in California waters
or Sherri Norris (California Indian Environmental Alliance) - Mercury poisoning in California waters
3:30-4:30 - Open discussion on topics not covered above
4:30-5:00 - Closing remarks and Adjournment
Organizations participating in the planning and coordinating of the San Francisco Session include: Asian Pacific Environmental Network: http://www.apen4ej.org//
Center for Law and Global and Justice: http://www.law.usfca.edu/centers/clgj/index.html
Council for Global Equality: http://www.globalequality.org/
Disability Rights Education Defense Fund: http://www.dredf.org/
Human Rights Advocates: http://www.humanrightsadvocates.org/
International Indian Treaty Council, http://www.treatycouncil.org/
Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute: http://mcli.org/
National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, http://www.nnirr.org/
West County Toxics Coalition: http://westcountytoxicscoalition.org/
Women of Color Resource Center: http://www.coloredgirls.org/
University of San Francisco Law School: http://www.usfca.edu/law/
US Human Rights Network: http://www.ushrnetwork.org/campaign_upr
BERKELEY PROPOSED AGENDA
Thursday, March 25th, 8:30 AM to 12:30 PM
-Program Subject To Change-
Schedule:
8:30-9:00 - Registration
9:00-9:30 - Welcome, Introductions, and Overview of UPR Consultation Process
9:30-10:45 - Panel 1 - Health and Education: no one left out?
-- Panelists
Justice Now: Incarcerated women - http://www.jnow.org/
National Lawyers Guild: Accountability of Government Officials - http://www.nigsf.org/
Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute: Berkeley Resolution - http://www.mcli.org/
WILD for Human Rights/Initiative of the Miller Center, UC Berkely: San Francisco incorporation of CEDAW - http://www.law.berkeley.edu/mgcl.htm
-- Participant/Open Comments on State Accountability
-- Dialogue with Government Officials
11:45-12:15 - Participant/Open Comments on topics not covered above
12:15-12:30 - Closing remarks and Adjournment
Organizations participating in the Oakland/Berkeley Session
Alliance for Justice
Amnesty International USA (WRO)
Asian Law Caucus (TBC)
Boalt Hall Committee for Human Rights
Boalt Alliance to Abolish Torture
Center for Justice and Accountability
Community Water Center (pending)
Ella Baker Center - Books Not Bars Campaign
Institute for Redress & Recovery at Santa Clara University
Justice Now
Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute
Mujeres Unidas y Activas
National Lawyers Guild, Committee Against Torture
National Lawyers Guild, Boalt Hall Chapter
Public Advocates
Transgender, Gender Variant and Intersex Justice Project
UC Davis Immigration Law Clinic
WILD for Human Rights, Initiative of the Miller Center for Global Challenges and the Law, UC Berkeley
UPR TRAINING
Participating organizations will provide a training for all interested parties on Wednesday, March 24th from 6:00 PM to 8:00 PM at the Mission Cultural Center, Studio D, 2868 Mission St. San Francisco.
The training will provide an indepth explanation of the UPR process, a review of US international treaty obligations, guidelines on how best to make use of the UPR process and a conversation about continuing involvement in the UPR process.
Please Register if you would like to attend.
UPR INFORMATION
For more information on the Universal Periodic Review process itself, please visit the following websites:
United Nations UPR: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRbodies/UPR/Pages/UPRSessions.aspx
US Department of State UP: http://www.state.gov/g/drl/upr/
US Human Rights Network UPR web site: http://www.ushrnetwork.org/campaign_upr
IITC Web Page: www.treatycouncil.org/home.htm [click right column “Human Rights ‘Listening’ Sessions…” and, “New IITC Fact Sheet…”.
Human Rights Project at the Urban Justice Center “UPR toolkit”: http://www.hrpujc.org/documents/UPRtoolkit.pdf
On US International Human Rights Obligations
BERKELEY CONSULTATION
The Bancroft Hotel
http://www.bancrofthotel.com/
2680 Bancroft Way, Berkeley, CA 94704
Thursday, March 25, 2010, from 8:30 AM to 12:30 PM
SAN FRANCISCO CONSULTATION
Mclaren Conference Center, University of San Francisco
2130 Fulton Street
San Francisco, CA 94117
Friday, March 26, 2010, from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM
The United Nations Human Rights Council will examine the United States’ compliance with its legally-binding obligations under its signed and ratified Human Rights treaties as well as the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The process of this examination is called, “Universal Periodic Review” or “UPR”, in which the human rights compliance of every UN member state is reviewed every four years. This November will be the United States’ first review since the process’ creation
As part of the UPR process, the U.S. government is required to conduct consultations with stakeholders, including non-governmental organizations, civil society and those facing rights violations, to provide input regarding human rights in the United States. The government selected several cities in the US, including San Francisco and Berkeley, in which to conduct listening sessions or consultations.
The Bay Area consultations will be held on March 25-26th, 2010.
A half day consultation will be held in Berkeley on Thursday, March 25, 2010 from 8:30 AM - 12:30 PM and will focus on Health, Education, and State Accountability followed by an open comment period.
On Friday, March 26, 2010 from 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM, the Mclaren Conference Center at the University of San Francisco will host a discussion on the human rights challenges faced in San Francisco and surrounding communities. Representatives of the U.S. Department of State and other federal agencies will be in attendance to inform their report to the Universal Periodic Review (UPR).
The meetings will be recorded, and a written report of the meeting will be prepared and posted on the U.S. Department of State’s website. This summary may be used as part of the U.S. government’s submission to the Human Rights Council. Organizations are also welcome to submit a 5-page report directly to the UN before April 19th.
In addition, participating organizations are providing a training on the UPR to be held on Wednesday, March 24th from 6:00 PM to 8:00 PM at the Mission Cultural Center, Studio D, 2868 Mission St. San Francisco.
PARTICIPATION
Your input is vital to this process. Accordingly, we have reserved time for public comment and participation on the agenda. To ensure there is time for input from the widest community, comments need to be a maximum of two minutes in length for each topic. Please reference the human rights obligation being violated and provide a recommendation for how the government can improve this situation. We welcome your contribution and encourage you to join us to ensure that the U.S. government representatives attending this meeting receive accurate information on the human rights challenges faced by our communities.
If you are interested in participating, please register on this site. If you know of others who would like to attend, please forward them this invitation and ask them to register as well.
ACCOMMODATIONS FOR SAN FRANCISCO
The email you received with this link included a hotel listing for the University of San Francisco area and instructions on travel to the campus. The Mclaren Center at the University of San Francisco is wheelchair accessible. If you require a disability accommodation such as a Sign Language interpreter or print materials in alternative formats, or have any questions about accommodations, please contact Katelyn Keil. Her telephone number is 510-644-2555 (v/TDD) and her email is kkeil@dredf.org. Please contact Katie by March 12, 2010 if you require an accommodation.
SAN FRANCISCO PROPOSED AGENDA
Friday, March 26th, 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM
-Program Subject To Change-
Schedule:
8:30-9:00 - Registration
9:00-9:30 - Welcome, Introductions, and Overview of UPR Consultation Process
9:30-10:30 - Panel 1 - Race Discrimination
Moderator: Alberto Sadamando (International Indian Treaty Council)
Linda Burnham (Women of Color Resource Center)
Arnoldo Garcia (National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights)
Lakota Harden (Bay Native Circle)
10:30-11:30 - Panel 2 – LGBT rights issues
Moderator: Shannon Minter (National Center for Lesbian Rights) - Hate crimes, employment discrimination, immigration discrimination, and need for health benefits for same-sex partners of federal employees
Sylvia Guerrero - Increasing hate crimes based on sexual orientation and gender identity
Shirley Tan -Lack of recognition of LGBT families in immigration law
Cecilia Chung - Employment discrimination in the U.S. and lack of protections
Henry Pacheco - Workplace discrimination in the federal government
11:30-12:30 - Panel 3 - Criminal justice; Death Penalty; Prison Conditions
Moderator: Professor Connie de la Vega (University of San Francisco School of Law)
Michelle Leighton (Center for Law and Global Justice) –Juvenile Life Sentences Without Possibility of Parole
Alison Parker (Human Rights Watch) –Racial discrimination in anti-drug laws
Don Specter (Prison Law Office) – Prison overcrowding in California
12:30-1:30 Lunch (on your own)
1:30-2:30 - Panel 4 - Disability Rights
Moderator: Professor Connie de la Vega (University of San Francisco School of Law)
Kim Swain (Disability Rights California) - Progress/challenges concerning deinstitutionalization and prevention of institutionalization of people with disabilities in the SF and Northern California areas
Mary Lou Breslin (Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF)) - Healthcare access for people with disabilities
Claudia Center (Disability Rights Programs of the Legal Aid Society) - Employment with a focus on people with pscyhosocial disabilities
2:30-3:30 - Panel 5 - Environmental Justice
Moderator: Morning Star Gali (International Indian Treaty Council)
Rev. Henry Clark (West County Toxics Coalition) - Shell Refinery
Jim Brown (Pomo Nation) - Mercury poisoning in California waters
or Sherri Norris (California Indian Environmental Alliance) - Mercury poisoning in California waters
3:30-4:30 - Open discussion on topics not covered above
4:30-5:00 - Closing remarks and Adjournment
Organizations participating in the planning and coordinating of the San Francisco Session include: Asian Pacific Environmental Network: http://www.apen4ej.org//
Center for Law and Global and Justice: http://www.law.usfca.edu/centers/clgj/index.html
Council for Global Equality: http://www.globalequality.org/
Disability Rights Education Defense Fund: http://www.dredf.org/
Human Rights Advocates: http://www.humanrightsadvocates.org/
International Indian Treaty Council, http://www.treatycouncil.org/
Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute: http://mcli.org/
National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, http://www.nnirr.org/
West County Toxics Coalition: http://westcountytoxicscoalition.org/
Women of Color Resource Center: http://www.coloredgirls.org/
University of San Francisco Law School: http://www.usfca.edu/law/
US Human Rights Network: http://www.ushrnetwork.org/campaign_upr
BERKELEY PROPOSED AGENDA
Thursday, March 25th, 8:30 AM to 12:30 PM
-Program Subject To Change-
Schedule:
8:30-9:00 - Registration
9:00-9:30 - Welcome, Introductions, and Overview of UPR Consultation Process
9:30-10:45 - Panel 1 - Health and Education: no one left out?
-- Panelists
Justice Now: Incarcerated women - http://www.jnow.org/
National Lawyers Guild: Accountability of Government Officials - http://www.nigsf.org/
Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute: Berkeley Resolution - http://www.mcli.org/
WILD for Human Rights/Initiative of the Miller Center, UC Berkely: San Francisco incorporation of CEDAW - http://www.law.berkeley.edu/mgcl.htm
-- Participant/Open Comments on State Accountability
-- Dialogue with Government Officials
11:45-12:15 - Participant/Open Comments on topics not covered above
12:15-12:30 - Closing remarks and Adjournment
Organizations participating in the Oakland/Berkeley Session
Alliance for Justice
Amnesty International USA (WRO)
Asian Law Caucus (TBC)
Boalt Hall Committee for Human Rights
Boalt Alliance to Abolish Torture
Center for Justice and Accountability
Community Water Center (pending)
Ella Baker Center - Books Not Bars Campaign
Institute for Redress & Recovery at Santa Clara University
Justice Now
Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute
Mujeres Unidas y Activas
National Lawyers Guild, Committee Against Torture
National Lawyers Guild, Boalt Hall Chapter
Public Advocates
Transgender, Gender Variant and Intersex Justice Project
UC Davis Immigration Law Clinic
WILD for Human Rights, Initiative of the Miller Center for Global Challenges and the Law, UC Berkeley
UPR TRAINING
Participating organizations will provide a training for all interested parties on Wednesday, March 24th from 6:00 PM to 8:00 PM at the Mission Cultural Center, Studio D, 2868 Mission St. San Francisco.
The training will provide an indepth explanation of the UPR process, a review of US international treaty obligations, guidelines on how best to make use of the UPR process and a conversation about continuing involvement in the UPR process.
Please Register if you would like to attend.
UPR INFORMATION
For more information on the Universal Periodic Review process itself, please visit the following websites:
United Nations UPR: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRbodies/UPR/Pages/UPRSessions.aspx
US Department of State UP: http://www.state.gov/g/drl/upr/
US Human Rights Network UPR web site: http://www.ushrnetwork.org/campaign_upr
IITC Web Page: www.treatycouncil.org/home.htm [click right column “Human Rights ‘Listening’ Sessions…” and, “New IITC Fact Sheet…”.
Human Rights Project at the Urban Justice Center “UPR toolkit”: http://www.hrpujc.org/documents/UPRtoolkit.pdf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)