Category Archives: North America

USA: New Haven Alders Put Peace On The Ballot

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article by Thomas Breen in the New Haven Independent

Peace will be on the ballot this November — in the form of a nonbinding referendum asking New Haveners how they’d like Congress to spend the majority of the federal budget.

On the military, as is currently the case? Or on jobs, education, environmental sustainability, and other human services instead?


Monday night’s virtual aldermanic hearing.

During Monday night’s regular monthly meeting of the full Board of Alders, local legislators voted unanimously in support of adding that question about federal spending priorities to the Nov. 3 general election ballot.

The non-binding advisory referendum, proposed by the city’s Peace Commission, will ask New Haveners the following question: “Shall Congress prepare for health and climate crises by transferring funds from the military budget to cities for human needs, jobs and an environmentally sustainable economy?”

Hill Alder Ron Hurt urged his colleagues to vote in favor of the resolution that included the ballot update. He said the purpose of the resolution and nonbinding referendum is to give New Haven voters an opportunity to weigh in on whether or not they would like to see Congress and the President “end foreign wars, scrap all nuclear weapons, rebuild infrastructure, and develop a new economy based on renewable energy.”

According to a June committee hearing on the item, 53 percent of the current federal budget is devoted to military spending. Many who testified during that two-and-a-half-hour hearing spoke of the perversity of this country spending so much on weapons and vehicles of destruction when that money could instead be going to bolster the nation’s public health infrastructure, which has so struggled to keep up with the pandemic. The Department of Defense’s budget, meanwhile, has proven seemingly impossible to audit because of bookkeeping errors, deficiencies, and irregularities.

In a press release put out after the vote, Downtown/Yale Alder Eli Sabin, who is the aldermanic representative on the Peace Commission, applauded the move. He quoted Peace Commission Chair Joelle Fishman as saying, “this ballot referendum will allow New Haven voters to express their hopes and dreams, and perhaps inspire other cities to do the same, building the momentum needed to create the political will for every person to be treated with dignity and respect, for every person to have health care, housing, a living wage job, food security, in a peaceful and sustainable world.”

(Article continued on the right column)

Questions for this article:

Does military spending lead to economic decline and collapse?

How can culture of peace be developed at the municipal level?

(Article continued from the left column)

Westville Alder and Health and Human Services Committee Chair Darryl Brackeen, Jr. is also quoted in that release as saying that supporting the peace resolution “is the right thing to do and now it’s time to hear from the people.”

Peace Resolution

Below is the resolution adopted by the Board of Alders Monday night. The title of the resolution is: From the Peace Commission, a Resolution calling on Congress and the President to prepare for health and climate crises by transferring funds from the military budget to cities and states for human needs, jobs, and an environmentally sustainable economy and placing a non-binding advisory referendum to that effect on the November 3, 2020 New Haven municipal ballot.”

Whereas, the severity of the U.S. economic crisis, compounded by the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, has caused severe budget shortfalls at all levels of government, necessitating a re-examination of national spending priorities; and

Whereas, every dollar spent on the military produces fewer jobs than spending the same dollar on education, healthcare, clean energy and other beneficial programs; and

Whereas, U.S. military spending has ballooned to more than half of federal discretionary spending – more than during the Cold War, the Vietnam conflict, or the Korean War; and

Whereas, the United States trails many other nations in life expectancy, infant mortality, education, housing, and environmental sustainability;

Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Board of Alders of the City of New Haven, Connecticut calls on the U.S. Congress and the U.S. President to end foreign ground and air wars; refrain from new military ventures; work toward an end to all nuclear weapons; reduce military spending in order to meet human needs; promote job creation; re-train and re-employ those losing jobs in the process of conversion to non-military industries; rebuild infrastructure; assist municipal and state governments; and develop a new economy based on renewable energy.

Be it further resolved that the most honorable City Clerk of New Haven is hereby directed to accomplish any and all actions necessary to place the following non-binding advisory referendum on the November 3, 2020 municipal ballot:

“Shall Congress prepare for health and climate crises by transferring funds from the military budget to cities for human needs, jobs and an environmentally sustainable economy?”.

DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION, DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, North America

US: Remembering Congressman John Lewis with gratitude

. DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION . .

Special to CPNN by Anne Creter, U.S. Dept. of Peacebuilding Campaign

Inspired from having just watched Rep John Lewis’s poignant Memorial Service, allow me to make some “good trouble” by sharing the following FYI.  Rep John Lewis is a true Peace Hero to us at the Peace Alliance because he was an original cosponsor of the first Department of Peace bill introduced in Congress by former Rep Dennis Kucinich on July 11, 2001 (along with then Rep Bernie Sanders!). 


Unlike Bernie who moved on to the Senate, Rep Lewis continued to faithfully cosponsor the bill in each of the 10 additional congressional sessions it has been reintroduced (presently HR-1111 sponsored by Rep Barbara Lee of Ca).  Few other Members of Congress have that long-enduring distinction.  

Our Georgia Dept of Peacebuilding Committee member had a wonderful relationship with Rep Lewis, so we often visited his office during our Advocacy Days in DC (first picture). 

(Article continued in the column on the right)

Questions related to this article:

Where in the world can we find good leadership today?


(Article continued from the column on the left)  
  
His Deputy Chief of Staff, Jamila Thompson, who just spoke at the Service, is in middle of the second picture.   

We will sorely miss him making “good trouble” — “necessary trouble” for the culture of peace in the beloved community of our one world.  

Here is a recent Peace Alliance tribute to Rep Lewis.  https://peacealliance.kontribune.com/articles/10053

If you are not already on the Peace Alliance list of individual / organizational endorsements for the Department of Peacebuilding bill, now is a great time to do so.  Thanks. 
https://peacealliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/DoPOrgEndorsements6-5-20.pdf

DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION, FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, North America

US  Conference of Mayors’ 2020 Vision for America: A Call to Action

.. DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION ..

Excerpts from the website of The United States Conference of Mayors

As the leading voice of America’s cities, The U.S Conference of Mayors is uniquely qualified to recommend a strategic vision for America. Since its founding in 1932, the Conference remains the place where America’s mayors – Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike – come together in a collegial, cooperative, bipartisan manner to get things done.

The mayors of cities of all sizes, across all regions and all manner of demographic and socio-economic composition, are working side-by-side to solve problems, improve conditions, and create and catalyze positive change for the people we all serve.

Our Mayors’ 2020 Vision for America: A Call to Action platform of 12 priorities is organized under the Conference’s bipartisan focus on Infrastructure, Innovation and Inclusion. Together they represent a positive way forward.

* Protect and Advance Human and Civil Rights

(Continued in right column)

Questions for this article:

How can culture of peace be developed at the municipal level?

(Continued from left column)

* Re-imagine and Modernize the Nation’s Transportation Infrastructure

* Invest in America’s Water and Wastewater Systems

* Address Climate Change by Accelerating Clean Energy Use

* Embrace Efficient, Effective Modern Technology While Protecting Consumers and Cities

* Strengthen Education, Improve Schools, and Build the Workforce of the Future

* Join with Mayors and Police Chiefs to Support Public Safety for All

* Fix our Broken Immigration System

* Make Housing More Affordable and End Homelessness

* Guarantee Access to Affordable, Quality Healthcare and Critical Human Services

* Rewrite the Tax Code to Help Hardworking Taxpayers and Reduce Economic Inequality

* Promote American Exports, Fair Trade, and International Tourism

DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION, North America

US: Progressive Caucus Announces Opposition to ‘Wasteful, Bloated’ $740 Billion Pentagon Budget Proposal

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

A article by Jake Johnson from Common Dreams (reprinted under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License)

The Congressional Progressive Caucus said Sunday that it will formally oppose the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2021 unless “significant action” is taken to reduce the bill’s proposed Pentagon outlay.


Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) speaks during an oversight hearing in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill February 8, 2019 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

“Rubber-stamping a record $740 billion for the Pentagon shortchanges millions of families trying to get by in this crisis,” tweeted the CPC, which has more than 90 members. “Enhanced unemployment benefits expire in less than two weeks. The federal eviction moratorium expires in six days.”

“Congress should be focused on addressing these urgent crises,” the CPC added, “not passing a wasteful, bloated $740 billion defense bill to line the pockets of defense contractors.”

(Article continued on the right column)

Question for this article:

Does military spending lead to economic decline and collapse?

(Article continued from the left column)

Along with Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), CPC co-chairs Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) are advocating the passage of an NDAA amendment that would cut the proposed Pentagon budget by 10%—$74 billion—and redirect the savings toward healthcare, housing, and education in poor communities.

“This 10% cut is eminently doable and reasonable,” Jayapal said  during an event late last month. “But it’s not going to be easy… As progressives, it is our job to redefine and reimagine what it is to be strong. Strong means an end to endless wars and a return to robust diplomacy and international coalition building.”

Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt) and Ed Markey (D-Mass.) are co-sponsoring a companion amendment in the Senate. In a speech on the Senate floor last month, Sanders described the proposed 10% cut as a “modest” way to begin shifting U.S. spending priorities away from endless war and toward urgent domestic concerns.

With the amendment expected to receive a vote this coming week, Sanders wrote in an email to supporters Sunday that “the time is now to cut military spending and use that money for human needs.”

“How can it be that we have enough to spend more on defense than the next eleven countries combined, but we don’t have enough to make sure every American child has a roof over their head and enough food to eat?” Sanders wrote. “A great nation is not judged by the size of its military budget, it is judged by how well it treats its weakest and most vulnerable citizens.”

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, North America

Oppostion to Israel’s proposed annexation of occupied Palestinian territory

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

A letter from Members of US Congress

Despite lack of attention by the commercial media, described by Jan Oberg, Israel’s proposed annexation of occupied Palestinian territory has been opposed by 100 US organizations and by the following letter by members of the US Congress.


Palestinians are gathering in Gaza City and occupied West Bank for demonstrations against the Israeli plan [Mohammed Salem/Reuters]

June 30, 2020

To: The Honorable Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State, U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC 20520

Dear Secretary Pompeo:

We write to you to express our deep concern over the planned annexation of occupied Palestinian territory by the government of Israel. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said annexation could begin as early as July 1, 2020. Should the Israeli government move forward with these plans, they would actively harm prospects for a future in which all Israelis and Palestinians can live with full equality, human rights and dignity, and would lay the groundwork for Israel becoming an apartheid state, as your predecessor John Kerry warned in 2014.We call on you to take all necessary action available to reverse course on this proposal, which will cause more tension and conflict for decades to come. While the full scope and details of the plan are not yet public, Palestinians have overwhelmingly rejected the idea of annexation, and have understandably refused to participate in a process that is not grounded in a recognition of their national rights under international law.

Leading human rights experts warn that annexing parts of the West Bank will perpetuate and entrench human rights violations against the Palestinian people, including limitations on freedom of movement, mass expropriation of privately-owned Palestinian land, further expansion of illegal settlements, continued demolitions of Palestinian homes, and a loss of Palestinian control over their natural resources.

Furthermore, Israel has stated it will not grant citizenship to Palestinians living in annexed territory or to the many more Palestinians living in the isolated enclaves that Israel will opt not to annex, formalizing in law the separate and unequal treatment of the two populations and paving the path toward an apartheid system. Indeed, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967 has stated that it would “crystalize a 21st century apartheid, leaving in its wake the demise of the Palestinians’ right to self-determination.”

Of further concern, Israeli annexation of the West Bank is a clear violation of international law. Annexation is prohibited by Article 2(4) of the UN Charter and is a prohibited act of aggression under Article 47 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, of which Israel is a party. Forty-seven of the independent Special Procedures mandates appointed by the Human Rights Council at the United Nations reaffirm this. Further, already existing Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem, amount to a war crime under Article 8(2)(b)(viii) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court because Israel, as the Occupying Power, is prohibited from transferring, either directly or indirectly, parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.

(continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

Presenting the Palestinian side of the Middle East, Is it important for a culture of peace?

Israel/Palestine, is the situation like South Africa?

(continued from left column)

Annexation is specifically prohibited because it incites armed conflict, political and economic instability, systematic human rights abuses, and, most importantly, legitimizes the erasure ofidentity. There is no question that the acre by acre de facto annexation since 1967 for the purpose of new Israeli settlements is a blatant attempt to suppress Palestinian identity and nationhood.

Unilateral annexation in the West Bank is in direct opposition to the principles of democracy and human rights that the United States of America is supposed to stand for. At a time when the American people are taking to the streets to demand justice for all in our own country, there is no question but that such an action would alienate many U.S. lawmakers and citizens. Members of Congress should not be expected to support an undemocratic system in which Israel would permanently rule over a Palestinian people denied self-determination or equal rights.

Should the Israeli government continue down this path, we will work to ensure non-recognition of annexed territories as well as pursue legislation that conditions the $3.8 billion in U.S. military funding to Israel to ensure that U.S. taxpayers are not supporting annexation in any way. We will include human rights conditions and the withholding of funds for the offshore procurement of Israeli weapons equal to or exceeding the amount the Israeli government spends annually to fund settlements, as well as the policies and practices that sustain and enable them.

The United States must remain committed to a future in which all Israelis and Palestinians live with full rights, dignity, and democracy. This means that we do not support policies that would prevent that future, as annexation would. We therefore urge you to make clear to the Israeli government that such a move is unacceptable.

Thank you for your consideration of this request.

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Representative Pramila Jayapal

Representative Betty McCollum

Senator Bernard Sanders

Representative Rashida Tlaib

Representative Ayanna Pressley

Representative André Carson

Representative Jesús G. “Chuy” García.

Representative Bobby Rush

Representative Raul Grijalva

Representative Ilhan Omar

Representative Danny Davis

Representative Nydia Velázquez

(Thank you to Phyllis Kotite, the CPNN reporter for this article.)

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, Mideast, North America,

USA: The Failure of Police Use of Force Policies to Meet Fundamental International Human Rights Law and Standards

. HUMAN RIGHTS . .

Introduction and Conclusion from a report by the University of Chicago Law School – International Human Rights Clinic

Introduction

This Report is being published in the midst of a long series of horrifying incidents of police abuse of power in the United States. The deaths of George Floyd, Lacquan McDonald, Eric Garner, Michael Brown, Ahmaud Arbery, Tony McDade, Regis Korchinski-Paquet, Breonna Taylor and many others, have echoed throughout the communities of this nation and prompted protests across the country. The video and testimonies from these incidents provide grim illustrations of the power law enforcement officers have over the people they are sworn to serve and protect, and the deadly consequences when they abuse that power.

Society vests law enforcement with the responsibility to protect public safety and enforce the law when necessary. For these reasons, and these reasons only, law enforcement officers are granted the immense power to use force, including lethal force. This authority – state sanctioned violence – necessarily comes with limits and obligations to ensure those who enforce the law do not abuse it. These limits and obligations require that police use their power in a manner that protects and serves the entire community that has vested them with this privilege. The exercise of this authority also requires accountability when abuses occur. Without accountability, state sanctioned violence is nothing but the exercise of arbitrary brute force, a common tool of tyrannical and despotic governments.

Yet, as endless reports and studies have indicated, the police in the United States do not always use their power in a manner that reflects the restraint, care and humility promised to its people. The many and terrible deaths of unarmed African Americans, the targeting of poor communities and communities of color, and the absence of a mandate to protect individuals from domestic violence, all sanctioned by the Supreme Court of the United States in the name of police discretion, have scarred many and raised questions of whether the police sufficiently serve their mandate.

Even as the evidence of criminality and misconduct permeates the news, drives thousands to the streets, and garners national outrage, the exact scope and scale of lethal use of force remains unknown. The United States does not count the number of lives lost nationally due to police use of force. And police departments vary as to how and whether data on officer use of force, including the discharge of police firearms and deaths, is collected and published. This absence of comprehensive reporting and publishing of data on police use of force severely limits our ability to see the full picture and to accurately evaluate police misconduct. It also constrains our ability to identify practices and institutional mechanisms in need of reform. The failure by states and the federal government to address this lack of transparency and accountability tells its own story and is, on its own, a cause for great concern.

The human rights of people living in the United States are profoundly affected by how law enforcement officials carry out their duties. Police use of force implicates the basic rights of every individual subject to this power – the rights to life, security of person, freedom from discrimination and equal protection of the laws. These rights, established following the atrocities of World War II in the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, form the cornerstone of the human rights system. The challenge of managing police power is a global one. People in every country face the difficult and complex balance between granting police the discretion and resources needed to achieve their purpose, while holding them accountable when they abuse their power in violation of the human rights of the communities they serve.

To address this global challenge, the 193 member states of the United Nations, which include the United States, have developed principles and standards to constrain, direct and ensure the proper use of lethal force. These principles – legality, necessity, proportionality and accountability – have been developed and concretized in various forms in the international system, and have been articulated in resolutions by the U.N. General Assembly, rules by committees of experts, and findings by U.N. Special Procedure Mechanisms. These principles and the rules they establish represent the best global effort to consider how police discretion and accountability can contribute to a just and humane society that respects and protects the rights of all its individuals.

In the United States, some of these principles have been adopted and articulated by our courts and law makers. However, this country lacks a comprehensive and effective national legal framework that places specific conditions on the use of force and establishes mechanisms of accountability.5 While the Constitution sets some limits on the use of force, the standards set by the Supreme Court in its case law fall woefully short of meeting the international standards, and Congress has failed to take action to fill this critical gap in federal law.6 Due to the decentralized nature of law enforcement in the United States, and the failure of national leadership to set uniform, federal standards, the main restrictions on police use of force exist at the state and local level. State law and police departmental policies provide the principles and standards on use of force and the consequences for when that authority is abused.

(Report continued in right column)

Questions for this article:

Where are police being trained in culture of peace?

(Report continued from left column)

While, in many states, legislation provides some direction on the use of force to police departments, research and data indicates that state laws have overwhelmingly failed to do so in an effective manner. In 2015, Amnesty International, USA released “Deadly Force: Police Use of Lethal Force in the United States,” evaluating state laws’ compliance with international human rights standards. Alarmingly, the report found that not a single state’s law fully complied.

This Report builds on Amnesty’s findings by examining the other main source of accountability for the use of force: police department policies. To capture a large portion of the population and a diverse set of contexts, this Report evaluates the police policies from the 20 largest cities in the United States during 2017 to 2018.7 These internal departmental policies provide the primary guidance to police officers on when and how they may use lethal force.8 They are intended as manuals for officers on how to execute their duties, written by police leadership and, for the most part, adopted by the governing police boards.9 These policies provide the substantive standards that officers are trained on and the principles that departments must operationalize. Policy violations trigger internal and sometimes external reviews and possible disciplinary measures.

While police policies vary, a use of force policy generally establishes the magnitude and nature of the threat that must exist, and the level of certainty police officers must have, to justify the use of lethal force.10 Some policies call for a gradual escalation of the use of force; some list a series of measures an officer must or should take before resorting to lethal force.11 They also prescribe what must happen after force has been used, who must be notified, and how an investigation unfolds.

This Report reviews and analyzes these policies to better understand how and whether police departments provide meaningful and effective direction to officers on the use of lethal force in a manner that respects the rights of the people they are charged to protect and serve. To evaluate use of force policies, authors developed and applied a grading system based on international law and standards on police lethal use of force. Through this evaluation, authors found that the policies in all 20 cities reviewed fail to meet international human rights law and standards. These use of force policies grant police undue discretion and insufficient guidance on when lethal force can be used, and they fail to establish strong enough accountability mechanisms.

Part I of this Report provides summary of findings and recommendations for the development of a robust mechanism to constrain police lethal use of force. Police departments across the country allow for the use of force in circumstances where there is no immediate threat to life, such as allowing exceptions for the capture of a fleeing suspect. And almost none of the city policies provide adequate oversight and accountability mechanisms.

Part II presents the international law and standards governing police use of lethal force in the United States. It highlights the four main principles derived from these standards – legality, necessity, proportionality, and accountability – and explains their application to police use of force policies.

Part III uses these four principles to analyze and grade the use of lethal force policies of the 20 largest U.S. cities. Like the laws of the 50 states, not a single policy fully complied with international human rights law and standards. In fact, some policies fell well below full compliance, for example, failing to require that lethal force only be used in response to the immediate threat of deadly force.

Ultimately, deep, structural reform of the United States’ law enforcement system is needed. The police in the United States kill more people than any of our peer nations.12 In a 24-day period in 2015, police in the United States shot more people than the police did in England and Wales in 24 years.13 By all measures, the current system is broken. As this Report demonstrates, the very laws and departmental policies that are meant to guide police officers on how to make the difficult, life and death decisions that are required of them, do not comply with human rights. Structural reform to end police killings of unarmed black and brown men and women must start in the police departments themselves with human rights-compliant use of force policies.

Conclusion

Not one of the police departments in the 20 largest cities in United States has a human rights compliant use of force policy. None of the policies are constrained by a state law that complies with human rights law and standards. And too many police departments allow the use of lethal force in response to a non-lethal threat, thereby sanctioning unnecessary and disproportionate use of force.

These policy failures have contributed to the tragic killings of unarmed black and brown men and women by police officers around the country. Ensuring police use of lethal force in the United States is constrained by international human rights law and standards requires a broad range of legal, institutional and practical measures, from a solid grounding in legislation, to a committed political and police leadership. Human rights compliant laws and police policies are an absolutely necessary component, but they alone cannot operationalize and make real the human rights law and standards embodied in the four core principles. Instead, law and policies provide the foundation on which a structure of reinforcing attitudes, practices and mechanisms must be built.

Making law and police policies more than just paper promises requires, among other things: comprehensive, effective and ongoing officer training; effective supervision and planning; robust corrective measures applied to officer misbehavior; independent and transparent investigating and reporting; disciplinary measures; and mechanisms with real independence, resources, power and will to provide accountability. Nevertheless, true structural transformation of law enforcement practices in the United States must begin with police policies that comply with international human rights law and standards.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, HUMAN RIGHTS, North America

What is Juneteenth and how are people commemorating it this year?

… . HUMAN RIGHTS … .

An article from Reuters (reprinted by permission)

Juneteenth, an annual U.S. holiday on June 19, has taken on greater significance this year following nationwide protests over police brutality and the deaths of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Rayshard Brooks and other African Americans.
.


FILE PHOTO: The Emancipation Proclamation is displayed at the National Archives building in Washington, January 13, 2006. President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863, during the American Civil War, formally proclaiming the freedom of all slaves held in areas still in revolt. This original document is displayed for public during four days once a year. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas/File Photo

WHAT IS JUNETEENTH?

Juneteenth, a portmanteau of June and 19th, also is known as Emancipation Day. It commemorates the day in 1865, after the Confederate states surrendered to end the Civil War, when a Union general arrived in Texas to inform the last group of enslaved African Americans of their freedom under President Abraham Lincoln’s 1863 Emancipation Proclamation. In 1980, Texas officially declared it a holiday. It is now recognized in 46 other states and the District of Columbia. Although in part a celebration, the day is also observed solemnly to honor those who suffered during slavery in the United States with the arrival of the first enslaved Africans over 400 years ago.

(Article continued in right column)

Question(s) related to this article:

Are we making progress against racism?

(Article continued from left column)

WHAT IS SIGNIFICANT THIS YEAR?

This year Juneteenth coincides with global protests against racial injustice sparked by the May 25 death of Floyd, a black man, in Minneapolis police custody. It also accompanies the coronavirus outbreak, which has disproportionately affected communities of color. Last week, U.S. President Donald Trump, who had already been under fire for his response to both crises, drew further criticism for scheduling a Friday re-election rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma. He has since moved it to Saturday. Tulsa is an important and especially sensitive site where a white mob massacred African-American residents in 1921. Community organizations nationwide will devote the day to discussions on policing and civil rights ahead of the November election.

[Editor’s note: Although Juneteenth is not a national holiday in the U.S. there is a move in the Congress to do this.]

HOW ARE PEOPLE MARKING THE DAY?

People will mark the 155th anniversary across the country with festive meals and gatherings. While many cities have canceled this year’s annual parades because of the pandemic, other groups have opted for virtual conferences or smaller events. In Washington, groups plan marches, protests and rallies. Amid the wave of racial justice protests, some U.S. businesses have committed to a change of policies, including recognition of the holiday. Among the companies that have announced they will recognize Juneteenth as a paid company holiday are the National Football League (here), the New York Times, and Twitter and Square.

HUMAN RIGHTS, North America

USA: Historian Robin D.G. Kelley: Years of Racial Justice Organizing Laid Groundwork for Today’s Uprising

EDUCATION FOR PEACE .

Excerpts from a report on Jun 11 in Democracy Now (The original content of this program is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Please attribute legal copies of this work to democracynow.org.)

AMY GOODMAN: For more on the mass uprising engulfing the U.S. and what protesters are demanding now, we go to Los Angeles, where we’re joined by Robin Kelley, professor of African American studies at UCLA. He studies social movements, author of many books, including Freedom Dreams: The Black Radical Imagination. . . .


video of full report

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Professor Kelley, I want to go back to something that you  wrote  immediately following Trump’s election in November 2016. You wrote that the U.S. needs a multiracial movement committed to, quote, “dismantling the oppressive regimes of racism, heteropatriarchy, empire, and class exploitation that is at the root of inequality, precarity, materialism, and violence in many forms.” You’ve just talked about how the demands of this movement are very different. Do you see what’s happening now as what you wanted to happen in November 2016?

ROBIN D.G. KELLEY: Exactly. And not only that, but what I wrote in 2016 was actually a reflection of what was already happening on the ground. So, in some respects, remember, the Movement for Black Lives put out their policy platform in August of 2016.

(Article continued in right column)

Question(s) related to this article:

Are we making progress against racism?

(Article continued from left column)

And one of the things we all have to acknowledge is that we’re not here by accident. You know, this is not a spontaneous response to the pandemic, and suddenly white people are waking up and saying, “Oh, wait a second, Black lives matter.” No, this is a product of enormous work, going back well before Trayvon Martin. But you think about all the organizing work, the Movement for Black Lives, Black Lives Matter, the women who organized Black Lives Matter, initiated — Opal Tometi, Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors — people like Melina Abdullah, Charlene Carruthers of Black Youth Project 100, all the scholar activists who have been working on this question — Barbara Ransby, Kimberlé Crenshaw, Angela Davis, Ruth Wilson Gilmore — and then, before that, the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement, Copwatch, Dignity and Power, Critical Resistance, the African American Policy Forum. These were initiatives on the ground who did all this political education, all this organizing work — We Charge Genocide, Dream Defenders, the Rising Majority, Black Organizing for Leadership and Dignity, and also groups like SURJ, you know, [Showing] Up for Racial Justice, which deals with white racism.

So you have an infrastructure in place that has been doing this work for a decade or more — more than a decade. And that’s why people are out here. That’s why people can come out into the streets and simply roll off their tongues words like “defund the police,” connect transphobia, homophobia, gender oppression, patriarchy to racial capitalism and to racial violence, connect these things in ways that I think are kind of unprecedented. But again, without the organizing work, we would not be here, you know? And I think it’s very important to even go back and acknowledge how the foundations were laid by the Combahee River Collective, by people like Barbara Smith, raised by the Third World Women’s Alliance, I mean, fighting around questions of connecting sterilization, abortion rights with racism. You know? So, these kinds of links, these connections — and also with war — are important. So, there’s a long history that got us here.

And the real question now is whether or not this can be sustained, because we know, throughout history, we’ve had revolutionary moments, after Reconstruction in the 1870s, followed by backlash and by what we can describe as American fascism. We have the sort of Second Reconstruction of the 1960s, followed by backlash, the rise of the Klan, the tamping down on the strike wave in the 1970s, neoliberalism. And now we’re facing another one. We have these forces trying to transform the world in a way that could actually bring safety and prosperity to all versus a president and a regime that asks, “What happened to Gone with the Wind? …

EDUCATION FOR PEACE, HUMAN RIGHTS, North America

Film From USA: Camden’s Turn: A Story of Police Reform in Progress

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

A film from Not in our town, a movement to stop hate, racism and bullying, and build safe, inclusive communities for all.

Camden’s Turn is a documentary about a police department and a community in the process of transformation. As views of police and the communities they serve have become polarized across the country, Camden, NJ Police Chief Scott Thomson works to build relationships and calls on his officers “to shift from a warrior mentality to that of a guardian and community builder.”


Video of Camden’s Turn

The film follows Chief Thomson, his command staff and officers, as they work to implement community policing reforms in Camden County.

After the entire police force was laid off in 2012, Chief Thomson rebuilt the department and instituted a culture of community policing — incorporating de-escalation training, engaging officers in sports, school programs and community events, putting officers on bikes in neighborhoods and parks, and getting officers out of patrol cars and walking the beat.

(Article continued in right column)

Questions for this article:

Where are police being trained in culture of peace?

(Article continued from left column)

Camden’s strategy was highlighted by President Obama’s national efforts to implement the recommendations outlined in the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. After years of mistrust, violent crime, high arrests rates and devastating poverty, the film looks at how things are starting to turn around in Camden. Crime rates are down, people feel safer, and jobs are coming back to the city. (29 minutes)

Guide for film

This guide is designed as a tool for law enforcement and community stakeholders to facilitate screenings and discussions of the 29-minute Camden’s Turn: A Story of Police Reform in Progress. The guide provides: discussion questions and tips for organizing internal law enforcement agency and community screenings; information about community-oriented policing; and supplemental resources. Used together, the film and guide can help agencies and community groups work together to help improve law enforcement-community relations and build collaborative public safety partnerships.

Download the guide here.

[Editor’s note: According to an article in CNN published on June 9, Camden dissolved its entire police department in 2012 because it was corrupted with the drug trade and replaced it with a new police force with “community-oriented policing.” “It starts from an officer’s first day: When a new recruit joins the force, they’re required to knock on the doors of homes in the neighborhood they’re assigned to patrol, he said. They introduce themselves and ask neighbors what needs improving.”]

DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION, DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, EDUCATION FOR PEACE, North America

‘A part of history’: Calm prevails over D.C.’s biggest George Floyd protest

… . HUMAN RIGHTS … .

An article from Thomson Reuters (reprinted by permission)

Tens of thousands of demonstrators amassed in Washington and other U.S. cities on Saturday [June 6] demanding an end to racism and brutality by law enforcement, as protests sparked by George Floyd’s fatal encounter with Minneapolis police stretched into a 12th day.

Reuters Video of Washington demonstations

A Lincoln Memorial rally and march to the White House marked the largest outpouring yet of protests nationwide since video footage emerged showing Floyd, an unarmed black man in handcuffs, lying face down and struggling to breathe as a white police officer knelt on his neck.

Demonstrators rallied on Saturday in numerous urban centers – among them New York, Atlanta, Philadelphia, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Boston and Miami – as well as in small, rural communities across the country.

“It feels like I get to be a part of history and a part of the group of people who are trying to change the world for everyone,” said Jamilah Muahyman, a Washington resident at a demonstration near the White House.

One of the more surprising Black Lives Matter rallies was a gathering of 150 to 200 people in the east Texas town of Vidor, notorious for its long associations with the Ku Klux Klan.

Floyd’s May 25 death has sparked a storm of protests and civil strife in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, thrusting the highly charged debate over racial justice back to the forefront of the political agenda five months before the Nov. 3 U.S. presidential election.

With the notable exception of Seattle, where police used flash-bang grenades in a confrontation with demonstrators in the city’s Capitol Hill district, Saturday’s protests on the whole took on a relaxed tone compared with those of recent days.

The week began with sporadic episodes of arson, looting and vandalism in several cities that authorities and activists have blamed largely on outside instigators and criminal elements.

Police have at times resorted to heavy-handed tactics as they sought to enforce curfews in some cities, including New York and Washington, where baton-swinging officers in riot gear dispersed otherwise orderly crowds.

Those clashes have only galvanized the focus of the protests into a broader quest for reform of the criminal justice system and its treatment of ethnic minorities.

“I’m just hoping that we really get some change from what’s going on. People have been kneeling and protesting and begging for a long time, and enough is enough,” said Kartrina Fernandez, 42, a protester near the front of the White House.

“We can’t take much more.”

The intensity of protests over the past week began to ebb on Wednesday after prosecutors in Minneapolis had arrested all four police officers implicated in Floyd’s death. Derek Chauvin, the white officer seen pinning Floyd’s neck to the ground for nearly nine minutes as Floyd repeatedly groaned “I can’t breathe” was charged with second-degree murder.

But Saturday marked the largest demonstration over Floyd’s killing to date.

Crowds numbering in the tens of thousands converged on the nation’s capital, despite health risks posed by the coronavirus, though official estimates of the turnout were unavailable.

The rallies in Washington, as elsewhere, were notable for drawing racially mixed crowds.

(Article continued in right column)

Question(s) related to this article:

Are we making progress against racism?

(Article continued from left column)


Another website with many photos of the demonstrations throughout the United States

“Especially as a white person, I benefit from the status quo, and so not showing up and actively working to deconstruct institutional racism makes me complicit,” said Michael Drummond, 40, a government employee, explaining his reason for taking part.

Hundreds of miles to the south, in Floyd’s birthplace of Raeford, North Carolina, hundreds lined up at a church to pay their respects during a public viewing of Floyd’s body prior to a private memorial service for family members.

Floyd’s funeral is scheduled for Tuesday in Houston, where he lived before relocating to the Minneapolis area.

In New York, a large crowd of protesters crossed the Brooklyn Bridge into lower Manhattan on Saturday afternoon, marching up a largely deserted Broadway. Thousands of others gathered in Harlem near the northwest corner of Central Park to march downtown, about 100 blocks, to the city’s Washington Square Park.

In Philadelphia, demonstrators gathered on the steps of Philadelphia Art Museum steps chanting, “No justice, No peace.” Others marched along Benjamin Franklin Parkway, through John F. Kennedy Plaza, and around Philadelphia City Hall.

On the West Coast, protesters briefly blocked traffic on San Francisco’s Golden Gate Bridge as motorists honked in solidarity.

An almost festive atmosphere prevailed among protesters assembled at an outdoor strip newly rechristened Black Lives Matter Plaza – the phrase “Black Lives Matter” painted in large yellow letters on the pavement – a block from the White House.

It was near the spot where U.S. Park Police and military personnel cleared Lafayette Square of peaceful demonstrators with chemical spray and smoke grenades on Monday night, paving the way for President Donald Trump to walk from the White House through the park to a church to hold a bible aloft for cameras.

On Saturday, Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser, a vocal critic of Trump’s response to the protests this week, was spotted in the crowd while songs such as “Sweet Caroline” by Neil Diamond and “Alright” by Kendrick Lamar blared from loudspeakers.

The demonstrators included families and people of all ages carrying signs with slogans such as “Fed up,” “All lives do not matter until black lives do,” and “My black son matters.”

Police officers were present but in smaller numbers than earlier in the week. They generally assumed a less aggressive posture, wearing patrol uniforms rather than body armor and helmets.

In another sign of easing tension, Major General William Walker, commander of the D.C. National Guard, told CNN that the nearly 4,000 additional Guard troops deployed to the city from 11 states at the Pentagon’s request were likely to be withdrawn after the weekend.

“They will be redeploying this week, probably as early as Monday,” Walker said.

Reporting by Nandita Bose and Makini Brice in Washington and Lucas Jackson in New York; Additional reporting by Linda So, Mike Stone, Suzanne Barlyn, Barbara Goldberg, Scott Malone, Raphael Satter and Andrew Hay; Writing by Frank McGurty and Steve Gorman; Editing by Daniel Wallis, Robert Birsel
Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

HUMAN RIGHTS, North America