Obama pressures peace movement through dirty e-mailing campaign to soften its resistance to his escalation of the war in Afghanistan

The Obama administration is stooping to the exact same dirty tricks used by Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon in trying to undermine the efforts of the peace movement... from circulation of letters like the one below I have responded to, to getting outfits like the Huffington Post and Campaign for America's Future to censor and silence critics through deleting comments being made to postings.

This "Letter from the road #38" by Rabia Elizabeth Roberts has been making its rounds through a variety of peace organizations... this particular one comes to me from members of the West Michigan Justice and Peace Coalition.

In my opinion, while this "letter" tells us a lot about what the Afghans require, it is quite dishonest in that it, like most of the information, coming out of peace organizations these days which are dominated by pro-Obama "leaders" usually employed by the organizations as staff whose salaries are paid for through "philanthropic" foundation grants, intentionally ignores the past history of Afghanistan, especially the history of the last thirty to forty years and the role of the CIA and other U.S. government agencies and the U.S. military operations.

Not once have I read or heard any discussion about the only democratically and fairly elected governments of Afghanistan... the last of which came to an end with the President, Najibullah, a Marxist, having his head severed, impaled on a pole with his penis cut off and left hanging from his mouth which was ordered by the C.I.A. so as to "remind" the people of Afghanistan what they would get should they continue to seek democracy and freedom through socialism.

For some strange reason it is difficult to find a photo of Najibullah's head impaled on a pole with his penis hanging from his mouth... a very important part of Afghanistan's history... and our own history since the United States government ordered and managed this grotesque and gory dirty deed which for some strange reason they don't want the American people to see.

This is my response to this "letter" now being circulated trying to get the peace movement to soften up its opposition to Barack Obama's escalation of the war in Afghanistan... one more dirty imperialist war with the objective of control, manipulation, domination and occupation.

Let us be honest here; the only good, honest government the Afghan people have ever experienced was while the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan was in power. Previous to this were the feudal lords; what followed were the corrupt dope-dealing governments maintained in power by the C.I.A. and the U.S. military in the name of "free markets." Dr. Najibullah's popularly elected democratic government of the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan provided the Afghan people the chance to democratically govern themselves for the first time in hundreds of years.

The grisly, gory and brutal murder of D. Najibullah was not unlike the grisly, gory and brutal murder of Ernesto Che Guevara... another of a long line of murders carried out by the U.S. C.I.A. on every continent, often with the help of the AFL-CIO with silence from the same elements who now are trying to get the peace movement to "soften" its present struggle to stop Barack Obama's savage and bestial escalation of this dirty imperialist war in Afghanistan which is directly targeting the same progressive forces which were headed up by Dr. Najibullah before he was so brutally murdered.

Now, since my original response to this "letter" from Rabia Elizabeth Roberts went out, I have been inundated with e-mails and phone calls asking me why I have been so obscene and vulgar in the way I described the execution of Dr. Najibullah.

I find this very interesting since these people who are accusing me of being obscene and vulgar have nothing to say about the barbaric, grisly murder of Dr. Najibullah carried out upon the orders, directions, supervision and direct participation of the American C.I.A. and military intelligence by the very drug-pushing sadistic killers who Barack Obama hugs today.

Now, if someone can explain to me how any government installed by a bunch of thugs employed by the C.I.A. who commits such horrendous crimes against its political opposition can ever have any kind of "legitimacy" I would like to hear the explanation.

Thursday, December 10th marks the 61st Anniversary of the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights... on the occasion of this important date, peace activists might want to display photos of Dr. Najibullah with his severed head impaled on a pole with his penis hanging from his mouth.

By the way... these blood-thirsty, deranged butchers cut off Dr. Najibullah's penis prior to dragging him naked, still alive, through the streets until they severed his head while he was still alive and jammed his penis into his mouth as they they begin the intentionally very slow process of severing his head before impaling it on a pole where Dr. Najibullah's head was displayed like this for weeks.

If anything is gross and obscene it is what passes for "U.S. foreign policy"--- the policies of U.S. imperialism which, under Barack Obama have not changed.

In fact, from the tone and tenor of the e-mails and phone calls I have been receiving, it seems some Obama supporters would like to do the same to me.

In fact, just moments ago as I was writing this blog post, I got a phone call from a woman who said her name was Michelle Harris calling from phone number 866-932-6801; who stated: "...Maki, someone should cut off your dick and shove it in your mouth before they chop off your fingers so you can't write before they cut off your head. I voted for Barack Obama and I'm proud of it... just shut the fuck up about Barack Obama."

Nothing like the good old U.S.A.

I did send my e-mail below to Rabia Elizabeth Roberts to get her response; I even had to go through her ritual of having to prove I wasn't "spamming" her--- which I did. Should she respond I will publish her response here... in the interest of fairness and democracy.

Anyways, read the "letter" below and my response here:


Subject: RE: [WMJPC] Fwd: Fw: LETTER FROM THE ROAD #38 - VOICES FROM KABUL

I think this perspective being put forward by Rabia Elizabeth Roberts is exactly the message Barack Obama and the Democrats want to have coming out of the peace movement in order to justify their position which is an open imperialist position designed to make the occupation of Afghanistan palatable to the American people.

First, this is an imperialist war. No imperialist war is ever just.

Second, the war is being conducted in a way that is setting the country up for very long-term occupation.

Third, the United States had not one iota of business seeking to defend its “national interests” in Afghanistan because it has no legitimate national, or any other, interests in Afghanistan.

Fourth, the Soviets were working with the progressive Afghan government that had the support of the majority of the Afghan people. Everything this writer (Rabia Elizabeth Roberts) says is being done by good people helping the Afghan people on a very small scale right now was being done on a huge, gigantic scale by the Soviets.

I have pictures around someplace of Mohammad Najibullah (not sure of spelling) with his head impaled on a pole by the very corrupt, dope-peddling present government the CIA brought to power that Americans are dying for and paying to protect.

Thousands of progressive Afghans were murdered in the same grisly manner as Najibullah; this is why it is so difficult to get a good, honest government in Afghanistan today--- good, decent people don’t want to have their heads impaled on a pole with their penis cut off left dangling from their mouth.

There are no other alternatives to good and honest government than those who were working with Najibullah.

Mikhail Gorbachev can be thanked for this mess as much as the U.S. CIA… Soviet troops never should have pulled out of Afghanistan. Bin Laden would have been taken care of long ago and the World Trade Center would still be standing today had Soviet troops been allowed to complete their mission and there isn’t a single person who can say that the government of Najibullah was anything other than a decent, honest humanitarian government--- his “crime” was having been a “Marxist” … anyone is free to examine the accomplishments of the Najibullah government that, with Soviet assistance, was helping one of the poorest countries on this planet achieve decent livelihoods for the Afghan people… this fact is ignored by the letter writer below as it is ignored by most of the peace movement… in fact, I don’t know of anyone except myself who has even stated as much. But, the facts are there for anyone to see if they want to look.

The only thing the United States has to do now is pull all of its troops and contractor/mercenaries out of Afghanistan and the Afghan people will get the help they need from their friends in the region and around the world… in addition to pulling out the United States needs to agree to write the checks for rebuilding in the wake of the destruction and havoc it has created over the last three decades in Afghanistan… there is no replacing human life--- how does anyone ever apologize to the wife and children of Najibullah who Barack Obama should be hugging--- instead his hugs and kisses go to a dope-dealer pumping our children’s veins full of this poison.

In our small local newspaper that usually isn’t worth a darn… the lead Opinion/Editorial written for the Roseau Times-Region’s Jeff Olson states, now remember, this is no communist newspaper. The Roseau Times-Region is the largest circulation newspaper in northern Minnesota--- I quote, word for word, from the Saturday, December 5, 2009 Roseau Times-Region Editorial Page, page 4:

“Always, the Republicans have backed the rich the vested business interests, and not given a sweet damn about the poor.

You can see that in the national health care debate, which is becoming a debacle.

But forget about health care reform, which even Presidents Eisenhower and Nixon favored. It all came to naught. As will this opportunity.

But we’ve got bigger concerns: Fighting two wars.

On Tuesday, President Obama called for an additional 30,000 American troops to be sent to Afghanistan.

That’s in addition to the 20,000 American troops he ordered deployed to Afghanistan last March.

Mr. Obama should forget about the Nobel Peace Prize. He should also forget about showing up in Stockholm to receive it.

He’s a war president, not a peace-maker.

And this from a guy who voted for him.”

This commentary should be in a Communist newspaper; unfortunately it isn’t.

And, then, Jeff Olson goes on for another half page saying the “Congress deserves a good swift kick in the rump” for allowing this war to go on.

There is only one way to end these dirty wars and that is if the American people to send a strong, clear message to Barack Obama and the Democrats:

No Peace; No Votes.

And the peace movement should be gearing up to take this campaign to the American people so the Democrats feel the heat going into the 2010 Election. No one in the peace movement should be making any apologies or trying to skew the issues or confuse the issues with the intent of protecting Barack Obama and the Democrats.

We don’t owe the Democrats a darn thing… they owe us peace for putting them in full control of both houses of Congress and the Presidency.

The Democrats are responsible for their actions and in a democracy the voters are entitled to enforce accountability… no one voted for Barack Obama wanting more war… the entire reason for dumping the Republicans was because the American people were fed up with these wars and wanted real health care reform instead of war--- single-payer, to be exact.

How can Barack Obama and the Democrats bring democracy to Afghanistan when they don’t even respect the peace sentiments of the overwhelming majority who voted for them?

If the Democrats suffer a resounding defeat at the polls they deserve the trouncing. And no matter what; no leader of any peace organization should ever again be allowed by the members of the organizations to give their support to Barack Obama… he is nothing but a liar and a killer. Obama lied to the American people to get elected; Obama lies about the nature of this war now… who in their right mind uses over one-hundred thousand troops trying to chase down less than 100 criminals. Maybe if the FBI would stop tapping my phone and following me around they could catch Osama bin Laden… although they haven’t had much luck stopping organized crime in this country because half their F.B.I. “special” agents are “on the take” accepting bribes from drug lords while the other half of the F.B.I. is busy tapping our telephones and looking through our e-mails and monitoring our blog postings for signs of anti-imperialist peace sentiments.

I am sure the rest of the world will pitch in and help the people of Afghanistan just like they help so many other victims of war and natural disasters--- there is no need for any U.S. presence in Afghanistan… the people will get along just fine without the United States.

Barack Obama is a bigger liar than Richard Nixon… and that takes some doing.

I would rather lose an election supporting a real peace-loving candidate like George McGovern than win an election with a lying warmonger like Barack Obama and it sickens me to see someone suggest, while making a pretense of being for peace, when all they are doing is providing cover and deflecting criticism for Barack Obama as Rabia Elizabeth Roberts is doing here.

I would also point out that this bunch of corrupt, drug-dealing American puppets controlling the Afghan government right now destroyed the houses, schools and hospitals built with Soviet assistance because they wanted to eradicate any and all vestiges of what a progressive, anti-imperialist, socialist oriented government can do for the people. The grisly and barbaric murder of Mohammad Najibullah with his head impaled on a pole with his penis dangling from his mouth was meant to instill fear into a proud people who only want the right to live in peace with a standard of living befitting human beings.

Think about it… the Najibullah government was no different than the socialist oriented government in power in the Province of Manitoba right now whose former leader is now the U.S. Ambassador to the United States… Manitoba New Democratic Party leader Gary Doer.

I would be willing to bet that the writer of this letter will not be supporting the political friends of Najibullah coming back to power; and, I doubt she will join in calling for:

No peace; no votes because she supports Barack Obama.

I would like to hear what Rabia Elizabeth Roberts has to say in response to me on all counts.

It boggles my mind that the socialist oriented government of Najibullah was anathema to the United States, but Barack Obama can hug and kiss a bunch of murdering heroin dealers and this is acceptable.

By the way, I find it equally of interest that the “Progressives for Obama” is headed up by a guy named Carl Davidson who supported another butcher while he was conducting his killing spree--- Pol Pot; and he now adamantly refuses to disassociate himself from another killer, Barack Obama, by supporting: No peace; no votes. Stop the killing, U.S. out of Afghanistan now!

We need to dump Barack Obama the same way we dumped that warmonger Lyndon Johnson. Barack Obama should be forced to resign in shame just as Richard Nixon did… a killer is a killer and a liar is a liar; there is no reason why the American people should have to continue to put up with this killing in our name with our tax-dollars paying for this dirty war instead of real progressive health care reform right here in our own country. How dare any politician in this country squawk about the price-tag for real health care reform when they don’t bat an eyelash over funding this kind of dirty war.

Offer a trillion dollar reward to anyone who brings Osama bin Laden’s head impaled on a pole with his penis hanging from his mouth to Barack Obama and this will solve the matter and it will be a whole lot cheaper.

Alan L. Maki
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell phone: 651-587-5541
E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net

Check out my blog:

Thoughts From Podunk

http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/

[WMJPC] Fwd: Fw: LETTER FROM THE ROAD #38 - VOICES FROM KABUL


More from Peace Activist who was in Afghanistan

--- On Fri, 11/6/09, Rabia Elizabeth Roberts wrote
Letter from the Road #38
Rabia Elizabeth Roberts
November, 2009
Voices from Kabul

So ring the bells that still can ring
forget your perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That’s how the light gets in.
- Leonard Cohen

I recently returned from the Middle East and Afghanistan, and am surrounded by my journals, magazine articles, blog snippets, position statements from peace groups, everything written in the New York Times about Afghanistan, and copies of some of the more than 200 emails I received in response to my last Letter from the Road: Confessions of a Peace Activist. It looks like my old dorm room at term paper time.

All of this material confirms my impression that the debate about whether to “bring the troops home now” or “surge” with more troops is misleading the national conversation. They are easy slogans but both sides of the debate tempt us to believe there is a quick resolution to our involvement in Afghanistan.

I believe it is time to stop thinking of Afghanistan either as a war to be won or abandoned. Our foreign policies there do not exist in a vacuum. Instead we need to acknowledge the responsibility the United States has for bringing about the current situation and recognize that our role is now to cultivate a long-term healing relationship with Afghanistan - for the good of the Afghan people, the stability of the region, and for the long-term interests of the United States and the world as a whole.

We cannot ignore the facts that over the past three decades the U.S. armed Afghanistan’s fundamentalist war lords, ignored the huge build-up of its drug trade, failed to help rebuild the country after its invasion in 2001, tolerated Pakistan’s continued support for Taliban terrorists, and bombed its villages for the past eight years. If the U.S. turns its back on the Afghan people now it will not only bring about more violence and injustice but also betray the principles we hold most dear. We helped to break it and now we must help to mend it.

How can we do this? Here are a few central issues that I heard from Afghans during my visit:

The Builders

For guidance we must start by listening to the non-governmental organization (NGO) workers – especially the Afghans - who have been working for years to re-build the country. They are part of the culture, and are trusted. They are under daily threat of kidnapping and death and yet fear is not diminishing their determination. Unfortunately, they are rarely consulted by policy makers or military commanders. These are the people working in child welfare, teacher training, women’s empowerment, capacity building, civic education, agriculture development, and peacemaking. They understand all the dimensions involved in “human security,” which includes a military presence but in service to long-term non-military goals such as justice, jobs, health, and education.

The Women

As a woman from the U.N. Fund for Women (who asked to remain unnamed) told us, “This conflict has been waged on the backs of women – it is about control of women.” This is not a side issue. A frequently mentioned concern of women is that the Taliban will set a pre-condition for any potential talks that no women be allowed to participate. When our peace delegation asked what we might do, she said, “Keep asking ‘Where are the women?’

There is a recurring proposal that comes before the Afghan government at the behest of Taliban supporters to set up a “department of virtue and vice.” There is also the much talked about “Shia Family Law,” which among scores of other repressive rules, says there is no such thing as marital rape, that a woman is required to obey her husband in all his needs, and that she cannot go outside the home without a male family member. This law, which is being strongly contested by women’s organizations, is being promoted by fundamentalist Shia religious groups in Iran.

The women we spoke with kept reminding us: there will be no democracy if it only involves men. When asked if we western women may be forcing something on the women of Afghanistan that they don’t want, a UNIFEM spokeswoman said, “There is no one who, when asked, does not want freedom.”

The international community has an important role to play here. All negotiations, public policies, and foreign aid must include the women of Afghanistan. President Obama should lead the way here by asking, “Where are the women?”

The Aid

Reconstruction and development have to be at the top of the list of U.S. policy initiatives in Afghanistan. At present, for every American dollar that goes to Afghanistan as aid, 60% comes back to the U.S. in corporate contracts and high salaries. This can of course be reduced by seeing that most aid money goes to Afghans. But that is easier said than done – USAID, for example, doesn’t give funds below $25 million. This limitation, plus overwhelming reporting requirements, means that only larger international corporations can make use of this money.

With the use of so many large foreign independent contractors and subcontractors the public interest needs of the Afghan people and culture can get lost. Furthermore, between the emphasis on large private contractors and the problems of government corruption there is little money available to build up the effectiveness of government agencies and provide adequate pay to Afghan personnel.

Afghanistan needs schools, hospitals, clinics, roads, sanitation systems, wells - these must be built as much as possible by Afghans, or with Afghans and used as a means of investing them in the reconstruction effort.

The problem here is that the Taliban are against all efforts of capacity building and consequently rural Afghans are often afraid to join in the work of reconstruction. To overcome this resistance, aid must be combined with protection, and involve Afghans in the process from the ground up. Perhaps a way forward here is to concentrate on certain key areas in which progress can then function as a model for other regions.

The Government

By all accounts the weak and corrupt Karzai government contributed significantly to the growth of the insurgency. By definition weak states cannot meet the basic needs of their population. They cannot consolidate authority over all their territory and they don’t have the resources to provide security.

After 30 years of war the Karzai government was too weak from the beginning to survive without international support. We didn’t provide that support after the invasion. As a result over the years people have lost faith in the government being able to provide the essentials of social functioning. Since they identify America with the current national government we also are no longer trusted.

Failure of governance is also a problem at the provincial level. Professor Aram Mir Ahzar, director of the Independent Commission for Peace and Reconciliation, told us that one of the problems with getting the Taliban to put down their guns and join the government is because “We can’t keep them safe.” When a Taliban fighter comes in (and reportedly 8300 have joined the peace commission so far), he is given $200 to return to his village and a card from the national government saying he should be given a piece of land and helped to find work. However the governor of the province may be a former Northern Alliance commander, a drug smuggler, or simply unsympathetic to this process and either kills the person or “disturbs their family” instead. Not surprisingly Taliban have stopped coming in.

Restoring civil politics in a multiethnic state shattered by war is difficult because the years of war destroyed the possibility of cooperation. Provincial people keep their relationship with the Taliban or the Northern Alliance for security and for fear they may come back into governmental power. As long as we threaten to withdraw or give a timetable for withdrawal without an adequate Afghan army or police this dynamic will continue to undermine a viable national government.

The U.S., NATO, and the U.N. cannot ignore the corruption and poor planning in the Karzai government. It is causing massive discouragement among Afghans and feeding distrust in American involvement and intention. The U.S., NATO, and the U.N. must, as a condition of all military or economic aid, make purging the most egregious corrupt officials and their militias from the government a priority. This will go a long way in renewing respect for America amon g Afghans.

Safety

Most public discussion in the U.S. at the moment focuses on the important role of military forces in Afghanistan, but according to some of my informal conversations, while military and paramilitary forces play a key role in maintaining safety for society, the police are perhaps the most critical force in peoples everyday lives. According to General Stanley McChristal’s counter-insurgency strategy, the Afghan and international military forces may be able to penetrate and protect an insurgent area, and if well sustained with adequate troops may reduce guerilla activity. But as history shows, once a local situation becomes untenable for insurgents, the Taliban simply transfer their activity to another area and the problem remains unsolved. A viable indigenous police force with a permanent presence in urban and rural areas is a critical component of counter-insurgency in the long term.

At Camp Eggars I spoke with two British soldiers with NATO forces whose job was to train the police force in Kabul. How was it going? Well, it is complicated by the fact that Afghan police have not received formal training for two decades. The job of training was turned over to private contractors like DynCorp who were not up to the job. A real governmental strategy for training police did not exist until 2007, and the fact is most Afghans can’t read. “How can I train a policeman if he can’t write a police report?” It will take a decade to do this. A long time - and yet it needs to be done if people are to be safe after the international forces leave.

Getting It Right

Based on the above challenges and Afghanistan’s history, the U.S., NATO, and the U.N. need to work at multiple levels simultaneously to achieve security:
• learn from and partner with NGO’s and local entities in development;
• involve women in all aspects of rebuilding;
• confront corruption and build capacity in good governance;
• train an Afghan army and national police force;
. stop the flow of drugs and drug money;
• work diplomatically with regional partners to undermine the Taliban and Al Qaeda sanctuary in Pakistan.

Reading over these notes I admit the whole situation can discourage me at times. It is an interlocking puzzle of dysfunctional systems. So why not let the Taliban have the country? Or let the warlords “cut it up” as Thomas Friedman recommended in a recent New York Times article?

For me, these suggestions ignore the human costs involved. I can’t stop seeing the faces and hearing the stories of the people I met in Kabul. The “let them work it out” scenarios promise only more war, personal violence, and refugee displacement which could easily be worse than what is happening now. If the past is any guide this violence could go on for a very long time, further destabilizing the whole region, including the Pakistan-India stand off.

The people I met in Afghanistan do not want another civil war, a narco-state, or a repressive women-hating regime. Nor do they want a long-term foreign occupation - but they do want help in rebuilding a secure, functional country.

Walking away from Afghanistan now perpetuates the idea, to both U.S. citizens and the rest of the world, that all we are willing, and able, to do in a country is to destroy and kill, achieve our limited idea of “mission accomplished” and walk away. As we know this only increases recruitment for the growing global terrorist network. Reconstruction, education, jobs and development are our most powerful anti-terrorism tools. And Afghanistan is a place to demonstrate our commitment to these goals.

I continue to believe that international troops have a roll to play in protecting civilians and development efforts, securing roads, training an Afghan army and national police, and securing the border with Pakistan. It is hard for me to see how Afghanistan can achieve these goals without military support at this time.

I bow to my good friends in the peace movement who tell me our government is incapable of living up to our values and engaging in nation-building in a positive way. They have some history behind them and may prove to be right. However, I believe that everything outlined above is possible with long-term commitment and care. I hope my government and its allies are up to it for the sake of the Afghan people and the world.

This message was sent from Rabia Elizabeth Roberts to katrussell@att. net. It was sent from: The Boulder Institute for Nature and the Human Spirit, 2434 Mapleton Avenue, Boulder, CO 80304.

Criticizing or Accountability... what do Obama and the Democrats need when it comes to escalating the war in Afghanistan?

I have been trying to drum up a discussion to include as part of the peace movement "accountability" which goes like this:

No peace; no vote.

Peace now!

This was a post I made on a list serve after I was attacked for "being a Democrat" as a letter signed by 100 or so peace activists calling for a demonstration in Washington D.C.--- which I support--- was being discussed, take it for whatever you think it is worth--- the Huffington Post and the Campaign for America's Future and some other Century Foundation funded organizations have been censoring my comments by deleting them:

I think there is confusion here.

The source of the confusion has to do with not understanding the difference between "criticizing" the Democrats and holding the Democrats "accountable."

There is a big difference even though on the surface this might seem like splitting hairs.

Criticism is used to "convince" someone to do things differently.

"Accountability" is used to "coerce" some action.

I don't think the peace movement understands the distinction between "criticism" and "accountability."

No amount of "criticism" is going to "convince" Barack Obama and the Democrats to halt the escalation of the war and killing in Afghanistan, Pakistan or Iraq.

Does anyone really believe Obama, Congress people and Senators will be swayed by "criticism?"

No way.

They are going to have to be "coerced" through "accountability."

Pesonally, I think the peace movement has the exact same problem the labor movement has even though most people--- including peace activists--- do not want to acknowledge the problem.

The "leaders" of the peace movement are tied in one way or another to the Democratic Party or at least they are convinced their "credibility" is tied to not doing anything that offends Barack Obama and the Democrats.

Calling for using "accountability" to enforce and coerce Democratic Party politicians to act for peace instead of expanding and escalating wars is definitely considered a "no, no" because what is it you have to do to enforce "accountability?"

You have to pledge not to vote for Obama and these Democrats who vote for these wars in various ways.

Out of the more than "100 leading peace activists" calling for these mobilizations against the war... not one single one of them have called for the kind of "accountability" along the lines of:

No peace; no votes.

They do not have to "criticize" Obama or any Democrats in an offensive manner.

But, why would they not simply be urging the tens of millions of people who are fed up with these wars to actively do something anyone 18 or over can do to oppose these wars.

We all know that very few people take the plunge from thinking these wars are wrong to marching through the streets... their activity level is someplace between their thinking process and taking to the streets.

In my opinion there is a direct correlation between more and more people thinking these dirty wars are wrong, and fewer and fewer people willing to take to the streets and this is because these "leaders" of the peace movement have not suggested that those presently in the streets go back into their communities in a way that convinces their friends and neighbors to become involved in the struggles for peace by helping people take a step forward in becoming involved... people will not take a flying leap from thinking to doing.

We are missing a step... the anti-Vietnam war movement was very successful in bringing more and more people out into the streets because the call for accountability at the ballot box was always a part of the peace movement. First you get people to take the easiest step--- associated with the ballot box, then they learn they need to reinforce that step by stepping into the streets.

Now, for some reason "leaders" of the peace movement have refused to place accountability on the table--- and I believe the reason is the foundation money financing peace organizations are connected to the Democratic Party and the leaders of these peace organizations understand very thoroughly where their pay-checks come from. So if they begin calling for "accountability" at the ballot box by saying:

No peace; no votes... they will not have their jobs for long. Often this is enforced through tax-exempt status which prohibits partisan political activity.

Calling on people not to vote for specified candidates because they promote war--- like Barack Obama--- is deemed partisan political activity... we saw the trouble Julian Bond got the NAACP into when he called for members to exercise accountability when it came to Bush and the Republicans.

Now, I think most grassroots and rank-and-file peace activists in communities and places of employment-- - except those believing they have some kind of "responsibility" to protect Democrats--- will agree with me that "accountability" is a needed and required tactic especially as we move towards the 2010 elections where we can serve notice on any Democrat who votes to escalate and continue these dirty wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq that in accordance with our strategy aimed at bringing about "Peace Now!" we are going to include in our tactics, "No peace, no votes," in the same way we encourage people to demonstrate in the streets or write a letter to the President or their Senator or member of Congress.

We need to be asking these "leaders" of the peace movement why they urge people to do everything and anything for peace except use their vote as a means to coerce these politicians to do what is right and just.

I think the vast majority of the people in this country understand that they have a right to get peace rather than stupid, dirty, imperialist wars for domination and occupation in return for their votes; and politicians, in a democracy, are supposed to be accountable to the people, not the other way around.

Barack Obama and the Democrats making these wars have no one but themselves to blame should they lose elections because they escalated the war in Afghanistan rather than stopping it.

Leaders of the peace movement also need to be held "accountable;" their job is to mobilize people to the maximum so we can stop these wars, not to protect Barack Obama's or any other Democrat's worthless political butt... and, let's be clear, when any politician acts in any way to promote war instead of peace, no matter Democrat, Republican, Green, Independent, Socialist or Communist they are worthless politicians and no matter what their stand on any other issue they should get the boot by voters holding them accountable.

We have a worthless labor "leadership" in this country which has learned to pander and grovel to the Democrats for piddly jobs at poverty wages by learning to keep their mouths shut when it comes to these dirty wars... not once have I heard any "leader" of the AFL-CIO or Change To Win tell Obama and the Democrats that their warmongering policies are killing American jobs and further depressing the economy causing the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs... common sense, not a Harvard business degree, tells us the government can't spend trillions of dollars to fight wars with the objective of occupying countries which will cost trillions more and still expect the government to create jobs here at home. Yet, every major labor "leader" in this country--- including Anna Berger, Richard Trumka and Leo Gerard--- was face-to-face with Obama this past week and not a one of them stated any opposition to his announcement of escalating the war in Afghanistan--- if any did, I haven't heard it... of course, like the leaders of the peace movement who are following in the path of these labor leaders... no one told Obama that he was going to be losing the labor vote because of his wars.

We need to put "accountability" in front of the American people--- with or without the "leaders" who should be leading on this issue, but aren't:

No peace; no votes.

There is no weapon in our arsenal of tactics more powerful than enforcing "accountability" at the ballot box and it is the one tactic as part of a strategy for winning peace that is missing. I don't think it is missing by oversight or by accident.

I would suggest that if you want new leaders in the peace movement you look around... but, start by looking in the mirror if you think "accountability" is a tactic that has been overlooked.

Maybe as your first step as a leader you could consider writing a letter to the editor explaining why Barack Obama will never again get your vote.

I would rather have a peace-loving George McGovern lose an election than get stuck with a warmongering Barack Obama.

I don't think this country has ever had a more dishonest president than Barack Obama considering what he led people to believe he stood for to get elected and what he actually is doing to win Wall Street's confidence in him.

Of course, the other side of the coin comes from those in the peace movement who have refused to raise the issue of "accountability" through "No peace; no vote;" they are the ultra-leftists who are so super-revolutionary they think participating in elections is selling out.

This is not about "criticism;" it is about "accountability." The two usually go together and Barack Obama and the Democrats are deserving of both... especially accountability.

Alan L. Maki
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Check out my blog:
http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/

The Huffington Post censored my post on Afghanistan

I posted the following comment in response to an article by a Nation Magazine editor and the moderators of the Huffington Post eliminated it a brief period after it was posted.

This is the link to the article by Cristian Parenti and the article is posted below in its entirety:

For Obama the Road to Reelection Runs Through Kabul - Or So He Thinks

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christian-parenti/for-obama-the-road-to-ree_b_380459.html


My post on the Huffington Post in response to an article by Christian Parenti which I am sure Barack Obama's hacks will read:

I disagree with you on the reasons for this war--- but this disagreement is neither here nor there; the killing has to stop.

Obama is carrying out the McCain/Palin agenda of endless wars creating untold death, destruction and misery for large sections of humanity while as a result of funding these dirty wars for whatever reasons: oil, gas, regional domination, political popularity--- the needs of the American people go unmet--- our right to real health care reform that includes a public health care system providing free, comprehensive, all-inclusive, pre-natal to grave health care, publicly funded, publicly administered and publicly delivered; decent housing; good schools providing quality education; and jobs at real living wages--- all remain ellusive as trillions of dollars are squandered on killing abroad so the Wall Street merchants of death and destruction can profit while maintaing the military-financial-i­ndustrial complex of which maximum corporate profits is the only goal.

The only way Barack Obama's killing spree in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq will be brought to an end is when the American people send this con-artist and flim-flam man turned health insurance salesman who hypocritically manipulated and hoodwinked the American people into electing him president with his lies of "change" and "hope"--- is when the American people deliver Obama a very clear message:

No peace; no votes!

End the killing now!

Agreed: Whatever the outcome, Obama has made it clear: he is willing to kill to get reelected.

Article:

For Obama the Road to Reelection Runs Through Kabul - Or So He Thinks

The real goals of the Afghanistan escalation are domestic and electoral. Like Lyndon Johnson who escalated in Vietnam, Obama lives in mortal fear of being called a wimp by Republicans.

To cover his flank and look tough in the next US elections, Obama is expanding the war in Afghanistan. To look strong in front of swing voters he will sacrifice the lives of hundreds of US soldiers; allow many more to be horribly maimed; waste a minimum of $30 billion in public money; and in the process kill many thousands of Afghan civilians.

It is political theater, nothing else. What are the other possible explanations for Obama's escalation? And why has he pledged to start drawling down the new deployment after only a year of fighting?

Is it to get the job done? To rebuild Afghanistan? To kill Osama Bin Laden and crush Al Qaeda? No, all those goals are nearly impossible. And Al Qaeda is too small and internationally defused to destroy.

Some say that Afghanistan is about a pipeline to export gas from Central Asia. Nonsense -- only a maniac would invest large sums of money in building a pipeline there. In the late 1990s the Argentine firm Bridas and the US firm Unocal jockeyed for the right to build such a pipeline. But that dream, always tentative, has evaporated. Afghanistan will never be stable enough for such a project.

Others say the Afghan war is about establishing US military bases to menace China, Russia and Iran. Indeed, the US now has bases on either side of Iran due to its occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan. And small bases in Central Asia. But these do not require this new escalation.

The real purpose of these 300,000 soldiers is to make Obama look tough as he heads toward the next US presidential election.

As a landlocked, underdeveloped, fragmented buffer state with few resources, Afghanistan has long served as a means to get at other issues. Consider the history of how the US has used Afghanistan.

First, during the Cold War, Carter then Regan used it as the Soviet "bear trap." Then George W Bush used it to trampoline into Iraq. The Bush administration discussed régime change in Iraq at one of its first cabinet meetings. Among other things, they wanted direct economic control, and indirect geostrategic control, over Iraq's vast oil wealth. That has been partially accomplished, as witnessed by the recent Exxon and Shell deals there.

The only credible way into Iraq was via Afghanistan. On October 12, 2001 Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, Paul Wolfowitz, actually suggested that the US skip an invasion of Afghanistan and go directly to Iraq. But that would have made coalition building impossible. After all, Al Qaeda was in the Taliban's Afghanistan.

So, the Afghan invasion was done - but on the cheap, fast and light. And then for eight years Afghanistan festered as the forgotten other war.

Then came the US presidential elections of 2008. Obama promised to end the Iraq war. But living in fear of being called a wimp, he too used Afghanistan. It became a rhetorical charm, a political mojo in his masculine war dance: He promised to lose Iraq (withdrawal or redeploy if you prefer), but do so while salvaging our national honor by winning the "necessary" war in Afghanistan. In short - he used Afghanistan to show that we was not the soft, meek, scared, pussified, little Democrat portrayed in GOP spin.

Wait, you say, most Americans want out of Afghanistan! So what.

US Presidential Elections are not decided by the majority of voters but rather by swing voters, in swing states. By "Reagan Democrats" and "Clinton Conservatives." By a sliver of older, whiter, middle and working-class men and (less so) women, in rural and suburban Ohio, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Tennessee, Michigan, etc.

This demographic has a strong sense of national honor, a fondness for the military, a traditional sense of masculinity and the role of violence in ordering the world, and perhaps a too simple view of international politics. Obama feels he must go to the polls able to tell them he was not afraid to fight, that he made a good effort in Afghanistan.

Never mind the reality of the war. What matter is what it will it look like. Nay, what it will feel like to swing voters. Will they believe the young Black President with the funny Muslim name cut and run?

There is nothing else to Obama's Afghan strategy. The war is a lost cause, but a useful story. Victory in Afghanistan is re-election in 2012.

But the ghost of LBJ's re-election surrender in 1968 stalks the young president. The irony is that if Obama cannot claim progress and begin drawing down in time, his Afghanistan gamble may backfire and cost him a second term in the White House.

Whatever the outcome, Obama has made it clear: he is willing to kill to get reelected.

Afghans say: Obama builds occupation

This article deserves the widest circulation possible…

Afghans say: Obama builds occupation

Kabul money changer Ehsanullah wondered why U.S. forces had managed to find former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, but had yet to locate Al Qaeda head Osama bin Laden or Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar, who both fled U.S. troops in Afghanistan in 2001.

"This is part of America's further occupation of Afghanistan," he said. "America is using the issue of insecurity here in order to send more troops."

 

 http://www.reuters.com/article/asiaCrisis/idUSSP236797

Wed Dec 2, 2009

Afghans unimpressed by Obama's troops surge

·                              

By Sayed Salahuddin 

KABUL (Reuters) – Thirty thousand more U.S. troops for Afghanistan? Esmatullah only shrugged.

"Even if they bring the whole of America, they won't be able to stabilize Afghanistan," said the young construction worker out on a Kabul street corner on Wednesday morning. "Only Afghans understand our traditions, geography and way of life."

U.S. President Barack Obama's announcement of a massive new escalation of the eight-year-old war seemed to have impressed nobody in the Afghan capital, where few watched the speech on TV before dawn and fewer seemed to think new troops would help.

Obama said his goal was to "disrupt, dismantle and defeat" al Qaeda in Afghanistan and "reverse theTaliban's momentum."

The extra U.S. forces, and at least 5,000 expected from other NATO allies, would join 110,000 Western troops already in the country in an effort to reverse gains made by the Islamist militants, at their strongest since being ousted in 2001.

Shopkeeper Ahmad Fawad, 25, said it would not help.

"The troops will be stationed in populated areas where the Taliban will somehow infiltrate and then may attack the troops," he said. "Instead of pouring in more soldiers, they need to focus on equipping and raising Afghan forces, which is cheap and easy."

For many, the prospect of more troops meant one thing: more civilian deaths.

"More troops will mean more targets for the Taliban and the troops are bound to fight, and fighting certainly will cause civilian casualties," Ahmad Shah Ahmadzai, a former Afghan prime minister, told Reuters.

"The civilian casualties will be further a blow to the U.S. image and cause more indignation among Afghans."

"NOTHING REALLY NEW"

By late morning, the Afghan government had yet to issue an official response to Obama's statement.President Hamid Karzai has in the past said he favors additional Western troops, although he wants Afghan forces to take over security for the country within five years.

Although Obama pointedly addressed Afghans, telling them the United States was not interested in occupying their country, parliamentarian Shukriya Barakzai said she was disappointed because the speech contained little talk of civilian aid.

"It was a very wonderful speech for America ... but when it comes to strategy in Afghanistan there was nothing really new which was disappointing," she told Reuters from her home.

"It seems to me that President Obama is very far away from the reality and truth in Afghanistan. His strategy was to pay lip-service, and did not focus on civilians, nation-building, democracy and human rights."

Other Afghans, hardened by decades of war and wary of foreign forces whom have for years fought proxy battles in Afghanistan, were skeptical of the United States' intentions.

Kabul money changer Ehsanullah wondered why U.S. forces had managed to find former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, but had yet to locate Al Qaeda head Osama bin Laden or Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar, who both fled U.S. troops in Afghanistan in 2001.

"This is part of America's further occupation of Afghanistan," he said. "America is using the issue of insecurity here in order to send more troops."

Alan L. Maki

58891 County Road 13

Warroad, Minnesota 56763

Phone: 218-386-2432

Cell phone: 651-587-5541

E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net

Check out my blog:

Thoughts From Podunk

http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/

An open letter to peace activists who supported Barack Obama

Peter Lems and Mary Zerkel, American Friends Service Committee;

Here is a President many of you “leaders” of peace organizations supported knowing that Obama’s stated intent was to expand the war in Afghanistan… now he has fulfilled this campaign promise and you pretend to be surprised.

There is no shortage of funding... for wars from the president and Democrats you supported but there is a lack of funds for socialized health care or single-payer. I have to ask a question here: What is going on; will all these organizations go out into the streets and carry signs saying the escalation is a bad idea and then turn around and campaign and vote for the Democrats and Barack Obama in 2010 and 2012?

I hear all kinds of “mass activities” being planned to oppose this escalation of the war; but, why is there no ADDITIONAL suggestion that in retaliation for escalating this dirty imperialist war the Democrats will suffer repercussions at the polls… This is called “accountability.”

“Accountability” is something basic and fundamental to democracy.

“Accountability” goes like this…

No peace; no votes.

Yet, I haven’t heard either of you or one single one of these “leaders” of the peace movement talk about holding Barack Obama and the rest of these warmongering Dumb Donkeys “accountable” at the polls.

What gives?

Go out and hold a little peace parade and then turn around and tell these war mongers you are going to be supporting them in the next election?

Of course, if you aren’t going to be supporting warmongering Democrats in the next Election; that kind of begs another question… do we challenge these warmongers and Dumb Donkeys in their own primaries and continue on as independents in the general election or should progressives begin to consider organizing an alternative to this two-party trap set for us by Wall Street. Could we do both?

Something to think about:

Accountability.

If politicians don’t know the meaning of the word, give them a dictionary… but not your vote.

No peace; no votes.

Should there be an organized movement demanding “accountability” from Obama and the Democrats as a means to end these wars?

Should peace organizations be leading this effort for “accountability” at the polls?

I am having a very difficult time understanding how it is that I should protest the escalation of this war with you if you are then going to go right back and urge people to vote for the Democrats and Obama. 



We heard a lot of talk from liberals, progressives and those on the left as they enthusiastically supported Obama often telling us that this support would provide our peace and other progressive movements with clout.

From the same people eager to sell us on Obama we were assured they would be initiating and leading movements  for real change as a means of "holding Obama's feet to the fire" but so far we have only seen these people sitting on resources required to mobilize people in defense of their rights and interests, and holding an occasional press conference where they made all kinds of fantastic claims to be "organizing" on our behalf but no movements have developed as these foundation funded organizations walk away from the required struggles.


One has to ask how you get any kind of accountability from Barack Obama and these Democrats if promises are made to campaign and vote for them the next time around?

No peace; no votes.



Something to think about around the dinner table as Barack Obama sends off another 30,000 troops to fight and kill in an unjust, illegal and unconstitutional war in Afghanistan.




Alan L. Maki

58891 County Road 13

Warroad, Minnesota 56763


Phone: 218-386-2432

Cell phone: 651-587-5541


E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net



Check out my blog:



Thoughts From Podunk



http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/

Sign the Petition for Nuclear Disarmament to: Mr Ban Ki-moon, Secretary General, United Nations

We wish to add our voices to the global campaign for an end to nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. We believe that the world needs to take urgent action to stop the spread of nuclear weapons, and to make the world free of nuclear weapons, as part of the overall drive for worldwide peace and the transfer of military spending to socially-useful ends. The international treaties concerning nuclear non-proliferation, nuclear weapons test-ban and fissile material cut-off are essential to achieving this goal.

In May 2010 the United Nations will meet to review the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Trade unionists from around the world are urging that meeting to make a clear path towards abolition of nuclear weapons in the shortest possible time. We ask that:

• those countries which have not joined the NPT do so, and for all countries to comply with it in full; 
• the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty enter into force as soon as possible;
• there be an immediate start to and rapid progress on the Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty; and
• we ask for international agreements to support nuclear-weapon-free zones.

We support the actions of the “Mayors for Peace”, headed by the mayors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, in calling for abolition of all nuclear weapons by 2020.

Production and maintenance of nuclear weapons, and military expenditure overall, cost more than one trillion dollars each year. We call for major reductions in military expenditure, to allow this money to be spent on social and economic development and fighting poverty.

We further ask that this transformation from military to peaceful expenditure be done in a way which protects the livelihoods of those who would be affected by it.

Sign the petition on-line here:

http://www.breakingthroughforpeace.org/ 


Petition endorsed by the following organizations: 

• Minnesotans for Peace and Social Justice 
• Concerned L.O.W.-Roseau County MNDFL Caucus 
• Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council

• Lake-of-the-Woods Communist Club
• Iron Range Club, CPUSA
• Duluth-Superior Club, CPUSA
• Pine County Socialist Club
• Jacobson Community Club, CPUSA
  
• Hardwood Creek Trail Club, CPUSA
  
• Thief River Falls Political Affairs Discussion Club
• Barron Club, CPUSA
• Rusk County Neighbors for Peace
  
• Rhinelander Marxist Reading Circle
• Bayview Progressive Farmers & Homesteaders
  
• U.P. Club, CPUSA
• Crystal Falls Marxist Reader's Circle
  
• Republic Club, CPUSA
  
• Westside Club-Grand Rapids, CPUSA
• Detroit Marxist Study Circle
  
• Great Lakes Area Watermelons for Peace

Sudbury, Ontario nickel miners prepare for long cold winter; picket lines hold strong at Vale Inco as struggle goes international

Support Local 6500

An Open Letter from USW:

http://www.usw.ca/UserFiles/File/radio_ads/sudbury_star_ad.pdf

United Steelworkers Local 6500:

http://www.local6500usw.ca/

Miners Dig In: Steelworkers Ready Nickel Strike for Long Canadian Winter

With the Canadian winter already set in and four long months already on picket lines, 3,000 striking members of United Steelworkers (USW) Local 6500 in Sudbury, Ontario, remain upbeat. Their fight to retain living standards and working conditions opposite an interloping landlord, Vale of Brazil, has turned into a test of wills between a profitable multinational and working-class Canadians.

This match-up pits Vale, intent on taking much more than just rich nickel reserves from Canadian soil, against miners and metalworkers, who together with their families see now experience unique fusion through their union in protecting their livelihoods.

Strikers here, as well as 500 other striking steelworkers at Port Colborne, Ontario, and Goose Bay and Voiseys Bay, Labrador, know now their walkouts will last through the long Canadian winter. They know by Vale’s reticence to return to bargaining, by the firm’s secretive and intimidating posture to resume production, and by the fact that global nickel prices have not risen – following the collapse – to levels that will further maximize Vale’s profits.

So they’ve prepared for a long winter without pay checks. While teams of strikers fan out across the world to spread a message of corporate greed, Local 6500 President John Fera remains in Sudbury and tends to what is necessary – nurturing unity and fraternity, and waging the fight against Vale on the local front, a relentless task considering company assaults on picket lines and in courtrooms.

“Everyone here knows what this fight is about,” Fera told the ICEM. “Every worker on strike is fully engaged and every family member knows what is at stake for this community. And that is a credit to the Steelworkers union.”

He then ticks off an ever-expanding list of local actions, activities, and self-help programmes that USW Local 6500 is engaged in through its newly-built union hall. Strikers receive C$200-a-week in strike benefits from the international union. That is supplemented by a big food bank, a special-needs fund, as well as social service professionals on duty – all operated out of a union hall that was rebuilt from a costly fire 14 months ago.

Local 6500 continues to launch activities on a weekly basis, including a “coats-for-kids” drive, in which donations from unions, organizations, and individuals will fund new winter wear. A recent “Family Day” on picket lines underscores what Fera speaks of. The union also will sponsor several Christmas events to forge even greater cohesion.

As testament to this unity is that not one striker has crossed picket lines to return to work since the strike began on 13 July.

While dozens of striking steelworkers have taken the strike to Vale worksites and Vale showcase events on four continents, hundreds other Sudbury activists have been just as active at home. They have protested at Vale offices in Toronto, at provincial offices, and against a national Tory government that has turned a deaf ear to the Investment Canada Act, a law that is meant to protect Canadian jobs and resources when non-Canadian enterprises take over.

Sudbury strikers have also taken the fight to Canadian Industry Minister Tony Clement, a Conservative who at the outset of the strike said the Sudbury region would be a “valley of death” had it not been for Vale buying Canadian-based Inco in 2006.

Now, as a fading day’s light turns rapidly to another winter night, the only semblance of death is on picket lines with Vale’s black-suited security guards trying to prod strikers into violent acts for the sake of cameras and the courtroom. Since early October, the company has feigned start-up of production. But there has been no real output, only Vale’s false tricks to psychologically intimidate workers.

The company has manipulated unionised administrative and technical workers, who remain on the job with a working labour agreement, to begin training for production. Fera says maybe 50 out of 450 such workers might be doing Local 6500 work, adding that three of the six mines might have limited activity. Workers and non-union personnel are also active in a nickel refinery, but there is no activity inside the huge, 100,000-metric-tonne-per-year smelter.

“The company wants us to believe that one shipment has gone out from the Clarabelle refinery, but our sources in transportation say this is not true,” Fera said.

 

Meanwhile, trade union activity across the world continues. Last month, the International Metalworkers Federation (IMF) joined the campaign to press Vale for a fair collective agreement in Canada. Today, in Seoul, Korea, the ICEM and IMF facilitated two Canadian strikers in a public “head-shaving” protest in front of Vale offices in Seoul.

The protest today was also brought before Korea Zinc, a company whose subsidiary – Korea Nickel Corp. – is 25% owned by Vale. In a letter to CEO and Chairman Chang Keun Choi, USW President Leo Gerard, ICEM General Secretary Manfred Warda, and IMF General Secretary Jyrki Raina, said: We request “that you contact Vale and demand that they treat workers fairly around the globe, including by returning to the bargaining table in Canada and ceasing to use replacement workers.”

The letter requested that Korea Zinc “refrain from the purchase, receipt, or processing of nickel and nickel products produced in Canadian facilities where members of the USW are on strike.”

Thirty Korean activists turned out today for the manifestation outside of the office tower housing Vale, including all three ICEM Korean trade union affiliates, and eight of their officers.

The same team of Canadian strikers now in Korea – Nick Larochelle, Tim Kiley, along with the USW’s Doug Olthuis, and Brazilian CNM-CUT Metalworkers’ General Secretary Sergio Guerra – accompanied the ICEM and Indonesia Chemicals, Energy, Gas, and Mining affiliate, FSP-KEP, and its President D. Patombong Sjaiful, to Vale’s remote PT Indonesia Nickel Corp. at Soarako, Sulawesi. The delegation attempted to meet with miners there, themselves victimized by Vale’s corporate policies.

The unions produced a joint statement. It can be seen here.

In Brazil, a team of strikers from Canada, including those from both Ontario and Newfoundland/Labrador, were inside during a Vale investors meeting in Rio de Janeiro, raising questions related to the company’s social responsibilities. They also are meeting with politicians, civil society groups, and will address worker delegate assemblies of trade unions representing Vale miners and metalworkers, who are themselves considering ratification of tentative collective agreements with Vale in Brazil.

A week ago in the UK, a team of USW members joined top leaders of Unite the Union in a protest in front of Deutsche Bank in the City of London, while Vale was inside giving a report on its performance in global metals market.

In addition, LabourStart, the trade union activists’ portal to the global union movement, began an on-line protest against Vale two weeks ago. To lodge a protest with Vale in Brazil on its maltreatment of Canadian workers and there families, click here.

And back in Sudbury, all the latest strike activity by Local 6500, and Local 6200 in Port Colborne and Local 9508 in the Canadian maritime province, can be accessed by visiting the union’s excellent website, here.

***********************************************

Read the views of one of Sudbury's great working class leaders:  

Son of a Working Man by Jim Tester

also check out the book: Red Bait! by Al King 

For continued coverage of the Sudbury strike... check out 

The People's Voice 

http://www.peoplesvoice.ca/

SUPPORT STRIKING SUDBURY STEELWORKERS!

(The following article is from the October 1-15, 2009, issue of People's Voice, Canada's leading communist newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the source is credited. Subscription rates in Canada: $30/year, or $15 low income rate; for U.S. readers - $45 US per year; other overseas readers - $45 US or $50 CDN per year. Send to: People's Voice, c/o PV Business Manager, 133 Herkimer St., Unit 502, Hamilton, ON, L8P 2H3.)

The Ontario Committee of the Communist Party of Canada, meeting in Toronto on Sept. 20, condemned the Vale corporation for its hostility to Canadian workers and labour laws, and the threat it poses to the Sudbury community with its decision to use scabs in a provocative and dangerous effort to break the strike.

  "We call on the Federal government to nationalize the Canadian operations of this multinational corporation without further delay, repealing the 2006 agreement which allowed Vale to purchase the Canadian owned Inco," said the Ontario Committee.

     "Vale's purchase of the mines and operations in Sudbury, Port Colborne and Voisey's Bay should not have been permitted in the first place, as the Sudbury mines are now wholly owned by foreign interests, at the expense of Canada's sovereignty.

     "Vale is a vicious multinational employer bent on cutting the wages, pensions, benefits and working conditions of workers employed in one of the most dangerous occupations in the world.   Their aim is to inflate bloated profits, and use the current downturn in nickel prices to undermine free collective bargaining and slash the living standards and quality of life of Inco workers.       

"Vale is demonstrating its sheer greed, and is in complete contravention of the rights of workers in Canada, and the public interest.

     "Federal and provincial governments must take immediate action to protect workers, instead of protecting the companies that are exploiting them, and the resources that properly belong to all the people of Canada.

     "The Communist Party stands in full support of the members of Local 6500 USWA in their just struggle to defend their livelihoods, their families, and their community. An injury to one is an injury to all!"



An interesting blog with some good thoughts and information about the struggle for justice in Sudbury:

My Cat May Be A Socialist

A Canadian political rant with a bias towards Organized Labour...

http://mycatmaybeasocialist.blogspot.com/

Trumka: Jobs Crisis—Fix It Now

This sign says it all...

Workers get more hot air... no action from union "leaders."

Consider who this is coming from... the very same "leaders" who helped Barack Obama and the Democrats kill single-payer universal health care.


Consider this in reading this AFL-CIO blog posting: Richard Trumka has not lifted his voice, even in a whimper, to insist that affirmative action goals and policies be adhered to and lived up to and enforced. Why didn't the leadership of the NAACP raise this important issue at this press conference knowing their members wanted this as one point in this program.



Previously these same "leaders" came together talking about how they were going to mobilize local communities to back an identical program; only to find them hiding out in their Washington offices sitting on the resources required to bring people into the kind of united, militant and massive struggles required to win as their high-paid staffs sit with their feet up on their desks playing computers games all day.


Take this press conference seriously and you are simply submitting to the working class getting stuck with the tab while Wall Street coupon clippers profit.


Richard Trumka and the AFL-CIO were no-shows when progressive Minnesota legislators initiated legislation aimed at saving the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant... again, this same bunch of labor-fakers who can't figure out if they are working class or middle class were no-shows when Minnesota State Senator David Tomassoni tried to introduce "The Minnesota People's Bailout" that could be used as a model for legislation on a national level incorporating this wholly inadequate "Five Point Program" even though Senator Tomassoni pointed out that the only way out of this economic crisis is to "work our way out" by putting people back to work at real living wages.


I also point out that in spite of all of Richard Trumka's talk against racism when it came to his support for this Wall Street con artist and health insurance salesman--- Barack Obama; Trumka's booming voice has been silent--- as has the voice of Minnesota AFL-CIO President Shar Knutson--- concerning the institutionalized racism in hiring all across Minnesota and the rest of this country which is directly responsible for the massive unemployment and its associated poverty in communities of people of color as they have refused to join the struggle of local Native American Indian working class community activists in Bemidji, Minnesota who are challenging this institutionalized racism in hiring in the construction of the Bemidji Regional Event Center while state and federal funding and the use of "stimulus funds" are the primary funding sources.


Please check out my further comments at the end of this blog which I posted on another web site in response to this press conference... The AFL-CIO blog only allows "select" comments to be posted.

The two-million casino workers across this country employed in the Indian Gaming Industry forced to work in smoke-filled casinos at poverty wages without any rights under state or federal labor laws know full well that union "leaders" like Richard Trumka are more interested in electing Democrats than in solving the problems of working people. 


What is most interesting is that while the AFL-CIO ignores calls for help in fighting for full implementation of affirmative action hiring policies and goals; these same AFL-CIO union leaders work hand-in-hand with the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association raising funds for Barack Obama and the Democratic Party... in Bemidji, Minnesota, in the Beltrami County DFL, AFL-CIO union leaders  work hand-in-hand with John McCarthy the Executive Director of the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association--- not only to raise funds for a racist State Senator Mary Olson, but are working in cahoots trying to belittle the efforts for enforcement of affirmative action policies, goals and guidelines when it comes to constructing and staffing the Bemidji Regional Event Center as well as working in league with Enbridge to subvert affirmative action in hiring in building the massive pipeline from the Tar Sands of Alberta to the Great Lakes Region.


Not once has Minnesota AFL-CIO President Shar Knutson so much as mentioned the fact that there is not one single Native American Indian sitting in the Minnesota State Legislature in spite of a huge Native American Indian population in Minnesota which causes any thinking person to wonder if the AFL-CIO is he least bit concerned about racism--- or, if the "concern" voiced by Trumka during the Election was not merely a gimmick used to bully working people into supporting Barack Obama who is not now, and never has been, a friend of working men and women in this country as he carries out Wall Street's anti-labor agenda... not only here in this country but across the globe.



Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council

Trumka: Jobs Crisis—Fix It Now

by Seth Michaels, Nov 17, 2009




Today at the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka and other leaders joined together to call for urgent action to create jobs and rebuild the economy.

In a live webcast panel discussion, the consensus was clear: Without quick action, an entire generation could be mired in economic turmoil. The nation can, and must, put people back to work—while addressing critical needs for the future of our communities.

The scale of the jobs crisis is obvious: Since the beginning of the recession, more than 8 million jobs have been lost. The official unemployment rate is at 10.2 percent, with more than 26 million unemployed or underemployed. These figures are even more severe among African American and Latino communities. Young people are at risk of permanently stunted opportunity, and the jobs crisis is rebounding throughout the country with increased hunger and poverty, massive numbers of home foreclosures and diminished access to health care.


In addition to Trumka, participants in today’s discussion included NAACP President Benjamin Jealous; National Council of La Raza (NCLR) President Janet Murguia; Leadership Conference on Civil Rights President (LCCR) Wade Henderson; and Deepak Bhargava, executive director of the Center for Community Change. EPI President Larry Mishel moderated the conversation, which Jealous called the beginning of a national human rights movement for economic opportunity.

Trumka laid out five critical points that must underlie a new jobs agenda:

1.Extend the lifeline for jobless workers.
2.Rebuild America’s schools, roads and energy systems.
3.Increase aid to state and local governments to maintain vital services.
4.Fund jobs in our communities.
5.Put TARP funds to work for Main Street.
Trumka said that the coalition will push the White House and Congress to act on these recommendations immediately, starting at President Barack Obama’s Dec. 3 Jobs Summit.

We can not afford to do nothing, Trumka said, and we can’t afford to go back to an economy built on stagnant wages, inequality and consumer debt. We need to create good jobs that support families and communities.

Henderson said the nation’s jobs crisis requires urgent attention—because it’s not just an economic imperative to put people to work, it’s a moral responsibility:

Make no mistake, for us this is the civil rights issue of the moment. Unless we resolve the national job crisis, it will make it hard to address all of our other priorities.

Murguia added that we need specific programs to make sure all communities, especially those that have been disadvantaged, get the opportunities, training and assistance they need.

There are people who need work in our communities and there is work to be done rebuilding the country, Bhargava said. By investing now, we can make real, needed improvements and we can give people the jobs they need. But to do that, Bhargava said, we need to break through the “shell of complacency” around too many legislators in Washington. We need to organize communities around an economic agenda that really helps them.

All of the leaders present affirmed their commitment to building grassroots pressure on Congress to act now on job creation. Families across the country know we need solutions that are at the scale of the serious problems we’re facing and, Trumka said, they will be looking to see whether lawmakers are listening to them or just acting on behalf of Wall Street. Trumka criticized the fact that small minorities in the Senate can hold America hostage by blocking much-needed change and promised that union members and Working America members would fight hard against elected officials who are obstructing progress.

The way things are is not the way they have to be, Trumka said. We need action now to create jobs, and we have the resources to do it.

My response:


•Sorry for the previous lengthy post.

I could have just said:

A lot of tough talk; no action.

Working people can expect to get from Wall Street's Barack Obama and these other Dumb Donkeys what the sparrows leave behind.

Posted by Alan Maki, 18/11/2009



•Maybe this story just missed a few things; but, was it discussed that:

Real living wages need to come along with the jobs?

Affirmative action policies and goals needed to be implemented, monitored and enforced for all jobs created?

Also missing is any mention of the need to cut the military budget and reorder the priorities of this country away from war and military spending towards meeting the needs of the people, and the need to tax the rich to begin the raggedy, complex and controversial process of redistributing the wealth created by workers but horded by capital in order to pay for all of this.

Also not mentioned is the need for single-payer universal health care since at present Obama and the Democrats are only working on insuring the profitability of health insurance companies and the main issue of access to quality health care by the majority of Americans who can not afford their monthly mortgage payments let alone with-stand another big insurance premium--- what are people supposed to do; pay for health insurance premiums on their credit cards?

Another thing not mentioned is the need for a moratorium on home foreclosures and evictions and the need to get all these people who have been swindled by mortgage companies and evicted back into homes and properly and adequately compensated for the injustices and indignities they have been subjected to with the culprits thrown behind bars where they belong.

This "five point program" being put forward here does not even begin--- if implemented--- to deliver on the change people were anticipating since Obama and his Administration in catering to Wall Streets every beck and call has caused this capitalist economic crisis to worsen creating havoc with the lives of most working people.

We really need to begin to consider more broad solutions that will benefit the entire working class...

For starters, working people require a real living minimum wage that is legislatively tied to actual cost-of-living factors and nothing less than single-payer universal health care with a vastly expanded public health care sector where very basic health care needs are met without charge on a universal basis.

I notice that Trumka and the others involved in this press conference failed to point out that the only expanding industries in this country are Goodwill Industries where John Sweeney's book, "America Needs A Raise" can be purchased for spare change.

In fact, as "modest" as this Five Point Program is and as lacking as it is; no resources on a scale required have been designated for seeing this project through to fulfillment by activating and organizing the kind of grassroots and rank-and-file movements required to bring the kind of pressure to bear on this corporate bribed Congress of Democrats and Republicans to see things through to implementation.

This is just one more glitzy press conference intended to make people think that they will be called upon to act when the only thing these "leaders" really intend is to convince voters to go to the polls and vote these Dumb Donkeys into office again in 2010 without any kind of accountability.

In fact, we must remember that it has been these very same cast of characters who helped Obama and the Democrats kill off single-payer universal health care in spite of all of their memberships continuing to support it.

Something to think about.



Posted by Alan Maki, 18/11/2009

While Obama lectures the Chinese about Internet "censorship"...

My Internet Service Provider--- CenturyTel/CenturyLink--- who charges me a ridiculously high fee has admittedly bowed to the FBI censoring me by blocking my communications promoting peace and nuclear disarmament.

Here is the proof:

_____________________________________________
From: System Administrator

Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 9:18 PM

To: Alan L. Maki

Subject: Undeliverable: You might want to add your name to this petition to end the nuclear arms race

Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients.

Subject: FW: You might want to add your name to this petition to end the nuclear arms race
Sent: 11/17/2009 9:18 PM

The following recipient(s) could not be reached:

'XXXXXXXXX' on 11/17/2009 9:18 PM
450 4.0.0 ... Your IP address has been restricted due to improper content of e-mails as ordered by the United States Department of Justice and Homeland Security..

So much for the great democracy of "free enterprise" and the world's greatest bastion of democracy... more hypocrisy from the great health insurance salesman claiming to be the President of the United States when all he is, is a mouthpiece for his Wall Street backers.

If you are looking for a telephone company or Internet Service Provider (ISP) I would urge and encourage you to look elsewhere beyond CenturyTel/CenturyLink.

CenturyTel/CenturyLink has now acknowledged working hand in hand with Homeland Security, the FBI and the United States Department of Justice to harass me for the political content of the materials I send out that is protected speech under the United States Bill of Rights.

It is the epitome of arrogance and hypocrisy for Barack Obama to lecture the Chinese government about human rights and democracy when one of his largest campaign contributors is a CEO with CenturyTel/CenturyLink.

The CenturyTel/CenturyLink Vice-president of Operations personally approved singling my e-mail account out for harassment--- admittedly at the request of the FBI and Homeland Security who were instigated by supporters of Barack Obama.

The CenturyTel/CenturyLink operations where all of these dirty deeds take place is located in the KKK controlled town of San Marcos, Texas where the company orchestrates a vicious union busting campaign against its employees being paid less than $8.00 an hour while they charge hundreds of thousands of customers over $80.00 a month to have our telephones tapped, our e-mails monitored and our service shut down when it is deemed the improper political messages are being sent out--- which means anything critical of Wall Street and Barack Obama.

When I politely insisted that my e-mail service be restored, Supervisor Thomas (Employee Identification # 21326) said, "Listen bud; when the FBI tells us to shut down an e-mail account we do what the United States government tells us to do not what you want."

Several days ago I began having "problems" with my e-mail service and CenturyTel/CenturyLink customer service and technical service insisted the problem was in my computer equipment. I spent days and dozens of hours trying to troubleshoot the problem only to find there was no problem with my equipment and that this was actually a problem of government and corporation working together to stymie and thwart my democratic rights.

CenturyTel and CenturyLink recently joined operations to combine into an even larger corporation to steal from the people.

Alan L. Maki

The American people "get it"... Obama and the Democrats don't: Tax the hell out of the rich to pay for health care reform!

The majority of the American people understand, according to this Associated Press POLL: Tax the rich to pay for health bill, that the wealth they have created, they have not been able to share in by way of benefiting from socially necessary and universal social programs like health care--- and this has got to change.

This is called redistributing the wealth through progressive taxation.

I find it interesting that the worthless, high-paid union leaders who have been taking the dues of the members and living high-on-the-hog as part of a very well-heeled middle class are crying about the intent to tax health care benefits of their members but in the end will do nothing as Congress and Obama do just that.

Their talk-tough, scream bloody murder, give-in, do-nothing, non-struggle approach to "defending" the gains made through difficult struggles spanning several decades is all being taken away and eroded incrementally by the very Democratic politicians they used the dues and funds contributed by their members to elect--- a bunch of Dumb Donkeys who suck up to Wall Street lobbyists offering bribes.

In the very same way they have sold out their dues-paying members--- John Sweeney, Richard Trumka, Leo Gerard, Ron Gettelfinger and their underlings like David Foster, Bob King, Bruce Bostick, Ray Waldron, Shar Knudson and Mark Froemke--- they have sold out the entire working class in helping Barack Obama and the Democrats kill off single-payer universal health care, which, not coincidentally, has the same majority support as TAXING THE HELL OUT OF THE RICH.

And, again, not coincidentally, the same majority support is for ending---immediately--- these dirty imperialist wars for Wall Street's oil and Wall Street's regional domination and control over the Middle East.

And, once again, not coincidentally, the very same majority of the American people want an end to the nuclear arms race and they insist on a policy of "beating swords into plowshares" meaning that they want the military budget--- not incrementally "reduced" (which Obama calls an incrementally increased military budget)--- they insist in an overwhelming majority on the reordering of this country's priorities away from military spending towards meeting the needs of the people.

These pollsters were shocked at the results of their last honest poll asking people what they thought about capitalism and socialism; now they have become too timid as a result of those answers so they are not asking the American people the real ^4 million dollar question:

Are you for vastly expanding socialized health care in the United States so that everyone will have the kind of health care system offered by the popular socialized health care programs like VA, the Indian Health Service and the National Public Health Service and many of the small and limited county health care services and very limited but successful and popular government funded hospitals and nursing home care?

One has to wonder what all these so-called "progressives" supporting Obama are thinking when they follow behind these union "leaders" who continue to provide their services to the Democrats and their Wall Street partners by refusing to free up resources needed to launch a massive "people's lobby" pushing a real progressive, working class agenda in this country in opposition to Wall Street's thoroughly reactionary agenda of making the working class pay through the nose for the problems created by the rich.

The time has come to launch the building of a "people's lobby" by starting out holding Barack Obama and the Democrats accountable.

Accountability is the foundation upon which democracies are built.

If working class voters give up their right to demand accountability from those they cast their votes for, democracy becomes a sham and a farce.

Accountability can only be attained by working people insisting they have a right to get something in return for their votes.

What working class Americans want is:

Single-payer universal health care based upon Canadian-style health care COMBINED with a vastly expanded public health care that can be explained as---

No-fees/no-premiums, comprehensive, all-inclusive, universal health care; publicly financed, publicly administered and mostly publicly delivered.

Which means:

Tax the hell out of the rich to pay for progressive health care reform and tell the profit gouging doctors and the American Medical Association to go to hell because we can replace them easier than Ronald Reagan replaced the air-traffic controllers when they went out on strike.

What is it that Obama and these Dumb Donkeys don't understand about the messages coming from these polls?

Obama and these Dumb Donkeys will get the message real quick if we organize by way of a "people's lobby" and tell them we want something in return for our votes:

No peace; no votes.

No real health care reform; no votes.

Tax the rich to do what needs to be done; or no votes.

The time has come for the American people to organize to back up their votes.

Minnesota's socialist United States Senator who went on to become Minnesota's socialist Governor--- Elmer Benson--- had it right when he said to Minnesotans: "I can't do anything without your help and support. These rich son-of-a-bitches still control our State Senate; the only way you are going to get what you elected me to do is 'join my Minnesota People's Lobby and pack the state capitol.'"

Workers and Farmers did what Elmer Benson asked them to do to back up their votes for the Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party.

The "Minnesota People's Lobby" worked in 1937 and it it will work if organized across the United States today.

I don't think anyone doubts that we need a powerful "People's Lobby" to counter the corporate lobbyists who are bribing the politicians today when it comes to health care reform.

No peace; no votes.

No real health care reform; no votes.

Tax the rich to do what needs to be done; or no votes.

The time has come for the American people to organize to back up their votes.

The American people "get it"... Obama and the Democrats don't: Tax the hell out of the rich!

The time has come to organ!ze to make these Dumb Donkeys understand what job it is they have to do--- and to understand that they work for us, not the other way around... we need to serve notice on these Dumb Donkeys that we are not satisfied with what the sparrows leave behind.

It's all about "accountability." Getting something in return for our votes.

Remember:

No peace; no vote.

No health care; no vote.

We are all fed up with politicians telling us there is never any money for the things we need like health care, education, housing, jobs at real living wages.

Tax the rich; slash the military budget and put an end to these senseless wars.

Democracy: use it or loose it.

Wall Street is our enemy.

We don't want the Wall Street coupon clippers to continue to profit from health care the way they profit from war.

Look around you in your community and in the mines, mills and factories where you work--- are you able to find the kind of leaders capable of leading the class struggle fighting for what is right and just? If not; it is up to you to become that leader.

We don't need "Tea Parties;" what we need is a citizens' initiative: "The People's Lobby."

Something to think about around the dinner table this evening as you ponder "accountability".



Alan L. Maki





AP POLL: Tax the rich to pay for health bill



Nov 17, 2009

By ERICA WERNER


WASHINGTON (AP) - When it comes to paying for a health care overhaul, Americans see just one way to go: Tax the rich.

That finding from a new Associated Press poll will be welcome news for House Democrats, who proposed doing just that in their sweeping remake of the U.S. medical system, which passed earlier this month and would extend coverage to millions of uninsured Americans.

The poll found participants sour on other ways of paying for the health overhaul that is being considered in Congress, including taxing insurers on high-value coverage packages derided by President Barack Obama and Democrats as "Cadillac plans."

That approach is being weighed in the Senate. It is one of the few proposals in any congressional legislation that analysts say would help reduce the nation's health expenditures, but it has come under fire from organized labor and has little support in the House.

Lawmakers also are looking at levying new taxes on insurance companies, drug companies and medical device makers. But the only approach that got majority support in the AP poll was a tax on upper-income Americans.

The House bill would impose a 5.4 percent income tax surcharge on individuals making more than $500,000 a year and households making more than $1 million.

The poll tested views on an even more punitive taxation scheme that was under consideration earlier, when the tax would have hit people making more than $250,000 a year. Even at that level the poll showed majority support, with 57 percent in favor and 36 percent opposed.

"You know, I mean, why not? If they have that much money, it should be taxed," said Mary Pat Rondthaler, 60, of Menlo Park, Calif. "It isn't the same way that the guy making $21,000 is."

Not everyone agreed.

"They earn their money. And they shouldn't have to pay for somebody else. It doesn't seem fair," said Emerson Wilkins, 62, of Powder Springs, Ga.

The latest survey was conducted by Stanford University with the nonpartisan Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

Overall, the poll found the public split on Congress' health care plans. In response to some questions, participants said the current system needed to be changed, but they also voiced concerns about the potential impact on their own pocketbooks, preferring to push any new costs onto wealthier Americans.

For example, 77 percent said the cost of health care in the United States was higher than it should be, and 74 percent favored the broad goal of reducing the amount of money paid by patients and their insurers. But 49 percent said any changes made by the government probably would cause them to pay more for health care. Thirty-two percent said it wouldn't change what they pay, and just 12 percent said they would end up paying less.

With lawmakers searching for new revenue sources to pay for their overhaul legislation, upper-income taxes may be increasingly gaining favor.

Legislation passed by Senate committees did not go that route, but now Majority Leader Harry Reid, who has a free hand in merging two committee-passed bills, is considering raising the payroll tax that goes to Medicare on income above $250,000 a year, officials told The Associated Press last week. Current law sets the tax at 1.45 percent of income, an amount matched by employers.

The Senate Finance Committee bill would tax health insurance plans costing more than $8,000 annually for individuals and $21,000 for families, although those numbers could rise. Union members are lined up against that approach because they fear their benefits could be hurt, and the public doesn't like it either, the AP poll found. Fifty-six percent were opposed and only 29 percent in favor.

Other payment methods being contemplated on Capitol Hill also met with disapproval. Participants in the poll didn't support new taxes on medical device makers, drug companies or even insurers - even though they said in response to different questions that drug companies and insurance companies made too much money.

Forty-eight percent in the poll were opposed to new taxes on insurance companies, and 42 percent were in support. Fifty-one percent opposed raising taxes on drug and device makers, while 41 percent supported that approach.

But 72 percent of people polled said insurance companies made too much profit, compared with 23 percent who said they made about the right amount of profit. And 74 percent said drug companies made too much profit, versus 21 percent who said they made about the right amount of profit.

People who told pollsters they generally supported Congress' health care overhaul plan were also more receptive to new taxes to pay for it. Taxing health care companies, drug companies and equipment manufacturers eked out majority support from that group.

The payment approach that met with least approval by far in the poll was borrowing the money and increasing the federal debt, something Obama has repeatedly vowed not to do. Just 6 percent of people polled said they could support that approach, while 88 percent opposed it.

The poll was based on landline and cell phone interviews with 1,502 adults from Oct. 29 to Nov. 8. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.5 percentage points. The interviews were conducted by GfK Roper Public Affairs and Media. Stanford University's participation was made possible by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which conducts research on all facets of the health care system.