And they have the nerve to call this "democracy?" XKeyscore

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/nsa-top-secret-program-online-data

XKeyscore: NSA tool collects 'nearly everything a user does on the internet'

• XKeyscore gives 'widest-reaching' collection of online data
• NSA analysts require no prior authorization for searches
• Sweeps up emails, social media activity and browsing history
• NSA's XKeyscore program – read one of the presentations

^BETA

• Share39174
• 
  
• 
  
• inShare396
• Email

• Glenn Greenwald
• theguardian.com, Wednesday 31 July 2013 08.56 EDT
• Jump to comments (2933)

One presentation claims the XKeyscore program covers 'nearly everything a typical user does on the internet'

A top secret National Security Agency program allows analysts to search with no prior authorization through vast databases containing emails, online chats and the browsing histories of millions of individuals, according to documents provided by whistleblower Edward Snowden.

The NSA boasts in training materials that the program, called XKeyscore, is its "widest-reaching" system for developing intelligence from theinternet.

The latest revelations will add to the intense public and congressional debate around the extent of NSA surveillance programs. They come as senior intelligence officials testify to the Senate judiciary committee on Wednesday, releasing classified documents in response to the Guardian's earlier stories on bulk collection of phone records and Fisasurveillance court oversight.

The files shed light on one of Snowden's most controversial statements, made in his first video interview published by the Guardian on June 10.

"I, sitting at my desk," said Snowden, could "wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant, to a federal judge or even the president, if I had a personal email".

US officials vehemently denied this specific claim. Mike Rogers, the Republican chairman of the House intelligence committee, said of Snowden's assertion: "He's lying. It's impossible for him to do what he was saying he could do."

But training materials for XKeyscore detail how analysts can use it and other systems to mine enormous agency databases by filling in a simple on-screen form giving only a broad justification for the search. The request is not reviewed by a court or any NSA personnel before it is processed.

XKeyscore, the documents boast, is the NSA's "widest reaching" system developing intelligence from computer networks – what the agency calls Digital Network Intelligence (DNI). One presentation claims the program covers "nearly everything a typical user does on the internet", including the content of emails, websites visited and searches, as well as theirmetadata.

Analysts can also use XKeyscore and other NSA systems to obtain ongoing "real-time" interception of an individual's internet activity.

Under US law, the NSA is required to obtain an individualized Fisawarrant only if the target of their surveillance is a 'US person', though no such warrant is required for intercepting the communications of Americans with foreign targets. But XKeyscore provides the technological capability, if not the legal authority, to target even US persons for extensive electronic surveillance without a warrant provided that some identifying information, such as their email or IP address, is known to the analyst.

One training slide illustrates the digital activity constantly being collected by XKeyscore and the analyst's ability to query the databases at any time.

The purpose of XKeyscore is to allow analysts to search the metadata as well as the content of emails and other internet activity, such as browser history, even when there is no known email account (a "selector" in NSAparlance) associated with the individual being targeted.

Analysts can also search by name, telephone number, IP address, keywords, the language in which the internet activity was conducted or the type of browser used.

One document notes that this is because "strong selection [search by email address] itself gives us only a very limited capability" because "a large amount of time spent on the web is performing actions that are anonymous."

The NSA documents assert that by 2008, 300 terrorists had been captured using intelligence from XKeyscore.

Analysts are warned that searching the full database for content will yield too many results to sift through. Instead they are advised to use themetadata also stored in the databases to narrow down what to review.

A slide entitled "plug-ins" in a December 2012 document describes the various fields of information that can be searched. It includes "every email address seen in a session by both username and domain", "every phone number seen in a session (eg address book entries or signature block)" and user activity – "the webmail and chat activity to include username, buddylist, machine specific cookies etc".

Email monitoring

In a second Guardian interview in June, Snowden elaborated on his statement about being able to read any individual's email if he had their email address. He said the claim was based in part on the email search capabilities of XKeyscore, which Snowden says he was authorized to use while working as a Booz Allen contractor for the NSA.

One top-secret document describes how the program "searches within bodies of emails, webpages and documents", including the "To, From, CC, BCC lines" and the 'Contact Us' pages on websites".

To search for emails, an analyst using XKS enters the individual's email address into a simple online search form, along with the "justification" for the search and the time period for which the emails are sought.

The analyst then selects which of those returned emails they want to read by opening them in NSA reading software.

The system is similar to the way in which NSA analysts generally can intercept the communications of anyone they select, including, as one NSA document put it, "communications that transit the United States and communications that terminate in the United States".

One document, a top secret 2010 guide describing the training received by NSA analysts for general surveillance under the Fisa Amendments Act of 2008, explains that analysts can begin surveillance on anyone by clicking a few simple pull-down menus designed to provide both legal and targeting justifications. Once options on the pull-down menus are selected, their target is marked for electronic surveillance and the analyst is able to review the content of their communications:

Chats, browsing history and other internet activity

Beyond emails, the XKeyscore system allows analysts to monitor a virtually unlimited array of other internet activities, including those within social media.

An NSA tool called DNI Presenter, used to read the content of stored emails, also enables an analyst using XKeyscore to read the content of Facebook chats or private messages.

An analyst can monitor such Facebook chats by entering the Facebook user name and a date range into a simple search screen.

Analysts can search for internet browsing activities using a wide range of information, including search terms entered by the user or the websites viewed.

As one slide indicates, the ability to search HTTP activity by keyword permits the analyst access to what the NSA calls "nearly everything a typical user does on the internet".

The XKeyscore program also allows an analyst to learn the IP addresses of every person who visits any website the analyst specifies.

The quantity of communications accessible through programs such as XKeyscore is staggeringly large. One NSA report from 2007 estimated that there were 850bn "call events" collected and stored in the NSA databases, and close to 150bn internet records. Each day, the document says, 1-2bn records were added.

William Binney, a former NSA mathematician, said last year that the agency had "assembled on the order of 20tn transactions about US citizens with other US citizens", an estimate, he said, that "only was involving phone calls and emails". A 2010 Washington Post article reported that "every day, collection systems at the [NSA] intercept and store 1.7bn emails, phone calls and other type of communications."

The XKeyscore system is continuously collecting so much internet data that it can be stored only for short periods of time. Content remains on the system for only three to five days, while metadata is stored for 30 days. One document explains: "At some sites, the amount of data we receive per day (20+ terabytes) can only be stored for as little as 24 hours."

To solve this problem, the NSA has created a multi-tiered system that allows analysts to store "interesting" content in other databases, such as one named Pinwale which can store material for up to five years. 

It is the databases of XKeyscore, one document shows, that now contain the greatest amount of communications data collected by the NSA.

In 2012, there were at least 41 billion total records collected and stored in XKeyscore for a single 30-day period.

Legal v technical restrictions

While the Fisa Amendments Act of 2008 requires an individualized warrant for the targeting of US persons, NSA analysts are permitted to intercept the communications of such individuals without a warrant if they are in contact with one of the NSA's foreign targets.

The ACLU's deputy legal director, Jameel Jaffer, told the Guardian last month that national security officials expressly said that a primary purpose of the new law was to enable them to collect large amounts of Americans' communications without individualized warrants.

"The government doesn't need to 'target' Americans in order to collect huge volumes of their communications," said Jaffer. "The government inevitably sweeps up the communications of many Americans" when targeting foreign nationals for surveillance.

An example is provided by one XKeyscore document showing an NSAtarget in Tehran communicating with people in Frankfurt, Amsterdam and New York.

In recent years, the NSA has attempted to segregate exclusively domestic US communications in separate databases. But even NSA documents acknowledge that such efforts are imperfect, as even purely domestic communications can travel on foreign systems, and NSA tools are sometimes unable to identify the national origins of communications.

Moreover, all communications between Americans and someone on foreign soil are included in the same databases as foreign-to-foreign communications, making them readily searchable without warrants.

Some searches conducted by NSA analysts are periodically reviewed by their supervisors within the NSA. "It's very rare to be questioned on our searches," Snowden told the Guardian in June, "and even when we are, it's usually along the lines of: 'let's bulk up the justification'."

In a letter this week to senator Ron Wyden, director of national intelligence James Clapper acknowledged that NSA analysts have exceeded even legal limits as interpreted by the NSA in domestic surveillance.

Acknowledging what he called "a number of compliance problems", Clapper attributed them to "human error" or "highly sophisticated technology issues" rather than "bad faith".

However, Wyden said on the Senate floor on Tuesday: "These violations are more serious than those stated by the intelligence community, and are troubling."

In a statement to the Guardian, the NSA said: "NSA's activities are focused and specifically deployed against – and only against – legitimate foreign intelligence targets in response to requirements that our leaders need for information necessary to protect our nation and its interests.

"XKeyscore is used as a part of NSA's lawful foreign signals intelligence collection system.

"Allegations of widespread, unchecked analyst access to NSA collection data are simply not true. Access to XKeyscore, as well as all of NSA's analytic tools, is limited to only those personnel who require access for their assigned tasks … In addition, there are multiple technical, manual and supervisory checks and balances within the system to prevent deliberate misuse from occurring."

"Every search by an NSA analyst is fully auditable, to ensure that they are proper and within the law.

"These types of programs allow us to collect the information that enables us to perform our missions successfully – to defend the nation and to protect US and allied troops abroad."

Cindy Sheehan is running for California governor on the Peace and Freedom Party ticket.

Cindy announced on FaceBook that she will oppose "At-Will Employment" and support "Just Cause."

As far as I know, she is the first candidate to take a position in opposition to "At-Will Employment."

Good luck, Cindy!

I'm glad to see a few other working class activists besides myself finally beginning to speak out about the need for a struggle to put an end to "At-Will Employment" although we need to put an end to "At-Will Hiring and At-Will Firing" which would assure fairness and non-discrimination when it comes to both hiring and firing.

It is bad enough employers have the "right" to exploit the labor of workers; employers shouldn't have the "right" to determine who should work and who shouldn't work based on any forms of discrimination--- be it age, sex, racial, political thinking & ideology or whether workers are engaged in union organizing activities, drives & campaigns.

Class collaboration among the top circles of leaders of organized labor has prevented a campaign to repeal "At-will hiring and At-will firing" since these labor "leaders" believe employers have more rights than workers and they are for going along to get along with employers which has proven to be detrimental to union organizing as the declining membership in unions proves.

When I introduced a resolution to repeal "At-Will Hiring and At-Will Firing" at the Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party's State Convention in Duluth, it was then Minnesota AFL-CIO President Ray Waldron and his little toady, Mark Froemke, who organized opposition to the resolution--- more organizing than either of these labor-fakers have done in their entire lives. This resolution was defeated by about a 70% majority vote which tells us a great deal about the commitment of the Democratic Party for justice for working people; and, it tells us a great deal about why organized labor, while doing the bidding of employers, can't organize Wal-mart, Marvin Windows and Doors, Arctic Cat, Polaris, Digi-Key or any of the other large non-union employers in Minnesota... there is even the huge Northshore mining operation that Cleveland Cliffs operates that the huge United Steel Workers Union hasn't been able to organize because all the rank-and-file organizers keep getting fired because of "At-Will." Then there was the failed Canal Park organizing fiasco where organized labor couldn't even organize a couple hotels... again, because of "At-Will Employment."

Not one single Democratic Party politician has had the moral or political courage to take on the repeal of "At-Will Employment." What does this tell us about the Democratic Party and labor?

When I first brought forward Precinct Caucus resolutions to repeal "At-Will Employment" here in Minnesota I was told by every single sitting member of the DFL Caucus in the State Legislature that the obstacle was Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty. Well, now there is a Democratic Party super-majority with a billionaire Democratic governor supported by the Rockefellers claiming to be sympathetic to organized labor and the State Senate leader is Tom Bakk who claims to be a leader of the Building and Construction Trades unions and working people can't even get a hearing on the repeal of "At-will hiring and At-will firing." Of course, these same labor loving Democrats left Minnesota's Minimum Wage at $6.25 an hour, too; below the Minimum Wages of Mississippi and even North Carolina and Wisconsin.

Not one single labor "leader" from Change To Win or AFL-CIO unions in Minnesota has brought forward the need to repeal "At-will hiring; At-will firing;" why not? Because they fear a struggle with employers and their Democratic Party partners over this issue.

Unless At-will hiring and At-will firing are both confronted at the same time I doubt we can successfully replace At Will Employment with "Just Cause" because workers of color, women and the youth understand that they will remain the last hired and never get jobs in the first place... this is why for over 40 years I have pushed the idea that we need to challenge the "rights" of employers over hiring and firing. Here in Minnesota, fair employment hiring could take place through the Minnesota Workforce Centers with these government centers matching workers to employment opportunities; why would any employer not want to get employees through these centers which employ professionals? One reason only--- employers want complete control over workers and their work-forces.

The repeal of "At-will hiring; At-will firing" is all about justice and democracy... it is all about workers, who are human beings, forced by economic circumstances and an unjust economic system being entitled to human rights.

The "Doctrine of At Will Employment" has to go--- it is a thoroughly reactionary concept dating back to the days of the emerging industrial industrial revolution when employers believed they had the "right" to treat workers like shit.

Here is an interesting perspective deserving of wide discussion:

The United States is alone among industrialized countries in allowing workers to be considered "at will" employees and dismissed for any reason – justified or not, unless protected by a union contract or individual agreement. Labor should seize the opportunity to champion the passage of "just cause" standards into state laws. It's a labor law reform proposal that will appeal to all workers while putting employers on the defensive.

“JUST CAUSE:” ISN’T IT TIME FOR ALL WORKERS TO HAVE MORE JOB SECURITY?

by RAND WILSON

July 30, 2013 4:03 pm

The next collective bargaining battleground is likely to be the job security provisions of union contracts, including the “just cause” clause.

Instead of waiting for such an attack, labor should seize the opportunity to champion the passage of “just cause” standards into state laws. It’s a labor law reform proposal that will appeal to all workers while putting employers on the defensive.

It’s long overdue.

The United States is alone among industrialized countries in allowing workers to be considered “at will” employees and dismissed for any reason – justified or not, unless protected by a union contract or individual agreement. Governments such as France, Germany, Japan and the United Kingdom require employers to have a “just cause” to dismiss non-probationary employees. Just cause appeals to basic fairness, just as due process does in court. Workers who believe they have been fired unfairly have the opportunity to contest their dismissals before various types of industrial tribunals. In the U.S., such recourse is available only to public employees with civil service protection and/or union-represented workers with access to a negotiated grievance/arbitration procedure.

At-will employees have no job security: they can be fired for a mistake, an argument with a supervisor, a critical comment about the enterprise or management, taking a sick day, a complaint about working conditions or pay, or involvement in outside political campaigns – all activities that just-cause protected workers can take part in without worry.

One state has passed a law: The Montana Wrongful Discharge from Employment Act was passed in 1987. Applicable to non-union non-probationary employees, it prohibits discharges without good cause, allows workers to sue for up to four years of back pay, and provides a method for workers to recover attorneys’ fees. Despite fear-mongering by opponents, the Big Sky state’s robust economic growth has not been affected. Statutes in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands also prohibit termination without the slightly more ambiguous “good cause.”

Winning state “just cause” legislation would certainly not be easy. But building a movement to win it offers union leaders and activists an opportunity to champion an issue that would benefit all workers and also help union growth. Short of winning state legislation, local unions, Central Labor Councils and workers’ centers could seek to enforce a community “just cause” standard through workers’ rights boards and / or strategically applied public pressure on employers.

A “just cause for all” campaign could engage working people at many different levels. One can imagine communities declaring certain areas “just cause zones” while other activists could be involved using the proposed legislation as a “litmus test” for politicians to gain labor support in electoral campaigns. Still others could be involved in holding hearings on the importance of achieving a “just cause for all” standard and lobbying for resolutions with their city councils.

Some union leaders have voiced concerns that winning just cause for all could make the main reason workers join unions irrelevant. However, if just cause campaigns succeed, workers will have more security to participate in union campaigns. Union leaders and organizers will be able to make the point that they are experts at enforcing just cause protections and can provide representation at hearings etc.

Even if campaigns for just cause do not succeed, millions of non-union workers will learn about the concept (especially if campaigns are based on ballot referendums) and the increased security it could bring to their lives. By popularizing the just cause concept, more workers may respond by thinking, “If we can’t get this important protection through legislation, let’s get it by forming a union!”

Meanwhile, when employers seek to roll back the just cause articles in our contracts, union members won’t be in the same position we were with the attacks on health care and defined benefit pensions. Instead, we will have laid important groundwork to fend off the employers’ attack by building broader public support for union job security provisions.

Imagine the labor movement leading a $50 to $100 million campaign over the next five years to win just cause protections for all workers in eight to ten states where grassroots movements have shown a desire to pursue it. Employers (and their political handmaidens) would be on the defensive. Most likely they would spend five or ten times more than our side to defend the “freedom to fire.” By over-reaching, it would actually help us raise more awareness about the importance of having just cause job protections.

A major Just Cause for All campaign would make labor a champion of the 99 percent and spur more workers to form unions. The sooner we get started the better!

Rand Wilson is currently on the staff of SEIU Local 888 in Boston. Wilson was the founding director of Massachusetts Jobs with Justice and has been active in community-labor coalition building for more than 30 years.  This article is adapted from a forth-coming article in Democratic Left.

It must be nice for politicians always being able to respond to a reporter's question of, "What are the three main issue in this election?" and being able to respond with "Jobs, jobs, jobs," knowing there is nothing to hold them accountable for creating those jobs.

The people in power have to rob working people of their history in order to stifle the struggles for progress in the present.

Schools deprive young people of any real discussion about the struggle to include the Bill of Rights as part of the United States Constitution and the people who were left out of protection.

Did anyone ever learn about the racist Doctrine of Discovery or the racist United States Supreme Court decision of Johnson versus M'Intosh which still stands today--- almost 200 years later.

Few students learn of the most successful third party alternative in this country--- the Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party when this party of united Socialists and Communists dominated Minnesota politics for almost two decades electing two Socialist governors--- Floyd Olson and Elmer Benson, and a union organizer Communist--- John Bernard--- to the U.S. Congress with a majority in the State House and a near majority in the State Senate.

Students don't learn about the Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party and they don't learn about the massive government repression that killed it.

History books which have to be approved by a bunch of anti-working class racists in Texas are a bad joke.

I am sure the struggles of working people must have had similar successes at the ballot box in other states but I never learned about these successes in school so I can't tell you... did Wisconsinites ever have any successes in electing real representatives of the people outside the Democratic or Republican parties? What about in New York--- do people remember the Communist Councilman from Harlem, Benjamin Davis; or are they fixated on Anthony Wiener's sexting escapades?

Lots of kids tell me they are learning all about "terrorism" in their classes today; when I ask them if they know what the largest terrorist organization in the world is they don't know that it is the KKK.

I recently tried to find out about the Full Employment Act of 1945 which was pushed by the left-led CIO unions and authored by liberal Texas Democrat Wright Patman... not one single member of Minnesota's Congressional delegation would provide me with it... I never learned about it in school; it passed the U.S. Senate by a wide margin but when Wall Street went on the attack it was defeated in the House. It would have made the President and Congress responsible for attaining and maintaining full employment--- but, who cares about legislating full employment when you can run for office and get elected by mouthing the words "jobs, jobs, jobs" without being held accountable for actually providing the jobs once elected, eh?

The "Full Employment Act of 1945;" one of labor's most important legislative battles and it is just about impossible to locate the text of the legislation and the transcript of the hearings which is a history book itself. It took me hours upon hours of searching for this information because the people in power and the politicians have gone to such lengths to conceal it.

If anyone doesn't believe that history is being concealed from the people just check out the Full Employment Act of 1945 and the transcript of the hearings.

With all the talk about "jobs, jobs, jobs" at election time the Full Employment Act of 1945 must be at least somewhat relevant? Go ahead... try to find the text and transcript.

Finding out about real history in this country has become an unpleasant but necessary task.

It must be nice for politicians always being able to respond to a reporter's question of, "What are the three main issue in this election?" and being able to respond with "Jobs, jobs, jobs," knowing there is nothing to hold them accountable for creating those jobs.

Go ahead... try to find the text and transcript of the hearings on the Full Employment Act of 1945 anyplace except on my blog:

http://fullemploymentnow.blogspot.com/

Half of call center jobs will be part-time... about half the jobs are part-time, with no health benefits

Concord: Half of call center jobs will be part-time

By Matthias Gafni

Contra Costa Times

Posted:   07/25/2013 05:59:00 PM PDT

 

Link:

http://www.contracostatimes.com/breaking-news/ci_23733818/concord-half-call-center-jobs-will-be-part?IADID=Search-www.contracostatimes.com-www.contracostatimes.com

CONCORD -- Earlier this year, Contra Costa County won the right to run a health care call center, where workers will answer questions to help implement the president's Affordable Care Act. Area politicians called the 200-plus jobs it would bring to the region an economic coup.

Now, with two months to go before the Concord operation opens to serve the public, information has surfaced that about half the jobs are part-time, with no health benefits -- a stinging disappointment to workers and local politicians who believed the positions would be full-time.

The Contra Costa County supervisor whose district includes the call center called the whole hiring process -- which attracted about 7,000 applicants -- a "comedy of errors."

"The battle for the call center was over jobs with good working wages and benefits; I never dreamed they would be part-time," said Karen Mitchoff, who has heard from complaining constituents and expressed her "extreme displeasure with how it was handled" to call center supervisors.

One recent hire, who last week learned the job would be part-time, said the new "intermittent" employees feel like they've been used as a political tool, and many now regret applying for the positions.

"What's really ironic is working for a call center and trying to help people get health care, but we can't afford it ourselves," said the worker, who asked for anonymity out of fear of losing the job. The county says it had been telling the public and supervisors all along that some positions would be full-time and some part-time. However, portions of staff reports list all 204 jobs as full-time, and a job posting said the same.

It's the latest controversy involving the call center, one of three created statewide to help citizens enroll in various new health care options under President Obama's Affordable Care Act when it goes live at the start of next year.

Contra Costa was selected early on by the state to run the call center, but the deal mandated the county run the operation itself, with state funding, or lose it to another county. Once Contra Costa secured the call center, Concord and Richmond battled for the right to host it. Unions nearly derailed the project before some last-minute wrangling to ensure workers weren't transferred needlessly and would receive appropriate benefits.

The state budget allows for 180 customer service agents, half of them part-time, when the call center opens Oct. 1, said Contra Costa Deputy County Administrator Theresa Speiker. The full-time employees, she said, will handle the core 40-hour work week, while the part-timers will handle the extended hours. For the first three months, the call center at 2500 Bates Ave., off Highway 4 and Port Chicago Highway, will be open 72 hours a week. After that, it drops to 59 hours a week.

"In open session and in (staff reports) we've been pretty clear that not all will be full-time jobs," Speiker said.
Speiker said the 7,000 applications were "totally outside what we anticipated with the demand for these jobs. We were blown away."

The new hires, many of whom left other full-time jobs for the call center positions, were told they were the "cream of the crop," the recent hire said.

Orientation and training started in July, but stopped on the afternoon of July 18, when employees were told they would have private meetings about their positions, the employee said.

"It reminded me of that George Clooney movie where he goes around the country firing people ('Up in the Air')," the employee said. "The woman said, 'I know you were led to believe you would be full time, but things have changed. ... You are actually 'part-time intermittent.'"

The worker said no clear reasons for the change were given.

Those who became part-time were told they would have to pay full freight on their health plans, ranging from $600 to $1,200 a month for a single worker and between $1,400 to $2,900 a month for an employee with a family. That is a steep bill for employees with part-time jobs paying from $15.33 to $18.63 an hour.

Another applicant said he ditched another job offer after getting a congratulatory hiring letter from call center operators in June, only to be given the runaround in the months since.

During negotiations months ago, Service Employees International Union Local 1021, which represents the customer service agents, demanded 80 percent of health insurance premiums be paid by the county, and 20 percent be paid by the employee. SEIU did not return a call for comment.

"It is very disappointing. I was under the impression these were going to be well-paying, well-compensated positions," said County Supervisor Mary Piepho. "We were really hopeful these would be jobs meeting the unemployment needs in our county and offer them the ability to make a living and support their families."

Contact Matthias Gafni at 925-952-5026.

Unity... unity for what? For real change or to back another warmongering Democrat who will ignore people's needs??

In response to my criticisms of these calls for "left unity" I received a phone call yesterday with the angry caller concluding: Can you do better?

Quite frankly, I think I can articulate the need for unity better than what these Obama supporters posing as leftists have done.

Lots of people are talking about "left unity" and all other kinds of "unity."

I agree with the idea we need to be united. But, who are "we." What do "we" stand for? Is support for Wall Street politicians like Obama the basis of creating "left unity;" or even a contributing factor to "left unity?" Is "left unity" all that we seek?

We should be seeking the unity of all Americans "fed up" with the Democrats and Republicans which would include many of those fed up trying to work for change from within and around the Democratic Party and even a few Democratic Party politicians who are just as fed up as the rest of us.

Many of those calling for "left unity" are doing so simply to divert our attention from the fact that they supported a Wall Street imperialist war monger like Obama and this support of theirs of Obama has become detrimental to "left unity" and working class unity and unity of liberals, progressives and the left.

Unity has to be based on the fact that we are, "People united For Peace, Full Employment, Universal Health Care and Environmental Protection."

A movement is in formation and is in various stages of development and these "left" Obama supporters under the guise of saying they are for "unity" are really trying to set us up like sitting ducks for the next Democrat they intend to support under the guise: "we can't allow Republicans to take over."

We do need organized unity. Our strength is in building a united movement for real change.

I don't think it is important that we have an organization with a name at this point. But, we do need to be united around a basic agenda for real change.

Many of those calling for "left unity" are part of the "Progressives for Obama" organization now with a changed name to hide the fact they are Obama supporters that will be used to back, most likely war-monger Hillary Clinton; the organization called "Progressives Rising." These sell-outs have a name but they don't articulate a specific agenda for united action.

We can simply present ourselves as an "Ad Hoc organization in formation" welcoming anyone aboard who agrees on the need for "People uniting For Peace, Full Employment, Universal Health Care and Environmental Protection."

Organizations are in formation all the time and people who we want to reach out to. people who are fed up--- (liberals, progressives and leftists), will understand this... and so will many other people. There has been a lot of talk about all kinds of "unity" without any substance.

We should proceed with drafting a statement explaining how these four issues are related: Peace, Full Employment, Universal Health Care and Environmental Protection; this could be the gist of how we explain ourselves:

Fed up?
 
So are we.
 
We are concerned Americans joining together with the rest of the world's peoples demanding:

Peace.
Full Employment.
Universal Health Care.
A healthy people and planet.

Given the fact that it is our labor that creates all wealth we don't think we are demanding too much.

Without an end to militarism and ending these dirty wars we have no means to finance universal health care without drastically increasing taxes. Our Nation at peace with a peace budget will create millions of jobs providing the American people with no-fee/no-premium, comprehensive, all-inclusive, universal health care that is publicly financed, publicly administered and publicly delivered like FDR's Secretary of Labor, Frances Perkins, envisaged--- health care delivered just like public education.

In ending militarism and wars we eliminate the largest carbon footprint of any industry on the planet--- the Military-Industrial Complex.

The "peace dividends" we reap from ending wars and militarism are many; people and the planet will benefit if our struggles in the streets, at work and at the ballot box succeed.

Uniting people is about a struggle for power against the greedy, parasitical Wall Street vultures who bribe Democrats and Republicans so these Wall Street merchants of death and destruction can continue to profit from militarism and wars the same way they profit from the present private, for-profit health care system while reaping super-profits from using large numbers of unemployed people forced into poverty to depress all wages (low wages mean higher profits) and bust unions while destroying our living environment--- the air we breath, the water we drink and the land we grow our food on.

With peace--- and without Wall Street in power--- planet earth will be able to begin recovering from global warming and climate change as the Military-Industrial Complex is finally shut down instead of our basic manufacturing industries which will be brought back to life in environmentally friendly ways putting millions of unemployed and under-employed Americans back to work as  the focus of government turns from looking after Wall Street  to putting people to work solving the problems of the people like the Full Employment Act of 1945 introduced by Texas liberal Congressman Wright Patman called for in making Congress and the President responsible for a peace-time full employment economy.

Through peace we create jobs providing real health care reform while keeping both people and the planet healthy.

Government budgets are a reflection of our Nation's real priorities.

Wall Street dictate through bribing politicians is not what democracy is all about.

Peace. Full Employment. Universal Health Care. For a healthy people and planet.

Only a powerful "people's lobby" can challenge the Wall Street lobbyists.

Is anyone interested? Let's talk about this. Let's respond to these idle calls of the phony "leftists" backing Obama and the Democrats who will continue to deliver what the Republicans promise: wars, unemployment, poverty.

Finding real solutions to our problems is what has the potential for real unity.

This is who we are: the "fed up"... "People uniting For Peace, Full Employment, Universal Health Care and Environmental Protection."

Does anyone disagree these are the basic points of united action and the kind of unity required at this time?

Alan L. Maki