Go Green in '16
Unlike the “major” parties, the Green Party has to petition to get our candidates onto the ballot. But that's just one important difference between the Green Party and the Democratic and Republican parties.
For a start, from the Green Party of CT website: “As a matter of principle, we DO NOT ACCEPT donations from corporate PACs or pro-corporate interests.” I strongly agree with the policy, and it is one of many important reasons I am a member of the Green Party.
If you would like to see my name on the ballot, and if you would like your friends, neighbors, and fellow voters to be able to vote for a candidate who is not owned by, or beholden to, corporate interests, please help us! Your donation will help the Green Party of Connecticut secure the ballot lines in this year's U.S. Senate AND Presidential elections. Help us give Connecticut's voters real choices in 2016!
To make a donation you can send a personal check, along with your full name, occupation, and name of employer, to:
Green Party of Connecticut
PO BOX 231214
Hartford, CT 06123
Make Checks Payable to: "Green Party of Connecticut"
You can also download a donation form.
a supporter named Omar Scott Antar has sent me some detailed information on the connection between the C.I.A. and the N.Y.P.D.
This kind of activity is prohibited by Federal law, and is a violation of the C.I.A. charter. i was aware of this problem, but had nowhere near the detailed information Omar has shared. the format of what Omar sent had some common computer jumbles i have seen before. (ie, several letters and symbols replacing quotation marks and other punctuation) i took it upon myself to clean that up. i have made every effort to maintain the integrity and meaning of Omar's statement. as a candidate for U.S. Senate, i have to say i agree with Omar's recommendations. they are the least that should be applied to the crimes he describes.
Here is what Omar sent me with as little editing i could manage;
I wish to proclaim my strong condemnation of the anti-Muslim (and anti progressive) policies, practices, and attitudes deeply rooted within New York Police Department,s Intelligence Division (NYPD ID). The NYPD ID and its "counter-terrorism"� operations were established and conducted in collaboration with the CIA (both current and former CIA officers), as exposed in part by the Associated Press (AP) series and NYPD Confidential. The NYPD-CIA, in their highly politicized, discriminatory, and illegal operations, target not only Muslims, but also liberal activists. All collaborations with the CIA for ongoing and past domestic operations (NYPD or FBI) are in violation of the National Security Act of 1947 and Executive Order 12333, and therefore are illegal. Especially reprehensible to me is the undercover intrusion into the constitutionally protected activities of university students and personnel, people who pray in local mosques, as well as left-wing activists who protest the massive income inequality in the United States, such as Occupy Wall Street.
The recent report of NYPD ID misdeeds from the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of the NYPD (OIG-NYPD), the Senate fight over UASI (Homeland Security grants) funding, mostly for the criminal NYPD ID, and the controversy over the failure of the DNC and Clinton campaign to denounce Michael Bloomberg for his non-apology for the NYPD-CIA scandal are just more wake-up calls regarding the on-going and perhaps even increasing NYPD, FBI, CIA, and worse surveillance of our Muslim and left-wing brothers and sisters.
Because Ivanka M. Trump, daughter of Donald J. Trump, 2016 Republican presidential nominee, is on board of the NYC Police Foundation (page 124 of 128), the NYPD's slush fund, which finances the NYPD-CIA,s International Liaison Programs (ILPs), is little wonder Trump approves of and extols the NYPD-CIA and its abusive former Police Commissioner Ray Kelly. Donald Trump also calls for explicit profiling of Muslims, as in less free foreign countries, such as France and Israel. The Trump campaign invokes the NYPD-CIA precisely because they know the NYPD-CIA enacted and implemented real world, actual anti-Muslim and right-wing programs, and these bigoted programs are politically protected by Democrats like Senator Schumer, and the very powerful and rich donors to both the Democratic party and NYC Police Foundation, either individuals or corporations, like Goldman Sachs.
In fact, foreign powers, such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Israel, were exposed as influencing and funding the NYPD-CIA through the NYC Police Foundation, and other means. The UAE is not only a host of one of the NYPD's ILP satellites, but it also defamed the Muslim American Society (MAS) part of the ICNA-MAS conference organizers, spied upon by the NYPD-CIA, as being terrorists! Recently there is evidence of a brewing alliance between the UAE and Saudi Arabia. So servitude to the UAE, can and will turn into servitude towards Saudi Arabia, since the crime of operating on behalf of a foreign power financial sponsor has been well established by the NYPD-CIA.
It would have been alarming enough if the NYPD were conducting these operations and practices only in New York City. However, not only did/does the NYPD-CIA operate within the legal jurisdiction of New York City, but also outside of its traditional jurisdiction, all across the region, nation, and even world, including the state of Connecticut. The NYPD ID even had units termed "Out of City units" to conduct documented operations and "visits/letters" in New Jersey, Long Island, and Connecticut, including "Operation NEXUS", according to the NYPD ID's 2006 "Strategic Posture"� document (pages 100, 103-104, 107), released by Handschu and NYCLU legal efforts.
I strongly condemn those particular operations within the state of Connecticut. I also condemn all activities by all those who collaborate with and enable the NYPD ID, namely several institutions within the state of Connecticut (CT State police) and parts of the FBI. Other states, like New Jersey, have signed agreements between NYC and their state, to permit operations of the NYPD-CIA within its borders. Given the established presence of the NYPD-CIA within the state of Connecticut, I request that the existence and text of any and all agreements between the state of Connecticut and NYC/NYPD be released to the public.
As the blockbuster Intercept article powerfully illustrates, the NYPD-CIA and its collaborators (including those within the state of Connecticut) have established a systematic, deliberate, and unremitting program of psychological torture against its Muslim and non-Muslim progressive students and citizens. These abuses include violations of Muslim student privacy rights (FERPA) by academic institutions (for example, UCONN). From the mainstream perspective, in fact, the NYPD-CIA and its various partners have actually made us less safe by sending responsible law enforcement agents after those with certain political and religious views/beliefs targeted by the NYPD Intelligence Division, diverting their attention and resources.
Therefore to begin to heal the trauma within Connecticut, I request that all information about NYPD-CIA agreements/operations within the state of Connecticut be released, and all connections and collaborations between NYC regarding NYPD ID and the state of Connecticut be rescinded. In addition, I call upon the Governor, Lt. Governor, and the CT state legislature to propose, pass, sign, and implement legislation against the NYPD-CIA operating within its state. There is a precedent in New Jersey's 2013 legislation curtailing NYPD and other out-of-state illegal spying, though I assert this legislation does not go far enough. Finally I call upon the Senate and House budget process to defund the NYPD ID, starting with eliminating UASI (Homeland Security grants) funding of the NYPD ID. Such funds are better used in uplifting social programs, such as Medicare-for-all!
Omar Scott Antar
The unprecedented changes we, the human species, have made in our atmosphere are warming the planet to an alarming degree. The Berkeley Earth project (paid for by the Koch brothers) determined that the global temperature of the Earth rose approximately one degree Celsius in one century (1910-2010). It was the most comprehensive analysis of temperature data I know of.
The organization known as 350.org chose its name because several sources indicated 350 parts per billion of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was near the upper limit of where we could sustain our industrial civilization. We were at 401 as of March 2015.
We have reached the point where mitigation of emissions might not be enough to head off disaster. Amplifying feedback has already been documented in Arctic regions. Permafrost is releasing methane, a very powerful greenhouse gas that decays to carbon dioxide and water.
The climate deniers are doing the same con game the pro-smoking crowd did three decades ago. They are claiming the science is uncertain with sophistry, half truths and outright lies. For the most part, it isn't only the same con game, it is the same con artists. (See "Merchants of Doubt" and skepticalscience.com.) Just as the effort on behalf of tobacco was well financed by tobacco industry, this effort is well financed by the carbon industry. The goals are the same: to maintain maximum profitability by 1) delaying regulation as long as possible, 2) eroding as much support as possible for strong action when it is clear action is required, and 3) organizing as strong a lobbying effort as possible to see that regulations, when they do come, cut into profitability as little as possible.
Rather flimsy excuses for making our planet uninhabitable, in my humble opinion.
When Ralph Nader was the Green Party candidate for President, he was rather adamant that there was no difference between the Republican and Democratic parties. i won't go that far.
i do see differences, but i also see striking similarities. Democrats would never nominate a person like Antonin Scalia to the supreme court, but they would vote to confirm his appointment in the U.S. Senate.
the bottom line is, both major parties are beholden to big money. neither one will enact legislation contrary to the fundamental interests of the one percent (see represent.us on the web). they talk differently, they take different sides on some important issues, but i never see actions following the words, especially where we need them most.
the idea that 'third party' candidates can't be anything but a spoiler is nonsense. throughout our history third party movements have been the driving force for social and political change. beside that, from personal experience i can say a good portion (perhaps a substantial majority) of the people who voted for me in past elections would not have voted at all if i wasn't there. very difficult to fit that into the definition of "spoiler."
in real political terms, the major parties will continue to ignore, dismiss, or pay nothing more than lip service to the issues that are important to us until they see a real possibility we can "spoil" their campaigns. if we get enough people to vote Green to be equal to or greater than the difference between the "major" candidates, they will have irrefutable evidence that they HAVE TO pay attention to 'our' issues. in fact, we can accomplish that by just getting near that margin. if we out poll any 'major' candidate in any election, that will change the ballgame.
of course the best outcome would be to win an election. if that happens once on the federal level, we are on our way. the big money will come after us with a vengeance, but we will have proven the oligarchy is not invulnerable. just one win to show it is possible and we could find ourselves with substantial influence in the House and Senate in two more election cycles.
that really is not beyond the realm of possibility; there are enough eligible voters who don't vote to overwhelm the number of voters who regularly participate. i have to admit, if the only choices i had were a Republican candidate and a Democratic Candidate, i would be sorely tempted to stay home on election day, but more likely, i would go to the poles and turn in a blank ballot.
Please, if you know any fed up potential voters who are not planning to vote, please let them know about this campaign. more than anything else, i want to give people the choice of something to vote for, as opposed to voting against.
Let's face it, the major parties have been giving us a lot more to vote against than to vote for for decades.
Fellow supporters of genuine democracy, the Green Party of Connecticut is organizing to make an all out effort to GET ON THE BALLOT for the 2016 Federal Election for the positions of U.S. Senator and U.S. President. I am not terribly web savvy, but I have some help. We are doing what we can to set up this site to register Volunteers for, and collect donations for our effort to GET ON THE BALLOT!
KEEP AN EYE ON THIS SPACE!
How can we have real democracy if we can't get real alternatives on the ballot?
As I have pointed out in every campaign I have participated in as a Green, both major parties accept so much funding from the corporate oligarchy that their positions on important issues (Environment, Economy, Education, etc...) hardly differ in any significant manner. There are differences between them, but the similarities are greater, and the similarities are what are going to kill us.
And finally, another thing I've been saying for decades: if you want real change on Election Day, there are three things you can't do: you cannot vote for Republicans, and you cannot vote for Democrats, and YOU CAN'T STAY HOME!
There is no arguing that the court system of the U.S. Has granted an outrageous level of legal, civil, and human rights to the legal construct we call a corporation.
This has prompted a movement to end the status of a corporation as a person. Nothing could be more dangerous.
A bit of history:
Corporations were invented by the Roman Republic. They are older than the Roman Empire. Shortly after the Romans invented corporations, they discovered a problem. If a corporation was responsible for some damage, there was no way to hold it accountable in a court of law. The local magistrate got stuck holding the bag. The Romans decided that a corporation would be a person in a court of law for the sole purpose of accountability. In over a thousand years, they never had real problems with corporations. Corporations' rights were limited to only those needed to accomplish the objective stated in the corporate charter.
If we literally end corporate person-hood, it will be impossible to bring a corporation to court. We will have what one retired law professor described as a nexus of contracts. The only person who could be brought to court is the person who signed the pertinent contract. Does anyone doubt every corporation will have robosigners in Brazil?
The problems we have in the 21st century U.S. Date to a nineteenth century Supreme Court decision where a former congressman testified that when the 14th amendment was debated, it was the intent of congress that that amendment include corporate persons. I am convinced that testimony was perjury.
Every other congressman who was asked about the issue stated there was no such intent discussed. I was told the congressman who testified was well paid. The case was important to the railroads, a very powerful economic interest at the time. Several Supreme Court judges were heavily invested in Railroads, a clear conflict of interest. At the time, the idea that a justice excuse himself because of a conflict of interest simply did not exist.
Every expansion of corporate rights has been base in that faulty decision. If a strong enough case can be made that that decision is based on perjured testimony, the remedy becomes easier than a constitutional amendment. All that is required is a congress independent of corporate influence. That congress could make a credible case for that case being illegal and declare it null and void due to perjury. Any judge who took issue with the congress could then be impeached on the grounds they were an accessory to perjury.
The obvious problem is the congress is bought and paid for by the corporate interests. But we the people are hardly impotent on this issue. We can do a lot of this and put pressure on congress to act. We can research the history. We can make the case. We can petition and pressure state and federal elected officials. It will be a lot more productive to push this than to push for a constitutional amendment.
These kinds of things are things I cannot do myself. Is there anyone out there willing to research this history? Is there anyone out there willing to organize? To start drumming up support? This is a good idea. It will go a lot farther to accomplish what needs to be accomplished than the movement to amend. And if that movement is subverted by the corporate interests, it could have disastrous results.
We don't need an election year to get this rolling. Lets get this started now.