SATURDAY February 24 at 2pm
At the Central Islip Public Library at 33 Hawthorne Avenue:
Dr. Lucius Ware
Dr. Ware is President of the NAACP Eastern Long Island Branch and an activist in the east end community. He will speak on the history of racism and disturbing current trends.
Dr. Bob Zellner
Bob Zellner, Alabama born Long Islander was recruited to the civil rights movement by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
His story as a white man fighting for Civil Rights during the 1960’s is one of courage, dedication and true conviction. On Long Island Dr. Zellner has been active in human rights as a prominent fighter for the rights of Native Americans and African Americans.
Also at the Central Islip Public Library starting at noon:
"Unchained Memories: Readings from the Slave Narratives" will be shown.
For more information telephone (631) 234-9333
________________________________________
SUNDAY February 25:
Dr. Bob Zellner will speak at a program sponsored by the NAACP and others at the Riverhead Public Library. The program starts at 1pm and the talk by Dr. Zellner starts at 3pm.
The Riverhead Public Library is at 330 Court St.
Telephone (631) 727-3228
Week of February 22, 2007
For a complete and updated East End Report click here ,
then click on your browser's RELOAD button!
AOLers: go to www(.)eastendrep(.)blogspot(.)com - replace "(.)" with "."
In this week's report: [ click on any of the bold headers below ]
Steiger Trial Date Postponed
Give us your poor.....
What your Congressman said
What we said to our congressman
Peace & Justice Calendar
Suffolk Peace Vigils
Counter Recruiting Schedule
Alternative Media for Eastern LI
Democracy Now!
Non-corporate news hour with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez:
on Riverhead/Southampton/Southold Channel 20:
Monday 10 pm - Tuesday 9 pm - Wednesday 9 pm - Thursday 9 pm -
Friday - 6:30 am- Saturday - 6:30 am
Also on WUSB 90.1 FM 5pm Mon-Friday and East Hampton LTV Ch 20
See WPKN Today for program details on WPKM heard at 88.7 Montauk to Water Mill and WPKN 89.5 Bridgeport to Southampton and Southold.
WPKN/M Local News at 6:30 pm (Mon-Fri) has occasional reports from the East End.
WPKM 88.7 is temporarily off the air due to problems at the Montauk transmitter site which should be rectified soon.
see wpkn(.)org for latest update.
For more Information on Peace Activism on LI
see North Fork People of Conscience at www(.)nfpofc(.)blogspot(.)com
see Suffolk Progressive Vision at www(.)spv(.)active(.)ws
then click on your browser's RELOAD button!
AOLers: go to www(.)eastendrep(.)blogspot(.)com - replace "(.)" with "."
In this week's report: [ click on any of the bold headers below ]
Steiger Trial Date Postponed
Give us your poor.....
What your Congressman said
What we said to our congressman
Peace & Justice Calendar
Suffolk Peace Vigils
Counter Recruiting Schedule
Alternative Media for Eastern LI
Democracy Now!
Non-corporate news hour with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez:
on Riverhead/Southampton/Southold Channel 20:
Monday 10 pm - Tuesday 9 pm - Wednesday 9 pm - Thursday 9 pm -
Friday - 6:30 am- Saturday - 6:30 am
Also on WUSB 90.1 FM 5pm Mon-Friday and East Hampton LTV Ch 20
See WPKN Today for program details on WPKM heard at 88.7 Montauk to Water Mill and WPKN 89.5 Bridgeport to Southampton and Southold.
WPKN/M Local News at 6:30 pm (Mon-Fri) has occasional reports from the East End.
WPKM 88.7 is temporarily off the air due to problems at the Montauk transmitter site which should be rectified soon.
see wpkn(.)org for latest update.
For more Information on Peace Activism on LI
see North Fork People of Conscience at www(.)nfpofc(.)blogspot(.)com
see Suffolk Progressive Vision at www(.)spv(.)active(.)ws
Give us your poor ....
Agents from the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE), have been conducting raids of homes and businesses from California to Long Island lately.
This week a pack of ICE agents took up residence in a East Hampton
motel and staged pre-dawn raids at several houses in the Springs.
According to the Southampton Press 36 people were arrested. Ten of these are on their way out of the country. The others are scheduled for an immigration hearing.
Reports of similar events in Hempstead are being investigated by Nadia Marin-Molina of the Workplace Project and the Center for Labor Rights.
Ms. Marin says, about recent raids
"Supposedly ICE was looking for someone, the person was not there, and they then proceeded to ask everyone at the house for their papers. That is the tactic that immigration is using these days."
Members of OLA, the Latin American Organization of Eastern Long Island have been investigating and have connected some local legal immigrants with lawyers. Many report they were rousted out of their beds on Monday and Tuesday and when they objected to warantless searches were told to shut up.
Michael Wright of the Southampton Press reported:
"Jasmine Leon and other members of her family said six agents had been in their house on Tuesday morning. Ms. Leon and her family live in the six-bedroom house with her mother and five children between the ages of 4 and 14 and with other relatives. All but one, Jasmine, are naturalized U.S. citizens. Jasmine is a legal resident. Her husband has lived in the United States for 20 years. No one at their house was arrested, and the agents left after about 15 nerve-racking minutes, she said.
“My sister asked to see their warrant, and they told her to sit down and shut up,” she said. “The kids were very scared.”
All the members of the Leon family maintained that the agents were unnecessarily harsh with them.
“My daughter asked them to let her put some clothes on—she was just in her underwear—and they wouldn’t let her close the door,” said Norman Aguilar, who is married to Jasmine Leon’s sister, Adriana, and lives in the house, after returning to the house from filing a police report about the raid. “They wouldn’t let us call the police. They didn’t show us any badges. We don’t know if they are just wearing costumes. Even the police told us we had the right to call the police or a lawyer.”
This week a pack of ICE agents took up residence in a East Hampton
motel and staged pre-dawn raids at several houses in the Springs.
According to the Southampton Press 36 people were arrested. Ten of these are on their way out of the country. The others are scheduled for an immigration hearing.
Reports of similar events in Hempstead are being investigated by Nadia Marin-Molina of the Workplace Project and the Center for Labor Rights.
Ms. Marin says, about recent raids
"Supposedly ICE was looking for someone, the person was not there, and they then proceeded to ask everyone at the house for their papers. That is the tactic that immigration is using these days."
Members of OLA, the Latin American Organization of Eastern Long Island have been investigating and have connected some local legal immigrants with lawyers. Many report they were rousted out of their beds on Monday and Tuesday and when they objected to warantless searches were told to shut up.
Michael Wright of the Southampton Press reported:
"Jasmine Leon and other members of her family said six agents had been in their house on Tuesday morning. Ms. Leon and her family live in the six-bedroom house with her mother and five children between the ages of 4 and 14 and with other relatives. All but one, Jasmine, are naturalized U.S. citizens. Jasmine is a legal resident. Her husband has lived in the United States for 20 years. No one at their house was arrested, and the agents left after about 15 nerve-racking minutes, she said.
“My sister asked to see their warrant, and they told her to sit down and shut up,” she said. “The kids were very scared.”
All the members of the Leon family maintained that the agents were unnecessarily harsh with them.
“My daughter asked them to let her put some clothes on—she was just in her underwear—and they wouldn’t let her close the door,” said Norman Aguilar, who is married to Jasmine Leon’s sister, Adriana, and lives in the house, after returning to the house from filing a police report about the raid. “They wouldn’t let us call the police. They didn’t show us any badges. We don’t know if they are just wearing costumes. Even the police told us we had the right to call the police or a lawyer.”
What your congressman said
The House passed a resolution opposing Bush's plan to escalate the war in Iraq.
Our 1st C.D. Congressman Tim Bishop spoke on the house floor in support of the resolution.
Here are his extended remarks from the Congressional record courtesy of True Majority:
(Mr. BISHOP of New York asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. BISHOP of New York. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution which is a clear and concise response on behalf of the majority of Americans who share our opposition to the President's misguided plan to escalate the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq.
We can all agree upon and indeed must take this opportunity once again to affirm that our support for the brave men and women of the United States Armed Forces is steadfast and unyielding.
As this resolution declares, our first priority must continue to be protecting the brave men and women in uniform who have served this Nation honorably and valiantly. The decision to invade Iraq is the single most devastating and misguided foreign policy decision our Nation has ever made, and the process of protecting our Nation from compounding this tragic error must begin this week under new leadership with a clear vision and a plan that finally acknowledges that we can no longer stay the course in Iraq.
After nearly 4 years of war, the sacrifice of more than 3,100 brave servicemen and -women, tens of thousands more injured, and over $600 billion spent on the war to date, President Bush's ``mission accomplished'' declaration certainly rings hollow.
We must not forget whose war and misguided strategy failed us, and we must ask who the President is listening to beyond the small circle of advisers who were the architects of this fiasco in the first place.
The only strategy this administration has proposed is to stay the course, augmented by four earlier surges, along with the most recent plan to deploy the additional 21,500 U.S. troops, likely to escalate further to 40,000 to 60,000 more troops before the year's end. This latest policy is stay the course writ large.
The President's plan operates under the assumption that somehow, despite
[Page: H1706] all the evidence to the contrary, there is a military path to success if only more forces are on the ground. Not only is this logic flawed, it flies in the face of the wisdom of his top generals in the field, such as the former commander of the U.S. Central Command, John Abizaid, who told the Senate Armed Services Committee that ``more American troops right now is not the solution to the problem.''
I agree. We cannot afford to inject more of America's best and bravest into the chaos, particularly without the armor and training to protect them. Shortchanging our heroes in the face of a relentless insurgency is unworthy of this Nation. If we can't supply our troops with what they need, how can we possibly contemplate an escalation?
Without a reduction to the violence against U.S. troops, without stability in the region, and without evidence of a correlation between the raging violence and the number of U.S. troops and the number of trained Iraqi troops, now is the time to reduce the U.S. combat presence in Iraq, not expand it.
The Republican mantra has been that the Democrats don't have a plan for Iraq other than cut and run, an assertion that is simply false. We do have a comprehensive plan for Iraq that includes implementing the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, a regional conference to engage Iraq's neighbors diplomatically, and seeking political solutions to the escalating turmoil in the region. But again I would ask, what evidence is there to suggest that this President will listen to anyone's plan other than his own?
This is simply not an insurgency that needs to be crushed. Confirmed by the President's most recent National Intelligence Estimate, Iraq is in a state of civil war, and thus political solutions are needed to address the real problem. Although al Qaeda remains active in Iraq, they have been surpassed by ethnic violence, the primary source of conflict and the most immediate threat to stability in Iraq.
Proponents of the war claim that those opposed to the surge aren't supporting the troops. I would ask them how we are supporting our troops while keeping them in a country where 70 percent of Iraqis believe it is acceptable to attack U.S. troops, where 78 percent believe that our troops provoke more violence than they prevent, where three-quarters of them would feel safer if American forces left Iraq.
By staying the course in Iraq, we are putting our troops in a situation that has no positive outcome. Aren't the lives of our troops more valuable than saving political face and trying to prove a point?
And while it is well known that the claims of weapons of mass destruction were based on faulty intelligence and there was no connection between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda, why are we committing our troops and resources towards refereeing a civil war in Iraq, thereby diverting resources required to win the global war on terror rather than fighting al Qaeda in Afghanistan, tracking down Osama bin Laden, and preventing another terrorist attack against America?
The President's earlier NIE made it very clear last September that the war in Iraq has become a primary recruitment vehicle for violent Islamic extremists, motivating a global jihadist movement and a new generation of potential terrorists around the world whose numbers may be increasing faster than the United States and our allies can reduce the threat.
Opposition to this surge does not mean a lack of support for our troops; rather, it affirms what the American people made clear last November, that our policy in Iraq is not working and that we need a new direction. I will vote for this resolution, and I will continue to join with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to bring our involvement in this misguided tragedy to an end
The NIE also indicates that, rather than contributing to eventual victory in the global counter-terrorism struggle, the situation in Iraq has diminished America's position, What additional evidence does the President need to prove that his policies in Iraq are only making matters worse for Iraqis and making the world decidedly less safe for America?
And to those who would argue that this resolution sends a signal to our enemies that we are weak and divided, you are wrong. This debate proves why democracy works, unites us, makes us stronger, more resolute, and why these strengths--that our enemies envy and seek to overcome--will ensure that we ultimately prevail over them.
Opposition to this surge does not mean a lack of support for our troops. Rather, it affirms what the American people made clear last November--that our policy in Iraq is not working and we need a new direction.
I will vote for this resolution, and I will continue to join with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to bring our involvement in this misguided tragedy to an end. Voicing opposition to this war, to this President's policies, and to more of the same is our solemn responsibility, consistent with the objectives of this resolution, the hopes of the American people, and the mission of the U.S. Armed Forces.
Mr. Speaker, I commend the Majority leadership and the distinguished chairmen of the Armed Services and International Relations Committees for their hard work and making this debate a priority of this Congress.
Our 1st C.D. Congressman Tim Bishop spoke on the house floor in support of the resolution.
Here are his extended remarks from the Congressional record courtesy of True Majority:
(Mr. BISHOP of New York asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. BISHOP of New York. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution which is a clear and concise response on behalf of the majority of Americans who share our opposition to the President's misguided plan to escalate the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq.
We can all agree upon and indeed must take this opportunity once again to affirm that our support for the brave men and women of the United States Armed Forces is steadfast and unyielding.
As this resolution declares, our first priority must continue to be protecting the brave men and women in uniform who have served this Nation honorably and valiantly. The decision to invade Iraq is the single most devastating and misguided foreign policy decision our Nation has ever made, and the process of protecting our Nation from compounding this tragic error must begin this week under new leadership with a clear vision and a plan that finally acknowledges that we can no longer stay the course in Iraq.
After nearly 4 years of war, the sacrifice of more than 3,100 brave servicemen and -women, tens of thousands more injured, and over $600 billion spent on the war to date, President Bush's ``mission accomplished'' declaration certainly rings hollow.
We must not forget whose war and misguided strategy failed us, and we must ask who the President is listening to beyond the small circle of advisers who were the architects of this fiasco in the first place.
The only strategy this administration has proposed is to stay the course, augmented by four earlier surges, along with the most recent plan to deploy the additional 21,500 U.S. troops, likely to escalate further to 40,000 to 60,000 more troops before the year's end. This latest policy is stay the course writ large.
The President's plan operates under the assumption that somehow, despite
[Page: H1706] all the evidence to the contrary, there is a military path to success if only more forces are on the ground. Not only is this logic flawed, it flies in the face of the wisdom of his top generals in the field, such as the former commander of the U.S. Central Command, John Abizaid, who told the Senate Armed Services Committee that ``more American troops right now is not the solution to the problem.''
I agree. We cannot afford to inject more of America's best and bravest into the chaos, particularly without the armor and training to protect them. Shortchanging our heroes in the face of a relentless insurgency is unworthy of this Nation. If we can't supply our troops with what they need, how can we possibly contemplate an escalation?
Without a reduction to the violence against U.S. troops, without stability in the region, and without evidence of a correlation between the raging violence and the number of U.S. troops and the number of trained Iraqi troops, now is the time to reduce the U.S. combat presence in Iraq, not expand it.
The Republican mantra has been that the Democrats don't have a plan for Iraq other than cut and run, an assertion that is simply false. We do have a comprehensive plan for Iraq that includes implementing the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, a regional conference to engage Iraq's neighbors diplomatically, and seeking political solutions to the escalating turmoil in the region. But again I would ask, what evidence is there to suggest that this President will listen to anyone's plan other than his own?
This is simply not an insurgency that needs to be crushed. Confirmed by the President's most recent National Intelligence Estimate, Iraq is in a state of civil war, and thus political solutions are needed to address the real problem. Although al Qaeda remains active in Iraq, they have been surpassed by ethnic violence, the primary source of conflict and the most immediate threat to stability in Iraq.
Proponents of the war claim that those opposed to the surge aren't supporting the troops. I would ask them how we are supporting our troops while keeping them in a country where 70 percent of Iraqis believe it is acceptable to attack U.S. troops, where 78 percent believe that our troops provoke more violence than they prevent, where three-quarters of them would feel safer if American forces left Iraq.
By staying the course in Iraq, we are putting our troops in a situation that has no positive outcome. Aren't the lives of our troops more valuable than saving political face and trying to prove a point?
And while it is well known that the claims of weapons of mass destruction were based on faulty intelligence and there was no connection between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda, why are we committing our troops and resources towards refereeing a civil war in Iraq, thereby diverting resources required to win the global war on terror rather than fighting al Qaeda in Afghanistan, tracking down Osama bin Laden, and preventing another terrorist attack against America?
The President's earlier NIE made it very clear last September that the war in Iraq has become a primary recruitment vehicle for violent Islamic extremists, motivating a global jihadist movement and a new generation of potential terrorists around the world whose numbers may be increasing faster than the United States and our allies can reduce the threat.
Opposition to this surge does not mean a lack of support for our troops; rather, it affirms what the American people made clear last November, that our policy in Iraq is not working and that we need a new direction. I will vote for this resolution, and I will continue to join with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to bring our involvement in this misguided tragedy to an end
The NIE also indicates that, rather than contributing to eventual victory in the global counter-terrorism struggle, the situation in Iraq has diminished America's position, What additional evidence does the President need to prove that his policies in Iraq are only making matters worse for Iraqis and making the world decidedly less safe for America?
And to those who would argue that this resolution sends a signal to our enemies that we are weak and divided, you are wrong. This debate proves why democracy works, unites us, makes us stronger, more resolute, and why these strengths--that our enemies envy and seek to overcome--will ensure that we ultimately prevail over them.
Opposition to this surge does not mean a lack of support for our troops. Rather, it affirms what the American people made clear last November--that our policy in Iraq is not working and we need a new direction.
I will vote for this resolution, and I will continue to join with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to bring our involvement in this misguided tragedy to an end. Voicing opposition to this war, to this President's policies, and to more of the same is our solemn responsibility, consistent with the objectives of this resolution, the hopes of the American people, and the mission of the U.S. Armed Forces.
Mr. Speaker, I commend the Majority leadership and the distinguished chairmen of the Armed Services and International Relations Committees for their hard work and making this debate a priority of this Congress.
What we said to our congressman
Here is a portion of a message sent to Rep. Bishop last month:
Dear Congressman Bishop:
....Last year when we talked, you stated that Democrats in Congress could not stop the funding of the Iraq war, since the Republicans added funding measures which you could not vote down. Now as Dems control both houses, we are hearing that 'we can't stop funding for the war as long as our troops are there in harm's way'.
I believe that as long as the funding continues, our troops will be there in the cross fire of a civil war our intervention has encouraged. There is money enough in the hands of the Pentagon to fund a safe withdrawal.
We look for you to help stop the blood-letting.
Tony Ernst
Southampton, NY
Dear Congressman Bishop:
....Last year when we talked, you stated that Democrats in Congress could not stop the funding of the Iraq war, since the Republicans added funding measures which you could not vote down. Now as Dems control both houses, we are hearing that 'we can't stop funding for the war as long as our troops are there in harm's way'.
I believe that as long as the funding continues, our troops will be there in the cross fire of a civil war our intervention has encouraged. There is money enough in the hands of the Pentagon to fund a safe withdrawal.
We look for you to help stop the blood-letting.
Tony Ernst
Southampton, NY
Suffolk Peace Vigils - Starting Friday February 23
This coming week's Peace Vigils are on:
Friday in Sayville: 4pm at Railroad Ave and Main St
Saturday in Bellport: 11am at Station and South Country Roads
Saturday in Setauket: 11 am at Bennetts Road and Rte 25A - North Country Peace Group
Sunday in Patchogue: Sundown at Ocean and Main –Monthly Vigil - see below for details
Wednesday in Mastic-Shirley: 4:30 pm - Montauk Highway and William Floyd Parkwaynew vigil- contact: Susan at SMc1270236@msn.com
_______________________________________________________
East End Women in Black vigil for peace in the middle east and an end to the occupations of Palestine and Iraq on the first and third Sundays in Bridgehampton and Sag Harbor.
The next vigil is on Sunday March 4 at the Monument in Bridgehampton, from 3 to 4pm.
For the winter months, vigils are held on the first Sunday each month in Bridgehampton and the third Sunday each month at the Sag Harbor Wharf starting at 3pm
More info at East End Women in Black web site or call 631-259-2482
_______________________________________________________
South Country Peace Group, South Country Women in Black and Pax Christi Sponsor a vigil in Patchogue on the last Sunday of each month.
This month the memorial candlelight vigil will be on Sunday, February 25 at the Four Corners in Patchogue—where Ocean Avenue crosses Main St/Rte 27A at sundown.
There will be a reading of the names of those killed in Iraq .
Organized by the South Country Peace Group, Bellport Women In Black and St Joseph the Worker Pax Christi. This event takes place on the last Sunday of each month at or right after sundown.
For update on time contact Dennis Urlaub at dmu7@optonline.net
_________________________________________________________
Veterans For Peace and Code Pink will vigil for peace on the second Saturday each month at the Armed Forces Plaza in Hauppauge in front of the Dennison State Office Building on Route 347. The next vigil will be Saturday, March 10th between 4:00 & 6:00 pm.More info: email to ltbrin@earthlink.net
Friday in Sayville: 4pm at Railroad Ave and Main St
Saturday in Bellport: 11am at Station and South Country Roads
Saturday in Setauket: 11 am at Bennetts Road and Rte 25A - North Country Peace Group
Sunday in Patchogue: Sundown at Ocean and Main –Monthly Vigil - see below for details
Wednesday in Mastic-Shirley: 4:30 pm - Montauk Highway and William Floyd Parkwaynew vigil- contact: Susan at SMc1270236@msn.com
_______________________________________________________
East End Women in Black vigil for peace in the middle east and an end to the occupations of Palestine and Iraq on the first and third Sundays in Bridgehampton and Sag Harbor.
The next vigil is on Sunday March 4 at the Monument in Bridgehampton, from 3 to 4pm.
For the winter months, vigils are held on the first Sunday each month in Bridgehampton and the third Sunday each month at the Sag Harbor Wharf starting at 3pm
More info at East End Women in Black web site or call 631-259-2482
_______________________________________________________
South Country Peace Group, South Country Women in Black and Pax Christi Sponsor a vigil in Patchogue on the last Sunday of each month.
This month the memorial candlelight vigil will be on Sunday, February 25 at the Four Corners in Patchogue—where Ocean Avenue crosses Main St/Rte 27A at sundown.
There will be a reading of the names of those killed in Iraq .
Organized by the South Country Peace Group, Bellport Women In Black and St Joseph the Worker Pax Christi. This event takes place on the last Sunday of each month at or right after sundown.
For update on time contact Dennis Urlaub at dmu7@optonline.net
_________________________________________________________
Veterans For Peace and Code Pink will vigil for peace on the second Saturday each month at the Armed Forces Plaza in Hauppauge in front of the Dennison State Office Building on Route 347. The next vigil will be Saturday, March 10th between 4:00 & 6:00 pm.More info: email to ltbrin@earthlink.net
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)