HILLARY CLINTON CANDIDATE
FOR PRESIDENT.
A THIRD ANTHOLOGY OF
CRITIQUES PRO AND CON PUBLISHED DURING HER CAMPAIGN FOR PRESIDENT 2015-2016.
Compiled by Dick
Bennett. June 12, 2016.
(#2 Feb. 19, 2016)
Contents 3rd
Anthology
(I
supported Bernie during the primaries. –Dick)
Get
the Facts
Clinton
a Progressive?
Endorsements
Sierra Club (with Joyce’s satire)
NOW
President Obama
Elizabeth Warren
LOCAL CRITICISM
Dick,
Joyce, Art
National Criticism
Chomsky
Johnstone, Queen
of Chaos
Kreitner, ed.
Who Is Hillary Clinton?
William Blum, He’ll Vote for Trump
Common Dreams, Sanders Better for World Peace
Karlin, Clinton Supported Military Coup in
Honduras
Hillary and Israel: She is Pro-Netanyahu
Blacks Should Support Bernie
Greenpeace Asks HC to Oppose Fossil Fuel Money
Checking
the Facts
PolitiFact:
Fact-checking US politics
PolitiFact.com
is a project of the Tampa Bay Times to help you find the truth in Washington
and the Obama presidency.
Truth-O-Meter
TM Pants on Fire! - False - True
Barack Obama Joe Biden's file
Hillary
Clinton
Donald Trump
PolitiFact
(@PolitiFact) | Twitter
HILLARY
CLINTON A PROGRESSIVE?
Google Hillary
Clinton's Progressive Values for a bit of the debate. She defines it differently.
Endorsements
2016 ENDORSEMENTS OF HC 
List of Hillary Clinton presidential campaign
endorsements, 2016 ...
This
is a list of notable individuals and organizations who have voiced thei r endorsement of Hillary Clinton as the Democratic Party's presidential nominee for the .
Sierra Club, NOW (and Planned Parenthood and
NARAL),
President Obama, Elizabeth Warren, et al.
President Obama, Elizabeth Warren, et al.
SIERRA
CLUB ENDORSEMENT FROM MICHAEL BRUNE
Accompanied by Joyce’s poem
Let's all kiss and make up in a group Hillary Hug!
Drill, Baby, Drill.
Forgive Miss Franking Shill.
Our air is bad
'Cause we've been had;
Our water is like swill.
Drill, Baby, Drill
I'll make it safe," says Hill.
"Just vote for me!"
But you will see
Taxpayers foot the bill.
Drill, Baby, Drill.
There are pipelines yet to fill.
Some may be old
(That we've been told)
We hope there's not a spill.
Drill, Baby, Drill.
The thought gives me a chill!
Our globe is warm
With methane harm.
It's climate's poison pill.
Joyce
From: "Michael Brune, Sierra Club" Sent: Jun 9, 2016 9:33 AM To: lmann2@earthlink.net Subject: We have a big announcement!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
NOW
Statement on Hillary Win
|
|||||||||||||||||||
PLANNED PARENTHOOD AND NARAL
also endorsed Clinton
PRESIDENT OBAMA
Obama endorses Hillary - HillaryClinton.com
Adwww.hillaryclinton.com/Go
Stand with Barack Obama & help elect Hillary Clinton in November!
Official campaign
website · Shop the official store · Help make history
ELIZABETH WARREN
Elizabeth Warren Endorses Hillary Clinton on Rachel
Maddow Show ...
www.nbcnews.com/.../elizabeth-warren-endorse-clinton-r...
NBCNews.com
3
days ago - Massachusetts
Sen. Elizabeth
Warren, a hero to liberal progressives ideologically aligned with
Bernie Sanders' anti-Wall Street rhetoric, endorsedpresumptive Democratic
nominee Hillary
Clinton Thursday
night on MSNBC's the Rachel Maddow Show.
DIVERSE ARGUMENTS AND CHOICES
LOCAL CRITICISM OF CLINTON
LETTERS
TO TYLER CLARK and DEMS RE PRES PRIMARY OUTCOME, Feb. – April 2016
Tyler,
if Clinton wins the Primary. 2-17-16
I hope the first thing you do if Clinton
wins is to reach out to Sanders’ supporters, particularly the youth. He
has attracted a large, strong number of people who aspire for a better nation
he refers to as “democratic socialism,” or the way people live and are governed
in domestic policy especially in the Scandinavian countries. Ms. Clinton demonstrably shares some of
Sanders’ aspirations and has promised more, and therein could be the bridge to
the transition of their loyalty from Sanders to Clinton.
The many young people who support Sanders
must not be allowed to drop out in disappointment, but Clinton Democrats should
make truly sincere and persistent efforts to retain their loyalty to the values
and practices we share and those we aspire to in our Party’s future. For people like me, at my age, it’s easy to
be for Sanders now and contemplate working for Clinton later if my first choice
loses, because my loyalty is to the historical values, for me to the New Deal
in what it accomplished and what it was yet to achieve. But to many of the young people to whom I
have talked, the candidate is foremost, and if Sanders loses, they’re
outahere. I hope you will make this
danger to our Party and therefore to our nation a high priority right now
despite your understandable preoccupation with the campaign at hand.
For
freedom and equality, Dick Bennett
LETTER
TO DEMS 3-22-16
TO
Tyler Clark and Washington County Democrats
Last Feb. I wrote you that if Ms. Clinton
won the Primary our Party should try to avoid losing our many young Bernie supporters. Now, if she wins and we are only superficially
informed about her, we will want to study her past carefully in order not only
to hold her to her campaign debate promises with Senator Sanders but to urge
her to strengthen them. Our Party cannot endure a repetition of Bill
Clinton’s Republican deflection from our historical values, nor should we allow
a repetition of the disappointments inflicted on us by Barack Obama, who in
some ways is worse than Pres. Bush (books by Hodge and Press).
It
should be no surprise that many people and some Democrats perceive the two
Parties as the Corporate/War Party. There
is no excuse for any Democrat to be ignorant of this history nor any necessity
given the ample publication of the facts.
So I urge our leaders, if Ms. Clinton wins, to convene a series of talks
and panels that convey to us her full political history, some of which does not
deserve our respect. By providing such
reality we become a beacon to our Party.
If we fail to do this and, like Obama, she fails to represent the best
in our Party despite her campaign promises, we will be complicit in our Party’s
sad inadequacy since the 1980s to turn back the force of the anti-democratic,
anti-equality, anti-compassionate Republicans.
Dick
Bennett
I have published online two collections of writings about
Clinton and two about Sanders. Here’s
link for my second Clinton collection: http://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2016/02/hillary-clinton-for-president-pro-and.html
Here are two 2015 books and one 2016 about Clinton, plus one
2010 and one 2016 about Obama. Clinton: Doug Henwood, My Turn. Liza
Featherstone, ed. False Choices. Diane Johnstone, Queen of Chaos. Obama: Roger Hodge, The Mendacity of Hope. Bill
Press, Buyer’s Remorse .
From: Dick Bennett <j.dick.bennett@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 3, 2016 4:39 PM
In early 2015 I urged Sr Dems to spend that year and 2016 studying the candidates, and then work for the best one, and then work equally hard for whoever won the Primary. We now know the US public was not acquiescent but only temporarily defeated. They want the decent lives people have in Scandinavia. Now let's step in late as it is and push for Bernie, but be equally energetic in helping young Bernie supporters not feel defeated if he loses the election, because he has significantly altered our sense of what is possible in the US despite the tsunami of self-interest money.
Sent: Sunday, April 3, 2016 4:39 PM
In early 2015 I urged Sr Dems to spend that year and 2016 studying the candidates, and then work for the best one, and then work equally hard for whoever won the Primary. We now know the US public was not acquiescent but only temporarily defeated. They want the decent lives people have in Scandinavia. Now let's step in late as it is and push for Bernie, but be equally energetic in helping young Bernie supporters not feel defeated if he loses the election, because he has significantly altered our sense of what is possible in the US despite the tsunami of self-interest money.
Dick Bennett <j.dick.bennett@gmail.com>
Hillary Clinton and the Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations
- In These Times inthesetimes.com/.../hillary-clinton-and-the-soft-bigotry-of-low-expectati...
Apr 19, 2016 - DONATE. BY Theo Anderson.
This is a thumbnail
portrait of an idealistic young woman who lowered her expectations and possibilities
and then ran for president against an elderly man who advocates all she once
hoped for. It is also a mirror to hold
up to the Democratic Party today.
I recommend In These Times for anti-war, civil
liberties, women, colored, unions, working people. –Dick
Reply to Anderson by Joyce Hale, who never averts her eyes
from hard truth.
"her election wouldn’t be a tragedy."
I wish I could believe this article's final assessment to be
true. I fear that any election that does not fully return the Democrat's
former New Deal policies and more to address our litany of problems
ASAP would be a tragedy of the first order. It would be the missed
opportunity we will not have again in time to make an impact. Time is not
on our side as climate change and the buildup of military activity continue at
an increasing rate. We are creating enemies faster than we can kill them
off. Once the TPP and TTIP are locked down the erosion of
our sovereignty with the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS)
tribunals will be assured. As more voters desperate for change see for
themselves the suppression and fraud blatantly practiced in the 2016
Democrat primaries and caucuses, the revulsion will make it hard if not
impossible to unite the Party. The policy of incrementalism that is
advocated by Hillary does not recognize the urgency to change course. It is that
same incrementalism that has slowly altered or removed New Deal policies
and shifted the Democratic Party into Republican Light.
ART HOBSON REPLYING TO STANTON (sorry I failed
to copy Stanton, but Art’s essay can stand alone)
|
9:55 AM (1 hour ago)
|
|
||
|
||||
Dear Sam, Michael, and others
-
John Stanton's article shows signs of being written too hastily
despite being published online for millions to read, which always makes me
suspicious. John Stanton is strongly committed to a particular
ideological “side,” which again rouses suspicions that the article is
over-the-top. And introducing, based on David Talbot’s book, the old
chestnut about CIA involvement in the Kennedy assassination doesn’t help.
Nevertheless, the stories about Hillary’s history ring true and
are in line with my own meager knowledge. The emailed comments of Herb
Hirsch, John Weiss, and Michael Totten all provide confirmation of the basic
truth of the article.
Hillary is clearly committed to America’s long-term, overly
aggressive, overly militarized foreign policy. She has made huge
mistakes, so far as I can tell, in supporting the Iraq war, helping to
overthrow Gaddafi in Libya, and advocating the U.S. establish a no-fly zone in
Syria. Her foreign policy will reverse the relative (but still too
hawkish) sanity of Obama’s pull-back from all-out Mideast war all the time,
providing further encouragement and support for the Islamic State and
heightening our present situation of permanent war.
But what does Stanton propose we do about it? Bernie is
not going to get nominated. I’m glad he’s staying in the race, but it’s
now only in order to get more delegates in order to influence the Democratic
convention. And I doubt that Bernie would have been able to turn around
America’s permanent war culture. America's commitment to being tough goes
much deeper than mere politics, and even deeper than the financial interests
that Stanton points to. It is centuries old, extending at least to
pre-revolutionary 18th-century days when we inherited the Scots-Irish
“borderer” culture via massive immigration from central England and Northern
Ireland. It is religious, cultural. It’s the culture of the South
and the Midwest and it’s had us by the throat for centuries. Its most
prominent legacy was the Civil War. It’s expressed in America's delight
(which I must confess I often share) with John Wayne movies, football, and
military heroes. If you want to quickly learn where we’re coming from,
google on “Drink, Pray, Fight, Fuck” by Joe Bageant.
Am I supposed to not vote? Am I supposed to vote for
Trump? The first would be self-defeating, and the second would be even
worse. I will vote for Hillary, although I might simultaneously be in
the streets protesting against her warlike foreign policy. Those who want
to do something about the Hillary dilemma need to look far beyond the coming election.
If the planet is to survive, American culture must be changed.
There are signs (for instance in the pro-Bernie movement among young
people, the growing atheism of young people, and the beginning of realism about
global warming and its fossil-fuel source) that things are changing. A
specific feature of the American system that we can quickly change and that
would make a huge difference would be promotion of more political parties by
requiring run-off votes for Senate and House elections. We need at least
two additional parties: progressive on the left (Bernie), and
conservative on the right (Cruz).
Cheers - Art
I
hope you all will build a structure of facts about HC and send them to Arkansas
Democrats. We must block Trump, but we
need a much better HC. Thanks, Dick
NATIONAL CRITICS OF CLINTON
CHOMSKY NO AND YES
|
Diane Johnstone, Queen
of Chaos: The Misadventures of Hillary Clinton.
AK, 2016.
U.S.
wars are getting repetitive. Always the same old scenario. The mainstream media
alert public opinion to the latest "villain" supposedly threatening
to slaughter "his own people". The U.S. does the job instead with its
drones and missiles. The new "villain" is soon forgotten, but his
country is left in a shambles, with competing fanatics vying to dominate the
chaos. Something new is needed. How about a woman War President? Hillary Rodham
Clinton has painstakingly groomed herself for the role. Her record as Secretary
of State shows that she is fully qualified to be the first woman to be known as
the "mother of all drones" or even to launch World War III.
Praise
for Queen of Chaos:
“Veteran
journalist Diana Johnstone captures the imperial worldview of Hillary Clinton
in memorable detail. Hillary the Hawk, as U.S. Senator and Secretary of State,
never saw a weapons systems she did not support nor a U.S. war practice she did
not endorse. This included her hyper-aggressive launch of the war on Libya
(against the opposition of Secretary of Defense Robert Gates) and the resulting
sprawling chaos, violence and weapons dispersal spilling beyond Libya’s
war-torn society to larger regions of central Africa. Johnstone documents
Hillary Clinton as ‘the top salesperson for the ruling oligarchy’ and ‘the
favorite candidate of the War Party.’ That is what is at stake in November
2016.”—Ralph Nader, author of Return to Sender: Unanswered Letters to the
President
"If
you are still fooled by Bill and Hillary Clinton, as well as the Democratic
Party, then Diana Johnstone's book will dispel the myth that either they or the
party are redeemable. Hillary, like her husband, Barack Obama and the
Democratic leadership, are controlled by corporate money and willing
accomplices in the crimes of empire. Her appeal to gender holds no more promise
for the poor, the working class or the wretched of the earth we tyrannize
around the globe than Obama's appeal to race. The predatory engines of
corporate capitalism and the security and surveillance state will run as
smoothly under her direction as they did under her predecessor. If you doubt
this, read this book." —Chris Hedges,
author of Wages of Rebellion
“Diana
Johnstone's Queen of Chaos is an
excellent source of information for Hillary Clinton's political rivals. But
it's much more than that. It offers very perceptive accounts of US foreign
policy of the last 25 years, particularly the complex and highly controversial
cases of Libya, Yugoslavia, Honduras and Russia, as well as the issue of women
in power. 'Is there something wrong with American women,' Johnstone asks, 'that
they need Hillary Clinton as President to make them feel better?'"
—William Blum, author of Killing Hope
Who is
Hillary Clinton? Two Decades of Answers From the Left
INTRODUCTION BY KATHA POLLITT. EDITED BY RICHARD KREITNER
Who is Hillary Clinton? is a fascinating
time-lapse depiction of the leading
Democratic presidential candidate as seen from the left. But it is also
much more than that. A carefully-edited anthology of The Nation’s coverage of
Clinton’s career, it’s a rigorous and painstaking study of one our most
enigmatic public figures. It is a history of our time, and a must-read for the
2016 election season.
Contributors
include David Corn, Erica Jong, Christopher Hitchens, Michael Tomasky, William
Greider, Ari Berman, Barbara Ehrenreich, Chris Hayes, Jessica Valenti, Richard
Kim, Joan Walsh, Jamelle Bouie, Doug Henwood, Heather Digby Parton, Michelle
Goldberg, and many more.
“Hillary
Clinton is a Rorschach test of our attitudes—including our unconscious
ones—about women, feminism, sex and marriage, to say nothing of the Democratic
Party, progressive politics, the United States and capitalism,” writes Nation
columnist Katha Pollitt in the book’s introduction. “This collection of Nation
articles won’t answer all the readers’ questions, but at the very least in
brings the Rorschach blot into clearer focus.”
WILLIAM
BLUM ON HILLARY CLINTON MARCH 2016
William Blum The Anti-Empire Report #144
By
William Blum, March 11th, 2016
American exceptionalism presents an election made in hell
If the American presidential election winds up with Hillary
Clinton vs. Donald Trump, and my passport is confiscated, and I’m somehow
FORCED to choose one or the other, or I’m PAID to do so, paid well … I would
vote for Trump.
My main concern is foreign policy. American foreign
policy is
the greatest threat to world peace, prosperity, and the environment. And when
it comes to foreign policy, Hillary
Clinton is an unholy disaster. From Iraq and Syria to Libya and Honduras
the world is a much worse place because of her; so much so that I’d call her a
war criminal who should be prosecuted. And not much better can be expected on
domestic issues from this woman who was paid $675,000 by Goldman Sachs – one of
the most reactionary, anti-social corporations in this sad world – for four
speeches and even more than that in political donations in recent years. Add to
that Hillary’s willingness to serve for six years on the board of Walmart while
her husband was governor of Arkansas. Can we expect to change corporate
behavior by taking their money?
The Los Angeles Times ran an editorial the day after the multiple primary
elections of March 1 which began: “Donald Trump
is not fit to be president of the United States,” and then declared: “The
reality is that Trump has no experience whatsoever in government.”
When I need to have my car fixed I look for a mechanic with
experience with my type of auto. When I have a medical problem I prefer a
doctor who specializes in the part of my body that’s ill. But when it comes to
politicians, experience means nothing. The only thing that counts is the
person’s ideology. Who would you
sooner vote for, a person with 30 years in Congress who doesn’t share your
political and social views at all, is even hostile to them, or someone who has
never held public office before but is an ideological comrade on every
important issue? Clinton’s 12 years in high government positions carries no
weight with me.
The Times continued about Trump: “He has shamefully little knowledge
of the issues facing the country and the world.”
Again, knowledge is trumped (no pun intended) by ideology. As
Secretary of State (January 2009-February 2013), with great access to
knowledge, Clinton played a key role in the 2011 destruction of Libya’s modern and secular welfare
state, sending it crashing in utter chaos into a failed state, leading to the
widespread dispersal throughout North African and Middle East hotspots of the
gigantic arsenal of weaponry that Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi had
accumulated. Libya is now a haven for terrorists, from al Qaeda to ISIS,
whereas Gaddafi had been a leading foe of terrorists.
What good did
Secretary of State Clinton’s knowledge do? It was enough for her to know that
Gaddafi’s Libya, for several reasons, would never be a properly obedient client
state of Washington. Thus it was that the United States, along with NATO,
bombed the people of Libya almost daily for more than six months, giving as an
excuse that Gaddafi was about to invade Benghazi, the Libyan center of his
opponents, and so the United States was thus saving the people of that city
from a massacre. The American people and the American media of course swallowed
this story, though no convincing evidence of the alleged impending massacre has
ever been presented. (The nearest thing to an official US government account of
the matter – a Congressional Research Service report on events in Libya for the
period – makes no mention at all of the threatened massacre.)
The Western
intervention in Libya was one that the New York Times said Clinton had
“championed”, convincing Obama in “what was arguably her moment of greatest
influence as secretary of state.” All the knowledge she was privy
to did not keep her from this disastrous mistake in Libya. And the same can be
said about her support of placing regime change in Syria ahead of supporting the
Syrian government in its struggle against ISIS and other terrorist groups. Even
more disastrous was the 2003 US invasion of Iraq which she as a senator supported. Both policies were of course
clear violations of international law and the UN Charter.
Another
foreign-policy “success” of Mrs. Clinton, which her swooning followers will
ignore, the few that even know about it, is the coup ousting the moderately
progressive Manuel Zelaya of Honduras in June, 2009. A tale told
many times in Latin America. The downtrodden masses finally put into power a
leader committed to reversing the status quo, determined to try to put an end
to up to two centuries of oppression … and before long the military overthrows
the democratically-elected government, while the United States – if not the
mastermind behind the coup – does nothing to prevent it or to punish the coup
regime, as only the United States can punish; meanwhile Washington officials
pretend to be very upset over this “affront to democracy”. (See Mark Weisbrot’s
“Top Ten Ways You Can Tell Which Side the United States Government is On With
Regard to the Military Coup in Honduras”.)
In her 2014 memoir, “Hard Choices”, Clinton reveals just how
unconcerned she was about restoring Zelaya to his rightful office: “In the
subsequent days [after the coup] I spoke with my counterparts around the
hemisphere … We strategized on a plan to restore order in Honduras and ensure
that free and fair elections could be held quickly and legitimately, which
would render the question of Zelaya moot.”
The question of Zelaya was anything but moot. Latin American
leaders, the United Nations General Assembly, and other international bodies
vehemently demanded his immediate return to office. Washington, however,
quickly resumed normal diplomatic relations with the new right-wing police
state, and Honduras has since become a major impetus for the child migrants
currently pouring into the United States.
The headline from Time magazine’s report on Honduras at the close of that year
(December 3, 2009) summed it up as follows: “Obama’s Latin America Policy Looks
Like Bush’s”.
And Hillary
Clinton looks like a conservative. And has for many years; going back to at
least the 1980s, while the wife of the Arkansas governor, when she strongly
supported the death-squad torturers known as the Contras, who were the empire’s
proxy army in Nicaragua.
Then, during
the 2007 presidential primary, America’s venerable conservative magazine,
William Buckley’s National Review, ran an editorial by Bruce Bartlett. Bartlett was a policy
adviser to President Ronald Reagan, a treasury official under President George
H.W. Bush, and a fellow at two of the leading conservative think-tanks, the
Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute – You get the picture? Bartlett
tells his readers that it’s almost certain that the Democrats will win the
White House in 2008. So what to do? Support the most conservative Democrat. He
writes: “To right-wingers willing to look beneath what probably sounds to them
like the same identical views of the Democratic candidates, it is pretty clear
that Hillary Clinton is the most conservative.”
During the
same primary we also heard from America’s leading magazine for the corporate
wealthy, Fortune, with a cover featuring a
picture of Mrs. Clinton and the headline: “Business Loves Hillary”.
And what do
we have in 2016? Fully 116 members
of the Republican Party’s national security community, many of them veterans of
Bush administrations, have signed an open letter threatening that, if Trump is
nominated, they will all desert, and some will defect – to Hillary Clinton!
“Hillary is the lesser evil, by a large margin,” says Eliot Cohen of the Bush
II State Department. Cohen helped line up neocons to sign the “Dump-Trump”
manifesto. Another signer, foreign-policy ultra-conservative author Robert
Kagan, declared: “The only choice will be to vote for Hillary Clinton.”
The only choice? What’s wrong with Bernie Sanders or Jill Stein,
the Green Party candidate? … Oh, I see, not conservative enough.
And Mr. Trump? Much
more a critic of US foreign policy than Hillary or Bernie. He speaks of Russia
and Vladimir Putin as positive forces and allies, and would be much less likely
to go to war against Moscow than Clinton would. He declares that he would be
“evenhanded ” when it comes to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (as
opposed to Clinton’s boundless support of Israel). He’s opposed to calling
Senator John McCain a “hero”, because he was captured. (What other politician
would dare say a thing like that?)
He calls Iraq “a complete disaster”, condemning not only George
W. Bush but the neocons who surrounded him. “They lied. They said there were
weapons of mass destruction and there were none. And they knew there were none.
There were no weapons of mass destruction.” He even questions the idea that
“Bush kept us safe”, and adds that “Whether you like Saddam or not, he used to
kill terrorists.”
Yes, he’s personally obnoxious. I’d have a very hard time being
his friend. Who cares?
BERNIE NOT HC BETTER FOR WORLD
PEACE
While I don't have an article to
compare Hillary directly on the five top points named as to why Bernie Sanders
would be a peace president, I thought you would appreciate this list. It
clearly deals with the military budget.
Clinton Betrayed Democracy, Economic Justice, and Women and
Children in Honduras
Mark
Karlin, BuzzFlash at Truthout 3-13-16: The
repercussions to Honduras of Clinton siding with the military have led to it
becoming one of the most corrupt and violence-ridden nations in the world.
LOCAL
PROTEST TO HONDURAN COUPS AND ASSASSINATION OF BERTA CACERAS.
US BACKED HONDURAN MILITARY:
RELEASE GUSTAVO CASTRO SOTO IMMEDIATELY
Friday, March 11, 2016
- 2pm to 5pm Federal
Bldg, 35 E. Mtn. St Fayetteville, AR
Environmental
activist Berta Caceres was assassinated in her home last week on March 3, 2016
while her good friend and fellow activist, Gustavo Castro Soto, from Chiapas,
Mexico was visiting. The Honduran military also shot Gustavo twice &
assumed he was dead. He feigned death and found his way to the Mexican embassy
in the Honduran capitol and received medical attention. When the Mexican
ambassador took him to the airport the Honduran military seized Gustavo and has
held him against his will since March 4th.
We gather to demand the US govt make their agent Honduras military
release Gustavo. Allow him to return to his home-Mexico.
US Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton during Obama's first term in
2009 made no objection to the June 28, 2009 military coup ousting progressive
Honduran President Manuel Zelaya. Honduras became the deadliest country in the
Western Hemisphere since then.
this action sponsored by Central
America Peace Action (CAPA)
Amnesty International also has issued an Urgent
Action Appeal that can be downloaded at:
http://www.amnestyusa.org/get-involved/take-action-now/honduras-allow-gustavo-castro-soto-to-return-to-mexico-ua-5016
HILLARY AND ISRAEL
Hillary working for Netanyahu...
BLACKS SHOULD SUPPORT BERNIE
Greenpeace Asks Hillary Clinton to Say No to Fossil
Fuel Money
Whether on
Twitter or on the rope line at a campaign event, people are using any means
necessary to ask Hillary Clinton to stop taking money from
the fossil fuel industry. This week, Greenpeace tried a
new method—flying a banner attached to a thermal airship launched 1,000 feet
into the Las Vegas skies days before the Nevada caucus.
The
Greenpeace A.E. Bates thermal airship flies over Las Vegas, Nevada Feb. 16,
2016 urging Hillary Clinton to reject fossil fuel money. The airship carried
two messages, one for all candidates and local politicians which reads “Don’t
Gamble With Our Democracy” and a second message to Secretary Clinton urging her
to “Say No To Fossil Fuel Money”. Photo credit: Steve Marcus / Greenpeace.
Last month,
Greenpeace and more than 20 partners launched a pledge asking
all candidates to commit to fixing democracy by rejecting campaign
contributions from fossil fuel companies and protecting voting rights. After
outreach to all the presidential campaigns, Sen.
Sanders is still the only Democratic candidate to sign the
pledge. No Republican candidates have signed it.
Secretary
Clinton responded to
Greenpeace’s request last week committing to initiate a process that would
reverse the effect of the Citizens United decision and restore the full
protections of the Voting Rights Act. However, the statement did not include a
commitment to reject fossil fuel money. Secretary Clinton will attend a
fundraiser tomorrow afternoon in Las Vegas and we’ll be there too asking
her to say no to fossil fuel money.
Tell all the presidential
candidates to say no to fossil fuel money and protect voting
rights—two big steps on the way to fixing our democracy!
Contents 2nd
Anthology for 2016 Democratic Presidential Contender, Hillary Clinton, Feb. 19,
2016 http://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2016/02/hillary-clinton-for-president-pro-and.html
Contents 1st
Anthology June 12, 2015
Dick,
Introduction
Ms.
Clinton’s Campaign Letter
Breaking
Good News: Clinton vs. Citizens United
Google
Search: Biography
Google
Search: Families and Children
Rev.
of Two Biographies
Bernstein
Gerth and Natta
Rev.
of Parry-Giles, Hillary Clinton in the
News
Essay
by Susan Douglas, Clinton and the Patriarchy
END 3RD
ANTHOLOGY ON HILLARY CLINTON, THIS ONE COVERING THE FIRST FIVE-AND-A-HALF
MONTHS OF JUNE 2016
No comments:
Post a Comment