Author: Slingshot Collective

As the war in Iraq drags into its fifth year, popular dissatisfaction has solidified even while the US political system has shown itself incapable of finding a way out. Recent direct action at the port of Tacoma, Washington aimed at physically blocking the war by blockading the loading of arms onto ships headed to Iraq provides a hopeful alternative to the republicrat paralysis while the bodies pile higher.

It is increasingly absurd to call US involvement in Iraq a “war.” What started as an unprovoked war of aggression — justified based on lies about non-existent weapons of mass destruction and ties to the 9-11 attacks, and really designed to steal Iraqi oil — has devolved into a clumsy occupation in the middle of a complex civil war. It’s a civil war with confusing, shifting fronts — and it is totally unclear what the US regime hopes to accomplish or which “side” US forces are trying to assist. The US fights for the Shiite controlled government, yet against the Shiite death squad controlled by it and the Shiite militias and political parties that make it up. Simultaneously, US forces try to prevent total ethnic cleansing of Sunnis, yet wage a brutal war against a popular Sunni insurgency. The US condemns Iran while aiding Iraqi forces allied with Iran. The contradictions go on and on.

In the end, the US has managed to unite Iraqis around one key conclusion — that the US has utterly destroyed their country through unforgivable incompetence and arrogance and that US forces should get the hell out. As Slingshot goes to press, a hundred thousand Iraqis were in the streets on the anniversary of the fall of Baghdad demanding “US Out!” Iraqi public opinion polls file support for the occupation in the low single digits. So much for being met with flowers. Bush’s reaction is to escalate and add troops.

Four years after the invasion and billions of dollars later, water, electricity, medical care and employment possibilities are grossly worse than they were under Saddam’s regime, even while he was under crippling economic sanctions. The most basic freedom in life — freedom to go outside without being killed — does not exist in Iraq. The US can no longer contend that its forces are “rebuilding” Iraq.

The best way to understand the war at this point is that Bush continues to fight with an eye towards his political “legacy” and not with any real hope that the war can somehow be “won.” Halliburton corporation — VP Cheney’s well connected previous employer — recently declared its job “finished” in Iraq and left the country. When Halliburton leaves, you know that Bush and his cronies have concluded that Iraq is lost.

Bush is now intent on running out the clock — keeping US troops in Iraq until the end of his presidency so that right-wing historians can later conclude that someone other than Bush lost the war. Twenty years from now, you’ll hear the Rush Limbaugh of the future blame the loss of Iraq on the media, on Democrats, on the peace movement — hell, on Jane Fonda! They’ll reason that Bush couldn’t have lost it, because he kept fighting, and troops only withdrew in disgrace after he left office. “It was someone later who pulled the plug . . . .”

The Bush regime cares more about its legacy than millions of Iraqis or tens of thousands of US solders who it has needlessly sacrificed — killed or permanently disabled with traumatic brain injuries, amputations, post traumatic stress disorder, or worse.

The mainstream US political system is broken. While the overwhelming majority of the public has reached the obvious conclusion — that the war is unwinnable and not worth fighting in the first place — this resounding public sentiment is not reflected in the formal institutions of government. The Democrats are too scared of being blamed for losing the war to take any real action to cut the funding. Instead, they debate, delay and set 2008 time-tables — playing right into Bush’s hands — permitting him to delay until he is out of office.

The only hope comes from those not in the halls of power — regular people like folks near Tacoma, Washington. In May, 2006, the Army’s attempt to load armored vehicles onto ships bound for Iraq in Olympia, Washington were met with a prolonged blockade and 40 arrests.

In March, the Army decided to avoid a repeat in Olympia and instead load 1,000 vehicles, including 300 armored Stryker vehicles from the 4th Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division based at Fort Lewis, at the port of Tacoma, a few miles north of Olympia. The army denied their decision had anything to do with the Olympia protests. (“The executive officer of the 833rd Transportation Battalion . . . declined to comment on why the equipment moved through Tacoma instead of Olympia, saying it was classified” according to the Olympian.) The effectiveness of last May’s tactics in Olympia are undeniable.

Tacoma mobilized overnight, organizing a round-the-clock protest at the port that resulted in three arrests. Demonstrators included members of the Tacoma Students for a Democratic Society, recently revived after a 35 year hiatus.

This is by no means the only direct action underway against the war. At least 140 people have been arrested in numerous actions around the country aimed at putting pressure on individual members of Congress. In San Francisco, activists have camped on the street outside House speaker Nancy Pelosi’s house demanding to talk to her about the war — she refused saying “my home is my home.” Huh? Around the country, there have been protests or office occupations against John McCain, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Rahm Emanuel, Marcy Kaptur, David Obey, Richard Durbin and Barbara Mikulski.

You can’t wait for politicians to end a war when they and their wealthy contributors are making money hand over fist off the killed and it is other people’s sons and daughters who are dying. Five years into the war, silence is complicity with the slaughter — only physically confronting the war machine and preventing it from operating can end this war. Bush is escalating the war — it is up to us to escalate the resistance.

Slingshot is an independent, radical, newspaper published in Berkeley since 1988.

Sometimes travelers who’ve seen our Organizer and paper all over the place visit our collective expecting to find some kind of huge, well organized, experienced group and they’re rather surprised to find out how tiny and rag-tag we are — a cluttered office, antique equipment and sometimes only three or four people at meetings keeping things going.

The gap between what people think about our project and the reality causes a problem for us — people treat us like we’re an institution that magically provides “services” and they’re passive consumers. In this model, the consumers may wonder why we’re not providing more quality service, never stopping to think that perhaps behind the Slingshot Wizard of Oz are a few volunteers barely keeping up with the orders.

For example, a number of folks have written us recently saying our cover art on recent projects wasn’t so good. Our response: PLEASE create a cover and send it to us! The only way we get covers is if someone draws ’em — we have no consistent artists in our collective nor a pool of artists. Since we don’t pay anyone (including ourselves), it is hard for us to find everything from art to articles.

And yet we keep publishing! To make this issue, people came out of the woodwork from everywhere at the last minute to work hard and make the issue a reality. It was as if a secret “underground collective in hiding” briefly surfaced. Doing this project is one of the funnest and most inspiring moments in our lives — there’s a huge sense of community and shared creativity up in our tiny loft.

Recently local paper Faultlines questioned whether it is worth it to still be doing a print publication in the internet era. They noted grimly the number of publications that went under recently and admitted the long gap between issues nearly put them on that list. One thing that drained and helped destroy morale for their project was trying to raise the funds needed to regularly publish. We are by no means immune from similar dilemmas.

As soon as we finish this issue, we’re going to scramble to make the 2008 Organizer so we can pay for the paper. Please send us your suggestions for dates, radical contact listings, DIY features for the back, or anything else you want to see in the Organizer. The deadline is July 31. It should be out around October 1.

Slingshot is always looking for new writers, artists, editors, photographers, translators, distributors & independent thinkers to make this paper. If you send something written, please be open to being edited.

Editorial decisions are made by the Slingshot collective, but not all the articles reflect the opinions of all collective members. We welcome debate and constructive criticism.

Thanks to all who made this: Astrogirl, Aunt B’s Catering, Eggplant, Glenn, Hefty Lefty, Hunter, kathryn, Molly, PB, Rachel & Terri.

Slingshot New Volunteer Meeting

Volunteers interested in getting involved with Slingshot can come to the new volunteer meeting on Sunday, August 19 at 4 p.m. at the Long Haul in Berkeley (see below).

Article Deadline and Next Issue Date

Submit your articles for issue 95 by September 15, 2007 at 3 p.m.

Volume 1, Number 94, Circulation 16,000

Printed April 19, 2007

Slingshot Newspaper

Sponsored by Long Haul

3124 Shattuck Ave. Berkeley, CA 94705

Phone: (510) 540-0751

slingshot@tao.ca • www.slingshot.tao.ca

Circulation Information

Slingshot is free in the Bay Area and is available at Long Haul and Bound Together Books (SF), plus lots of other places. Subscriptions to Slingshot are free to prisoners, low income and anyone in the USA who has a Slingshot organizer, or cost $1 per issue. International is $2.50 per issue. Back issues are available for the cost of postage. National free distribution program: Outside of the Bay Area, we’ll mail a stack of free copies of Slingshot to distributors, infoshops, bookstores and random friendly individuals for FREE in the US if they give ’em out for free.

Circulation Information

Slingshot is free in the Bay Area and is available at Long Haul and Bound Together Books (SF), plus lots of other places. Contact us or come by if you want to distribute Slingshot for free in the Bay Area.

Subscriptions to Slingshot are free to prisoners, low income and anyone in the USA who has a Slingshot organizer, or cost $1 per issue. International is $2.50 per issue. Back issues are available for the cost of postage. National free distribution program: Outside of the Bay Area, we’ll mail a stack of free copies of Slingshot to distributors, infoshops, bookstores and random friendly individuals for FREE in the US if they give ’em out for free.

Back issue Project

We’ll send you a random assortment of back issues for the cost of postage: send us $2 for 2 lbs or $3 for 3 lbs. Free if you’re an infoshop or library. Or drop by our office. Send cash or check to Slingshot to: Slingshot 3124 Shattuck Ave. Berkeley, CA 94705.

Often known for their oral tradition, the Native people of the United States will have many stories to tell of this time, particularly pertaining to their struggles in care taking of the planet. The years of counter revolution these past ten years have pitted a people who live in accordance to the planet, against the forces of unchecked authority eager to obtain complete control of the earth’s resources via corporations and/or government.

A most vivid example can be seen in the recent fight in Arizona to preserve and protect the San Francisco peaks. Native people had a victory March 12th in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that reaffirmed the integrity of the peaks as a space sacred to tribes such as the Navajo and the Hopi. They hold the land as a cornerstone for origin myths and a place for renewal and reconnection to the inside worlds. As of now the Forestry Department, who was helping push for development on the peaks, hasn’t decided to appeal, leaving a moment’s respite.

The impetus of the development is itself a result of climate change and how it hampers the insanity of consumer culture. The ski seasons have been growing shorter and shorter compelling the Snow Bowl on Humphrey’s peak to scheme ways to ensure a longer tourist season. The proposal included spreading recycled water from nearby Phoenix, providing the daunting image of shit water being used to build children’s snowmen. The Forestry Department basically proceeded to help the ski resort despite the contradictions that arise from their noting that “the tribes believe that the water, soil, plants and animals from the peaks have spiritual and medicinal properties.” That’s not to imply that skiers don’t derive an at-oneness from doing their thing, but it begs the question, at what price, or rather at whose expense?

The most recent fight coming down the pipe line out west is with the idea to build a Geothermal power plant on Medicine Lake in Northeastern California. This bright idea is being pushed by the Calpine Energy Corporation who already lost their proposal in the 9th circuit court back in Nov. of 2006. They are seeking an appeal but the people opposed to it held a protest April 6th 2007 in front of the Department of Justice. Around 150 people showed up delivering the message for the DOJ to respect the 9th Circuit ruling, and are asking that they do not file the appeal. If there is a retrial and the natives lose, they will have to take their case to the supreme court.

On the surface Geothermal may seem to be a practical solution to an American populace soon to be hung up on energy crisis and climate change. Often touted as a Green Energy for it’s neutral carbon emissions, this tag line may be soon magnified in the American imagination and thus legitimize pushing it through. But simple entreaties such as curbing energy use or enforcing corporate accountability has a tendency to get buried under during times of heated public debate.

The Geothermal plant is being sold to the public as a “Green” energy source, without any of the contentiousness being revealed. They include the surrounding area being clear-cut to build toxic slump ponds, roads, pipelines, cooling towers and the tallest building in Northeastern California. The building would be fully lit and generating noise around the clock. This will disturb the present natural harmony as well as create a blemish in what native people consider to be a citadel. The Geothermal plant would have to drill 9,000 ft. into the earth extracting hot water or steam from the earth’s crust. The run-off from this process could taint the near by water supply with a variety of toxins. Most notable among them is arsenic, mercury, and hydrogen sulfide. The water supply of Medicine Lake connects to the Pitt River which flows into the Sacramento River, which then flows into the Bay of San Francisco. The hard question not being posed could be; do we have lights and computers running on while not being used, or do we have drinkable water?

Both court victories are promising but stand on unstable ground. When the 9th circuit ruled against Calpine’s proposal the Bureau of Land Management, who was helping push forward the plan, stated to the Pitt River Tribes that they would not appeal the decision. Then without notice to those tribes they filed an appeal. Native people have learned to not believe what they are told by the federal government and saw little out of character from such a maneuver. But the fact that the Forestry Department is a stake holder in both the San Francisco Peaks and Medicine Lake should caution us that the plans will not be easily put to bed. Another factor is that the laws today have little regard for the protection for Native American sacred spaces.

While considering the treatment of the first nation people one encounters the most naked discrimination. People like Native Hawaiians were forbidden to even teach their language as late as the 1970’s. The right to practice ancient ceremonies such as sweat lodges were not allowed in prisons until about ten years ago. And around that time debate raged about Native people’s right to use peyote during ceremonies, linking it to the paranoia of the drug war. All of these examples are practices a people have known for thousands of years on this continent and to continue to erase them is to continue in the practice of erasing a people. So it goes when questions of Native people’s sovereignty and acknowledgment of sacred spaces are raised the response is more than slow. Probably because the property centric culture of America can identify with protecting a church or a Starbucks, but can’t see the value of the land as it was before those entities existed.

Americans can greatly benefit from having a belief system that values nature and get off its addiction of profit for profit’s sake. While Native people are hardly asking you to give up technology and live a primitive lifestyle, you could benefit in not being so goddamn wasteful.

As the fight truly comes home and we are faced with compliance with the state sanctioned consumer rat mazes that are in effect open air prisons, or with the totality of life on earth and their various rhythms. The government may not take seriously the petitions of Native People alone, but it will be hard to avoid the demands of a broad range of the populace, in solidarity giving voice issue by issue. Unfettered development locally has threaten the Oak Grove in Berkeley and the Shell Mounds in Emeryville and Vallejo. The potential is here that we too can share in the story to the next seven generations in how we moved decisively and effectively in not spoiling our relation with the earth during this time of transition.

Saturday the 7th of April was a good day for the San Francisco community housing rights movement and a bad day for the squat they came together to defend on 23rd and Treat Street in San Francisco’s Mission District. Homes Not Jails, the SF Tenants Union and other groups got together to defend a squat that was evicted in 2003 through the now notorious Ellis Act. The Ellis Act has been used to evict untold numbers of longtime residents to make way for the real estate boom that came with the dot-com wave of silly money, a fragile bubble economy and a wave of speculation seemingly bent on destroying community in its wake before ultimately collapsing. Long time residents of SF like myself have been pushed out by skyrocketing rent and a wave of relatively conservative, ethnically homogenous, technically adept people have changed the social landscape of San Francisco in their wake.

The action began when a number of squatters, including a homeless youth, an activist clergywoman, a member of the housing advocacy group the SF Tenants’ Union, and squatter group “Homes Not Jails” member Ted Gullickson broke into 2065 23rd street and spent the night in the building.

The following day, about 150 people gathered for song, dance and speeches outside the 24th street commuter rail station. The protest sang and chanted its way to the building where the squatters unfurled banners from the second story window demanding the repeal of the Ellis Act and a stop to the eviction of seniors.

“We’re demanding that the city use its legal powers to take over this building, to return the evicted tenants, and to make the units available for affordable housing,” said Gullickson at the rally. “This building has been vacant for about four years at this point. If landlords are going to take our buildings and leave them empty, we’ll just take them back.”

The Ellis Act goes back to 1986 and supposedly exists in order to allow a landowner to go out of the rental housing business. It takes a lot of power away from tenants, where rent control is in effect, and gives the owner a pretext for evicting tenants, who are barred from using defenses like “retaliation” (eviction of a tenant who demands repairs, for example) to protest the eviction. The intent of the law, according to the SF Rent Board User’s Guide is “to allow owners an absolute right to exit the landlord business while holding on to their property.”

Homes Not Jails was founded in 1992, according to their website, “to advocate for the use of vacant and abandoned housing for people who are homeless. With people literally dying on the sidewalks in front of vacant buildings, housing advocates, homeless advocates, and people who were homeless came together to find ways to utilize vacant buildings.” The SF chapter was very active in the 90’s seemingly squatting a property every week, and getting evicted about as often, but they persevered and some people even got to hold on to their buildings. HNJ also operates in Boston and Washington, DC. One of the main challenges that squatters face is being taken seriously by police and being afforded due process.

Many of the same laws that make squatting a viable and even attractive option for activists, new arrivals, young people, immigrants, bohemians and drug addicts in cities like Philadelphia, London, Barcelona and Helsinki also exist in California Law. Essentially, since every tenant is theoretically eligible to a legal eviction procedure, squatters can enter a vacant building illegally, and establish tenancy by living there, receiving mail, renovating the house and paying bills. The onus is then on the property owner to provide a legal framework for eviction. Some owners even allow squatters to remain in return for payment of property taxes or a promise to leave when the building is renovated at a later date. Responsible squatters can be a boon for homeowners, since a vacant house accumulates standing water, rot, mold and is subject to damage from pipes freezing and debris accumulation, especially on the roof, all of which are expensive for the owner and can lead to irreparable damage to the building. The city governments of Helsinki and Trondhiem in northern Europe even recognize that squatters have helped to preserve the architectural history of these cities by preserving buildings that the city government could not afford to preserve by itself.

But San Francisco is not Helsinki, and if the American law is notorious for enshrining private property as holy, dot-com era San Francisco is even harder on people who fall on the wrong side of the class divide. “This wouldn’t be an eviction,” Officer Flagherty told me while overseeing the April 7th eviction. “They don’t have any legal right to be there. There’s a difference between an eviction and people taking over an unoccupied building. That would be trespass.” And trespass, unlike tenancy, IS something that police are legally empowered to resolve on the spot.

The tradition of cops and landowners making judicial decisions leads to heartbreak and homelessness for others as well. Illegal immigrants, legal immigrants with limited knowledge of English, the elderly and the mentally handicapped are all routinely denied their rights as tenants because police are ignorant of the law or simply wish to BE the arbiters of the law. The previous occupants of 2065 23rd Street were elderly longtime SF residents.

Claire, one of the squatters of 2065 23rd street wants to see the passage of Senate Bill SB 464, which she says will make it a lot harder for landlords to evict in order to raise rents. The bill would require an owner to possess a property for at least five years before evoking the Ellis Act, making it harder for business people to buy, evict, renovate and re-rent properties at will.

In an ongoing demonstration of integrity, the Memorial Oak Woodland tree-sit, on the University of California (UC) Berkeley campus, continues amongst 42 threatened mature trees (38 of which are native Coast Live Oaks.) The aim is to preserve the grove’s intricate eco-system from being developed into a “Student Athlete High Performance Center.” Also acting with ongoing diligence is the University of California’s Police Department.

The sit began on December 2nd, when a couple of environmental activists occupied the trees in response to UC plans to develop a 155,000 square foot gymnasium, incurring over $250 million dollars in economic costs. This drive to sacrifice the natural world for financial growth is clearly not an isolated incident, but rather is the result of a worsening psychosis, a series of symptoms indicating impaired contact with the reality that the eco-systems they are all too eager to wipe out are in fact intrinsic to the same broader eco-system human life depends on.

Fortunately, the Berkeley tree-sit has grown to 7-10 sitters, a dedicated group of on-sight ground supporters, and local community members providing hot meals, supplies, frequent visits and much love. Despite the Alameda Superior Court’s ruling on January 29th barring UC from moving forward until lawsuits against the plans can be heard, the university’s private police department continues to follow through with orders to shake down those involved. There have been several raids on the protesters involving the destruction and confiscation of property and a growing number of threats, citations and arrests.

Some of the latest arrests have been made under questionable circumstances. Tree-sitter “Tinkerbell” was arrested around 2am on April 6th on trespassing and illegal lodging charges. The young woman was reportedly grabbed while hanging onto the limb of one of the smaller oak trees. Witnesses have said that she was handled roughly by the officers who caused her pants to be pulled down in the process and who held her face down in the dirt while sitting on top of her. Later that morning, Zachery Running Wolf was arrested under alleged warrants for unresolved bicycle tickets. Friends of the political activist suspect the police are targeting Wolf for his political actions and influence. Meanwhile, UC detectives are building up information on those involved with the sit. The activists have grown accustomed to frequent visits from officials. Night and day, those on site can expect to be photographed and questioned. While some choose to not respond, others have been engaging in an ongoing discourse with the authorities, possibly in hopes to find a common ground or at least a common decency. Still, the pressure is building.

At this time there are four lawsuits against the project; three of them have been consolidated into one suit. The City of Berkeley suit is founded mainly on the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act and the California Environmental Quality Act. The grove and stadium exist on top of the Hayward Fault and the plans to build a sports facility on this site have been widely criticized as dangerous and unwise. The California Oak Foundation also filed a motion against the destruction of the grove. With widespread development and a fungal epidemic known as Sudden Oak Death Syndrome, which has killed thousands of oaks since 1995, the site is an important genetic resource and the last remaining grove of Coast Live Oaks in the Berkeley lowlands. A Berkeley law prohibits cutting of Live Oaks with a diameter of greater than 12 inches. The University has no intentions of adhering to Berkeley City law.

There is no denying the direct link between fewer living trees and the rise of global warming. Very simply, fewer trees, no matter how good our football players, means we are that much closer to our own extinction. This, though, does not seem to be convincing evidence for a conglomerate as insatiable as the University of California.

When asking officer Michael Wycoff his thoughts on who would win the dispute, the university or the trees, ground supporters did not know whether to laugh or to cry. “I don’t know. All I know is that these trees aren’t paying my bills.” This is true. While UC Berkeley operates at the rate of ten billion dollars per year, its corporate funds are a steadily increasing part of university research budgets. This institution has a long history of managing nuclear weapons programs and has plans to refurbish the nations nuclear stockpiles. A $500 million dollar deal with BP could turn Strawberry Canyon into a testing facility for genetically modified organisms, and of course, UC would like to replace one of the few remaining green spaces into what some claim will be a hub for the ever growing steroid industry. That all may very well pay young officer Mike’s bills, but there’s nothing in those plans that can actually nourish him or any of us and allow us to experience life. Food, air, water, harmony – these are provided not by any said industry, but rather by planet Earth. Of course, in the end, the trees are going to win. More immediately however, the lives of these trees are currently dependent on the direct protection of the sitters. If the court ruling (a date not yet set but expected for the end of May) lands in favor of the University, the difficulties of continuing the action will heighten. For this it is important that the support be made even stronger through steady community nourishment. If you are in the area, please visit the grove located on Piedmont Ave near Bancroft Ave and the International House. The crew is always welcoming of new company, warm meals and nonperishable food, blankets, instruments, climbing gear, supplies and enthusiasm. If you are elsewhere on the planet, remember that this is a worldwide epidemic. In examining these circumstances, can it be said that human destruction begins with a tendency towards objectifying our planet? When the trees and rivers, the earth and sky become expendable at the prospect of cash and football, we see something has deeply affected the relationship between civilization and much of reality. If we are to get better, to truly regain awareness, and act in harmony, must we not do it with loving intent, exploration, and courage?

In a startling revelation this spring, the University of California announced a $500 million dollar deal with BP (British Petroleum). The agreement would partner industry and academia to solve the problem of global warming. The plan involves building a large research complex in Berkeley’s sensitive Strawberry Creek Canyon, behind the barbed wire of the Berkeley Lawrence Lab. There they will pursue research on genetically engineered (now politely called “synthetic biology”) crop plants to try to coax an energy surplus out of them that will provide for America’s fuel needs.

This deal would convert California’s public educational institution into a research arm of a large, immoral, profit-seeking mega-corporation. Much of the research on campus lands would be classified, and BP would co-own the intellectual property rights. The direction of public research would be dramatically turned away from studies of conservation, public transit, changing public habits and government responsibilities, and against precautionary research about the dangers of genetically engineered plants and industrial agriculture on the environment.

If the public cannot rely on our University to tackle crucial issues with scientific objectivity, we will have lost our means to do so. Just Say No. And say it fast, because BP has a lot of funds to slick their way into turning our future into quick profits and certain environmental devastation.

Every four years, in two very lucky cities, big money gets thrown around while look-alikes from opposite ends of a closed circle step up to their podiums and spout nonsense. Republican National Convention — RNC. Democratic National Convention — DNC. Whatever. The point is that once the conventions are over, once November has come and gone, once the inauguration is only an unpleasant memory, people across this stolen land find themselves in pretty much the same place as before: a bad one.

From September 1st through 4th, 2008, the Republican National Convention will be held in St. Paul, MN. The RNC Welcoming Committee has invited folks from all over the country to show up and make something happen — to pull this moment out of its rut and start something new.

In preparation for the 2008 actions, the RNC Welcoming Committee is inviting radicals from all over the country to come and get to know Minneapolis/St. Paul and help hone your convergence-planning skills during the first week of Sept., 2007. “Over the next five months, we encourage people to start dialogue about the RNC in their own communities — what do you want to see happen in 2008? How do you think we can get there? What resources do you have to contribute? What will you need?” according to a communiqué from the Welcoming Committee. The 2007 weekend will feature Critical Mass on Friday, August 31, and three days of tours, workshops, skillshares, street medic training, games, strategizing sessions and L(A)bor Day activities.

In 2008, the Welcoming Committee is calling for “decentralized actions: both coordinated and independent.” For more info, contact the RNC Welcoming Committee: rnc08@riseup.net

“You are not alone”, is a popular saying that can be found all over the radical scene, in punk band lyrics, the Icarus Project propaganda (Icarus is a radical mental health support web site and group made for and by people with bi-polar) and DIY drawings/patches etc. I believe this slogan reminds one to draw friends and loved ones close as you seek to find people you can relate to. People that you relate to through politics, art, etc. Those who have an anarchist ideology and/or lifestyle, people who understand deep ecology and believe that right now the stakes are high and the progress slow for reshaping the current political trends that are destroying the planet and all its abundant life forms.

I am pleased and excited to find that many young collectives and organizations are putting mental health on the table as an important part of sustainable political work. Its been all too often that projects, campaigns and organizations collapse or become stagnant due to poor communication among members or underdeveloped skills for dealing with personal and group mental strain. If someone you knew was home sick with the flu, you would understand that they need certain things to get better — but what if someone is home depressed or anxious, then what? It is more difficult to determine how much hot tea and sleep to suggest for various mental influxes. The fact is that we just don’t know. There are very few models that are available for people to support each other with out the involvement of a “professional.” However, here are some helpful tips that I can share which I have compiled over the last 6 years that I have been interested in radicals and our relationship to mental health.

So let’s say your friend, housemate, lover, etc. is exhibiting behaviors or feelings that begin to concern you. As an ally of someone dealing with a mental health issue, it’s a great first step to ask them about their medical and mental health history. Ask them if they have noticed a shift in their behavior, get a feel for the situation. What are things you should look out for? Often times people who struggle with mental health issues will know what early warning signs are for them, i.e. lack of sleep, no interest in things they used to like to do, too much sleep, isolation, over or under eating, etc. Find out who their main support people are. Do they have a parent, friend or doctor that they trust? What is helpful/harmful in their healing process? Avoid belittling the problem, making fun of them, telling them everything will be ok or adding pressure.

I suggest finding other people who can help you support your friend so that you do not get drained in the process. I also suggest helping your friend find a therapist or counselor who they can see weekly just to have that extra outlet to talk. I am biased here because I do believe that many talk therapists, life coaches, counselors, peer counselors, or somatherapists will be very helpful for most people looking to broaden their understanding of themselves. When getting involved with someone who is coming from a past which may include trauma, abuse, or mental “illness” it is your responsibility to educate yourself about the issues. It’s important because it will allow you to be a better friend and support person, even if you have not had the same experiences and can’t understand their emotional reactions. It may feel like a huge leap to ask someone to disclose their most vulnerable parts and stories, but doing so may deepen your bond and lead to that person being more directive in receiving the care and support they need and want. It may also allow for you to start building support for yourself in the likely case that you will need it in the future.

If you are the person who is dealing with mental distress may I suggest making a list of all that has worked in the past and what has not worked. Look at your own medical and mental health history. What are your patterns, your family patterns, what triggers you and what calms you down? Set some goals for your self and monitor your feelings. If you use the internet, there are many helpful sites including the Icarus site — a radical site created by bi-polar folks where you can post and dialogue with other “crazy” people about what’s going on for you (www.icarusproject.net). Write about your experience and read about other people’s experiences. Find support behind every door you can, look for a therapist or healer you can relate to. Finding someone who has interest in helping you discover and change the behavior and thought patterns that you’re finding destructive or disabling while be most beneficiary. Many towns have sliding scale centers for counseling services (you can always stop if you don’t like it). You can order, download and submit Radical Zines and other literature at www.radicalmentalhealth.net. There is nothing more soothing and satisfying for me than to sit down with some good reading that I can relate to.

Healthy group dynamics

What about if you’re in a collective house or working on a collective project and you’re finding aggressive, depressive, explosive, unbalanced behaviors and emotions? This is probably the hardest topic to tackle. Along with addressing everything mentioned above, I would suggest having a check-in at the beginning and ending of every meeting or gathering just to start getting the juices flowing and building trust. I have also participated in and observed feelings/process meetings. These feelings meetings can be a bi-monthly mental health check-in meeting, where each member is not under the stress of getting through a collective task agenda but can just share what is helping or hindering them and the collective in working smoothly. It is here that you can talk about power dynamics, what each member needs to feel comfortable, how to distribute the work load, and a space where you can learn and share more of the complex parts of you. Although it will take up more of your time initially, I do believe that in the long run with the collective working with better understanding your work will get done faster and there will be better group dynamics.

I believe that by building better communication skills and support systems we will be more effective and have greater longevity in not only our personal relationships but our political work as well. The hope being that we will lift each other up through knowing ourselves and taking the time to build thriving personal, community and political structures.

These suggestions are just the tip of the melting iceberg. There are many ways to tackle the overwhelm, shame, disappointment and fear that comes along with emotional, spiritual and physical stress.

One last thing I would like to address is somewhat of a current pet peeve. Attention folks: Being “crazy” is not “cool” or chic.

As radicals have begun addressing mental health issues more, I’ve seen a rise in people who get excited about being insane or nuts or crazy and are ready to use those “dangerous gifts”. Having chronic, long term or acute battles with mental health is nothing to speak lightly of. It is very easy to glamorize the idea that people with mental unrest are “special” and more in tune with the out of balance universe. Really it’s just extra hard to make it through the day and nothing feels good or glamorous about that. So while it is important to debunk the straight jacket stereotypes of crazy people, I think it is more important to seek stability, support and balance for radicals so we can continue to swim within and ride against the currents so that we may play our role in altering the course of history . Building the support that we need in our communities will take time and a grand effort on our parts. We can not expect to scrape the pieces of our bulldozed souls off the ground and hop right on the good time train to mental health and wellbeing. That said, I do believe that only when we have created systems within our own counter-cultures to provide respite and support will one have the capacity to
maintain in their work standing up next to the trees, the oppressed peoples, the brutalized animals and each other as we enter new battles for the earth and a new dawn. www.radicalmentalhealth.net

Critical mass bike rides around the San Francisco Bay Area have been expanding dramatically this spring — perhaps serving as a barometer of popular concern over climate change — or maybe just reflecting that people want to have fun at the best party on wheels in the galaxy! There are now critical mass rides almost every Friday of the month for folks in the Bay Area — the first Friday in Oakland (gather at 14th & Broadway), the second Friday in Berkeley (downtown BART), the third Friday in Walnut Creek (at WC BART) and the last Friday in San Francisco (Justin Herman Plaza at Embarcadero BART). All of the rides are gathering by 6 p.m. and leave around 6:15. In months with five Fridays, there used to be Emeryville critical Mass (Macarthur BART), but it just got moved to the last Saturday of the month at 5 pm. One participant suggested that soon, there could be a critical mass ride every day of the month! Hell yeah! See you there?

I’ve been riding on as many critical masses as I can because no matter how I’m feeling when the ride starts, I’m totally exuberant and inspired by the end. The rides are such a perfect response to so many of the scourges of modernity. We replace the noise, pollution and danger of car-filled streets with joyful, zero-emissions bikes. Critical mass rides are leader-less, spontaneous, un-organized, free and participatory in sharp contrast to the daily reality of hierarchy, managed lives, alienation and the commodification of everything.

The April Oakland mass was the biggest ride yet in Oakland. There were two sound systems, circus bikes, a few police cars, and a mixed age and race group of riders — everyone from cyclists with spandex and fancy bikes to crusty punks riding 35 year old Schwinns. Someone brought a bike trailer with their 6-year-old kid and two huge pink boxes of vegan doughnuts. At an intersection mid-way through the ride, doughnut guy got off his bike and handed out free doughnuts to everyone. I got a chocolate one — yummy — thanks! On the San Francisco ride, there is a “cookie guy” who hands out free cookies at several points during the ride and on the April Berkeley ride, Wynd had a bike basket full of vegan cookies.

What if more and more people started bringing food and drinks to the rides and handing it out for free? That would help deal with the attrition rate the ride seems to suffer as people get hungry at around 7:30. Visualize a full-scale gift economy on wheels that might develop: free clothes, books and zines, haircuts while riding a tandem, free skool classes and backrubs on trailers carrying massage tables! If you’ve been to the massive San Francisco mass and seen all the unusual bike vehicles and crazy costumes, you’ll know what I mean . . .

Speaking of the San Francisco ride, it is still — as far as I know — the largest and most amazing critical mass bike ride in the universe. I try to take visitors to the ride and they always leave transformed. If you haven’t been for a while, give it a spin — it will cheer you up.

On the March ride, a huge group rode to the Southern reaches of the city towards Daly City to a neighborhood I had never visited before. Then we rode fast along Allegheny to get back to downtown. The road was very smoothly paved and gently curvy like a roller coaster — 3 lanes wide and designed for fast car travel so there were no stop signs or lights. It was amazing to be in a group of hundreds of bikes flying along this road together! I clocked our top speed at 28 miles an hour — that is fast for a bike!

I left at 8:30 before an incident at 9 p.m. when there were only 30 cyclists left (out of maybe 1,000 at the start of the ride) in which an impatient mini-van driver drove at high speed through the crowd and hit and threw a cyclist, running over and crushing the bike, and then fled. Riders gave chase, surrounding the vehicle at a red light and then, unfortunately, a cyclist broke the back window of the mini-van. Unknown to the cyclists, there were 5 kids in the mini-van. This incident received incredible hype in the media which made it sound like rabid bicyclists were attacking innocent citizens and trying to hurt their children for no reason.

It sucks that the window got broken — someone over-reacted in anger and fear after they saw a fellow cyclists intentionally hit by an irate car driver. Video of the incident shows that the windows were tinted so there was no way to see the kids. The incident was used to smear critical mass when bicyclists know that in most road incidents between cars and bikes, it is the bicyclists who are at risk. The reason people love critical mass is that for a few hours, we can ride in relative safety because of our numbers. When we ride to work or to the store, we’re isolated and vulnerable. Some car drivers are very disrespectful of our choice to bike and of our lives — cutting us off, bumping us, pushing us off the side of the road, yelling insults or throwing stuff.

Critical mass has learned to react calmly to most incidents of car/bike conflict — emphasizing dialogue, de-escalation and mutual respect — and videotaping when incidents occur. The ride works best that way — our goal in riding on the mass is to ride our bikes, not get into shouting matches with drivers. It is usually best to avoid a fight, smile, wave and keep riding.

I also rode on the March Emeryville critical mass ride. It was small and needs more support! Emeryville is a fake city — an almost perfect representation of un-restrained capitalist development in which commerce and cars have swallowed human needs. Even with our small numbers, it was intoxicating to ride through the fake shopping mall “main street” lined with chain stores yelling “stop buying — you don’t need that stuff!” People in the stores looked at us like we were space aliens — not only were we not shopping, we weren’t even in cars! The city is a maze of freeway-like roads and massive parking lots with knots of irate, impatient drivers — totally unfriendly to bikes. How can Emeryville exist a mile from Berkeley and escape frequent protests and disruptions? I don’t know, but at the moment, Emeryville critical mass is our best chance to shake up Emeryville. The next three Emeryville rides are May 26, June 30 and July 28 — write these dates in your calendar and see you there if you live in the Bay Area!

The issue of the HPV vaccine is complex, there are different ‘authorities’ asserting different facts and people on both sides of the debate that we, as radicals, vehemently mistrust and disagree with. As a collective, we are deeply divided on this issue. Some of us come down on the side of doubting the merit and utility of the vaccine and discouraging its use, while others ultimately believe that the benefits of access to the vaccine outweigh the potential dangers of its use and our misgivings about Merck. Because of this we are running two articles on the issue. Conflict and differences of opinion can be difficult to work through, but its better than conforming to a party line. As always, If you take issue with anything we publish, let us know about it. Write: Slingshot Collective, 3124 Shattuck Ave. Berkeley, CA 94705.

Article #1:

By PiratePrentice

Sometimes, people can respond appropriately to situations for completely the wrong reasons. One of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world is facing the loss of between $8 and 25 billion dollars in over 96,000 separate lawsuits. It is attempting to recover its losses by lobbying state governments for the mandatory vaccination of pre-pubescent girls with a new vaccine. By the company’s own admission, this vaccine is only partially effective and the cancer it is designed to prevent is easily curable if detected early. It is obscenely expensive, has been inadequately tested, and numerous cases of severe side-effects have already been reported. This company is forced to abandon its lobbying efforts, not for any of the obvious reasons listed above, but in response to a formal coalition of the righteous Christian fanatics who believe it is against God’s will to force children not to get cancer without their parents’ approval as well as a loose association of individual Christian fanatics who believe that the vaccinations will cause young girls to have sex…

This scenario isn’t imaginary. Merck Pharmaceutical (whose painkiller Vioxx was discovered to have caused heart attacks and strokes after long-term usage) recently was forced to abandon lobbying for the mandatory injection of their new HPV vaccine, Gardasil, for all 12 year old girls. Merck’s mandatory vaccination scheme was opposed by numerous Christian conservative groups such as Focus on The Family and The Family Research Council because (according to the FRC’s official website), “it would infringe upon parental rights to decide their own children’s medical care, without sufficient public health justification… our opposition to mandatory vaccination is rooted in a concern about parents’ rights, not about sexual behavior.”

This is a direct contradiction of the views expressed earlier by the FRC and other Christian ‘abstinence-only’ sexual health groups when Gardasil was being tested/developed in 2005. Then Bridget Maher of the FRC stated that “giving the HPV vaccine to young women could be potentially harmful, because they may see it as a license to engage in premarital sex.” (This opinion which is widely held among the ‘abstinence-only’ circles regarding everything from free condoms to needle distribution, is called ‘disinhibition’.) But after over 100 lawmaker wrote letters to the Center for Disease Control (doubtlessly urged on by Merck lobbyists) requesting that the CDC avoid playing politics with scientific judgments, and assurances (+$$$?) by their local Merck representatives that “no evidence of sexual disinhibition had been found during trials of the vaccine”, the FRC and other Conservative Christian groups reversed their position and decided that vaccinating pre-pubescent girls against HPV would not necessarily lead to rampant promiscuity. However, they were able to see far enough past the Merck hype (and $$$?) to realize the very direct dangers and doubtful benefits that the HPV vaccine offers. For this we all owe a very tiny debt of gratitude to all these conservative Christian groups despite their wacko beliefs. Because Merck’s HPV vaccine Gardasil might turn out to be some truly evil shit and mandatory injections could result in a disaster.

Calling Gardasil a potential disaster is no exaggeration. This vaccine was rushed into the market by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) using their ‘fast track” process without adequate testing. For instance Merck has published clinical test results for only one other vaccine (hepatitis B) in combination with Gardasil. Many vaccines react adversely with each other and as you probably painfully recall from childhood visits to your doctor or public health nurse, multiple vaccinations are the rule and not the exception.

What’s worse is that Gardasil may actually re-activate the latent HPV virus in patients already exposed to one of the HPV strains which the vaccine was designed to act against. Clinical trial results for Gardasil showed that , “…trial subjects who had already had exposure to the four strains showed higher rates of cervical neoplasia (abnormal cancer cell precursors), raising questions as to whether the vaccine impairs immune response under such circumstances, …”.

The Center for Disease Control (CDC) has already reported over 540 complaints of adverse reactions from Gardasil. Between the introduction of Gardasil on June 8, 2006 and mid-February 2007 the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) reports that over 385 distinct case reports concerning the adverse effects of a Gardasil injection were reported to the federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Five of these VAERS incidents were described as life threatening and 6 as disabling. Two hundred ten (or 61%), had not yet fully recovered. Hospitalization was reported in 12 cases and two-thirds sought additional care in an emergency room or doctor’s office. Adverse reactions included: pain of various types, fainting (55), dizziness (41), Partial loss of sensitivity to sensory stimuli (32), rash (33), itching (31), dilation of blood vessels(19), headache (19), and vomiting (16). There were also several reported cases of Guillain-Barre syndrome, a serious disorder in which the body’s immune system attacks part of the peripheral nervous system, potentially resulting in temporary paralysis or even death.

Gardasil was designed to prevent HPV which causes many genital warts and can cause cervical cancer. HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection (STD) with more than 50% of the sexually active population becoming infected sometime in their lives. There are over 100 strains of HPV with between 30 and 40 strains that are sexually transmitted and 15 associated with cervical cancer. Genital warts can be very painful, particularly in women, but most of the time the warts are benign, with any ‘cure’ being more painful than the disease. As noted in the previous sentence, 15 strains of HPV can lead to pre-invasive lesions, which can lead to cervical cancer. Fortunately, these pre-invasive lesions develop slowly, so virtually 100% of all cervical cancers can be prevented with regular Pap smear screening and prompt treatment. Virtually all of the recent cases of cervical cancer, reported in the U.S., have been among women who have not had regular pap-smears.

Gardasil can’t even accomplish the task for which its manufacturers designed it. According to the Food and Drug Administration, Gardasil is effective against only 4 strains of HPV. Currently, these strains are responsible for 70% of the HPV infections which lead to cervical cancer and 90% of the infections which cause genital warts. 70% and 90% sound like pretty good numbers, but remember that over 100 strains of HPV exist and that any one of these relatively benign strains could rapidly evolve to replace one of its more harmful cousins.

Why was Merck pushing so hard to have a vaccine that is only partially effective and potentially dangerous mandated for young women in the United States? Well, Merck would have no legal liability for the vaccine’s side effects if it were mandatory.
Also, the cost of the vaccinations (it’ll take three of them) is estimated to be $360 per patient. Multiply that by the number of girls entering middle-school each year and you’ll have an answer to that question.

It is a shame that Merck was so greedy to get the fast buck (but expecting a large pharmaceutical company not to be greedy is like expecting to find fur on a fish). A safe, effective HPV vaccine would have eliminated the need for painful procedures to remove pre-cancerous and cancerous lesions in American and European women. More importantly, it is a vaccine that would have saved the lives of about 200,000 women per year in the developing world where women do not have access to regular cervical examinations and pap smears and cervical cancer remains their leading cause of death from cancer. Unfortunately, Gardasil is not that vaccine.

Article #2

By PB Floyd

The first time I became personally aware of HPV (human papilloma virus) was when I started dating Jenn and she told me she had been treated for it. She had caught it ten years before from a boyfriend and had to endure painful, embarrassing and invasive treatments. She hadn’t had a re-occurrence since then, but the virus was likely present in her. Since condoms don’t protect you from HPV (it is found in genital skin areas other than the penis and vagina that a condom doesn’t cover) it meant that if I slept with her, I would be exposed, even though we were going to use condoms. At the time, in the heat of passion (don’t these conversations always take place in such heat?) I didn’t think clearly and I didn’t have enough facts about what this meant. Over the next few months when I looked into the details, it started to hit me that now that I had been exposed, I would always have to tell any future partner about the risks if we shared a bed. It was really emotionally awful to come to grips with this — I felt dirty and my future sex life felt ruined. Even though I never developed symptoms, I became extremely aware of HPV.

It was around that time that I learned that scientists were working on a vaccine that would prevent people from becoming infected with some strains of HPV. There are 100 kinds of HPV — about 40 that are sexually transmitted. Some varieties can lead to cervical or rectal cancer. Other varieties only cause painful, embarrassing genital warts. About 5.5 million new genital HPV cases occur each year according to the American Social Health Association — about 1/3 of all new STD infections. The personal trauma associated with each and every one of the these cases — the doctor’s visits, difficult talks with partners, feelings of loss and dirtiness, and physical pain associated with treatment — is very considerable. If you’re a guy, you don’t get pap smears so you don’t really know what you may have unless you see a wart, but you can infect your loved ones through your ignorance. Many varieties of HPV that cause problems for women have no symptoms whatsoever in men.

I felt excited at the possibility that the vaccine would soon be released. I knew I didn’t have all 40 strains of HPV, so I figured if I got the vaccine, I might be protected against some strains I hadn’t been exposed to. Also, I figured future partners who got the vaccine wouldn’t be infected by me. Whew — maybe my future sex life wasn’t ruined . . .

The vaccine (Gardasil) released last year doesn’t quite live up to my hopes and expectations, but it still offers some protection. According to tests with 11,000 women, it was virtually 100% effective in preventing infection by four of the 40 strains of HPV (types 6, 11, 16, and 18), including 2 strains that cause 70 percent of cervical cancers, and 2 strains that cause 90 percent of genital warts. The clinical trial found “no serious side effects” according to the Centers for Disease Control.

Controversy about the vaccine began almost immediately from Christian conservative groups. The vaccine will only work if you take it before you are infected with HPV and thus it is most effective when taken before a person is sexually active. Therefore, it is recommended that girls between 9 and 26 years old get the vaccine. Some fundamentalist Christians couldn’t handle the idea of giving a vaccine to young girls designed to protect women from a sexually transmitted infection.

These Christians believe that the best way to prevent sexually transmitted infections is for people to remain virgins until they get married, marry a virgin, and then not have sex outside of marriage. Since the vaccine is only really necessary for people who violate those standards — people with multiple, non-virgin partners — the Christians apparently reasoned that a vaccine would “encourage” immoral behavior. This is the same type of reasoning some Christians use when they oppose sex education and access to birth control — that “immoral” sexual behavior is a result of insufficiently harsh penalties for sex, like unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections. This kind of fundamentalist Christian thinking is, at its base, anti-sex. Fundamentalist Christians, not content to pursue their private, religious and moral beliefs themselves, seek to impose these beliefs on others. These Christians — not all Christians, by the way — are happy to put their version of morality ahead of women’s health, and general human enjoyment of life and sex.

Perhaps because the federal government — which approves drugs like Gardasil — is under the sway of conservative Christians, the FDA put strange restrictions on the use of the vaccine. Most glaringly, the vaccine is approved for women, but not for men, even though both men and women get infected with HPV and can transmit it to others. My hopes of taking the vaccine myself were dashed! Another odd restriction is that the vaccine is only authorized for women 26 years old and younger — even though many women older than 26 are sexually active and have not yet contracted all of the targeted strains of HPV.

Finally, because the drug was developed by the pharmaceutical industrial complex, the vaccine is extremely expensive: $360 for a course of three shots over six months.

Merck, the company that developed Gardasil, spent millions to promote the expensive vaccine by trying to get states to make vaccination mandatory for school age girls. There is no doubt that Merck’s greed-based, heavy-handed manipulation of the public health process is deplorable. Merck’s efforts caused a backlash from Christians and anti-vaccination activists such as the National Vaccine Information Center.

NVIC, a private advocacy group, has never met a vaccine they didn’t dis-like. It is true, as they contend, that some people will have bad reactions to every vaccine. With Gardasil, the CDC has found primarily very minor, non-dangerous reactions such as “soreness at the injection site” and infrequently dizziness or nausea. There is no credible data showing worse side effects — just fear, speculation, and hype. If there were worse side effects, they would have been identified during the clinical trial with 11,000 women, the results of which were carefully tracked and published for all to see. While Merck’s marketing campaign was clumsy, there is no reason to think that the medical science behind Gardasil will cause a “public health disaster.”

As with any medical procedure, the key in analyzing whether the vaccine does more harm than good is weighing the seriousness and frequency of negative reactions against the seriousness and frequency of the medical problem the vaccine is intended to address.

Each person has to make their own decision, but in my opinion, the minor negative reactions to Gardasil are totally outweighed by the protection the vaccine provides against HPV infection. In 2006, over 9,700 women were diagnosed with cervical cancer and about 3,700 died from it. Even according to the NVIC, no one has died from being inoculated with Gardasil. Many more women
who never develop cancer have abnormal pap smear results after being infected with HPV and these abnormal results take a huge emotional and mental toll on the women who have to undergo treatment and further tests. (See Cara’s article in Slingshot # 86.) Telling women that they should just be treated for cancer or HPV — rather than avoid getting cancer or HPV in the first place — is not justified given the minor and rare reactions associated with getting the vaccine.

I don’t want the vaccine to be mandatory. To the contrary, I just want the vaccine to be made available, cheaply and widely, to everyone who can benefit from it — men and women, young and older. People concerned with medical safety have to be careful not to play right into the hands of conservative Christians who are against treatments for sexually transmitted infections because consequences for “immoral” sex are “God’s Will.”