Connecticut residents protest the US war on Iran

By Reginald Johnson

Recent days have seen protests pop up around Connecticut against the illegal attack by the United States and Israel against the Islamic Republic of Iran.

In Norwalk on Saturday, about 20 people attended a vigil against the war and an anti-war banner was hung over the I-95 bridge at Exit 16.

"We tried to stop this war. We we were unsuccessful. So now we're trying to stop this one as soon as we can," said John Miksad, one of the participants, in an interview with News 12.

Benjamin Wesley, who helped organize the vigil, said "Nobody wants this war but we have to be LOUD with our lawmakers and make it clear to them! The lives of our fellow American servicemen and citizens and Iranian servicemen and civilians hang in the balance."

Wesley said a big focus going forward should be on getting Congress to pass war powers resolutions which will require President Trump to obtain Congressional authorization before launching any further attacks on Iran.

Groups participating in the Norwalk protest were Veterans for Peace, Jewish Voice for Peace, World Beyond War. The Peace Pact and Democratic Socialists of Connecticut.

In New Haven, about 60 people rallied against the war on Sunday outside City Hall.

The ANSWER Coalition and the Party for Socialism and Liberation sponsored the demonstration, according to the New Haven Independent.

Protesters slam new housing at Testo's site

     BRIDGEPORT REPORT

     By Reginald Johnson

       BRIDGEPORT --- About 30 people picketed in front of the former Testo’s restaurant on Madison Avenue Sunday demanding that Mayor Joseph Ganim get involved to stop a housing development at the site which residents claim is out of place for the area.

   Under a hot sun the group walked in front of the closed-up restaurant with signs reading  “No to 177 units!” and “Mayor Ganim, Where are You?"

  People driving by honked their horns in approval.

 “We are out here to try and get the mayor to stop this development. It’s going to affect all of us,"  said Bianca, who owns a house on Westfield just across from the former restaurant.  “It’s going to lower the property values for everybody around here and we need our values to stay the way it is,” she added.

 Bianca moved to Bridgeport from New York city three years ago to buy her house and said it was a “rude awakening” when she found out that the restaurant was going to make way for a 177-unit apartment complex.

  “We need our neighborhood to stay a neighborhood,” she said, “and not turn into a commercial area like a city like New York that is overcrowded and overpopulated. We need to have a safe space."

                               

Bianca, who lives on Westfield Avenue, protests the plan for new housing at the former Testo's restaurant. (Reginald Johnson photo)

  Other protesters echoed Bianca’s view, saying that the complex was too big and not fit for the area which is dominated by single-family homes. They complained bitterly that local residents have not been given any say-so in how the development was planned.

  “There’s been no input from the neighborhood,” said one.

                      

North End residents demonstrate against housing at Testo's.

 (Reginald Johnson photo)

  The four-story complex to be constructed by builder John Guedes appears to be a done deal, with zoning approval for the general plan given previously. There don’t seem to be any legal avenues for opponents to block the project.

  However, protesters are hoping that possibly Mayor Ganim, who has remained quiet on the controversial project, will step forward and ask for some modifications to reduce the size of the building.

  “It’s past the Council people.” said Bianca. “The Council already voted on it, so the mayor has to get involved at this point,” she said.

                                          

                                   

Protesters at Testo's. (Reginald Johnson photo)

  The former Testo’s Ristorante at 1775 Madison was a fixture in the North End for decades and also served as a political base for the Democratic Party, with the eatery hosting many fundraisers and election night parties. The restaurant was owned by Mario Testa who was the longtime head of the Democratic Town Committee and a close friend of Ganim. Testa and his relatives closed the restaurant at the end of last year and the apartment plan was announced soon afterwards.

 

Ukraine War protestors: "Negotiations Now!"

 

By Reginald Johnson

 

 

    MIDDLETOWN, CT ---   Peace activists took to the streets here on Saturday to protest the war in Ukraine and warn people that the conflict threatens to become a nuclear holocaust.

Gathering on the corner of Main and Washington, the demonstrators held signs and passed out fliers which said “Prevent Nuclear War” and “Negotiations Now.”

“We’ve gotten a number of horn honks and people have taken leaflets,” said Steve Krevisky, one of the organizers.

  As parents walked by with their children dressed up in halloween costumes, Krevisky added, “We know there’s a halloween celebration down the street and you don’t want to spoil a good mood, but the threat of nuclear war should bother people. So considering, we’ve had a pretty good response.”

 The Middletown protest was one of more than 70 actions that took place around the country and Canada in the past week sponsored by an umbrella peace group, the United National Anti-war Coalition (UNAC).

 “We did not expect such an overwhelming response from our movement, but we learned people are ready to hit the streets and build a strong unified antiwar movement,” a UNAC official said.

 The protests erupted as the Ukraine-Russia war, now seven months old, has reached a more dangerous phase. Neither side seems to have the upper hand in the war and leaders of both nations have talked of the possibility of using nuclear weapons.

 NATO, the US-led military alliance which is aiding Ukraine, recently began nuclear war training exercises in eastern Europe and Russian President Vladimir Putin said his country may do the same.

Protestors in Middletown warn of nuclear war danger in Ukraine.

 Over the months, the US and NATO have pumped billions of dollars in lethal aid into Ukraine and military observers believe the weaponry has allowed Ukraine to launch effective counter attacks against Russian forces and prolong the war. Thousands of combatants have died in the conflict and there’s been massive damage to civilian infrastructure.

 Meanwhile, there is no movement towards negotiations to achieve a peaceful settlement. While several European leaders including France’s Emanuel Macron as well as Putin and Ukrainian leader Volodomyr Zelensky have indicated at different times that they were open to peace negotiations, the United States has been a roadblock.

  The administration of President Joseph Biden has rebuffed the idea of peace talks several times, including in April shortly after the war began when a tentative settlement was on the table, but the US rejected it.

 Recently, Biden reaffirmed American opposition to negotiations when he told CNN that he had no interest in meeting with Putin at an upcoming G20 summit and he was not interested in negotiations to end the war.

  Nonetheless, Biden himself commented recently on the gravity of the present situation. He said the risk of a nuclear “Armageddon” was higher now than at any time since the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962.

 The US refusal to get behind peace talks is a sore point for activists like Krevisky.

  “I feel from my own perspective that I have to be critical of the Biden administration not only because they still refuse to negotiate, but in fact they seem to be upping the ante,” he said.

  A member of the Connecticut Peace and Solidarity Coalition, Krevisky said that he and others in the group are also trying to make people understand the “connections” between US war policy and military spending and the fact that domestic needs are not being met at home.

   “One of my favorite slogans is,  ‘money for jobs and education, not war and occupation.’ So we wanted to connect issues and get people to recognize the danger of the situation especially since a lot of us think that the corporate media is brainwashing people to go along with a war that many of us think the West wanted a long time ago,” he said.

                                        

Congressional candidate Dr. Amy Chai takes a stand on the Ukraine War.

  Also protesting the war --- at the same time she was campaigning --- was Dr. Amy Chai of New Haven who is running for Congress as an independent against long-time Democratic incumbent Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro in the Third Congressional District. DeLauro has, like other Democrats, fully backed the massive military aid packages being sent to Ukraine.

 “I’m against all proxy wars --- the war in North Africa, sending arms to Yemen and sending arms to Ukraine,” said Chai. “I’m against the US being the arms dealer for the world and I’m against that because I don’t want people using my tax dollars to kill people --- that goes against everything I believe in as a doctor.”

  Asked about the administration’s claim that the American support for Ukraine was about defending Ukrainian democracy and freedom, she said, “That’s baloney. That’s baloney. It’s about corruption and money --- making money for the arms dealers. It’s a corrupt scheme that serves some people’s interest but not ours,” she said.

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

Protests target Ukraine War

By Reginald Johnson 

    Peace activists will take to the streets in the coming days to demand that the Biden administration pursue a negotiated settlement to end the war in Ukraine and avert a nuclear confrontation with Russia.

 The United National Anti-war Coalition said more than 40 actions will take place around the country from Oct. 15-21 as  part of a campaign to bring about a cease-fire in Ukraine and end the war, which has cost tens of thousands of lives so far.

 In Connecticut, a protest against the war will take in Middletown on Saturday, October 22. The demonstration will be held at the corner of Main and Washington Streets and run from 12 noon to 2 pm.

  The possibility of the war going nuclear has been growing as Russian President Vladimir Putin recently said his nation might be forced at a certain point to use nuclear weapons and Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky has suggested bluntly that the West should fire nuclear missiles at Russia right now.

  A flier announcing the Middletown protest quotes President Biden’s recent comment that for the first time since the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, “we have a direct threat of the use of nuclear weapon...there is no ability to use a tactical weapon and not end up with Armageddon.”

  But the flier notes, “Yet the US government intends to prolong the war in Ukraine as long as it takes to weaken and ultimately destroy Russia, a country with thousands of nuclear weapons. This is madness!”

  The Middletown action is sponsored by the Connecticut Peace and Solidarity Coalition and the Greater New Haven Peace Council, among others.

  For further information contact Steve in Middletown at  Skrevisky@mxcc.commnet.edu; Alex in Hartford at koskinasa175@gmail.com; or Henry in New Haven at grnhpeacecouncil@gmail.com.

 

 

 

Protesters: No war with Russia!

 

   By Reginald Johnson

   Opposition is growing to a potential war with Russia over Ukraine.

 In the last two weeks, there’s been a flurry of protests around the country with people demanding that the United States and NATO stop their aggressive military actions in Eastern Europe, stop sending military aid to Ukraine and seek a diplomatic solution to the Ukraine crisis through the United Nations.

  Demonstrations began happening last week after a call was put out by a coalition of 12 antiwar organizations to mobilize against a war with Russia. The call was subsequently endorsed by another 200 peace groups.   

  Protests took place in 70 cities around the country on Saturday, followed by a national online rally, where peace activists spoke of the urgency of stopping the slide towards war. A webinar hosted by the United National AntiWar Coalition, with both national and international peace activists, took place on Sunday.

  More actions are taking place this week, such as one in Hartford, CT, where peace activists demonstrated outside the offices of US Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Connecticut, who is supporting the Biden administration’s Ukraine policy.

  “This is a really important time because of the escalation of aggression by the US government towards Russia and the amount of misinformation in the corporate media,” said Margaret Flowers director of Popular Resistance, one of the groups which organized the online rally.

  “We’re being lied into another war. The whole, you know, ‘Russia has troops on its border’ is equivalent to the ‘Saddam has WMDs’ that lied us into a disastrous war with Iraq,” she said.

  Flowers added that nearly 1,000 people signed a petition to President Biden and to UN Secretary-General Anthony Guiterrez, calling on them to resolve the Ukraine conflict in compliance with international law using the United Nations Security Council, “rather than what the United States is doing, using NATO to perform its war, which is how the US engages in all these illegal wars, bypassing international law.”

 

A protest against a possible war with Russia outside the offices of U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn, in Hartford. Blumenthal has been supporting hawkish US policies in Ukraine. (Photo by Henry Lowendorf)

      

     The protests are taking place as the U.S., NATO and Russia are engaging in a tense military stand-off in eastern Ukraine. The US and its allies are charging that Russia is “massing troops on the Ukraine border” in preparation for a possible invasion of Ukraine. Russia has been supporting pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine ever since a US backed coup installed a pro-western and far-right regime in Kiev in 2014.

   Biden administration officials, backed by both Republicans and Democrats in Congress, say that Ukraine’s “sovereignty” must be protected and that “Russian aggression” must be stopped.

 The US has been sending a steady stream of lethal aid to the Ukrainian regime over the past 8 years --- some $2.5 billion in arms and ammunition.

  US military advisors are on the ground in eastern Ukraine as are American mercenaries.  

Biden has threatened “severe consequences” for Russia --- including harsh economic sanctions --- if an invasion takes place.

 Russian officials maintain that they have no plans to invade, but say they are concerned about provocative US, NATO and Ukrainian military activity near their border and the US sending naval ships into the Black Sea, where Russia has a large naval port.

  The Russians are also concerned about the possibility of Ukraine joining NATO, the western military alliance formed more than 70 years ago to deter aggression by the Soviet Union, a country that no longer exists. Most European countries, including former Soviet bloc nations, are now in NATO. The alliance has bases throughout the continent, including missile launchers in Poland and Romania.

 President Vladimir Putin has made clear that any plan for ending the crisis in Ukraine must include a guarantee that Ukraine not be allowed to join NATO.

 But the US has already rejected a Russian peace plan which includes that guarantee.

Joe Lombardo, co-coordinator of the United National AntiWar Coalition (UNAC), said at the webinar that Americans are getting a false picture from their leaders and the media about who is responsible for the crisis in eastern Europe.

 “Now there are 300,000 US troops throughout Europe. There are 150,000 Ukrainian troops with US advisors and modern US weapons, including predator drones which have been used in some of the areas in Donbass (eastern Ukraine).  So there are 150,000 troops with US advisors in and around Donbass, that is on the Russian border, but that is not said in the media,” he said.

   Lombardo added that NATO is conducting “what they call wargames, right on the border with Russia. But when Russia puts its troops on the other side of the border, on its side of these wargames, the US says that’s aggressive, not the wargames.”

  He continued, “So it’s a very dangerous situation and the actual aggression is on the side of the United States, which in the last couple of decades has been in one war after another, one invasion and one occupation after another, many of them based on false flag situations.”

  Another speaker at the UNAC webinar was Vladimir Kozin, correspondent member of the Russian Academy of Military Science.

  Kozin talked of the repeated violations of the Minsk II peace accords and arms control treaties by both the United States and Ukraine. Kozin said that all 13 provisions of the Minsk Accords have been violated, including the prohibition on sending foreign fighters into the conflict zone.

   Kozin said that Russia had no plans to attack Ukraine now, but if Ukrainian forces should launch a full attack on Donbass, “surely Russia will come to support the population of Donbass.”

   At the protest in Hartford on Tuesday, 18 people stood outside the offices of Senator Blumenthal, who has strongly supported America's militaristic Ukraine policy.

  “We were protesting Senator Blumenthal’s promoting war and war hysteria,  and defending the illegal and violent coup the US engineered in 2014 to kick out the constitutional government of Ukraine, said Henry Lowendorf, of the Greater New Haven Peace Council.

  The group attempted to deliver a letter to Blumenthal’s office demanding that “all belligerent threats” towards Russia stop, that there be a resumption of honest diplomacy to settle any differences between the US and Russia, and that NATO not be allowed to expand eastward. But a security guard would not grant the group access to the office.  Lowendorf said he then left messages with both the Hartford and Washington offices.

   Lowendorf said a Washington staff member called back on Wednesday and left a message, but did not include a return number.

  “I couldn’t call the individual back … Senator Blumenthal runs a very unwelcoming office. He places roadblocks before the public even to meeting his staff. The way he runs his office contradicts the image he tries to project as a people friendly official,” Lowendorf said.

  Nonetheless, Lowendorf and the other activists, members of the Connecticut Peace and Solidarity Coalition, passed out fliers urging people to call their legislators in Washington at 202-224-3132 and the White House at 202-456-1111, demanding no war with Russia.

  At the UNAC webinar, Bruce Gagnon, coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in space said that there is a unique danger that could unfold from a war in Ukraine. He said there are 15 nuclear power plants in the country.

 “Imagine what could happen, from an accident or otherwise, with those nuclear power plants. That’s frightening,” Gagnon said, pointing out that radiation contamination would spread globally.

  “It’s absolutely insane what the US and NATO are doing today,” he said.

Ajamu Baraka, national organizer for the Black Alliance for Peace, stressed that people have to understand the central role that imperialism plays in the wars that keep erupting around the globe.

  “For the Black Alliance for Peace, let me be clear, we say the common enemy is the US-EU-NATO axis of domination. We argue that we must center our analysis within the context of the global class struggle,” he said.

 “It is imperialism, led by the United States, that is the culprit.”

 

 

 

 

     

 

   

Democrats silent on U.S. coup in Venezuela

                    

By Reginald Johnson

  Members of Connecticut’s congressional delegation --- all Democrats --- are remaining mostly silent as the Trump administration tries to oust Nicolas Maduro as president of Venezuela, threatening to use force if necessary.

  Claiming that Maduro is running an authoritarian regime which has mismanaged the Venezuelan economy, President Donald Trump and other officials are demanding that Maduro be replaced, and they have hinted at the possibility of a military intervention. Crippling economic sanctions have also been levied against Venezuela.

  On January 23, Trump said in response to a question about possible military action by the U.S., that “all options are on the table.” He reiterated the comment that  “all options” were being considered, at a press conference with Colombian President Ivan Duque Marquez last week.

   In threatening to use military force to overthrow a sovereign government, Trump is violating the UN charter, to which the United States is a signatory.

     Article 2, paragraph four of the UN charter unequivocally states: “All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.”

  Yet all members of the Connecticut congressional delegation, with one exception, have said nothing about Trump’s strong-arm policy.

   A check of congressional websites shows none of the five members of the House of Representatives from Connecticut have taken a stand on Trump’s Venezuela policy.

   Phone calls were also made last week to the offices two congressmembers,  Rep. Jim Himes, D-4, and Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-3, seeking comment on Venezuela.  A staff person for Himes said the congressman had not taken a stand yet on the issue, but someone would call back if he chose to comment now. So far, there’s been no reply.

   A staff person at DeLauro’s office said she didn’t know if the congresswoman had a position on the administration’s Venezuela policy. “All her positions are on the website,” she said.

   A spokesman at the office of U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn, said “I don’t think he’s made a comment on that yet,” when questioned about Venezuela. But he promised that if the senator did take a stand, the office would inform me.

   U.S. Sen. Chris  Murphy, D-Conn  is the only one to comment on the Trump policy.  He wrote in an op-ed in the Washington Post on Jan. 29 saying that while he agreed with the objective of replacing Maduro --- due to his “lack of democratic legitimacy” and economic mismanagement --- he cautioned against a military solution. He said “the administration must recognize the troubled history of US intervention in Latin America” and added that “public bluster about military options and private leaks about coup planning only serve to undercut the legitimacy of the democracy that we should support.”  

       Murphy said that “the United States should be working with international partners to support negotiations with all of Venezuela’s factions in pursuit of a transitional government that can hold new elections.”

    

President Nicolas Maduro of Venezuela  (Getty Images)

    Henry Lowendorf, chairman of the Greater New Haven Peace Council, which is strongly opposed to the U.S. Venezuela policy, said “there seems to be a conspiracy of silence --- not just in the Connecticut delegation, but in general, among Democrats.”

     Lowendorf added, “Republicans are cheering Trump on.  Democrats for the most part, with a few exceptions, have been silent. Maybe a half dozen Democrats, including Tulsi Gabbard,  Ro Khanna and Bernie Sanders have said we shouldn’t overthrow the government. That’s none of our business.”

   “I don’t want to let the Republicans off the hook,” Lowendorf said.  “Historically, over the last half-century or so, Republicans have been the war party. But Democrats now are the war party. The Republicans continue to push for war and more military but the Democrats are pushing it even more.”

  Lowendorf said over the last two years, whenever Trump has done something that is not militaristic, such as moving to pull troops out of Syria and Afghanistan, or make a peace deal with North Korea, the Democrats have criticized him. Also he noted, very few Democrats have criticized the “U.S. role in the devastation of Yemen.”

   Despite the stand of the Democrats, peace activists in Connecticut and elsewhere are beginning to mobilize to protest U.S. policy on Venezuela and prevent what could be a catastrophic American military intervention.

   Next Saturday, February 23,  rallies are being held around the country and around the world to protest U.S. policy towards Venezuela.  Locally, the Greater New Haven Peace Council is sponsoring a rally in New Haven, on the New Haven Green at Elm and Church Streets from 12 noon to 1 PM.  There will also be a march to Congresswoman DeLauro’s office at 59 Elm Street.

  Another rally sponsored by the Connecticut Peace and Solidarity Coalition is taking place in Hartford outside the Federal Building on Main Street from 12 noon to 1 PM. In New York City, there will be another rally entitled “March on Wall Street to Defend Venezuela,” beginning at 1 PM at 40 Wall Street in Manhattan.
  "We must stop another war. We must end the sanctions. No to the coup," said Lowendorf.

       

   

 

  

   

 

   

Protesting the Coup in Venezuela

  By Reginald Johnson

    NEW HAVEN --- Members of the Greater New Haven Peace Council showed up in frigid weather outside City Hall on Friday to pass out leaflets urging people to oppose the Trump administration’s coup attempt in Venezuela.

     Claiming that Venezuelan leader Nicholas Maduro is running an undemocratic failed state, administration officials are demanding that Maduro step down and be replaced by a man backed by the United States, Juan Guaido.

   On Wednesday, President Donald Trump said that “all options are on the table” --- implying that if Maduro is not willing to step down, the United States would consider using military force to get rid of him.

   Peace Council member Jim Pandaru said people are tired of America trying to force regime change around the world, often using force to achieve its ends. He cited Iraq and Libya as recent examples.

   “ I’m here to draw attention to another American misadventure overseas, getting involved and continuing endless wars.  Everybody is almost taking war as a given, as a natural thing just like getting dressed in the morning. This madness has to stop,” said Pandaru, a Vietnam veteran and member of Veterans for Peace.

Jim Pandaru of the Greater New Haven Peace Council protesting US-orchestrated coup in Venezuela.

    Pandaru said the administration is lying by saying that they want to replace Maduro in order to bring more democracy and freedom to the Venezuelan people. “Venezuela is sitting on top of one of the greatest oil reserves in the world and we just want to get our hands on it,” he said.

    Peace Council members urged people to call their elected representatives in Congress to demand that the United States stay out of Venezuela and stop interfering in the affairs of other countries. The congressional switchboard is 202- 224-3121.  The White House number is 202-456-1111.

Freedom of Speech and Donald Trump

                 

                      

By Reginald Johnson

   Does Donald Trump have freedom of speech like all other Americans?

  Yes, unfortunately he does.

 Freedom of speech is a cornerstone of our system, stemming from the very first amendment to the Constitution, which bars Congress from passing any law which would abridge that right.

  In the U.S., you can pretty much say or write anything, unless you’re advocating something illegal.

This separates our system from a lot of other places, where if you criticize the government or some high official too much, you could wind up in jail or worse.

  It’s very important to protect the first amendment. Without it, our constitutional system is shot.

  That’s why it’s a bit concerning that some protesters have gotten it into their heads that the best way to combat Trump and his offensive views is by showing up at his rallies and either shouting him down or interrupting him so many times that he can’t effectively communicate.

   The New York Times reported that at a recent event in New Orleans, Trump’s speech was interrupted repeatedly. The Times wrote “an almost continual stream of protesters interrupted a Trump event, sometimes dropping to the ground to make guards drag them out, or heckling back at Mr. Trump’s supporters with their own crude language and gestures.”

  Other campaign events by Trump have also been interrupted on multiple occasions.

  Some protesters said after the aborted Trump rally in Chicago that they had successfully “shut down” Trump’s appearance, set for an arena at the University of Illinois. The rally had drawn hundreds of protesters inside the arena, and the Trump campaign cancelled the event just after the candidate was scheduled to speak. The event descended into chaos after the announcement, with Trump supporters and protesters yelling at each other and exchanging punches.

  “Shutting down” free speech is not a good thing, no matter what you think of the person doing the speaking.

  Anyone running for office has a right to make their case. People who don’t like their views don’t have the right to prevent that.

  Let me say right here I do not like Donald Trump. He's shown himself to be bigoted, denigrating Mexican and Muslim immigrants and hesitating at one point to repudiate KKK leader David Duke. Except for a few remarks he’s made about the need to avoid overseas interventions and his opposition to trade treaties (not expressed very coherently), I have no use for this man.

   He’s also made irresponsible remarks about protesters, saying he wouldn’t care if they got punched out or remarking that “in the old days” they’d take demonstrators “out on a stretcher.”

  He also said he would pay the legal fees for anyone who beat up a protester who was “getting ready to throw a tomato.”

  These inflammatory remarks may well have fueled some incidents of violence, notably the sucker-punching of a demonstrator by a Trump supporter as the protester was being removed from a rally. Trump said last weekend that he didn’t want to see any violence at his events, but he refused to criticize the man who threw the punch.

  For his views and his incendiary remarks, Trump deserves to be condemned. The question is where and when.

 If a candidate from any party has obtained a hall or space to hold a campaign rally and make his or her pitch on why they should be elected, that person and his supporters should not be subjected to protests in the same area.

 However, it is entirely appropriate to hold demonstrations or protests outside the hall or space. Opponents of Trump should hold mass demonstrations outside the venues where Trump is going to speak. Protest rallies with hundreds or thousands of people will get press attention.  Critics can set up soft picket lines outside Trump events, carry placards, hand out leaflets and try to buttonhole event-goers and tell them why Trump is not a good candidate.

 Opponents can also take out ads in the paper, write letters, and write op-eds criticizing Trump.

  There’s plenty of ways to show opposition to candidates besides engaging in blocking tactics at campaign rallies.

  Should anti-Trump protesters continue their efforts at interrupting speeches, it is likely that opponents of Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders will decide to return the favor and show up at rallies for those candidates and disrupt their speeches. Campaign rallies could degenerate into circuses, which is not fair to either to the candidates trying to make their case or the people who came to hear what they have to say.

 

   

 

  

              

Demanding Justice for Michael Brown

By Reginald Johnson

   Around the country, people are demanding justice in the Michael Brown case.

  Demonstrations have swept major cities like New York, Los Angeles and Chicago as well as dozens of smaller cities, with thousands expressing anger that a grand jury decided not to indict police officer Darren Wilson for fatally shooting Brown, an unarmed teenager in Ferguson, Missouri last August.

  Hundreds of people are now marching to the Missouri State Capital of Jefferson City to show their concern for what happened to Brown, who was 18 at the time of the shooting.

  Last weekend about 100 people protested in Bridgeport, a city of about 150,000 in Connecticut.

 “Bridgeport could be the next Ferguson,” Rev. Mary McBride Lee told the crowd gathered outside the City Hall Annex, according to the Connecticut Post. “We have to stick together and stand up for what’s right.”

  It’s a good thing that so many people are criticizing the grand jury result in the Michael Brown case, because there’s a lot to be upset about.  The more you look at the facts of the case, it’s hard to understand how the grand jury came to the conclusion that there was no probable cause to indict Wilson.

  There are inconsistencies in the account Wilson gave to the grand jury and some legal experts, including a noted forensic pathologist, say Wilson’s version of how the fatal shooting took place, doesn’t conform with the physical evidence.

  Questions have also been raised about the quality of the local investigation of the Brown shooting and the way St. Louis County Prosecutor Robert McCulloch handled the grand jury.

  A recent piece in Mother Jones magazine analyzed the testimony given by dozens of witnesses to the shooting, and compared that with Wilson’s testimony, and the statement by McCulloch announcing there was no basis for an indictment.  The article identified a number of discrepancies, relating to different accounts about an initial confrontation between Wilson and Brown, how it escalated into a fight, whether Wilson shot at Brown when he and his friend Dorian Johnson ran away, and whether Brown had his hands up when Wilson shot at him, after Brown had stopped running and turned around.

   Two findings are particularly noteworthy from the article, which drew in part from an analysis by PBS News Hour of 500 pages of witness testimony and Wilson’s statements:

·        While Wilson testified he did not shoot at Brown after he fled, a full 16 witnesses said he did. Only four witnesses supported Wilson on this point;

·        Though Wilson told the grand jury he shot Brown only after the teenager turned around with his hands down and began advancing towards the officer, 16 witnesses said Brown had his hands raised after he turned around. Only two witnesses said Brown did not have his hands up.

  In a recent interview with CNN’s Erin Burnett, well-known forensic pathologist Cyril Wecht said Wilson’s testimony that Brown had his hands down and was reaching into his waistband, does not comport with the physical evidence. Wecht, the one-time president of the American Academy of Forensic Science, a professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine and a past consultant on many high profile crime cases, said the location and shape of the wounds sustained by Brown indicate that he could not have had his hands down at the time of the shooting. His hands had to have been raised, Wecht said.

  Wecht also expressed astonishment that a county medical examiner who came to review the Brown shooting scene on the day of the incident failed to take photographs, as required. The official said he couldn’t do so, since his camera was “out of batteries.” The medical examiner also failed to take measurements, another standard step.

   “This is absolutely unacceptable,” said Wecht.

 While no criminal charges will be forthcoming from the local grand jury, there is still the possibility that the federal government could file criminal charges against Officer Wilson. Officials from the Justice Department are conducting a separate investigation of the case.