Home
Overtime--2004 and 2003 issues

Overtime


OVERTIME--July 2003 issue
timeovertimeovertimeovertimeovertime

Dedicated to reflecting the collective wisdom of enlightened workers.

Linda Featheringill
4651 West 41st Street, Down
Cleveland, OH 44109
(216) 661-0794

lfeatheringill@hotmail.com

July 2003
Volume 4, Number 2

Greetings!

This issue is a bit late. A lot of folks sent many very good articles and essays and it took a long time to decide what to include in this issue. Some of these will appear in the August issue.

The theme this month is lies. I’m sure that we are all tired of being lied to. I’m also tired of commentators who use every synonym in the thesaurus in order to keep from actually saying that members of our government have lied. If our leaders know the truth and do not speak it, then they lie. There is no other word for it.

At any rate, I hope you enjoy this issue. July often brings extreme temperatures all over the world. Take care of yourself and try to be comfortable. -- Linda Featheringill

Iraq

Bill Clinton deceived the country. George W. Bush deceived the world.

Clinton got impeached. Bush probably will get re-elected.

The country spent millions of tax dollars in hearings over Monica's blue dress. The country is spending billions to rebuild Iraq.

Clinton's wife just came out with a book rehashing the Lewinsky affair. The best part is when Hillary says the only family member who would hang out with Bill was the dog.

Bush should be in the doghouse right now. Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein are still on the loose, despite our takeovers of Afghanistan and Iraq. And those pesky weapons of mass destruction are still missing in action. I'm waiting for Laura Bush to write a tell-all about how humiliated she felt after her husband started a war that killed thousands of Iraqis and dozens of American and British soldiers - a war based on faulty evidence.

Of course, that book will never be written. You don't hear much about UN Resolution 1441 these days. In the fall, people could quote it from memory. Back then, the Bush administration told the world Iraq posed an imminent threat to world peace because it had not disarmed.

That's how this war was sold. We bought that and are still paying for it - in dollars and in lives. It looks as if Iraq disarmed before we attacked, leaving Bush with a major credibility problem.

In October, his camp showed us satellite photographs of possible nuclear weapons sites. We're "in country" now, so why haven't we found those facilities?

Bush scared us with talk of a mushroom cloud. It turns out we were the mushrooms, kept in the dark and fed - well, let's just call it fertilizer, to be nice. In the Senate debate over war last October, majority leader Tom Daschle said, "We need to make clear to the world that the reason that we would use force in Iraq is to remove Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. I would have preferred this goal had been made explicit in this resolution. However, it is clear from this debate that Saddam's weapons of mass destruction are the principal threat to the United States and the only threat that would justify the use of the United States military force against Iraq.

"It is the threat that the president cited repeatedly in his speech to the American people Monday night. It may also be the only threat that can rally the world to support our efforts. Therefore, we expect, and success demands, that the administration not lose sight of this essential mission."

Ever since we "won" the war, the Bush camp has lost sight of its essential mission, the one Bush explained on March 6 this way:

"I wish that Saddam Hussein had listened to the demands of the world and disarmed. That was my hope. That's why I first went to the United Nations to begin with on Sept. 12, 2002, to address this issue as forthrightly as I knew how. That's why months later we went to the Security Council to get another resolution called 1441, which was unanimously approved by the Security Council, demanding that Saddam Hussein disarm."

During that same speech, Bush asked this of Saddam: "The world needs him to answer a single question: Has the Iraqi regime fully and unconditionally disarmed as required by Resolution 1441, or has it not?"

The world needs Bush to answer a single question: Where are those weapons of mass destruction?

[Regina Brett, The Plain Dealer, June 27, 2003.]

An American who spent two months working on a US-led reconstruction team in Iraq has accused Washington of failing to prepare for the post-conflict situation. Timothy Carney, a former US ambassador who until recently had been overseeing Iraq's industry ministry, said most of the focus was placed on the military campaign and very little on the security and political problems that could ensue.

"What we didn't understand was the lack of resources and priority that would be assigned to our efforts," Carney told BBC radio in Washington today. "Those military officers simply did not understand or give enough priority to the transition from their military mission to the political military mission," added Carney, who had been working with the Pentagon's Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance in Iraq. Asked whether the White House had thought through the post-conflict situation, he answered: "Clearly not. I'm not aware of any discussion of post-conflict Iraq taking place before November or December of last year." The US and Britain have come under fire since the end of the war, with aid workers accusing them of leaving the country in a state of anarchy.

Carney said "billions of dollars" were needed to fund the reconstruction effort and he said neither the US military nor officials were prepared for the task at hand. "There is a lack of... doctrine on how to do such political military missions and that has caused many of the problems," he said. "There was a great gap in our knowledge of what Iraq was like."
Speaking to the BBC from Iraq, Britain's international development secretary, Valerie Amos, said restoring security was the top priority but that efforts were being "sabotaged". She said: "Without getting the security environment right it's going to very difficult indeed to deal with all the other issues. The people in Iraq want their basic services to be up and running but we are being sabotaged the whole time. There are forces here that don't want the coalition effort to succeed," she said.

[Reuters, June 26, 2003 .]

"We are losing the peace," said Maj. Bob Caffrey, a Special Forces civil affairs officer assigned to the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment’s 1st Squadron, which has responsibility for the East Baghdad neighborhoods. There are few jobs, of course, and what few government services once reached here are gone. There are only teasing flickers of electric power. Without power, there is no water pressure or water treatment. By day, parched women walk miles for a tin of warm, untreated water. Sewage, which used to flow in primitive drainage systems, bakes in clogged ditches beneath clouds of flies and gagging putrescence.

"We are dying for help from the NGOs (private relief groups, or non-governmental organizations), and we get zero from OCPA," said Caffrey. "We’ve been told there is $55 million in OCPA money out there, but trying to get any of it is like trying to get a bank loan."

The Bush administration awarded a $670 million contract to the Bechtel Corp. for development projects in Iraq but it may be months before they get to work. They are just now setting up their offices in a downtown Baghdad building with gilt rococo furniture, ceilings two stories high, Persian carpets, and fierce air conditioning.

Sgt. John Breaux, a member of Caffrey’s civil affairs team, said, "We’ve got two fights on our hands. We fight for the people out here who have nothing and we fight against the people back in those air-conditioned offices who won’t seem to help."

[From an article by D. Wood for Newhouse News Service, June 26, 2003.]

The Bush administration has found its next target for pre-emptive war, but it's not Iran, Syria or North Korea. Not yet anyway. Before launching any new foreign adventures, the Bush gang has some homeland housekeeping to take care of: it is going to sweep up those pesky non-governmental organisations (NGOs) that are helping to turn world opinion against US bombs and brands. The war on NGOs is being fought on two clear fronts. One buys the silence and complicity of mainstream humanitarian and religious groups by offering lucrative reconstruction contracts. The other marginalises and criminalises more independent-minded NGOs by claiming that their work is a threat to democracy. The US Agency for International Development (USaid) is in charge of handing out the carrots, while the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the most powerful think-tank in Washington, is wielding the sticks.

On May 21 in Washington, Andrew Natsios, the head of USaid, gave a speech blasting US NGOs for failing to play a role many of them didn't realise they had been assigned: doing public relations for the US government. According to InterAction, the network of 160 relief and development NGOs, Natsios was "irritated" that starving and sick Iraqi and Afghan children didn't realise that their food and vaccines were coming to them courtesy of George Bush. From now on, NGOs had to do a better job of linking their humanitarian assistance to US foreign policy and making it clear that they are "an arm of the US government". If they didn't, InterAction reported, "Natsios threatened to personally tear up their contracts and find new partners".

Many humanitarian leaders are shocked to hear their work described as "an arm" of government - most see themselves as independent (that would be the "non-governmental" part of the name). The best NGOs are loyal to their causes, not to countries, and they aren't afraid to blow the whistle on their own governments. Think of Médecins Sans Frontières standing up to the White House and the European Union over Aids drug patents, or Human Rights Watch's campaign against the death penalty in the US.

These days, NGOs are supposed to do nothing more than quietly pass out care packages with a big "brought to you by the US" logo attached - in public-private partnerships with Bechtel and Halliburton, of course. That is the message of "NGO Watch", an initiative of the AEI and the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies that takes aim at the growing political influence of the non-profit sector. The stated purpose of the website, launched on June 11, is to "bring clarity and accountability to the burgeoning world of NGOs". In fact, it is a McCarthyite blacklist, telling tales on any NGO that dares speak against Bush administration policies or in support of international treaties opposed by the White House.

This bizarre initiative takes as its premise the idea that there is something sinister about "unelected" groups of citizens getting together to try to influence their government. "The extraordinary growth of advocacy NGOs in liberal democracies has the potential to undermine the sovereignty of constitutional democracies," the site claims.

Coming from the AEI, this is not without irony, as it is an NGO. As for influence, few peddle it quite like the AEI, whose looniest of ideas have a habit of becoming Bush administration policy. And no wonder. Richard Perle, member and former chairman of the Pentagon's Defence Policy Board, is an AEI fellow, along with Lynne Cheney, the wife of the vice-president, and the Bush administration is crowded with former AEI fellows. In other words, the AEI is more than a think-tank - it's Bush's outsourced brain. Taken together with Natsios's statements, this attack on the non-profit sector marks the emergence of a new Bush doctrine: NGOs should be nothing more than the charity wing of the military, silently mopping up after wars and famines. Their job is not to ask how these tragedies could have been averted, or to advocate solutions. And it is certainly not to join anti-war and globalisation movements pushing for real political change.

The control freaks in the White House have really outdone themselves this time. First they tried to silence governments critical of their foreign policies by buying them off with aid packages and trade deals. (Last month US trade representative Robert Zoellick said that the US would only enter into new trade agreements with countries that offered "cooperation or better on foreign policy and security issues".)

Next they made sure the press didn't ask hard question during the war by trading journalistic access for editorial control. Now they are attempting to turn relief workers in Iraq and Afghanistan into publicists for Bush's Brand US. The US government is usually described as "unilateralist", but I don't think that's quite accurate. The Bush administration may be willing to go it alone, but what it really wants is legions of self-censoring followers, from foreign governments to national journalists and international NGOs.

This is not a lone wolf we are dealing with; it's a sheepherder. The question is: which of the NGOs will play the sheep?

[Naomi Klein, The Guardian (London), June 23, 2003]

ECOLOGY

The only way we can preserve the earth is to grant every living entity what it needs to thrive and take from it only what it can afford to give.

Britain’s butterflies are being hit by a double whammy of climate change and changing land use, scientists have warned. A survey has revealed that dozens of the rarest types are in severe decline. Removal of their habitats has prevented the butterflies spreading their wings and moving north to take advantage of the warmer and wetter weather.

Special habitats such as woodlands, grasslands, and heaths are being destroyed, preventing the butterflies from spreading.

Scientists have used climate models to predict the distribution of future butterfly populations. Records show Britain has warmed by 1.0-1.5 degrees C over the past 25 years. This trend should help butterflies such as the ringlet that currently live in the warmer weather of the south.

"But a more realistic scenario is that it will decline in the future as it will disappear from areas in the south but fail to colonise many areas in the north," scientists write in Biologist magazine.

The scientists looked at the distribution of 46 of Britain’s 56 resident butterfly species, ignoring those that migrate. Distribution of three-quarters of these has declined since the 1970s.

[From an article by David Adam for The Guardian (London), June 7, 2003. Contributed by P.E.N., Colchester, England, UK.]

Introduction of alien species

Italian motorists have a new danger to contend with as they hurtle along the motorway near Florence, reports AFP. A colony of crayfish, which escaped from their breeding pool in nearby Massaciuccoli to set up home in a lake next to the highway, is on the move again. The crayfish originated in Louisiana and breed rapidly. Each female produces around 12,000 eggs each year. The growing population is now venturing onto the motorway in search of more water. The Italian authorities are currently trying to design and build a barrier sufficiently high to keep the crustaceans away.

[The Guardian (London), June 20, 2003.] [Note: Cockatoo Island is on the northwest shore of Australia, by the Indian Ocean.]

Iron ore mining on the beach at Cockatoo Island in the Kimberley is claimed to be smothering areas of coral and other marine life with thousands of tones of sediment and waste material. Images taken at the remote site show coral, shellfish and seaworms covered in thick deposits of runoff from the site.

A spokesman for the mining companies said that the sediment runoff was not extensive. Australia’s Environmental Protection Agency has not formally assessed the project but stated that they believed that "the turbidity and tidal patterns were such that sedimentation would only be temporary."

On the other hand, a coral expert at the West Australia Museum said that sedimentation is one of the biggest environmental problems facing coral communities - next to global warming and over-fishing.

[Carmelo Amalfi, The West Australian, May 24, 2003. Contributed by Gogglesworth, West Australia, Australia.]

The Environmental Protection Agency is preparing to publish a draft report next week on the state of the environment, but after editing by the White House, a long section describing risks from rising global temperatures has been whittled to a few noncommittal paragraphs.

The report, commissioned in 2001 by the agency's administrator, Christie Whitman, was intended to provide the first comprehensive review of what is known about various environmental problems, where gaps in understanding exist and how to fill them.

Agency officials said it was tentatively scheduled to be released early next week, before Mrs. Whitman steps down on June 27, ending a troubled time in office that often put her at odds with President Bush.

Drafts of the climate section, with changes sought by the White House, were given to The New York Times yesterday by a former E.P.A. official, along with earlier drafts and an internal memorandum in which some officials protested the changes. Two agency officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the documents were authentic.

The editing eliminated references to many studies concluding that warming is at least partly caused by rising concentrations of smokestack and tail-pipe emissions and could threaten health and ecosystems. Among the deletions were conclusions about the likely human contribution to warming from a 2001 report on climate by the National Research Council that the White House had commissioned and that President Bush had endorsed in speeches that year. White House officials also deleted a reference to a 1999 study showing that global temperatures had risen sharply in the previous decade compared with the last 1,000 years. In its place, administration officials added a reference to a new study, partly financed by the American Petroleum Institute, questioning that conclusion.

In the end, E.P.A. staff members, after discussions with administration officials, said they decided to delete the entire discussion to avoid criticism that they were selectively filtering science to suit policy.>BR>
[From an article by A.C. Revkin & K.Q. Seelye for New York Times, June 19, 2003.]

Question: Is there anything, short of violence, that we can do about a government that refuses to take care of the environment? Voting and letter writing haven’t worked and neither have street demonstrations. - L.F.


This and That

Politicians lie and that is official according to a recent government-funded report. "Politics should be regarded as less like an exercise in producing truthful statements and more like a poker game," said author Glen Newey, reader in politics at the University of Strathclyde. "And there is an expectation by a poker player that you try to deceive them as part of the game."

Newey’s report - published by the government-funded Economic and Social Research council - adds that not only is lying "sometimes justifiable" where there is a public interest (national security), but voters even have a "right to be lied to" about things where they would rather not know what happened, such as what was done during a war.

[Observer (London), May 18, 2003. In Socialist Standard, June 2003.]

Here we are. We finished the Twentieth Century. That century saw many advances in science and technology. Yet despite the potential to satisfy worldwide human need, there are still millions of people suffering from hunger and human misery. Unhappily, our social organization has not changed in a way that would enable the human race to reap the full benefits of the useful advances and abandon the harmful ones. Instead, science and technology are commodities produced sale and profit. They serve the needs of the market system. Presently, access to the means of life is through money for most people. For the majority, this means employment of some kind is necessary. However, jobs only come when there is the prospect of profit. Worse, men and women are judged by the amount of their material possessions. If you are stuck in a poor economic situation, you are judged as having little or no worth.

Oh, how apparent is the most urgent need for the earth to belong to its entire people. Then, freed from the shackles that sale and profit place on human endeavours, people will find that there will be sufficient resources for everyone to have a satisfying way of life.

[Weijagye Justus, Uganda, who can be reached at jkweijagye@yahoo.com]

About 23,500 people die every day as a direct result of starvation and starvation-related diseases. Yet, there is enough food produced to feed the world’s population two to three times over. Rather than make sacrifices in spending on the distribution of this vial commodity to all people, we spend huge amounts of money on war. Does this seem odd to anyone else?

[E.S., Letter to the Editor of the West Australian, April 22, 2003.]

The war on Iraq and Afghanistan, coupled with the "War on Drugs," were created by our very own government to fulfill their agenda of banging away at our constitutional rights. Which by the way they want to control so they can have absolute power over our lives. Make no mistake, it’s going to get worse before it gets better.

Oh, don’t worry. Other countries will fall at the cost of our young men and women, while we stand by and weep the tears of ignorance. We deserve what we get because we are smarter than we used to be. Yet, we stand and applaud with our listless hands for the creeps that start wars with fake allegations.

[Gerald Van Hoorelbeke, Colorado, USA.]

French Parliament [Sounds like the US Congress!] A protracted debate on pension reform in the Assemblee Nationale, France's parliament, was briefly interrupted yesterday [June 17] when an MP placed a tortoise on the writing desk in front of him.

Pierre Lellouche brought out the tortoise - which was of the stuffed toy variety - to protest about the slowness of the discussion, reports AFP (a news service). It was around a quarter to six when the socialist MP Pascal Terrasse noticed it and asked for the session to be suspended so that the "ostentatious" item could be removed.

"Mr. Lellouche wanders around with his tortoise like a fool with his toothbrush," Mr. Terrasse complained. "If we are going to have a tortoise in the chamber, why not a slug?" he asked later, adding that he had nothing against the creatures: "Tortoises are very nice animals which take their time but always get there in the end."

[The Guardian (London), June 18, 2003.]

Dancing the tango, playing chess, and playing the piano are the best ways to ward off senile dementia, according to a new study. Over the past 21 years, 469 cogent (mentally sound) adults between 75 and 85 were observed for signs of mental decline and memory loss. Those who kept their minds nimble were 75% less likely to develop dementia or Alzheimer’s disease.

Ballroom dancing is the only physical activity that appears to keep dementia at bay. "Dancing involves precise physical activity, listening to the music, remembering dance steps and taking your partner into account. This is very mentally testing," said Dr. Joe Verghese, a neurologist. "Doing a daily crossword does not seem as effective, although it is difficult to know haw hard people have to think. I would recommend Scrabble because it encourages thought in a number of different directions."

[N. Wapshott, The Times (London), June 20, 2003.]

At present the average life expectancy at birth in the United Kingdom is 75 years for men and 80 years for women. A healthy-living, slim 35-year-old with a good family history might expect to live to 86 if male, or 93 if female, but:
--For smoking more than 10 cigarettes a day subtract 2 years
--For failing to take regular exercise 20 minutes a day subtract 1.4 years
--For not avoiding foods high in saturated fats subtract 2 years
--For regularly eating barbecued food and charred meats subtract 0.4 years
--For drinking more than two units of alcohol (female) or three (male) a day subtract 1.2 years
--For liability to stress subtract 2.8 years
--For not living close to relatives other than immediate family subtract 1.8 years
--For indulging in risky sex subtract 1.6 years
--For not cleaning and flossing teeth regularly subtract 1.2 years
--One way of prolonging life is now thought to be not to take retirement, but to remain at work. Some calculations suggest that at age 65 this can add 1.8 years

[From an article by Christine Seib for The Times (London), June 23, 2003.]

The Opiad of the People?

"Drink is the joy of Russians!" Prince Vladimir is said to have cried in the 10th century when he rejected teetotal Islam as a national religion for Russia. The Russian Orthodox Church later canonized him. Russia is still paying the price for his choice, with recent estimates calculating that one in every seven Russians is an alcoholic.

The government, even under health-conscious President Vladimir Putin, has steered clear of any policies that would smack of hugely unpopular anti-alcohol campaigns. Russians drink some 15 litres of pure alcohol a year. Germans drink nine. Alcohol is readily available at kiosks dotting Moscow streets, many open around the clock. Commuters often clutch bottles of beer as they make their way into work in the morning.

Mr. Gorbachev’s anti-alcohol policies were among the greatest failures of perestroika but Russia’s life expectancy did rise to 65 years. It has since fallen to below 59 for men.

"In Russia, the government always prefers to let people drink rather than have a revolution," said Konstantin, a volunteer adviser at Alcoholics anonymous. "Each time we have prohibition, we have social upheaval - under the tsar, under Gorbachev."

[Clara Ferreira-Marques, Reuters, date unknown. Contributed by Gogglesworth, West Australia, Australia.]

Resistance to Change

[Response to James Sullivan’s essay in the June issue] Much of mankind is highly resistant to change. Even when evidence clearly indicates that a given change would be beneficial to society, many people will fight against it. Very often the plaintive wail is: The old way worked, so why change it?

A very vivid demonstration can be seen in America’s childishly stubborn clinging to the thoroughly anachronistic and utterly chaotic inch/pound system of weights and measures.

I can readily agree with James C. Sullivan’s argument that government should not impose the acceptance of new goods, products, and services; the market pretty much takes care of introducing these.

But - in some instances - change must be imposed by government, in the matter of currencies or standards of weights and measures, for example. Government should be involved simply because these so greatly impact upon the whole society. Also, given a choice, people will nut accept a change - unless compelled to do so.

Mr. Sullivan used the example of the Susan B. Anthony dollar as an example of people resisting change, stating that: "The government tried to force that upon us." In fact they did not. They offered the people the choice of adopting it. Admittedly it was a poorly designed coin but people would have resisted any new coin (given a choice), no matter how well it was designed. Certainly the argument that "Carrying $10.00 worth of Susan B. Anthonies would soon rip a hole in your pocket" is totally without merit; so would $10.000 worth of quarters. Besides, almost no one could carry $10.00 worth of any coin.

Had that coin been adopted, the $2.00 bill would have replaced the $1.00 bill and, after a bit of time, people would hardly notice the difference.
When the US switched from the Silver Certificate to the Federal Reserve Note, the government declared the Silver Certificate "no longer legal tender" and called them in. When a change would clearly benefit the society, then government is right to impose the change.

People in general will not willingly make the change. As Allan Watts so aptly stated it: "An individual’s ability to embrace a new [idea] is in inverse ratio to his emotional dependence upon the old [idea]. The fear of change is mankind’s most prevalent malady; yet, change is the one absolute of nature. Even the universe changes. Progress [one form of change] is the road to a better lot. Stagnation is the road to ruin!"

[C. Victor Gabriel, Nevada, USA.]

welcome to the theocracy
my eyes cross every time I hear
some flag-wrapped plutocrat utter The Monosyllable.
I certainly haven’t been blessed with health insurance,
nor a cult of seraphim to protect me from rising taxes.
no matter a lifetime of consume. . .reproduce. . .obey,
the working poor are always left behind.
& just when you think existence
on our blue dot couldn’t get more precarious,
those who presume to know what’s best for us
mis-anthropomorphize The Absolute, give it
two right wings & a political agenda.

[From a poem by roibeard ui-neill, in Blue Collar Review (Norfolk, VA), Autumn 2002.]

World Citizens Wanted

Global conditions are vastly different than they were a scant two years ago. The sympathy of the world for America (and Americans) in the wake of the horrific 9/11 attacks has been bombed out of the heart of a vast majority of Earth’s inhabitants by this country’s vile, unwarranted, money-driven attack upon the people of Iraq. Even many of America’s staunchest friends have begun to condemn our arrogant imperialism.

The strident, discordant hate-mongering of this nation’s super-chauvinistic, Pseudo-Patriots [like "Lush Lumberger" . . er . . Rush Lumbrain, and that ilk] to the contrary not withstanding, it is not the duty or the right of this nation ALONE to rid the world of "undesirables."

Indeed, it is the "Moral Police" of America’s "Christian" leaders that is causing world sympathy to give way to deep, bitter resentment, hatred, and increasing terrorism. The obsession with war in our leaders, coupled with constant tax "breaks" for huge corporations and the wealthiest members of this society, is beginning to stir a call for revolution among the lower-income groups throughout the world.

How are the rational citizens of Earth supposed to be loyal to the descent into madness of "Statesmen" who send the sons and daughters of their own people into combat to kill the sons and daughters of others? More and more, rational people have begun to look to the "philosophy" of Rationalism as the only hope for the salvation of the human species from the stubborn obsession with the present unhealthy social system. The world’s economies have been severely damaged by runaway corporate greed. There has been gross political failure of what our leaders call "democracy," which in fact is more like a wealthy oligarchy that is at war with the poor.

But, like any invasion by a bigger, stronger force, the assault on Earth’s people will be resisted by a growing community of world citizens who are sick and tired of war and who seek relief from grinding poverty, hunger, and all forms of slavery.

Fortunately, hope springs anew out of this capitalist-driven social chaos. A determined group of world citizens are beginning to unit against the arrogant demagogues. They are seeking better answers and working toward solutions to life’s problems, using scientific truth (aided and abetted by reason) and genuine justice.

[C. V. Gabriel, who publishes A Gadfly’s Journal, Box 3943, Tonopah, NV 89049, USA.]

Next month: We’d love to know what you think. These are our usual classifications:

-- Open - questions, comments, tirades, etc.
-- RSVP. React to previous statements.
-- The ecology.
-- Clippings from newspapers, etc.

On the Web:

Overtime is included in the website of Socialism for a Real Labor Union at:

socialismmarxdeleonforarealunion.org
[Socialism Marx DeLeon for a real union]

Money.

Overtime is free, but there are expenses and any help with these would be appreciated. Please make checks payable to Linda Featheringill and mail to me at 4651 West 41st Street, Down, Cleveland, OH 44109.

Contributions will be acknowledged in the next issue, or you can remain anonymous if you wish. Finances at the end of June 2003:

Balance -------------------14.70

Contributions -------------50.48

Copying -------------------30.74

Postage -------------------28.97

Total expenses ------------59.71

Balance --------------------9.23

Contributions: C. V. Gabriel 5.00, Anon. 10.48, Anon. 10.00, S. Jeffrey, 25.00.

And, to Everyone, thank you, thank you, thank you. Linda Featheringill.