CODEPINK Peace Delegation in Sana’a, Yemen with family members of prisoners extra-judicially detained at Guantanamo Bay.

Medea arrived at 2 a.m and joined us on the beautiful rooftop of Burj al Salam hotel.  Over breakfast, we contemplated our itinerary, at every hour, at opposite sides of Sana’a, we were scheduled for a meeting. We decided we had to split up.  Bob Naiman of Just Foreign Policy, Terry Rockefeller of 9/11 families for Peaceful Tomorrows and I chose to go to the US Ambassador meeting while the other three, Medea Benjamin and Tighe Barry of CODEPINK and Pam Bailey, an independent journalist, went off to meet with Prime Minister Basindwa and Human Rights Minister Hooria Mashhour.  The other team were greeted by Yemen media when they arrived at the Prime Minister’s house, they were excited to see U.S. Peace Activists .

12 P.M., U.S. Embassy, Sana’a, Yemen:

We sat down on the couches outside the offices and near a table set for 40 guests, waiting to be called in. Ambassador Gerald M. Feierstein’s delightful Information Officer told us we have an hour with the Ambassador because at one o’clock he was hosting a luncheon. It was noon.

The Ambassador comes in, greets us warmly and we launch into introductions. Bob tells Ambassador Feierstein he is key to the issues we had come to Yemen about. The Ambassador responds with “I am not key”. But since we’ve arrived, we’ve heard from numerous people that he is the puppet pulling all the strings. They’ve even nicknamed him “Sheikh Feierstein” for his strong interference and influence in the decision-making process, but apparently “Sheikh Feierstein” didn’t think so.  It reminded me of my visit to the White House with the 300,000 signatures that demanded Obama to send the prisoners cleared for release from Guantanamo back home.  They all play that same tune of “who me, I have no power around here.”

We open the topic of Guantanamo and he tells us that McCain had just visited a few weeks ago showing his support for closing Guantanamo and releasing the prisoners. And that the Saudi’s had just been in town as well to discuss the “model” system they have created for reintegrating Guantanamo prisoners and it sounded like funding for the reintegration program in Yemen was underway. He said “it was the Saudi’s program that would give the US citizen’s confidence the prisoners wouldn’t go back to doing what they were before.”  Forgetting, I assume, that they were cleared for release for no wrongdoing since 2007.  But his monologue was going at a clip, and I didn’t want to interrupt.

I perked up when he said, “Solution to violent extremism is not drones, they will not end the threat.  The solution to violent extremism is economic and social development.”   WOW.  Why don’t their behaviors match what they know to be true?  He continues, “It is far better to have Yemeni’s take on the challenges than the U.S..”  But what he says is not matching his actions.

When we started getting into the discussion of drone strikes, our information just did not match and it reminded me of the layers of blindness and disconnect that happen to people in power, especially one like the Ambassador who lives behind walls.  He didn’t believe that there were any drone strike mistakes in Yemen and he refused to acknowledge something that everyone knows to be true, that children had been killed and that drone strikes contribute to the growing and strengthening of AQAP.  What the Ambassador was claiming, differed significantly from what we heard the day before by those who are impacted directly by it and who work on these issues.  When I mentioned UNICEF has even set up a fund to support and provide drone survivors with medical treatment in Jordan,  he looked shocked.

Ambassador Fierstein  goes on to say, casualties caused by U.S. drone strikes have been exaggerated by the US media, but of course fails to mention the Al-Qaeda exaggeration in Yemen.  Yemen Polling Center, an independent think-tank in Sana’a, recently published their research “Perceptions of the Security Sector”, and they found that on the list of the 10 greatest security threats, AQAP wasn’t one. But Fierstein and the Obama administration refuse to listen to the Yemeni people and are instead, deciding for the Yemeni people what their biggest threat is. Using that to justify the lethal program and further militarization.

CODEPINK co-founders Medea Benjamin and Jodie Evans with two little girls whose uncle is imprisoned in Guantanamo. Photo Credit: Pam Bailey

The meeting continued for over two hours and the sounds of the attendees coming for lunch began to grow louder. The guests were waiting patiently to be seated.  As we wrapped up our meeting, we secured three promises with the Ambassador.  An answer about the policy around drones strikes in Yemen, so Bob can report about it.  A meeting with the family members of Guantanamo prisoners, and a meeting with those working on reintegration and rehabilitation for members of Al-Qaeda.  Right before leaving, I asked one quick question to the Ambassador, “What were your thoughts on Dirty Wars?”, I asked.  He looked back, blank faced and then over to his information officer, who says. “Jeremy Scahill”.. “Ah, I won’t watch anything Jeremy did, he is too ideological.” responds the Ambassador.  As they begin to show us out the door,  I suggested to the Ambassador that he consider watching it, since Yemen has a big role in the film.  His information officer agrees to do a screening, if I get him a DVD.

We left pleased with what we learned and what was promised to 5 hours of testimonies by the Guantanamo families that were heartbreaking. You can follow a bit of it on my twitter @MsJodieEvans.  At the end of the testimonies the families agreed to meet with the U.S. Ambassador next week and the rest of the supporters would be outside the U.S. Embassy in a vigil.  Already human rights and activist groups are signing on to join us.  I end the day shocked that it took a few people coming from the US to connect these family members who have been suffering for 12 years to the US representative in Yemen, they have never been heard by a US Ambassador.  I go to bed hopeful that with a collective effort, we can make this happen.  They were so happy to have told their stories to us today, imagine what it will do to be finally heard by a US official.  Their hearts were pouring out with grief.

One of the most heartbreaking things I learned is that they are outcasts here in Yemen because they have a relative in GITMO.  There is this belief that if the prisoners are languishing in Guantanamo Prison, they must be a terrorist. With so much stigma attached to Guantanamo, relatives in Yemen are deeply marginalized. The young girl can’t go to school, sisters have been divorced by their husbands, parents have died from heartbreak, lives have been totally broken.  It was very hard to sit through the stories.  But in the end, the joy of being a listener gave them and us hope.

Tomorrow we meet with more families.  We are filming their stories to create a 30 minute show for LinkTV. Oh dear 1am.

p.s. because there is sketchy electricity this is getting posted a day late, but I add a cause for celebration.  The Ambassador’s office HAS committed to the meeting before Ramadan which starts Tuesday the 9th of July.  Yippeeeee!

Unreported in the mainstream press is the dramatic long-term hunger strike by a group of Americans in solidarity with the hunger strikers in Guantanamo prison. The fasters include CODEPINK cofounder Diane Wilson (on a water-only fast since May 1), Veterans for Peace member Brian Wilson (May 12), and former president of Veterans for Peace, Elliott Adams. Below is an interview with Elliott Adams, who began his hunger strike on May 17.

Why did you decide to take this dramatic action, which entails such personal sacrifice?

What is happening in Guantanamo is despicable. Just think about it: 86 prisoners are cleared by the government– the Department of Defense, Justice, and Homeland Security over a year ago, and they’re still being held. Many of them have been held for over 11 years!

Now the prisoners’ access to their attorneys has also been reduced. They have a new rule that to meet with their attorneys, they have to go through a draconian search process, which includes people touching their genitals and anus, violating their religion.

The prisoners in Guantanamo are desperate. They see no sign that they will ever get out of that place. They’ve tried the legal route but now realize that even though the government has decided not to charge them and admits that they’re not a threat to US national security, they’re still going to be held. The only way they can see to get out is to starve themselves.  That is a level of desperation that Americans don’t understand.  And instead of releasing them or giving them trials, the government is brutally force-feeding them.

It’s disgusting. It’s a violation of our moral and religious principles, international law, national law; it’s a violation of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the things that are supposed to define America. It goes against the very principles I thought the American flag stood for when I was a young man.

I just can’t sit and enjoy my life when my country is doing such terrible things to these people. It’s up to us to force our government to get them out of there.

How are you feeling physically?  Have you lost a lot of weight?

I’m losing 1-1.5 pounds every day. I got rid of excess fat, and I can physically see my muscles deteriorating. I feel tired at times.

As soon as you start a long-term fast, your electrolytes get out of balance; you face potential heart problems. Once you start digesting the body a little bit, you immediately face potential kidney damage. The reduced diet may lead to nerve damage. It can be a very high-risk thing to be doing. There is also the aspect that it is uncomfortable not to eat.

But these are tiny things compared to what those men at Guantanamo are experiencing.

Have you done any hunger strikes in the past?

This is the first indefinite one I’ve done. The last one I had to stop after nine days due to health problems.

How long are you planning to continue the hunger strike?  What will convince you to start eating again?

My hunger strike is open-ended. I don’t know when we’ll see significant motion but I need to see some real action, not just nice words.

What has been the reaction of your family and friends?

Most of the people who love me think it’s crazy; it’s wrong; it’s stupid.  Fortunately, my wife is still putting up with me.  She’s been very patient for many, many years.

How do you feel about the fact that dozens of hunger strikers are being force-fed every day?

It’s really simple: it’s torture. So says the American Medical Association, the World Medical Association, and anybody with a conscience. To force-feed a conscious person is torture.

What do you think President Obama should be doing?

He should start by invoking the national security waiver that allows him to release the 86 prisoners who have been cleared for release.  He needs to stop talking and take action.

It reminds me of when George McGovern ran for president in 1972. People said to him, “You’re in favor of getting out of Vietnam, but that’s a really complicated issue.  How do you do that?”  His answer was, “I’d try ships and planes.”  It’s time we start getting people out—on ships and planes.

Do you see similarities between the way prisoners in Guantanamo are treated and prisoners in the US are treated?

Yes, absolutely. In both cases, we have situations that are immoral.  Here in the US we’ve been holding prisoners in solitary confinement, 24 hours a day by, for decades! It’s as wrong as what’s happening at Guantanamo, just a different flavor of torture and abuse.

Do you think military courts can provide Guantanamo prisoners with a fair trial?

No, of course not—that’s why they created the military courts.  In an extreme hierarchy like the military, you cannot have a fair trial.  The judge, the prosecutor, the jury—everybody is subject to what they’re told.  That’s the way it works.  It’s like saying the Spanish Inquisition or Salem Witch Hunt held fair trials.  The whole idea of a military trial is an oxymoron.

More importantly, our civilian court system works.  We have certainly tried and handled in our court system people far worse than those at Guantanamo. We can handle it. We can give them a fair trial.

Why do you think President Obama is not releasing those prisoners in Guantanamo who have been cleared for release?

Somewhere in the hierarchy of the Democrat party, someone is thinking it will cost votes.  They calculate that if they release the cleared prisoners, the Republicans will call them soft on terrorists.  That is why we have to build grassroots support for releasing the prisoners.  We have to make it a good political move for them.  We have to force our government to do what’s right.

What do you say to Americans who think the Guantanamo prisoners are “the worst of the worst” and should stay there?

I don’t think those people know much about these prisoners. I think they ought to educate themselves, and then they’ll discover that it’s pure hogwash—these people are not the worst of the worst.  I can guarantee you the US prisons hold people far worse than those at Guantanamo, people so fundamentally mean you wouldn’t even believe it. I’m not saying all of the people at Guantanamo are saints, but to say that they are the worst of the worst is a misunderstanding. In fact, our own government has determined that the majority of them should be cleared because they represent no threat to US society.

How do you think the situation at Guantanamo is seen overseas, particularly in the Muslim world?

People all over the world have lost respect for us because they see us violating the principles we are supposed to stand for and the principles of international law. In the eyes of the world, Guantanamo delegitimizes the government, the country, and even you and me because we’re paying for it. That’s why I think Guantanamo is a risk to our national security.

It’s also a violation of the American dream, the “grand experiment” that President Abraham Lincoln referred to. We can’t sit idly by while that experiment is ruined.

Medea Benjamin is cofounder of www.codepink.org and www.globalexchange.org. To help shut down Gitmo, go to www.closegitmo.net.

Is the Vermont Air National Guard being used for corrupt purposes having nothing to do with its military mission? The answer is yes. Big time. And for big money. In the article, “Those who “Fudged” Should not be Allowed to Judge” we described how military brass fudged their own scoring process to get Senator Leahy’s home state of Vermont on the list as the “preferred alternative” for basing the F-35. We know who loses: thousands of Vermonters whose homes are in noise and crash zones. This article will follow the money to see who benefits from the corrupt practices of the military brass who fudged.

The developers who stand to gain the big money did not have to invest their own dollars to position themselves. They got the taxpayers to do that for them. The City of Burlington applied for and received a federal grant of $40 million to buy 200 families out of their affordable homes near the airport entrance, and the City now holds title to most of those homes. 55 have so far been demolished. Another hundred homes stand vacant awaiting demolition. Other homes are awaiting purchase for demolition.

The federal government put up the money to buy those 200 homes as “mitigation” for noise being made by the F-16 jet fighter currently flown by the Vermont Air National Guard at the local Burlington International Airport. The 200 homes are in a zone that is being blasted by a noise level from the F-16 jets that the federal government considers so loud that their neighborhood is “unsuitable for residential use.” A report about Burlington International Airport prepared for the Federal Aviation Administration (the “FAA report”) says that “land acquisition and relocation is the only alternative that would eliminate the residential incompatibility” with that noise level (page 29).

Certain Vermont officials, including Senator Leahy and Governor Shumlin, continue to repeatedly suggest that the F-35, which the Air Force draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) says is more than four times louder than the F-16, would be fine for thousands more Vermont families who live in affordable neighborhoods of Winooski, Burlington, Williston, and South Burlington Vermont. The Air Force draft EIS says the F-35 would put 3410 homes within that same noise contour that the federal government considers “unsuitable for residential use.”

But here is how the developers stand to make their millions: according to a chart in the FAA report (page 6), different land uses have different federally mandated noise limits. Noise levels that make a home “unsuitable for residential use” are perfectly fine for commercial and industrial use. This may be because residential use generally involves children going out to play, open windows during spring, summer, and fall, family conversation, and sleeping. Hotels and other commercial buildings may have permanently closed windows and incorporate other measures in design and construction to achieve substantial sound reduction. This difference in FAA mandated noise limits is what the big money people will exploit.

The FAA report indicates that the land left after the homes are demolished within the high noise contours is not scheduled to be left as green space. Taking into account the fact that land unsuitable for residential use can still be used for commercial and industrial activity, the FAA report calls for adoption of a “Reuse Plan.” In fact, the FAA report says, “preparation of a property reuse plan is an FAA grant requirement.” Thus, the affordable residential properties the City of Burlington acquired with $40 million of federal funds in South Burlington are officially being demolished for the purpose of making the land available for the non-residential commercial reuses.

The emptied land from those 200 families is being eyed by certain developers who stand to make lots of money by putting up commercial buildings near the airport entrance—similar to the commercial development one sees at other airports. The president of one of the state’s biggest commercial developers, Ernie Pomerleau, is a member of the Airport Strategic Planning Committee. Its meetings openly discuss things like building hotels and other commercial real estate on land next to the airport that used to be a thriving community of tiny affordable homes. In an interview on WPTZ TV on June 6, 2013 Pomerleau said, “”Should there be a hotel? Yea, if it works for Burlington and South Burlington I would fully encourage that.”

Vermont Air Guard vastly increased F-16 noise

Commercial flights had nothing to do with driving out the 200 families. The Air Force draft EIS states that “The contribution of civilian aircraft is negligible compared to the military aircraft contribution” to Burlington airport noise (page BR4-21). In the neighborhood near the airport entrance, the major component of F-16 noise comes from the use of the afterburner by F-16s for routine takeoffs.

Routine afterburner use on takeoff was not required with the original configuration of the F-16. Only when the Vermont Air Guard switched from an external fuel tank located under the fuselage to tanks mounted under the wings did pilots find that they needed to use the afterburner for takeoff.

The F-16 fuel tanks, the afterburner, the noise, and federal funds were all methodically and smoothly used to remove the two hundred families living peacefully in affordable homes. Without any hearing, a thriving community of affordable homes was destroyed in favor of the Vermont Air Guard changing the position of its external fuel tank—and in favor of making this consolidated acreage available to commercial developers.

The only remaining obstacle between those developers and giant profits is the level of South Burlington City Government willingness to rezone the newly vacated land from residential to commercial.

Buying an election in Vermont

Just in time to push that rezoning for commercial development, heavily moneyed interests recently formed a political action committee (PAC) and spent an unprecedented amount to almost literally purchase seats on the South Burlington City Council for two pro-developer candidates in the March 2013 election. While the amount spent was among the highest ever to buy a city council seat in Vermont, it is a tiny fraction of the projected gain developers can expect from redeveloping the land when the remaining houses are torn down and Burlington makes the land available to the commercial developers.

The Air Force says the F-35 is more than four times louder than the F-16. Just as F-16 noise was vastly increased and harnessed to acquire federal money for use to eliminate residential neighborhoods and make their valuable real estate near the airport entrance available to commercial developers, F-35 noise might in another way work magic for the developers: to facilitate major airport expansion goals. The F-35 is so loud that any amount of noise from the goal of doubling commercial jet traffic will be totally negligible compared to the F-35 noise. Just as the shift in the F-16’s external fuel tanks and routine afterburner use is now being leveraged to remove housing near the airport entrance for commercial development, continued massive military jet noise from the F-35 can be leveraged for ambitious airport expansion to pass zoning and Vermont environmental review.

The fudge reported by the Boston Globe may only be the frosting on the cake.

The ones who “fudge” should not be the ones to judge

With thousands of Vermont families and their homes at risk, with the integrity of the Air Force basing process undermined, with questions swirling about whether facts or political influence drives the basing decision, and with personal gain by a certain commercial developer an underlying factor, an independent and impartial investigation is needed to determine whether the numbers were fudged, and if so by whom and at whose behest. If indeed numbers were fudged, the Pentagon officials who fudged should not be allowed to continue to be the ones to make the final decision. And they should be prosecuted.

No more tricks–the process was fixed, the F-35 should be nixed

If fudging was essential for Burlington to come out on top, that alone should be enough to stop the process. Honest Vermont public officials and the Vermont Air National Guard should now join with local residents and Burlington area clergy in asking the Air Force to skip Burlington for the first F-35 basing round.

But we can have no confidence in view of a money-soaked scheme by which noise zones are being put to use to drive personal gain for rich commercial developers while thousands more families in affordable homes are being put at risk.

Now is the time to build a national grass roots movement demanding an immediate halt in any plan to base the F-35 in Burlington or anywhere else and to call for canceling the entire F-35 program.

Medea Benjamin is cofounder of the peace group www.codepink.org and the human right group www.globalexchange.org. James Marc Leas is a patent lawyer in South Burlington Vermont and is active with the http://www.stopthef35.com/ coalition

2 a.m. and Tighe and I just arrived to Sana’a International Airport.

An hour later Terry, Pam and Bob got in.  We arrived to our hotel in the Old city of Sana’a and were ready for some sleep. An hour into our sleep, we woke up to the beautiful sound of the fajr athan (the call of prayer).  We drifted off for a few hours and woke up again at 7 a.m. We enjoyed a tasty breakfast with our new friend Luai, and then headed together to our first meeting across town.

We were greeted by Abdul Rahman Barman, a HOOD lawyer who represents Abdulelah Haider Shaye and many of the Guantanamo prisoners and US drone survivors. Despite Abdul Rahman being one of the busiest men in Yemen, he was kind enough to set aside time to talk and share stories, information, and photos with us.

He holds the violence of the drone attacks in his heart and describes the devastation it’s left on young lives. His team works for Human Rights in Yemen and obviously have their hands full. After a little while, we were joined by Baraa Shiban, the project coordinator from Reprieve, the human rights group based in London.

Listening to Abdul Rahman and Baraa speak, we learned how former President Saleh took advantage of Al-Qaida’s growing presence in the Arabian Peninsula — or better known as AQAP– and would exaggerate the threat to the United States to secure funding for himself. We also learned through US cable leaks in 2012 that Saleh gave the U.S. “an open door to terrorism”. This strategy was counter-productive and strengthened and helped AQAP grow.   When a loved one is killed for no reason by our counter-terrorism policies, and their deaths are being denied by both Yemeni and U.S. governments, Yemenis feel that there is no other way but to seek revenge and join a militant group. They mention that in some cases, you even see recruitment happening in the jails, where petty thieves come out as Al-Qaida operatives, motivated again by revenge.

Everyone we met today had the same message– the only answer to the violence is dialogue.  During our HOOD meeting, we were told that many in AQAP want to be in dialogue and reintegrated into society, but the Yemeni government and U.S. government continues to alienate them by refusing dialogue and dropping bombs.

In our second meeting we met with The Youth Organizing Committee. They told us that the key component of their work during the revolution was dialogue. Those who had grievances came together and spent 3 weeks learning to trust each other and find points of unity and common ground. Their goal was to get rid of Saleh and collectively build towards transition and a new post-revolutionary Yemen.

Despite Yemenis being strongly opposed to the drone strikes and Guantanamo Bay Prison, Yemenis say the bigger and underlying issue is a humanitarian and economic crisis. At least half of Yemen’s population are forced to worry about where they will be getting their next meal from. In addition to food insecurity, education, electricity and other basic needs are also being ignored by the Yemeni government.

At the offices of the Yemen Polling Center we were given the results of their last security concerns poll — we were surprised to learn that drones or Al-Qaida didn’t register. The view from the US is that AQAP has a huge stronghold in Yemen; however, there is more fear of the well armed and much larger militias that the power struggling tribal leaders have, which has lent to whispers of a swiftly approaching civil war. The more powerful factions in the militia-citizen dynamic are funded by the United States, Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia. Such a power play is reinforced by racism in electoral representation: for example, the tribe that experiences the most racism consists of 2 million of the 24 million in Yemen but has one seat of the 500.

Our friends here tell us that they have watched the country dissolve over the last 11 years and what is really missing is a country the people feel allegiance to. Corruption, warring factions and a horrific US-backed dictator have unraveled and destroyed the infrastructure of Yemen. Yemenis have been turned against each other by power interests just like in Iraq and Syria. A proxy war is taking place and everyone has power but those who live here.

Money is spent on Yemen but not “in” Yemen; instead of investing in development and education, billions have been wasted on the militarization of the country which in return, uses that force against its own people. It is beyond heartbreaking.

Yemen is so beautiful. The streets is full of the honking of horns, explosions of firecrackers at a distant wedding and the barking of dogs. Here in the old city the electricity just went off so we are in the pitch dark. What stays with me the most from the day was the generosity and kindness of the Yemenis we met. They are grateful that we are here showing a different kind of support from what they are used to by the international community, listening and standing in solidarity with the Yemeni people’s right to self-determination.

Electricity is back on and I must send this in this window of opportunity. Until tomorrow.

How broke does the U.S. have to be to reduce military spending?

The omnibus military spending bill known as the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)  rolled out of the House Armed Services Committee pulling a trailer load of amendments. In the same week as news broke of school closings in Chicago and Philadelphia for lack of funding, only two members of the committee, California representatives Jackie Speier and John Garamendi, had the presence of mind to vote “no” on $637.5 billion more for drones, nukes, and missile “defense” in FY2014.

The NDAA speeds through a House of Representatives packed with liberals and conservatives who take massive campaign contributions from military contracting firms. Democrats take their lead from President Obama, who proposed the $1.15 trillion annual budget that includes a whopping 56.5% military share of the discretionary spending pie.

Source: National Priorities Project

Despite sequestration and claims that the U.S. is too broke to adequately fund food stamps, Head Start, or “Meals-on-wheels” for the elderly, the NDAA contains $85.8 billion for the war in Afghanistan plus another $7.7 billion for the Afghan Security Forces. These funding levels are $52.2 billion over what sequestration would supposedly require — an additional $1 billion a week.

The House Armed Services Committee also passed a “Sense of Congress” endorsement of a continued U.S. military presence in Afghanistan after 2014 as well as ongoing funding for the Afghan Security forces. Thus the U.S. “withdraws” from Afghanistan.

Why does Congress keep voting for military spending when the U.S. is supposedly so broke?

It is as if they have never seen the study by economists at the University of Massachusetts, “The U.S. Employment Effects of Military and Domestic Spending,” demonstrating that investing in any other sector produces more jobs than putting money into the military. Funding education, manufacturing energy efficient home components or light rail, even just giving taxpayers cash rebates, generate up to twice as many full-time, full-benefit jobs as building weapons does.

As military spending has continued to gobble up more than half the federal spending pie every year of the Obama administration, economic conditions have continued to deteriorate for the majority of people in the U.S. According to the U.S Census, 13 percent of people in the U.S. now live in poverty. Children fare even worse: 1 in 6 live below the federal poverty line. Job growth following the financial crisis of 2008 occurred almost entirely in sectors where workers do not make a living wage, and economic migration to the U.S. has slowed. Entire generations are struggling with historically high levels of debt for education.

How broke do we have to be before Congress really reduces military spending? It’s past time to bring our war dollars home and put them to work meeting people’s needs.

Austerity is no basis for true security.

As an organization, we strive to speak truth to power and stand for human rights for all. We respect intersectionality and strive to stay aware of the many forms of privilege among our group. We would like to make an unequivocal apology to Michelle Obama, Alicia Keys, and everyone who took offense to messages we posted on Twitter.

By tweeting about how Michelle Obama “should have” responded to Ellen Sturtz’s interruption, we behaved in such a way that reflected a long history of white women dictating how Black women should behave. Our actions were not in keeping with our own values as an organization. While yesterday’s interruption was not a CODEPINK action, it is exemplary of CODEPINK tactics, and the way we responded to it was insensitive and thoughtless.

When the process of petitioning, lobbying and writing letters fails, and when mainstream media ignores the real issues, interruptions of high-profile officials are one tactic to make our voices heard. Because it crosses the line of agreed-upon civility, this tactic is always messy.

We appreciate all the people who gave us instant feedback over Twitter and it has been and will continue to be a learning opportunity for CODEPINK. We are immediately reviewing our process and criteria for social media use, as an organization, and we invite any of our our critics to speak with us directly about issues of race and privilege in order to prevent a similar occurrence in the future.

Onward to peace and justice,

The CODEPINK Staff