Resolution Opposing First Strike

Adopted January 7, 2003 by Western Connecticut Central Labor Council, AFL-CIO


Whereas, a preemptive war violates international law and sets a dangerous precedent for other nations as well as our own, and

Whereas, this war will pose enormous costs on American workers, taking money from needed programs, and

Whereas, tens of thousands of innocents could die as well as our own working-class soldiers, and

Whereas, this could destabilize the entire Middle East, making the world less secure

Therefore, the Sisters and Brothers of the Western Connecticut Central Labor Council oppose a first strike war on Iraq. We believe the United Nations weapons inspections are the correct and most effective approach to ensure a peaceful solution and

Further, we urge our Congress, the President and our Locals and Affiliated bodies to concur and act on our resolution.


(2)
Resolution by The Greater Hartford Labor Council, AFL-CIO January 8, 2003

Whereas, President George Bush has shown through words and deeds that he is preparing the United States for a unilateral and pre-emptive war against Iraq; and

Whereas, the Bush administration is carrying out unprecedented attacks against American workers and their unions, including interfering with the right to organize and increasing surveillance and harassment of those who oppose administration policies; and

Whereas, a ballooning military budget of $338 billion plus an estimated $200 billion to be used for war against Iraq, coupled with tax breaks for the rich, will mean cuts in funding for important national needs; and

Whereas, AFL-CIO President John Sweeney reminded Congress in October, 2002 that a war against Iraq will mean that the sons and daughters of America's working families will bear the costs of military decisions; therefore be it


RESOLVED that the Greater Hartford Labor Council, AFL-CIO urges the AFL-CIO Executive Council and our Connecticut congressional representatives to

Read More Show less
ACLU By ACLUSponsored

Imagine you've forgotten once again the difference between a gorilla and a chimpanzee, so you do a quick Google image search of “gorilla." But instead of finding images of adorable animals, photos of a Black couple pop up.

Is this just a glitch in the algorithm? Or, is Google an ad company, not an information company, that's replicating the discrimination of the world it operates in? How can this discrimination be addressed and who is accountable for it?

“These platforms are encoded with racism," says UCLA professor and best-selling author of Algorithms of Oppression, Dr. Safiya Noble. “The logic is racist and sexist because it would allow for these kinds of false, misleading, kinds of results to come to the fore…There are unfortunately thousands of examples now of harm that comes from algorithmic discrimination."

On At Liberty this week, Dr. Noble joined us to discuss what she calls “algorithmic oppression," and what needs to be done to end this kind of bias and dismantle systemic racism in software, predictive analytics, search platforms, surveillance systems, and other technologies.

What you can do:
Take the pledge: Systemic Equality Agenda
Sign up