Athens, Greece – 15 October 2014

 

STATEMENT

 

Ebola virus deaths facilitated by imperialism

Only free and public healthcare systems with a focus on prevention can provide an adequate response

 

The Ebola epidemic that has struck mainly in Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea of West Africa and threatens the entire world has killed thousands of people and caused panic to millions of others.

As high level officials of the World Health Organization confess, the epidemic has severely expanded over the last weeks and 70% of the people affected die because of the lack of proper healthcare facilities.

This epidemic brings in the forefront in the most tragic way the chronic and deep wounds in the African Continent by colonialism, by the continuous plundering of the wealth-producing resources and by the high public debts that keep African states and their economies enslaved to the IMF, the World Bank and monopolies cartels.

Crucial problems that in extraordinary conditions such as the one today can create an explosive atmosphere are: The poverty, the malnutrition, the lack of basic healthcare infrastructure and social welfare, the limited access to a system of Public and Free Education capable to eradicate illiteracy and the effect of prejudices and superstitions, the slums that continue to exist being a disgrace for humanity and a danger to public health, the militarization and the state violence that are the answer of the panicked state mechanism.

The World Federation of Trade Unions expresses its indignation at the current situation in the existing healthcare facilities in the abovementioned countries which result in medical personnel offering their services while risking their own lives without any safety measures (gloves, masks). As a result, deaths amongst medical personnel have risen to extreme levels.

The World Federation of Trade Unions and its members worldwide have in the past, with two International Action Days, denounced the role of the Pharmaceutical Multinational Companies which profit from the people’s suffering.

State budget cuts in the funding of public institutions in the field of research, pharmaceutical production and healthcare in the USA and the European Union are aggravating the problems while working in favor of the privatization of those fields, the expansion of the control of the monopolies over the industry and against the satisfaction of the people’s needs.

It is very clear in the case of Ebola as well that as long as the research, the production and the healthcare are ruled by the laws of the monopoly competition and the profit, the people will be suffering from diseases that should have long been extinct or adequately controlled.

Furthermore, in complete contrast to the imperialist policy of the USA and Britain which in the midst of the crisis have ceased the opportunity to send new troops in Africa, the World Federation of Trade Unions feels the need to congratulate the heroic decision of the Cuban Government and the Cuban people to show in the most humanitarian way their solidarity to the people of Africa by sending in Liberia and Guinea a large group of doctors and medical personnel in order to assist in the efforts for the relief of the Ebola patients. As More than 50,000 Cuban doctors and medical personnel working in 66 countries around the world and specifically 4,000 in 32 African countries, are offering high level Health services as a form of practical solidarity.

We congratulate our affiliate the CTC Cuba and its members in the Health Sector who heroically prove their international solidarity.

The World Federation of Trade Unions representing 90 million workers in 126 countries reaffirms its consistent position that preventive healthcare on a framework of a public, free and adequate healthcare system is the best solution in all Health issues.

The WFTU struggles for:

• The creation of contemporary, adequate and fully equipped institutions of healthcare in all countries that will be part of a broad Public, Free and centrally designed healthcare system to offer to all the population proper healthcare services at all stages of their lives. The sufficient number of medical personnel, the satisfaction of the labour rights and the proper conditions of hygiene and safety are important factors.
• The formation of public institutions of research, production and distribution of free or cheap pharmaceutical supplies, medicine and vaccination to all the people.
• The eradication of illiteracy by securing the access for all people to a public and free Education.
• For state policy that will solve the housing problems in many countries.
• The elimination of poverty and hunger. The African Continent is rich in natural resources and agricultural capabilities. If those are put in the control and the service of the people would offer greatly in the rapid improvement of the living standards of the ordinary people and to the drastic elimination of the diseases and poverty. 
• THE SECRETARIAT
•  

Published time: October 15, 2014 18:40 Via http://rt.com/news/196268-five-things-know-ebola/ The UN’s health watchdog, the WHO, says there are 60 days left to contain the Ebola outbreak, which has already claimed almost 5,000 lives. This is what you need to know about the killer virus.

1. It has been here for decades

The virus lives naturally in animals, mostly in sub-Saharan Africa. The first two recorded outbreak were in 1976. The Ebola virus (EBOV) is one of five members of the Ebolavirus genus, four of which cause lethal hemorrhagic fever. It was previously called Zaire virus, after the country that is now called the Democratic Republic of Congo. There are currently two separate Ebola outbreaks underway. In addition to the one in Western Africa, which has already spread to the US and Europe, there is another one in the Congo. Bats are the natural reservoir of the virus, because they can carry it without getting ill. Apes can suffer from it too. Humans may get infected by eating bushmeat or through feces, after which the virus can spread from human to human via blood, saliva and other fluids.

2. There is no cure

Ebola’s high mortality rate and gruesome symptoms have given it the air of something out of a horror movie. But statistically speaking, the virus was a minor threat, with outbreaks quickly fading out claiming a few hundred lives at most. So it’s not surprising that institutions researching infectious diseases never invested many resources into finding a cure, preferring to spend money on more wide-spread (and, cynically speaking, more profit-generating) threats. The exception to that are bioweapons specialists, who concluded that the virus that could not go airborne and is an ineffective means to attack the enemy (or serve as a weapon for terrorists, for that matter). So when the current outbreak started beating records – in fact killing more people than all previous outbreaks combined – and spreading into cities, nobody had a working treatment at hand. A handful of experimental vaccines are in the pipeline, including three developed in Russia. But they are far from being mass produced, while the virus is spreading.

3. No adequate response

The countries affected by the current outbreak are poor, their healthcare systems are rudimentary, and the tradition-dictated hygiene habits of many of its citizens are not suitable for stopping the infection. Where Western countries can rally experts in biohazard suits, quarantine every person a suspected carrier had contact with and run blood tests, countries like Guinea, Sierra Leone, and Liberia have neither the resources nor experience to take such measures. And the problems only start with healthcare: the epidemic spreads panic, fear and violence, causing deterioration in whatever social order is in place. The assistance from international organizations helps a lot, but it’s not a magic wand that can stop the outbreak with a deft wave. Organizations like the WHO have their difficulties too. For instance, the UN’s health body had its budget cut, leaving it with less than $4 billion to spend in 2013-2014. In contrast, the budget of the US agency tackling infections, the CDC, was about $6 billion in 2013. Just like scientists researching treatments, doctors preventing them in the field have to prioritize. Ebola was not a priority, and the outbreak went under the radar for an estimated three months, before it was declared as such by Doctors Without Borders. By that time it was already in Guinea’s capital Conakry, a city of 2 million people.

4. The West is not prepared

Or at least not as well prepared as it should be! Even if Ebola manages to get into developed nations with some travelers slipping through airport cordons, the spread of the virus would not be large. It takes between four to 21 days for an infected person to become contagious, which means once a case is discovered, everyone who had contact with the person can be quarantined and tested before they can spread the disease. But being among the few unlucky victims is little consolation for those who do get infected. And the fact that in the US and Spain, health workers who provided care to known Ebola sufferers got infected, despite knowing what they were dealing with, is less than reassuring. In both countries there is criticism over how the treatment of Ebola patients is conducted and how reports of new suspected cases have been responded to.

5. Epidemic cost: Tens of billions of dollars

Battling the outbreak is difficult and costly. The WHO estimates that by November there could be 10,000 new cases of the disease each week in two months, unless it’s taken under control. This would require having 70 percent of infected people in a care facility and 70 percent of burials done without further infections. Otherwise the breakout would reach a stage, for which there is no plan. The World Bank says in the worst case scenario the economic damage from the epidemic could reach $33 billion. The US Department of Defense said it needs over $1 billion to cover the cost of the effort to fight the disease in Africa. It may send as many as 3,000 soldiers to the epidemic zone, with an estimated cost of $750 million over a six-month period. Other states, world bodies and charities have promised to chip in to stem the tide of the developing outbreak and provide aid to the most afflicted West African nations. In September, the European Union pledged 150 million euros to fight the virus in West Africa. The World Bank Group has pledged US $230 million in emergency funding to help Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone contain the spread of Ebola infections. Last month the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation released $50 million to the UN and other international aid agencies working to contain the epidemic. The International Committee of the Red Cross, in tandem with the Red Cross and Red Crescent societies, has set aside 34.7 million Swiss francs to tackle the epidemic as well. The price tag of developing and distributing drugs, however, is less than one would expect. Ripley Ballou, who heads the Ebola vaccine program for GSK, estimated the company could make 100,000 to 500,000 doses for just $25 million. The problem: it would take around 9 months. In any such epidemic, however, the real cost comes not from the cure, but treating the consequences of human fear, WHO director general Margaret Chan said. According to Chan, 90 percent of the economic costs incurred from any such outbreak “come from irrational and disorganized efforts of the public to avoid infection.”

STOP THE DEPORTATIONS OR WE WILL RUN LUIS GUTIERREZ FOR PRESIDENT!/

¡DETENER LAS DEPORTACIONES O CORREREMOS LUIS GUTIERREZ PARA PRESIDENTE!

We the undersigned, having been betrayed by the President and the Democratic Party, facing the reality of the continuing unjust deportations and separation of families in the millions, do hereby support and draft Congressman Luis Gutierrez to run AS AN INDEPENDENT for the Presidency of the United States in 2016 if President Obama does not use the authority we have given him to stop the deportations by November 27^th of this year. We pledge also to march during Thanksgiving Weekend to show the unity of our community.

Nosotros los abajo firmantes, por lo tanto haber sido traicionado por el Presidente y el partido demócrata, y enfrentando la realidad de las continuas deportaciones injustas y separación de nuestras familias en los millones, apoyo el proyecto de obligar a Congresista Luis Gutiérrez para funcionar como nuestro candidato independiente para la Presidencia de Estados Unidos en el año 2016 si Presidente Obama no utiliza su autoridad que le hemos dado para que pare las deportaciones antes del 27 de noviembre de este año. Nos comprometemos también a marchar durante el fin de semana de Dar Gracia, para mostrar la unidad de nuestra comunidad.

Name/Nombre                           Address/Dirección                                                    Email                                   Tel/Cell             RV

1.________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 2.________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 3.________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 4.________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 5.________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 6.________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 7.________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 8.________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 9.________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 10_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Return to November 27^th Coalition, 2009 W 22^nd Place, Chicago, Il. 60608

______________________________________        __________________________________  _______________________________

Circulator full name                                                                            Address                                                                                 City State and Zip code

______________________________________________         __________________________________________   _____________________________________

Tel.                                                                               Tel.cel                                                               email

Bernie Sanders is building a “Revolution” to challenge Hillary Clinton in 2016

Grace Wyler

Via http://progresoweekly.us/bernie-sanders-building-revolution-challenge-hillary-clinton-2016/

October 8, 2014

Bernie Sanders is angry. In fact, he’s furious. He’s mad about income inequality, and about the decades of economic policies and trade agreements that he says have gradually eroded the middle class. He’s mad at Republicans in Washington, DC, who want to gut spending for entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare. He’s mad at House Speaker John Boehner for suggesting last week that the US might have “no choice” but to send ground troops into Syria. He’s mad at everyone in Congress for not doing more to address climate change, or to rein in the financial industry after the 2009 economic meltdown. He’s mad—really, really mad—about the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United ruling, and about the overwhelming political influence of corporate campaign contributors. He’s mad at Democrats for not being mad enough. And he wants you to start getting mad too.

It’s for all of these reasons, plus a couple of others, that Sanders, the independent US Senator from Vermont and a self-described “democratic socialist,” is seriously considering running for president in 2016. While Democrats quietly wait for Hillary Clinton to declare her presidential plans, Sanders has publicly made it clear that he plans to challenge the party’s heir apparent from the left, tapping into a growing wave of populism among liberal activists upset about issues like income inequality, climate change, and corporate cronyism. Already he’s making moves that threaten to complicate Clinton’s presumptive White House bid, popping up at events in Iowa and New Hampshire, on Meet the Press, and at progressive rallies like last month’s Climate Change March to build support for a grassroots “revolution” that he sees as a progressive response to the Tea Party movement.

Of course, Sanders knows that he has little chance of winning anything in 2016, and not just because American voters don’t tend to take kindly to candidates who embrace “Scandinavian-style socialism.” A 2016 poll released by McClatchy/Marist over the weekend showed Sanders with just 4 percent support among Democratic voters, trailing Joe Biden, who came in with 15 percent, and Elizabeth Warren, who came in at 8 percent. (Clinton was the overwhelming favorite, leading the other candidates by nearly 50 points.)

But long-shot presidential candidates have a way of influencing US elections in profound and interesting ways, forcing frontrunners to talk about issues that they might have otherwise liked to ignore. So I called up Sanders last week to find out more about how he wants to change the national conversation.

VICE: You’ve been sounding the alarm on inequality and the decline of the middle class for quite a while. Do you think people are starting to pay attention?

Bernie Sanders: Absolutely, I think the overwhelming majority of the American people are deeply concerned about the collapse of the middle class, about the fact that tens of millions of Americans are working longer hours for lower wages, and that the gap between the very very rich and everybody else is getting wider and wider. Everywhere I go, people are outraged that 90 percent of all new income generated in this country since the Wall Street crash is going to the top 1 percent, while the vast majority of the American people are seeing a decline in their incomes. So yes, there’s outrage out there and people want a government that represents them and not just the top 1 percent.

You’ve mentioned in previous interviews that you’re thinking of running for president in 2016. Have you come to a closer decision on that?

I was just in New Hampshire and I’m going to Iowa next week, so I am going around the country just trying to hear from as many people as possible about if they think that the agenda I would run on—which is basically to protect the interest of working families and take on big money interests—really has resonance in their areas. So we’re still doing a lot of talking but I haven’t made a final decision yet.

Do you think it’s possible to channel your messages into a political campaign for 2016?

I believe so. One of the problems is that while the Republican Party has become a far-right extremist party controlled by the Koch brothers and other billionaires, and the Democratic Party has not been as clear as it should be in making the American people aware of the fundamental economic issues facing this country and their willingness to fight on behalf of working families and take on Wall Street and corporate America. All I can tell you is that in my political life there is virtually no special interest, whether it’s Wall Street, the military-industrial complex, the pharmaceutical industry, oil companies, coal companies— you name it— I’ve taken them on.

Basically, my view is that the American people are hurting, they are angry, and they worry very much about what’s going to happen to their kids. So, if the question is, “Do I believe that a strong, progressive agenda can motivate many millions of americans to stand up and fight back, yes, I do believe that is the case.”

It seems like there is often a disconnect on the left between a progressive, anti-corporate agenda and the political reality that it takes a lot of money to run a political campaign. Do you think it’s possible to become president of the United States, whether it’s you or someone else, without becoming beholden to some kind of interest group?

You have to define what the “interest groups” are.

Anyone who has a lot of money and an interest in influencing policy.

I think that’s a good question, especially since this disastrous Citizens United decision, which now enables billionaires to spend unlimited sums of money. It’s a very legitimate question to ask whether the billionaires can be beaten, or whether their money and power are such that it is impossible to take them on. My view is that I think we still can beat them. I think we have to overturn Citizens United and move to public funding of elections. What is going on now is an absolute disgrace.

I think it is possible, if one runs a well-organized campaign and if one is able to mobilize millions of people to stand up against big money and trust that they can be defeated. But you raise a legitimate question. It may well be that at some point in the not-so-distant future, these guys who own the economy may be absolutely able to control completely the political processes with their money. It’s certainly what the Koch brothers want to do, and it remains to be seen whether they will be successful.

Democrats have also been able to get plenty of billionaires donating on their side. Does that present similar issues? Or is it a case of Good Billionaires vs. Bad Billionaires?

Let me respond in two ways. I think the media has said, “Both sides are getting money from the very rich.” The answer is yes and no. The truth is that the Republicans are receiving a lot more money from the very wealthy, from the Koch brothers alone—who I understand will put $400 million into this campaign—not to mention many other people. So it is not a question of equivalence. One side is getting far, far more from the very rich than the other side is.

On the other hand, I personally, very strongly, believe that we have to overturn citizens united. I don’t think that any billionaire, regardless of his or her politics, should be able to play a significant role in a campaign. It’s not what democracy is about.

The third point that I would make is that when people say, “The Democrats are getting money from very rich people,” is that it’s true, though the Republicans are getting a lot more. Then you have to ask yourself, “What are the rich people donating to the Democrats concerned about?” You have some billionaire out there who’s legitimately concerned about global warming. You know what? Global warming is one of the great planetary crises that we face and it must be addressed. What are the Koch brothers concerned about? Their concern is that we should use more and more fossil fuels, that we should build the Keystone Pipeline, that we should significantly weaken the Environmental Protection Agency, and, by the way, that we should cut Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and education. It’s not enough to say that there are billionaires on both sides. You’ve got to ask what they want.

At the end of the day, I personally want to see all billionaires unable to heavily influence campaigns. I want to see Citizens United overturned, and I want to see public funding of elections.

Do you think it’s possible that Congress would pass a constitutional amendment that would overturn Citizens United, or is that just a pipe dream?

Well, as you know, although it didn’t get much media coverage, we debated that issue a few weeks ago in the Senate, and every Republican voted against proceeding to a legislation that would overturn Citizens United. I think that the overwhelming majority of Americans—Republicans, Democrats, and independents—understand that Citizens United is a disastrous decision that is having a profoundly negative impact on American democracy. I believe that if we are capable of mounting the kind of strong grassroots effort that we need, which means getting state legislatures on board, city councils on board, millions of people on board, then yes, I do believe we can overturn it.

Congress has been bogged down recently by a lot of vague philosophical arguments about the size and role of the federal government, and consequently hasn’t been able to get anything else done. One instance in which that wasn’t the case was in passing the Sanders-McCain Veterans Bill, to expand healthcare options for veterans and also hold the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) accountable for hiding long wait times. Can you talk about how you got that done? I’ve heard there was a lot of shouting involved.

Well, you’re right. The VA bill will provide $17.5 billion into the VA for healthcare and deals with some other important issues including affording educational opportunities to Gold Star Wives [spouses of veterans who have died in service] and helping young veterans be able to go to college. It was an important piece of legislation and I’m glad we were able to get that passed. I think the reason we were successful is that, in terms of veterans issues, across the political spectrum, whether you’re progressive or conservative, I think one understands that it would be grotesquely immoral not to address the problems facing people who put their lives on the line to defend this country. And that was the reason I think we were able to bring people with different political ideologies together around this bill.

I’m afraid that on many other bills the ideological divide is so great that I am not optimistic. The Republican agenda is pretty clear. They want more tax breaks for the very rich and for large corporations. And the end of the day, they’re going to want to cut Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, nutrition programs—that’s their agenda. I think they are way out of touch from where the American people are. I think they may be in touch with where the Koch brothers are, but not where the average American is. And that’s the problem that we have. I think you have a lot of people in Congress who are not reflecting the views of the vast majority of the American people.

What we need is a political revolution. We need to end the situation where, in this coming election, the estimate is that 60 percent of the people are not going to vote. We need to change that and get people much more actively involved in the political process than is currently the case.

How do you think that happens?

It ain’t easy, that I can assure you. It means a lot of grassroots organizing. It means knocking on millions of doors and educating people as to what the right-wing Republican agenda is about. We just sent out a Facebook post talking about what the Koch brothers’ agenda is. It’s an extreme right-wing agenda that most of the American people do not agree with, but people don’t know it. So we have to do a lot of educating, and one of the problems we have is that the corporate media is not particularly interested in doing that, so we have to do it for them. We need to educate, organize, and make it very clear to working families that there is a war going on against their wellbeing, and they’re going to have to fight back.

Check out this link  http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/10/04/in-the-medical-response-to-ebola-cuba-is-punching-far-above-its-weight/