Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization

TBR-The Uruguay Round agreements 

The “Final Act” signed in Marrakesh in 1994 is like a cover note. Everything else is attached to this. Foremost is the Agreement Establishing the WTO (or the WTO Agreement), which serves as an umbrella agreement. Annexed are the agreements on goods, services and intellectual property, dispute settlement, trade policy review mechanism and the plurilateral agreements. The schedules of commitments also form part of the Uruguay Round agreements. 

The Parties to this Agreement,

Recognizing that their relations in the field of trade and economic endeavour should be conducted with a view to raising standards of living, ensuring full employment and a large and steadily growing volume of real income and effective demand, and expanding the production of and trade in goods and services, while allowing for the optimal use of the world’s resources in accordance with the objective of sustainable development, seeking both to protect and preserve the environment and to enhance the means for doing so in a manner consistent with their respective needs and concerns at different levels of economic development,

Recognizing further that there is need for positive efforts designed to ensure that developing countries, and especially the least developed among them, secure a share in the growth in international trade commensurate with the needs of their economic development,

Being desirous of contributing to these objectives by entering into reciprocal and mutually advantageous arrangements directed to the substantial reduction of tariffs and other barriers to trade and to the elimination of discriminatory treatment in international trade relations,

Resolved, therefore, to develop an integrated, more viable and durable multilateral trading system encompassing the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, the results of past trade liberalization efforts, and all of the results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations,

Determined to preserve the basic principles and to further the objectives underlying this multilateral trading system, 

Agree as follows:

back to top

Article I
Establishment of the Organization

The World Trade Organization (hereinafter referred to as “the WTO”) is hereby established.

back to top

Article II
Scope of the WTO

1.   The WTO shall provide the common institutional framework for the conduct of trade relations among its Members in matters related to the agreements and associated legal instruments included in the Annexes to this Agreement.

2.   The agreements and associated legal instruments included in Annexes 1, 2 and 3 (hereinafter referred to as “Multilateral Trade Agreements”) are integral parts of this Agreement, binding on all Members.

3.   The agreements and associated legal instruments included in Annex 4 (hereinafter referred to as “Plurilateral Trade Agreements”) are also part of this Agreement for those Members that have accepted them, and are binding on those Members. The Plurilateral Trade Agreements do not create either obligations or rights for Members that have not accepted them.

4.   The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 as specified in Annex 1A (hereinafter referred to as “GATT 1994”) is legally distinct from the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, dated 30 October 1947, annexed to the Final Act Adopted at the Conclusion of the Second Session of the Preparatory Committee of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, as subsequently rectified, amended or modified (hereinafter referred to as “GATT 1947”).

back to top

Article III
Functions of the WTO

1.   The WTO shall facilitate the implementation, administration and operation, and further the objectives, of this Agreement and of the Multilateral Trade Agreements, and shall also provide the framework for the implementation, administration and operation of the Plurilateral Trade Agreements.

2.   The WTO shall provide the forum for negotiations among its Members concerning their multilateral trade relations in matters dealt with under the agreements in the Annexes to this Agreement. The WTO may also provide a forum for further negotiations among its Members concerning their multilateral trade relations, and a framework for the implementation of the results of such negotiations, as may be decided by the Ministerial Conference.

3.   The WTO shall administer the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (hereinafter referred to as the “Dispute Settlement Understanding” or “DSU”) in Annex 2 to this Agreement.

4.   The WTO shall administer the Trade Policy Review Mechanism (hereinafter referred to as the “TPRM”) provided for in Annex 3 to this Agreement.

5.   With a view to achieving greater coherence in global economic policy-making, the WTO shall cooperate, as appropriate, with the International Monetary Fund and with the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and its affiliated agencies.

back to top

Article IV
Structure of the WTO

1.   There shall be a Ministerial Conference composed of representatives of all the Members, which shall meet at least once every two years. The Ministerial Conference shall carry out the functions of the WTO and take actions necessary to this effect. The Ministerial Conference shall have the authority to take decisions on all matters under any of the Multilateral Trade Agreements, if so requested by a Member, in accordance with the specific requirements for decision-making in this Agreement and in the relevant Multilateral Trade Agreement.

2.   There shall be a General Council composed of representatives of all the Members, which shall meet as appropriate. In the intervals between meetings of the Ministerial Conference, its functions shall be conducted by the General Council. The General Council shall also carry out the functions assigned to it by this Agreement. The General Council shall establish its rules of procedure and approve the rules of procedure for the Committees provided for in paragraph 7.

3.   The General Council shall convene as appropriate to discharge the responsibilities of the Dispute Settlement Body provided for in the Dispute Settlement Understanding. The Dispute Settlement Body may have its own chairman and shall establish such rules of procedure as it deems necessary for the fulfilment of those responsibilities.

4.   The General Council shall convene as appropriate to discharge the responsibilities of the Trade Policy Review Body provided for in the TPRM. The Trade Policy Review Body may have its own chairman and shall establish such rules of procedure as it deems necessary for the fulfilment of those responsibilities.

5.   There shall be a Council for Trade in Goods, a Council for Trade in Services and a Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (hereinafter referred to as the “Council for TRIPS”), which shall operate under the general guidance of the General Council. The Council for Trade in Goods shall oversee the functioning of the Multilateral Trade Agreements in Annex 1A. The Council for Trade in Services shall oversee the functioning of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (hereinafter referred to as “GATS”). The Council for TRIPS shall oversee the functioning of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (hereinafter referred to as the “Agreement on TRIPS”). These Councils shall carry out the functions assigned to them by their respective agreements and by the General Council. They shall establish their respective rules of procedure subject to the approval of the General Council. Membership in these Councils shall be open to representatives of all Members. These Councils shall meet as necessary to carry out their functions.

6.   The Council for Trade in Goods, the Council for Trade in Services and the Council for TRIPS shall establish subsidiary bodies as required. These subsidiary bodies shall establish their respective rules of procedure subject to the approval of their respective Councils.

7.   The Ministerial Conference shall establish a Committee on Trade and Development, a Committee on Balance-of-Payments Restrictions and a Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration, which shall carry out the functions assigned to them by this Agreement and by the Multilateral Trade Agreements, and any additional functions assigned to them by the General Council, and may establish such additional Committees with such functions as it may deem appropriate. As part of its functions, the Committee on Trade and Development shall periodically review the special provisions in the Multilateral Trade Agreements in favour of the least-developed country Members and report to the General Council for appropriate action. Membership in these Committees shall be open to representatives of all Members.

8.   The bodies provided for under the Plurilateral Trade Agreements shall carry out the functions assigned to them under those Agreements and shall operate within the institutional framework of the WTO. These bodies shall keep the General Council informed of their activities on a regular basis.

back to top

Article V
Relations with Other Organizations

1.   The General Council shall make appropriate arrangements for effective cooperation with other intergovernmental organizations that have responsibilities related to those of the WTO.

2.   The General Council may make appropriate arrangements for consultation and cooperation with non-governmental organizations concerned with matters related to those of the WTO.

back to top

Article VI
The Secretariat

1.   There shall be a Secretariat of the WTO (hereinafter referred to as “the Secretariat”) headed by a Director-General.

2.   The Ministerial Conference shall appoint the Director-General and adopt regulations setting out the powers, duties, conditions of service and term of office of the Director-General.

3.   The Director-General shall appoint the members of the staff of the Secretariat and determine their duties and conditions of service in accordance with regulations adopted by the Ministerial Conference.

4.   The responsibilities of the Director-General and of the staff of the Secretariat shall be exclusively international in character. In the discharge of their duties, the Director-General and the staff of the Secretariat shall not seek or accept instructions from any government or any other authority external to the WTO. They shall refrain from any action which might adversely reflect on their position as international officials. The Members of the WTO shall respect the international character of the responsibilities of the Director-General and of the staff of the Secretariat and shall not seek to influence them in the discharge of their duties.

back to top

Article VII
Budget and Contributions

1.   The Director-General shall present to the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration the annual budget estimate and financial statement of the WTO. The Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration shall review the annual budget estimate and the financial statement presented by the Director-General and make recommendations thereon to the General Council. The annual budget estimate shall be subject to approval by the General Council.

2.   The Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration shall propose to the General Council financial regulations which shall include provisions setting out:

(a)    the scale of contributions apportioning the expenses of the WTO among its Members; and
 

(b)    the measures to be taken in respect of Members in arrears.

The financial regulations shall be based, as far as practicable, on the regulations and practices of GATT 1947.

3.   The General Council shall adopt the financial regulations and the annual budget estimate by a two-thirds majority comprising more than half of the Members of the WTO.

4.   Each Member shall promptly contribute to the WTO its share in the expenses of the WTO in accordance with the financial regulations adopted by the General Council.

back to top

Article VIII
Status of the WTO

1.   The WTO shall have legal personality, and shall be accorded by each of its Members such legal capacity as may be necessary for the exercise of its functions.

2.   The WTO shall be accorded by each of its Members such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the exercise of its functions.

3.   The officials of the WTO and the representatives of the Members shall similarly be accorded by each of its Members such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the independent exercise of their functions in connection with the WTO.

4.   The privileges and immunities to be accorded by a Member to the WTO, its officials, and the representatives of its Members shall be similar to the privileges and immunities stipulated in the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies, approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 21 November 1947.

5.   The WTO may conclude a headquarters agreement.

back to top

Article IX
Decision-Making

1.   The WTO shall continue the practice of decision-making by consensus followed under GATT 1947⁽¹⁾. Except as otherwise provided, where a decision cannot be arrived at by consensus, the matter at issue shall be decided by voting. At meetings of the Ministerial Conference and the General Council, each Member of the WTO shall have one vote. Where the European Communities exercise their right to vote, they shall have a number of votes equal to the number of their member States⁽²⁾ which are Members of the WTO. Decisions of the Ministerial Conference and the General Council shall be taken by a majority of the votes cast, unless otherwise provided in this Agreement or in the relevant Multilateral Trade Agreement⁽³⁾.

2.   The Ministerial Conference and the General Council shall have the exclusive authority to adopt interpretations of this Agreement and of the Multilateral Trade Agreements. In the case of an interpretation of a Multilateral Trade Agreement in Annex 1, they shall exercise their authority on the basis of a recommendation by the Council overseeing the functioning of that Agreement. The decision to adopt an interpretation shall be taken by a three-fourths majority of the Members. This paragraph shall not be used in a manner that would undermine the amendment provisions in Article X.

3.   In exceptional circumstances, the Ministerial Conference may decide to waive an obligation imposed on a Member by this Agreement or any of the Multilateral Trade Agreements, provided that any such decision shall be taken by three fourths⁽⁴⁾ of the Members unless otherwise provided for in this paragraph.

(a)    A request for a waiver concerning this Agreement shall be submitted to the Ministerial Conference for consideration pursuant to the practice of decision-making by consensus. The Ministerial Conference shall establish a time-period, which shall not exceed 90 days, to consider the request. If consensus is not reached during the time-period, any decision to grant a waiver shall be taken by three fourths(4) of the Members.
 

(b)    A request for a waiver concerning the Multilateral Trade Agreements in Annexes 1A or 1B or 1C and their annexes shall be submitted initially to the Council for Trade in Goods, the Council for Trade in Services or the Council for TRIPS, respectively, for consideration during a time-period which shall not exceed 90 days. At the end of the time-period, the relevant Council shall submit a report to the Ministerial Conference.

4.   A decision by the Ministerial Conference granting a waiver shall state the exceptional circumstances justifying the decision, the terms and conditions governing the application of the waiver, and the date on which the waiver shall terminate. Any waiver granted for a period of more than one year shall be reviewed by the Ministerial Conference not later than one year after it is granted, and thereafter annually until the waiver terminates. In each review, the Ministerial Conference shall examine whether the exceptional circumstances justifying the waiver still exist and whether the terms and conditions attached to the waiver have been met. The Ministerial Conference, on the basis of the annual review, may extend, modify or terminate the waiver.

5.   Decisions under a Plurilateral Trade Agreement, including any decisions on interpretations and waivers, shall be governed by the provisions of that Agreement.

back to top

Article X
Amendments

1.   Any Member of the WTO may initiate a proposal to amend the provisions of this Agreement or the Multilateral Trade Agreements in Annex 1 by submitting such proposal to the Ministerial Conference. The Councils listed in paragraph 5 of Article IV may also submit to the Ministerial Conference proposals to amend the provisions of the corresponding Multilateral Trade Agreements in Annex 1 the functioning of which they oversee. Unless the Ministerial Conference decides on a longer period, for a period of 90 days after the proposal has been tabled formally at the Ministerial Conference any decision by the Ministerial Conference to submit the proposed amendment to the Members for acceptance shall be taken by consensus. Unless the provisions of paragraphs 2, 5 or 6 apply, that decision shall specify whether the provisions of paragraphs 3 or 4 shall apply. If consensus is reached, the Ministerial Conference shall forthwith submit the proposed amendment to the Members for acceptance. If consensus is not reached at a meeting of the Ministerial Conference within the established period, the Ministerial Conference shall decide by a two-thirds majority of the Members whether to submit the proposed amendment to the Members for acceptance. Except as provided in paragraphs 2, 5 and 6, the provisions of paragraph 3 shall apply to the proposed amendment, unless the Ministerial Conference decides by a three-fourths majority of the Members that the provisions of paragraph 4 shall apply.

2.   Amendments to the provisions of this Article and to the provisions of the following Articles shall take effect only upon acceptance by all Members:

Article IX of this Agreement;
Articles I and II of GATT 1994;
Article II:1 of GATS;
Article 4 of the Agreement on TRIPS.

3.   Amendments to provisions of this Agreement, or of the Multilateral Trade Agreements in Annexes 1A and 1C, other than those listed in paragraphs 2 and 6, of a nature that would alter the rights and obligations of the Members, shall take effect for the Members that have accepted them upon acceptance by two thirds of the Members and thereafter for each other Member upon acceptance by it. The Ministerial Conference may decide by a three-fourths majority of the Members that any amendment made effective under this paragraph is of such a nature that any Member which has not accepted it within a period specified by the Ministerial Conference in each case shall be free to withdraw from the WTO or to remain a Member with the consent of the Ministerial Conference.

4.   Amendments to provisions of this Agreement or of the Multilateral Trade Agreements in Annexes 1A and 1C, other than those listed in paragraphs 2 and 6, of a nature that would not alter the rights and obligations of the Members, shall take effect for all Members upon acceptance by two thirds of the Members.

5.   Except as provided in paragraph 2 above, amendments to Parts I, II and III of GATS and the respective annexes shall take effect for the Members that have accepted them upon acceptance by two thirds of the Members and thereafter for each Member upon acceptance by it. The Ministerial Conference may decide by a three-fourths majority of the Members that any amendment made effective under the preceding provision is of such a nature that any Member which has not accepted it within a period specified by the Ministerial Conference in each case shall be free to withdraw from the WTO or to remain a Member with the consent of the Ministerial Conference. Amendments to Parts IV, V and VI of GATS and the respective annexes shall take effect for all Members upon acceptance by two thirds of the Members.

6.   Notwithstanding the other provisions of this Article, amendments to the Agreement on TRIPS meeting the requirements of paragraph 2 of Article 71 thereof may be adopted by the Ministerial Conference without further formal acceptance process.

7.   Any Member accepting an amendment to this Agreement or to a Multilateral Trade Agreement in Annex 1 shall deposit an instrument of acceptance with the Director-General of the WTO within the period of acceptance specified by the Ministerial Conference.

8.   Any Member of the WTO may initiate a proposal to amend the provisions of the Multilateral Trade Agreements in Annexes 2 and 3 by submitting such proposal to the Ministerial Conference. The decision to approve amendments to the Multilateral Trade Agreement in Annex 2 shall be made by consensus and these amendments shall take effect for all Members upon approval by the Ministerial Conference. Decisions to approve amendments to the Multilateral Trade Agreement in Annex 3 shall take effect for all Members upon approval by the Ministerial Conference.

9.   The Ministerial Conference, upon the request of the Members parties to a trade agreement, may decide exclusively by consensus to add that agreement to Annex 4. The Ministerial Conference, upon the request of the Members parties to a Plurilateral Trade Agreement, may decide to delete that Agreement from Annex 4.

10.   Amendments to a Plurilateral Trade Agreement shall be governed by the provisions of that Agreement.

back to top

Article XI
Original Membership

1.   The contracting parties to GATT 1947 as of the date of entry into force of this Agreement, and the European Communities, which accept this Agreement and the Multilateral Trade Agreements and for which Schedules of Concessions and Commitments are annexed to GATT 1994 and for which Schedules of Specific Commitments are annexed to GATS shall become original Members of the WTO.

2.   The least-developed countries recognized as such by the United Nations will only be required to undertake commitments and concessions to the extent consistent with their individual development, financial and trade needs or their administrative and institutional capabilities.

back to top

Article XII
Accession

1.   Any State or separate customs territory possessing full autonomy in the conduct of its external commercial relations and of the other matters provided for in this Agreement and the Multilateral Trade Agreements may accede to this Agreement, on terms to be agreed between it and the WTO. Such accession shall apply to this Agreement and the Multilateral Trade Agreements annexed thereto.

2.   Decisions on accession shall be taken by the Ministerial Conference. The Ministerial Conference shall approve the agreement on the terms of accession by a two-thirds majority of the Members of the WTO.

3.   Accession to a Plurilateral Trade Agreement shall be governed by the provisions of that Agreement.

back to top

Article XIII
Non-Application of Multilateral Trade Agreements between Particular Members

1.   This Agreement and the Multilateral Trade Agreements in Annexes 1 and 2 shall not apply as between any Member and any other Member if either of the Members, at the time either becomes a Member, does not consent to such application.

2.   Paragraph 1 may be invoked between original Members of the WTO which were contracting parties to GATT 1947 only where Article XXXV of that Agreement had been invoked earlier and was effective as between those contracting parties at the time of entry into force for them of this Agreement.

3.   Paragraph 1 shall apply between a Member and another Member which has acceded under Article XII only if the Member not consenting to the application has so notified the Ministerial Conference before the approval of the agreement on the terms of accession by the Ministerial Conference.

4.   The Ministerial Conference may review the operation of this Article in particular cases at the request of any Member and make appropriate recommendations.

5.   Non-application of a Plurilateral Trade Agreement between parties to that Agreement shall be governed by the provisions of that Agreement.

back to top

Article XIV
Acceptance, Entry into Force and Deposit

1.   This Agreement shall be open for acceptance, by signature or otherwise, by contracting parties to GATT 1947, and the European Communities, which are eligible to become original Members of the WTO in accordance with Article XI of this Agreement. Such acceptance shall apply to this Agreement and the Multilateral Trade Agreements annexed hereto. This Agreement and the Multilateral Trade Agreements annexed hereto shall enter into force on the date determined by Ministers in accordance with paragraph 3 of the Final Act Embodying the Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations and shall remain open for acceptance for a period of two years following that date unless the Ministers decide otherwise. An acceptance following the entry into force of this Agreement shall enter into force on the 30th day following the date of such acceptance.

2.   A Member which accepts this Agreement after its entry into force shall implement those concessions and obligations in the Multilateral Trade Agreements that are to be implemented over a period of time starting with the entry into force of this Agreement as if it had accepted this Agreement on the date of its entry into force.

3.   Until the entry into force of this Agreement, the text of this Agreement and the Multilateral Trade Agreements shall be deposited with the Director-General to the CONTRACTING PARTIES to GATT 1947. The Director-General shall promptly furnish a certified true copy of this Agreement and the Multilateral Trade Agreements, and a notification of each acceptance thereof, to each government and the European Communities having accepted this Agreement. This Agreement and the Multilateral Trade Agreements, and any amendments thereto, shall, upon the entry into force of this Agreement, be deposited with the Director-General of the WTO.

4.   The acceptance and entry into force of a Plurilateral Trade Agreement shall be governed by the provisions of that Agreement. Such Agreements shall be deposited with the Director-General to the CONTRACTING PARTIES to GATT 1947. Upon the entry into force of this Agreement, such Agreements shall be deposited with the Director-General of the WTO.

back to top

Article XV
Withdrawal

1.   Any Member may withdraw from this Agreement. Such withdrawal shall apply both to this Agreement and the Multilateral Trade Agreements and shall take effect upon the expiration of six months from the date on which written notice of withdrawal is received by the Director-General of the WTO.

2.   Withdrawal from a Plurilateral Trade Agreement shall be governed by the provisions of that Agreement.

back to top

Article XVI
Miscellaneous Provisions

1.   Except as otherwise provided under this Agreement or the Multilateral Trade Agreements, the WTO shall be guided by the decisions, procedures and customary practices followed by the CONTRACTING PARTIES to GATT 1947 and the bodies established in the framework of GATT 1947.

2.   To the extent practicable, the Secretariat of GATT 1947 shall become the Secretariat of the WTO, and the Director-General to the CONTRACTING PARTIES to GATT 1947, until such time as the Ministerial Conference has appointed a Director-General in accordance with paragraph 2 of Article VI of this Agreement, shall serve as Director-General of the WTO.

3.   In the event of a conflict between a provision of this Agreement and a provision of any of the Multilateral Trade Agreements, the provision of this Agreement shall prevail to the extent of the conflict.

4.   Each Member shall ensure the conformity of its laws, regulations and administrative procedures with its obligations as provided in the annexed Agreements.

5.   No reservations may be made in respect of any provision of this Agreement. Reservations in respect of any of the provisions of the Multilateral Trade Agreements may only be made to the extent provided for in those Agreements. Reservations in respect of a provision of a Plurilateral Trade Agreement shall be governed by the provisions of that Agreement.

6.   This Agreement shall be registered in accordance with the provisions of Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations.

DONE at Marrakesh this fifteenth day of April one thousand nine hundred and ninety-four, in a single copy, in the English, French and Spanish languages, each text being authentic.

Explanatory Notes: back to top

The terms “country” or “countries” as used in this Agreement and the Multilateral Trade Agreements are to be understood to include any separate customs territory Member of the WTO.

In the case of a separate customs territory Member of the WTO, where an expression in this Agreement and the Multilateral Trade Agreements is qualified by the term “national”, such expression shall be read as pertaining to that customs territory, unless otherwise specified.

LIST OF ANNEXES

ANNEX 1

ANNEX 1A:  Multilateral Agreements on Trade in Goods

• General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994
• Agreement on Agriculture
• Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures
• Agreement on Textiles and Clothing
• Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade
• Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures
• Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994
• Agreement on Implementation of Article VII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994
• Agreement on Preshipment Inspection
• Agreement on Rules of Origin
• Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures
• Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures
• Agreement on Safeguards

ANNEX 1B:  General Agreement on Trade in Services and Annexes
ANNEX 1C:  Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights

ANNEX 2

Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes

ANNEX 3

Trade Policy Review Mechanism

ANNEX 4

Plurilateral Trade Agreements

• Agreement on Trade in Civil Aircraft
• Agreement on Government Procurement
• International Dairy Agreement
• International Bovine Meat Agreement

---

Note:

1. The body concerned shall be deemed to have decided by consensus on a matter submitted for its consideration, if no Member, present at the meeting when the decision is taken, formally objects to the proposed decision. Back to text
2. The number of votes of the European Communities and their member States shall in no case exceed the number of the member States of the European Communities. Back to text
3. Decisions by the General Council when convened as the Dispute Settlement Body shall be taken only in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 4 of Article 2 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding. Back to text
4. A decision to grant a waiver in respect of any obligation subject to a transition period or a period for staged implementation that the requesting Member has not performed by the end of the relevant period shall be taken only by consensus.

Beyond a whisper

Upper photo-My aunt and whisper Nicholas Caldwell at my father's funeral.

TBR Leighton Bradford Editor-in-Chief 

I remember my folks telling me about how talented my father was, and that he created or started the R&B group the whispers! My mother told me about how he played the guitar for her and eased towards her fondness. Not bad for a brother from South Central LA! The sixties were a turbulent time, Watts, CA exploded into a riot after the death of Malcolm X and soci

al degradation. I possess books recovered from the Watts riot; it has shaped my knowledge of Black Consciousness. My latest struggles within the uplifting of my people within the south, allows me to reflect on what I took for granted, growing up on the west coast. I was born in South Central LA, it has molded my understanding of the pitfalls of inner city life. Black people are doing great things, despite socio-economic deprivation. I never knew I would be countered within the aforementioned construct. My brothers and sister's aren't afforded the sacrifices made towards freedom. My southern brothers and sista's still fear shadowy bigots. Racism is alive and well.  My parents were the catalyst for this chosen path. My relatives kept telling me to watch the unsung depiction of the group. I said to myself the unsung person is my father. Clarence Andrew Bradford gathered his classmates together at Jordan High School in Watts, California; beginning what we now know as the Whispers! My father could play the guitar, dance and sing.  My uncle use to tell me  that my father could fight and handle himself around the block. Most of the Whispers ate and stayed with my grandparents during their formative years. I'm told the Bradford refrigerator nourished the group. The passing of my father and Nicholas Caldwell, allowed me to reflect on my fathers past accomplishments. My mother, Dr. Bradford, made sure his memory was truthful. She told me how they had house parties in the sixties, and she danced better than my father.  The last memory of my father was him driving an early seventies Eldorado Cadillac, heading toward a gig. I never talk about this part of my life. The Whispers founder choreograph, sang, and played several instruments. "Needle In A Haystack", was the whispers first hit! After a stint within the army, the twins came later in the group. People only know the Don Cornelius/Solar version. The group has had countless hits.  Andrew Bradford played several instruments. Contributing to the neo-soul sound

of today. The music of today could benefit from the timeless soul music created by the Whispers. I know there are some that read this and want me to be negative, and concentrate  on people's problem's. Sure they were human beings who had problems. My father started one of the most profound R&B groups of all time!

Reverend Pinkney-How I became a political prisoner

Rev. Pinkney and his wife Dorothy. Rev. Pinkney was held as a political prisoner for 21⁄2 years because he led the community’s
challenge to a corporate backed mayor in Benton Harbor.

 

 



TBR-BENTON HARBOR, MI —  I am Reverend Edward Pinkney, a national and community activist, who tragically, became a political prisoner in the state of Michigan on December 15, 2014.  I was sent to prison with absolutely no evidence a crime was ever committed. The Berrien County trial court and Judge Sterling Schrock, along with prosecutor Mike Sepic, stole 30 months of my life.
On July 26, 2016 the Michigan Court of Appeals rejected my appeal. The three-judge panel, Kelly, O’Brien, and Hood, better known as the three blind mice, stated Rev. Edward Pinkney must have told somebody to change the dates on the recall petitions. This was ridiculous. There was absolutely no evidence to support their theory. I was convicted by an all white jury that was motivated by something other than the truth, but it is bigger than that. The powers that be will crush anybody who stands up today. It’s me today, and you tomorrow.
I have already completed the 30 months that was forced on me as the result of a Jim Crow trial that accused me of altering dates on a recall petition against the puppet Mayor James Hightower, who lost the last election by a landslide.
The prosecutor and judge formed a partnership and instructed the all white jury to convict me without any evidence. I am an innocent man tried, convicted and sentenced to die in an effort to isolate and silence me against the power of the land grabbing, job out sourcing, criminal Whirlpool Corporation, with its headquarters in Benton Harbor. This is a company who refuses to pay taxes or hire Benton Harbor Black residents. My unusually harsh sentence was imposed by Judge Schrock.
I appealed the judgment of the Michigan Court of Appeals with the Supreme Court on Sept 3, 2016. On May 17, 2017, the Court asked two questions about the case, (but refused to ask about the insufficiency of evidence.) The questions are about whether the Berrien County trial court violated the Michigan Rules of evidence, the first amendment and due process for allowing “evidence” against me to be admitted under 404b based on the prosecutor’s allegation that I was politically and socially motivated (indicated by my political and social activity, which was 100% legal). The allegation was that it was likely I committed the illegal act of forgery because it promoted my political goal of having the election recall go forward. This was nonsense.
Question number two was whether I was ever charged with a crime. The only statute that was the basis of the felony counts (168.937) set forth a penalty provision for forgery that is prohibited by other sections of the election code and does not set forth a substantive crime that can be the basis of a prosecution.
The scale of Lady Justice is imbalanced, especially against people of color. We must continue to fight against this grave imbalance to ensure a humane, just future for people of color, the homeless, the poverty stricken, for the whole weary and for the beaten populace of America. All across our country, we must continue to speak truth to power. We must demand that justice be served for all people.

5 Misconceptions About Economic Bubbles And People Who Warn About Them



 

TBR-Jesse Colombo , Forbes Contributor; I'm an economic analyst who is warning of dangerous post-2009 bubbles. Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
 

In my experience with warning about economic bubbles - both last decade's U.S. housing bubble and post-2009 bubbles - I have come across a significant number of misconceptions about bubbles and people who warn about them. The public's belief in these misconceptions is strongest when bubbles are in the final stage of their inflation, which is when excessive greed, euphoria, and delusional thinking take over. People who are caught up in a bubble gravitate to these misconceptions because they justify and confirm their beliefs while trivializing the warnings of skeptics.
Here are five common misconceptions about bubbles and people who warn about them:
1) Early bubble warnings are wrong
This is one that I find particularly irritating, and it's one of the most common. This misconception assumes that skeptics who warn that a bubble is forming years before it pops are wrong or bad forecasters for doing so, even if they are right in the end. This argument makes little sense to me because I believe that bubbles need to be warned about as early as possible to help prevent their inflation and the ensuing damage that occurs when they pop. In addition, early bubble warnings give the individuals who take heed time to prepare for an economic crisis or to limit their exposure to the bubble.
Major, economy-destroying bubbles typically take at least several years to form and can be spotted early on in their development. For example, the reckless debt buildup and asset price inflation that occurred during last decade's housing and credit bubble was identifiable as early as 2002 to 2004, even though it took until 2007 and 2008 to cause a crisis. People who believe that early bubble warnings are wrong are basically implying that the U.S. housing and credit bubble only became a bubble immediately before it popped.

2) Bubble warnings are immediate "sell" signals
This misconception is closely related to the first one, and is a common argument that is used as an attempt to discredit people who warn about bubbles. This fallacy assumes that people who warn about an economic bubble are also calling the bubble's top at the same time. By extension, this fallacy implies that the person making the warning is saying to sell the asset in question immediately and often go short. Though someone who is warning about a bubble may be doing it to inform the public and to prevent a crisis, they often get criticized for "missing the rally" as the bubble inflates.
This argument is wrong because people who warn about a bubble may also realize that the bubble is likely to inflate for several more years, creating gains for anyone holding the asset until the bubble pops. For example, in early-2012, I warned that the global economy could be on the verge of a massive new bubble that would create the illusion of an economic recovery (or what I call a "Bubblecovery") and a bull market in many financial assets. Though I was fully aware that the new bubble could continue to inflate for years, I still believed that it was important to try to fight or prevent it.

3) Bubble skeptics are "permabears"
This belief assumes that people who are aware of a bubble or warning about it cannot acknowledge or trade shorter-term bullish signals in the asset that is inflating. On the contrary, I frequently spot bullish tactical signals in stocks and other assets that I believe are experiencing a bubble that will end disastrously. Analysts and traders who use "trend-following" trading systems can capture gains during a bubble even if they are skeptical of the long-term fundamentals behind the trend. Of course, actually taking advantage of these bullish signals may present a moral dilemma for someone who is warning about a bubble.

4) A global, system-wide bubble cannot happen
For the last few years, I've been warning about numerous post-2009 economic bubbles that are forming in China, emerging economies, Canada, Australia, U.S. stocks, global bonds, tech startups, and more. Common criticisms that are leveled at me and other like-minded skeptics include, "you call everything a bubble!" and "there's a bubble in people calling bubbles."
The problem with these criticisms is that they imply that national economies and individual assets exist in a vacuum instead of being highly interconnected due to globalization. We now live in the era of the global economy rather than national economies (as was the case in the 20th century and earlier), so the possibility of a truly global bubble economy is not far-fetched at all.

How can a global economic bubble form? It's quite simple, really. For the past seven years since the Global Financial Crisis, major central banks around the world have held their interest rates at record low levels (as I discussed here) while flooding the global financial system with over $10 trillion worth of liquidity in the form of QE. These highly stimulative conditions have helped to inflate the valuations of assets such as equities, bonds, commodities, and property. Ultra-low borrowing costs have enabled a borrowing spree by governments, corporations, and households alike in many countries - particularly those that were least affected by the Global Financial Crisis.

5) Strong economic growth means that there is no bubble
This one is downright laughable, but is a fallacy made frequently by so-called "sophisticated" economists, business and political leaders, and financial journalists. The idea behind this fallacy is that a booming economy that is creating jobs and corporate earnings growth is on a sustainable path and, therefore, not experiencing a bubble. This argument is being made about the current U.S. economic recovery. Here is the problem with this logic: economists were saying the exact same thing about the U.S. economy in 2005, 2006, and 2007, which were the prime housing and credit bubble years.

intellectual property of Jesse Colombo

Stop the Raids!

 

TBR-Op-ed, www.RootsAction.org

RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act of 1970) laws were initially designed to prosecute powerful organized crime syndicates like the Mafia. Over the past few years, RICO has been used to excessively charge young people of color from low-income neighborhoods as if they were gangsters.

Click here to sign this petition to Congress:

STOP THE RAIDS, REFORM RICO AND END OVER-PROSECUTION OF OUR COMMUNITIES.

We are asking you to act now to #ReformRICO and stop prosecutors from using these federal laws, originally designed to take down the Mob, to score easy convictions against poor communities of color. Innocent teens and young adults are often forced to take plea deals when faced with first-degree conspiracy counts on which they can face a maximum of 25-years-to-life in prison.

The overwhelming majority of those charged never see trial. RICO laws are disastrous and have ruined lives, torn apart families and contributed to the enormous racial inequities we have come to expect with mass incarceration.

Click here to add your name.

Trump's inaugural pledge for "law and order" is coded messaging to law enforcement agencies, both local and federal, that will empower them to continue their abusive, racialized policing. This will mean more arrests and more incarceration at a time when America should be moving away from needless punishment of Blacks and Latinos.

Collaboration between local police departments and federal law enforcement in large, military-style "gang" raids have been cheered on by sensationalized media reports. The reports describe these young men as all being dangerous and part of organized criminal enterprises -- which they were not.

Over the past few years we have seen the emergence of a bipartisan consensus for criminal and civil justice reforms. Movements are growing across our nation urging legislators to change unfair laws that hurt families and communities of color. A wasted $80 billion a year spent on prisons actually dehumanizes inmates, many of whom are detained in inhumane conditions, some tortured in solitary confinement and denied visits or communication with their families.

Sign this petition, spearheaded by family members of those charged with RICO.

After signing the petition, please use the tools on the next webpage to share it with your friends.

This work is only possible with your financial support. Please chip in $3 now.

-- The RootsAction.org Team

P.S. RootsAction is an independent online force endorsed by Jim Hightower, Barbara Ehrenreich, Cornel West, Daniel Ellsberg, Glenn Greenwald, Naomi Klein, Bill Fletcher Jr., Laura Flanders, former U.S. Senator James Abourezk, Frances Fox Piven, Lila Garrett, Phil Donahue, Sonali Kolhatkar, and many others.

  www.RootsAction.org

 

 Blowing The Whistle On Drones
TBR-Op-ed, info@rootsaction.org

As one of the very few drone whistleblowers in the world, Cian Westmoreland needs and deserves our support.

Cian is the first recipient of the Drone Whistleblower Fellowship. In the past he was a U.S. Air Force technician who worked on the drone program. Now he takes to heart a statement by Martin Luther King Jr. that remains crucial in 2017: “Those who love peace must learn to organize as effectively as those who love war.”

Please support the work of Cian Westmoreland by making a tax-deductible contribution to the Drone Fellowship Program of the RootsAction Education Fund.

Speaking clearly about compelling moral issues, Cian offers a blunt perspective on the U.S. drone war: “In this war on terror, we have become terror. Drones are heartless by design, and the act of killing through them can become routine and bureaucratic.”

Cian reports: “I have been connecting, speaking, writing and helping where I can all over Europe.” He has put in a lot of time in Germany, which hosts U.S. military bases directly involved in the drone war.

When Cian speaks out, he is educating activists, journalists, elected officials and the general public. In early winter, for instance, he spoke to 3,000 “hackers and hacktivists” from around the world at the huge Chaos Communications Congress in Hamburg. There he addressed “the Global Assassination Grid.”

At the Hamburg conference, “I spoke of the various layers of dehumanizing elements in the drone program to include the structural, political, and psychological. It was not only understood but well received. A professor of mathematics at Cambridge University approached me afterward and said that he’s noticed the problem of students not connecting their work to real life, and that my talk inspired him to go back and show my speech to them.”

It’s far from easy, living out of a suitcase, far from home, doing this kind of work. The pressures are severe, and the resources are thin. Please help Cian Westmoreland keep going with a tax-deductible donation to the Drone Fellowship program.

It’s vital for Cian to be doing what he’s doing at this time. As he explains: “Germany is now getting prepared for Trump’s world, and Germans are now at a point where they are discussing the need to take a normative stance against Trump’s stance on Muslims and the brutal war strategy of annihilation that the Secretary of Defense, General James Mattis, is promising.”

Cian adds: “It appears that Germany is now deciding how they will work with the United States. Will they be compliant or will they resist?”

Meanwhile, Cian is also engaged in public outreach elsewhere in Europe, most crucially in the U.K. and Italy where two other critical pieces of the global drone infrastructure are based.

We hope that you’ll keep supporting Cian Westmoreland’s important work as a drone whistleblower. You can show support now by making a donation to the Drone Whistleblower Fellowship.

For Cian, stepping forward as a whistleblower has been very difficult -- and morally imperative.

Now, your tax-deductible contribution -- in solidarity with Cian Westmoreland’s whistleblowing work -- is needed to support the first Drone Whistleblower Fellowship.

The Hidden Dimension-An Inside View On The Reality Of Inner City African America

TBR-Steve B. Lofton, contributor
If Hillary Clinton wins the upcoming Presidential Election the Black underclass is doomed! Just like Hillary Clinton our Black Democratic Leadership also has no respect for our laws from President Barrack H. Obama all the way down through the local level. Is this a Nation of laws or not? Yet and unfortunately this phenomenon also holds true for our Black middle-class like Clarence Thomas, Dr. Ben Carson, and talk show host Larry Elder etc. who express their views from the right side of the political spectrum without an understanding.The result is a lawless inner-city African America headed toward its own total self destruction.

     I studied at the Los Angeles University of Hard Knocks for almost a lifetime. The courses heaped upon me there forced me to finally accept the truth about the nature of my own African-American leadership; political, social, and religious despite my great unwillingness to do so and the facts. It may be the reason many black people remain poised to cry racism at every turn. I come from both a unique and odd experience. Yet I have no criminal record which is a rarity when it comes to black men although I've been jailed many times. Our almost entirely Democratic Party affiliated African-American leadership has attempted to resolve all of our problems through the welfare system for the past half-century.

Its consequence has been the total annihilation of the African-American family. This practice by my own leadership consequently even gave birth to the Los Angeles gangs known as the Crips and the Bloods the byproducts of broken black female led homes. The African-American so called educated middle-class has failed to pull its weight for it allowed this leadership to continue to exist unchecked making me wonder if they are functionally illiterate. Is not the purpose of education still to build your community? For the black middle-class education serves them to flee the Black community believing somehow they can solve the problems of everyone else rather than to take notice of those facing their own kind.The timing finally seems right to publish the Hidden Dimension for Americans are angered by their

 Washington based politicians on both sides of the isle where our President Barrack Hussein Obama sits center stage. The world has now gotten a glimpse of this African-American President and the same unmerited black middle-class arrogance about self that we within the inner-city have existed beneath for half a century. You just can't reach them up there in the ivory towers of government or their various offices where they have caused the total breakdown of law on the civil side of the system within the inner-city then retire to the white suburbs where they live at the end of the day.There are African-Americans within the inner-city who have asked themselves how on earth is it that we have fared so miserably beneath our own kind? My book The Hidden Dimension documents the answer to that question. At the age of 60 years old I am a first time newlywed to Estella Louise Lofton and we live within the inner-city of City of Los Angeles, California. The Hidden Dimension                

Simon Reeve, operated a ‘drone’ in breach of CAA New Zealand rules sentenced.



 

Drone sentencing a ‘beacon of awareness’

for new aviation rules – CAA

At Kaiapoi, on 5 January 2015, Simon Reeve operated a remotely piloted aircraft system (RPAS) in a

control zone in close proximity to a helicopter conducting firefighting duties over the Pines Beach

settlement.

The helicopter pilot was not aware that the RPAS was operating in his proximity. Further RPAS

flights were carried out over a beach fire at the same location on 20 January. The Civil Aviation

Authority (CAA) decided to prosecute the drone pilot.

CAA General Manager - General Aviation, Steve Moore said CAA’s decision to prosecute three

charges was based on the following factors:

 

· Seriousness of the offending;

· Serious risk of harm;

· Breach of Section 44 of the Civil Aviation Act 1990 [Dangerous activity involving aircraft] Civil

Aviation Rule 101.13 X 2 [Hazardous Operations]

 

 

On 6 May 2015 the District Court Judge, G S MacAskill, found Mr Reeve guilty on all 3 charges. Today

Judge MacAskill sentenced Mr Reeve to make a $500 payment to charity and discharged him

without conviction on the charge of unnecessary endangerment. He was sentenced to pay a $250

fine for each of the other charges of flying a model aircraft in controlled airspace without Air Traffic

Control clearance.

“The CAA respects the decision of the court and considers that any penalty in this case, irrespective

of the conditions of the sentence, provides a very clear signal to RPA (drone) operators that they

need to follow rules that are in place to ensure the safety of all.

“These are not toys, they are a new form of aircraft and need to be treated with respect and flown

responsibly,” Mr Moore said.

Mr Moore continued “This case has become a beacon of awareness of the new RPAS (drone) rules

that came into effect last August.”

“This outcome should come as a timely reminder to all RPAS users – fly within the rules. And think of

others when your unit is in the sky.” He said.

look up RPAS (www.caa.govt.nz/rpas/)

 

Intending or new drone operators are advised to check the www.airshare.co.nz
or CAA website and Contact: Mike Richards, Manager Corporate Communications (Media phone 0800 222 697)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

U.S. Senate approved the Whistleblower Appreciation Day Resolution.

 

TBR-www.RootsAction.org

This month the U.S. Senate approved the Whistleblower Appreciation Day Resolution. But if the government had put you in prison for telling the truth about torture, you probably wouldn’t feel appreciated.

As CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou says, that Senate resolution is “no joke.” When whistleblowers reveal grim secrets that the public needs to know for the sake of democracy, the government’s goal is not only to punish -- “it's to ruin, professionally, personally, and financially.”

John served two years in prison for shedding light on the CIA’s torture program -- a steep price for telling the truth about some awful consequences of undemocratic power. NSA whistleblower Thomas Drake has also paid a steep price. They need your help!

With vindictive prosecutions, the government wrecked their personal finances. Please click here to make a tax-deductible donation now. Half of every dollar will go directly to John and Tom, while the other half will go to the Whistleblowers Public Education Campaign that they co-chair.

Below are some comments from John and Tom.
______________________________

John Kiriakou:

“The United States Senate in July passed the Whistleblower Appreciation Day Resolution. No joke. Senate Whistleblower Protection Caucus chairman Senator Chuck Grassley said that the resolution would designate July 30, 2016 as a day to recognize ‘the role whistleblowers play in shining a light on fraud, waste, and abuse... Workers who come forward to report fraud or misconduct in their agencies are frequently punished by their superiors for simply telling the truth. These brave citizens should not be penalized, they should be praised.’

“Somebody should tell the Justice Department. The War on Whistleblowers has been a hallmark of the Obama Administration’s judicial policy. Legitimate whistleblowers are charged under the Espionage Act, a draconian law meant to punish traitors and spies, not truth tellers. Leakers with political connections or who are friends of the President get a pass. The goal is not just to punish. It’s to ruin, professionally, personally, and financially.

“Still we went into this with our eyes open. It might sound crazy, but we would blow the whistle again. We don't need the Senate's ‘appreciation.’ What we need is for the Justice Department to respect the laws already on the books, to support whistleblowers exposing waste, fraud, abuse, and illegality.

“Over to you, Tom.”

Tom Drake:

“Congress has yet to invite John or myself in front of Congress to testify before any committee regarding our whistleblowing on torture and mass surveillance, respectively. We both came forward at great risk and to this day are the only two people who have paid a very high price for exposing government wrongdoing and criminal conduct regarding these two state-sponsored programs.

“Prosecuting whistleblowers under the Espionage Act sends a most chilling message to anybody who dares to expose critical information on government conduct vital to the public interest done in the name (and under the cover) of National Security.

“Our whistleblowing turned our lives upside down. It will take years for us to recover from the ordeal of the government criminally prosecuting both of us as vindictive and malicious punishment for exposing their criminal conduct involving torture and mass surveillance.

“We would not break faith with the Constitution. We upheld our oath to defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic (including our own government), faithfully serving our country in the line of duty at the CIA and the NSA -- even when our agencies didn’t and wouldn’t.

“We are eyewitnesses to the dark side of history. It is the truth tellers and the whistleblowers who are key to sounding the alarm and holding our own government to account. Please support our education campaign to get the word out that informs the public and holds up a mirror to those in power who abuse power.

“Thank you for your continuing support.
                                            Background:
>  Jesselyn Radack, The New York Times: "Whistleblowers Deserve Protection Not Prison"
>  The Huffington Post: "The One Man Jailed for CIA Torture Tried to Expose It"
>  Jane Mayer, The New Yorker: Thomas Drake -- "The Secret Sharer"

www.RootsAction.org

####

Grass Roots Organization RootsAction-Questions U.S. Foreign Policy

TBR-www.RootsAction.org
Since the end of the Cold War, the United States of America has systematically violated the prohibition against the threat or use of force contained in the UN Charter and the Kellogg Briand Pact. It has carved out a regime of impunity for its crimes based on its UN Security Council veto, non-recognition of international courts and sophisticated "information warfare" that undermines the rule of law with political justifications for otherwise illegal threats and uses of force.

                                    Former Nuremberg prosecutor Benjamin B. Ferencz has compared current U.S. policy to the illegal German "preemptive first strike" policy for which senior German officials were convicted of aggression at Nuremberg and sentenced to death by hanging.

                                    In 2002, the late U.S. Senator Edward Kennedy described post-September 11th U.S. doctrine as "a call for 21st century American imperialism that no other nation can or should accept." And yet the U.S. government has succeeded in assembling alliances and ad hoc "coalitions" to support threats and attacks on a series of targeted countries, while other countries have stood by silently or vacillated in their efforts to uphold international law. In effect, the U.S. has pursued a successful diplomatic policy of "divide and conquer" to neutralize global opposition to wars that have killed about 2 million people and plunged country after country into intractable chaos.

As representatives of civil society in the United States, the undersigned U.S. citizens and advocacy groups are sending this emergency appeal to our neighbors in our increasingly interconnected but threatened world. We ask you to stop providing military, diplomatic or political support for U.S. threats or uses of force; and to support new initiatives for multilateral cooperation and leadership, not dominated by the United States, to respond to aggression and settle international disputes peacefully as required by the UN Charter.

We pledge to support and cooperate with international efforts to stand up to and stop our country's systematic aggression and other war crimes. We believe that a world united to uphold the UN Charter, the rule of international law and our common humanity can and must enforce U.S. compliance with the rule of law to bring lasting peace to the world we all share.

This petition will be sent to all the world's national governments.

Click here to sign as an individual.

Click here to sign as an organization that you are authorized to sign on behalf of.

After signing the petition, please use the tools on the next webpage to share it with your friends.

This work is only possible with your financial support. Please chip in $3 now.

-- The RootsAction.org Team

P.S. RootsAction is an independent online force endorsed by Jim Hightower, Barbara Ehrenreich, Cornel West, Daniel Ellsberg, Glenn Greenwald, Naomi Klein, Bill Fletcher Jr., Laura Flanders, former U.S. Senator James Abourezk, Coleen Rowley, Frances Fox Piven, Lila Garrett, Phil Donahue, Sonali Kolhatkar, and many others.

www.RootsAction.org