Blockade at PA Fracking Site Highlights Risks to Farms and Food
This article by the Shadbush Environmental Justice Collective is re-posted from EcoWatch.
Residents of Western Pennsylvania and friends of Lawrence County farmer Maggie Henry locked themselves to a giant paper-mache pig today in the entrance to a Shell natural gas well site in order to protest the company’s threat to local agriculture and food safety. The newly-constructed gas well is located at 1545 PA Route 108, Bessemer, PA , 16102, less than 4,000 feet from Henry’s organic pig farm.
The farm has been in the Henry family for generations and has been maintained as a small business despite pressure from industry consolidation. The Henry’s made a switch from dairy to organic pork and poultry production several years ago as part of their commitment to keeping the operation safe and sustainable for generations to come. Joining Maggie Henry at the well site are residents from other Pennsylvania counties affected by natural gas drilling and Pittsburgh-area residents of all ages who support Henry’s fight. Many are customers who buy her food at farmers’ markets and grocery stores who do not want to see the integrity of their food source compromised.
The Henry farm is especially vulnerable to the risks associated with fracking because it is located in an area riddled with hundreds of abandoned oil wells from the turn of the 20th century. According to hydro-geologist Daniel Fisher who has studied the area, “Each of these abandoned wells is a potentially direct pathway or conduit to the surface should any gas or fluids migrate upward from the wells during or after fracking.”
Methane leaks from gas wells have been responsible for numerous explosions in or near residences in Pennsylvania in recent years. Migrating gas and fluids also threaten groundwater supplies, on which Henry and her animals depend for their drinking water. Last summer a major gas leak in Tioga County, PA caused by Shell’s own drilling operations, produced a 30 foot geyser of methane and water, which spewed from an unplugged well and forced several families to evacuate.
The nine foot tall pig is stationed in the driveway of the site with four protestors chained to its’ legs, obstructing traffic to and from the site. The protestors are wearing signs that read, “Fracking Threatens Food” and “Protect Farms for Our Future.” A couple dozen supporters are also on the scene.
Nick Lubecki, one of the protestors locked to the pig, recently started a farm of his own in Allegheny County. He worries about the future of agriculture in Pennsylvania, which is the state’s number one industry. “It is extremely disturbing as a young farmer to have to worry about the safety of the water supply in a chaotically changing climate while these out of state drillers have the red carpet rolled out for them. In a few years the drillers will all be gone when this boom turns to bust like these things always do. I don’t want to be stuck with their mess to clean up.”
Prior to this action, Henry exhausted all avenues to prevent or shut down the well through the legal system. Supporters of her farm have also held previous protests at the site. Despite the heightened risks posed by the abandoned wells in the area, Shell is moving forward with their operations, and Maggie’s supporters have turned to nonviolent civil disobedience.
The action comes on the heels of escalating nonviolent civil disobedience across the continent to stop extreme energy projects, like fracking, mountaintop removal coal mining and tar sands oil mining, which destroy communities and fuel the climate crisis. Last week a coalition of Appalachian and Navajo communities impacted by strip mining, blockaded Peabody Coal’s headquarters in St. Louis, MO. Earlier this month protestors in eastern Texas erected a tree sit blockade to halt construction of TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline, slated to transport crude oil from the devastating tar sands mining in Alberta, Canada to refineries in Texas.
Anti-Racist author Tim Wise to speak at GVSU this Thursday
Tim Wise is a long-time anti-racist activist and author of numerous books that challenge White Supremacy, most recently, Dear White America: Letter to a New Minority.
His lecture for this Thursday is entitled, Beyond Diversity: Challenging Racism in an Age of Blacklash, where he will critique “diversity” efforts on campuses and in corporate America.
Unlike conservative criticisms, which claim diversity and multiculturalism have gone too far, this presentation focuses on how most “tolerance” training amounts to little more than a feel-good approach which fails to address the fundamental structures of racism and inequality.
Since it is these institutional realities that cause a lack of “diversity” in the first place, failure to discuss strategies for changing the current distribution of power will doom diversity efforts to failure. Focusing on personal prejudice rather than institutional bias is shown to be inadequate for building an anti-racist movement. The negative impact on all Americans that results from failing to address structural racism will be discussed in detail.
Tim Wise Lecture
Thursday, January 31
Noon
GVSU – Allendale Campus
Kirkhof Center – Room 2250 Grand River
This event is free and open to the public. Sponsored by the GVSU LGBT Resource Center.
Sen. Carl Levin continues propaganda about US/NATO operations in Afghanistan after 2-Day Trip
Michigan Senator Carl Levin just returned from a two-day trip to Afghanistan. As he has in the past, Levin defended the US occupation and continued his mantra of support for the US training of Afghan police and military.
Since the Obama administration announced an escalation in US troops to Afghanistan, Levin has justified it on the grounds that it was necessary so that the US military could train Afghanis to provide their own security in the future.
A week ago, Levin posted a letter that he and Senator Reed sent to National Security Advisor Donilon that lays out their belief that much progress is being made in Afghanistan.
The claims by Senator Levin are widely challenged by numerous sources, which do not paint the current situation in Afghanistan or the Af-Pak strategy as well.
First, Levin ignores the whole drone war and the targeted assassinations that the Obama administration has deployed.
Second, there is no mention of human rights abuses in Afghanistan, committed by US, NATO and Afghan Security Forces, as has been documented by Voices for Creative Non-Violence.
Lastly, Senator Levin’s position on the “progress” of the Afghan Security Forces is not shared by many independent analysts. For example, a recent e-book published through the Afghanistan Analysts Network, entitled Snapshots of an Intervention, has several chapters devoted to the US/NATO training of Afghan Security Forces. This collection of essays does not portray the outcome in anyway similar to the claims of Senator Levin.
Another recent report from the Afghanistan Analysts Network, Beating a Retreat: Prospects for the Transition Process in Afghanistan, also offers information and analysis that conflicts with that of Senator Levin.
In this report the author notes that there are serious flaws in the US/NATO troop drawdown plan, the lack of stability, ongoing government corruption and the long-term problem of US military bases in Afghanistan after the 2014 “withdrawal” date. There are also major concerns about the ongoing presence of private mercenaries, which provide additional incentives for insurgent groups to continue even after US/NATO forces have diminished.
In short, Michigan Senator Carl Levin is either highly misinformed on what is actually happening on the ground in Afghanistan or he is merely playing his role to defend the imperialist nature of US foreign policy in that part of the world.
Until Housing is a Right, Blacks Will Live Marginalized Lives
This article by Glen Ford is re-posted from Black Agenda Report.
“The very notion that housing should be affordable to all – much less that housing is a right – has all but disappeared from major party political discourse.”
This year’s Martin Luther King Day report from United for a Fair Economy critiques U.S. housing policy, which has always been geared towards individual family home ownership. In recent decades, as Wall Street consolidated its political and economic dominance, government policy has been to treat housing as an asset whose value is to be constantly boosted; that is, housing as a wealth-building mechanism. It is a policy that ultimately serves the financial capitalists – a class that produces nothing, but grows more and more wealthy by manipulating the value of assets ever upward. Artificially inflating the price of housing also creates value against which homeowners can borrow – which is great for the banks but creates artificial bubbles in the economy that finally burst with catastrophic consequences.
In all of this mad, artificial wealth and bubble building, the very notion that housing should be affordable to all – much less that housing is a right – has all but disappeared from major party political discourse. United for a Fair Economy’s report, State of the Dream 2013: A Long Way From Home, puts housing policy at the center of what’s wrong with economic policy. Author Tim Sullivan says the steady “hemorrhaging of wealth in communities of color stems largely from treating housing policy as an asset-building policy.” Home ownership accounts for roughly half the total wealth of Black and Latino families, “but only 28 percent for white families,” who have other sources of wealth. The report urges that the government invest “in affordable housing and policies that reach people for whom homeownership is not the best or most viable option” – that is, renters, or forms of community-owned housing. Housing should be treated as a right, and housing policies must be informed by the realities of race.
If anything, the report is understated. In a pervasively racist society like the United States, race becomes an overwhelming factor. Race has shaped the social geography of the United States – and, therefore, the geography of wealth – as in no other modern society. Just as Black life is devalued in the criminal justice system, so the very presence of Blacks devalues the surrounding land and structures, in terms of market price. Race – and by that, I mean white racism – distorts and deforms this country’s market system, lowering the value of assets based on their proximity to concentrations of Black people, and artificially boosting the value of land and buildings that are located at a distance from Black neighborhoods.
Informal racial redlining remains probably the most powerful pricing mechanism in the American real estate market. One can cross an invisible line from a largely Black and brown city to a mostly white town, and the property values immediately soar upward, regardless of the quality of the actual houses. Urban development schemes pre-suppose the breaking up or clearing out of Black population concentrations before any economic revitalization is even attempted. Public housing has been marked for extinction, based, at root, on the assumption that concentrations of Black people are bad for business and for society. These facts of American life require that Blacks demand that affordable housing be provided as a right, not as something that trickles down. Otherwise, African Americans will remain marginalized people living on marginalized properties.
This article by Marion Nestle is re-posted from EcoWatch.
Who knew that Wednesday’s New York State Supreme Court hearing on the lawsuit filed against New York City’s cap on sodas larger than 16 ounces would turn out to be a debate about race relations?
Let’s be clear. This lawsuit is about only one thing and one thing only: to protect the profits of Big Soda—mainly, Coca-Cola and PepsiCo. The lawsuit is funded by their trade association, the American Beverage Association (ABA), at what must be astronomical expense.
But to shift attention away from profit as a motive, the ABA enlisted two organizations of underrepresented groups—the NAACP and Hispanic Federation—to file an amicus brief on behalf of the soda companies. The brief argues that the soda cap discriminates against citizens and small-business owners in African-American and Hispanic communities. But it neglects to mention that both “friends of the court” received funding from soda companies.
The financial arrangements between Big Soda and such groups demand further examination. Fortunately, we have Michael Grynbaum at the New York Times, who explains that:
The obesity rate for African-Americans in New York City is higher than the city average, and city health department officials say minority neighborhoods would be among the key beneficiaries of a rule that would limit the sale of super-size, calorie-laden beverages.
But the N.A.A.C.P. has close ties to big soft-drink companies, particularly Coca-Cola, whose longtime Atlanta law firm, King & Spalding, wrote the amicus brief filed by the civil rights group in support of a lawsuit aimed at blocking Mr. Bloomberg’s soda rules…Coca-Cola has also donated tens of thousands of dollars to a health education program, Project HELP, developed by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. The brief describes that program, but not the financial contributions of the beverage company. The brief was filed jointly with another organization, the Hispanic Federation, whose former president, Lillian Rodríguez López, recently took a job at Coca-Cola.
Soda companies have a long history of targeting their marketing efforts to Blacks and Hispanics, as shown in at least one book (and described in one of its reviews).
Last fall, the East Bay Express exposed how the soda industry exploited race issues and used them to divide and conquer in defeating the Measure N soda tax initiative in Richmond, California.
The No on Measure N workers’ paychecks were signed by political consultant Barnes Mosher Whitehurst Lauter & Partners (BMWL), which had been hired by the American Beverage Association … By the time that Big Soda had arrived, the issue of race was already a factor in the campaign. Some opponents of the tax had alleged that it was racist, arguing that it would unfairly harm low-income residents in the city. And the No on Measure N campaign … nurtured that sentiment. Indeed, there is evidence that the beverage association helped keep race at the forefront of the campaign as part of a strategy that exploited Richmond’s existing tensions.
… the beverage industry discovered a winning formula in Richmond last year that it might be able to replicate elsewhere … And if that were to happen, it could drive a wedge through traditional Democratic constituencies in many communities, with blacks and Latinos opposing their longtime political allies—progressives and environmentalists—just like they did in Richmond.
Is a cap on soda sizes discriminatory? Quite the contrary.
Public health measures like this are about removing health disparities and giving everyone equal access to good nutrition and health. This makes public health—and initiatives like the soda cap—democratic, inclusive, and anything but elitist.
But I can’t think of anything more elitist, less inclusive and more undemocratic than suing New York City over the soda cap.
In funding this suit, the soda industry has made it clear that it will go to any lengths at any cost to protect its profitability—even to the point of dragging along with it the very groups that would most benefit from the initiative.
If the American Beverage Association and its corporate members really cared about Black and Hispanic groups, it would stop target marketing, stop marketing to children and stop pretending that sugar-sweetened beverages are an important part of active, healthy lifestyles. It certainly would stop wasting these groups’ time and credibility on anti-public health lawsuits.
New Film Captures Egypt’s Ongoing Revolution After Mubarak’s Fall
This video is re-posted from Democracy Now!
As Egyptians mark the second anniversary of the Egyptian revolution, we look at a new documentary that captures the ongoing protest movement in Egypt well after the downfall of Hosni Mubarak.
“The Square” follows a group of activists as they risk their lives in the uprising that ousted Mubarak only to face further threats under the transitional military regime. We’re joined by the film’s Egyptian-American director, Jehane Noujaim, at the Sundance Film Festival in Park City, Utah. Noujaim’s previous work includes the famed Al Jazeera documentary, “Control Room.”
Obama’s Unprecedented Number of Deportations
This article by Tanya Golash-Boza is re-posted from CounterPunch.
Between 1892 and 1997, a total of 2.1 million people were deported from the United States. A change in laws in 1996 permitted the number of deportees to increase from 70,000 in 1996 to 114,000 in 1997. In 1998, the number of deportees rose to 173,000. The numbers stayed fairly steady until 2003, when the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) infused more money into immigration law enforcement and 211,000 people were deported. From there the numbers have continued to rise – peaking at just over 400,000 in 2012.
These numbers are unprecedented: by 2014 President Obama will have deported over 2 million people – more in six years than all people deported before 1997. However, there is more to this trend than these numbers. The content of policies has also changed. There have been relatively low numbers of returns as compared to removals, a reflection of a focus on interior enforcement. There has been a shift towards the deportation of convicted criminals. With these trends, unprecedented numbers of people have been separated from their families in the United States. Obama has not only deported more people than any President; he also has separated more families by focusing on interior enforcement.
More Removals than Returns
Under the Obama administration, immigration enforcement has shifted from the border to the interior. The ratio of returns to removals reflects this shift – as returns are a border enforcement mechanism.1 “Returns” occur when a Border Patrol agent denies entry, whereas a “removal” involves a non-citizen attending an immigration hearing or waiving the right to a hearing—as in an expedited removal. In 1996, there were 22 times as many returns as removals. This ratio has dropped continuously, and in 2011, for the first time since 1941, the United States removed more people than it returned.
How has ICE been able to achieve a marked increase in removals?
Removals are carried out by immigration law enforcement officers who work in two branches of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS): Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Since 2008, we have witnessed a shift towards more ICE apprehensions. In 2002, ICE apprehensions accounted for 10% of all DHS apprehensions. By 2011, that figure was nearly 50%.
In Fiscal Year 2011, immigration law enforcement agents apprehended over half a million non-citizens. For the first time, ICE apprehended nearly half of them: just over 300,000. The decrease in Border Patrol apprehensions is due to the fact that fewer people are crossing the border illegally. Deportations have continued to rise because ICE has enhanced its efforts in the interior of the United States. This has happened in two ways: 1) funding for programs targeting criminal aliens has skyrocketed; and 2) increases in Police/ICE cooperation. ICE can’t do this alone. There are only 20,000 ICE agents nationwide, with only 5,000 actively employed in enforcement and removal operations. To achieve 400,000 deportations, ICE has to rely on Border Patrol apprehensions and police arrests. As Border Patrol apprehensions decrease, ICE increasingly relies on local law enforcement.
Focus on Criminal Deportations
President Obama’s focus has been not only on deporting more people, but deporting more immigrants convicted of crimes. There are four programs designed to locate criminal aliens: Criminal Alien Program (CAP), Secure Communities, 287(g), and the National Fugitive Operations Program (NFOP). Congress appropriated $690 million for the four programs in 2011 – up from $23 million in 2004. This funding led to an increase in arrests through these programs from 11,000 to 289,000 during that time.
The Criminal Alien Program is the largest of the four programs. In FY 2011, ICE issued 212,744 charging documents for deportation through the Criminal Alien Program (CAP). In that same year, 78,246 people were removed through Secure Communities, a program where the FBI automatically sends the fingerprints of people arrested to DHS to check against its immigration databases. 287(g) is a program that allows state and local law enforcement agencies to act as immigration law enforcement agents within their jurisdictions. I don’t have 2011 data on 287(g), but in 2010, 26,871 people were removed through 287(g). Only about 1500 were removed through NFOP. Much of the attention on Police/ICE cooperation has been on Secure Communities and 287(g), yet the vast majority of removals are occurring through the Criminal Alien Program.
Mostly minor offenses
Many of these criminal deportees are deported after a minor criminal conviction. In 2011, 188,382 people were deported on criminal grounds. Nearly a quarter were deported after a drug conviction, another 23% for traffic crimes, and one in five for immigration crimes. The DHS does not get very specific about these convictions, but we do know that drug crimes include marijuana possession; traffic crimes include speeding; and immigration crimes include illegal entry and re-entry.
It is likely that large numbers of people apprehended through the Criminal Alien Program are minor drug offenders and immigration offenders. Additionally, it is likely that the Criminal Alien Program is tearing apart families. One study found that, on average, people deported after being convicted of a crime had lived 14 years in the United States.
Family Ties
There has been an increase in the number of deportees who have family ties in the United States. Between July 1, 2010, and Sept. 30, 2012, nearly a quarter of all deportations—or, 204,810 deportations—involved parents with U.S. citizen children. This is remarkable, as a previous report found that DHS deported about 100,000 people who had U.S. citizen children in the ten years spanning 1997 and 2006.
Is there a relationship between interior enforcement and the focus on criminals?
We have seen a concurrent increase in the deportation of people convicted of crimes and of people with US citizen children being deported. Are these two factors related? The answer to this question may be an obvious “yes,” but I’d like to be able to speak more concretely about this in order to assess the consequences of deportations under the Obama administration.
ICE field offices
We can address this question by looking at ICE field offices that deport people. There are 25 ICE field offices responsible for deportations. Of these, five include jurisdictions along the southern border: El Paso, Houston, Phoenix, San Antonio, and San Diego. The remainder operate in the interior of the United States. Immigrant detainees may be transferred from office to office, so this is far from a perfect measurement. However, a look at ICE field office activity can reveal some important trends.
CAP and ICE offices
In FY 2011, there were 396,906 deportations. Of these, 208,940 were from the five southern border jurisdictions. The remaining 187,966 were from other field offices without a southern border. The percentages are similar for 2010 and 2009.
Many of the people deported from the five southern border jurisdictions were living in those areas, but many were also recent border crossers. And, even those recent border crossers may have previously lived in the United States returning to be with their families. In FY 2011, 45,938 of the people deported were recent border crossers who were removed, as opposed to simply returned.
Whereas deportations are concentrated in the southern field offices, this is not the same for the Criminal Alien charging documents. For example, in 2011, 36,195 people were deported via the El Paso office. In that same year, there were only 4429 CAP charging documents issued in El Paso – a ratio of 0.12. Compare that to New York City, where 3,522 people were deported, yet 7267 CAP charging documents were issued – a ratio of 2.09.
The overall ratio of CAP charging documents to removals in FY 2011 was 0.53. The ratio for the five southern border field offices was an average of 0.23. The average for the remaining field offices was 0.87 – nearly a 1 to 1 ratio. This difference between the southern border field offices and the others points to a crucial distinction in deportations: relatively speaking, CAP is much more active in the interior of the United States. Since the vast majority of criminal deportees are found through CAP, it is fair to say that criminal deportations are more likely to affect immigrants living in the United States.
Conclusion
This brief analysis provides some evidence that the focus on criminal deportations has led to enhanced interior enforcement, and that this in turn is the reason so many parents of U.S. citizens are being deported. It would be useful to get a handle on how and why enforcement has changed. One of the most important changes appears to have happened in 2008, when ICE apprehensions shot up from 84,000 to 320,000. What happened within ICE to provoke this change?
Many pro-immigrant Obama supporters would like to know if the unprecedented numbers of deportations that have happened under his watch are due to his actions or to those of Congress or other parties. The most marked changes appear to have happened in 2008, the year before Obama was elected. However, President Obama has chosen to continue on the path set by the Bush administration. For example, President Obama appointed Janet Napolitano as Secretary of DHS, and she has made it her mission to achieve a quota of 400,000 deportees a year, even as fewer immigrants have come to the United States illegally. Obama has made it clear that he wants DHS to focus on criminal deportations. This commitment has led to increased Police/ICE cooperation, which has torn millions of immigrants from their homes.
Protestors Confront Gov. Snyder outside of Amway Grand Plaza Hotel
Earlier today, about 100 people from Detroit travel to Grand Rapids to confront Michigan Governor Rick Snyder over his economic policies, particularly the recent Right to Work law.
The group organizing today’s protest was Good Jobs Now, a group that was formed in April of 2011. According to their website, Good Jobs Now is a broad coalition of community groups, faith leaders, concerned citizens and the labor sector that is committed to solving the issues facing our neighborhoods and holding decision makers and elected officials accountable for creating jobs and finding solutions to these problems.
Some of the protestors went inside the Amway Grand Plaza Hotel with sign and noisemakers, which resulted in Grand Rapids Police officers showing up immediately to make sure people did not “disrupt” the patrons in the hotel.
The cops tried to talk to protestors, but people just kept chanting and ignoring the police, while marching in front of the hotel.
Amway security were posted inside the front doors to prevent protestors from coming in and when asked about what they thought of the protestors, they told refused to respond.
We did talk to one representative from Good Jobs Now about what brought them to Grand Rapids today. According to Kimland Terry, Gov. Snyder was in Grand Rapids for a couple of weeks to participate in the Auto Show and was staying at the Amway Grand Plaza Hotel.
The Governor has slashed taxes for 2% of the wealthiest in the state, while working class and middle class families had been forced to share a bigger portion of the financial burden facing this state.
It is out intent to either ride him out of state or to vote him out of office, but either way we are committed to winning justice for our communities, said Mr. Terry.
The Good Jobs Now protestors were an almost exclusively African American group today, with little evidence that West Michigan people were in attendance, despite a Facebook posting about the action.
Workers respond to management abuse by forming new union at Star Tickets in Grand Rapids
On Wednesday, employees at Star Tickets in Grand Rapids, announced they are formally a union with the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW).
According to their Press Release they have “walked on the boss” today demanding a reduction in workload, an employee grievance procedure, and recognition of their union. The employees have formed the IWW Star Tickets Workers Union for mutual support and respect on the job. Their intentions are to begin collective bargaining with owner, Jack Krasula, over a work environment that they say has become untenable.
“We are just exercising our legal right to form a union for our mutual benefit” said Deirdre Cunningham, a Client Services Representative. “We have been meeting, assisting one another, and acting as a union for some time so today we made it official to our boss.”
Star Tickets, which is located at 620 Century Avenue Southwest #300, becomes the second Grand Rapids establishment whose workers have joined the Industrial Workers of the World labor union in just over a year. Workers at Bartertown Diner, 6 Jefferson St., all joined the IWW in 2011.
“During my time here Mr. Krasula has routinely sent us his insights and anecdotes for success. We hope that he will respect our choice and work with us in affecting the context of our daily lives ” said Alisa Stone.
The owner of Star tickets, Jack Krasula, who has operated several large business operations and has substantial personal wealth, also has his own radio show in the Detroit area, which offers a daily dose of his own personal philosophy on life. It seems that Krasula doesn’t believe in applying those same principles to those he employs.
On Wednesday, the workers filed with the National Labor Relation Board, but as of today there has been no overt reaction from the company to their announcement of becoming an IWW workplace.
The newly formed union – IWW Star Tickets Workers Union – has created a Facebook page, where they plan to post updates and welcome comments of solidarity.
Aquinas screening new film on slain Salvadoran Bishop Oscar Romero
On Friday, January 25th, the Student Social Action Committee is hosting a screening of a new documentary on the life of Salvadoran Archbishop Oscar Romero.
In El Salvador in the late Seventies, one man was the voice of the poor, the disenfranchised, and the Disappeared – all struggling under the corrupt Salvadoran government. Appointed Archbishop in early 1977, Monseñor Óscar Romero worked tirelessly and in constant personal peril until the day he was assassinated in March 1980.
Romero broke off ties with the military and aligned himself with the poor, delivering messages of hope in weekly sermons which became national events. Encouraging direct action against oppression, Romero’s speaking impacted political events in El Salvador that still have meaning to this day.
With rare recordings and film footage from Romero’s own collection and a wide range of interviews from those whose lives were changed by Archbishop Romero, including church activists, human rights lawyers, former guerrilla fighters and politicians, Monseñor: The Last Journey of Óscar Romero is a timely portrait of one individual’s quest to speak truth to the rich and powerful forces which dominated his government.
Monsenor: The Last Journey of Oscar Romero
Friday, January 25
7:00 PM
Aquinas College: Loutit Room Upper Wege
This event is free and open to the public.
Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy 