The Trump administration has proposed changes to NAFTA that could adversely affect commerce on both sides of the border. President Trump has spoken of leveling import fees on products of Mexico which could lead to retaliatory actions. President Trump has called for the construction of a wall that could cost upwards of $20 billion even while America’s own infrastructure is decaying. He has declared he will deport up to 8 million people which will break apart families and adversely affect important sectors of the U.S. economy, including hospitality, agriculture, and construction. Finally, his planned actions could seriously erode the bi-lateral relationship between the two neighboring nations. Just this month some 20,000 Mexicans marched in protest of the Trump Republican Administration. As no one else, those of us Americans who are concerned about these policies, and who also make our homes in Mexico, are in a unique position to provide the Secretary of State a viewpoint that he might not receive in Washington, D.C. We call on Secretary Tillerson to meet with us at a time and place of his convenience during his visit.

CNN has reported that the Defense Department "might propose that the US send conventional ground combat forces into northern Syria for the first time," and that the move would "significantly alter US military operations in Syria if approved and could put troops on the ground within weeks." CNN says "one goal of their presence would be to help reassure Turkey that Kurdish forces are not posing a threat to Ankara's interests." [1] "Reassuring Turkey" a terrible reason to deploy U.S. troops to danger in Syria. Kentucky Senator Rand Paul says, "It would be a really rotten, no good, bad idea to have ground troops in Syria." [2] Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy says, "Sending combat troops into Syria would make the unforced errors of the first four weeks look like child's play." California Representative Ted Lieu says, "As Member of House Foreign Affairs Committee, I want to say that sending ground troops to Syria is a VERY BAD IDEA." [3] Urge your Senators and Representative to join Chris Murphy, Rand Paul, and Ted Lieu in denouncing the idea of sending U.S. ground troops to Syria by signing our petition. References: 1. http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/15/politics/pentagon-considering-recommending-combat-troops-in-syria/index.html 2. http://rare.us/rare-politics/issues/foreign-policy/rand-paul-it-would-be-a-really-rotten-no-good-bad-idea-to-have-ground-troops-in-syria/ 3. http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opinion/the-conversation/sd-troops-to-syria-20170215-htmlstory.html

An apartment building in a West Bank settlement was funded by an organization headed by David Friedman, Trump’s nominee for ambassador to Israel. The building is financed by American Friends of Beit El Institutions, which Friedman chairs. American Friends of Beit El Institutions raised almost $667,000 for its Israeli counterpart, the Organization for the Sukkat Ovadia Yeshiva of Beit El. The Israeli organization funded construction projects on private Palestinian land. The projects were illegal under Israeli law. The planned apartment building is also to be built on private Palestinian land. [1] To stop private property thief David Friedman from representing America, we need the help of at least three Senate Republicans. True conservatives oppose the government theft of private property. Maine's Susan Collins and Alaska's Lisa Murkowski voted no on Betsy DeVos. [2] If they can vote no on Betsy DeVos, they can vote no on the thief David Friedman. Urge Maine's Susan Collins and Alaska's Lisa Murkowski to oppose the government theft of private property by signing our petition. References: 1. http://forward.com/news/breaking-news/362712/david-friedman-trump-s-israel-envoy-pick-reportedly-behind-newly-approved-s/ 2. http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/317379-gop-senator-to-vote-no-on-betsy-devos

The Puerto Rico political status issue pertaining to its relationship with the United States is a complicated one. A significant majority of the Puerto Rico people believe that due to the island's unequal political rights under the American flag, Puerto Rico is in fact not just a territory, but a colony. We agree with this theory because all the elements of a colony are present. In 2012, the people of Puerto Rico voted to end the current colonial political status , and yet Congress and the White House chose to ignore the democratic will of over 3.5 million American citizens (more population than 23 states). As a result of the United States government's clear rejection and disinterest in making Puerto Rico a state, Congressman Luis Gutierrez of Illinois, has filed HR 900 to recognize Puerto Rico's sovereign nationhood under either independence or free association and to provide for a transition process, and for other purposes. As a proud Puerto Rican I strongly encourage you to support HR 900 by becoming a co-sponsor. No country or territory deserves to be held as a colony subject to the absolute powers of another country. US Congress should support Congressman Gutierrez's bill and grant independence to Puerto Rico. Otherwise the US would be doing exactly the same as Great Britain when it held the original 13 colonies under an undemocratic and voiceless political situation which triggered the declaration of independence and the birth of the United States of America.

To paraphrase Shakespeare, "Something is rotten in the White House." The President's soft stance, admiration, and pro-support of Putin and Russia--Syria, Crimea, interference in America's 2016 election, disavowing US intelligence reports, equating US actions with Putin's authoritarian regime--are highly suspect. Is there collusion? We need answers regarding the President's ties to Russia. NOW.

Veterans for Counteracting Russian/Putin interference in our freedoms.

The New York Times reports that an executive order is under discussion at the White House which would designate the Muslim Brotherhood, a mostly nonviolent Islamist political movement in the Middle East, as a terrorist organization. [1] Such a move would hamstring U.S. diplomats, who wouldn't be allowed to talk to the Brotherhood. Among Islamist groups in the Middle East, the Brotherhood has been relatively moderate in recent decades, a key reason the U.S. has maintained communication with them under longstanding bipartisan U.S. policy. Like the Smith Act during the McCarthy period, banning the Brotherhood would criminalize a political belief, regardless of behavior. It would unnecessarily classify a huge group of people as enemies of the U.S., though they had no dispute with the U.S. in the past. It would be spectacularly hypocritical, since the U.S., especially the CIA, maintains cozy relations with Saudi Arabia, whose government promotes and enforces, including with violence, a far more rigid and extreme form of Islam than most Brotherhood groups espouse. Such an overbroad designation would allow the executive branch to opportunistically and unaccountably target Islamists not based on whether they threaten the United States, but based on whether they support the imperial agendas of Saudi Arabia and the CIA. The ACLU says the move would "target and stigmatize American Muslims" and would "open the door to using overbroad and unfair laws" that "sweep up innocent individuals and organizations and lack due process safeguards ... it could have a tremendous effect on freedom of speech." [2] Urge President Trump and Members of Congress to oppose designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization by signing our petition. References: 1. "Trump Pushes Dark View of Islam to Center of U.S. Policy-Making," https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/01/us/politics/donald-trump-islam.html 2. "'Witch hunt' fears as US may outlaw Muslim Brotherhood," http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/02/hunt-fears-ban-muslim-brotherhood-170201014221892.html

Almost every single goal of the Trump administration is a direct attack on an already marginalized group of people, or the planet itself. That was most of his platform. He is making good on his promises, and many of his own supporters are turning against him. He and the billionaires he has installed can and will harm and kill innumerable human beings over time through these sociopathically irresponsible actions. They are waging war against us for their own benefit. We, the American people, are diverse and united. We do not subscribe to his rhetoric, and we do not intend to cooperate with his policies. We are strong, and will protect the most vulnerable among us. That does not mean we do not need allies. We will ask that other nations keep an eye on our leaders, and do what they can to curb their callousness. We will ask that they use rational, peaceful means against this machine of social and environmental destruction.

As Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy has warned, National Security Advisor Michael Flynn promoted dangerous escalation when he suggested that attacks by Yemen's Houthi rebels on Saudi forces could lead to war between the United States and Iran. As Sen. Murphy noted, Iran does not command nor control Houthi rebels fighting against U.S.-backed Saudi forces in Yemen. [1] Unfortunately, the New York Times editorial board has supported Flynn's dangerous claim that Houthi rebels in Yemen are Iran's proxies. "Flynn was right," the NYT said, "in highlighting Iran’s troubling behavior, including the recent attack on a Saudi Navy patrol boat by Iranian-backed Houthi rebels from Yemen." [2] By characterizing the Houthi attack as "Iran's behavior," the NYT promoted the dangerous claim that Iran was responsible for the Houthis' action as if it were settled fact, while providing no evidence for the claim. By this standard of evidence, if the Houthis' intent were to attack a U.S. ship, as Fox News reported - or misreported - that the Pentagon believed [3], then it was Iran's intent to attack a U.S. ship. It's not wildly implausible that the Houthis might intend to attack a U.S. ship - it has happened before [4], and unlike Iran, the U.S. is a direct participant in Saudi Arabia's war in Yemen, even though U.S. participation in Saudi Arabia's war in Yemen has never been authorized by Congress [5], contrary to the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution. [6] Urge the New York Times to correct the record and urge the Times and Members of Congress to refrain from characterizing Yemen's Houthis as Iran's proxies in the future by signing our petition. References: 1. Sen. Chris Murphy, "A Reckless Slide Toward War With Iran," http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/5893ce89e4b02bbb1816b8d3 2. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/03/opinion/new-tensions-with-iran.html 3. https://theintercept.com/2017/02/02/press-secretary-sean-spicer-falsely-accuses-iran-of-attacking-u-s-navy-vessel-an-act-of-war/ 4. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-yemen-security-usa-ship-idUSKCN12A082 5. http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2016/08/16/senator-chris-murphy-on-yemen-saudi-arabia-conflict-the-lead-jake-tapper-interview.cnn; http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/21/politics/senate-arms-sale-saudi-arabia/ 6. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/warpower.asp

Using faulty intel, President Trump ordered a pointless raid against al-Qaeda in Yemen that left one US sailor and more than a dozen civilians dead. Now he and the Defense Department are threatening to involve America’s military in Yemen’s civil war, and even make it easier to put American boots on the ground in Yemen – with NO input from Congress. Yemen is already devastated from two years of civil war and constant bombardment by the Saudi-led coalition, with US support. Further military escalation could commit Americans to an outright war in a country whose civilians face constant violence and widespread malnutrition, and whose displaced can no longer seek refuge inside our borders. By invoking the War Powers Resolution, Congress can intervene and stop the Trump administration from escalating US military operations in Yemen into an all-out war that can't be won. We can't afford to sit by and let a trigger-happy Trump administration send American troops into conflict without so much as a public debate! Sign the petition: Demand Congress take action to stop Trump from going to war in Yemen!

Two Saudi sailors have been killed by Houthi rebels in Yemen in what Saudi Arabia has called a suicide boat attack and Houthis rebels have called a missile attack. [1] Fox News reported that the Pentagon believes the attack was meant for a US warship. [2] Trump Administration national security adviser Michael Flynn blamed Iran and threatened unspecified retaliation against Iran. [3] This dangerous situation was anticipated by Congress when it passed the War Powers Resolution during the Vietnam War. U.S. military forces are participating in the Saudi war in Yemen. There is a significant risk that U.S. forces will be drawn deeper into military conflict against Houthi rebels and possibly even against Iran. Yet Congress has never authorized the use of force against Houthi forces in Yemen, nor against Iran. Under the War Powers Resolution, a single Member of Congress can force a debate and vote on the deployment of U.S. forces to a conflict that has not been authorized by Congress. [4] Urge your Representative and Senators to invoke the War Powers Resolution to force a debate and vote on U.S. participation in the Saudi war in Yemen before further U.S. military escalation by signing our petition. References: 1. https://www.yahoo.com/news/2-saudis-killed-yemen-rebel-sea-strike-coalition-060300258.html 2. http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/01/31/exclusive-pentagon-believes-attack-on-saudi-frigate-meant-for-us-warship.html 3. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/01/iran-trump-michael-flynn-on-notice 4. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/warpower.asp

President Trump's anti-Muslim immigration executive order has sparked outrage worldwide. But one government has kept strangely silent: the government of Saudi Arabia. The New York Times reported: "King Salman of Saudi Arabia, home of Islam’s holiest sites, spoke to Mr. Trump by telephone on Sunday but made no public comment...Even the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, a group of 57 nations that considers itself the collective voice of the Muslim world, kept quiet." The Times noted that in issuing is order, "Trump invoked the Sept. 11 attacks three times. Yet Saudi Arabia, which was home to 15 of the 19 attackers, was not included on the list of countries whose citizens would be shut out." [1] The Organization of Islamic Cooperation is based in Saudi Arabia, which might have something to do with the silence of this purported "collective voice of the Muslim world." The Saudi government markets itself in the Islamic world as "protector of the Muslims," even as it bombs and blockades Muslim civilians in Yemen with U.S. participation. Urge Members of Congress to demand the Saudi government end its silence on Trump's #MuslimBan by signing our petition. References 1. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/world/middleeast/donald-trump-muslims-reaction.html