Inherency

Federal law enforcement agencies use StingRay to search and seize

cell phone data without court oversight. This type of surveillance is
very intrusive, and unless we intervene, the government will continue
to violate our rights.

ACLU 2014

(StingRays: The Most Common Surveillance Tool the Government Wont Tell You About Online
https://www.aclunc.org/sites/default/files/StingRays_The_Most_Common_Surveillance_Tool_the_Govt_Won
%27t_Tell_You_About.pdf)

Federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies have been using IMSI
catchers to engage in dragnet searches and seizures of information from cell
phones without disclosing this use to the courts or criminal defendants. By
shrouding this technology in secrecy, the government has succeeded in
deploying a highly intrusive form of surveillance . In cases where the government may
have used an IMSI catcher, vigorous advocacy is necessary to obtain full discovery and suppression
of tainted evidence. Unless criminal defense attorneys pursue these issues aggressively, the government
will continue to write its own rules for conducting surveillance, without
the benefit of court oversight or an adversarial process.

Warrantless Stingray surveillance is becoming more common in the status

quo

Klonick 2014

(Kate Klonik, lawyer and writer, currently a resident fellow at Yale Law Schools Information
Society Project,
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/11/stingrays_imsi_catchers_how_local_law_enforcement
_uses_an_invasive_surveillance.html)

One of the tools making it possible for Chief Wiggum to gather all your
deets is known colloquially as a Stingray, a portable gadget about the size of a box of
doughnuts. Theyre also known as cell-site simulators, because, well, thats exactly what they do: A Stingray
mimics a cellphone tower and forces all nearby mobile phones or devices
to connect to it. Every phone that connects to the Stingray reports its
number, GPS location, and the numbers of all outgoing calls and texts. Thats
every location and outgoing call and text log of every phone within a certain radiusup to several kilometersof
the Stingray, and thats all without a warrant. Its probably not a huge surprise to most people in
America today that the federal government has incredible surveillance technology that it uses occasionally on its

own citizens. (Hi, NSA!) But polling shows that only 27 percent of people think that this technology is focused on
them, and even if not, half of Americans surveyed say that there might be a margin of federal surveillance theyre
willing to endure in the name of homeland security or fighting terrorism. But that logic is a much harder sell when it

local police, who have been acquiring Stingrays in increasing

numbers. At least 46 state and local police departments, from Sunrise,
Florida, to Hennepin, Minnesota, have gotten cell-site simulators, which range
widely in price from $16,000 to more than $125,000 a pop. And like the federal government,
local police are using this technology without any judicial oversight. That
means Barney Fifeor, if youre looking for a more sinister example, think Denzel in Training Day can
walk into your neighborhood with a Stingray, fire it up, and collect all the
numbers, GPS, and call logs of every cellphone in the area. If theyre
looking for a specific number (hopefully, its not you), they can also use a
Stingray to trick your phone into being a personal GPS tracker and then
use that warrantless cellphone tracking to enter your home and arrest you
again without a warrant.
comes to

Plan
Plan: The FCC should decertify ISMI technology for use in law enforcement.

Advantage 1
Law enforcement agencies dont only use StingRay to pursue
suspects in criminal cases; the devices retrieve data from thousands
of innocent civilians as well. This violates the Fourth Amendment and
endangers democracy.

Fakhoury 12

(Hanni Fakhoury for Electronic Frontier Foundation StingRays: The Biggest Technological Threat
to Cell Phone Privacy You Dont Know About October 22 Online https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/10/stingraysbiggest-unknown-technological-threat-cell-phone-privacy)

Beyond the government's conduct in this specific case, there is an even broader danger in law enforcement using

these devices
allow the government to conduct broad searches amounting to general
warrants, the exact type of search the Fourth Amendment was written to
prevent.
these devices to locate suspects regardless of whether they explain the technology to judges:

A Stingraywhich could potentially be beamed into all the houses in one

neighborhood looking for a particular signalis the digital version of the pre-Revolutionary
war practice of British soldiers going door-to-door, searching Americans homes without rationale or suspicion, let

The Fourth Amendment was enacted to prevent these

general fishing expeditions. As the Supreme Court has explained, a warrant requires probable cause
alone judicial approval.

for all places searched, and is supposed to detail the scope of the search to ensure nothing is left to the discretion
of the officer executing the warrant.But if uninformed courts approve the unregulated use of Stingrays, they are

essentially allowing the government to enter into the home via a cellular
signal at law enforcements discretion and rummage at will without any
supervision. The government cant simply use technology to upend
centuries of Constitutional law to conduct a search they would be
prevented from doing physically. Stingrays Collect Data on Hundreds of Innocent PeopleAnd
when police use a Stingray, its not just the suspects phone information
the device sucks up, but all the innocent people around such suspect as
well. Some devices have a range of several kilometers, meaning
potentially thousands of people could have their privacy violated despite
not being suspected of any crime. This is another fact the government didnt fully explain to the
magistrate judge in Rigmaiden.The government now claims it protected privacy by deleting all third-party data on
its own after it collected it. But the governments unilateral decision to binge and purge comes with its own

Now theres no way to know what exactly the government

obtained when it used the device.Had the government told the court what it really was planning
consequences.

on doing and the amount of information it would obtain, the court may have exercised its constitutional role of
ensuring the government narrowed its search. After all, it was for the court, not the government, to decide how best
to balance the governments need for information with third-party privacy, and any suspects future interest in
access to potentially exculpatory information.

Strong democracy maintains global peace the best research proves

Cortright 13 David Cortright is the director of Policy Studies at the Kroc Institute
for Peace Studies at the University of Notre Dame, Chair of the Board of Directors of
the Fourth Freedom Forum, and author of 17 books, Kristen Wall is a Researcher and
Analyst at the Kroc Institute, Conor Seyle is Associate Director of One Earth Future,
Governance, Democracy, and Peace How State Capacity and Regime Type Influence
the Prospects of War and Peace,
http://oneearthfuture.org/sites/oneearthfuture.org/files//documents/publications/Cor
tright-Seyle-Wall-Paper.pdf
Drawing from the empirical literature , this paper identifies two underlying
pathways through which state governance systems help to build peace.
These are: State capacity. If states lack the ability to execute their policy
goals or to maintain security and public order in the face of potentially
violent groups, armed conflict is more likely . State capacity refers to two
significant aspects: security capacity and social capacity. Security capacity
includes the ability to control territory and resist armed incursion from
other states and nonstate actors. Social capacity includes the ability to
provide social services and public goods. Institutional qxuality. Research
suggests that not all governance systems are equally effective or capable
of supporting peace. Governance systems are seen as more credible and
legitimate , and are better at supporting peace , when they are
characterized by inclusiveness, representativeness, transparency, and
accountability. In particular, systems allowing citizens to voice concerns,
participate politically, and hold elected leaders accountable are more stable and
better able to avoid armed conflict. Both dimensionsstate capacity and quality
are crucial to the prevention of armed conflict and are the focus of part one
of this paper. Part two of the paper focuses on democracy as the most common
way of structuring state government to allow for inclusive systems while
maintaining state capacity. The two parts summarize important research
findings on the features of governance that are most strongly associated
with prospects for peace. Our analysis, based on an extensive review of
empirical literature , seeks to identify the specific dimensions of
governance that are most strongly associated with peace. We show
evidence of a direct link between peace and a states capacity to both
exert control over its territory and provide a full range of social services
through effective governance institutions. We apply a governance framework
to examine three major factors associated with the outbreak of warborder
disputes, ethnic conflict, and dependence on commodity exportsand emphasize
the importance of inclusive and representative governance structures for the
prevention of armed conflict.

Democracy solves war

Diamond 95, (Larry Diamond, Promoting Democracy in the 1990s: Actors and
Instruments, Issues and Imperatives, Carnegie Commission, December 1995,
http://carnegie.org/fileadmin/Media/Publications/PDF/Promoting%20Democracy
%20in%20the%201990s%20Actors%20and%20Instruments,%20Issues%20and
%20Imperatives.pdf)
Other Threats. This hardly exhausts the lists of threats to our security and wellbeing in the coming years and decades. In the former Yugoslavia nationalist
aggression tears at the stability of Europe and could easily spread. The flow of
illegal drugs intensifies through increasingly powerful international crime syndicates
that have made common cause with authoritarian regimes and have utterly
corrupted the institutions of tenuous, democratic ones. Nuclear, chemical, and
biological weapons continue to proliferate. The very source of life on Earth, the
global ecosystem, appears increasingly endangered. Most of these new and
unconventional threats to security are associated with or aggravated by the
weakness or absence of democracy, with its provisions for legality, accountability,
popular sovereignty, and openness. LESSONS OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY The
experience of this century offers important lessons. Countries that govern
themselves in a truly democratic fashion do not go to war with one another. They do
not aggress against their neighbors to aggrandize themselves or glorify their
leaders. Democratic governments do not ethnically "cleanse" their own populations,
and they are much less likely to face ethnic insurgency. Democracies do not sponsor
terrorism against one another. They do not build weapons of mass destruction to
use on or to threaten one another. Democratic countries form more reliable, open,
and enduring trading partnerships. In the long run they offer better and more stable
climates for investment. They are more environmentally responsible because they
must answer to their own citizens, who organize to protest the destruction of their
environments. They are better bets to honor international treaties since they value
legal obligations and because their openness makes it much more difficult to breach
agreements in secret. Precisely because, within their own borders, they respect
competition, civil liberties, property rights, and the rule of law, democracies are the
only reliable foundation on which a new world order of international security and
prosperity can be built.

Advantage 2
The government uses cell phone trackers like StingRay for racial
profiling
Calabrese and Fulton 12

(Christopher Calabrese and Sandra Fulton for The Leadership Conference.

Privacy Rights: A 21st Century Update Online http://www.civilrights.org/monitor/winter-2012/privacy-rights-a21st.html?referrer=https://www.google.com/)

Despite the efforts of civil rights groups, the practice of racial profiling by members of
law enforcement at the federal, state, and local levels remains a widespread and
pervasive problem affecting African-American, Muslim, Latino, and other communities .In
August 2011, an Associated Press report revealed a massive surveillance department established within the
New York Police Department (NYPD) after 9/11 to monitor Muslim neighborhoods and infiltrate their
community organizations. According to officials involved, undercover officers were sent to investigate all parts of daily
life in these communities including bookstores, bars, Internet cafes, and clubs looking for hot spots of radicalization. As part
of a largely secret police program, they spied on and recorded the lives of innocent
Americans without any evidence of wrongdoing.The NYPD has long viewed the Internet as dangerous
territory. In a 2009 report it said:The Internet plays an important role during the radicalization process. The Internet becomes a
virtual echo chamber acting as a radicalization accelerant while creating the path for the ultimate stage of Jihadization. In the
Jihadization phase, people challenge and encourage each others move to action. The Internet (sic) is now a tactical resource for
obtaining instructions on constructing weapons, gathering information on potential targets, and providing spiritual justification for an
attack.Its not known whether NYPDs efforts to track Muslims involved government surveillance under ECPA because of the
secrecy of the program. Assuming ECPA applied, however, there is no question that the outdated nature of ECPAs protections
would have allowed these activities to proceed with little transparency and judicial oversight.Additionally, recent

studies
have shown that minority communities use smart phones at a significantly higher rate
than the rest of the population. At the same time, the sensitive information stored in
these phones has become a hot commodity for law enforcement investigations. The company
even set up a website for law enforcement agents so they could access these records from the comfort of their desks. The tool
has just really caught on fire with law enforcement, said Paul Taylor, Sprints manager of electronic
surveillance, in 2009. The fact that Sprint needs to employ a person with the title manager of electronic surveillance may go a long
way toward explaining why ECPA needs updating.[]Conclusion The

Founding Fathers recognized that

participants in a democracy need privacy for their persons, houses, papers, and
effects. That remains as true today as ever. But privacy laws have not kept up as
technology has changed the way Americans hold their personal information. Outdated laws
allow law enforcement to circumvent the right to privacy, probe personal communications and track an individuals whereabouts

has a disproportionate
impact on racial minorities and people who may hold unpopular beliefs. Updating privacy laws to
without any evidence of wrongdoing. In many circumstances, such a weak statutory scheme

require a warrant for access to sensitive personal information will ensure that police are following proper investigative guidelines and
help to guard against profiling. Its important to update ECPA in order to maintain the robust privacy protections all Americans expect
and deserve.

Stingray devices are being used to pursue minorities living in the United States.
Vote Aff to stop this unwarranted and racist method of surveillance.
We reject racialized notions of Surveillance and Security. These
practices falsely construct threats and shut-down dissent in many
forms
Kumar & Kundnani 15

Deepa Kumar is an associate professor of Media Studies and Middle East Studies at Rutgers University.
She is the author of Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire (Haymarket Books, 2012). Arun Kundnani
is research fellow at the International Centre for Counter-Terrorism. He is a writer and activist, and a
professor at NYU. Race, surveillance, and empire International Socialist Review - Issue #96 Spring
- http://isreview.org/issue/96/race-surveillance-and-empire

we turn our attention to the current conjuncture in which the politics of the War on Terror
shape national security surveillance practices. The intensive surveillance of Muslim Americans
has been carried out by a vast security apparatus that has also been used against dissident movements
such as Occupy Wall Street and environmental rights activists, who represent a threat to the neoliberal
order. This is not new; the process of targeting dissenters has been a constant feature of American history. For instance, the Alien
In the second part,

and Sedition Acts of the late 1790s were passed by the Federalist government against the Jeffersonian sympathizers of the French

State
surveillance regimes have always sought to monitor and penalize a wide range of dissenters, radicals, and
revolutionaries. Race was a factor in some but by no means all of these cases. Our focus here is on the production of racialized
others as security threats and the ways this helps to stabilize capitalist social relations. Further, the current system of mass
surveillance of Muslims is analogous to and overlaps with other systems of racialized security surveillance
that feed the mass deportation of immigrants under the Obama administration and that disproportionately target
African Americans, contributing to their mass incarceration and what Michelle Alexander refers to as the New Jim
Crow.4 We argue that racialized groupings are produced in the very act of collecting information about certain
groups deemed as threats by the national security state the Brown terrorist, the Black and
Brown drug dealer and user, and the immigrant who threatens to steal jobs. We conclude that security
has become one of the primary means through which racism is ideologically
reproduced in the post-racial, neoliberal era. Drawing on W. E. B. Duboiss notion of the psychological wage, we argue
Revolution. The British hanged Nathan Hale because he spied for Washingtons army in the American Revolution.

that neoliberalism has been legitimized in part through racialized notions of security that offer a new psychological wage as
compensation for the decline of the social wage and its reallocation to homeland security.

The states method of surveillance relies on racial profiling in action. We must

prevent these false security mechanisms from occurring in order to stop racism
from state regimes.
Ignoring structural racism in the context of mass surveillance
contributes to the invisibility of its disproportionate impacts

Cyril 3/30, (Malkia Amala, under and executive director of the Center for Media Justice (CMJ) and co-founder of the Media Action Grassroots
Network, Black America's State of Surveillance, http://www.progressive.org/news/2015/03/188074/black-americas-state-surveillance, 3/30/15, //VZ)

One of the most terrifying aspects of high-tech surveillance is the invisibility of those it
disproportionately impacts. The NSA and FBI have engaged local law enforcement agencies and
electronic surveillance technologies to spy on Muslims living in the United States. According to FBI training
materials uncovered by Wired in 2011, the bureau taught agents to treat mainstream Muslims as supporters
of terrorism, to view charitable donations by Muslims as a funding mechanism for combat, and to view
Islam itself as a Death Star that must be destroyed if terrorism is to be contained. From New York City to Chicago and beyond,
local law enforcement agencies have expanded unlawful and covert racial and religious profiling against Muslims not suspected of any crime. There is no
national security reason to profile all Muslims. At the same time, almost 450,000 migrants are in detention facilities throughout the United States,
including survivors of torture, asylum seekers, families with small children, and the elderly. Undocumented migrant communities enjoy few legal
protections, and are therefore subject to brutal policing practices, including illegal surveillance practices. According to the Sentencing Project, of the more

But by far, the widest net is

cast over black communities. Black people alone represent 40 percent of those incarcerated. More black
men are incarcerated than were held in slavery in 1850, on the eve of the Civil War. Lest some misinterpret
that statistic as evidence of greater criminality, a 2012 study confirms that black defendants are at least 30
than 2 million people incarcerated in the United States, more than 60 percent are racial and ethnic minorities .

percent more likely to be imprisoned than whites for the same crime. This is not a broken system, it is a
system working perfectly as intended, to the detriment of all. The NSA could not have spied on
millions of cellphones if it were not already spying on black people, Muslims, and migrants . As
surveillance technologies are increasingly adopted and integrated by law enforcement agencies today , racial
disparities are being made invisible by a media environment that has failed to tell the story of surveillance
in the context of structural racism. Reporters love to tell the technology story. For some, its a sexier read.
To me, freedom from repression and racism is far sexier than the newest gadget used to reinforce racial
hierarchy. As civil rights protections catch up with the technological terrain, reporting needs to catch up, too. Many
journalists still focus their reporting on the technological trends and not the racial hierarchies that these trends are
enforcing.

If we dont do something about structural violence, people will suffer its impacts
(violence, oppression, etc.) vote on our plan to combat structural violence by ending
the surveillance of minority communities through cellular monitoring.

Challenging institutional racism is a prior ethical question it makes

violence structurally inevitable and foundationally negates morality
making their utilitarianism arguments less imperative than racism.
We should evaluate both sides based on who solves racial injustice
the best, rather than who saves the most people.
Memmi 2K Albert - Professor Emeritus of Sociology @ U of Paris,
Naiteire, Racism, Translated by Steve Martinot, p. 163-165

The struggle against racism will be long, difficult, without intermission, without remission, probably
never achieved. Yet, for this very reason, it is a struggle to be undertaken without
surcease and without concessions. One cannot be indulgent toward racism; one must not even
let the monster in the house, especially not in a mask. To give it merely a foothold means to augment the
bestial part in us and in other people, which is to diminish what is human. To accept the racist universe to
the slightest degree is to endorse fear, injustice, and violence. It is to accept the persistence of the dark
history in which we still largely live. it is to agree that the outsider will always be a
possible victim (and which man is not himself an outsider relative to someone else?. Racism
illustrates, in sum, the inevitable negativity of the condition of the dominated that is, it illuminates in a
certain sense the entire human condition. The anti-racist struggle, difficult though it is, and always in
question, is nevertheless one of the prologues to the ultimate passage from animosity to
humanity. In that sense, we cannot fail to rise to the racist challenge. However, it remains true that ones
moral conduit only emerges from a choice: one has to want it. It is a choice among other choices, and
always debatable in its foundations and its consequences . Let us say, broadly speaking, that the choice to
conduct oneself morally is the condition for the establishment of a human order, for
which racism is the very negation. This is almost a redundancy. One cannot found a moral order,
let alone a legislative order, on racism, because racism signifies the exclusion of the other, and his or her
subjection to violence and domination. From an ethical point of view, if one can deploy a little religious
language, racism is the truly capital sin. It is not an accident that almost all of humanitys spiritual
traditions counsels respect for the weak, for orphans, widows, or strangers. It is not just a question of
theoretical morality and disinterested commandments. Such unanimity in the safeguarding of the other
suggests the real utility of such sentiments. All things considered, we have an interest in banishing injustice,

injustice engenders violence and death . Of course, this is debatable. There are those who
think that if one is strong enough, the assault on and oppression of others is permissible . Bur no one is ever
sure of remaining the strongest. One day, perhaps, the roles will be reversed. All unjust society contains
within itself the seeds of its own death. It is probably smarter to treat others with respect so that they
because

treat you with respect. Recall. says the Bible, that you were once a stranger in Egypt, which means both that
you ought to respect the stranger because you were a stranger yourself and that you risk becoming one again

In short, the
refusal of racism is the condition for all theoretical and practical morality because, in the end, the ethical
choice commands the political choice, a just society must be a society accepted by all. If this contractual
principle is not accepted, then only conflict, violence, and destruction will be our lot. If it is accepted, we
can hope someday to live in peace. True, it is a wager, but the stakes are irresistible.
someday. It is an ethical and a practical appealindeed, it is a contract, however implicit it might be.

Structural violence causes the greatest amount of harm and

outweighs all impacts.

Lance 13
Mark Lance, is a professor in the Philosophy Department and Justice and Peace Studies Program
at Georgetown University, On complicity, structural violence, and ideological blinders, August
20, 2013, New Apps: Art, Politics, Philosophy, Science,
http://www.newappsblog.com/2013/08/on-complicity-structural-violence-andideological-blinders.html (NV)
Arendt made a valiant effort to turn moral and political attention to the ways that
unexceptional individuals performing actions that, when looked at locally, were unexceptional yet
contributed to exceptionally evil systems. Sadly, current attitudes across the professions, literature, the press, and
philosophical ethics suggest that her efforts were a failure. And that is, in my view, a bad thing. The overwhelming majority
of the violence in the world today is what Galtung has labeled "structural violence" - roughly, the point is
that far greater harm is done to people as the result of complex social forces than by individual actors . And
Post WWII, Hanah

in my view it is a scandal of philosophy that this is not a central issue in applied moral and political philosophy. (Of course there are
philosophers who address such things. But I doubt that anyone could claim that such work is generally treated as central to

Consider racism: enormous harm is done to African American people and the African American
by the complex effects of the illegalization of drugs by federal and state governments, the prison

philosophy.)
community

system (including both federal and state bureaucracies and private institutions together with their armies of lobbyists and the
political system that embraces both), the enduring wealth disparities between black and white in the US, the
bureaucratization of policing that encourages easy arrests (hence generally of poor folks), the lack of aid to
families with members in prison, lax funding of drug treatment, the way that jobs are allocated on the
basis of whether one has a history in prison, the US foster care system, etc. The overall harm of this
complex system is vastly greater than the combined harm of every hate group, explicit racist, etc. And it
can go on without anyone having ill intent. The structural violence of the prison-industrial-governmentalpolice ... complex can go one without anyone wanting to imprison disproportionate numbers of African
Americans, or setting out with policies having that goal. Similar points could be made about the millions of
deaths each year from poverty, or the ongoing destruction of our environment, or, indeed, the creeping
police state conditions of our society. These are the pressing moral concerns of our time. People dying in the tens of
millions from poverty and preventable disease, massive social destruction as a result of policing, and an
impending environmental disaster. Since none of these require ill-intent, or projects directly designed to
do evil, it simply follows that if we want to address these concerns seriously, we need to think about
forms of support other than explicit endorsement that our actions give to these systems.

If we look at human history over the course of the past 1000 years, we can attribute
structural violence to killing billions of people over time. This outweighs any nuclear
war impact that would kill the whole human population, which is 7 billion roughly.
Not to mention, that racial injustice will affect people in the coming generations for
centuries to come, meaning that there is infinite suffering and infinite death in our
impact. Vote Aff to stand against racial injustice.

Solvency
The FCC Can Withdraw the Authority for Police to Employ ISMI
Technology
Benson 14

(Thor Benson, freelance writer. THE ATLANTIC The Briefcases that Imitate Cell Phone Towers
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/09/the-briefcases-that-imitate-cell-phone-towers/380678/

The ACLU, on the other hand, wants to know if local police departments are using Stingrays to monitor citizens in a

the FCC should be reevaluating

these grants of authority to Harris to make sure that they're actually appropriate, in light of the actual
effect, Wessler told me. If the FCC investigated this possibility and found
they were mislead in how the Stingray would be used by police, they could
revoke the authorization for police departments using such technology.
way that they feel should not be allowed. At the very least,

Whether it be the crimes against minorities committed by police departments, the unprecedented militarization of
the police in the past decade or the police acting as appendages of the NSA, it's becoming clear that policies of
police forces in the United States are broken. The ACLU and human rights groups around the country are pleading
for more information on what these authorities are doing in their day-to-day work, but they are forced to file
information requests that only result in being given parts of the greater picture. Instead of a few emails between
Harris and the FCC, the ACLU wants a copy of the actual application that was sent. But for now, they are limited to
what the government is willing to give thema string of emails between Harris employees and the FCC regulators

And from what they can tell based on those emails, todays
use of Stingrays lies in sharp contrast with how they were approved.
who reviewed Harris's application.

Rejecting each instance of racism is key to avoiding extinction

Barndt 91 (Joseph, Co-director, Crossroads, Dismantling Racism p. 155-156)

The limitations imposed on people of color by poverty, subservience, and
powerlessness are cruel, inhuman, and unjust: the effects of uncontrolled power
privilege, and greed, which are the marks of our white prison, will inevitably destroy
us. But we have also seen that the walls of racism can be dismantled. We are not
condemned to an inexorable fate, but are offered the vision and the possibility of
freedom. Brick by brick, stone by stone, the prison of individual, institutional, and cultural racism can be
destroyed. You and I are urgently called to join the efforts of those who know it is time to tear down, once and for
all, the walls of racism. The danger point of self-destruction seems to be drawing even more near .

The results
of centuries of national and worldwide conquest and colonialism, of military
buildups and violent aggression, of overconsumption and environmental
destruction, may be reaching a point of no return. A small and predominately white
minority of the global population derives its power and privilege from the suffering
of the vast majority of peoples of color. For the sake of the world and ourselves, we
dare not allow it to continue