Wednesday, February 22, 2017

The Last Thing On My Mind-With Tom Paxton’s “Last Thing On My Mind” In Mind

The Last Thing On My Mind-With Tom Paxton’s “Last Thing On My Mind” In Mind





By Si Landon  

Eric Long didn’t know exactly how it had happened, didn’t know how the whole blessed thing fell apart after so many years together. Didn’t know that his sweetie, his “sweet pea” his pet name for her, his Mona, was so radically dissatisfied with their lives together the night that she laid out her future plans, future plans that did not include him. Had to take some journey of discovery to find her spiritual being she called it. He could never quite figure out what she meant by that since the “spiritual,” that New Age business that she lived by and for and he was leery, very leery of, was totally foreign to the way he operated in the world, the world of hard-boiled radical anti-war politics and taking heed, being guided by in fact, the notion that this was a dangerous world and watch out, watch your back (and she fragile and defenseless against the villains watch her back as well, maybe watched it too much and smothered her ability to breathe on her own). 

Could never quite talk the same language with her on those issues where to use an expression that she had come to use more frequently to describe their relationship of late they were “two ships passing in the night,” could never get the idea that she was drowning in some Mona-made sea, that she was unsure of her place in the sun, and worst of all not sure of who she was. For him who knew exactly what he was about, well, maybe not exactly as it turned out but at least for public consumption he appeared to be driven by a set of specific tasks and orientations and so could not follow her on that path she has set for herself.   

Funny the night in question was their “wine date” night, a time they had established a couple of years before as a way to be together and share whatever there was to share, usually day to day stuff and not such a decisive split. That too had been predicated on a prior series of misunderstandings and falling apart that was only staunched for that precious moment by his willingness to join her in couples counselling (That “willingness” subject to his understanding that he was under the gun and that if he had not done as she had asked then that first lowering of the boom would have been the last and they would now have been separated for about two years now.)

Although at first he was as leery about this process as he was about the more outlandish and bizarre New Age therapies he actually had come to as he called it see that this was significantly different from what he had expected and had embraced the process whole-heartedly what he called “being in one hundred per cent (they had unsuccessfully done the procedure many years before both agreeing then and now that the counsellor was not particularly helpful). The thrust of this new procedure was that it was less driven by trying to figure out what in their mutual troubled childhood pasts had made them both attracted to each but also too scarred by those experiences to let the past slip away against their love for each other. So at the counselling they would spent each session looking for “today” ways that they could relate to each other and hence the “wine date” idea. Simple but effective since they either had a going out date or they did not really relate to each other in the vast amounts of time over the previous few years when both had effectively retired. Eric found the sweet wines a way to relax (a problem that as we shall find was the crux of what went south in the current lowering of the boom).                

Oh sure Eric as he told his friend Peter a few days later when the initial shock had worn off a bit he and Mona  had had their problems over the previous few years but they were supposed to be working on getting closer like with that wine date business. For several years before that they had definitely been drifting apart, had become in his term “roommates” and hers “ships passing in the night” until one day on U.S. Interstate 5 just outside of San Diego he had exploded at her in the car telling her they couldn’t keep going on the way they were going, something had to give. The underlying reason for his outburst though was that he had kindled up a relationship with an old high school classmate whom he did know in school but who he had met on-line when he was searching for information about his high school class reunion that was coming up. In the back of his mind he was half-way ready to quit the whole thing himself.

After that incident it had gotten pretty heavy with that old classmate but when push came to shove, when he was confronted with the thought of total separation and good-bye with his sweet pea he had backed off. The price for that thought, the price that he was willing to pay to stay with Mona was to go into couples counselling in which he gave what he thought, and more importantly she thought, was good faith effort to reconcile their differences, her grievances against him. That was the source of the wine date idea provided by the counsellor as way they were to make connections in a quiet and cozy environment. Eric thought when Mona lowered the boom on him this time that a lot of what was driving her as much as her need to find her own path in life was deep and unspoken continued resentment over that “affair” with the old classmate.   


The couples counselling went on for about a year until around the time they had gone to Paris, a place that she had never been to but had desired to go to since she was a young girl like a lot of young girls. They had a great time there. But about a week after they came back Mona lowered the boom on him the first time. She wanted out under similar conditions to the latest episode. The result of letting him stay was for him to go into individual counselling which he agreed to do. He committed himself to a year in her presence but the year had not been up before this fatal night. That grievous parting had been the last thing on his mind. That broke him down in front of Peter. He couldn’t finish his story to Peter that night and maybe never ….      

Mikhail Gorbachev: 'It All Looks as if the World Is Preparing for War'

 
 
Mikhail Gorbachev
January 26, 2017
Time Magazine
 
The world today is overwhelmed with problems. Policymakers seem to be confused and at a loss. But no problem is more urgent today than the militarization of politics and the new arms race. Stopping and reversing this ruinous race must be our top priority. While state budgets are struggling to fund people's essential social needs, military spending is growing.
 
   
 

The current situation is too dangerous. 
More troops, tanks and armored personnel carriers are being brought to Europe. NATO and Russian forces and weapons that used to be deployed at a distance are now placed closer to each other, as if to shoot point-blank.
 
While state budgets are struggling to fund people's essential social needs, military spending is growing. Money is easily found for sophisticated weapons whose destructive power is comparable to that of the weapons of mass destruction; for submarines whose single salvo is capable of devastating half a continent; for missile defense systems that undermine strategic stability.
 
Politicians and military leaders sound increasingly belligerent and defense doctrines more dangerous. Commentators and TV personalities are joining the bellicose chorus. It all looks as if the world is preparing for war.
 
 
It could have been different
 
In the second half of the 1980s, together with the U.S., we launched a process of reducing nuclear weapons and lowering the nuclear threat. By now, as Russia and the U.S. reported to the Non-proliferation Treaty Review Conference, 80% of the nuclear weapons accumulated during the years of the Cold War have been decommissioned and destroyed. No one's security has been diminished, and the danger of nuclear war starting as a result of technical failure or accident has been reduced.
 
This was made possible, above all, by the awareness of the leaders of major nuclear powers that nuclear war is unacceptable.
 
In November 1985, at the first summit in Geneva, the leaders of the Soviet Union and the U.S. declared: Nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. Our two nations will not seek military superiority. This statement was met with a sigh of relief worldwide.
 
I recall a Politburo meeting in 1986 at which the defense doctrine was discussed. The proposed draft contained the following language: "Respond to attack with all available means." Members of the politburo objected to this formula. All agreed that nuclear weapons must serve only one purpose: preventing war. And the ultimate goal should be a world without nuclear weapons.
 
 
Breaking out of the vicious circle
 
Today, however, the nuclear threat once again seems real. Relations between the great powers have been going from bad to worse for several years now. The advocates for arms build-up and the military-industrial complex are rubbing their hands.
 
We must break out of this situation. We need to resume political dialogue aiming at joint decisions and joint action.
 
There is a view that the dialogue should focus on fighting terrorism. This is indeed an important, urgent task. But, as a core of a normal relationship and eventually partnership, it is not enough.
 
The focus should once again be on preventing war, phasing out the arms race, and reducing weapons arsenals. The goal should be to agree, not just on nuclear weapons levels and ceilings, but also on missile defense and strategic stability.
 
In modern world, wars must be outlawed, because none of the global problems we are facing can be resolved by war - not poverty, nor the environment, migration, population growth, or shortages of resources.
 
 
Take the first step
 
I urge the members of the U.N. Security Council - the body that bears primary responsibility for international peace and security - to take the first step. Specifically, I propose that a Security Council meeting at the level of heads of state adopt a resolution stating that nuclear war is unacceptable and must never be fought.
 
I think the initiative to adopt such a resolution should come from Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin - the Presidents of two nations that hold over 90% of the world's nuclear arsenals and therefore bear a special responsibility.
 
President Franklin D. Roosevelt once said that one of the main freedoms is freedom from fear. Today, the burden of fear and the stress of bearing it is felt by millions of people, and the main reason for it is militarism, armed conflicts, the arms race, and the nuclear Sword of Damocles. Ridding the world of this fear means making people freer. This should become a common goal. Many other problems would then be easier to resolve.
 
The time to decide and act is now.
 
[Mikhail Gorbachev was the president of the Soviet Union and is the author ofThe New Russia.] 
 
 
 
 
The Finger on the Nuclear Button
 
Editorial Board
 
February 5, 2017
 
 
 
 
Illustration by Joan Wong; Photo by Doug Mills/The New York Times 
 
 
Scientists who study the risk of nuclear war recently moved the hands of the symbolic Doomsday Clock to 2-1/2 minutes before midnight - meaning they believe that the world is closer to nuclear catastrophe than it has been since 1953 after the United States and Soviet Union tested hydrogen bombs. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, which created the clock in 1947, says that President Trump is the main reason for this worrisome development.
 
Mr. Trump came to office with little knowledge of the vast nuclear arsenal and the missiles, bombers and submarines it contains. He has spoken, alarmingly, about deploying this weaponry against terrorists and about expanding America's nuclear capabilities. He has said he values unpredictability, meaning presumably that he wants to keep other nations on edge about whether he will use nuclear weapons.
 
"Let it be an arms race," he told a television interviewer in December. During a debate three months earlier he contradicted himself, saying that "I would certainly not do first strike," then adding, "I can't take anything off the table." What's worrisome about all this is that it is the opposite of what Republican and Democratic presidents have long sought, which is to ensure that these weapons are not used precipitously if at all.
 
It is the fear of such precipitous action that has led Senator Edward Markey of Massachusetts and Representative Ted Lieu of California, both Democrats, to propose legislation to prohibit any president from launching a first-strike nuclear weapon without a declaration of war from Congress.
 
The bill would not undercut Mr. Trump's ability to respond on his own authority to a nuclear attack, an authority all presidents have had and should have. It has support from leading arms control advocates, including former Defense Secretary William Perry. And while it won't go anywhere in this Republican-led Congress, it sends a clear message to Mr. Trump that he should not be the first since World War II to use nuclear weapons. Mr. Trump could more usefully deploy his energies engaging with Russia to further reduce both countries' nuclear arsenals, maintaining the Iran nuclear deal and finding new ways to curb North Korea's nuclear program.
 
A Pentagon advisory board recently proposed that the United States consider building more lower-yield nuclear weapons to provide an option for "limited use" in a regional conflict. The only legitimate role for nuclear weapons is deterrence. The absurd notion of a "limited" nuclear war, which could make it easier for a president to use lower-yield weapons, needs to be rejected. The country has enough advanced conventional weapons to defend against most threats.
 
Mr. Trump commands about 4,000 weapons that he alone is empowered to launch. Any decision responding to an attack would have to be made quickly. That kind of life-or-death choice would test any leader, even those well-schooled in arcane nuclear doctrine, the intricacies of power politics and the importance of not letting tensions get to the point where a nuclear exchange becomes likely. But none of Mr. Trump's closest advisers are known to be nuclear experts, the president has yet to put together a nuclear strategy and, as the Bulletin's Science and Security Board warned last month, Mr. Trump "has shown a troubling propensity to discount or outright reject expert advice."
 
With Mr. Trump, sound decision-making may be an even greater challenge, given his disruptive, impulsive style. There is also the fact that he has assumed office at a particularly unstable time, with the Middle East in turmoil and Russia and China acting more aggressively. This is a time for restraint and careful deliberation, and for leaders who clearly understand that nuclear weapons are too dangerous to be brandished as a cudgel.

 
 
VIEW ONLINE
PRINT
SUBSCRIBE
VISIT PORTSIDE.ORG
TWITTER
FACEBOOK

 
 

Portside aims to provide material of interest to people on the left that will help them to interpret the world and to change it.

     
 

-- 
Cole Harrison
Executive Director
Massachusetts Peace Action
11 Garden St, Cambridge, MA 02138
w: 617-354-2169
m: 617-466-9274
f: /masspeaceaction
t: @masspeaceaction
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MAPA Nuclear Disarmament" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mapa-nuclear-disarmament+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to mapa-nuclear-disarmament@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mapa-nuclear-disarmament/CAKfC%2B3vM%2BpA9NO3NRSo8mkjFQYCOEEZ_WJ5MXuvKnC0fMUzg7Q%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Songs To While Away The Class Struggle By-Bob Dylan's "Just Like Tom Thumb's Blues"

Songs To While Away The Class Struggle By-Bob Dylan's "Just Like Tom Thumb's Blues"




A "YouTube" film clip of Bob Dylan performing "Just Like Tom Thumb's Blues".


In this series, presented under the headline “Songs To While Away The Class Struggle By”, I will post some songs that I think will help us get through the “dog days” of the struggle for our communist future. I do not vouch for the political thrust of the songs; for the most part they are done by pacifists, social democrats, hell, even just plain old ordinary democrats. And, occasionally, a communist, although hard communist musicians have historically been scarce on the ground. Thus, here we have a regular "popular front" on the music scene. While this would not be acceptable for our political prospects, it will suffice for our purposes here.


Just Like Tom Thumb's Blues


When you're lost in the rain in Juarez
And it's Eastertime too
And your gravity fails
And negativity don't pull you through
Don't put on any airs
When you're down on Rue Morgue Avenue
They got some hungry women there
And they really make a mess outa you

Now if you see Saint Annie
Please tell her thanks a lot
I cannot move
My fingers are all in a knot
I don't have the strength
To get up and take another shot
And my best friend, my doctor
Won't even say what it is I've got

Sweet Melinda
The peasants call her the goddess of gloom
She speaks good English
And she invites you up into her room
And you're so kind
And careful not to go to her too soon
And she takes your voice
And leaves you howling at the moon

Up on Housing Project Hill
It's either fortune or fame
You must pick up one or the other
Though neither of them are to be what they claim
If you're lookin' to get silly
You better go back to from where you came
Because the cops don't need you
And man they expect the same

Now all the authorities
They just stand around and boast
How they blackmailed the sergeant-at-arms
Into leaving his post
And picking up Angel who
Just arrived here from the coast
Who looked so fine at first
But left looking just like a ghost

I started out on burgundy
But soon hit the harder stuff
Everybody said they'd stand behind me
When the game got rough
But the joke was on me
There was nobody even there to call my bluff
I'm going back to New York City
I do believe I've had enough

Copyright ©1965; renewed 1993 Special Rider Music

In Boston-The Nuns, the Priests, and the Bombs: Sneak Preview February 25 @ 3:00 pm - 5:00 pm


The Nuns, the Priests, and the Bombs: Sneak Preview

February 25 @ 3:00 pm - 5:00 pm

The Nuns, the Priests, and the Bombs
Join us a for a screening of the exciting new documentary, The Nuns, the Priests, and the Bombs, about the struggle of nonviolent activists like Sr. Megan Rice and her colleagues to challenge the nuclear weapons establishment.  The filmmaker, Helen Young, as well as Sr. Megan, will be on hand to introduce the film and answer questions.
Nuclear resistance protestIn July 2012 three intruders broke into the Y-12 National Security Complex in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, known as America’s “Fort Knox of Uranium”. Y-12 stores enough highly enriched uranium to make some 10,000 nuclear bombs. The break-in, described by The New York Times, as the most serious security breach in the history of the U.S. atomic complex, sent shock waves throughout the federal government, when it turned out the intruders were an 82-year-old Catholic nun and two fellow peace activists. The trio succeeded in penetrating the heart of America’s nuclear stockpile through the sheer power of their moral conviction and a pair of bolt cutters. Theirs was a Plowshares protest designed to raise public consciousness on the existential threat posed by nuclear weapons.
More than 25 years after the end of the Cold War, nuclear weapons are, once again, at the center of world attention. Deteriorating relations between the U.S. and Russia; the uncertain future of the Iran nuclear deal; the ongoing provocations by North Korea; have all ratcheted up the tensions surrounding the world’s 15,000 nuclear weapons.
While recent world events have captured the public’s attention, for disarmament activists the struggle for aNuclear resistance protestbolition has never stopped. This film profiles the people on the frontlines of this movement. Since 1980, activists in lay and religious life have undertaken dramatic Plowshares protests, risking long prison terms, and even death in an ongoing campaign to move the world away from the nuclear brink. Plowshares is derived from an injunction in the Bible, “They Shall Beat Their Swords into Plowshares”.
The break-in at Y-12 by Sister Megan Rice and two others was inspired by a Plowshares action at a U.S. naval base near Seattle less than three years earlier. The naval base houses the largest stockpile of active nuclear warheads in the country. Five activists, including a Catholic nun and two Jesuit priests, intruded onto the base reaching the nuclear warhead bunkers. The film follows the two federal criminal cases triggered by both incidents. It traces the activists’ legal efforts to justify their actions under international law.
The film also follows diplomatic efforts at the United Nations in 2015 to effect implementation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), signed by the U.S. and four other nuclear-armed states more than 45 years ago. The NPT signatories pledged to abolish their nuclear weapons, a promise that remains unfulfilled. Last year, because of the lack of progress on the NPT, a majority of nations voted to begin negotiations on a treaty banning nuclear weapons. Talks are set to begin at the U. N. in 2017. This new diplomatic initiative increases the relevance of this film.
The film runs 106 minutes.

Details

Date:
February 25
Time:
3:00 pm - 5:00 pm
Event Tags:
nuclear disarmament, Nuclear resistance, Nuclear Weapons, Plowshares

Venue

First Church in Cambridge, Congregational, UCC
11 Garden St 
Cambridge, MA 02138 United States
+ Google Map
Phone:
617-547-2724
Website:
http://www.firstchurchcambridge.org/



--
"Not one step back"

Cole Harrison
Executive Director
Massachusetts Peace Action - the Commonwealth's largest grassroots peace organization
11 Garden St., Cambridge, MA 02138
617-354-2169 w
617-466-9274 m
Twitter: masspeaceaction

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MAPA Nuclear Disarmament" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mapa-nuclear-disarmament+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to mapa-nuclear-disarmament@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mapa-nuclear-disarmament/CAKfC%2B3u7n2unrwh3zEUnYoxUHfwNsfSoufk%2BuOpS8s6tmGe5jQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Hundreds Rally for Science at Demonstration Near AAAS Meeting


[Many hundreds, see photos]




Lindzi Wessel
February 19, 2017
Science Magazine

The last few weeks of activism have been a sign that “scientists have woken up and are ready to fight back."


Boston’s Copley Square fills with people during the Rally to Stand Up for Science., Sarah McQuate ,


BOSTON--Hundreds of science supporters gathered here in Copley Square this afternoon at a rally coinciding with the annual meeting of AAAS, which publishes Science. Ralliers chose the meeting—the first major gathering of scientists since Trump took office—as an opportune moment to demonstrate that the science community plans to fight recent policies that many see as dangerous to the role of science in society. 

“We scientists want to send a message to Mr. Trump, and that’s that America runs on science,” Geoffrey Supran, a postdoctoral fellow studying energy modeling at MIT and science history at Harvard, tells Science. “Neither scientists nor citizens are going to stand idly by while the administration peddles anti-science rhetoric and alternative facts.”

The Rally to Stand Up for Science, which was supported by over a dozen science activism groups, is not the first of its kind, and it won’t be the last. Concerned scientists organized a similar event at the December American Geophysical Union conference in San Francisco, shortly after President Trump was elected. And science supporters in the hundreds of thousands have pledged to march in cities around the globe on Earth Day (22 April).

Scientists don lab coats and carry signs at Boston's Rally to Stand up for Science. Sarah McQuate
While AAAS itself was not involved in the rally, many conference attendees headed to Copley Square for the demonstration. And in many ways the tone of the rally seemed to parallel the atmosphere within conference center walls, where this year’s meeting theme was “serving society through science policy.” Session titles included “Defending Science and Scientific Integrity in the Age of Trump” and “Science Policy in Transition: What to Expect in 2017 and Beyond.” Attendees jumped at the opportunity to ask major science policy leaders, like John Holdren, the former Science Adviser to Barack Obama, how they could help influence policy under the new administration. 
“The energy of this year’s meeting feels different,” says former State Department Science Adviser, Frances Colón. “Some people sound excited, some concerned, some even enraged, and they all want to get engaged.”

Not all meeting attendees were on the same page, though. During a session on science policy, former congressman Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.) echoed worries expressed by some science community members that the march could be “dangerous,” by painting science as just another interest group. But Boston rally speakers contested that view, arguing that they are fighting to protect the public more than their own interests. 

“If I lose my university job, I have enough transferable skills in communication and data analysis that I could find some other work,” says rally speaker Jacquelyn Gill, a paleoecologist studying climate change at the University of Maine, who is also involved in planning the March for Science. “It’s not myself that I'm worried about, it’s the outcomes of my research for the stakeholders—who are the American public.” 

Harvard historian of science and popular author, Naomi Oreskes, expressed a similar sentiment to ralliers at Copley Square. “We don’t want to be here. We want to be doing science,” she said. “But we can no longer sit on the sidelines assuming someone else well do the work of protecting the integrity of science.”

“Science is not silent,” was one of the cries that rang out through Boston’s Copley Square during the Rally to Stand Up for Science.  Sarah McQuate

And not all ralliers were from the scientific community. Holding a sign reading, “Living proof that you can [love] God and science,” Cambridge, Mass. minister Kate Layzer says she came out because she believes “we need science to save the world.” Greg Savage, an Acton, Mass. resident who works in finance says he came out with his wife, Nancy, because “it scares us that science is being ignored.” A botanical artist, she added that the couple thinks “it’s great for scientists to speak out.” 

It’s not the first time in history scientists have spoken out, noted Supran, arguing that the tradition of scientists speaking “truth to power” dates back to the days when Galileo was persecuted by the Roman Catholic Church for insisting that the earth revolved around the sun. The last few weeks of activism have been a sign that “scientists have woken up,” he said, and are ready to fight back.








PORTSIDE AIMS TO PROVIDE MATERIAL OF INTEREST TO PEOPLE ON THE LEFT THAT WILL HELP THEM TO INTERPRET THE WORLD AND TO CHANGE IT.






To unsubscribe, click here.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MAPA Nuclear Disarmament" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mapa-nuclear-disarmament+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to mapa-nuclear-disarmament@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mapa-nuclear-disarmament/033f01d28b78%24c6316cf0%24529446d0%24%40texnology.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

In Boston - "Passage at St. Augustine" Film Showings and Discussion, led by filmmaker Clennon L. King, and Civil Rights veteran Mimi Jones.


"Passage at St. Augustine" Film Showings and Discussion, led by
filmmaker Clennon L. King, and Civil Rights veteran Mimi Jones.

Roxbury Community College
Tues. Feb 21st
Reggie Lewis Track & Athletic Center, Multipurpose Rooms (2nd floor)

01:30 PM - 04:00 PM
Free and open to the public

http://www.rcc.mass.edu/events/icalrepeat.detail/2017/02/21/1496/46|60|61|63|78|64|126|130/passage-at-st-augustine-screening

"Passage at St. Augustine" establishes America's Oldest City as home to
the most violent Civil Rights campaign of the entire Movement. Viewers
are transported back to this unlikely Florida tourist town to hear
first-hand from civil rights foot soldiers, Klansmen, journalists,
clergy, politicians and the like, who fought on the front lines of the
18-month battle that led directly to the passage of the landmark Civil
Rights Act of 1964. Despite MLK and LBJ headlining the film's real-life
cast, most come away asking why a campaign so pivotal appears to have
been wiped from the hard drive of History.

Other showings
Monday March 8, 6 – 8 p.m. at the Central Library in Copley Square.
State Representative Byron Rushing will be part of the event's discussion.

Thursday, April 6, 6:00 – 7:30 p.m.at the Dudley Branch.

Trailer
https://vimeo.com/135600497

Boston Public Library Programs
http://www.bpl.org/programs/

_______________________________________________
Act-MA mailing list
Act-MA@act-ma.org
http://act-ma.org/mailman/listinfo/act-ma_act-ma.org
To set options or unsubscribe
http://act-ma.org/mailman/options/act-ma_act-ma.org