In response to George Bush, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid smiling in bipartisan friendship at a press conference announcing their new "economic stimulus" package, I sent this letter to the Madison Capital Times:
To the editor:
When my coworker, Judy Miner, and I heard that George W. Bush wanted to send us each a check, and was urging us to go shopping to save the economy, we asked this question: What’s the last place George Bush would want us to spend this money?
It wasn’t hard to think of an answer. I’m going to sign my entire “stimulus” check over to Iraq Vets Against the War, and Judy is donating hers to Wisconsin Network for Peace and Justice so we can hire three new work-study students to assist us with our work supporting immigrant rights, justice and fair treatment for prisoners, and countering the increasingly aggressive and desperate military recruiters in Wisconsin’s high schools (well, the President did say he wanted to stimulate job creation.)
How about you? We know there are people out there who are genuinely hurting, and we don’t begrudge those folks any money that can help, but what about those of us who aren't in trouble financially? Will we take the President’s cue to head to the mall, check in hand, or will we take this check and direct it exactly where George W. Bush does not want the money to go?
If you like the idea of pledging all or part of your “stimulus check” to fight what Dr. Martin Luther King called the “triplets of racism, militarism and materialism,” please send an email to info@wnpj.org telling us where you’re sending Bush’s borrowed money, and we’ll track the responses on our website.
Steve Burns is WNPJ Program Coordinator
Judy Miner is WNPJ Office Coordinator
Monday, January 28, 2008
Friday, January 25, 2008
Joy First: Trespasser for Peace
Joy First sends us this statement, which she intends to read at her trial in Madison Municial Court on Friday, January 25. Joy was arrested with six others: Bonnie Block, Conor Murphy, Jean McElhaney, Jamie Haack, Susan Spahn and Father Jim Murphy during a "die-in" at Madison's East Towne Mall, organized by Madison Pledge of Resistance.. The peaceful protesters, who were assisted by others reading the names of Americans and Iraqis killed in the war, were charged with unlawful trespassing, and fined $424.
Statement for Madison Municipal Court - Joy First, January 25, 2008
Good afternoon Your Honor.
I come before you again today for the same reasons I have come before you several times in the past. Our government is engaged in an illegal and immoral war in Iraq causing unbelievable human suffering. I cannot remain silent while my government is engaged in war crimes against humanity, while my government is responsible for the murder of a million innocent Iraqis and almost 4000 US soldiers, while my government is breaking international laws and treaties, such as the Nuremberg Principles, the Geneva Convention, and the UN Charter.
I have done everything I can to be heard by my government. I have called and written the president and my message falls on deaf ears. I have visited, called, and written members of Congress more times than I can count, beseeching them to end the funding for the war. As the war continues and the human suffering grows, I must continue to speak out more strongly against the actions of my government. Principle seven of the Nuremberg Principles states that if I do not, I am complicit in the crimes of my government.
Part of what I must do is to raise awareness among my fellow citizens of the horrors of what is going on, and to ask them to join me in speaking out against the war. With that in mind, I, along with my co-defendants, went to East Towne Mall on November 2 to dramatically illustrate the human costs of the war through a die-in. This was a peaceful action, protected by my First Amendment right to free speech. We would have stayed for a period of about an hour and then left if we would not have been arrested. Malls are our new town square and it is imperative that we have the right to free speech in a mall. For that is where the people are. We did a similar die-in on a public sidewalk in front of Senator Kohl’s office and we were not arrested. While in front of Senator Kohl’s office, the police observed our action and we were not breaking any laws. We went to the mall because we must go where the people are to share our message. The question of whether we have the right to free speech in a mall is being raised around the country. Recently, there was a decision in a California court allowing free speech at a shopping mall there.
Your honor, it is my sacred duty and responsibility to continue to speak out against the war and occupation of Iraq, and I will not be deterred. I was in Washington, DC on January 11 and arrested with 80 others at the US Supreme Court for speaking out against our government’s illegal actions, their use of torture and denial of the right of Habeas Corpus to the men being detained in Guantanamo. I was incarcerated for 30 hours in horrible conditions where we were denied food, water, and sleep. This experience dramatically increased my resolve in speaking out against the crimes of my government, where my personal safety and comfort is no longer as important as the principles I must stand up for at this critical point in human history.
We have a war criminal in the White House and a congress complicit in the war crimes, yet we are being persecuted for doing our duty as we cry out for peace. We come to you, the third branch of our government because we have faith in our system, because we believe that somehow our system will work and that our voices will be heard. We come here before you today asking you to find us not guilty, to say that we are not the ones committing a crime, we are not responsible for the deaths of millions of innocent people. We come before you today, as we did on November 2, to say that we are not breaking the law, but that we are upholding the law by our actions.
I believe we are now at a critical time in the history of our country and of the world. We just celebrated the birthday of Dr. King. A year before his death he began speaking out strongly against the war in Viet Nam. His words still ring so clear and true today. He said, “The choice is ours, and though we might prefer it otherwise we must choose in this crucial moment of human history.” We made a choice to speak out against the war on November 2nd . Today, we come to you asking you to make a choice for truth and justice and peace and find us not guilty.
Thank you Your Honor.
Joy First is a member of WNPJ and Madison Pledge of Resistance.
Statement for Madison Municipal Court - Joy First, January 25, 2008
Good afternoon Your Honor.
I come before you again today for the same reasons I have come before you several times in the past. Our government is engaged in an illegal and immoral war in Iraq causing unbelievable human suffering. I cannot remain silent while my government is engaged in war crimes against humanity, while my government is responsible for the murder of a million innocent Iraqis and almost 4000 US soldiers, while my government is breaking international laws and treaties, such as the Nuremberg Principles, the Geneva Convention, and the UN Charter.
I have done everything I can to be heard by my government. I have called and written the president and my message falls on deaf ears. I have visited, called, and written members of Congress more times than I can count, beseeching them to end the funding for the war. As the war continues and the human suffering grows, I must continue to speak out more strongly against the actions of my government. Principle seven of the Nuremberg Principles states that if I do not, I am complicit in the crimes of my government.
Part of what I must do is to raise awareness among my fellow citizens of the horrors of what is going on, and to ask them to join me in speaking out against the war. With that in mind, I, along with my co-defendants, went to East Towne Mall on November 2 to dramatically illustrate the human costs of the war through a die-in. This was a peaceful action, protected by my First Amendment right to free speech. We would have stayed for a period of about an hour and then left if we would not have been arrested. Malls are our new town square and it is imperative that we have the right to free speech in a mall. For that is where the people are. We did a similar die-in on a public sidewalk in front of Senator Kohl’s office and we were not arrested. While in front of Senator Kohl’s office, the police observed our action and we were not breaking any laws. We went to the mall because we must go where the people are to share our message. The question of whether we have the right to free speech in a mall is being raised around the country. Recently, there was a decision in a California court allowing free speech at a shopping mall there.
Your honor, it is my sacred duty and responsibility to continue to speak out against the war and occupation of Iraq, and I will not be deterred. I was in Washington, DC on January 11 and arrested with 80 others at the US Supreme Court for speaking out against our government’s illegal actions, their use of torture and denial of the right of Habeas Corpus to the men being detained in Guantanamo. I was incarcerated for 30 hours in horrible conditions where we were denied food, water, and sleep. This experience dramatically increased my resolve in speaking out against the crimes of my government, where my personal safety and comfort is no longer as important as the principles I must stand up for at this critical point in human history.
We have a war criminal in the White House and a congress complicit in the war crimes, yet we are being persecuted for doing our duty as we cry out for peace. We come to you, the third branch of our government because we have faith in our system, because we believe that somehow our system will work and that our voices will be heard. We come here before you today asking you to find us not guilty, to say that we are not the ones committing a crime, we are not responsible for the deaths of millions of innocent people. We come before you today, as we did on November 2, to say that we are not breaking the law, but that we are upholding the law by our actions.
I believe we are now at a critical time in the history of our country and of the world. We just celebrated the birthday of Dr. King. A year before his death he began speaking out strongly against the war in Viet Nam. His words still ring so clear and true today. He said, “The choice is ours, and though we might prefer it otherwise we must choose in this crucial moment of human history.” We made a choice to speak out against the war on November 2nd . Today, we come to you asking you to make a choice for truth and justice and peace and find us not guilty.
Thank you Your Honor.
Joy First is a member of WNPJ and Madison Pledge of Resistance.
Friday, January 18, 2008
Michelle Naar-Obed: End U.S. support for Turkish attacks on Kurdistan
Michelle Naar-Obed of WNPJ member group Loaves and Fishes Catholic Worker House in Duluth sends us this report from Kurdistan and an open letter to our government, by delegates from the Christian Peacemaker Team:
Dear friends,
Below is an open letter that our CPT team composed and is sending out as an editorial piece to newspapers across the country. We will also try to get it published on webmedia as well. We are still in the process of getting clearance to accompany villagers home. Many have returned but are still frightened by the near daily flyovers by Turkish aircraft. Just 2 days ago, there was another shelling by Turkish military but no reports of civilian casualties.
Our request for accompaniment has gone through a series of UN and government channels. All have welcomed the proprosal. The request is right this moment on its way to PM Barzani's office. He has the final word. It is quite a mystery why no journalists have been allowed in the Qandeel mountain villages to report on the attack of the village that sustained the most damage, injury and death. Speculations for this run across the board but they are only speculations.
We met an assistant to the Mayor of this village and he has video footage, still pictures and a piece of the bomb that exploded in the village. We now have copies of the still photos and we can download the video footage unto a DVD. We took photos of the bomb fragment. The weather is finally warming up here. It has been the coldest winter in 10 years. For over 2 weeks we had running water intermittently. Most of the time it was frozen in the water tanks that are kept on the roof. But now we and the water are getting a chance to thaw out. That's it for now. Peace, Michele January 15, 2008
An open letter to the United States Administration, United States Department of State and United States Defense Department:
We are members of Christian Peacemaker Teams, presently living and working in the Kurdish north of Iraq. We have closely watched the news reports that detail the Turkish military invasions and bombings of Kurdish territory over the last five months, purportedly against PKK resistance. We note that the United States has provided intelligence for those attacks and has chosen to open Iraqi air space for those incursions.
We have had regular contact with the United Nations, the ICRC and local Kurdish NGOs that have assisted the casualties from those attacks. Those attacks killed at least three civilians and injured at least six. CPT has visited two of the families who had a member killed or injured. Additionally, reports indicate those bombings have damaged or destroyed homes, schools, mosques, and hospitals.
CPT visited mayors of communities to which some of the 600-800 displaced families, approximately 3000 individuals, fled for refuge. Those mayors shared photos and videos of the damages in the villages and encouraged us to visit some of the families who are now unable to return home.
The bombings killed hundreds of sheep and cows, animals upon which families depend for a living. Other animals are uncared for because families are afraid to return as flights by Turkish military continue. Farmers now wonder how they can do spring planting.
As CPT talks to Kurdish people, we hear a call for the United States to abide by the standards to which it holds other countries: Do not kill or injure civilians and an occupying power is responsible to protect and care for the civilians who are under its control. The United States identifies the Kurdish Regional Government as a model of democracy, but it is clear that democracy is not served by opening air space to an outside military to attack civilian targets. These civilians had no voice in this decision.
On a larger scale, CPT has observed a dramatic change in the Kurdish population from unapologetic support for the U.S. military presence in Iraq to anger at the way in which the United States has dumped one of its most loyal allies in the Middle East. Kurdish people have experienced the Anfal assaults under the Saddam Hussein regime and fear U.S. support will encourage Turkey to move even more aggressively against Kurdistan.
Therefore, CPT in Iraq deplores the decision by the United States to aid these attacks on a civilian population. We beg you as U.S. officials to reverse this decision that assists Turkey in violence toward civilians. We encourage U.S. pressure on Turkey to pursue diplomatic solutions to the PKK/Turkey disputes and other underlying issues. CPT calls on the people of the United States to learn more about these events and advocate for the safety of these Kurdish people.
Peggy Gish, Anita David, Cliff Kindy, Michele Naar-Obed - CPT delegates http://www.cpt.org/
Dear friends,
Below is an open letter that our CPT team composed and is sending out as an editorial piece to newspapers across the country. We will also try to get it published on webmedia as well. We are still in the process of getting clearance to accompany villagers home. Many have returned but are still frightened by the near daily flyovers by Turkish aircraft. Just 2 days ago, there was another shelling by Turkish military but no reports of civilian casualties.
Our request for accompaniment has gone through a series of UN and government channels. All have welcomed the proprosal. The request is right this moment on its way to PM Barzani's office. He has the final word. It is quite a mystery why no journalists have been allowed in the Qandeel mountain villages to report on the attack of the village that sustained the most damage, injury and death. Speculations for this run across the board but they are only speculations.
We met an assistant to the Mayor of this village and he has video footage, still pictures and a piece of the bomb that exploded in the village. We now have copies of the still photos and we can download the video footage unto a DVD. We took photos of the bomb fragment. The weather is finally warming up here. It has been the coldest winter in 10 years. For over 2 weeks we had running water intermittently. Most of the time it was frozen in the water tanks that are kept on the roof. But now we and the water are getting a chance to thaw out. That's it for now. Peace, Michele January 15, 2008
An open letter to the United States Administration, United States Department of State and United States Defense Department:
We are members of Christian Peacemaker Teams, presently living and working in the Kurdish north of Iraq. We have closely watched the news reports that detail the Turkish military invasions and bombings of Kurdish territory over the last five months, purportedly against PKK resistance. We note that the United States has provided intelligence for those attacks and has chosen to open Iraqi air space for those incursions.
We have had regular contact with the United Nations, the ICRC and local Kurdish NGOs that have assisted the casualties from those attacks. Those attacks killed at least three civilians and injured at least six. CPT has visited two of the families who had a member killed or injured. Additionally, reports indicate those bombings have damaged or destroyed homes, schools, mosques, and hospitals.
CPT visited mayors of communities to which some of the 600-800 displaced families, approximately 3000 individuals, fled for refuge. Those mayors shared photos and videos of the damages in the villages and encouraged us to visit some of the families who are now unable to return home.
The bombings killed hundreds of sheep and cows, animals upon which families depend for a living. Other animals are uncared for because families are afraid to return as flights by Turkish military continue. Farmers now wonder how they can do spring planting.
As CPT talks to Kurdish people, we hear a call for the United States to abide by the standards to which it holds other countries: Do not kill or injure civilians and an occupying power is responsible to protect and care for the civilians who are under its control. The United States identifies the Kurdish Regional Government as a model of democracy, but it is clear that democracy is not served by opening air space to an outside military to attack civilian targets. These civilians had no voice in this decision.
On a larger scale, CPT has observed a dramatic change in the Kurdish population from unapologetic support for the U.S. military presence in Iraq to anger at the way in which the United States has dumped one of its most loyal allies in the Middle East. Kurdish people have experienced the Anfal assaults under the Saddam Hussein regime and fear U.S. support will encourage Turkey to move even more aggressively against Kurdistan.
Therefore, CPT in Iraq deplores the decision by the United States to aid these attacks on a civilian population. We beg you as U.S. officials to reverse this decision that assists Turkey in violence toward civilians. We encourage U.S. pressure on Turkey to pursue diplomatic solutions to the PKK/Turkey disputes and other underlying issues. CPT calls on the people of the United States to learn more about these events and advocate for the safety of these Kurdish people.
Peggy Gish, Anita David, Cliff Kindy, Michele Naar-Obed - CPT delegates http://www.cpt.org/
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Tom Arbogast: Iowa caucuses a source of hope
Tom Arbogast of WNPJ member group Sauk Prairie Area Peace Council send us this letter to the editor, printed in the Sauk Prairie Eagle.
Dear editor:
It's been awhile since I've felt like writing another of these letters, as I was feeling very discouraged about the country/world situation and felt like what's the use of even trying, feeling almost hopeless. However, I find after the Iowa caucuses there are signs of new life and new hope for change at the top coming from the grassroots, at least in our neighoring state of Iowa. The hard fought victories of Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee, in their respective parties, there last week represented to me expressions by most of the voters were looking for real change as these candidates' message were ones of populist politics for reform and real change and not the status quo.we've become so stagnated in. This may be only a "change" moment, as for sure the status quo will fight back heavily and probably get ugly, unfortunately. However, the Iowa results are a good start. By the time this letter is published we'll know more about how this moment holds up.
Note the words of Obama, the first person of color to win the first-caucus state, in his victory speech, "We came together as Democrats, as Repulicans and independents, to stand up and say we are one nation, we are one people and our time for change has come. Hope is the bedrock of this nation, the belief that our destiny will not be written for us but by us, by all those men and women who are not content to settle for the world as it is but who have the courage to remake the world as it should be." Doesn't that sound like Robert F.Kennedy from the sixties?
Huckabee declared similarly, "When one is elected to public office, one is not elected to be a part of the ruling class. One is elected to be a part of the serving class." His victory on the Republican side was a remarkable story of that night, as he was outspent by at least 7 to1 by Mitt Romney's self-financed campaign. So, money isn't necessarily what wins. Even outsider Republican, Texas Congressman Ron Paul, pulled another 10 percent, and, it is noted that militant populist candidate John Edwards came in second and Hilary Clinton was third.
So, my friends, there is new hope in the land that the people can and will take back our country, sooner than later in this new year of 2008.
Dear editor:
It's been awhile since I've felt like writing another of these letters, as I was feeling very discouraged about the country/world situation and felt like what's the use of even trying, feeling almost hopeless. However, I find after the Iowa caucuses there are signs of new life and new hope for change at the top coming from the grassroots, at least in our neighoring state of Iowa. The hard fought victories of Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee, in their respective parties, there last week represented to me expressions by most of the voters were looking for real change as these candidates' message were ones of populist politics for reform and real change and not the status quo.we've become so stagnated in. This may be only a "change" moment, as for sure the status quo will fight back heavily and probably get ugly, unfortunately. However, the Iowa results are a good start. By the time this letter is published we'll know more about how this moment holds up.
Note the words of Obama, the first person of color to win the first-caucus state, in his victory speech, "We came together as Democrats, as Repulicans and independents, to stand up and say we are one nation, we are one people and our time for change has come. Hope is the bedrock of this nation, the belief that our destiny will not be written for us but by us, by all those men and women who are not content to settle for the world as it is but who have the courage to remake the world as it should be." Doesn't that sound like Robert F.Kennedy from the sixties?
Huckabee declared similarly, "When one is elected to public office, one is not elected to be a part of the ruling class. One is elected to be a part of the serving class." His victory on the Republican side was a remarkable story of that night, as he was outspent by at least 7 to1 by Mitt Romney's self-financed campaign. So, money isn't necessarily what wins. Even outsider Republican, Texas Congressman Ron Paul, pulled another 10 percent, and, it is noted that militant populist candidate John Edwards came in second and Hilary Clinton was third.
So, my friends, there is new hope in the land that the people can and will take back our country, sooner than later in this new year of 2008.
Saturday, January 12, 2008
Francis Pauc: Not smart or just to demonize our opponents
WNPJ member Francis Pauc, of Oak Creek, sends us this essay, raising some concerns about how those of us in the peace movement relate to our political opponents:
Over the past five years, my family and I have participated in various demonstrations against the war in Iraq. In general these have been positive experiences for us, and I know that I have learned a great deal. The protests have been good opportunities to meet new people and for me to expand my horizons. However, I have to admit that there is something about these gatherings that disturbs me.
Quite often during the protests I have witnessed people expressing anger and bitterness toward the people who got us into this war. It is understandable for people to feel this way, but I would argue that it is counterproductive. Railing and ranting against Bush and Company may help in getting the crowd worked up, but it is essentially a negative energy. We are very good at opposing the war, but are we as competent when it comes to promoting peace? Being against something is easy, being in favor of something requires more thought and work. At demonstrations I hear people speaking loud and clear about what we don't want any more. I am not entirely sure that I hear well-thought-out expressions of what we should do instead.
Speakers at the demonstrations often mock and belittle the Bush administration. By extension they are also criticizing those that agree with Bush concerning the war in Iraq. I grant you that there are plenty of things about these people to criticize, but I don't think that it is smart or just to demonize our opponents. When we label somebody a " warmonger " or " rightwing fanatic" are we any more noble than the person who calls one of us a " cut-and-run liberal " or " a friend of the terrorists " ? When we dismiss somebody out of hand by labelling them, we are only hurting ourselves.
There is a crucial difference between saying that somebody is seriously mistaken and saying that they are in some way evil. I think that too often we cross that line and say in some manner that our adversaries are evil. This is a mistake. It is a mistake because, if we say that, now we have eliminated the possibility of communication with our opponents. We have certainly eliminated the possibility of any compromise on an issue. I am not saying that we need to agree with people that we consider to be badly mistaken. On the contrary, we need to passionately oppose them. However, we need to respect them, even if they refuse to respect us.
Francis Pauc - Oak Creek, Wisconsin
Over the past five years, my family and I have participated in various demonstrations against the war in Iraq. In general these have been positive experiences for us, and I know that I have learned a great deal. The protests have been good opportunities to meet new people and for me to expand my horizons. However, I have to admit that there is something about these gatherings that disturbs me.
Quite often during the protests I have witnessed people expressing anger and bitterness toward the people who got us into this war. It is understandable for people to feel this way, but I would argue that it is counterproductive. Railing and ranting against Bush and Company may help in getting the crowd worked up, but it is essentially a negative energy. We are very good at opposing the war, but are we as competent when it comes to promoting peace? Being against something is easy, being in favor of something requires more thought and work. At demonstrations I hear people speaking loud and clear about what we don't want any more. I am not entirely sure that I hear well-thought-out expressions of what we should do instead.
Speakers at the demonstrations often mock and belittle the Bush administration. By extension they are also criticizing those that agree with Bush concerning the war in Iraq. I grant you that there are plenty of things about these people to criticize, but I don't think that it is smart or just to demonize our opponents. When we label somebody a " warmonger " or " rightwing fanatic" are we any more noble than the person who calls one of us a " cut-and-run liberal " or " a friend of the terrorists " ? When we dismiss somebody out of hand by labelling them, we are only hurting ourselves.
There is a crucial difference between saying that somebody is seriously mistaken and saying that they are in some way evil. I think that too often we cross that line and say in some manner that our adversaries are evil. This is a mistake. It is a mistake because, if we say that, now we have eliminated the possibility of communication with our opponents. We have certainly eliminated the possibility of any compromise on an issue. I am not saying that we need to agree with people that we consider to be badly mistaken. On the contrary, we need to passionately oppose them. However, we need to respect them, even if they refuse to respect us.
Francis Pauc - Oak Creek, Wisconsin
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Bill Christofferson: Silent anti-war majority must act
WNPJ member Bill Christofferson, regular contributor to the blog Uppity Wisconsin and a Wisconsin coordinator of the Iraq Moratorium, sends us this call to action, orignally printed in the Duluth News Tribune:
As we enter another year with U.S. troops in Iraq, the obvious question is: What will it take to end this war? President Bush will not be moved, despite a solid majority — perhaps two-thirds — of Americans who want to end the war and start bringing troops home. Unfortunately, on a day-to-day basis, the majority is silent. Life goes on, and so do the war and the deaths.
Opponents of the war have become the new Silent Majority.
The new Congress, elected with a mandate to stop the war, has acted as chicken-hearted as the president has been bull-headed. This year’s presidential election offers precious little hope as the three leading Democratic candidates refuse to commit to having troops out by 2013.
The peace movement’s challenge is not to persuade Americans to oppose the war, but to mobilize the silent majority and convert them to active, vocal advocates to end the war.
That’s what has sparked the Iraq Moratorium, a decentralized, growing, national grass-roots effort that asks individuals to take personal responsibility to do something — anything — to show their opposition to the war.
The moratorium asks people to act, individually or collectively, on the third Friday of every month. Actions have ranged from wearing a black armband or button to participating in large-scale protests. The Iraq Moratorium Web site, IraqMoratorium.org, offers ideas, information and reports about past and upcoming actions.
The moratorium is a growing movement that touches big cities and small towns. Duluth has held Iraq Moratorium events. Hayward has been cited by organizers as an inspiration, with a turnout for a December event of 80 people in a city of 2,129. If the same turnout happened nationally, there would be 12 million people calling for an end to the war — too many to ignore.
The next Iraq Moratorium events fall on Friday, Jan. 18. Hayward will again be the site of a roadside vigil. And the Northland Anti-War Coalition will sponsor a public forum in Duluth — “Native & African American Voices Against the War” — at 7 p.m. at Central Hillside Community Recreation Center, 12 E. Fourth St.
But participation doesn’t require attendance at an event; individual actions to call for an end to the war are equally important.
Because while it would be easy to dismiss Iraq Moratorium events as meaningless (cynics sometimes say nothing anyone does will make a difference), doing something is infinitely more likely to have an impact than doing nothing. That’s what drives the Iraq Moratorium.
Buttons and armbands won’t stop the war by themselves. Neither will rallies and marches or letters to the editor or phone calls to Congress or speeches or civil disobedience. There’s no single magic solution. Those who want to end the Iraq war need to do everything. The Iraq Moratorium is one more tool in the toolbox — but one that in the long run could be an effective way to tighten the screws on elected officials to end the war.
Bill Christofferson of Milwaukee is a Vietnam veteran, a former journalist, a long-time political consultant, now retired, and a volunteer member of the Iraq Moratorium Committee.
As we enter another year with U.S. troops in Iraq, the obvious question is: What will it take to end this war? President Bush will not be moved, despite a solid majority — perhaps two-thirds — of Americans who want to end the war and start bringing troops home. Unfortunately, on a day-to-day basis, the majority is silent. Life goes on, and so do the war and the deaths.
Opponents of the war have become the new Silent Majority.
The new Congress, elected with a mandate to stop the war, has acted as chicken-hearted as the president has been bull-headed. This year’s presidential election offers precious little hope as the three leading Democratic candidates refuse to commit to having troops out by 2013.
The peace movement’s challenge is not to persuade Americans to oppose the war, but to mobilize the silent majority and convert them to active, vocal advocates to end the war.
That’s what has sparked the Iraq Moratorium, a decentralized, growing, national grass-roots effort that asks individuals to take personal responsibility to do something — anything — to show their opposition to the war.
The moratorium asks people to act, individually or collectively, on the third Friday of every month. Actions have ranged from wearing a black armband or button to participating in large-scale protests. The Iraq Moratorium Web site, IraqMoratorium.org, offers ideas, information and reports about past and upcoming actions.
The moratorium is a growing movement that touches big cities and small towns. Duluth has held Iraq Moratorium events. Hayward has been cited by organizers as an inspiration, with a turnout for a December event of 80 people in a city of 2,129. If the same turnout happened nationally, there would be 12 million people calling for an end to the war — too many to ignore.
The next Iraq Moratorium events fall on Friday, Jan. 18. Hayward will again be the site of a roadside vigil. And the Northland Anti-War Coalition will sponsor a public forum in Duluth — “Native & African American Voices Against the War” — at 7 p.m. at Central Hillside Community Recreation Center, 12 E. Fourth St.
But participation doesn’t require attendance at an event; individual actions to call for an end to the war are equally important.
Because while it would be easy to dismiss Iraq Moratorium events as meaningless (cynics sometimes say nothing anyone does will make a difference), doing something is infinitely more likely to have an impact than doing nothing. That’s what drives the Iraq Moratorium.
Buttons and armbands won’t stop the war by themselves. Neither will rallies and marches or letters to the editor or phone calls to Congress or speeches or civil disobedience. There’s no single magic solution. Those who want to end the Iraq war need to do everything. The Iraq Moratorium is one more tool in the toolbox — but one that in the long run could be an effective way to tighten the screws on elected officials to end the war.
Bill Christofferson of Milwaukee is a Vietnam veteran, a former journalist, a long-time political consultant, now retired, and a volunteer member of the Iraq Moratorium Committee.
Sunday, January 6, 2008
Ann Frisch: Venezuela's Referendum is Evidence of Participatory Democracy
WNPJ member Dr. Ann Frisch, of Oshkosh, sends us this editorial, published in the Oshkosh Northwestern on December 6.
The constitutional reforms proposed by President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and those proposed by the Venezuelan National Assembly failed by less than 1.5 percent in their elections on Sunday. The propaganda machine calls Chavez a dictator…but dictators don’t lose elections. This was evidence of participatory democracy.
I am, however, ashamed that the US government has been using our tax money to destabilize a democratically elected government, artificially creating some of the opposition. The CIA’s Operation Pliers plan was to create rebellion among the armed forces, create phony polls to show that the “no” vote would prevail, releasing phony early report that the “no” vote was winning although against election rules. T-shirts with “fraud” had already been printed. Opposition advertising claimed that if the referendum passed, children would be taken away from their parents and businesses would be seized.
The media propaganda has not been limited to Venezuela. We have been drowning in assertions that are false and misleading.
The recent propaganda about press controls was the issue of RCTV, with 36 % ownership in the Venezuelan media. RCTV even before Chavez became president faced legal sanctions for sensationalist coverage, pornography and advertising cigarettes. It was an advocate of overthrow during the 2002 kidnapping of President Chavez. Five years later, President Chavez denied the station a license, something our own FCC has done. http://www.rethinkvenezuela.com/downloads/RCTV.htm
In spite of continual meddling by the US government, the government of Hugo Chavez has been successful in transforming Venezuela from being a virtual colony of the US to being a participatory democracy. Like other countries in Latin America, the Venezuelan government has refused to participate in the “free trade” agreements and has refused to send their soldiers to the notorious US Army School of the Americas (now called WHINSEC). The Bolivarian government (so named for Simón Bolívar, their hero) took back control over the national oil revenues from foreigners and returned it through loans and grants to small businesses, social security, and state of the art public health centers and increased wages to teachers and public health workers.
In 1999, the constitution that created a unicameral legislature, also created a National Election Commission and a Human Rights Ombudsman. The constitutional reforms at that time guaranteed citizens new human and civil rights, universal health care and free public education. Minorities (Afro Venezuelans and Indigenous people) were recognized and the work of home makers was considered a productive contribution to society meriting compensation. People all over the country were directly involved in the development of this constitution. It is considered to be one of the most comprehensive and progressive in the world. If you stop on the street to talk to Venezuelans, they will pull their personal copy of the constitution out of their pockets and read you their favorite sections. You can read it in English at: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Venezuela They consider it their constitution.
The current propaganda about the referendum characterized it as a road to dictatorship. In fact, what troubles the Bush administration and corporate execs is that it is just the opposite: it creates greater citizen involvement and government accountability. The proposed removal of the two-term limit does not change the fact that there will continue to be guaranteed open, free and fair elections. Our own Congress does not have term limits, nor do some European governments.
As we express our concerns about dictatorship, we need to tell our legislators to fill their duties to the US Constitution. It is being massively rewritten to favor corporate interests and government dictatorship. Our phone conversations and e mail are being read by bureaucrats and corporations are collaborating with the unauthorized searches. Habeas corpus has been denied. Local governments are seizing private property for tax revenues on more lucrative properties, and our elections are being manipulated. We must do something about dictatorship. We should start at home. Hands off Venezuela.
Ann Frisch is Professor Emerita, University of Wisconsin Oshkosh. She continues to teach “On Becoming a Global Citizen” a course in the Global Education Master’s Certificate Program at UWO. She is a Public Member of the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council. She served in Guatemala with Nonviolent Peaceforce, an international unarmed, nonpartisan peace keeping force and participated in a study tour of Venezuela with Marin (CA) Interfaith Task Force.
The constitutional reforms proposed by President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and those proposed by the Venezuelan National Assembly failed by less than 1.5 percent in their elections on Sunday. The propaganda machine calls Chavez a dictator…but dictators don’t lose elections. This was evidence of participatory democracy.
I am, however, ashamed that the US government has been using our tax money to destabilize a democratically elected government, artificially creating some of the opposition. The CIA’s Operation Pliers plan was to create rebellion among the armed forces, create phony polls to show that the “no” vote would prevail, releasing phony early report that the “no” vote was winning although against election rules. T-shirts with “fraud” had already been printed. Opposition advertising claimed that if the referendum passed, children would be taken away from their parents and businesses would be seized.
The media propaganda has not been limited to Venezuela. We have been drowning in assertions that are false and misleading.
The recent propaganda about press controls was the issue of RCTV, with 36 % ownership in the Venezuelan media. RCTV even before Chavez became president faced legal sanctions for sensationalist coverage, pornography and advertising cigarettes. It was an advocate of overthrow during the 2002 kidnapping of President Chavez. Five years later, President Chavez denied the station a license, something our own FCC has done. http://www.rethinkvenezuela.com/downloads/RCTV.htm
In spite of continual meddling by the US government, the government of Hugo Chavez has been successful in transforming Venezuela from being a virtual colony of the US to being a participatory democracy. Like other countries in Latin America, the Venezuelan government has refused to participate in the “free trade” agreements and has refused to send their soldiers to the notorious US Army School of the Americas (now called WHINSEC). The Bolivarian government (so named for Simón Bolívar, their hero) took back control over the national oil revenues from foreigners and returned it through loans and grants to small businesses, social security, and state of the art public health centers and increased wages to teachers and public health workers.
In 1999, the constitution that created a unicameral legislature, also created a National Election Commission and a Human Rights Ombudsman. The constitutional reforms at that time guaranteed citizens new human and civil rights, universal health care and free public education. Minorities (Afro Venezuelans and Indigenous people) were recognized and the work of home makers was considered a productive contribution to society meriting compensation. People all over the country were directly involved in the development of this constitution. It is considered to be one of the most comprehensive and progressive in the world. If you stop on the street to talk to Venezuelans, they will pull their personal copy of the constitution out of their pockets and read you their favorite sections. You can read it in English at: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Venezuela They consider it their constitution.
The current propaganda about the referendum characterized it as a road to dictatorship. In fact, what troubles the Bush administration and corporate execs is that it is just the opposite: it creates greater citizen involvement and government accountability. The proposed removal of the two-term limit does not change the fact that there will continue to be guaranteed open, free and fair elections. Our own Congress does not have term limits, nor do some European governments.
As we express our concerns about dictatorship, we need to tell our legislators to fill their duties to the US Constitution. It is being massively rewritten to favor corporate interests and government dictatorship. Our phone conversations and e mail are being read by bureaucrats and corporations are collaborating with the unauthorized searches. Habeas corpus has been denied. Local governments are seizing private property for tax revenues on more lucrative properties, and our elections are being manipulated. We must do something about dictatorship. We should start at home. Hands off Venezuela.
Ann Frisch is Professor Emerita, University of Wisconsin Oshkosh. She continues to teach “On Becoming a Global Citizen” a course in the Global Education Master’s Certificate Program at UWO. She is a Public Member of the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council. She served in Guatemala with Nonviolent Peaceforce, an international unarmed, nonpartisan peace keeping force and participated in a study tour of Venezuela with Marin (CA) Interfaith Task Force.
Friday, January 4, 2008
Elton Tylenda: Troops not served well by perpetuating hero myth
On Nov. 11, Armistice Day, now called Veterans Day, members of Veterans for Peace erected and managed the somber display representing American soldiers killed in the illegal invasions/occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.
"We erected over 4,300 tombstones (in Olbrich Park) so that people can comprehend the magnitude of this tragedy and reflect upon its meaning," project co-chair Richard Chamberlin said.
While I was walking the line over and over and listening to the people who came to view it, recollections from Vietnam and a host of related thoughts and reflections welled up. Here are some I'd like to share.
The scope of the tragedy expands exponentially when considering the defenseless civilians killed by our troops. It would require over 250 times more tombstones than were displayed. Our dead were, unwittingly or not, involved in that slaughter. So they're not heroes. In fact, they were victims in multiple ways. And when we parrot the media hype about "fallen heroes," we perpetuate victimization by promoting the continuation of the slaughter.
The hero hype works for those who use lies and deception to sell wars to the unwary -- wars that serve their own vested interests. These folks profit mightily while sacrificing nothing.
The planned invasion of Iran will require many more bodies, and the hero hype helps lure them in. And again, the future "heroes" like the ones already "fallen" will not come from the families of those who profit from war. They will come from that rapidly expanding pool of the poor, the powerless, the disadvantaged -- especially people of color. These will be the ones to sacrifice mightily and profit not at all from the folly. They will be the future victims (one who is killed, injured, or subject to suffering; one who is swindled or tricked).
Note: We're hearing the same rhetoric about Iran from the same people who lied and deceived us about Iraq. In fact, the Bush regime has employed some folks who deceived us about Vietnam -- Colin Powell comes to mind.
Given the nature and intent of these ill-begotten wars, the most idealistic soldier is given no opportunity for heroic actions (characteristic of a hero; noble).
The indefensible attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan are illegal by all measures of U.S. and international law. They likewise stand condemned by universal ethical principles common to all wisdom traditions.
Thus our soldiers are victims from the moment they arrive. The slaughter of defenseless civilians in Iraq alone (over a million) and the millions of refugees driven from their homes will soon exceed that of Vietnam.
The war on Vietnam was epitomized by the My Lai massacre of 500 defenseless Vietnamese children, women, and elderly by a cross-section of average American teenagers and young adults. Documented charges included mutilation and rape of children, the hanging of elderly invalids, and the Nazi-style machine-gunning of women and children into a ditch. The Vietnamese people were commonly called "gooks" and other derogatory names and were looked upon as less than human. My Lai was only one of many similar "incidents."
What atrocities are American youths committing in Iraq and Afghanistan, where Islamic people are commonly called "rag heads" and worse and are looked upon as enemies? For those orchestrating these wars, Islamic believers are also considered enemies of God. George Bush called it a "crusade" at the start, and Erik Prince calls his highly paid Blackwater mercenaries "Crusaders for Christ." Worse yet, the widespread torture (including waterboarding) and summary executions of Vietnamese "suspects" were illegal back then, but today's mercenaries can now kill with impunity, and torture has since been legalized.
How did America's image as the gleaming "City on the Hill" sink into the hellhole of a torture gulag as Abu Ghraib overshadows the Statue of Liberty in the eyes of the world? The "memorial mile" is about the need for redemption -- which can't begin until we courageously face the truth.
Elton Tylenda of Madison is a teacher, writer and combat veteran of Vietnam and is a member of the Madison chapter of Veterans for Peace, as well as WNPJ. This article was written for the Cap Times of Madison on 12/5/07 – and Elton asked us to spread this news to the Network Op-Ed.
"We erected over 4,300 tombstones (in Olbrich Park) so that people can comprehend the magnitude of this tragedy and reflect upon its meaning," project co-chair Richard Chamberlin said.
While I was walking the line over and over and listening to the people who came to view it, recollections from Vietnam and a host of related thoughts and reflections welled up. Here are some I'd like to share.
The scope of the tragedy expands exponentially when considering the defenseless civilians killed by our troops. It would require over 250 times more tombstones than were displayed. Our dead were, unwittingly or not, involved in that slaughter. So they're not heroes. In fact, they were victims in multiple ways. And when we parrot the media hype about "fallen heroes," we perpetuate victimization by promoting the continuation of the slaughter.
The hero hype works for those who use lies and deception to sell wars to the unwary -- wars that serve their own vested interests. These folks profit mightily while sacrificing nothing.
The planned invasion of Iran will require many more bodies, and the hero hype helps lure them in. And again, the future "heroes" like the ones already "fallen" will not come from the families of those who profit from war. They will come from that rapidly expanding pool of the poor, the powerless, the disadvantaged -- especially people of color. These will be the ones to sacrifice mightily and profit not at all from the folly. They will be the future victims (one who is killed, injured, or subject to suffering; one who is swindled or tricked).
Note: We're hearing the same rhetoric about Iran from the same people who lied and deceived us about Iraq. In fact, the Bush regime has employed some folks who deceived us about Vietnam -- Colin Powell comes to mind.
Given the nature and intent of these ill-begotten wars, the most idealistic soldier is given no opportunity for heroic actions (characteristic of a hero; noble).
The indefensible attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan are illegal by all measures of U.S. and international law. They likewise stand condemned by universal ethical principles common to all wisdom traditions.
Thus our soldiers are victims from the moment they arrive. The slaughter of defenseless civilians in Iraq alone (over a million) and the millions of refugees driven from their homes will soon exceed that of Vietnam.
The war on Vietnam was epitomized by the My Lai massacre of 500 defenseless Vietnamese children, women, and elderly by a cross-section of average American teenagers and young adults. Documented charges included mutilation and rape of children, the hanging of elderly invalids, and the Nazi-style machine-gunning of women and children into a ditch. The Vietnamese people were commonly called "gooks" and other derogatory names and were looked upon as less than human. My Lai was only one of many similar "incidents."
What atrocities are American youths committing in Iraq and Afghanistan, where Islamic people are commonly called "rag heads" and worse and are looked upon as enemies? For those orchestrating these wars, Islamic believers are also considered enemies of God. George Bush called it a "crusade" at the start, and Erik Prince calls his highly paid Blackwater mercenaries "Crusaders for Christ." Worse yet, the widespread torture (including waterboarding) and summary executions of Vietnamese "suspects" were illegal back then, but today's mercenaries can now kill with impunity, and torture has since been legalized.
How did America's image as the gleaming "City on the Hill" sink into the hellhole of a torture gulag as Abu Ghraib overshadows the Statue of Liberty in the eyes of the world? The "memorial mile" is about the need for redemption -- which can't begin until we courageously face the truth.
Elton Tylenda of Madison is a teacher, writer and combat veteran of Vietnam and is a member of the Madison chapter of Veterans for Peace, as well as WNPJ. This article was written for the Cap Times of Madison on 12/5/07 – and Elton asked us to spread this news to the Network Op-Ed.
Thursday, January 3, 2008
Lois Hart responds to Bhutto Assasination
In this, our first "guest editorial", WNPJ member Lois Hart of Watertown, South Dakota responds to the news of the assasination of Benazir Bhutto:
A family group was sitting around a table in Madison, watching the news as government officials and Presidential hopefuls responded to the death of Benazir Bhutto. We groaned as Mike Huckabee suggested we’d better close the border to hordes of Pakistanis entering our country. We weren’t impressed with Mitt Romney’s admonition to “restore stability” – without any suggestion of “how.” President Bush’s insistence that the January 8 elections must go forward – even if Bhutto’s party has no time to find a candidate – wasn’t what we were waiting for. Even Hillary Clinton’s memory of having
spoken with Bhutto didn’t address the basic issues.
But then came the challenge: “What would YOU have said if CNN called you for a response?” What can we learn from this death? What does it mean? How can we prevent such killings in the future?
As I tried to frame my answer, I realized that I don’t know enough to talk about Bhutto herself or to speculate about who wanted her dead and why. I know very little about Pakistan. Is Three Cups of Tea the only book I’ve read about the lives of people there?
But I do know that we live in a violent and hate-filled world. I know that it’s easy to condemn the violence used by terrorists and “militants” while excusing our own. I know we need new directions.
I see this image of brush fires breaking out in dry tinder – one here, then one there. We watch bombs fall on Lebanon – or clashes between Israelis and Palestinians – or angry crowds in Iran – or American soldiers kicking in doors in Iraq, with guns drawn on the terrified family huddled inside. In these moments of crisis we try to stomp out the flames and keep the blaze from spreading. But the damage is already done. Can we, instead, clear out some of the hate-filled undergrowth where the fires begin and smolder?
In a world of comfortable homes and nutritious meals, of good schools and medical care, of meaningful work and healthy neighborhoods, the brush-fires will be fewer. To create this safer world, we need to share our resources with others – and examine our own reliance on violence. We cannot stop the killing of Bhutto. It has already happened. What we CAN do is keep working to create a more peaceful world – and try to prevent the next assassination.
Lois Hart, Watertown, South Dakota
loishart@wat.midco.net January 1, 2008
A family group was sitting around a table in Madison, watching the news as government officials and Presidential hopefuls responded to the death of Benazir Bhutto. We groaned as Mike Huckabee suggested we’d better close the border to hordes of Pakistanis entering our country. We weren’t impressed with Mitt Romney’s admonition to “restore stability” – without any suggestion of “how.” President Bush’s insistence that the January 8 elections must go forward – even if Bhutto’s party has no time to find a candidate – wasn’t what we were waiting for. Even Hillary Clinton’s memory of having
spoken with Bhutto didn’t address the basic issues.
But then came the challenge: “What would YOU have said if CNN called you for a response?” What can we learn from this death? What does it mean? How can we prevent such killings in the future?
As I tried to frame my answer, I realized that I don’t know enough to talk about Bhutto herself or to speculate about who wanted her dead and why. I know very little about Pakistan. Is Three Cups of Tea the only book I’ve read about the lives of people there?
But I do know that we live in a violent and hate-filled world. I know that it’s easy to condemn the violence used by terrorists and “militants” while excusing our own. I know we need new directions.
I see this image of brush fires breaking out in dry tinder – one here, then one there. We watch bombs fall on Lebanon – or clashes between Israelis and Palestinians – or angry crowds in Iran – or American soldiers kicking in doors in Iraq, with guns drawn on the terrified family huddled inside. In these moments of crisis we try to stomp out the flames and keep the blaze from spreading. But the damage is already done. Can we, instead, clear out some of the hate-filled undergrowth where the fires begin and smolder?
In a world of comfortable homes and nutritious meals, of good schools and medical care, of meaningful work and healthy neighborhoods, the brush-fires will be fewer. To create this safer world, we need to share our resources with others – and examine our own reliance on violence. We cannot stop the killing of Bhutto. It has already happened. What we CAN do is keep working to create a more peaceful world – and try to prevent the next assassination.
Lois Hart, Watertown, South Dakota
loishart@wat.midco.net January 1, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
