Instrutive perhaps is a sentence handed down to a soldier from Eugene. Private Firt classJames Burmeister fled to Canada while on leave from his unit in Iraq He got six months in jail after returning voluntarily to face punishment.
Helen Burmeister: "I'm very disappointed in the way they feel they can treat veterans of war. I think the reason my son went AWOL was for a good reason. I don’t think he deserved the punishment he got." Helen Burmeister says she’s unsure whether to appeal the ruling because it could prolong James’s stay in jail.
We saw the usual silence on Burmeister unfold and the small number of people and outlets actually interested in the news (and this is news). As usual, one person steps up to the bat. Dee Knight's "Army court-martials resister for blowing whistle on 'bait-and-kill'" (Workers World): Private First Class James Burmeister faces a Special Court Martial at Fort Knox on July 16. The charges are AWOL and desertion. He returned to Fort Knox voluntarily in March, after living 10 months in Canada with his spouse and infant child. He refused redeployment to Iraq while on leave in May 2007. In most such cases at Fort Knox, the Army has in recent years quietly dismissed the resister with a less than honorable discharge "for the good of the military." This time it's different. The brass "offered" Burmeister a year in military prison and a dishonorable discharge if he agreed to plead guilty. Burmeister refused the offer. His father, Erich, says the Army is making an example of James for denouncing a secret "bait-and-switch" program he was forced to participate in while in Iraq. In media interviews last year in Canada, James described the program as a war crime he was forced to commit. Shortly afterward, the program's details came out in the Washington Post. "Baiting is putting an object out there that we know they will use, with the intention of destroying the enemy," the Post quoted Capt. Matthew Didier, leader of an elite sniper scout platoon. "We would put an item out there and watch it. If someone found the item, picked it up and attempted to leave with the item, we would engage the individual." The Post reported that "Eugene Fidell, president of the National Institute of Military Justice, said such a baiting program ... raises troubling possibilities, such as what happens when civilians pick up the items. ... 'You might as well ask every Iraqi to walk around with a target on his back,' Fidell said." (Sept. 24, 2007) James had asked to be classified as a conscientious objector following his training in Germany, but his request was ignored by his commander. Instead, he became a machine gunner. "Our unit’s job seemed to be more about targeting a largely innocent civilian population or deliberately attracting confrontation," he wrote in his deposition seeking asylum in Canada. "These citizens were almost always unarmed. In some cases the Iraqi victims looked to me like they were children." (Eugene Weekly, May 22) In Iraq, Burmeister had been knocked unconscious and his face filled with shrapnel when his Humvee was hit by a roadside bomb. The shrapnel wounds left him with a traumatic brain injury, and he suffers from severe Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. His parents insist that he urgently needs medical and psychological help, not jail time. His parents have waged an unceasing struggle for the Army to release him. They called on their representative, Peter DeFazio, to launch a congressional inquiry into James’s case, but have so far heard nothing. James' mother, Helen Burmeister, flew to Fort Knox in June, with help from anti-war ex-Colonel Ann Wright. Helen spoke directly to the base commander there, demanding that her son be discharged in lieu of a court martial. She then joined supporters from Veterans for Peace and Vietnam Vets Against the War demonstrating outside. On July 8 the Army invited Helen to attend her son's court martial on July 16. This time both she and her husband Erich are going. They're determined to keep James out of jail. "I bought a one-way ticket," Erich told Workers World. "I'm not leaving without my son. If I have to sit outside the base and wait for him, I'll do it. Even if I have to go on a hunger strike, that's what I'll do. My son does not deserve another day in jail." In an interview with Courage to Resist, Erich said: "[James] struggles with PTSD, yet he is quartered within earshot of the shooting range and tank training area, daily hearing the gunfire and explosions. He has been prescribed a dangerous cocktail of anti-psychotic drugs and sleep aids by Army doctors, while the command decides if they want to send him to prison, as a coward, a soldier who faced death, and followed orders to 'shoot to kill.' The cowards--George Bush and Dick Cheney, those in Congress and the generals with the blood on their hands--why are they the punishers instead of the punished?" (couragetoresist.org, May 12) Supporters can contact the Fort Knox post commander, General Campbell, to demand a speedy discharge and no further punishment for James. Send email to knox.pao@conus.army.mil, or call the Fort Knox public affairs office at 502-624-7451. Ask that they discharge PFC James Burmeister now so that he can get the help that he needs. Articles copyright 1995-2008 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved. Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011 Email: ww@workers.org Subscribe wwnews-subscribe@workersworld.net Support independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php
Since yesterday morning, the following community websites have updated:
Posted by Ralph Nader on Saturday, July 19, 2008 at 10:46:00 AM
(Listen to my Saturday morning audio message here.)
Good morning.
This is Ralph Nader.
It is Saturday, July 19, 2008.
As you know, hundreds of our stalwart supporters are deployed all over the country this weekend -- on street corners, at malls, in front of post offices -- seeking to meet their commitment to put Nader/Gonzalez on 15 state ballots by tomorrow midnight.
On our way to 45 state ballots by September 20th.
To give millions of Americans the chance to vote for a candidacy that will shift the power from the corporations back into the hands of the sovereign people.
One week ago, we asked you to help us reach this goal by raising $60,000 by Sunday midnight to fund this current ballot drive.
As of this moment, we are well over $50,000 -- thanks to all of you.
Tomorrow night, we will raise our hands with you and declare victory in reaching this important milestone.
But first, we must get there.
We have less than two days to raise the difference.
Less than $10,000.
So, this is a special plea.
To those of you who have yet to contribute, now is the time.
There is something happening to Canada that makes me uncomfortable. Last week, our Prime Minister joined with President George W. Bush to defer action on climate change to United Nations' talks planned 18 months from now in Copenhagen. This week, the Prime Minister allowed Robin Long, a U.S. Army deserter who fled to Canada three years ago, to be deported to the United States, marking the first time a resister to the U.S war effort in Iraq has been removed from this country by Canadian authorities. Long sought refuge on the grounds that the U.S. Army wanted him to participate in an 'illegal war of aggression" in Iraq. Coincidentally, the Prime Minister abandoned Omar Khadr to the vagaries of the U.S. military tribunal prosecuting him for alleged war crimes, including the grenade killing of a U.S. soldier. The Prime Minister's failure to act on the above reflects poorly on the values of Canadians and plants Canada's international reputation in an unfamiliar place. Omar Khadr was born in Toronto. He is a Canadian citizen. He was captured in 2002, at the age of 15 by U.S. forces in Afghanistan. He was a "child soldier". He should have received the protection of international law. Instead of being tried in U.S. military courts, he should have been protected and offered rehabilitation. He has been held without trial in a U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba since 2002.
The above is from W.E. (Bill) Belliveau's "It's time for Canada to act on Khadr" (Times and Transcript). Robin Long is a US war resister who went to Canada because he could not participate in an illegal war. On Monday, he was the subject of a deportation hearing. But he really wasn't deported. Deported means you are ordered out of the country. What Judge Anne Mctavish arranged was an extradition. She wants to lie (she lies about a lot -- and had an interesting dinner last weekend that she thinks no one's ever going to find about) and claim she authorized deportation. She authorized extradition. Deportation would have meant Robin was evicted from Canada. Robin could have then decided to go back to the US or he could have gone to Norway, Mexico, anywhere he wanted. Canada DOES NOT have the right to order him to the United States. But that is what they appear to have done. They made arrangements for him to be turned over to the US military police. Desertion from the US army is not a crime in a Canada and no one can be extradited to the US for that 'offense.'
Back during Vietnam, before spring 1969 (and later by fall of 1969 when Pierre Trudeau gave his speech and implemented the new policy), deserters and draft dodgers/evaders seeking advice in the US before going to Canada were advised to fly in, not simply cross the border by vehicle or on foot. The reason was because if you landed at an airport, they might decide to deport you but there was a process they'd have to go through. Whereas, at a border crossing, they could just turn you back right there.
Judge Mctavish needs to be disbarred because she doesn't understand case law, she refused to follow Canada's policy on immigration (e.g. deporting the parent of a Canadian child) and because Robin Long was NOT deported. He was extradited for an 'offense' that Canada does not recognize as a crime and that Canada has no treaty with the US that finds desertion from the US military to be grounds for extradition.
Long was held in a secret location, kept from his family (he has a partner in Canada, Renee, with whom he had a child), kept from his friends, and there's some question as to how much contact his attorneys were allowed.
Canadians should be outraged because Judge Mctavish allowed the US to call the shots on issues that pertain their country.
While Long's supporters, friends and family could not know when he was being 'deported,' somehow the US government did? That's extradition, it is not deportation.
I can take part in a felony crime tomorrow, go to Canada and, let's say the crime's manslaughter, be denied immigration status and, because of Canadian laws and treaties with the US, the Canadian government can be working with the US government to turn me over.
But if I go to Canada tomorrow and have committed no crime in the eyes of Canada, if they deny me immigration status and order to me leave, that's it for the Canadian government. I can hop a plane to France, I can take a boat to Greece. That's not their say. I have committed no crimes in the eyes of the Canadian government and all they can do is order me out of the country, they cannot determine where I go after.
Robin Long was NOT deported, he was extradited. Arrangements were made with the US government. While his friends, family and supporters could not speak to him, while his contact with his attorneys was (at best) highly limited, the Canadian government was in contact with the US government (and Mctavish was in touch with the US embassy in Canada throughout -- which is something that should have been known publicly) arranging his arrest.
Desertion from the US military is NOT a crime in Canada. It is not covered by any treaty the US and Canada have. Judge Mctavish arranged an illegal extradition and she should be disbarred for it. The Canadian Parliament should hold hearings on this latest attack (from within their own country) on Canadian sovereignty.
Mctavish didn't follow guidelines, didn't follow case law, didn't follow anything. She oversaw the extradition of someone and, in doing so, she wrote her own law and her own little treaty with the US.
In the United States, were a Canadian citizen treated in that manner, there would be calls not just for disbarment of the judge, but for criminal prosecution of her. If a US judge ignored US laws, US guidelines and US treaties, to write her own law, to write her own treaties, it wouldn't be enough for her to leave the bench, we'd want her behind bars. Where she belongs. Where Judge Mctavish belongs.
OPB (Oregon Public Broadcasting) reported late yesterday afternoon, "A U.S. Army deserter who was expelled from Canada earlier this week is being escorted back to his post under police guard Friday."
Robin Long was detained in Canada. He'd committed no crime. The whole purpose of the detention was said to be because he was a "flight risk." A "flight risk"?
You're deciding whether or not to deport someone you judge to be a potential "flight risk"? The best thing for Canadian tax payers is to leave him at large. Yes, he may go somewhere else in Canada but that really wasn't the concern, it was never the concern. The concern was always that he would leave on his own. He might cross the border back into the United States and go underground (or turn himself in) or he might decide to hop a plane or boat to another country. He was imprisoned because it was decided then, before the hearing took place, that the Canadian government would ignore laws and treaties and actively work with the US government to extradite him.
That is what happened and Canadians should be outraged. Time and money was spent, on their tax payer dime, holding someone to prevent them from leaving the country so that the person could be . . . forced out of the country.
Special to Workers World The minority Conservative government of Canada moved July 15 to deport 25-year-old U.S. war resister Robin Long, who would not fight in Iraq. Despite polls showing that 64 percent of Canadians want to grant sanctuary to Iraq War resisters and the passage of a parliamentary motion that would allow them to immigrate to Canada, the Federal Court of Canada dismissed a last-ditch attempt to delay the deportation process. "I was just shocked at [the] ruling," said Bob Ages of the Vancouver War Resisters Support Campaign. "It just flies in the face of everything that we and every Canadian know." (Globe and Mail, July 15) He said the court misunderstood the situation facing Long. "I do not think there is any doubt someone being up in Canada, and a vocal opponent to the war, will be treated harshly by the American military. ... There is no question he will be court-martialed and will receive severe punishment." Long is expected to be imprisoned at Fort Knox, the same base where PFC James Burmeister faces court martial this week (see accompanying article). "This is a gift from [Canadian Prime Minister] Stephen Harper to George Bush," said Gerry Condon of Project Safe Haven. "And it is a gift to the headline writers, who will trumpet that Canada is no longer a safe haven for AWOL GIs. "But it is an illusion," he added, "because this is not the first of many deportations. It may be the first and the last. A minority government that ignores the will of its people and its Parliament will not be allowed to rule much longer." Federal elections are expected to take place in Canada this fall. (press release, July 15) Project Safe Haven, a war resister advocacy group based in Seattle, called on war resister supporters to gather on July 15 at Peace Arch Park on the U.S.-Canada border at Blaine, Wash. There they will be joined by Canadian supporters. Articles copyright 1995-2008 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved. Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011 Email: ww@workers.org Subscribe wwnews-subscribe@workersworld.net Support independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php
Friday, July 18, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, who is harrassing IVAW
co-chair Adam Kokesh, the White House issues a statement the State Dept doesn't
want to touch, the US military announces another death, and more.
Starting with war resistance -- because Amy Goodman never can -- this was a
busy week. Monday US war resister in Canada Robin Long was the subject of
deportation of hearing. Which he lost. (Mainly because Judge Anne Mctavish
doesn't know her job.) He was deported Tuesday from Canada with the Canadian
government keeping everything hush-hush to try to clamp down on public shows of
support for Robin. On Wednesday, US war resister James Burmeister faced a
court-martial: "The court-martial of the
kill-team whistle blower." He was busted in rank, given six
months of time and stripped of his rights and benefits. The latter
is especially shocking when you realize he has Traumatic Brain Injury and Post
Traumatic Stress Disorder. The government gladly shipped him to a war zone
where he was injured and then they spat him this week by refusing to pay for the
injuries their illegal war caused James -- life-long injuries. Amy Goodman
(Democracy Sometimes!) continued the silence she's long maintained on James --
she never mentioned his name. James is the one who blew the whistle on the kill
teams -- groups of US soldiers assigned to leave US property (such as cameras)
out in the open in Iraq while snipers then wait for an unsuspecting Iraqi to
touch them at which point, living up to the team name, they kill the Iraqis. It
was big news and and Mark Larabee (The
Oregonian) broke the news domestically July 16, 2007. That
wasn't something to amplify. Apparently no one in Panhandle Media had
slept with James or wanted to. If so, we could have seen the kind of
embarrassing moment that had the 'left' recruiting talk show hosts not all that
long ago. Call it The Critic and the Young Chippie or -- as they
prepared to play it -- The Greatest All Time Threat to Democracy.
Nothing gets a fire burning for our 'fearless' 'leaders' as much as the thought
that one of their old 'lions' might finally get laid. So James, who was actual
news, got ignored in 2007 and, if you missed it, got ignored Wednesday, Thursday
and today. Free Speech isn't worth a damn when it's also Meaningless Speech --
and didn't so many prove just how meaningless they could be.
AP (Real Media) filed a
better version of their earlier story, one that noted, "He said he was disturbed
by a military tactic of planting equipment to lure Iraqis that American snipers
could then kill. Burmeister said he complained to superior officers that the
snipers couldn't know for sure whether the people they shot were actually
insurgents, or presented any threat to U.S. forces." The Oregonian did a
brief that noted, "Burmeister said he complained to superior officers
that the snipers couldn't know for sure whether the people they shot were
actually insurgents or presented any threat to U.S. forces. Eventually, the
soldier from Cheshire, near Eugene, was injured by a roadside bomb and sent to
Germany to recuperate. While there, he left his unit and went to Canada, where
he campaigned against the use of the small kill teams." Kill teams. War
crimes. But Panhandle Media had something else to cover. While whining about
the silence from Real Media on some stories, they censored themselves. Call it
Learned Pathetic. The only maturity in the story came from James himself. Ten
months ago, Mina Al-Oraibi (Asharq
Alawsat) quoted the then-in-Canada James Burmeister stating he
did not regret self-checking out, "Because I feel it's the right thing to do --
even if I face prison or a dishonorable discharge from the army. I can't go
back to the killing."
On Robin Long, Stefanie Fisher (Party for
Socialsim and Liberation) provides a run-through, "On July 15, Robin
Long became the first Iraq war resister to be deported from Canada back to the
United States. In 2005, Long went to Canada because he would not fight in an
'illegal war of aggression.' Like thousands of young recruits, Long discovered
that the Iraq war was based on lies only after he had joined the military. The
court denied Long sanctuary based on a so-called 'lack of evidence' that he
would face harsh treatment if he were sent back to the United States. The court
was fully aware that Long would be unjustly tried as a deserter, could face
prison time and be deployed to Iraq against his will. As an example to others,
on July 16, James Burmeister, a resister who turned himself over to the U.S.
government was sentenced to 9 months in jail and dishonorably discharged.
Protests in the U.S. and Canada have demanded sanctuary for Iraq war resisters.
Two-thirds of Canadians believe that war resisters should be allowed to stay in
Canada." Jeremy Deutsch (Kamloops This Week)
reports on NDP's Michael Crawford's reaction to
the deportation and quoted him stating, "We have a government in Canada
hell-bent on pleasing the American administration. . . . If we believe it's an
illegal war, why should we not give some form of sancturary to people who
are refusing to fight that war?" This follows NDP's Bill Siksay's earlier statements this week, prior
to the deportation of Robin, "Stockwell Day, Diane Finley and Stephen Harper
should respect the will of Parliament and the Canadian people and stop this
deportation immediately. The House of Commons has passed a motion supporting a
special programme that would allow conscientious objectors who refuse to serve
in the war in Iraq to remain in Canada. The government must respect this action
by the House and stop deportation action against Robin Long and other Iraq war
resisters. The Canadian government and the Canadian people do not support
George Bush's illegal war in Iraq. We must have the courage of those
convictions and back them up by ensuring that Americans who take a stand against
that war receive a welcome in Canada. Robin Long must be allowed to stay."
Meanwhile Keith Jones (WSWS)
examines the situation and concludes:
As for the Canadian government, in 2005 when the Liberals held
office, it took the highly unusual step of intervening at [Jeremy] Hinzman's
refugee hearing--the first for an Iraq war resister--to successfully urge the
Immigration and Refugee Board to exclude any arguments concerning the legality
of the US's invasion of Iraq. The pretext invoked by the government was that
only the International Court of Justice at the Hague has the authority and
jurisdiction to adjudicate on the legality of a war. (See "Canada denies asylum to US soldier who
refused to serve in Iraq")
During the Vietnam War more than 50,000 US draft-dodgers and
"deserters" found refuge in Canada. Today, however, the Canadian judiciary,
immigration board, and government are determined to ensure that the country not
become a safe haven for those in the US military who refuse to be party to the
US's wars of aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan.
This is not just because Canada's elite does not want to rile the
Bush administration and US military. The Canadian ruling class is determined to
jettison the myth of Canada as a peace-keeping nation--a myth closely bound up
with Pearson and Trudeau Liberal governments' attitude toward the Vietnam War
and decision to allow Vietnam war resisters to apply for landed immigrant status
in Canada--because they see it as cutting across their efforts to revive
Canadian militarism and use the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) as a means to assert
their predatory interests on the world stage.
Today, Canadian Christianity
notes: "Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT)
Canada held a public prayer vigil July 10 on behalf of Robin Long, a US war
resister who was scheduled to be deported from Canada July 15. Long joined the
US military in 2003, but became disillusioned with the US war in Iraq, deserted
and fled to Canada in 2005. He applied for refugee status in 2006, but his final
court appeal was turned down July 14. There are about 200 US resisters of the
Iraq War currently in Canada. The CPT Canada vigil, which took place in
Winnipeg, drew participants from the 'People's Summit for Faithful Living,' a
joint meeting of delegates from Mennonite Church Canada and Mennonite Church
USA."
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which
includes Megan Bean, Chris Bean, Matthis Chiroux, Richard Droste, Michael
Barnes, Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck
Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess,
Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin
Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross
Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther
Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Jose Vasquez, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara
Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera,
Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin
Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala,
Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey
Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark
Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo
Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders,
Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey,
Logan Laituri, Jason Marek, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel,
Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris
Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian
Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La
Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war
resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
IVAW's co-chair, Adam Kokesh, has been
regularly targeted by the US government for speaking out. Wednesday he wrote
(Revolutionary Patriot) "The Cops Are Everywhere --
Especially Where I Am." Thursday he posted a video of one
encounter. Friday, his report also
included a police report (pages of the police report are clickable to
make them larger to read) which reveals that one of the people who have been
hassling/harassing him is an FBI agent. So what's going on? I have no idea.
But Adam has been targeted before and there's no denying that an FBI agent is
going out of his way to target Adam now.
Staying on IVAW, they've posted a copy members of Congress sent to
the White House. The letter is signed by House Reps Yvette D. Clarke, John
Conyers, Lynn Woosley, Barbara Lee, Jan Schakowsky, Sheila Jackson-Lee, Dennis
Kucinich, James McGovern, Pete Stark, Edolphus Towns, Tammy Baldwin, William
Jefferson, and Eleanor Holmes Norton. The letter [PDF format warning] reads:
We, the below signed Members of Congress, voice our support for
current, present, and future members of the United States Armed Forces who
oppose the War in Iraq and who are working to bring it to a speedy and safe
conclusion. These brave men and women, who have served our nation so honorably,
represent the best aspects of our democratic tradition. While we cannot condone
the actions of any service members who translates their personal opposition to
the war into a deliberate decision to go Absent Without Leave (AWOL), we offer
our most sincere support to every service member affected by the War in Iraq.
This war has placed many of armed service members, like Sergeant Matthis
Chiroux, in an untenable dilemma. Sgt. Chiroux has served as an active duty
service member for the last 5 years -- serving tours of duty in Afghanistan and
the Philippines. In July of 2007, having served his country with distinction,
the Sergeant was discharged to the Individiual Ready Reserves. As the civil war
raging inside Iraq intensified, Sgt. Chiroux was moving on with his life and
leaving behind a war with which he disagreed. Unfortunately for the Sergeant,
the war's unpopularity has taken a heavy toll on the Army's recruitment
efforts. As such, in February of this year, he was recalled to active duty and
received his deployment orders for Iraq. We in the Congress oppose this type of
forced redeployment, as well as the military's so-called 'stop-loss' policy. As
such, we in the Congress reaffirm our support for ending the War in Iraq by all
means available to us. We also reaffirm our support for all military members
who speak out, advocate, and otherwise support efforts to bring the troops
home.
If the letter seems a little weak, let's go to Howard Zinn who isn't campaigning for any office and,
even if he was, could probably still tell the hard truths. From his "Memo to Obama, McCain: No one
wins in a war" (Boston Globe):
For someone like myself, who fought in World War II, and since then
has protested against war, I must ask: Have our political leaders gone mad? Have
they learned nothing from recent history? Have they not learned that no one
"wins" in a war, but that hundreds of thousands of humans die, most of them
civilians, many of them children?
Did we "win" by going to war in Korea? The result was a stalemate,
leaving things as they were before with a dictatorship in South Korea and a
dictatorship in North Korea. Still, more than 2 million people - mostly
civilians -- died, the United States dropped napalm on children, and 50,000
American soldiers lost their lives.
Did we "win" in Vietnam? We were forced to withdraw, but only after 2
million Vietnamese died, again mostly civilians, again leaving children burned
or armless or legless, and 58,000 American soldiers dead.
This morning in Tucson, Arizona, the traveling White House press corps heard
from Scott Stanzel, Deputy Press Secretary, regarding the continued treaty
negotiations between the White House and its puppet in Iraq, Nouri
al-Maliki. Stanzel stated, "And as the statement says, we have reached a point
in Iraq where we can have these discussions about continuing to transition more
control of the security situation to the Iraqi forces. . . . But these are
aspirational goals, not arbitrary time lines based on political expediency. So
we want to get to a point where we have sustainable security in the country, and
our forces are able to come home and transition into a role there of more
overwatch and training." What was Stanzel referring to? This statement issued
by the White House Press Secretary:
President Bush and Prime Minister Maliki spoke yesterday in their
regularly scheduled secure video conference, about a range of matters including
the improving security situation and the performance of Iraqi Security Forces
across Iraq, from Basra, to Maysan, Baghdad and Sadr City, and Mosul. The two
leaders welcomed the recent visit of Prime Minister Erdogan to Baghdad and the
successful visit of Prime Minister Maliki to the UAE. They also discussed
ongoing initiatives to follow security gains with Iraqi investment in its
people, infrastructure, cities, and towns, which will be aided by a $21 billion
supplemental budget now before the Iraqi parliament.
In the context of these improving political, economic, and security
conditions, the President and the Prime Minister discussed the ongoing
negotiations to establish a normalized bilateral relationship between Iraq and
the United States. The leaders agreed on a common way forward to conclude these
negotiations as soon as possible, and noted in particular the progress made
toward completing a broad strategic framework agreement that will build on the
Declaration of Principles signed last November, and include areas of cooperation
across many fields, including economics, diplomacy, health, culture, education,
and security.
In the area of security cooperation, the President and the Prime
Minister agreed that improving conditions should allow for the agreements now
under negotiation to include a general time horizon for meeting aspirational
goals -- such as the resumption of Iraqi security control in their cities and
provinces and the further reduction of U.S. combat forces from Iraq. The
President and Prime Minister agreed that the goals would be based on continued
improving conditions on the ground and not an arbitrary date for withdrawal. The
two leaders welcomed in this regard the return of the final surge brigade to the
United States this month, and the ongoing transition from a primary combat role
for U.S. forces to an overwatch role, which focuses on training and advising
Iraqi forces, and conducting counter-terror operations in support of those
forces.
This transition and the subsequent reduction in U.S. forces from Iraq
is a testament to the improving capacity of Iraq's Security Forces and the
success of joint operations that were initiated under the new strategy put in
place by the President and the Prime Minister in January 2007.
What's it mean? Nothing. BBC may come closest to that reality when they
note: "The BBC's Adam Brookes in Washington says the announcement is
designed to encourage the idea that US troops are coming home, without
committing to any dates." In which case, the hope would be to lull the American
people into a sense that the illegal war is drawing to a close, so everybody
calm down. Who is 'everybody'? Our pathetic 'peace' organizations who are
focused on Iran and have forgotten Iraq? Roger Runningen and Ken Fireman
(Bloomberg News) note that "White House spokesman, Gordon
Johndroe, said the new statement doesn't reflect a shift in the U.S. position."
At the State Dept today, spokesperson Sean McCormack attempted to play dumb.
Responding to questions about the discussions between the puppet and the White
House, McCormak first declared, "I think the -- well, the White House issued a
statement about this." The next question was answered with, "And they -- the
Iraqis -- also put out language." And then, "What am I going to add to the
statement that has been issued?"
It's all very Nixonian, this 'plan' that no one can know about but everyone
should know that peace is just around the corner. It echoes US Senator John McCain
(presumptive GOP presidential nominee) claiming yesterday that the
Iraq War could now be considered a 'win.' And, as with Nixon and his secret
'peace plan,' no one appears eager to probe McCain to explain what happens after
a 'win'? Mitt Romney took to NBC's Today
show this morning to speak vaugely of John McCain's 'goals' to end
the illegal war to Matt Lauer but Matt was more interested in cracking resume
jokes and asking about polls. Didn't even appear to note Romney's "sweet talk"
jab at Barack ("I think in the final analysis that sweet talk is going to give
into straight talk."). Maybe because Matt Lauer was too busy laying on the
"sweet talk" ("Can I just recite your resume here?").
Today, James Risen (New York
Times) reports that KBR's electrical work is even worse than
thought -- and this was with it thought that only 13 US service members had died
from being electrocuted in the showers due to cheap and shoddy work -- with
people receiving daily shocks and Risen notes, "During just one six-month
period -- August 2006 through January 2007 -- at least 283 electrical fires
destroyed or damaged American military facilities in Iraq, including the
military's largest dining hall in the country, documents obtained by The New
York Times show. Two soldiers died in an electrical fire at their base near
Tikrit in 2006, the records note, while another was injured while jumping from a
burning guard tower in May 2007." Meanwhile Hurriyet
reports that northern Iraq was bombed today by Turkish
warplanes.
Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers)
reports a Nineveh Province car bombing that killed the driver and 3
members of the Iraqi military with seven more left wounded, an apparent
assassination attempt on Laith Salih in Diyala Province -- Salih ("Awakening"
Council) wasn't wounded but his brother was.
Monsters and Critics
reports, " The Voices of Iraq (VOI) news agency
quoted a statement by the US Department of Defense saying a US soldier died of
injuries after a car accident in Nineveh's capital some 400 kilometres north of
Baghdad."
"Decades ago it was full of victories in the sixties and seventies," said Ralph Nader when asked about the changes in consumer
advocacy. "Full of victories. You know, regulated the lack of safety in motor
vehicles, flamable fabrics, Product Safety Commission, all kinds of -- going
after usary interest rates for the poor and many other pieces of legislation.
But now it's purely defensive. It's trying to hold the gains of the sixties and
seventies and that's become a losing fight because the Democrats are not going
after the Republicans on this issue, even in this campaign. The Republicans are
terrible on consumer protection and the Democrats are not fighting back." Hold
the line? You could apply the comments to reproductive rights (except Barack's
now attacked them with his demeaning of Doe v. ). Nader was speaking to John
Bachir and about the 2004 campaign (video here). But what about the
consumer aspect? Yesterday the US Food and Drug Administration issued an
announcement noting: "FDA is updating its warning to consumers
nationwide concerning the outbreak of Salmonella serotype Saintpaul. As
of today, FDA officials believe that consumers may enjoy all types of fresh
tomatoes available on the domestic market, without concern of becoming infected
with Salmonella Saintpaul. The agency is removing the warning that has
been in place since June 7, which states that consumers should avoid certain
types of fresh tomatoes due to a potential connection to the Salmonella
Saintpaul outbreak. Consumers may resume enjoying any type of fresh tomato,
including raw red plum, raw red Roma, and raw red round tomatoes. While we are
changing our consumer guidance about tomatoes, we reiterate our guidance to
consumers that those in vulnerable populations (infants, the elderly, and
immune-compromised people) should avoid eating jalapeno and serrano peppers as
the investigation continues." In what world is that acceptable? For those who
remember the earlier e-coli outbreak in spinach, in March of this year Consumer Reports' blog
noted "a report recently released by the House Committee on Oversight
and Government Reform called 'FDA and Fresh Spinach Safety.'
The findings paint a most unappetizing picture of food safety and once again
underscore the need to give the Food and Drug Administration more resources to
oversee the safety of the nation's food supply. The committee's investigation
was prompted by the September 2006
outbreak of E. coli 0157:H7 that caused hundreds of reported injuries and
several deaths—an outbreak that was ultimately traced to packaged fresh
spinach. So where is the House Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform? June 7th was when the FDA issued their warning
on tomatoes. A working Congress, a working committee would have
called for public hearings immediately. But apparently the public safety takes
backseat to showboating for elections so everyone has to wait until the end of
July for any hearings. Jim Downing (McClatchy
Newspapers) reports that "Americans have continued to get sick
-- at a rate of about 20 people per day -- even after" the FDA issued their
alert, even after they studied the spinach outbreak. US House Rep Diana DeGette issued
a statement yesterday: "It is absolutely outrageous that we are 90
days into the salmonella outbreak and the FDA and CDC still cannot determine the
source of contamination. Currently, over 1200 cases of salmonella have been
reported, hundreds have been hospitalized, while the outbreak has affected 41
states, including Washington, DC and even Canada. The salmonella outbreak
continues to spread, with nearly 30 cases a day, because we do not have a
national, comprehensive food traceability system that would quickly track our
foods from the field to the fork. . . . Now the FDA is saying that tomatoes are
safe, but only because they have a short shelf life. We still don't know the
source of the contamination and that is inexcusable." And it's inexcusable that
Congress has done nothing but issue press statements while this has taken
place. Stephen J. Hedges (Chicago
Tribune) quotes a letter Senator Tom Harkin sent to Michael
Leavitt, Secretary of Health and Human Services, "It seems highly unlikely that
tomatoes harvested in April would still be consumed fresh by consumers in late
June." And it seems highly unlikely that an effective Congress 'addresses' this
issue by sending letters instead of immediately calling hearings.
On a possibly related note, Bill Moyers and Michael Winship (PBS' Bill Moyers Journal ) point
out:
But we also get into these terrible dilemmas -- where the big guys
step all over everyone else and the victims are required to pay the hospital
bills -- because we refuse to recognize the connection between money and
politics. This is the great denial in democracy that may ultimately mean our
ruin. We just don't seem able to see or accept the fact that money drives
policy. It's no wonder that Congress and the White House have been looking the
other way as the predators picked the pockets of unsuspecting debtors. Mega
banking and investment firms have been some of the biggest providers of the cash
vital to keeping incumbents in office. There isn't much appetite for biting --
or regulating -- the manicured hand that feeds them. Guess who gave
the most money to candidates in this 2007-08 federal election cycle? That's
right, the financial services and real estate industries. They stuffed nearly
$250 million dollars into the candidate coffers. The about-to-be-bailed-out
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac together are responsible for about half the country's
$12 trillion mortgage debt. Lisa Lerer of Politico.com reports that over the
past decade, the two financial giants with the down home names have spent nearly
$200 million on campaign contributions and lobbying. According to Lerer,
"They've stacked their payrolls with top Washington power brokers of all
political stripes, including Republican John McCain's presidential campaign
manager, Rick Davis; Democrat Barack Obama's original vice presidential vetter,
Jim Johnson; and scores of others now working for the two rivals for the White
House." Last Sunday's New York Times put it as bluntly as anyone ever
has: "In Washington, Fannie and Freddie's sprawling lobbying machine hired
family and friends of politicians in their efforts to quickly sideline any
regulations that might slow their growth or invite greater oversight of their
business practices. Indeed, their rapid expansion was, at least in part, the
result of such artful lobbying over the years." What a beautiful
term: "artful lobbying." It means honest graft.
TV: NOW on PBS will focus on "the forgotten war'
Afghanistan (begins airing Friday on most PBS stations). Bill Moyers Journal (check your
local listings, begins airing on PBS in most markets tonight, it also streams
online -- transcript, video, audio) looks at the housing crisis and spotlights
the continued decline of a once strong voice who guests on the program to talk
about the 'up' of the housing crisis (for Democrats!). Gwen's fronting polls as
a 'draw' for viewers of this week's Washington Week which should give everyone pause. Dan
Balz is among the scheduled guests and the only one who might be able to
penetrate the spin. And independent journalist David Bacon continues
to explore the issue of immigration, his latest is "THE RIGHT TO STAY
HOME" (New American Media).
Bacon's latest book is set for release in September, Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates
Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press).
Michael
Crawford, the NDP candidate for the riding, said it was unfortunate
Immigration Canada and Canadian Border Services Agency decided to
deport Long. He said the refusal by the Conservative government to step in and stop the deportation goes against the will of Parliament. In
June, the House of Commons passed a non-binding motion to allow such
individuals to become permanent residents in Canada and stop the
deportation cases of those already in the country. All three opposition parties supported the motion; the Tories did not. Crawford said it's another example of how Prime Minister Stephen Harper cannot be trusted. "We have a government in Canada hell-bent on pleasing the American administration," he said. Crawford
called on the ministers of public safety and immigration to order
immigration and border services to stop exercising deportation orders. He
said war resisters like Long don't believe their county should be
involved in Iraq, noting Canada also believes the war is illegal. "If
we believe it’s an illegal war, why should we not give some form of
sanctuary to people who are refusing to go and fight that war?"
Crawford asked.
The above is from Jeremy Deutsch "Hinton, Crawford spar on deserter" (Kamloops This Week)
and Hinton is Betty Hinton, Conservative MP, defender of attacks of
humanity. Robin Long was deported from Canada Tuesday, becoming the
first war resister deported from Canada during this war and being
deported despite being the father of a Canadian child. Explain that
Judge Anne Mctavish, because you will have to. Mctavish's decision to
ignore Canadian law puts her into the history books for people to be
appalled over for centuries and centuries to come. How proud she must
be.
He said he was disturbed by a military tactic of planting equipment to lure Iraqis that American snipers could then kill. Burmeister
said he complained to superior officers that the snipers couldn't know
for sure whether the people they shot were actually insurgents, or
presented any threat to U.S. forces. Burmeister was later injured by a roadside bomb and sent to Germany to recuperate.
Burmeister
said he complained to superior officers that the snipers couldn't know
for sure whether the people they shot were actually insurgents or
presented any threat to U.S. forces. Eventually, the soldier from
Cheshire, near Eugene, was injured by a roadside bomb and sent to
Germany to recuperate. While there, he left his unit and went to
Canada, where he campaigned against the use of the small kill teams.
Burmeister
said he started having doubts about going to Iraq when his training
focused on combat tactics, how to kill and how to raid buildings. By
August 2006, he was a gunner atop a Humvee in Baghdad, about 15 miles
south of the fortified Green Zone. When the team wasn't setting
traps, it patrolled areas hoping to draw out the enemy. Burmeister says
he hated when they would set out the fake camera. "As soon as anyone
would mess with it, you were supposed to lay waste to them," he said.
"I completely disagreed with that tactic. I can't see how that's
helping anyone whatsoever." On Feb. 15, his Humvee hit a bomb,
knocking Burmeister unconscious. He lost hearing in his right ear;
shrapnel embedded in his face. He was sent to Germany to recover. On
May 4, on the eve of being sent back to Iraq, he and his family boarded
a plane for Canada. "I kind of felt stuck," he said. "I thought
people needed to be free there. But when I went there it was all about
captures and kills and it felt like we messed things up over there. "This felt like my last option."
During
the Vietnam War more than 50,000 US draft-dodgers and “deserters” found
refuge in Canada. Today, however, the Canadian judiciary, immigration
board, and government are determined to ensure that the country not
become a safe haven for those in the US military who refuse to be party
to the US’s wars of aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is not
just because Canada’s elite does not want to rile the Bush
administration and US military. The Canadian ruling class is determined
to jettison the myth of Canada as a peace-keeping nation—a myth closely
bound up with Pearson and Trudeau Liberal governments’ attitude toward
the Vietnam War and decision to allow Vietnam war resisters to apply
for landed immigrant status in Canada--because they see it as cutting
across their efforts to revive Canadian militarism and use the Canadian
Armed Forces (CAF) as a means to assert their predatory interests on
the world stage. Popular feeling in Canada, however, is strongly
against the Bush administration and the Iraq war and supportive of the
war resisters. An Angus Reid poll, conducted at the beginning of last
month, found that two thirds of Canadians favor granting permanent
residence status to US Iraq war resisters. In the case of the Afghan
War, in which the CAF is a major participant with 2,500 troops
stationed in Kandahar, public opinion is more divided. Despite the
strong support accorded the war by Canada’s principal political parties
and the media, polls have, nevertheless, consistently shown that a
majority of Canadians favor the withdrawal of Canadian troops. In an
attempt to curry favor with the public, the opposition parties combined
at the end of May to pass a non-binding resolution urging the minority
Conservative government, one of Washington's most fervent allies, to
allow Iraq war resisters to remain in Canada. The resolution, which was
co-sponsored by Bob Rae, the erstwhile social-democrat and Liberal
foreign affairs critic, and by Olivia Chow, the wife of NDP leader Jack
Layton, was adopted by 137 to 100. It read: "That the government
immediately implement a program to allow conscientious objectors and
their immediate family members (partners and dependents), who have
refused or left military service related to a war not sanctioned by the
United Nations and do not have a criminal record, to apply for
permanent resident status and remain in Canada; and that the government
should immediately cease any removal or deportation actions that may
have already commenced against such individuals." The reference to a
"war not sanctioned by the United Nations" served a double purpose. It
avoided the politically explosive question of the patently illegal
character of the US's invasion of Iraq and denied legitimacy to, and
support for asylum for, Afghan War resisters, whether in the US or
Canada. The Liberals' support for the motion was very much a means
for it to try to put some distance between itself and the
Conservatives, after it had combined forces with the government to
extend the CAF’s leading role in the counter-insurgency war in
Afghanistan until at least the end of 2011. Nor should it be forgotten
that it was under the Liberal government of Paul Martin that the
Canadian state initiated the drive to expel the war resisters and that
the Liberal government intervened at the very first refugee hearing to
make clear its support for their being returned for punishment in the
US, when it successfully argued for the exclusion of all arguments
relating to the war's illegality. See Also:Iraq war commander named head of Canada's military[9 June 2008] "Big Boy" Canada demands changes in Afghan government[18 April 2008] Canada's Liberals support war and social reaction [22 March 2008]
In brief On July 15, Robin Long became the first Iraq war resister to be deported from Canada back to the United States. In
2005, Long went to Canada because he would not fight in an "illegal war
of aggression." Like thousands of young recruits, Long discovered that
the Iraq war was based on lies only after he had joined the military. The
court denied Long sanctuary based on a so-called "lack of evidence"
that he would face harsh treatment if he were sent back to the United
States. The court was fully aware that Long would be unjustly tried as
a deserter, could face prison time and be deployed to Iraq against his
will. As an example to others, on July 16, James Burmeister, a
resister who turned himself over to the U.S. government was sentenced
to 9 months in jail and dishonorably discharged. Protests in the
U.S. and Canada have demanded sanctuary for Iraq war resisters.
Two-thirds of Canadians believe that war resisters should be allowed to
stay in Canada. --Articles can be reprinted with credit to the Party for Socialism and Liberation--
It
is my understanding that Resolution 1511 adopted by the United Nations
Security Council on Oct. 16, 2003, makes the Iraq war legal since that
resolution authorizes a multinational force under unified command to
take all necessary measures to contribute to the maintenance of
security and stability in Iraq. In addition, on Dec. 28, 2007, the Security Council extended the mandate of those foreign forces until Dec. 31, 2008. Therefore, that being the case, war objectors or deserters can't use the excuse that this war is illegal after Oct. 16, 2003.
Does
Ralph think the illegal war started on or after October 16, 2003? The
UN resolution was not about the war, it was about the occupation. Know
your facts, Ralph, or just keep inviting the world to laugh and laugh
freely.
Turning to another Ralph, Ralph Nader who is running for president of the United States. Megan notes this from Team Nader:
Nader on Obama/Israel
Posted by The Nader Team on Friday, July 18, 2008 at 08:15:00 AM
Last
week, we set a fundraising goal of $60,000 by Sunday July 20 midnight -
to put Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot in a total of 15 states.
In one week, we have raised $44,000.
Now, we need your help to raise the remaining $16,000 over the next three days - by Sunday midnight.
If only 8,000 of you, our loyal supporters, donate $2 now, we will meet this goal.
Why is it important to have Ralph Nader on the ballot in November?
Without him, the plight of the Palestinian people will not be an issue in this year's election.
How do we know?
Because Obama/McCain stand with the militaristic right wing AIPAC lobby in the United States.
Nader/Gonzalez stand with the Israeli/Palestinian peace movements.
You will be hearing a lot this weekend about Obama's upcoming trip to the Middle East.
Your contribution could be doubled. Public campaign financing may match your contribution total up to $250.
And Amanda notes this from Lance Selfa's "Obama's entrance exam" (US Socialist Worker):
Obama
is already a member of one of the world's most exclusive clubs, the
U.S. Senate. He has already collected hundreds of millions of dollars
from Silicon Valley and Wall Street--despite his campaign's pretensions
of being a grassroots effort. With the exception of his open somersault
on the telecomm immunity bill, his other "moves to the center" aren't
really that far from the already very cautious and "bipartisan"
positions that have been central to his campaign's message. By
way of defending Obama from Republican charges of "flip-flopping" on
his pledge to withdraw troops from Iraq, Countdown with Keith Olbermann
guest host Rachel Maddow on July 7 showed multiple video clips of Obama
making the same hedges about assessing the "situation on the ground"
during the primary campaign. Although
Maddow was trying to show Obama in a positive light--that Obama's
recent statements on Iraq were just a restatement of his longstanding
position--anyone paying attention could have concluded that Obama's
"antiwar" position isn't so antiwar at all. But it is the "responsible"
position that most of the Washington elite outside of the discredited
Bush/neocon cabal endorses and is counting on Obama to implement.
Kuwait
on Thursday named its first ambassador to Iraq since Saddam Hussein's
forces invaded the oil-rich country in 1990 and set off the 1991
Persian Gulf War. The announcement came as Iraq's
Shiite Muslim-led government is reaching out to its Sunni Arab
neighbors in a bid to ease tensions and secure investment to rebuild
the nation. U.S. officials also have been
encouraging Arab countries to normalize relations with Iraq to offset
the influence of neighboring Iran, where many of Iraq's current leaders
sought sanctuary under Hussein. Iraq's Arab
neighbors are suspicious of Baghdad's close ties with Tehran and have
been worried about the level of violence here. Arab nations have
maintained economic links with Iraq, but none has had a full embassy in
this country since 2005, when an envoy sent by Egypt with the intention
of moving toward full diplomatic relations was kidnapped and killed.
The above is from Alexandra Zavis' "Kuwait names ambassador to Iraq" (Los Angeles Times) and that actually is news -- if you doubt it, you can watch as outlets farm the topic off by running an AP story. By contrast, I-talk-to-generals-about-gossip is never news, even when it's run on the front page as the New York Times did yesterday. The Times does better today with James Risen's "Electrical Risks at Bases in Iraq Worse Than Previously Said." Here's the opening:
Shoddy
electrical work by private contractors on United States military bases
in Iraq is widespread and dangerous, causing more deaths and injuries
from fires and shocks than the Pentagon has acknowledged, according to
internal Army documents. During just one six-month
period -- August 2006 through January 2007 -- at least 283 electrical
fires destroyed or damaged American military facilities in Iraq,
including the military’s largest dining hall in the country, documents
obtained by The New York Times show. Two soldiers died in an electrical
fire at their base near Tikrit in 2006, the records note, while another
was injured while jumping from a burning guard tower in May 2007. And
while the Pentagon has previously reported that 13 Americans have been
electrocuted in Iraq, many more have been injured, some seriously, by
shocks, according to the documents. A log compiled earlier this year at
one building complex in Baghdad disclosed that soldiers complained of
receiving electrical shocks in their living quarters on an almost daily
basis.
The
federal government has dropped two investigations into the office of
the inspector general overseeing Iraq reconstruction projects,
according to a lawyer for the IG. In a July 3 letter, federal prosecutors said they had closed the criminal investigation of Stuart W. Bowen, the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, according to Bowen's attorney Bradford Berenson. "The
U.S. attorney's office informed us that the investigation related to
Mr. Bowen had been terminated without any charges being brought,"
Berenson said yesterday. "Mr. Bowen is gratified that this inquiry has
concluded without any finding of wrongdoing on his part." A grand
jury had been looking into charges of whether Bowen improperly accessed
employee e-mails, Berenson said. Brian McGinn, a spokesman for the U.S.
attorney for the Western District of Virginia, said "we can't confirm
or deny the existence or termination of any criminal investigation
handled by our office." He would not comment further. Earlier this
week, the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency wrote in a
letter to the office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq
Reconstruction, known as SIGIR, that it too had "terminated the
administrative investigation" on Bowen and his deputy, Ginger Cruz. The
council, which investigates allegations of misconduct by inspectors
general at federal agencies, said it "has elected to close the file and
does not contemplate further action in the matter."
Added, NOW on PBS will focus on "the forgotten war' Afghanistan (begins airing Friday on most PBS stations). Bill Moyers Journal
(check your local listings, begins airing on PBS in most markets
tonight, it also streams online -- transcript, video, audio) looks at
the housing crisis and spotlights the continued decline of a once
strong voice who guests on the program to talk about the 'up' of the
housing crisis (for Democrats!). Gwen's fronting polls as a 'draw' for
viewers of this week's Washington Week
which should give everyone pause. Dan Balz is among the scheduled
guests and the only one who might be able to penetrate the spin.
Ralph Nader is the independent candidate for president and you can find an archive of audio appearances here. Jonah notes this video from the Ralph Nader - Matt Gonzalez campaign.
A SHOCKING 615 Scots soldiers, more than an entire battalion, are AWOL or off sick. The number of troops absent without leave or unfit to fight has soared by almost 25 per cent in just a year. The grim figures reveal the depth of the manpower crisis in the Royal Regiment of Scotland. And they add to growing fears that the pressure of manning two deadly fronts in Iraq and Afghanistan is pushing the Army to breaking point. The Daily Record used Freedom of Information laws to obtain the absence and sickness figures from the Ministry of Defence.
Sarah Bjorknas, a co-ordinator for the War Resisters Support CampaignWar Resisters’ Support Campaign, said Long is the first Iraq war resister to be deported back to the United States. About 50 other American war deserters have contacted the support group asking for help to stay in Canada. Bjorknas isn’t worried that Long’s deportation will set a precedent for other objectors seeking refugee status. ‘‘Their circumstances are very similar, but they each have their own case,’’ she said. ‘‘We don’t intend to let his happen again.’’ Bjorknas said her group is very suspicious of the timing of the deportation so quickly after Parliament passed a resolution saying U.S. war resisters should be allowed to stay in Canada. That resolution is nonbinding on Stephen Harper’s government. Bjorknas believes the government wanted to indicate where it stood on the war resisters’ issue by using Long as an example. ‘‘The timing was convenient for them,’’ she said. ‘‘This may be just another attempt to pull the rug out from under us.’’
And the silences drag on. We've seen it all week. Over and over. What have they offered us instead? Campaign press releases? Passed off as news?
If we actually got news we could use (the supposed cry of alternative media), don't you think we'd get a lot more actual news and information?
Where's the left outlet that's not spitting on Ralph Nader? Where's the left outlet that's taking Cynthia McKinney's campaign seriously? Outlet? Let's focus on print. Why does Yes! even exist if all it's become is the same magazine as every other but with a touchy-feel nature?
What is this crap (labeled "Summer 2008: A Just Foreign Policy") that they're running. Erik Leaver's the author but I don't think you can blame it on him. It's pathetic. Leave aside the analsys and the writing. Just zoom in on the title "Summer 2008: A Just Foreign Policy." Summer 2008? It's a look at presidential candidates. There's John McCain, there's Barack Obama. There's no Nader, no McKinney. But I don't think it's fair to blame Leaver for that because he's including not just Hillary but also Bill Richardson. Richardson who dropped like a fly quickly. January 9th, Richardson was in all the news for being out of the race.
At that point, Ralph Nader had not declared. Cynthia McKinney was declared. She should have been included in the article, this alleged look at presidential wanna bes. But what sort of 'thinking' goes into entitling something "Summer 2008: A Just Foreign Policy" when it was clearly written before January 9th?
To sing along with Stevie Nicks, "Who in the world do you think that you are fooling?" Summer 2008 is what they're offering it under. At this rate, the Spring 2009 issue may feature a look at the presidential candidates . . . from the previous November.
That helps anyone how? Three candidates aren't even mentioned: Nader, McKinney and Bob Barr. They are the only candidates who have their parties' nominations -- everyone else is 'presumptive.' Yes! apparently has no blogs. In These Times does. What does a check of it show? The ITT List lets you know that, with Barack the presumptive Democratic nominee, it's okay to mention Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame. They supported Hillary's run and, like most who did, were rendered invisible (vanished) by Panhandle Media throughout the primary process. Wonder if Joe's going to feel like talking to all the backstabbers when they come calling now that Bully Boy's doing the presidential equivalent of pleading the fifth?
To the ITT List's credit, Mark Berlin offered "Turning the Grassroots Green" on Friday and "Greens Tap McKinney" on Monday. But how does ITT justify ignoring the Democratic scandal in Pennsylvania, BonusGate where Democrats cleaned up for their work keeping Ralph Nader off the ballot? And since In These Times is based in Chicago, how exactly do two blog posts on the Green Party convention (last Thursday through last Sunday) qualify for coverage? Do they have an article they're sitting on? As a Chicago based outlet and 'big' for little media, shouldn't In These Times have set the mark for coverage of the Green Party convention?
Actually, Berlin doing two pieces -- sad but true -- on the Green Party convention may be the 'mark' for 'alternative' media. The Progressive? Not a word on the convention. How does that happen? How does a political party on the left hold a convention and a magazine that bills itself as "The Progressive" never even bothers to note it?
When the mainstream media does that, our brave Panhandle Media 'leaders' call it out?
Or look the crap being offered at The Nation? Joann Wypijewski embarrasses herself, shames herself, by writing a piece of crap the mag bills as "the hot married love of Barack and Michelle." Did all the adults leave the building? What the hell is that crap? What the hell is Joann doing writing that nonsense? Is it remotely news or issues? Not at all. It has nothing to do with nothing and it's the sort of crap women were stuck writing fifty years ago but Joann's willing to disgrace herself by willingly writing it today. As Ruth Conniff might put it, "Yuck!" How damn pathetic can you get? Not much more but damned if the useless Nation magazine won't keep trying.
Katty-van-van shows up to gas bag about the topic we've tried to avoid here because everyone has talked it to death. (And it wasn't earth shattering to begin with. Did the US become Denmark this week?) But Katty's never been known for her 'awareness' and she flaunts in her 'discussion' piece by turning to regular Nation cartoonists and, of course, never noting that the "women of the Nation" (her phrase from not all that long ago) don't include cartoonists. It's really cute to read that dithering and realize a woman wrote the bulk of it and put together the rest and never had the slightest bit of awareness -- even while quoting that more African-American cartoonists are needed -- of just how sexist that magazine remains.
For how stupid it remains, Air Melber shows up tangled in the net to promote War Hawk Sammy Power as a voice worth listening to by the left. That's the same Sammy who DID NOT oppose the illegal war. She doesn't even make that claim herself. She'll let others make it and not correct it. But Power is a War Hawk -- one of the so-called 'liberal interventionists' -- and she's certainly revealed how stupid so many on the left are as they've sang her praises over and over. Did they read her latest book? If they didn't want to wade through trash, all they had to do was check out the blurb she gave to the army's counter-insurgency manual. If it's too hard for the idiots of The Nation to grasp: When someone praises counter-insurgency, they are not 'anti-war.'
The Miseducation of the American Left. Someone beg Lauryn to go in the studio and work on that. What all the above has in common is hero worship. (Katrina worships The New Yorker and dreams of being profiled in it.) When you've got juveniles with school-girl/boy crushes, you don't have an active left and you never will. While Air makes moon eyes at Sammy Power, things are happening that really matter. While Joann's filling a scrapbook with photos of Michelle and Barack, actual earth shattering events are taking place. As a general rule, adults keeping scrapbooks of JFK and Jackie didn't end up part of the peace movement during Vietnam. But that's how dumbed down the left is today.
And while you got all that crap, and so much more of it, they didn't cover Robin Long getting deported and they didn't cover James Burmeister being court-martialed. Those are 'stories' they can gas bag over. Those aren't stories that 'excite' them. Those are actual stories that matter so better they should pull out their paper dolls and spend hours trying to get their dream outfits to stay on them. Bend the tabs, Joann, bend the tabs.
It's embarrasing and it's exactly why the illegal war drags on and why so many in this country are still so unaware. They're misinformed and they are misdirected. Noam Chomsky should do another Manufacturing of Consent but focus on our allged 'alternative' media because not only do they trust you enough to give you all the information on candidates and let you make a decision (you're not smart enough to be trusted in their eyes), they don't trust you enough to give you the information you need to move from awareness to action.
This is the topic Ava and I will be addressing at Third on Sunday. But between now and then, you can think about Clamor. Clamor ceased publication. It didn't take part in the circle-jerk that passes for 'independent' media and it trusted that its readers were mature enough to actually want to think -- as opposed to being told, "Think this!" It challenged and explored touching topics that no one else would. Maybe Big Money would have tossed it money if it had turned off the brain to be like everything that's 'surviving'? ('Surviving' because circulation isn't flat, it's tanking.) This is more of a seed planting than anything else. But all the above explains why the illegal war will hit the six year mark next year. Also, somewhere John Nichols did a piece on McKinney. I don't feel like surfing that awful site but I had planned to link to it. Good for Nichols for doing one online column/blog post on McKinney. But that's really not enough . . . (yes, to be continued).
It's over, I'm done writing songs about love There's a war going on So I'm holding my gun with a strap and a glove And I'm writing a song about war And it goes Na na na na na na na I hate the war Na na na na na na na I hate the war Na na na na na na na I hate the war Oh oh oh oh -- "I Hate The War" (written by Greg Goldberg, on The Ballet's Mattachine!)
Last Thursday, ICCC's number of US troops killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war was 4116. Tonight? 4122. Just Foreign Policy lists 1,236,604 as the number of Iraqis killed since the start of the Iraq War up from . . the same as last week.
To reply to an e-mail, no the snapshot did not contain and endorsement by me of John McCain. I've stated I wouldn't vote for him and stated that from when this site started. John McCain declared that the US had 'won' the Iraq War. When someone is a presumed presidential nominee for an election four months away and they make that call, they need to be asked immediately about withdrawal. McCain has slammed Barack for having a timeline for withdrawal of combat troops. Barack's timeline is meaningless because he's not going to stick by it. But if McCain wants to declare the war won, he needs to be asked about withdrawal. If he has no answer, then he's an idiot. An obvious one. If you're saying the Iraq War is won and you're trying to become the president of the United States, the people of America have every right to ask, "Okay, you say it's won. So troops are coming home?" He doesn't have to give a timeline since he apparently loathes them. But if he thinks it is 'won,' then he should be able to speak of the transition he envisions. I don't think he can honestly. I think that was nonsense he tossed out and didn't mean. But he tossed it out. If you tell me, "You're hired," my first question to you is going to be, "When do I start?" If a presumed presidential nominee says the illegal war is 'won,' then there should be some discussion on what happens now? If he really thinks it's won then the approximately 140,000 US service members don't need to be over there, right? So -- leaving aside 'timelines' -- can he explain to the American people what he does next? If it's 'won' and he has no answer then he's not much of a leader because when one phase is over, you move to another phase. So if he calls a 'win' for the illegal war, the phase after a 'win' is that people leave the battlefield. He needs to be pressured to discuss that.
I don't think people are getting this, people in the press. Maybe they just don't care? But he could have avoided discussing withdrawal through November. He could have just kept saying 'timelines' are 'bad' and other nonsense. And he would have fallen back on his 'We will win' nonsense. He wouldn't have been pressured on withdrawal by most in the press because that was your answer. But now that he's called a 'win' for the Iraq War, he's in a corner.
If he can't talk in even general terms about how he would transition to the next phase (the one that follows a 'win'), he's demonstrating to the American people he can't lead. That's those in favor of the war and those opposed to it. Let me put it in sports terms in case it's not clear. If the football/baseball/soccer game has been won, do you trust a coach who leaves the players on the field for days after? I don't think so. When the game's over, people are supposed to leave the field. If McCain can't come up with a solid response, he's telling the American people that he lacks the leadership and skill to be president because his 'answer' to a 'win' is to continue to keep all those Americans in Iraq.
His '100 years' remark was about bases and he likened it to North Korea, etc. So, for example, his calling the Iraq War 'won,' means he should be willing to talk about that phase. Americans have a right to know his post-war phase. They did before his announcement today but they especially do now. And his favoring a permanent presence (which I disagree strongly with) is not keeping all the US service members in Iraq. That permanent presence was a hypothetical he could avoid because the illegal war was going on. But once he declared it a 'win' the hypothetical became very real. He's making the call, he needs to show how, under John McCain, the US transitions to the next phase. I don't think he can. I'm surprised the pro-Barack sites aren't hitting him hard with "Okay, now what?" This isn't something Charlie Gibson tossed at him, "Senator McCain, when the war is won, what would you do?" He declared a 'win' and he needs to explain what happens next. (I don't think he can. I could be wrong and often am.)
Thursday, July 17, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, James Burmeister is
court-martialed and sentenced, John McCain appears to be saying "War is over,"
hotel construction and big business in northern Iraq, and more.
Starting with war resisters. US war resister James Burmeister was
court-martialed yesterday. AP ridiculously offers, "Burmeister said
he was disturbed by a military tactic of planting equipment to lure Iraqis --
presumably insurgents -- who American snipers could then kill." No, not
insurgents. They can't even do their own reporting and they can't even the damn
facts right. What took place at Fort Knox yesterday was "The court-martial of the kill-team whistle
blower." Here's how Mark Larabee (The Oregonian) reported
it, "But once in Iraq, he was assigned to a 'small kill' team that set traps
for insurgents. They'd place a fake camera on a pole with a sign labeling it as
US property, giving the team the right to shoot anyone who messed with it."
[The Oregonian link does not currently work and the story does not show
up via a search. The section quoted here was quoted here on July 16, 2007. The story ran that
day and was entitled "Soldiers still go over the hill even in an all-vounteer
Army."] [Add this anywhere, on the paper's blog, they've just reposted Larabee's story.] The CBC reported it June 29,2007 (link has text and
also a listening option), "Instead he said he became part of a team that set
up traps for Iraqis using an object such as a fake camera as a lure" and quotes
James stating, "If the Iraqis would go and touch it they [the soldiers] could
shoot 'em because if anyone messes with the U.S. government property, they're
allowed to fire at 'em." It could have been news then -- the "kill teams." It
should have been. But instead Panhandle Media chose to ignore reality. They're
never very concerned with Iraq. Real Media got on the story in September, via
Josh White and Ann Scott Tyson (Washington
Post) reporting on Jorge Sandoval "As he and two other snipers face
charges of killing Iraqis, legal experts are debating how large a role a
classified program of "baiting" their targets played in the cases. The soldiers
in the unit had the spool of wire, defense attorneys said, only because the
Army's secretive Asymmetric Warfare Group had given it to them -- along with
other items, such as plastic explosives and AK-47 rounds -- so the snipers could
boost the number of suspected insurgents they killed by shooting whoever picked
up the materials. . . Retired Maj. Gen. Thomas J. Romig, a former judge
advocate general for the Army, said the group's baiting program, as described
publicly, opens up the possibility for indiscriminate shootings -- based on
little information -- that could lead to the death of scavengers or curious
passersby. He said that when troops kill civilians by mistake, it can harm the
war effort." Kim Sengupta (Independent of London)
summarized it, "US soldiers are luring Iraqis to their deaths by scattering
military equipment on the ground as "bait", and then shooting those who pick
them up, it has been alleged at a court martial." Sengupta then quoted an
unnamed "US military source" stating, "The guys picking them up are sometimes
bad guys. But how do you know each time?" The difference should be very clear
to the AP which, after all, reported of Sandoval
September 28th, "He was found not guilty of the two murder charges, but the
panel decided he had placed a detonation wire on one of the bodies to make it
look as if the man was an insurgent." But today AP wants to say "presumably
insurgents"?
HINOJOSA: During his many missions, James was caught in three
road-side bombings... And amazingly, a fellow soldier caught one of the
explosions on camera.
BURMEISTER: We were in a five humvee set. Rolling
down a--down a main street in Baghdad in our sector. I'm the gunner on top of
this humvee... Just a big bomb goes off. And it's so fast, you don't--you don't
see the bomb. You're scared. You're checking your body parts to see if you're
missing anything. A few days after that, I had actually passed out in my room.
Passed out, just hit the floor.
HINOJOSA: James says that was the first
sign of his post traumatic stress disorder. He says doctors thought he also may
have sustained a traumatic brain injury, so he was sent to Germany on medical
leave. Two months later, while still on medication, he was ordered back to
Iraq.
BURMEISTER: They were desperate for people to get back there. They
just needed people in Baghdad. They just need bodies to man the guns and the
equipment.
HINOJOSA: James saw only two options: either go back to
Iraq...or go AWOL, Absent Without Leave, a crime punishable by jail time and
even court-martial.
BURMEISTER: I got back home--talked to my wife. You
know, I said, "I think I'm gonna leave." It was like a 15 minute decision that
I'm--I'm gonna leave--I'm gonna leave the Army.
HINOJOSA: On May 4th of
this year James fled to Canada, a familiar haven for over 55,000 Americans
during the Vietnam War. But times have changed and Canadian immigration laws are
much stricter now. When James arrived in Ottawa he realized his only viable
option to legally stay in Canada was to apply for refugee status. We were with
him and his family the day they put in their application.
BURMEISTER:
Today I am here at the immigration office to file my refugee claim, and starting
the whole process today and hope everything goes well.
HINOJOSA: Up until
now James and his family had been living underground. During this war about 300
U.S. soldiers are known to have fled to Canada and around 50 have applied for
refugee status. None to this day have been granted but no one has been sent home
either. They, along with James, wait to see if Canada will take them in
permanently.
Speaking to the CBS June 29th, he explained: "Our platoon in particular
would set up small groups called small kill teams maybe a group of four, five
people, some snipers and we would set up fake cameras. We would put 'Property
of US Government' in English and Arabic and we would wait for an Iraqi to come
up and touch it because that gives the US the right to kill them, so they say.
That would be the typical thing we'd do. . . . I didn't see how that was helping
at all." Following the roadside bombing caught on tape (which wasn't the only
bombing James endured), he was put on 'leave' when he should have been sent to a
hospital. The military didn't want to take responsibility for that and expected
him to get (apparently brief) medical treatment while he was on so-called
'leave.' Mina Al-Oraibi (Asharq Alawsat) reported,
"Following three months of lengthy treatment and surgery for a head injury, the
US Army issued an order to send Burmeister back to Iraq" and James explained to
her, "They wanted to send me back there on crutches and taking
anti-depressants." James told the CBC that he was being threatened and told to
lie about his status because he was wanted back in Iraq which is when he made
his decision:
Like I said, I was back on leave, just taking care of my hospital
stuff. My commander of my company told me that I had two days to get ready to
head back to Baghdad. They gave me 24-hours duty on the first day so I couldn't
go home and tell my wife so I was -- when I got back after the 24-hours -- just
was looking on the internet about Canada and I heard a lot of stories about
Vietnam war resisters coming up to Canada so the idea just popped into my head
to look on the -- look on the internet. And I also included 'refugee" in that
search. Came across the website Resisters.ca and called them up and asked what
kind of options I had. You know, they told me I should look at all my options
before just running up to Canada but at that point I had already looked at a lot
of them, I had already talked to my commander about consientious objector status
and they just said no to that. So that day I bought the ticket and next day
flew out from Nuremberg Germany to Toronto and made my way up
here.
[The audio clip at CBC is an interview Burmeister did with Rob Benzie. More
from the interview -- for those who can't stream online or with hearing
disabilities -- can be found in the September 25th snapshot.]
Burmeister left Canada and returned to the US where he turned himself in on
March 4th. Camilla Mortensen (Eugene Weekly)
reported on his return and noted, "His father fears the Army wants to keep
Burmeister quiet about the 'bait-and-kill' teams the he alleges have been used
to kill Iraqi civilians. While James Burmeister awaits the Army's decision, his
father [Erich Burmeister] is fighting to bring him home." In May, James Burmeister's father Erich wrote about his son at Courage to
Resist:
He is not a kid anymore. When he joined the army, he was a typical
poor kid, naive kid, painted himself in a corner kid. A typical young man high
on testosterone low on common sense, he brought the recruiter's line of crap and
fine-print flim flaw, and was coached on how to assure his induction despite
medical conditions that would have disqualified him.
So the army trained him how to kill efficiently in urban warfare
situations and shipped his naive butt over to Baghdad to carry out the orders of
his commander and chief, the Warrior Prince Bush, our president, brave military
veteran of Vietnam. So my son was forced to take part in and was witness to
acts of human cruelty beyond his wildest imagination. He killed other young men
just like him. In another place in another time, they could have been friends,
they could have worked side by side and shared their dreams, now their ghosts
will haunt his dreams, like the dreams of this brand new generation of "winter
soldiers". For the matter of a few feet, or maybe even a few inches, my son's
brains would have been spilled out on a Baghdad street. My nightmare of a
soldier's dad, of cradling my son's blown up head in my lap while I try to put
it back together, it would have become reality like the nightmares of the
families of those soldiers who have already died, and those who will die next
week, next month, and next year.
So now my son sits in Army custody, brain injured by a roadside
bomb and struggling mightly with PTSD while he awaits court-martial for
desertion, because he refused redepolyment to combat in Iraq in May 2007 in
protest over the war crimes he was ordered to engage in. He married a
fifty-caliber machine gun atop a hummer providing perimeter security for one of
the now infamous small kill teams.
Helen Burmeister: I'm Helen Burmeister and I'm here today to support
my son Prviate 1st Class James Burmeister. My son is an Iraq War veteran and
I'm very proud of him today. He fought bravely in Iraq. He followed orders.
He was wounded in a roadside bomb and he's been diagnosed with PTSD and a
possible brain injury. Our request today is that the army release James. We
want James to be able to put this traumatic experience behind him so he can
begin to heal -- both emotionally and physically. I believe my son has done his
part. Now it's time for him to be given the recognition he deserves. Short of
that, we are requesting that he be allowed to go home to Oregon. And thank
you. Thank you to everyone for all your support today.
Chris Kenning (Courier-Journal) reported
on Helen Burmeister's efforts and spoke with US war resister Darrell Anderson
who also went to Canada. Anderson returned September 30, 2006 to turn
himself in October 3rd. Like Burmeister, he suffers from
PTSD and he also lost his benefits. He told Kenning, "It wasn't the easy
choice, it was the hard choice. I lost my GI Bill, my veteran's benefits . . .
but I did what's right, and I've still got my pride."
Today Chris Kenning (Courier-Journal) reports
on James Burmeister's court-martial yesterday and the sentence of jail (six
months), reduction in rank (busted down to private), dishonorable discharge (bad
conduct) and "a loss of pay" and quotes Burmeister's military attorney, Captain
Tyson McDonald, stating of the military, "They're not happy that dirty laundry
was getting aired." Nick Kyonka (Toronto Star) quotes
Vietnam vet and Vietnam Veterans Against the War's Carol Rawert-Trainer stating
the court-martial took four hours and, "It's quite a shock to everybody. We all
thought they were going to take it easy on him because he turned himself in, but
it doesn't look that way." She also spoke at the rally last month to show
support for James Burmeister:
Carol Rawert Trainer: I am a Vietnam
Era veteran and my husband is a retired USAF officer and Vietnam Veteran. We
belong to Lousiville Peace Action Community and
Vietnam Veterans Against the War, two
great organizations that work for peace and justice. I learned of PFC James
Burmeister through my involvement with the GI
Rights Hotline. We are disgusted at the way the government
treats our returning war heroes and we will not sit by and watch it happen. You
hear the slogan 'Support Our Troops.' Well that is why we have come here
today. I have personally heard too many horror stories of veterans in the
Lousiville area who return from war and do not receive proper medical care or
benefits or counseling for PTSD which is all too prevalent in this war. The
Army seems to care more about their retention at any cost to the soldier and
family than they do about the care of the soldiers affected by this war. Too
many soldiers are battling their physical and emotional problems alone. The
suicide rates have risen dramatically. This is obscene. We are here today to
demand that the army grant James a discharge in lieu of court-martial. We are
watching what the army is doing. James served honorably in Iraq and carried out
his duties as commanded. He received head injuries and shrapnel in his face in
the 3rd attack on his convoy. He also has PTSD and seizures and is on many
medications as a result of his experience. When he was recuperating in the
hospital in Germany he realized that what he was commanded to do -- killing
innocent people, sometimes in bait-and-switch schemes, was immoral. The army
trains these troops from basic to kill, kill, kill and does not differentiate
between innocent Iraqis or insurgents. James could not, would not, do it any
longer. He had to live with himself and his actions for the rest of his life.
The army does not care about the lifelong problems these honorable soldiers
face. In fact they were going to send James back to Iraq even though he was on
medications for high blood pressure, depression, sleep problems and more. At
least James is one of the lucky ones who realized he needed help before it was
too late. Going back to Iraq would be dangerous to his life as well as to those
who served with him. We are here today to support James and his family in their
struggle for justice! James' family has suffered through other family
circumstances that dictate that James be home to help them. We hope the army
will grant James an immediate discharge not only for his own personal needs but
for his families' needs. Even though he would not receive medical benefits
which he needs, he would be home in a safe and loving environment. This is what
is fair. This is what is just. James was there when the army needed him. Now
the army must be there for James and the countless other heroes who need
assistance and support as they cope with their war-induced
problems.
War Resisters Support Campaign Lee Zaslofsky tells Kyonka regarding the
verdict, "In that case, his post-traumatic stress disorder and some of the other
problems that he has won't be dealt with properly. I just hope this isn't an
ill omen for some of the other (resisters)."
Turning to news of Robin Long. Or how about "Huh?" "The Morning Show
discusses Canadian government's decision to expel an American war resistor, then
Jane Mayer . . ." It does? No, KPFA's The Morning Show did not.
Despite the summary and announcing it on air. Kind of like, as noted in yesterday's snapshot, "And US war resisters may
see refuge in Canada." Which should have been noted as taking place on
Tuesday. Or rather not taking place. Probably not a good idea to self-pat
yourself on the shoulders, in the midst of your latest round of begging, when
you're unable to deliver on what you have promised and appear to think that, as
the program ends, you can just pretend you never promised the segment. Or if
you let Aileen pimp the most embarrassing segment of the week as "independent,
listener sponsored media," don't expect people to be in a hurry to toss a few
coins at you -- not even to get you to be quiet.
Heath Druzin (Idaho Statesman) reports,
"Long, who has a child with a Canadian woman, has been considered absent without
leave since he fled the U.S. Commanders at Fort Carson will decide whether he
should be discharged from the military, returned to duty, court marshaled or
given a less severe punishment, Fort Carson spokeswoman Karen Linne said." Monique James (KTVB) notes, "He's been living in
British Columbia for the past three years and has a two-year-old son
there.Long's sister, Christine, says she fears for her brother now that he's
back in the U.S. 'When I heard what was going on I'm kind of freaked out because
he's my brother, I don't want anything to happen to him,' said Christine
Long."
Robin is the father of a Canadian child. It's not a minor issue. It is,
however, an issue that Judge Anne Mctavish should have to explain overlooking.
Apparently dizzy from the high altitude of the bench, she forgot the law: Robin,
as the father of a Canadian citizen, should not have been deported. It's not
just the common sense that it splits up a family (which it does), it's also that
the immigration policies are very clear regarding children and parents. Judge
Mctavish needs to be asked what gave her the right to override precedent and law
in making her decision to evict Robin from the country? Also covering Long? The
Idaho Examiner runs a summary of the article here while The Seattle Times does so here. KBOI News files a brief summary. The Chicago Tribune
files a small brief on Long here. Iran's Press TV covers his story here. And Susan Bourette (Christian Science Monitor) observes of
the decision to deport Robin, "In a country that provided refuge to an
estimated 90 percent of some 100,000 deserters and draft dodgers who went into
exile during the Vietnam War, it's an unprecedented decision -- though perhaps
not unexpected, given the political temper of the times in Canada."
Aura Bogado: When more than 50,000 people made their way from the US
to Canada to avoid fighting in the Viet Nam war, Canadian Prime Minister Pierre
Trudeau welcomed them, declaring Canada a "refuge from militarism". Today, while
much smaller in number and largely unnoticed in the US, a new generation of
"deserters" are fighting for the same sanctuary -- including Robin Long, who
came to Canada in 2005 seeking refugee status. But as FSRN's Sarah Olson
reports, Canadian government officials have not extended the same welcome to
these modern war resisters.
Sarah Olson: A federal judge in Vancouver ruled that Robin Long must
go home, saying Monday that the 25-year-old had failed to provide clear and
non-speculative evidence that he'd be singled out for harsh treatment if he
returned to the United States. By Tuesday afternoon, despite two federal court
victories, last month's Parliamentary resolution welcoming Iraq
war resisters and the support nearly two-thirds of Canadians have shown for
US war resisters, Long became the first Iraq Warwar resister to be deported
from Canada. Bob Ages with the War Resisters Support Campaign in
Vancouver.
Bob Ages: We think they have expedited what amounts to kidnapping and
extraordinary rendition precisely to try to set a precedent to take the wind out
of the sails of a campaign of support which has been growing in strength both in
terms of our legal arguments and our political support.
Sarah Olson: To understand the legal landscape Long is navigating,
one must examine three other cases. First, the Hinzman-Hughey case. Jeremy
Hinzman and Brandon Hughey arrived in Canada in 2004 and in 2005 became the
first US soldiers to petition for refugee status. They were denied but appealed
all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada which declined to intervene in
November of last year. Attorney Alyssa Manning represents deserters now living
in Toronto. Her client, Corey Glass, won a stay of removal last week
based largely on how dramatically Hinzman-Hughey changed things.
Alyssa Manning: We argued that it established new law in the area of
Canadian refugee law and that is that if you are fearing the persecution of the
state itself as opposed to some other actor in your country of origin then you
have to seek protection from that state before you can get refugee protection.
Before the Hinzman decision, it wasn't thought that you had to seek state
protection if it was actually the state that was persecuting you.
Sarah Olson: The second case is army private Joshua Key. Unlike
Hinzman and Hughey, Key was an Iraq veteran. In 2005, the refugee board found
that although Key had received orders which violated the Geneva Convention
disobeying these orders didn't entitle Key to refugee status. A federal court
heare his appeal earlier this month. Key's attorney, Jeffry House.
Jeffry House: The federal court said that the right to refuse
inappropriate orders is larger than what the refugee board had thought. It
isn't simply that a soldier can refuse to commit war crimes, a soldier can also
refuse to commit violations of the Geneva Convention if that's required of him
or her on a systematic basis. The court held that if the United States were to
prosecute Joshua Key for refusing to violate the Geneva Conventions then that
would give rise to a refugee claim.
Sarah Olson: This July 4th decision was the first legal victory for
Iraq War resisters and House says it could have substantial
implications.
Jeffry House: Any case in which it was alleged by the person
concerned that he or she was required to commit inappropriate acts on a
systematic basis probably would have a right to have their case re-heard.
Sarah Olson: Finally there is national guard Sgt. Corey Glass. Glass
arrived in Canada in 2006 after going AWOL while home on leave in the middle of
an 18-month deployment. His bid for refuge was also rejected. His legal
appeals unsuccessful. And his deportation seemed so likely he gave up his
apartment and quit his job. But thanks in part to the Key decision the federal
court stayed his removal last week while his legal team presents new evidence.
Attorney Alyssa Manning.
Alyssa Manning: The really interesting thing about the reason coming
down in Corey's case is that it will be the first decision that will consider
all of the evidence that we gathered about what has happened to simarly situated
individuals in the United States -- people like Stephen Funk or Camilo Mejia,
people who spoke out against the war and then were court-martialed and
imprisoned.
Sarah Olson: This makes Robin Long's removal yesterday all the more
unfortunate. Long is expected to be sent to Fort Carson, Colorado where his
tanker unit is based. Despite the Canadian court's assertion that most
deserters don't even face a court-martial or prison time, the percentage of
soldiers facing prosecution is much higher when the soldier is on record
opposing the war. And this has Long's US supporters concerned. For Free
Speech Radio News, I'm Sarah Olson, Oakland, California.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which
includes Megan Bean, Chris Bean, Matthis Chiroux, Richard Droste, Michael
Barnes, Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck
Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess,
Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin
Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross
Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther
Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Jose Vasquez, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara
Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera,
Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin
Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala,
Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey
Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark
Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo
Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders,
Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey,
Logan Laituri, Jason Marek, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel,
Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris
Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian
Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La
Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war
resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Turning to the MidEast where Deborah Haynes (Times of London) reports
Lt Gen Ali al-Momen will become Kuwait's first ambassador to Iraq since 1991and
notes, " His appointment will be issued in a decree by the emir. It is unclear
when the new embassy will open but it is likely to be situated inside Baghdad's
fortified Green Zone, home to other foreign embassies as well as Iraqi
Government buildings." And Iran's Press TV reports that Lebanon's Parliamentarian
leader Saad Hariri visited Iraq today for the first time since the start of the
Iraq War. CNN calls it a diplomatic push that will include
puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki going to meet with "leaders of Germany
and Italy and with the pope" next week. Strangely no one's talking about what
the Kurdistan region of Iraq's President Massoud Barzani's doing. He was
courting big business again today as ground was broken for construction of the a
new hotel in Erbil and, among his notable guests, were "Joseph Sarkis, Lebanon's
Minister for Tourism, Jacques Sarraf, President of Malia Group Holdings, Selim
al-Zyr, President and CEO of Rotana Hotles, Andrea Dini, CEO Dama and Diva
Companies." His speech is posted online here.
While some explore diplomacy, US Senator John McCain (presumptive GOP
presidential nominee) makes a surprising statement in Kansas City. CNN reports that he stated "we have succeeded in
Iraq. I repeat my statement that we have succeeded in Iraq. Not 'We are
succeeding.' We have succeeded in Iraq." If McCain truly believes that, he
should be able to speak of withdrawal and reporters shouldn't let him avoid the
very serious issue by his stating he doesn't want to talk about
'timelines.' Forget timelines. If he believes what he says, he should be able
to sketch out a specific plan for withdrawal. He can note qualifiers that
things on the ground could change or whatever -- but if he truly meant what he
said, he should be able to sketch a withdrawal. If he can't, he's honestly not
up to the job of running for president. When you state, "We have succeeded,"
being asked, "Then how do we withdraw?" is not an unreasonable question.
Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad
roadside bombing that wounded three people, a Diyala roadside bombing that
killed 1 man and wounded his three sons. Reuters notes a Samarra roadside bombing that left
seven "Awakening" Council members injured.
Before becoming McClatchy, it was Knight-Ridder Newspapers. Dr. Yasser
Salihee was one of the Iraqis working as a correspondent. In June of 2005, Ron Brynaert (Why Are We Back In Iraq?)
noted Yasser's final story: "The last story filed by Knight-Ridder special
correspondent, Yasser Salihee appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer on Tuesday
but received little attention. "Campaign of executions feared in Iraq" was
co-written by Tom Lasseter and it suggested that the Iraqi police may have been
acting as executioners instead of policemen". James Cogan (WSWS) explained in July 2005, "Over the
past month, Salihee had been gathering evidence that US-backed Iraqi forces have
been carrying out extra-judicial killings of alleged members and supporters of
the anti-occupation resistance. His investigation followed a feature in the
New York Times magazine in May, detailing how the US military had modeled
the Iraqi interior ministry police commandos, known as the Wolf Brigade, on the
death squads unleashed in the 1980s to crush the left-wing insurgency in El
Salvador." NPR's Jacki Lyden noted his death in 2005,
"Yasser was part of the first story I reported for NPR after Saddam Hussein was
deposed. We met in Baghdad, when he was a physician at Yarmouk Hospital's
emergency room. He invited me home the next day and I met his beloved wife and
child. . . . It was Friday, he was in his neighborhood on his day off, going to
get gasoline and an oil change so that he could take his wife and daughter
swimming. He was driving his car alone, when an American sniper from the 3rd
Infantry apparently shot him at a check point. I say apparently because the
cricumstances are somewhere unclear. He died of a single bullet to the brain,
which pierced the car's windshield." As part of the Sacremento Bee's
investigation into violence, Russell Carollo reports new details this week on the man who
shot Yasser dead, "But a yearlong examination by the Sacramento Bee found that
the shooter, Staff Sgt. Joseph J. Romero, brought a long, troubled past with him
to Iraq, and the Guard unit Vige praised was riddled with misfits, drug users
and soldiers with criminal records -- at least two of them former mental
patients. At the time that he shot Salihee Romero was under investigation for
selling cocaine, military records show. Days before the shooting, Romero
threatened to kill a fellow soldier who reported him to the Army's Criminal
Investigation Command or CID. Three weeks later, the drug allegations would
prompt the Army to strip Romero of his leadership, bar him from missions and
take away his large-caliber sniper rifle. And less than three months after the
shooting, on Sept. 9, 2005, Romero was sentenced to 14 months' confinement and
given a bad conduct discharge, convicted of selling cocaine, possessing other
drugs, obstructing justice and communicating a threat." The Sacremento Bee editorializes on the topic of who
is getting into the military on waivers today and notes:
Soldiers with criminal, drug and alcohol histories may represent just
a tiny fraction of the 1.4 million who serve in the United States military. But
Bee reporter Russell Carollo's stories show that these soldiers can wreak havoc
within the military, at times seriously jeopardizing the country's mission in
Iraq and Afghanistan.
Take one case examined by The Bee. As a young man, Staff Sgt. Joseph
Romero was charged with assault and a string of residential burglaries, but most
of the charges were dropped when he agreed to join the Army. During his
problem-plagued first 10 years of Army service, he was investigated but not
charged with selling drugs. He left the Army in 2001 and spent what those who
knew him described as a drug-soaked few years before he joined the Louisiana
National Guard and was deployed to Iraq.
While in Iraq, Romero was accused and later convicted of selling
drugs to fellow soldiers. After he was accused, the Army required him to
surrender his sniper rifle -- but only after he had used that rifle to kill
Yasser Salihee, an Iraqi physician who was working as an interpreter. No
criminal investigation of the shooting was ever conducted. Salihee's widow told
The Bee, "Before the accident I loved the Americans … but after … I hate all the
Army. All my neighbors were hating the Americans."
In the July 6, 2008 edition of the New York Times,
the courageously peripatetic columnist, Nicolas D. Kristof urged the creation of
a Truth Commission on torture and other war crimes. Here is Kristof in his
words: "When a distinguished American military commander accuses the United
States of committing war crimes in its handling of detainees, you know that we
need a new way forward. "'There is no longer any doubt as to whether the
current administration has committed war crimes,' Antonio Taguba, the retired
major general who investigated abuses in Iraq, declares in a powerful new report
on American torture from Physicians for Human Rights. "'The only question that
remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be
held to account.' "[W]e need a national Truth Commission to lead a
process of soul searching and national cleansing. "That was what South
Africa did after apartheid, with its Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and it
is what the United States did with the Kerner Commission on race and the 1980s
commission that examined the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War
II. "Today, we need a similar Truth Commission, with subpoena power, to
investigate the abuses in the aftermath of 9/11. "It's a national
disgrace that more than 100 inmates have died in American custody in
Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantánamo. After two Afghan inmates were beaten to death
by American soldiers, the American military investigator found that one of the
men's legs had been 'pulpified.' "Moreover, many of the people we
tortured were innocent: the administration was as incompetent as it was immoral.
The McClatchy newspaper group has just published a devastating series on torture
and other abuses, and it quotes Thomas White, the former Army secretary, as
saying that it was clear from the moment Guantánamo opened that one-third of the
inmates didn't belong there. "These abuses happened partly because, for
several years after 9/11, many of our national institutions didn't do their
jobs. The Democratic Party rolled over rather than serving as loyal opposition.
We in the press were often lap dogs rather than watchdogs, and we let the public
down. "Yet there were heroes, including civil liberties groups and
lawyers for detainees. Some judges bucked the mood, and a few conservatives
inside the administration spoke out forcefully. The Times's Eric Lichtblau
writes in his terrific new book, "Bush's Law," that the Immigration and
Naturalization Service commissioner, James Ziglar, pushed back against plans for
door-to-door sweeps of Arab-American neighborhoods. "'The book recounts
that in one meeting,' Mr. Ziglar bluntly declared, 'We do have this thing called
the Constitution,' adding that such sweeps would be illegal and 'I'm not going
to be part of it.' "The Truth Commission investigating these issues ideally
would be a non-partisan group heavily weighted with respected military and
security officials, including generals, admirals and top intelligence figures.
Such backgrounds would give their findings credibility across the political
spectrum -- and I don't think they would pull punches. The military and
intelligence officials I know are as appalled by our abuses as any other group,
in part because they realize that if our people waterboard, then our people will
also be waterboarded. "Both Barack Obama and John McCain should commit to
impaneling a Truth Commission early in the next administration. This commission
would issue a report to help us absorb the lessons of our failings, the better
to avoid them during the next crisis." Mr. Kristof has put forth a strong
case for a strong investigating Truth Commission. He asks for your commitment to
establish such a commission should either of you become President. How do you
respond to this prize-winning, eye witness-inclined journalist?
Long
and the estimated 200 American war resisters who have fled to Canada
since the start of the Iraq War in 2003 have become a cause celebre in
Canada. Last month, the Canadian Parliament passed a nonbinding measure
expressing support for allowing Iraq War resisters to apply for
permanent resident status. Long's deportation contrasts with the
warm reception given by Canadians to deserters and draft dodgers during
the Vietnam War. The news was a blow to the Canadian antiwar movement,
said Michelle Robidoux with the War Resisters Support Campaign, a
Canadian group that helps American Iraq War resisters. "It's a really shameful day for Canada," she said. Long,
who has a child with a Canadian woman, has been considered absent
without leave since he fled the U.S. Commanders at Fort Carson will
decide whether he should be discharged from the military, returned to
duty, court marshaled or given a less severe punishment, Fort Carson
spokeswoman Karen Linne said.
The first Iraq war deserter to be deported back to the United States from Canada is a Boise native. The
U.S. military has detained 25-year-old Robin Long, a Timberline High
School grad, on charges that he fled the country to avoid fighting in
Iraq. [. . .] He's been living in British Columbia for the past three years and has a two-year-old son there. Long's sister, Christine, says she fears for her brother now that he's back in the U.S. "When
I heard what was going on I’m kind of freaked out because he's my
brother, I don't want anything to happen to him," said Christine Long.
Reports
say there are about 200 deserters from the US military believed to be
living in Canada. He applied for refugee status in 2006, saying he
would suffer irreparable harm if he was forced to participate in the
“illegal war of aggression" in Iraq. Long was arrested last year after
his application was rejected and was told to leave the country.
Meanwhile,
in British Columbia, protesters gathered at the Canada-US border to
dispute a federal court's decision the day before to deport Robin Long,
a 25-year-old US Army deserter who fled to Canada in 2005, refusing to
fight an "illegal war of aggression" in Iraq. In a country that
provided refuge to an estimated 90 percent of some 100,000 deserters
and draft dodgers who went into exile during the Vietnam War, it's an
unprecedented decision -- though perhaps not unexpected, given the
political temper of the times in Canada. "These two events are
intimately connected," explains Michael Byers, a political science
professor at the University of British Columbia. "They are a sad legacy
of our alignment with the Bush administration in the post-9/11 world.
Both reflect a desire of the Canadian government to choose its
relationship with the Bush administration over human rights." He
adds that while the former Liberal government had worked to accommodate
some of its closest ally's preferences since 9/11, the Conservative
government of Stephen Harper is following in lock step with US
foreign-policy goals.
Mr.
Long was deported early Tuesday morning. Yesterday afternoon, he was
transferred from the Whatcom County Jail in Bellingham, Wash., about 35
kilometres south of the Canada-U.S. border, to the custody of military
police from Fort Lewis, Wash. The military base, about 80 kilometres
south of Seattle, was to make arrangements to send Mr. Long back to the
base from which he deserted.
Joint NGO Statement on the Handover of the Report of the Commission of Truth and Friendship
July 15, 2008
This
week the report of the bilateral Commission of Truth and Friendship
(CTF) will be handed over to the presidents of Indonesia and
Timor-Leste. The report concludes that crimes against humanity took
place for which militia groups and the Indonesian military, police and
civilian government bear institutional responsibility. The report
should be made public as soon as possible, and must not be the end of
efforts to assign responsibility for violence in 1999 and before.
While
Indonesia bears most of the responsibility to respond to the challenges
posed by the report, both countries and the international community
must work together to ensure individual accountability for the past,
and reform of these institutions in the future.
The
Commission was formed by the two governments to “establish the
conclusive truth” about the events of 1999 “with a view to further
promoting reconciliation and friendship.” In 1999 militias created,
trained, and directed by the Indonesian military carried out a terror
campaign that left more than 1,400 dead, hundreds of thousands forcibly
displaced, and much of the territory’s infrastructure destroyed.
According to available information, the report has found that
Indonesian security forces often directly participated in the violence.
Flaws
in the Commission documented by our own groups and others include: a
mandate that put a priority on rehabilitating the names of accused
perpetrators over justice or compensation for victims; prohibitions on
assigning individual responsibility or on recommending prosecutions or
creation of judicial bodies; inadequate witness protection; and a
narrow focus on events in 1999.
As
a result, despite the intent of the two nations to find “definitive
closure,” and a report that contributes to a better understanding of
the violence, the Commission cannot be the last word on responsibility
for past human rights violations in Timor-Leste. The body is by design
inadequate for the task of identifying the truth or obtaining closure
in any meaningful sense of the word.
However,
despite its limitations, commissioners from both countries made an
effort to sift through the information and produce meaningful
conclusions. Notably, the Commission did not exercise its power to
recommend amnesties for any individuals. The Commission has found that
the Indonesian military, as an institution, was responsible for crimes
against humanity. This finding leads our organizations to two
inescapable conclusions:
An
institution that was responsible for crimes against humanity remains a
powerful and largely unreformed force within Indonesia. Despite a few
important steps following the fall of President Soeharto, such as the
separation of the police from the military and the loss of automatic
seats in parliament, the military has made little progress in accepting
civilian control, divesting of its massive empire of legal and illegal
businesses, or holding its members accountable for human rights
violations.
A further
judicial mechanism is needed to assign individual responsibility for
those crimes. Individual responsibility is a fundamental principle of
international criminal law and an essential aspect of reconciliation.
Some of those implicated in the violence maintain positions of
influence in Indonesia, either within the military or as retired
civilians active in politics.
It
is also important to note that just as the Commission must not be the
last word, neither was it the first. A 2000 report by an investigative
team from Indonesia’s National Human Rights Commission identified
serious violations and recommended investigation of numerous civilian
and military officials. Timor-Leste’s Commission of Reception, Truth
and Reconciliation (CAVR) produced a comprehensive 2,000 page report
with recommendations on accountability and reparations that have been
largely unimplemented. The U.N.-backed Serious Crimes Unit in Dili
indicted numerous individuals for prosecution, most of whom remain at
large in Indonesia. A U.N. Commission of Experts found that Indonesia’s
efforts at accountability, the Jakarta ad hoc tribunals, were
“manifestly inadequate.” The only defendant serving time for a
conviction in those trials, militia leader Eurico Gutteres was recently
acquitted on appeal. The CTF report notes serious shortcomings of the
Jakarta trials.
Both the
U.N. Commission of Experts and the CAVR urged that an international
tribunal be formed if Indonesia did not promptly act to hold the
perpetrators accountable. It is possible that the findings of the
Commission of Truth and Friendship will spur further prosecutions in
Indonesia, ideally in conjunction with the international community to
ensure both credibility and resources. However, Indonesia’s record in
this area is clear, and it is highly unlikely that the Indonesian
government will act without clear signals from the international
community that an international tribunal remains a credible option.
Those
who committed crimes against humanity throughout Indonesia’s invasion
and occupation of Timor-Leste must be identified and prosecuted, for
the sake of justice for past victims in Timor-Leste and for a future in
which human rights are respected in Indonesia. The international
community and the government of Timor-Leste must play a role in
ensuring both prosecutions and reparations to victims. As recommended
by the Commission, Indonesia must comprehensively reform its armed
forces.
If Indonesia
truly wants closure and full acceptance by the international community
as a rights-respecting nation, there is no alternative but an end to
impunity through individual as well as institutional accountability.
Association HAK (Timor-Leste)
Australian Coalition for Transitional Justice in East Timor
East Timor and Indonesia Action Network (U.S.)
Human Rights First
International Center for Transitional Justice
The Commission for the Disappeared and the Victims of Violence (Kontras) (Indonesia)
Maria Afonso de Jesus, victims' families representative (Timor-Leste)
Turning to US presidential politics, Progressives Against Obama was noted earlier this week in a snapshot. Here is their press release in full:
PROGRESSIVES AGAINST OBAMA ORGANIZE REBELLION ONLINE New web site serves as hub of liberal backlash against Barack Obama
When Barack Obama broke his promise to progressives, and voted for the FISA Amendments Act, it was with the assumption that progressive voters would never abandon the Obama campaign, because they had no alternative. Now a group is organizing disgruntled voters online with the purpose of proving Obama's assumption to be wrong. Progressives Against Obama have begun to organize online at ProgressivesAgainstObama.com.
The FISA Amendments Act is the straw that breaks the camel's back, but it's not the only betrayal of progressive values by Barack Obama. Progressives also object to: - Obama's eroding position on ending the American occupation of Iraq - Obama's plan to expand Bush's so-called faith-based initiatives - Obama's use of religion as a tool for his presidential campaign - Obama's support for liquefied coal and other dirty "clean coal" schemes - Obama's advocacy for the death penalty - Obama's opposition to gun control - Obama's opposition to full marriage equality - Obama's use of homophobic preacher Donnie McClurkin to campaign for him - Obama's support for Joseph Lieberman against Ned Lamont in the 2006 Democratic primary
Some say that progressive voters should put their concerns about Barack Obama's embrace of George W. Bush's politics aside. They say that progressives should help elect Barack Obama, and then pressure him after the election to make sure that he does what we want.
There is an old story about a scorpion who asks a frog for a ride across a river, assuring the frog that he would never sting him, because to do so would be to kill them both. When the frog reaches the other side with the scorpion on his back, the scorpion stings him anyway, because it is in his nature. Progressives have seen the nature of Barack Obama. They have been stung by him already, and are not willing to carry him to victory just so that they can get stung again. Obama has broken his promises, and he no longer deserves the benefit of the doubt.
Now is the time to put serious pressure on Barack Obama. After the election, progressives will have no leverage. Now is the time to speak out, precisely because it is so inconvenient for Obama's campaign that we do so.
Democrat Jonathan Cook, founder of the web site, explains that Progressives Against Obama has no intention of serving as a tool of the Republican Party. "We do not support John McCain, and we do not support right wing and racist attacks against Barack Obama. As progressives, we oppose Barack Obama from a progressive perspective. We intend to hold true to our ideals, even as Barack Obama trades them away for the sake of political power."
News Release FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Chris Driscoll, 202-360-3273, chris@votenader.org
NADER LAUDS KRISTOF TRUTH COMMISSION PROPOSAL, CALLS FOR OBAMA/MCCAIN COMMITMENT
The
Nader/Gonzalez Campaign today released the following open letter to
Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain, calling on them to support Nicolas
D. Kristof's proposal in the New York Times for the establishment of a
national Truth Commission:
Obama For President Campaign Office Suite 1720 233 N. Michigan Ave Chicago, IL 60601
McCain For President Campaign Office Suite M 1235 S. Clark St. Arlington, VA 22202
Dear Senators McCain and Obama,
In
the July 6, 2008 edition of the New York Times, the courageously
peripatetic columnist, Nicolas D. Kristof urged the creation of a Truth
Commission on torture and other war crimes.
Here is Kristof in his words:
"When
a distinguished American military commander accuses the United States
of committing war crimes in its handling of detainees, you know that we
need a new way forward.
"'There is no longer any doubt as to
whether the current administration has committed war crimes,' Antonio
Taguba, the retired major general who investigated abuses in Iraq,
declares in a powerful new report on American torture from Physicians
for Human Rights. "'The only question that remains to be answered is
whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account.'
"[W]e need a national Truth Commission to lead a process of soul searching and national cleansing.
"That
was what South Africa did after apartheid, with its Truth and
Reconciliation Commission, and it is what the United States did with
the Kerner Commission on race and the 1980s commission that examined
the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II.
"Today, we need a similar Truth Commission, with subpoena power, to investigate the abuses in the aftermath of 9/11.
"It’s
a national disgrace that more than 100 inmates have died in American
custody in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantánamo. After two Afghan inmates
were beaten to death by American soldiers, the American military
investigator found that one of the men’s legs had been 'pulpified.'
"Moreover,
many of the people we tortured were innocent: the administration was as
incompetent as it was immoral. The McClatchy newspaper group has just
published a devastating series on torture and other abuses, and it
quotes Thomas White, the former Army secretary, as saying that it was
clear from the moment Guantánamo opened that one-third of the inmates
didn’t belong there.
"These abuses happened partly because, for
several years after 9/11, many of our national institutions didn’t do
their jobs. The Democratic Party rolled over rather than serving as
loyal opposition. We in the press were often lap dogs rather than
watchdogs, and we let the public down.
"Yet there were heroes,
including civil liberties groups and lawyers for detainees. Some judges
bucked the mood, and a few conservatives inside the administration
spoke out forcefully. The Times’s Eric Lichtblau writes in his terrific
new book, "Bush’s Law," that the Immigration and Naturalization Service
commissioner, James Ziglar, pushed back against plans for door-to-door
sweeps of Arab-American neighborhoods.
"'The book recounts that
in one meeting,' Mr. Ziglar bluntly declared, 'We do have this thing
called the Constitution,' adding that such sweeps would be illegal and
'I’m not going to be part of it.'
"The Truth Commission
investigating these issues ideally would be a non-partisan group
heavily weighted with respected military and security officials,
including generals, admirals and top intelligence figures. Such
backgrounds would give their findings credibility across the political
spectrum — and I don’t think they would pull punches. The military and
intelligence officials I know are as appalled by our abuses as any
other group, in part because they realize that if our people
waterboard, then our people will also be waterboarded.
"Both
Barack Obama and John McCain should commit to impaneling a Truth
Commission early in the next administration. This commission would
issue a report to help us absorb the lessons of our failings, the
better to avoid them during the next crisis."
Mr. Kristof has
put forth a strong case for a strong investigating Truth Commission. He
asks for your commitment to establish such a commission should either
of you become President. How do you respond to this prize-winning, eye
witness-inclined journalist?
Burmeister's military defense
attorney, Capt. Tyson McDonald, argued in court that the prosecution
was pursuing the case only because Burmeister had spoken to multiple
media outlets about the "small kill teams," which he said were later
halted. "They're not happy that dirty laundry was getting aired,"
said McDonald, who argued Burmeister did "the wrong thing for the right
reason." [. . .] In court
yesterday , soldiers, reporters, anti-war activists and Burmeister's
parents gathered for the four-hour trial. Testimony included discussion
about Burmeister's media interviews while in Canada. Burmeister told
The (Portland) Oregonian newspaper last year that he had participated
in a team that put out cameras labeled as U.S. property, giving the
team the right to shoot whoever tried to take it. He also spoke with
Canadian Broadcasting Corp. and other news outlets. "I know going
AWOL was wrong, but I thought it was the best way to stop the small
kill teams," said Burmeister, who left his wife and child in Germany to
spend nearly 10 months in Canada. Although the Army has declined to
discuss specific methods of combat, including the "small kill teams" or
"bait and kill," as the practice was known, their existence has been
detailed in several national newspaper articles. Yesterday, Burmeister
said wire, AK-47s or other objects were placed in the open as soldiers
laid in wait. Burmeister's attorney said that e-mails from his unit indicate that the practice was stopped earlier this year.
A
few comments on the above. 1) NOW on PBS needs to update their story --
online or on television. Since Burmeister's remarks about the kill
teams were entered into the record, it sure would be nice if NOW could
'kill' the embargo they placed on that portion of the interview Burmeister gave them to them last year.
2) Amy Goodman and all the other pathetics in 'independent' media never
made time for Burmeister's story. If they had, they could have scooped
the Washington Post. From the July 16, 2007 snapshot:
Starting
with war resistance. James Burmeister is a war resister who went to
Canada after serving in Iraq. He, his wife, Angelique, and their son,
Cornell, now live in Ottawa. Mark Larabee (The Oregonian) reports
on Burmeister and notes the "traps" were an issue -- setting out the
fake carmera or other equipment so that someone would go for it and
then shooting them for touching US property -- with James Burmeister
declaring, "As soon as anyone would mess with it, you were supposed to
lay waste to them. I completely disagreed with that tactic. I can't see
how that's helping anyone whatsoever"; and on Iraq, "I though people
needed to be free there. But when I went there it was all about
captures and kills and it felt like we messed things up over there."
For some reason, J.E. McNeil is quoted in the story and really doesn't
know the first thing about the topic. I'll call out McNeil the same way
I would a right winger. McNeil's area of expertise and area of interest
is C.O.s and that's the topic McNeil should stick to. I find McNeil's
remarks (and ingorance) damaging. It takes only a few seconds to say,
"C.O.s is my focus. Have you considered calling the War Resisters Support Campaign?"
A voice who does know something on the subject, Helen Burmeister,
mother of James, whom Larabee reports is proud of her son and declares,
"I don't support the war. I don't know anybody who supports what's
going on in Iraq. . . . It took guts for him to do what he did."
By
mid-week, I knew there was not much to report. By mid-week, the U.S.
"kill teams" operating in Iraq had been avoided by every radio program
I caught and I was streaming all over, from Pacifica to Pacifica and even NPR. "Kill
teams" were not a new development to this community. When war resister
James Burmeister went to Canada and began speaking of them, they were
noted here, months ago. But while Canada's CBC did a wonderful interview
with Mr. Burmeister, independent media in the U.S. ignored him.They
ignored him again this week which is why the narrative is being
dictated by the mainstream on "kill teams" and why the narrative is, to
no one's surprise, one that does not explore but scrapes the frost off
the top of the ice.
Meanwhile Josh White and Ann Scott Tyson (Washington Post) report on the "Kill Teams" noting,
"Officers described the program, in unclassified statements obtained by
The Post, as involving the placement of the items in insurgent areas
and killing those who picked them up." And Kim Sengupta (Indepent of London) reports,
"A US military source said "baits" had been left by a number of units.
'The guys picking them up are sometimes bad guys. But how do you know
each time?' Robert Emerson, a British security analyst, said: 'This
seems a highly arbitrary and suspect way of carrying out
counter-insurgency operations'." But neither outlet notes war resister
James Burmeister who went public about the "Kill Teams" in June. And,
in fact, cited them as one of the reasons he decided to self-checkout
and move to Canada with his family.
Starting
with war resistance. Big news! Canada cannot be reached by either phone
or e-mail! The apparent blockade must explain why All Things Media Big
and Small in the US are unable to contact James Burmeister who served
in Iraq and was publicly speaking of "kill teams" of US forces who
intentionally left items (not just items that were weapons or could be
used for making weapons -- as the mainstream narrative likes to insist)
out in public so that Iraqis could be shot for touching "US property."
Apparently the blockade also includes Canada's borders being heavily
guarded and Ottawa being ringed with armed guards -- possibly from the
US mercenary company Blackwater. In times long since past, independent
media would have been all over this story instead they're all
apparently imposing some self-gag order when it comes to the words:
"James Burmeister."
As noted before, as appalling (and illegal)
as the program is when guns and materials that might be used for making
bombs are, public outrage is mitigated by the fact that some in the US
will tell themselves, "Well, if they're touching it, they probably are
guilty!" Telling the truth (something independent media has a real
problem with these days -- as evidence by the elevation to sainthood of
a five times busted thug) would have Americans asking serious questions
about the program (which already appears to be fading from public
knowledge) because a camera, for example, is not a weapon. But what
should have been the minute where independent media stepped up to the
plate, grabbed the spotlight and demonstrated just how important they
could be instead became a time for travelogue. Remember that when they
next beg for money.
On
the subject of the US military's "kill teams," the press continues to
avoid the fact that war resister James Burmeister was publicly speaking
of them months before the press stumbled onto them this week. Paul von Zeilbauer (New York Times) reported
this morning on the court-martial of Jorge G. Sandoval and noted that
Anthony G. Murphy had testified in July that there was a sense of sense
"of disappointment from field commanders seeking higher enemy body
counts" and that "Soldiers also testified that battalion commanders
authorized a classified new technique that used fake explosives and
detonation wires as 'bait' to lure and kill suspected insurgents around
Iskandariya, a hostile Sunni Arab region south of Baghdad." AP reports
that Sandoval was acquitted today of some charges; however, "the panel
decided he had placed a detonation wire on one of the bodies to make it
look as if the man was an insurgent."
Another
war resister in Canada is James Burmeister and he's been avoided by all
US independent media. Apparently KvH's cowardice is contagious -- there
she is now, entertain us -- which is a real shame because this week's
'big' story about the US utilizing 'kill teams' in Iraq was actually
revealed in June of this year by anyone bothering to cover Burmeister.
If KvH hadn't issued her royal edict, she could be doing another one of
her crowing blog posts where she insists that "We at The Nation" were
covering ___ forever ago. The way she did yesterday on Blackwater
citing Jeremy Scahill's work but failing to note that the work on
Blackwater began while he was at Democracy Now!
and that Scahill established his bonafides on the topic long before he
moved over to the magazine. Well, if you were in charge of a magazine
and running it so badly that "I wish Victor would come back" has been
replaced with chatter of "Victor's coming back," you'd want to skirt
the truth as well. Mina Al-Oraibi does what KvH refuses to let anyone at The Nation do, reports on Burmeister today. From "Escaping War: America's Refugee Soldiers" (Asharq Alawsat):
He
revealed that going to Iraq last year was his first military combat
experience, saying that the suffering he had endured there was
unexpected. "It's nothing like what we see in the movies or what we are
told. You go looking for trouble and you don’t see it for weeks, then
suddenly there is so much chaos," he said in reference to the targeting
of US troops in Iraq. Burmeister arrived
in Canada in May 2007 from Germany where he had been in the American
military hospital [Landstuhl Regional Medical Center (LRMC)] recovering
from an injury he had suffered following a bomb explosion that targeted
his convoy in the Iraqi capital. Following three months of lengthy
treatment and surgery for a head injury, the US Army issued an order to
send Burmeister back to Iraq. "They wanted to send me back there on
crutches and taking anti-depressants," he said. Burmeister
spoke at length of the psychological effects the war had on him, saying
"I realized how my mind was changing while I was in Iraq, I just wanted
to kill. I had to step back, it was frightening."This is when
Burmeister knew that returning to Iraq was not an option. He went to
Toronto with his German wife whom he had met during the time he was
based in Germany before his first trip to Iraq. After he contacted
volunteers from the War Resisters Support Campaign, he relocated to
Ottawa where he stayed with a volunteering family since all the houses
of the volunteers in Toronto were occupied by other soldiers. Burmeister
feels a certain sense of guilt towards his comrades who remain in Iraq,
thinking at times about returning to his country. "Because I feel it's
the right thing to do -- even if I face prison or a dishonorable
discharge from the army," but added, "I can't go back to the
killing."Burmeister says he refuses to participate in the practices of
what he described as "small kill teams", which include "four of five
soldiers, with a couple of snipers, who would go out on the streets and
put something out, like a camera. Then they'd put a sign out [that
said] if anyone touched it, they would be killed. But a lot of these
people do not read English, so they would touch it to see what it is,
and then they would be shot. [This is justified by] saying the American
army has the right to shoot anyone trying to steal its property."
The
kill teams. As the illegal war drags on, let's all stop pretending that
a fiery editorial once a year qualifies as being part of the peace
movement. Victor led the magazine in the opposition to the illegal war.
His successor likes to talk "peace and security" when pressed but left
to her own inclinations would be dashing off another 16 magazine style
gush over American Idol (which -- after the sugar high wore off or was
it the circulation high? -- would embarrass even her so she would have
hit it 'disappeared' -- it still lives on online). Sadly, Victor
running is just a rumor at this point (a hugely repeated one, but still
just a rumor).
Are you getting how pathetic Panhandle Media
truly is. Take Tom-Tom who took-took to the pages of The Nation again
for another one of his half-lies, half-delusion pieces on Barack this
week. Tom-Tom wants to be seen as the 'leader' of the 'anti-war'
movement (Heaven, help us all). So he could have written about the
judge's decision in Joshua Key's favor July 4th, or he could have
written about Corey Glass being allowed to stay in Canada (at least
though his appeals), or he could have written about the impending
deportation of Robin Long. Instead, Tom-Tom's gas bagging about Barack
-- again. James Burmeister was passed over Panhandle Media. They always
had something 'better' to do; however, to consumers, it just appeared
they had found yet another way to waste time. On that, if nothing else,
they were successful.
Begging time is upon us again from
Panhandle Media and it's really past time to wonder exactly what it is
we are paying for. It's not news, it's not information. I'll bite my
tongue on what it is (Ava and I'll cover it Sunday at Third). But you
need to grasp how Panhandle Media fails -- and it certainly failed
James Burmeister. Or, as Panhandle Media would say, "Who?"
Renee
Murphy: . . . But first here, our top story, we're looking at the
charges being brought against a US soldier. Supporters say that Private
1st Class James Burmeister should be back in Oregon with his family
this Fourth of July holiday but instead he is being held at Fort Knox
facing a court-martial on AWOL and desertion charges. WHAS11's Kelsey
Starks joins us now ith more on our top story. Kelsey?
Kelsey
Starks: 23-year-old James Burmeister is being held at Fort Knox for
five months now. He is charged with deserting his army unit while on
leave from Iraq. Yesterday he got a court-martial date but his friends
and family say because he suffers from head injuries Post Traumatic
Stress Disorder after surviving a roadside bomb attack in Iraq, they're
hoping some of those charges can be dismissed.
Helen Burmeister:
My son is an Iraqi War veteran. And I'm very proud of him today. He
fought bravely in Iraq. He followed orders. He was wounded in a
roadside bomb. And he's been diagonsed with PTSD and a possible brain
injury.
Kelsey Starks: Video blogger James Pence followed Helen
Burmeister to Fort Knox last week where she was fighting for her son,
hoping to get him out of Fort Knox. PFC James Burmeister enlisted in
the army in June of 2005. Two years later while on leave he went AWOL
-- Absent Without Leave -- to Canada. After ten months, he turned
himself in to Fort Knox.
Nina Benson: He went AWOL after six
months of being there when he was back in Germany on his rest and
recuperation because he didn't feel that the treatment that he was
getting for his injuries were proper -- were up to par with what he
should be getting.
Kelsey Starks: Fort Knox is one of only two
processing centers for army deserters. Nearly 5,000 army army soldiers
were charged with deserting last year -- that's a number up 92% from
2004.
Harold Trainer: They really do need to find more solutions.
Kelsey
Starks: Harold Trainer and his wife Carol [Rawert-Trainer] are
following James' case very closely here in Louisville. They both served
in the military during Vietnam.
Carol Rawert-Trainer: It's not
rare that there are so many suffing from PTSD today that aren't getting
help. That part's not rare. And it's not even rare that we have AWOLs
anymore. The rare thing is how aggressive the army is going after James
instead of just giving him a discharge.
Harold Trainer: Those
young men and women give our country and our government a blank check
when they sign to go into the military. The country and the government
really needs to give them a blank check back to take care of them.
Kelsey
Starks: Now a Fort Knox spokesperson did not return our phone calls
this afternoon. If James is convicted of desertion, he could get a
dishonorable discharge and even face time in prison. His court-martial
date, by the way, is scheduled for July the 16th. Kelsey Starks, WHAS11
News.
I'll add Nader to the morning entries and a press release later.
Added: Independent journalist David Bacon continues to explore the issue of immigration. And his latest is "THE RIGHT TO STAY HOME" (New American Media):
For
almost half a century, migration has been the main fact of social life
in hundreds of indigenous towns spread through the hills of Oaxaca, one
of Mexico's poorest states. That's made the conditions and rights of
migrants central concerns for communities like Santiago de Juxtlahuaca. Today
the right to travel to seek work is a matter of survival. But this June
in Juxtlahuaca, in the heart of Oaxaca's Mixteca region, dozens of
farmers left their fields, and women weavers their looms, to talk about
another right, the right to stay home. In
the town's community center two hundred Mixtec, Zapotec and Triqui
farmers, and a handful of their relatives working in the U.S., made
impassioned speeches asserting this right at the triannual assembly of
the Indigenous Front of Binational Organizations (FIOB). Hot debates
ended in numerous votes. The voices of mothers and fathers arguing over
the future of their children, echoed from the cinderblock walls of the
cavernous hall. In Spanish,
Mixteco and Triqui, people repeated one phrase over and over: the
derecho de no migrar - the right to not migrate. Asserting this right
challenges not just inequality and exploitation facing migrants, but
the very reasons why people have to migrate to begin with. Indigenous
communities are pointing to the need for social change. About
500,000 indigenous people from Oaxaca live in the US, 300,000 in
California alone, according to Rufino Dominguez, one of FIOB's
founders. These men and women come from communities whose economies are
totally dependent on migration. The ability to send a son or daughter
across the border to the north, to work and send back money, makes the
difference between eating chicken or eating salt and tortillas.
Migration means not having to manhandle a wooden plough behind an ox,
cutting furrows in dry soil for a corn crop that can't be sold for what
it cost to plant it. It means that dollars arrive in the mail when kids
need shoes to go to school, or when a grandparent needs a doctor.
With Nader/Gonzalez being blocked out of the mainstream, we have to create our own media.
Thousands of Americans have learned about the Nader/Gonzalez campaign from our videos.
Sometimes, the medium is the message.
By
supporting Nader/Gonzalez media, you'll be supporting the
Nader/Gonzalez message - shift the power from the corporations back
into the hands of the people.
And you'll be supporting our current ballot access drive. (We're approaching our goal of $60,000 by Sunday. Help us get there now.)
So, check out our new home page - featuring our video player - front and center.
And drop a ten spot to support our underground effort to shake it up.
If
you are a musician who owns rights to original music, you can help us
with soundtracks for our web videos. If you would like for your music
to be considered for use in a Nader/Gonzalez video, please send an mp3
to karen@votenader.org. All musical styles are welcome.
Onward
The Nader Team
PS: We invite your comments to the blog.
Your contribution could be doubled. Public campaign financing may match your contribution total up to $250.
Wednesday,
July 16, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces
another death, reactions to US war resister Robin Long's deportation,
today's scheduled court-martial, Katty-van-van takes it on the chin and
nose, BonusGates still ignored by Panhandle Media, and more.
Starting with war resistance. As noted yesterday, US war resister Robin Long was deported from Canada. Robin's story makes the New York Times today (A14) with an article by Ian Austen and a photo by Darryl Dyck (The Canadian Press) of Sarah Bjorknas.
Austen notes, "Mr. Long was expelled a day after the Federal Court of
Canada rejected his request to delay his removal order pending further
legal appeals. That decision and Mr. Long's expulsion were somewhat
unexpected. Two other American deserters received Federal Court
permission this month to stay in Canada to continue their appeals. . .
. Sadia Qureshi, a spokeswoman for Diane Finley, the immigration
minister, said agents from the Canada Border Service Agency sent Mr.
Long back to the United States from British Columbia, where he had been
living, at 9:55 a.m. local time." Petti Fong (Toronto Star) speaks with War Resisters Support Campaign - Vancouver's
Sarah Bjorknas, "In Ontario, where he lived for a time, Long was
engaged to be married and had a child, according to Sarah Bjorknas, one
of his supporters. About 50 American deserters are currently making
refugee claims to stay in Canada, said Bjorknas, and a couple of
hundred are presumed to be living quietly underground." Robin and Renee
had a child (the child and Renee are Canadian). That should have been
enough for any Canadian court. Some form of immigration status should
have been granted Robin since he was the father of a Canadian child.
Check the laws -- something Judge Anna Mactavish appears not to have
done. As Ruth noted last night,
"Today is very sad because Robin was deported. It is also very sad
because a Canadian judge decided to break up a family. I hope the young
boy is able some day to ask Judge Mactavish why she sent his father out
of the country." Chris Cook (Gorilla Radio) interviewed Sarah Bjorknas Monday night. UPI cites
'word warrior' army Major Nathan Banks who "said Long would be returned
to Fort Knox, Ky., for disciplinary procedures, which could include
prison time." Courage to Resist explains,
"Courage to Resist has made civilian legal representation available to
Robin and will be doing everything possible to provide him our full
support. We plan to collaborate with many other groups in our efforts
to help Robin in the coming weeks. Refusing to fight in an illegal war
is not a crime--except under the Uniform Code of Military (In)Justice."
Liam Lahey (The Villager) explores
the reactions and notes: "Dale Landry is wanted by the U.S. Air Force
for refusing to fight in Iraq after serving in Afghanistan. Landry
spent the night of July 14 in full uniform outside the U.S. Consulate
on University Avenue in support of Long. The Parkdale resident, who
turned 23 this past week, lives with two other American military
personnel in a small apartment." Tom Banse (OPB News -- link has text
and audio)
speaks with Iraq Veterans Against the WarAsh Woolson
US war resister who states, "The Canadian people are not for the war
in Iraq. It seems that the government is really pushing against these
veterans and it's not the people." Meanwhile Janice Tibbetts and Linda Nguyen (Canwest News Service) dig into the legal aspects:
"'We've got a divided court,' said Toronto lawyer Geraldine Sadoway,
whose client, Justin Colby, recently lost his refugee bid, after
fleeing to Canada two years ago following a one-year stint as a medic
in Iraq. Ms. Sadoway says she cannot figure out why the Federal Court
rejected Mr. Colby's claim on June 26, only one week before it handed the first ever victory to deserter Joshua Key, who also served in Iraq."
Robin is from Idaho and the Idaho Statesman notes,
"A Boise native is believed to be the first deserter from the Iraq war
to be deported back to the U.S. from Canada. Late Tuesday, Robin Long,
25, was en route from Canada to Fort Lewis, Wash., said Army Capt. Greg
Dorman. From there, the private first class will be taken to Fort
Carson, Colo., where he was assigned to the 2nd Brigade, 2nd Infantry
Division, which was recently renamed the 4th Brigade, 4th Infantry
Division, said Dorman, a Fort Carson spokesman." Robert Matas (Globe and Mail) explains
that "Canadian authorities failed to co-ordinate the deportation with
U.S. military police. Mr. Long spent last night in a jail cell at the
Whatcom County prison, just south of the Canada-U.S. border" and quotes
police Sgt Ernie Stach declaring, "We're in the process of
co-ordinating the transfer. I don't know when he will go." We know
where he won't go: Fort Knox. After ignoring the story all week --
declared today, "He's expected to be returned to his unit at Fort Knox,
Kentucky." Pravda on the Hudson. Linda Nguyen (Canwest News Service) quotes
Fort Knox spokesperson Ryan Brus who states Long will be going to Fort
Carson until a recommendation is made by the unit commander about what
to do next and that he is returning in time to "witness the case of
James Burmeister, an American deserter who is currently facing criminal
charges at Fort Knox." July 4th, Louisville's WHAS11 reported (text and video) on James Burmeister
Renee
Murphy: . . . But first here, our top story, we're looking at the
charges being brought against a US soldier. Supporters say that
Private 1st Class James Burmeister should be back in Oregon with his
family this Fourth of July holiday but instead he is being held at Fort
Knox facing a court-martial on AWOL and desertion charges. WHAS11's
Kelsey Starks joins us now ith more on our top story. Kelsey?
Kelsey
Starks: 23-year-old James Burmeister is being held at Fort Knox for
five months now. He is charged with deserting his army unit while on
leave from Iraq. Yesterday he got a court-martial date but his friends
and family say because he suffers from head injuries Post Traumatic
Stress Disorder after surviving a roadside bomb attack in Iraq, they're
hoping some of those charges can be dismissed.
Helen
Burmeister: My son is an Iraqi War veteran. And I'm very proud of him
today. He fought bravely in Iraq. He followed orders. He was wounded
in a roadside bomb. And he's been diagonsed with PTSD and a possible
brain injury.
Kelsey
Starks: Video blogger James Pence followed Helen Burmeister to Fort
Knox last week where she was fighting for her son, hoping to get him
out of Fort Knox. PFC James Burmeister enlisted in the army in June of
2005. Two years later while on leave he went AWOL -- Absent Without
Leave -- to Canada. After ten months, he turned himself in to Fort
Knox.
Nina Benson:
He went AWOL after six months of being there when he was back in
Germany on his rest and recuperation because he didn't feel that the
treatment that he was getting for his injuries were proper -- were up
to par with what he should be getting.
Kelsey
Starks: Fort Knox is one of only two processing centers for army
deserters. Nearly 5,000 army army soldiers were charged with deserting
last year -- that's a number up 92% from 2004.
Harold Trainer: They really do need to find more solutions.
Kelsey
Starks: Harold Trainer and his wife Carol [Rawert-Trainer] are
following James' case very closely here in Louisville. They both
served in the military during Vietnam.
Carol
Rawert-Trainer: It's not rare that there are so many suffing from PTSD
today that aren't getting help. That part's not rare. And it's not
even rare that we have AWOLs anymore. The rare thing is how aggressive
the army is going after James instead of just giving him a discharge.
Harold
Trainer: Those young men and women give our country and our government
a blank check when they sign to go into the military. The country and
the government really needs to give them a blank check back to take
care of them.
Kelsey
Starks: Now a Fort Knox spokesperson did not return our phone calls
this afternoon. If James is convicted of desertion, he could get a
dishonorable discharge and even face time in prison. His court-martial
date, by the way, is scheduled for July the 16th. Kelsey Starks,
WHAS11 News.
There
is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which
includes Megan Bean, Chris Bean, Matthis Chiroux, Richard Droste,
Michael Barnes, Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano
Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal,
Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall,
Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve
Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha
Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister,
Jose Vasquez, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada,
Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen,
Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman,
Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck,
Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine,
Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey,
Logan Laituri, Jason Marek, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua
Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell,
Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake,
Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres,
Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and
Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada
have applied for asylum.
In Iraq today one handed, one halted. Deborah Haynes (Times of London) reports that Qadisiyah Province was handed over to Iraqi control -- or what passes for it. That's one handed. Waleed Ibrahim (Reuters) reports
that the handover of Al-Anbar Province "could be delayed because of a
dispute between Sunni Arab trial leaders and politicians in the vast
desert region. . . . The row hinges on who should be in charge of
security in the former insurgent heartland. The council wants ultimate
control, which normally happens when U.S.-led forces transfer security,
while tribal leaders want Iraq's military to have the final say."
Handed, halted and still the violence continues. As Richard A. Oppel Jr. (New York Times) observes
today, "For all the statistics showing improved security in Iraq, many
parts of the country remain astoundingly violent, places where
bullet-ridden bodies turn up every day and bombs destroy lives and
families in an instant." The BBC reports a Tal Afar car bombing that "targeted afternoone shoppers." Xinhua notes that 16 died and 94 were wounded. Iran's Press TV reports, "The town's mayor said all the dead were civilians."
In other reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
2 Baghdad roadside bombings that left six people wounded, a Mosul
roadside bombing that left two people wounded, a Mosul car bombing that
claimed 2 lives with either more injured, and another (this would be
the third) Mosul car bombing that killed the driver of the car and left
six people wounded. CBS and AP report:
"A female suicide bomber blew herself up Tuesday evening inside the
Baghdad house of a municipal leader who was planning to establish a
U.S.-allied Sunni group in the area" -- "Awakening" Council -- with 3
left dead (plus the bomber) and seven injured. Reuters notes
a Mosul mortar attack that left two people injured and an Iskandariya
roadside bombing that left one "Awakening" Council member injured.
Shootings?
Reuters notes 1 Iraqi soldier shot dead in Mosul and 1 Shi'ite cleric shot and Basra and left wounded.
Today the US military announced:
"A Multi-National Force - West Marine died of wounds he received in
action against an enemy force in al-Anbar Province July 14." The
announcement brought the total number of US service members who have
died in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4121.
Before anything else, Martha, Shirley and Eli advise about several topics in the e-mails. First, Ava's
response to one bit of b.s., "When you go out of your way to insist
you're not Latino -- to the point that your statements are insulting --
you really have no right to then try to speak for Latino. Stick to
Queens -- where you're still not hanging around with Latinos -- and
stick to speaking for the racial group you have chosen to self-identify
with. You have given up the right to speak for or to Latinos. And we
don't need your lies. Hillary had huge Latino support. You can try
shutting your damn mouth instead of lying. And shame on KPFA for
playing that nonsense -- but note that it was a Hillary Hater who did
the interview. As a Latina based in California and on the road across
the country every week, I think I know my own community a little better
than someone who rejected them publicly and repeatedly. Shut your damn
mouth, dear." This is something we can explore further in our TV piece
Sunday. And e-mail complaints about the nonsense passing for
'journalism' at too many outlets is not being ignored. The TV program
(entertainment) Ava and I are reviewing this Sunday allows us to pull
all the nonsense in. That includes the disaster broadcast today which
included "And US war resisters may see refuge in Canada." When the
piece runs (which we haven't written yet), it'll be clear why Ava and I
have both alluded to things here but otherwise just walked on by them.
The trash that's passed for 'news' this week fits perfectly with the
program we're reviewing and we're both taking plenty of notes
and reading the e-mails.
Turning to US presidential
politics. The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee is getting
back slaps and ass pats from his fawning press which refuses to note
(a) he's only promising a partial-withdrawal, (b) his 'promises' are
meaningless and (c) this is a reversal of his earlier statements that
the US would leave (combat troops only) Iraq in 10 months. Remember
that? He declared it in Houston Texas. One single sentence. Had
Tom-Tom Hayden so excited he stretched that one-liner in a "Gosh, Wally
. . ." column. Speaking of Jerry Mathers, Little Andy Malcolm (Los Angeles Times) blogged this morning, "A funny thing happened over on the Barack Obama campaign website in the last few days. The
parts that stressed his opposition to the 2007 troop surge and his
statement that more troops would make no difference in a civil war have
somehow disappeared. John McCain and Obama have been going at it heavily in recent days over the benefits of the surge." Does it all seem so very familiar? From the January 10th snapshot:
"But
since you raised the judgment issue, let's go over this again. That is
the central argument for his campaign. 'It doesn't matter that I
started running for president less a year after I got to the Senate
from the Illinois State Senate. I am a great speaker and a charismatic
figure and I'm the only one who had the judgment to oppose this war
from the beginning. Always, always, always.' " "First it
is factually not true that everybody that supported that resolution
supported Bush attacking Iraq before the UN inspectors were through.
Chuck Hagel was one of the co-authors of that resolution. The only
Republican Senator that always opposed the war. Every day from the
get-go. He authored the resolution to say that Bush could go to war
only if they didn't co-operate with the inspectors and he was assured
personally by Condi Rice as many of the other Senators were. So, first
the case is wrong that way.""Second, it is wrong that Senator Obama got
to go through 15 debates trumpeting his superior judgment and how he
had been against the war in every year, numerating the years, and never
got asked one time, not once, 'Well, how could you say, that when you said in 2004 you didn't know how you would have voted on the resolution? You said in 2004 there was no difference between you and George Bush on the war and you took that speech you're now running on off your website in 2004* and there's no difference in your voting record and Hillary's ever since?' Give me a break. "This
whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen...So you can talk
about Mark Penn all you want. What did you think about the Obama thing
calling Hillary the Senator from Punjab? Did you like that?" "Or
what about the Obama hand out that was covered up, the press never
reported on, implying that I was a crook? Scouring me, scathing
criticism, over my financial reports. Ken Starr spent $70 million and
indicted innocent people to find out that I wouldn't take a nickel to
see the cow jump over the moon. "So, you
can take a shot at Mark Penn if you want. It wasn't his best day. He
was hurt, he felt badly that we didn't do better in Iowa. But you know,
the idea that one of these campaigns is positive and the other is
negative when I know the reverse is true and I have seen it and I have
been blistered by it for months, is a little tough to take. Just
because of the sanitizing coverage that's in the media, doesn't mean
the facts aren't out there. "
A
friend called me a few days ago from Massachusetts, astounded at a WBUR
radio program featuring Glen Greenwald from Salon.com and Katrina
vanden Heuvel of The Nation, in which vanden Heuvel not only
unflaggingly defended Obama's open and bald embrace of right-wing
positions during the last few weeks against Greenwald's criticism, but
also did it from the right herself, calling him a "progressive
pragmatist." She affirmed Tom Hayden's insistence on the Progressives
for Obama blog that the candidate is a progressive, but a new kind of
progressive, or some such twaddle. In response to Greenwald's sharp
rebuke of Obama's FISA sellout, she acknowledged that he had 'missed an
opportunity to lead.' Defending his June 30 patriotism speech that
included a gratuitous rehearsal of the right-wing line about
anti-Vietnam War protesters from the "counterculture" who "blamed
America for all that was wrong in the world" and the canard about
antiwar activists "failing to honor" returning Vietnam veterans, which
Obama asserted "remains a national shame to this day" despite the fact
that is an utter lie, vanden Heuvel pointed again to Hayden's
endorsement as a sign that Obama's cheap move must be okay because,
after all, Hayden was a founder of SDS. And perhaps most tellingly,
despite their disagreements, Greenwald and vanden Heuvel both supported
Obama's practice of going out of his way to attack black poor people,
most recently in his scurrilous Father's Day speech and again before
the NAACP. (And, by the way, he grew up without a father and is running
for president, no?) To vanden Heuvel, Obama's contretemps with Jesse
Jackson, who, ironically, has his own history of making such attacks,
around this issue reflects a "generational division" among black
people, with Obama representing a younger generation that values
'personal responsibility.' She also, for good measure, asserted that
Obama has been 'nailed unfairly' for his cozying up to the evangelicals
and promising to give them more federal social service money. In
explaining that he comes out of a 'community organizing' tradition
based in churches in Chicago, she didn't quite say that the coloreds
love their churches. But she didn't really have to say it out loud, did
she?
Reed recommends an article with a link that's not working currently. I think this is the Liza Featherson, Doug Henwood and Christian Parenti article ("Action Will Be Taken") referred to. When
Reed's hard hitting column ends, you can scroll down to comments for
Tom-Tom's running buddy rushing to lie yet again. I'm really not sure,
maybe this is just me, that a New Alliance Party (Marxist) member is
really the person to rush to defend Barack or Tom-Tom. But have at it,
Carl, it's your funeral. Meanwhile John Murphy (Dissident Voice) examines
the Democrats' BonusGate scandal in Pennsylvania in light of the
criminal charges that have emerged against Democrats for their illegal
efforts to keep Ralph Nader off the state ballot in 2004 (Amy Goodman
hasn't said one word about this since proof emerged, has she?): "The
grand jury report described a 'massive' effort by House Democrats to
oust the independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader from the ballot
in 2004. The report also says that in 2006 the same machine was fired
up again to remove Carl Romanelli, the Green Party candidate for U.S.
Senate. The grand jury found that as many as 50 Democrat House Caucus
staff members participated in the Nader petition challenge and
contributed a staggering number of man hours." Peter Jackson (AP) quotes
Nader's attorney Oliver Hall stating, "We are going to aggressively
pursue every avenue to oppose this judgment. It now appears to be
clear that (the judgment) is the result of a criminal conspiracy."
Here's a thought on the silence from the 'independent' journalists --
maybe when you devalue and disrespect democracy so much that you launch
and join "Don't Run ___" campaigns, it's just a short step to breaking
the law to prevent a candidate from making the ballot? Maybe their
silence is due to their own guilt?
Nader is running as an independent presidential candidate this year and Heidi Przybla (Bloomberg News) reports
that Morley Winograd ("former chairman of the Michigan Democratic
Party") could get a considerable number of votes in Michigan if his
campaign gets on the ticket, "You have in Ralph Nader's candidacy a
genuine Arab-American who has a lot of notoriety and publicity."
Winograd estimates Nader could receive a qurter of the Arab community's
vote. Kris Alingod (AHN) reports Nader is now on the ballot in 12 states.
With Nader/Gonzalez being blocked out of the mainstream, we have to create our own media.
Thousands of Americans have learned about the Nader/Gonzalez campaign from our videos.
Sometimes, the medium is the message.
By
supporting Nader/Gonzalez media, you'll be supporting the
Nader/Gonzalez message - shift the power from the corporations back
into the hands of the people.
And you'll be supporting our current ballot access drive. (We're approaching our goal of $60,000 by Sunday. Help us get there now.)
So, check out our new home page - featuring our video player - front and center.
Lastly, Andrea Lewis debuts as the host of the Sunday Morning Show on KPFA
this weekend. The two hour broadcast (which streams online) airs
Sunday from nine in the morning until eleven in the morning. Lewis was
formerly co-host of The Morning Show with Philip Maldari (Aimee Allison took over for Lewis).
iraq
veterans against the war
adam kokesh
now
on pbs
bill
moyers journal
joshua
key
corey
glass
nick
kyonka
david bacon
