It was one of those bar conversations I'll probably remember for a lifetime. We
were sitting around talking about work, when my always articulate
friend Robert waxed poetic about how Canada has taken an abrupt turn
that we may never be able to recover from. That turn came when, this
week, we deported war resister Robin Long. We should all be hanging
our heads in shame. Here was someone willing to stand up for what he
believed in and leave his country rather than fight in a war he
believed was illegal. In other words--he is a conscientious objector.
He has a right to say "no," and if he needs to leave his country so he
can avoid taking part in a war that Canadians too refused to take part
in, then we should support him in that. During the Vietnam War
thousands of American soldiers fled the country, many of them landing
in B.C. One of the more famous ones--Corky Evans--ended up in politics.
This year he’s retiring, and the B.C. legislature won’t be the same
without his colourful comments. And there are many more who have
given to this country in ways we may never even realize. Don Gayton, a
local ecologist and author, is another member of that select crowd.
Over the years he's offered up a perspective on our land that we are
only now in our “greening” period truly coming to appreciate.
The above is from Karin Wilson's "Canada: She ain’t what she used to be" (Kelowna Capital News) and Vic
noted and asked that we give "the half-assed helper a history lesson."
He's referring to the next paragraph after the excerpt when helper
Karin decides knowledge and facts don't really matter. That's when she
repeats the LIE that the only ones going to Canada during Vietnam were
"draft dodgers." Everybody sing, "Karin, Karin, Karin, does it hurt to
be so stupid, Karin, Karin, Karin, does it hurt to be so dumb, Karin,
Karin, Karin . . ."
We noted several articles two Thursdays ago,
but we'll again note Robert Trumbull's "Evaders In Canada Call Action A
Sham: Exclusion of Deserters Is a Source of Bitterness to Exiles Who
Say Pardon Will Affect Only 2,000" (New York Times, January 22, 1977):
Jack
Colhoun, co-editor of a magazine for the self-exiled Americans in
Canada who is a deserter from the Army, branded Mr. Carter's plan "a
real sham, sinsiter, almost Nixonesque." [. . .] There
is no official figure, since the Canadian Government omits reference to
military status in its immigration procedures, but Mr. Colhoun's group
estimates that the number is from 20,000 to 25,000 of whom 6,000 to
7,500 are believed to hae become Canadian citizens. After
counting out the deserters and those who have taken Canadian
citizenship, only about 2,000 of the exiles in Canada, or one of every
10 or 17, will benefit by Mr. Carter's pardon, Mr. Colhoun declared.
Oh
my! Yes, Canada took in draft evaders and deserters during Vietnam.
Note the "and." And guess what? The deserters? Some of them were never
drafted, they enlisted. Real time studies in the seventies showed that
deserters tended to come from poorer backgrounds and they tended to
include a higher percentage of non-Whites. The reason for that? Draft
evaders tended to be college students, from middle class families, and
they already knew about alternatives. Deserters were more likely to be
the working class and they were the soldiers who saw what was really
happening on the ground in Vietnam. The war itself turned them against
that illegal war. And Canada welcomed them all. There was no issue of,
"Okay, you are a deserter so we need to first make sure that you were
drafted because if you enlisted, you're on your own!" To the contrary,
those who enlisted and turned against the war were seen as more
effective to tell the story by the press at that time. They'd believed
in the war believed Johnson or Nixon's spin and lies, enlisted, gone
over to Vietnam and seen reality. Their awakening (and this is true of
the press and of the peace movement) was seen as something big. (By the
press because they love stories where a person starts off one way and
completely transforms. By the peace movement because they thought such
stories really drove home the illegal and brutal nature of that war.)
But
someone wanted to help and didn't think to do her homework. "Karin,
Karin, Karin, do you have to be so stupid, Karin, Karin, Karin, do you
have to be so dumb?" I'm reminded of the drama student back in college,
who was suddenly 'awakened' to the horror of Vietnam and went around
screaming "Bananas!" That's all she could handle. She quickly became
the joke of the campus and did far more damage than anyone would have
thought. A peace activist (who was the head of the campus' College
Democrats) decided to explain the truth about Vietnam to her (let's be
honest, he was hot for her) so he started explaining US imperialism to
her one day in the liberal arts building. Everything was over her head
except "bananas." That she latched onto and went around repeating, over
and over. With no other context. She helped no one. A lot like Karin
Bananas. Hopefully Karin won't also decide that the way to really get
the message across is to show up at the student union topless and with
smashed bananas covering her chest and face while screaming, "End the
war on bananas!" (f she should, don't worry. You may grimace while it's
happening, but months later you will be able to laugh at it -- along
with everyone else. For years and years to come.)
A
U.S. Army deserter who fled to Canada three years ago was ordered
deported from British Columbia by the Federal Court of Canada. He was
returned to his unit in Fort Knox, Ky., where the company commander
will decide his punishment. He is the first Iraq war resister to be
deported. Fifty other deserters are seeking refugee status to remain in
Canada.
He is also Robin Long and it's strange that a brief would forget to mention that.
They're just there to try and make the people free, But the way that they're doing it, it don't seem like that to me. Just more blood-letting and misery and tears That this poor country's known for the last twenty years, And the war drags on. -- words and lyrics by Mick Softly (available on Donovan's Fairytale)
Last Sunday,
ICCC's number of US troops killed in Iraq since the start of the
illegal war hit the 4,118 mark. And tonight? It's down. I've waited and
waited for it to come back up, finished this entry, worked on other
things and it's still down. Thursday's number was 4122 and Friday one more death was reported for a total of 4123. Looking at MNF announcements,
I'm not seeing any announcements so, unless DoD got stuck announcing
deaths (they're only supposed to identify the dead), the number should
be 4123. Just Foreign Policy's counter estimates the number of Iraqis killed since the start of the illegal war to be 1,245,538 up from 1,236,604.
In some of the reported violence by McClatchy (starting with Sunday) . . .
Bombings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
a Baghdad car bombing ("adhesive IED stuck to a civilian car") claimed
1 life (driver), a Baghdad roadside bombing claimed 1 life (three more
wounded), a second Baghdad roadside bombing resulted in five police
officers being wounded, another Baghdad car bombing claimed 1 life and
left "seven people including one policeman and one baby girl" wounded,
a grenade wounded four people in Baghdad, a roadside bombing just
outside of Baghdad left three injured ("including a little girl), a
Diyala roadside bombing claimed the lives of 2 police officers, a
Nineveh Province car bombing claimed the life of 1 driver, and 2
"foreign private security contractors" and a Kirkuk roadside bombing
wounded one police officer. Dropping back to Saturday, Hussein Kadhim reported
2 Baghdad roadside bombings with four people wounded and Salahuddin
Province roadside bombing on Friday that wounded four people.
Shootings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
3 people were shot dead in a Mosul drive-by, 1 person was shot dead
outside his home in Mosul, 1 police officer was shot dead in Mosul and
"An American Special Force raided the residence of Khalaf Issa Turk in
al-Asri neighbourhood, Baiji at dawn, Sunday and opened fire upon Husam
Hamed Hmoud al-Qaissi, son of the Governor of Salahuddin Province while
he was asleep in the guest room and also opened fire upon Auday Khalaf
Issa al-Qaissi, his cousin killing them both, and detained two others
without giving any explanation, said a security source in Salahuddin
Province. The American military said its forces shot two armed men
during a raid because they felt they had 'hostile intent'. The
statement added that the forces also injured and captured an al-Qaida
financer during the operation. " On Saturday Hussein Kadhim reported 1 police officer shot dead in Mosul.
Corpses?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 corpses discovered in Baghdad and 1 female corpse was discovered in Basra. Saturday Hussein Kadhim reported
1 corpse discovered in Baghdad, 2 corpses (mother and daughter)
discovered in Sulaimanlyah Province, and, in Diyala Province, "two
heads for two shephers who were kidnapped last Wednesday" were
discovered.
Pru notes that most people have already seen "Barack Obama is already moving to the right" (Great Britain's Socialist Worker) but that with "all the apologists for Obama in the States, it might be wise to run it." Here it is:
Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The approved cover" continues the critique of the non-story of The New Yorker cover.
In this one Barack's dressed as Superman and Michelle as the Statue of
Liberty. Barack says, "Michelle's bitter and saying she's been forced
to wear blue-face. But I like it. Remember, I must be drawn White!"
Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Take Three" continues the critique of the non-story of The New Yorker cover.
In this one, Barack and Michelle are in beach wear and Barack says,
"Now I like us Frankie and Anette but Michelle refuses to approve any
cartoon featuring my man-boobs." That's Frankie Avalon and Annette
Funicello from their beach party movies.
Isaiah's latest The World Today Just Nuts "Take Two." If you were in a coma last week, you missed the non-story of The New Yorker cover.
Isaiah's offering three comics today. In this one, Michelle Obama holds
her head and screams, "Oh, the voices!" While Barack, dressed as Jesus,
explains, "As anyone who has caught my speeches attacking African
fathers knows, I don't like Black people. So I and my cult demans that
Michelle and I be drawn White. I suggested Jesus Christ for myself but
I don't think Mary Todd Lincoln's going to work for Michelle."
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.)