Article Update - July 16, 2007

We Need an Anti-War Government

SAY NO TO REDEPLOYMENT PLANS

The U.S. ruling circles are caught in the failure of U.S-style democracy. They cannot crush resistance in Iraq or anywhere else. They cannot meet the anti-war mandate of the voters. Their usual devise of using the Democrats as the way to divert and pacify the people is also failing. Peoples at home and abroad are rejecting U.S. empire building with its aggression, wars and crimes against humanity and will not accept anything less than All U.S. Troops Home Now.

The Democrats find themselves unable to both be champions of the ruling circles while also convincing the people that they are legitimate. Once again Democrats are voting to fund the war. Once again they are trying to present plans for redeployment of troops, as “the best” they can do. The recent bill that passed the House, 223-201, sets a deadline of April 1, 2008 to achieve a “limited presence,” then leaves President George W. Bush to decide what “limited” means. The bill requires a continued presence in Iraq large enough to “disrupt and eliminate al-Qaida and its affiliated organizations,” and to “maintain and advance U.S. national security interests.” It also requires that Bush merely consult with Congress on the redeployment.

In this manner, troops, bases and paid government mercenaries, which now outnumber troops, will remain. Indeed, their numbers may increase in Afghanistan and “redeployment” could also include “disrupting and eliminating” resistance in Syria, Iran and elsewhere. Congress is also putting in law the elimination of its role as decision-maker on matters of war, which is its Constitutional duty. Instead it requires that Bush simply “consult Congress,” on plans.

The New York Times also added its voice, saying it is “time for the U.S. to leave Iraq,” while also saying there must be a military presence, resources and bases in Iraq for the “foreseeable future.” Their “Road Home” is a road of splintering Iraq, involving the Kurds and Turkey in U.S. adventures and “meddling” in the affairs of Syria, Iran, and others in the region, so long as the meddling is not “excessive.”

The problem for the Democrats and the U.S. rulers they serve is that they cannot uphold principle and they cannot meet the demands of the times for a democracy that empowers the people. Indeed they stand exposed as the main block to empowerment of the people here and abroad. People are seeing that it is the peoples’ lack of political power that is the problem to solve and Democrats are not going to help.

The ruling circles are favoring their “rainbow” of Democratic candidates in thehopes of reclaiming some legitimacy. But these candidates are presenting themselves as staunch supporters of continued war and aggression, so long as it is better “managed;” staunch supporters for Israel in its genocide and aggression in the region; ready to continue government refusal to guarantee the right of Katrina survivors to return and rebuild; of maintaining the genocide of mass incarceration of the youth, especially national minorities; and implementing the broad attack on the rights of immigrants and all workers. The "rainbow" of faces will not cover the content. Whatever maneuvering room existed when Bush was first elected for Democrats to fool the people, is fast disappearing. It is the brutal path of war and fascism that remains for the U.S. And t is the Democrats who most likely will be that face of U.S.-style fascism.

It is now two years since Katrina and no responsibility has been taken by the government for the crimes committed before, during and since. The majority of people remain displaced and about 30,000 families face homelessness, again, when existing funds for housing assistance are eliminated on September 1. As in Iraq, more crimes are being committed, more openly, leaving no room for even the appearance of democracy and social responsibility.

It is the peoples who are standing up for principles, won in blood and struggle, such as the right of all nations to sovereignty, the right of all peoples to exist — to defend their right to be, the outlawing of aggressive wars, torture and genocide. And it is the peoples, with their broad defense of rights who are opening the path to a democracy that serves them and all humanity. They are putting their own empowerment on the agenda.

The existing set-up has been smashed by the rulers themselves and cannot be put back together again. It is a failed system, a failed U.S. state. The lack of maneuvering space imposed by this failure means they will necessarily strike with greater ferocity against the peoples. It also means there is an opportunity for the peoples to provide their own alternative, to provide an anti-war government. Let all together occupy this space!

 [TOP]

---

 

Bush to Decide Size of Withdrawal

House Votes to “Redeploy” Troops

On July 12, the House of Representatives voted 223-201 to begin redeployment of troops in Iraq. The plan calls for “the reduction of the number of U.S. Armed Forces in Iraq to a limited presence by April 1, 2008.” Redeployment would begin no later than 120 days after an actual bill was passed. The vote comes as the Democrats strive desperately to maintain credibility in a situation where they have a majority in Congress; they have a mandate from voters to end the war, yet they have consistently voted to continue funding the war.

The current bill is consistent with plans proposed by the Democratic presidential candidates, like Senator Hillary Clinton, and with the leading body and voice of the ruling circles, the Democratic Leadership Council. It does not demand immediate withdrawal, it does not demand an end to the occupation of Iraq, it says nothing about closing military bases in Iraq, and it does not stop the use of paid government mercenaries, which now outnumber troops in Iraq. It also leaves the size of the “limited force” in Iraq up to President George W. Bush.

Instead, consistent with the claim that the problem in Iraq is “mismanagement,” the bill calls for the redeployment to be “implemented as part of the comprehensive U.S. strategy for Iraq,” required by the bill. The “strategy” is to be presented by the president to Congress by January 1, 2008. It is to include “U.S. national security interests in Iraq and the broader Middle East region and the diplomatic, political, economic and military components of a comprehensive strategy to maintain and advance such interests.” It also is to justify the “minimum force levels required to protect U.S. national security interests in Iraq after April 1, 2008.” The bill also calls on Bush to speak to use of military forces in Iraq to “protect U.S. diplomatic facilities and citizens,” to “engage in actions to disrupt and eliminate al-Qaida and its affiliated organizations,” and to “train and equip members of the Iraqi Security Forces.” It calls for the strategy to include “specific plans for diplomatic initiatives to engage U.S. allies and others in the regions to bring stability to Iraq.” Bush is required to submit the strategy and plans to Congress but the bill includes no requirement for Congress to approve them. Thus, the bill leaves the size of the deployment and continued U.S. occupation in Bush’s hands. Indeed, it puts in law what has already occurred — Bush is only to consult with Congress and decisions concerning wars and occupations are to be left solely to the president.

The bill in no way meets the demands of the people to bring all U.S. troops home now. Iraq belongs to the Iraqis. This means the U.S. must get out now — no bases, no mercenaries, no actions to “disrupt and eliminate” the broad resistance to U.S. occupation and aggression, in Iraq and the region as a whole.

No U.S. Troops in Iraq and Afghanistan! U.S. Out of the Middle East!

 [TOP]

---

 

Attempting to Salvage U.S. Legitimacy

NY Times Outlines the “Road Home”

On July 8, as Congress prepares to vote to increase Iraq war funding, the New York Times issued an editorial called “The Road Home.” It begins by saying, “It is time for the United States to leave Iraq, without any more delay than the Pentagon needs to organize an orderly exit.” It also cautions that accomplishing any withdrawal “in less than six months” is probably unrealistic. The editorial then outlines a plan to keep troops and bases in Iraq and the region while demonstrating a “wise application of American power and principles.”

The editorial is both an effort to convince the anti-war movement to accept limited redeployment, and to relieve the legitimacy crisis facing U.S.-style democracy, at home and abroad. To do so it needs scapegoats — in this case both the Iraqis and President George W. Bush — as well as a “real” enemy, which is, of course, the “terrorists.” The difficulty the Times faces is the reality that U.S. rulers cannot act on the basis of principles and U.S. “power” is consistently showing itself a failure. Without this starting point, the plan will only intensify the illegitimacy of U.S. rulers and their democracy.

In trying to justify the plan and influence the anti-war movement, the Times tries to explain why they are only now calling for the U.S. to leave. They say, “Like many Americans, we have put off that conclusion, waiting for a sign that President Bush was seriously trying to dig the United States out of the disaster he created by invading Iraq without sufficient cause, in the face of global opposition, and without a plan to stabilize the country afterward.” The problem then is not an illegal war, it is not war crimes, it is not U.S. aggression. Instead, it is mismanagement and lack of planning by Bush. The Times then goes on to list some of the crimes without itself taking a principled position to demand reparations and withdrawal. Thus, they are caught in the failure of U.S.-style democracy: “At first, we believed that after destroying Iraq’s government, army, police and economic structures, the United States was obliged to try to accomplish some of the goals Mr. Bush claimed to be pursuing, chiefly building a stable, unified Iraq. When it became clear that the president had neither the vision nor the means to do that, we argued against setting a withdrawal date while there was still some chance to mitigate the chaos that would most likely follow.” They add, “The political leaders Washington has backed are incapable of putting national interests ahead of sectarian score settling…Additional military forces poured into the Baghdad region have failed to change anything.”

How is it that the U.S. did not have the “means” to build a “stable unified Iraq?” If the Times pursued such a question they would necessarily have to speak to actual source of the failures. Instead, the ruling circles emphasize that Iraqis are to blame, and now Bush is to blame, but certainly not the requirement of U.S. imperialism to build empire through use of force and military occupation. The fact that the U.S. cannot uphold principles that outlaw wars of aggression and defend the sovereignty of all nations is necessarily absent.

The editorial does speak to actual concerns of the ruling circles: “The war is sapping the strength of the nation’s alliances and its military forces. It is a dangerous diversion from the life-and-death struggle against terrorists. It is an increasing burden on American taxpayers, and it is a betrayal of a world that needs the wise application of American power and principles.” These concerns include the fear of the U.S. ruling elite that resistance will increase in the region, stated by the Times as, “Iraq, and the region around it, could be even bloodier and more chaotic after Americans leave… Perhaps most important, the invasion has created a new stronghold from which terrorist activity could proliferate.”

The “plan” then is to secure an exit route to redeploy troops. The Times suggests that the “United States should explore using Kurdish territory in the north of Iraq as a secure staging area. Being able to use bases and ports in Turkey would also make withdrawal faster and safer.” It also calls for a continued presence: “The United States will have to continue to battle terrorist forces and enlist local allies who reject the idea of an Iraq hijacked by international terrorists. The military will need resources and bases to stanch this self-inflicted wound for the foreseeable future.” Again, with a clear plan to partition Iraq, the Times says, “The United States could strike an agreement with the Kurds to create those bases in northeastern Iraq. Or, the Pentagon could use its bases in countries like Kuwait and Qatar, and its large naval presence in the Persian Gulf, as staging points.” The Times, like the various bills in Congress, leaves decisions up to Bush, “after consultation with Congress,” not decision making by Congress. They emphasize, “The bottom line: the Pentagon needs enough force to stage effective raids and airstrikes against terrorist forces in Iraq, but not enough to resume large-scale combat.” They also speak about dividing Iraq, including a “Bosnia-style partition,” with “millions of Iraqis forced to relocate,” as though these were not crimes in themselves.

The Times sets the stage for U.S. or U.S.-backed UN intervention in Syria and Jordan in the name of the humanitarian crisis of “nearly two million Iraqi refugees.” It insists, “Without the active cooperation of all six countries bordering Iraq — Turkey, Iran, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria — and the help of other nations, this disaster could get worse. Beyond the suffering, massive flows of refugees — some with ethnic and political resentments — could spread Iraq’s conflict far beyond Iraq’s borders.” The editorial also says “the nations of Europe and Asia have a stake and should contribute,” and that the government must “mend fences” with France and Germany. The reason for continued intervention the Times says is, “To put it baldly, terrorism and oil make it impossible to ignore.”

The editorial also emphasizes why the U.S. must continue to trample on the sovereignty of other countries, just not to excess: “One of the trickiest tasks will be avoiding excessive meddling in Iraq by its neighbors — America’s friends as well as its adversaries.” This involves “talking with both Iran and Syria. Britain, France, Russia, China and other nations with influence have a responsibility to help.”

Thus the road is not home but one of empire-building and demanding that other countries pay the costs, in funds, or refugees, or accepting U.S. “meddling” in their affairs. It is use of military force for “the foreseeable future.” Since this is precisely the path that has fed the legitimacy crisis it will serve only to intensify it.

The anti-war movement does not accept more U.S. aggression and continued military presence. It has a clear solution: All U.S. Troops Home Now! Indeed it is likely that the Times editorial and Congress debate will serve to strengthen the peoples’ conviction that what is needed is an anti-war government and by stepping up resistance and organizing anti-war candidates, the people themselves will create it.

 [TOP]

 

---

 

Petition Demands U.S. Senate Filibuster
to End War in Iraq

Filibusterforpeace.org

We the undersigned call on each and every United States Senator to participate in a filibuster to end the war in Iraq. It only takes 41 votes to sustain a filibuster and prevent funding requests from the Bush administration from coming to debate or a vote. The Bush administration would then have to return with a funding request that is satisfactory to the 41. That bill should include funds to bring all U.S. forces home quickly and safely but no money to prosecute the war in Iraq. Pro-war Senators used this tactic twice in February to stop non-binding resolutions condemning the so-called “surge.” If pro-war Senators can use this tactic, then anti-war Senators should use it also. Right now the filibuster is the only way to end the war in a veto-proof fashion. We call upon each and every Senator to join a filibuster effort to end the loss of life and save our country.

[There are currently 49 Democratic Senators, 49 Republicans and two independents who commonly vote Democratic—BF editor.]

 [TOP]

 

---

 

IVAW Takes Anti-War Actions to Military Bases

Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) organized a bus tour from June 23-July 8 as part of their anti-war organizing work among active-duty soldiers, sailors and marines. In addition to various activities with active soldiers, IVAW is conducting street theater in cities across the country. The street theater involves soldiers and people in staged “military checkpoints.” These are designed to give Americans a little taste of what daily life for Iraqi civilians is like under U.S. occupation. They also serve to create space for discussion about the war, conditions facing vets in Iraq and on return and the organizing efforts among vets to end the war and all its crimes. Both the theater and bus tour received broad support wherever they went.

The bus tour to military bases began in Washington, D.C. and toured through the Carolinas, to Georgia and back up to Philadelphia, New York City, Groton, Connecticut and Ft. Drum in upstate New York. The stops included various outreach efforts at the bases themselves and stores and places nearby where soldiers and military families gathered and engaged in discussion with the veterans. At two of the bases the government took action to intervene, arresting some of the veterans at Fort Benning, home to the infamous School of the Assassins, and Ft. Jackson in Colombia, South Carolina. Despite these efforts to derail the tour, the veterans continued and were welcomed for their efforts by soldiers and activists alike. The tour dates and stops included:

June 23, Washington, D.C. (Ft. Meade, Walter Reed, Andrews AFB)
June 24, Norfolk, Virginia (Norfolk Naval Base)
June 27, Jacksonville, North Carolina (Camp Lejeune)
June 29, Columbia, South Carolina (Ft. Jackson)
June 30, Atlanta, Georgia (U.S. Social Forum)
July 1, Columbus, Georgia (Ft. Benning)
July 3 & 4, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
July 5, New York, New York (Ft. Hamilton)
July 6, Groton, Connecticut (Naval Sub Marine Base)
July 8, Upstate NY (Ft. Drum)

 [TOP]

 

---

Agustín Aguayo, a 35-year-old Army medic and conscientious objector (CO) has joined the many organized forces working to build war resistance. Aguayo refused redeployment to Iraq, demanded release from the military as a conscientious objector. He refused to participate in the killing and was jailed for 8 months for taking this just stand. Since he was released from prison in May, he has spoken to day laborers, farm workers, and their families in Stockton, and high school and college students in Watsonville, both areas of California where broad struggles by immigrants have been taking place. The military attempts to bribe undocumented workers and youth with the chance of citizenship if they join the military. Many of those who did and were forced to go to Iraq were either killed or then denied citizenship on their return.

Aguayo has made a point of discussing war resistance with undocumented workers and youth and refusing to fight in aggressive wars. In May, at the Mexican Community Center in Stockton, Agustin joined community members in discussing ways keep military recruiters out of schools and immigrant communities in California’s Central Valley.

In Carmel, fellow Iraq War resisters Camilo Mejia and Pablo Paredes joined Aguayo at the local Unitarian Church. Students from nearby Hartnell Community College raised hundreds of dollars for these resisters with a bake sale for peace.

In San Francisco, with the help of Veterans for Peace and Codepink, a hundred supporters packed a large meeting room in the Veterans War Memorial Building to hear these resisters denounce war and aggression. The resisters also introduced screenings of the documentary film “The Short Life of José Antonio Gutiérrez” at a theater in the heart of San Francisco’s Mission District. Marine Lance Corporal Gutiérrez was a Guatemalan immigrant, a “Green Card” soldier, and was the first U.S. casualty of the Iraq War.

In Watsonville, recently discharged Marine conscientious objector Robert Zabala joined Camilo, Pablo, and Agustin in speaking to more than a 130 people at the United Presbyterian Church. About half the audience was students, with many joining in discussion about the realities of the crimes being committed in Iraq and the role of the military in occupying the country. Zabala, who also resisted as a conscientious objector, secured his release from the military when a federal judge determined that his conscientious objector stands were legitimate and the Marines, who denied him CO status, had to release him.

Now Aguayo and others are organizing a Northwest tour, from July 9-17, that includes marches and meetings in Portland, Oregon; Bellingham, Olympia, Port Angeles, Port Townsend, Seattle, and Tacoma, Washington.

 [TOP]

 

---

Army Again Attempts to Subpoena Activists

Lt. Watada & Supporters Continue Resistance

Courage to Resist July 9, 2007

On Friday, July 6, a pretrial hearing was held at Fort Lewis in the U.S. Army’s second attempt to court-martial Lieutenant Ehren Watada for refusing to deploy to Iraq in June 2006. Lt. Watada stands firm that the Iraq war is illegal under U.S. and international law. [He has been widely supported by fellow soldiers, military families and all those opposing the Iraq war. He has stood on principle, refusing to serve in an illegal and unjust war and refusing to participate in war crimes. On July 5, Watada supporters rallied at the San Francisco Federal Building that was widely supported by people in the Bay Area. Demonstrations also continue to be organized at Fort Lewis, as occurred at the first court-martial where thousands joined in defending Watada.]

During the first court martial in February, military judge Lieutenant Colonel John Head orchestrated a mistrial in order save the prosecution’s weak showing prior to defense arguments. Now, this same judge plans on presiding over a new trial. Last week Judge Head ruled in support of himself, twice. First, Head claimed, that he could be impartial, claiming, beyond credibility, that he does not have an “intractable attitude or preconceived notions.” Second, he ruled that a new trial would not violate Lt. Watada’s constitutional right not to be prosecuted twice for the same crime, known as double jeopardy. [Head made a number of contested decisions, including ones protested even by the prosecution, such as declaring a mistrial. (See VOR Update February 23 & 3) .]

The U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals has issued a partial stay in the court martial that remains in effect. While pretrial proceedings have been allowed to go forward, no court-martial can take place until the partial stay is lifted. If the current partial stay is lifted in time for the scheduled July 23 court martial, it is likely that the Federal Court of Appeals would step in to review the issue of double jeopardy.

During the pre-trial hearing, it came to light that Judge Head’s supervisor sent the judge an e-mail in February indicating she believed the mistrial did not create double-jeopardy issues and that a second court-martial could move forward. Lt. Watada’s attorneys said the e-mail suggested there was pressure on Judge Head to rule a certain way. […]

Although few expect the Army to be able to retry Lt. Watada July 23-28 as they plan, the Army has again subpoenaed regional anti-war organizers to take the stand against Lt. Watada. Late last week, Seattle Veterans for Peace organizers Gerri Haynes and Tom Brookhart were re-subpoenaed to “verify remarks Lt. Watada made to the VFP National Convention last August.” Olympia Movement for Justice and Peace activist Phan Nguyen was re-subpoenaed by the prosecution to explain how Lt. Watada’s initial June 7, 2006 press conference in Tacoma, Washington was organized. [The military subpoenas are a significant part of the attack on journalists who cover the anti-war movement, and more generally part of the effort to silence resistance. Like before, these journalists are opposing the demands to testify.]

Subpoenas delivered to activists last week read: “Enclosed is a copy of the travel order and subpoena for your production as a government witness in the court martial U.S. v. Watada. The trial is scheduled to take place from 23-28 July 2007.”

Last February, Oakland, California based journalist Sarah Olson voiced her objection to being subpoenaed, along with Honolulu Star Bulletin writer Greg Kakesako. Sarah Olson declared, “A member of the press should never be placed in the position of aiding a government prosecution of political speech. This goes against the grain of even the most basic understanding of the First Amendment’s free press guarantees and the expectation of a democracy that relies on a free flow of information and perspectives without fear of censor or retribution.” The military has not delivered subpoenas to either of these journalist.

[Organized resistance supporting Watada and all the war resisters continues to grow. More active-duty soldiers have signed the Appeal to Redress, demanding an end to the war now, and many others are working with youth against military recruitment. Resisters are standing by the journalists subpoenaed and organizing with many organizations to defend the rights of all.]

 [TOP]

---

 

GI Resisters Report from the U.S. Social Forum

---

 

Wanted: An Anti-War Government
Majority Demands Impeachment

Afterdowningstreet.org

The impeachment movement is gaining traction, and now is the time to push it all the way to success. Over the July 7-8 weekend, you made “Impeach Cheney” the number 1 video on YouTube!

On July 6, for the first time, a polling company asked Americans if they want Cheney impeached. A majority of 54 percent said Yes. On July 4, our Impeach Bush and Cheney petition passed 100,000 signatures. So now we are raising the bar to 1 million. Have you and everyone you know signed? Also on July 4, Los Angeles opened an Impeachment Center, and on July 5 Philadelphia held an impeachment forum.

July 23, 2007, is the fifth anniversary of the Downing Street Meeting, the meeting at Number 10 Downing Street, in London, at which the head of British intelligence reported that Bush and Cheney were intent on invading Iraq and were going to “fix the intelligence and facts around the policy.” The meeting was recorded in the Downing Street Minutes that were leaked in May 2005. It was then that we launched AfterDowningStreet.org.

This July 23, Cindy Sheehan will lead a march from Arlington National Cemetery (gather there at 10am.) to Capitol Hill, to the office of Congressman John Conyers, [head of the House Judiciary Committee responsible for starting impeachment proceedings] to ask him to move forward with impeachment. We encourage as many people as possible to join us, and if you cannot, to phone Congressman Conyers’ office that day asking him to move forward on impeachment: (202) 225-5126. Summer is also a great time to be outdoors holding signs, making noise, and making new friends. Use our calendar to schedule a “honk to impeach” event or to find the one nearest you: www.communitywalk.com/impeach

Cindy Sheehan plans to announce her candidacy that day for Congress, challenging House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to represent the 8th District of California. Sheehan’s candidacy is motivated in part by Pelosi’s actively blocking the impeachment of Cheney and Bush, but Sheehan will not run if Pelosi endorses impeachment. Please phone Pelosi’s office right away and as often as you can to encourage her to support impeachment: (202) 225-0100.

July 23 in D.C. is part of a march from Texas to New York. Cindy Sheehan, war resister Rev. Lennox Yearwood, and others are leading a march/drive from Crawford, Texas to New York City. The march will include stops at the district offices of House Judiciary Committee Members Mel Watt, and Bobby Scott. You can organize a meeting, protest, honk-a-thon, or sit-in at your Congress Member’s office. Stops include:

July 10-11 Crawford & Houston, Texas
July 12 New Orleans, Louisiana & Montgomery, Alabama
July 13 Fort Benning, Georgia
July 14-15 Atlanta & Gainesville, Georgia
July 16 Clemson, South Carolina
July 17-18 Charlotte and Greensboro, North Carolina
July 19-20 Lynchburg and Charlottesville, Virginia
July 21 Richmond and Arlington, Virginia
July 23 Arlington Cemetery, White House/Capitol, Washington, D.C.
July 24 Philadelphia & Allentown, Pennsylvania
July 25 New York City
July 26 United Nations Action
July 27 Central Park Rally
July 28 TBA
July 29 Gathering of Hearts Fest Central Park

For more information on the March for Humanity see www.thecampcaseypeaceinstitute.org

 [TOP]

---

Voice of Revolution
Publication of the U.S. Marxist-Leninist Organization

USMLO • 3942 N. Central Ave. • Chicago, IL 60634
www.usmlo.org • office@usmlo.org