Home
Mission and Activities
Patriots' Quotes
Local Opinion
Events
Additional Information
Contribute To This Web Site
Local Opinion
Open Letter to My Brother
Ron Clark, December 31, 2008
Dear Brother,
Sunday, January 4, 2009. Last scheduled Sunday morning demonstration of CANOPAS. (Chelsea Area Network of Peace Activists). Certainly, not the disbandment of he organization nor the abandonment of its ideals.
Why is it that when people think about an anti-war protester that they think that the protester does not love, respect, admire, thank, and appreciate all that both vets and the kids in Iraq have done, are doing, and have sacrificed for our freedom and way of life? John and Kathy Gourlay, the two who have worked the hardest in the anti-Iraq conflict demonstrations have a daughter who is a Captain and pilot of Blackhawk helicopters in combat in Iraq. I have never heard a protester disrespect a soldier... ever! (And some are vets themselves.)
I've sat in a Vietnam vets' bar and proudly bought rounds of drinks. But I would never buy George Bush a drink to celebrate the 4221 dead kids that his policies have created. (So far.) I walk next to memorials in Washington for Civil, Spanish-American, Korean, WWI, WWII, Vietnam, and cry. I watch historical documentaries about the soldiers in all of those conflicts and feel proud and shed tears for them. We don't have a memorial for the Iraq dead so far, but I (with pride!) on Memorial Day help carry a banner 400 feet long through Chelsea with the names, hometowns, ages, and dates of death of all the kids who have given their lives for their country, for their president, and for me.
But, this war is wrong; wrong reasons, wrong directions, wrong management, wrong results, wrong everything. And I think that my president was wrong. And when I see images of Iraq, of the soldiers, the civilians, and the damaged, divided country, I feel it is my duty to stand up and say that it is a wrong war. And if I didn't, I would be a poor example of that duty and freedom that all of these men and women have fought and died for.
Yes, we are all hoping that the new administration will be able to bring an end to the conflict, but it seems wrong to stand in protest to an administration's policies when that administration no longer exists. I plan to give my new president support and my confidence.
But, if or when I feel that his policies are wasting our young, dedicated soldiers' lives, I will stand on the corner again, and again, and again.
Keep buying the vets at the VFW beers. When I visit you next, I will go with you and buy a round or two.
CANOPAS Final Weekly Demonstration and Celebration
November 30, 2008
Because of the changed political climate in relation to the Iraq war, CANOPAS has decided to move its focus away from the weekly Sunday Vigil toward other activities.
CANOPAS will have its final weekly peace demonstration outside the Post Office on Sunday, January 4, at the usual time, 12 to 1 pm. Immediately following will be a potluck and program to celebrate the uninterrupted six years of Sunday demonstrations and to turn the group's attention and energy toward future plans. This celebration is at the Michigan Friend's Center. The indoor program will consist of songs (including at least one sing along), a short review of CANOPAS's activities over the years, a time for individuals to share their own memories of CANOPAS's experiences, and the potluck lunch. At the end of the lunch people will be invited to think about and write down ideas for future CANOPAS activities. After this the group will bundle up and go outside to a bonfire and ceremony including more singing honoring the people whose names are on our 50 or more boards of our wall of names of those who have died in the Iraq war.
Everyone who has ever supported CANOPAS's activities or has appreciated CANOPAS's work is invited to attend with their friends and family. Feel free to come to either one or both events. Directions to the Michigan Friends Center.
CANOPAS Demonstrations to End
Elizabeth Hammer, November 16, 2008
On Sunday, November 16, a group of those CANOPAS members who regularly have come to the post office vigil met and decided, by vote, that the weekly vigils will be suspended indefinitely, after Jan. 4, which will be the 6th anniversary of CANOPAS first vigil against the war in Iraq.
There were several reasons for the decision to suspend the weekly vigils, with the primary one being that the Status of Forces agreement, currently accepted by the Iraqi president and cabinet and poised for a vote by the Iraqi Parliament, establishes the road map for withdrawal of troops. While about 6 years too late, leaving Iraq is one of the main messages we have held up to the community, and the time and energy we all give to the greater cause of peace will be better spent in other processes and venues in the future.
Further discussion established that:
- Occasional vigils may still be held, to mark commemorative dates or (hopefully not) major death vigils (e.g., 5,000).
- The CANOPAS e-mail list and web site will still be maintained.
- A pot-luck meeting will be held at 5 pm on Sunday, Nov. 30, at Jan Bernath's home, 238 Harrison Street in Chelsea. Jan says bring only a dish to pass---she'll have the rest.
For those who would like to participate in defining "next steps" for CANOPAS, there will be two major agenda items:
- Planning for a community event (probably pot-luck) to follow the last regular vigil, on Jan. 4.
- Deciding on specific actions to take in the future, to assure that our voice for peace is not lost in this community.
Elizabeth Hammer has agreed to write a draft of an article/op-ed piece which will be shared on the 30th, and eventually sent to the Chelsea Standard re CANOPAS decision and change of focus.
Even if you cannot attend the planning meeting on Nov. 30, those who have stood with us and have supported our group are invited to share their ideas for inclusion in the article. Send your thoughts to her at ejhammer@fastem.com. If you wish to be quoted exactly, please indicate that, and give me the way you want to be identified--she will do the best she can to use your thoughts verbatim. Otherwise, your thoughts will be used to enrich and deepen the piece, but likely not used with attribution or your exact words.
If you have lengthy thoughts, you are encouraged to write a letter to the editor, planning to mail it after Christmas so that it will appear in the Jan. 8 (Thursday after our last vigil) edition.
Children's Books on Peace
The Friends Committee on National Legislation has prepared a timely list of children's books on peace.
Let's Change How We Vote
John Gourlay, September 25, 2008
I have always been someone who feels an obligation to participate in public affairs by volunteering, making my opinions known, and by voting. At the same time, however, I have always been repelled by the political process that makes otherwise respectable candidates malign their opponents and pander to the middle, and that sometimes makes me feel that I must vote for the second-best candidate because my first choice can't win.
In a book published this year, Gaming the Vote: Why Elections Aren't Fair (and What We Can Do About It), William Poundstone describes in horrifying detail all of those things that I detest about elections. Poundstone devotes a good part of the book to case after case of "spoiler" candidates who have thrown elections to opponents at the opposite end of the political spectrum. Almost everyone still remembers Ralph Nader running for president in 2000 and taking enough votes from Al Gore to make the less-popular George Bush the winner. But, of the 45 presidential elections held under the modern rules, at least five were decided by spoilers. Also, in 2006 alone, three of the six senate seats that the Democrats needed to gain a majority were won with the help of conservative spoilers. Our "plurality" voting system, in which we can vote for only one candidate even if three or more are running, has elected many unpopular candidates. As Poundstone puts it, "Were the plurality vote a car or an airliner, it would be recognized for what it is---a defective consumer product, unsafe at any speed."
Many alternative methods of voting exist in which voters have the ability to rank or rate several candidates, rather than just one. These have a long history of use throughout the world from the Renaissance and even before. Approval voting, for example, in which voters may vote for all of the candidates they find acceptable, was used in Venice for over 500 years, and in our own Electoral College in its early years. Instant-runoff voting was used throughout Europe and the United States until the middle 1900s. In this type of voting voters rank the candidates, and voters' second choices can be counted if their first choices do not achieve a majority. What happened in the middle of the century, among other things, was that Nobel-laureate economist Kenneth Arrow listed a set of desirable properties that everyone can agree should hold for all voting systems, and then proceeded to prove mathematically that no ranked-voting system can satisfy all five simultaneously. It appeared that all voting systems were flawed, so why struggle with anything more complicated than simple plurality voting?
Arrow's theorem damped interest in voting methodology to such an extent that it has taken half a century for further research by mathematicians and social scientists to clarify the picture, but it appears now that the pessimism was unfounded. One observation is that there are voting systems that do not fall within the control of Arrow's theorem. Approval voting is one example, and so is range voting, in which voters give numeric ratings or letter grades to the candidates. In range voting, the candidate wins who gets the highest total rating. Another development is that mathematician Warren Smith, with the help of computers unavailable in Arrow's day, has been able to simulate the behavior of voting systems under various scenarios of candidates' and voters' beliefs. What Smith has found, for example, is that voters are likely to be much more satisfied with the results of instant-runoff voting compared to plurality voting, in spite of the fact that both voting systems are flawed according to Arrow. In other words, in practice the flaws of instant-runoff voting are less likely to offend voters than those of plurality voting. Smith has also found that the outcomes of range and approval voting are likely to make voters happier yet.
Another advantage to these alternatives to plurality voting is that voters who support more than one candidate can indicate that support on their ballots. Third-party candidates no longer will be spoilers. Moreover, candidates need not feel that they must tear down their opponents to get votes, and elections under these alternative voting rules are more positive than the ones we’ve come to expect. With third-party candidates no longer a threat, there will be more of them, adding a welcome diversity of ideas to our elections. Finally, one of the most important benefits of these alternative voting systems is economic. Allowing voters to evaluate many candidates at once on a single ballot can make primary elections unnecessary, saving large amounts of money for the government and for candidates.
Gaming the Vote is a lively, detailed book worth reading and discussing. (You can get it at the Chelsea Library.) In this election season in which all of the candidates are emphasizing change, let's urge our representatives to make a fundamental change that will help change everything else. Let's change the way we vote.
The Earth is the Center
Arny Stieber, September 21, 2008
A talk given at the Brighton U. U. ChurchMy talk this morning is titled - "The earth is the center." At this point in my life I believe my role is to plant seeds and create dialogue. My hope is to do that this morning.
Thank you for allowing me to be here on this International Peace Day and the autumn equinox. They are related.
The autumn equinox is when day and night are EQUAL. EQUALITY. "We hold these truths to be self-evident that" we are ALL created EQUAL.
The International Day of Peace is also about equality. For with equality comes peace. The "others" are not "illegal", not "terrorists", not "evil". They are equal. They "are endowed by their creator with certain UNALIENABLE rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
But there are those who say this is not true. The "others" are not equal. They are illegal. They are terrorists. They are evil. That makes as much sense to me as those who once said the earth is the center of the universe.
At one time the earth was the center. There was no doubt. The leaders said so. The religious said so. The teachers said so. It was fact. There is a concept called the Learning Curve. It says that to retain a thought, you must hear it, and/or see it, at least six times. Thus if EVERYONE says the earth is the center, and you hear it over and over, then the earth is the center.
Some, those dissidents, those unfaithful, spoke out and said the earth can't be the center. Look at how the stars move in the sky. Look at the length of the days. They are long in the summer and short in the winter. Look at this time of year. It is a transition time. Light and dark are equal.
How dare you question!!! The earth is the center. The earth is the center. The earth is the center. The earth is the center. The earth is the center. The earth is the center. There. End of dissent.
Galileo - what say you? (I call on a person in the audience who I've coached to be Galileo and they say - the sun is the center). Seize that person. They speak lies. Off with their head.
If we hear it enough, we believe it. If we see it enough, we believe it. Violence is the solution. It is sold to us everyday, in many ways.
Go into any park in any town and you will most likely see a military statue, or a canon. Veterans' memorials are everywhere. Veterans and the military lead parades. The military carries the flag into sporting events. POW-MIA flags fly from Post Offices and other buildings. Highways are named after wars, war veterans, and generals. Battleships are named after Presidents. We have civil war re-enactments. We call the military "service".
We let violence into our language - "I could just kill my kids", "bullet points", and sports announcers inject "kill", "beat", "destroyed" into their descriptions. The more overt influences are easy - video games, TV shows, weapon toys, paint ball parks. We cheer when the politicians "get tough" and say they want to "take out" someone, or a group of people, or a country.
Violence is the solution and the earth is the center, and there is no other way. And some people wondered.
Several years ago I toured the Underground Railroad Museum in Cincinnati. I had read about slavery and I thought I knew what it was. But as I toured, I began to REALLY feel what slavery was/is. It felt vaguely familiar. The oppression, the hatred, the total domination, the violence, the tearing apart of families brought back many memories from my time in the military. But I also began to realize "the other side" of slavery. On the other side is the money and the righteous - the people who were not only comfortable with slavery, but promoted it. The preachers, the politicians, the teachers, the business people, the pillars of society said slavery was not only necessary, it was the only way the country could survive. The slaves weren't people. They weren't human. It was OK to torture them and shoot them and hang them. It was OK to use dogs on them and beat them. They didn't have a brain. The Golden Rule didn't apply to them.
Some, those dissidents, those unfaithful, spoke out and said slavery can't be right. Look at these people, they are just like us. They have eyes, noses and ears. They come in all sizes. They laugh and cry like we do. They are our brothers and sisters. They are equal.
Slavery is the solution and the earth is the center, and there is no other way - those in power said. And some people wondered - isn't slavery much like war?
Hermann Goering (Gestapo/Nazi leader). Testimony to Nuremberg war crimes trial, 1946. said: "Why of course the people don't want war . . . but after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along. Whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship . . . . Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."
Folks - at one time it was very difficult to get the facts. We had to relay on the leaders to tell us "the earth is the center". With the internet, and satellite communications we can get information from many sources around the world. We can reach outside the US corporate controlled media and look at the world and see that it is round, it is not the center of the universe, and the US is just a small part of it. We can gather multiple inputs and use our maturity to wonder and ask "why?", "what are the options?", "Is there another way?".
The last six words of the Pledge of Allegiance are - "with liberty and justice for ALL".
This is the International Day of Peace. Tomorrow is the autumn equinox. They are about relationships with ourselves, our neighbors, this community, this country, this world, this universe. They are about persistence. They are about asking "why?" They are about the connectedness of life. They are about equality.
Galileo - what say you? (I call on a person in the audience who I've coached to be Galileo and they say - the sun is the center).
Constitution Day
Arny Stieber, September 17, 2008
September 17th is the anniversary of the signing of the U.S. Constitution. Public schools are required to teach the Constitution on this day. It would be a good day for all of us to read the Constitution and remember that this document is much more than a piece of paper. It is the foundation of our country. Unless we know the Constitution and demand that it be followed, those in power will abuse our sovereign rights and defile our foundation.
Article VI, Section 2 states that "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land . . .".
This means that all treaties must be followed. Those in power often ignore, or side step the Constitution. Several examples include the treaties signed with Native Americans, the Treaty of Guadeloupe Hidalgo which guarantees the right to speak the Spanish language and the Geneva Convention which covers the laws of war and the treatment of prisoners.
I am a Vietnam veteran and I often hear people say that freedom isn't free. I agree. Freedom requires that we the people understand our laws and vigorously demand that they be enforced. Democracy is a verb, and without our constant vigilance, we are no more than pawns.
Read the Constitution. Talk to your kids, family and friends about it. It is who we are as a nation.
Farmer's Market Report
Elizabeth Hammer, June 28, 2008
The day started out raining, and drizzled most of the morning with a major downpour around 10. Park Street was torn up down to the mud, ready for resurfacing, so no one could park and few wanted to drive. Several regular vendors stayed home. Even with the dispiriting surround and the diminished foot traffic, the CANOPAS booth at the Saturday Farmer’s market was successful in attracting both the curious and the supportive.
This is the first time since 2005 that we have had a presence at the market, and we prepared carefully with a theme built around “De-fund the war, Re-fund the country”. We used a real pie, and cut it into segments representing portions of the federal budget. Passersby were invited to “play the budget pie game,” by using small cards with labels of the different budget categories. Most people were able to guess the largest category, “current and past wars” (44.5%), and then most became engaged with trying to guess how the other 56% was divided among the remaining 5 categories. Most were surprised to find “health care,” at 19%, was 2nd largest, and ruefully not surprised to learn that “diplomacy and human needs abroad” was the smallest, at 1.5%. (The data is from the FCNL Wage Peace campaign, www.FCNL.org.) Good conversations ensued, and folks were interested in taking our literature with them.
At the end of the morning, as all vendors were packing to go home at noon, another vendor came over to us to say how glad she was that we were there—how important it was to bring awareness of these issues forward, and to create an informed electorate. So, despite the dreary weather and low turn-out, it was a good day, with the summer rain an apt metaphor as we planted seeds of peace.
Memorial Day and "Service"
Arny Stieber, May 23, 2008
"They died in service to our country". That sentence will be heard may times as the nation observes Memorial Day.
I'm a father, a businessperson and a Viet Nam veteran. Over the past several years I've examined my military experience. Two time Medal of Honor recipient, Marine Major General Smedley Butler helped me. He finished his career, looked back and wrote a booklet titled "War is a Racket". He said he was a thug for big business. My studies confirm what the General said. Behind all of the flag waving, and the shouts of freedom, democracy and service, is a massive empire devoted to profit by any means. Weapons are our number one export product. The military is a tool. We are taught to puff our chests, and honor the military—alive and dead—but we are never taught to question the business of war.
They died in "service" to our country. I hope we think about those words.
Memorial Day Parade Report
John Gourlay, May 26 2008
About 20 Chelsea Area Peace Activists turned out for the Memorial Day Parade and helped to carry the 250-foot-long banner of over 4000 names updated, as always, by Palmer Morel-Samuels. The banner received polite applause all along the parade route, and toward the end of the route a young man, apparently an off-duty marine, joined the line and picked up some slack in the banner. When we reached the cemetery and were rolling the banner up, a number of people stopped to talk about it. Most of the people understood that the banner listed the U. S. war dead in Iraq, and they shook their heads at the large number of names. Incredibly, however, there were several people who imagined that the banner listed all of the U. S. war dead from all wars, and they were dumbfounded to learn that this list was just for Iraq. We need to do a better job of educating people about the cost of this war.
Barbarians
Arny Stieber, February 7, 2008
Barbarians—bizarre, primitive, wild or uncivilized. That word burst into my mind as I watched the State of the Union talk. Here was a President talking to elected representatives about killing people, and they were cheering and clapping and giving standing ovations.
I'm a father, businessperson and a Viet Nam veteran. I woke up to my military experience five years ago. I have learned much since then. My motto is—If you have to hurt someone to solve a problem, you are the problem. Barbarians would disagree.
Gore Book Discussion
Jim Grenoble, October 5, 2007
On Sunday, September 30, I attended the discussion of Al Gore’s book Assault on Reason, held at the Manchester District Library, and hosted by The Manchester Area People for Peace. The discussion was paneled by Pat Swaney of MAPP, Pat Vailliencourt, Manchester Village President, and Daniel Lai, editor of the Manchester Enterprise newspaper.
The event was attended by around 30 people.
Various reading material was spread out on a table in the back of the room, along with a petition to “draft” Al Gore for president.
At first, the panel talked about the book, then, a Q & A took place with the audience. About half of them hadn’t read the book (I had), but everyone pretty much knew the gist of it. It is about the insane hypocracy and corruption of the Bush administration, congress’s inability to stand up to it, and the corporate media’s role of non-investigative reporting and backing.
President Vailliencourt asked why no one would stand up against only two men (Bush & Cheney), and how these two could weld so much power.
Someone in the audience wondered why the antiwar movement was ineffective and not more mobile against the war in Iraq, and thought the movement is in limbo, unlike the resistance to the Vietnam War was in the ‘60s. I responded to this question by referring them to a book by Tom Hayden, seasoned antiwar activist from that era. In his book, Ending the War in Iraq, Hayden reminds us that in the ‘60s, a demonstration of 20,000 protesters was all over the news. A few weeks ago there was a demonstration in Washington, D.C., where over 100,000 protesters took part and the media didn’t cover it. It was not big news to them. In fact, millions of people protest this war and the Bush administration’s policies, not only in this country, but all over the world all the time, but it gets practically no coverage by the media, except in independent news. The Ann Arbor News mentioned this particular event with only two paragraphs on page 5, with two more paragraphs reporting the much smaller group of Bush supporters mounting a counter-protest. This is truly part of the “Assault on Reason”.
Think about all the antiwar organizations such as CodePink, MoveOn, & United for Peace & Justice. There are HUNDREDS more. Not to mention all the periodicals such as The Nation and Mother Jones magazines, and a million bloggers on the internet. Plus, now we have Air America Radio, and DemocracyNow! with Amy Goodman. These things just weren’t available in the ‘60s, and certainly not active in such as speedy pace as it became for this war.
Standing in front on the post office in Chelsea last Sunday, and talking to the good people of CANOPAS, I saw that the people of Chelsea who drove past us are more against this war now than just a few months ago. This is because THE PEACE MOVEMENT IS STILL ALIVE! You are making a difference. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. For the prospect of peace is a slow and arduous process, but eventually reason will catch up to the people, as long as we’re all out there every week in front of the library, as few as we are in Chelsea, reminding them about it for long as this hideous war continues. REASON WILL PREVAIL! Eventually.
Special Access Ended for Military Recruiters at Manchester High School
Eileen Parker, Manchester Area People for Peace, September 19, 2007
Good news! Our campaign to end the special access given to military recruiters at Manchester High School has succeeded!
MAPP approached the School Board in the spring with this request. The school counselor visited each classroom shortly after school started this fall to announce that military recruiters would no longer be allowed to set up in the school lunchroom. They will now have the same access as college recruiters and employers: they will be available to meet with students by appointment in the counseling office and at special career fairs. The school counselor also explained the Opt Out process to students who do not want their name and contact information released to military recruiters.
And, we have a group of students this year who hope to start a Peace Club at MHS. They are currently looking for a teacher to sponsor their club.
Please call the school if you have a chance and thank them for this policy change.
Iraq and Vietnam, Arny Stieber, August 26, 2007
I was in the Army, infantry in South Viet Nam in 1970 when George Bush was in the National Guard Air Force in south USA. George Bush is now saying that if we leave Iraq the same things will happen that happened in Viet Nam. George needs a history lesson. The war in Viet Nam was approved by Congress because of the Gulf of Tonkin incident. North Viet Nam, Congress was told, attacked a US Navy ship in the Gulf. One big problem - the attack never happened. Former Defense Secretary McNamara in his recent film "The Fog of War" admits it. (The Fog of War will be shown at the Chelsea Library on September 24th.)
So, we invaded a country based on lies. Millions of Vietnamese were killed. Millions were traumatized. Their country was destroyed. They are still suffering from Agent Orange. Tens of thousands of US troops died, and are still dying and are still suffering from that war.
A war based on lies. Results felt for decades. Yes, George, there are similarities between Viet Nam and Iraq.
Help to/from CANOPAS, Eric Lund, August 3, 2007
Even though I have not been an active participant, my heart is strengthened by those of you who do make public witness for the goal of peace. My avocation is stamp collecting - specifically the postal history of the peace movement. I would like to support the Canopas effort with a $50 donation if anyone can help me find an elusive item. The image below illustrates a stamp distributed by the "Bring 'em Home" coalition. If any local folk have a full stamped, cancelled envelope bearing this stamp, I'll send the check.
[Eric can be contacted at GBKuehnle@cs.com.]
To Be or Not To Be, Rewritten by Caitlin Clark and Raymond Byers, July 10, 2007
To pull out or not to pull out—that is the question,
Whether ‘tis nobler of a country to suffer by the ramblings of a monkey,
Or to take aims across a sea of trouble,
And by war to make peace? To send our young to suicide,
No more; and by protest we say end!
The heartache by a thousand bombs falling
Ere the knowledge of death of a loved one,
And in that death what remorse may come
Compressed to lies by politicians.
Through faux feelings announced on podium.
Yet we continue to add where subtraction is needed
So desperately childless mothers call for help without our aide
The calamity of Bush‘s errors; the death; suffering
Of 153 thousand troops so far from home.
To force our ideals or to withdraw
On one hand to better a nation, the other
Holding a spear against it.
To change a culture, or to watch it fall.
Let it not be us to write their history books
To stay in a country we already supposedly defeated;
Or to pull out when that‘s the only help needed
The hypocrisy of office and his minions,
That patience wears on our nation tiring
We ruin ourselves while not fixing another.
And end it Mr. President, and it before
It‘s farther more too late.
Reflections on the Memorial Day Banner, Elizabeth Hammer, Guest Editorial, Chelsea Standard, June 12, 2007
Dear Editor,
We were among the two dozen people who walked at the end of the Memorial Day Parade, carrying the banner listing the American servicemen and women killed in the current military occupation in Iraq. There were many positive responses from parade on-lookers, and we found ourselves thinking, and wondering, as we left for home after the ceremonies that day, May 28. We are writing to share some of our thoughts and questions.
Death number 1: 2nd Lt. Therrel Shane Childers was 30 when killed March 21, 2003…
Many of those clapping knew us as the same group that gathers on Sundays at the Post Office to stand vigil for peace. Perhaps those folks recognized that our banner is nearly 70 feet longer this year than last—at 15 names to a foot. How much longer will it be a year from now?
Death number 513: Cpl. Gary B. Coleman was 24 when killed Nov. 21, 2003…
Others of those clapping may have been voicing support for the military on this holiday which honors those who died-in-the-service-of-country. We join them, in honoring those who have fallen in the wars that gained and maintained our freedom and nationhood. Do these folks, we wondered, make any distinction between those wars, fought for defensive purposes, and this conflict, fought for changing reasons that are often spoken but never quite articulated?
Death number 1159: Sgt. Shawna Morrison was 26 when killed Sept. 5, 2004…
We also hold in the highest regard the troops who are currently fighting. Some of us have relatives and friends among them. They are burdened with an administration who has betrayed them, by engaging them in an ill-defined battle, with insufficient support, with no clear strategy or way to win. Which of these patriotic young people would have put their lives on the line for a multi-national corporation, or for the “right” to make Americans richer by stealing the Iraqi’s major natural resource for our use, or for any cause that cannot answer the question, “How will we know when we’ve won?”
Death number 2075: Maj. Gregory J. Fester was 41 when killed Aug. 30 2005…
Those who were listed on our banner, who have died in this military action are perhaps even due twice the honor, as their passion and idealism caused them to follow their leaders into a cul-de-sac. Yet, they still nobly fought, as they were duty-bound to do. These soldiers had courage and a loyalty that is commendable, but sadly manipulated. We are mostly too old for military service (though some of us have served in the past.) Every time we voice our opposition to the imperial conquest of a country which did not attack or harm us, we feel we are fighting, in a different way, for that same loyalty to country and vision of freedom. Fighting for your country is not always defined by fighting for its leaders. Where is the tipping point that will make that a broadly understood idea?
Death number 2731: Pvt. Kristian Menchaca was 20 when killed June 16, 2006…
As the guns saluted at the ceremony, and the jet flew over, we were struck by the ferocious noise, and both the threat and memory of violence it carried, in our otherwise quiet corner of the world. Then we thought of how those in Iraq, both Iraqi citizens and American soldiers, live with this on a daily basis, and of how often the implied threat becomes real violence for them. And of how many reports show it is failing strategically and only getting worse. How, we wondered, will this level of ever-increasing violence ever bring peace…and how will our nation grieve this legacy?
Death number 3012: Pvt. 1st class Stephen Bicknell was 19 when killed Oct. 15, 2006…
Some will point out that the number of current military dead, just short of 3,500, is a fraction of the number lost in earlier conflicts. Others will say this is not a local issue, and should not be discussed in a local forum. Still others will say that nothing can be done to change our course, or even that the entire military occupation in the Middle East is right and good and just. Fortunately, there is still room in our country for all points of view. Ensuring the defense of these Constitutional rights is a noble cause, indeed, and one we support. And we wondered, will the first American military death in Iraq tomorrow, and the one after that, and the one after that, do anything to protect this right, along with the others itemized in the Bill of Rights, for our citizens?
Death number 3470: Lance Cpl. Emmanuel Villarreal was 21 when he died yesterday, May 27, 2007.
Sincerely,
Representatives of the Chelsea Area Network of Peace Activists and Supporters
Memorial Day—Saddest Day of the Year, Arny Stieber, June 4, 2007
It's over. Memorial Day, the saddest day of the year is over. I'm a Vietnam infantry veteran and some may find my reasoning strange.
We talk about "duty", but we never talk about the Golden Rule. We talk about "freedom", but we never talk about humanity. We talk about "service", but never about options. We talk about the "ultimate sacrifice", but we never talk about the mega-billions made by those who profit from war. We talk about "heroes", but never about the long term effects of war. We talk about "honor", but we never talk about death and destruction. We talk about "courage", but never about questioning the reasons for war.
We send our children to kill other children. They die. We wave the flag. Its the saddest day of the year.
Altered American Flag, Letter to the Editor, Chelsea Standard, Elizabeth Hammer, May 3, 2007
[In the May 10 issue of the Chelsea Standard, the editor, Terry Jacoby, scoffed at the statistics that Elizabeth quoted in her letter. For the record, Elizabeth obtained her information from the following web sites: www.brookings.edu/iraqindex, www.iraq-crss.org, and www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm.]
I am writing in response to Jeff Hardcastle's letter of April 19. In this letter, he stated his respect for the commitment and dedication with which the CANOPAS group has stood vigil for peace for the last four years. He also stated that his perspective dramatically changed, when he happened to notice the altered American flag in which the stars had been replaced with the logos of major corporations. In the same spirit of respect for his opinion, I would like to offer the following for consideration.
When the flag was created, the idea of small independent states unifying or federating for a common larger purpose was novel, to say the least. Each star represented a state, and it was the collection of sovereign states that were to make up the nation, being controlled by individual citizens (white males at that time). One of the major concerns of the founding fathers was the protection of citizens from exploitation by corporations as they had experienced it in companies like the Hudson Bay Trading Company, the Walmart of that era. Citizens could control the states, which in turn would assume—with a very short leash—control of the corporations. Corporations were forbidden from attempting to influence elections, public policy, and other realms of civic society.
It is little known that a 180 degree shift occurred after the Fourteenth Amendment was passed in the late 1800's. A whole series of Supreme Court cases were brought to determine "who is a person" under the new amendment. Only 19 of these cases involved African Americans; 288 involved corporations, argued by highly paid corporate lawyers of the era. By 1910, corporations had gained the rights of "national personhood," essentially reversing the nation's first century of citizen protections. Corporations, a "thing," now enjoyed all the same protections originally given to citizens, a "person." Ironically the principles that were originally created to specifically protect the citizen from the corporate entities had been appropriated to make the corporations their equals under the law!
In our ongoing vigil for peace, the CANOPAS group is primarily interested in presenting ideas for observers to think about, counteracting the group-think which mushroomed after 9/11. The use of slogans or symbols which can be quickly grasped is our primary technique. A well-known slogan could be altered—e.g., What Would Jesus Do changed to Who Would Jesus Bomb. In the case of the flag, this universal symbol has been altered to reflect our concerns. Among these is that corporations that are driven by profit motives, not patriotism or ideals of liberty, justice or equality, have replaced individual citizens or states as major shapers of national policy.
Ask yourself, which likely has had more influence on national policy or laws--the state (and citizens) of Arkansas, or Walmart? The state of Texas, or Exxon-Mobile? Who are the major contributors to presidential campaigns? Who gains more from the current war—Halliburton Corporation, or individual citizens in Iraq or America?
In our view, the current war (and many other wars as well) is being fought to further corporate profits, not for the ever-shifting idealistic reasons given in the sound-bite interviews of our public officials. While you may still disagree with CANOPAS perspective about this war, please know that the use of the corporate logo flag is not intended to desecrate, but rather is used to illustrate our deep concerns for the erosion of individual citizen voice.
Current polls show that American citizens, at a rate of almost 2 to 1, believe the Iraq war was a mistake and want our country to disengage. Iraqi citizens, at a rate of 4 to 1, want the US to leave their country. However, the war continues. Why? When multi-national corporations have the right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," individuals will lose nearly every time.
Our great national heritage of individual freedom and justice for all, a heritage that will lead to peace for all people who experience it, is what we wish to protect. That is an idea which I believe we can all agree on.
Teaching Death and Destruction at the Career Center, A Presentation to the Jackson County Intermediate School District Board of Education, Arny Stieber, April 24, 2007
I am a father, business person with an MBA, and a veteran (Army, infantry, Viet Nam). I woke up to my military experience in January of 2003. Since then I have developed a heightened awareness of influences on our society, especially our children. In September, 2006 I worked as an aide in the JROTC "class".
This JROTC assignment was interesting. It brought back many memories of the military. I was told by one of the instructors that the purpose of JROTC was to teach citizenship. As the day progressed it was clear that the instructor's version of "citizenship" was very different from mine. For me, a good citizen is one who thinks, engages in dialogue, asks questions, and makes informed decisions. The students in JROTC are taught to be military. That is, they are taught that "rank" (vs. character) defines authority. They are taught to give orders with force, follow orders without question, and develop group think. They are taught that the mission is more important than the means.
In October of 2006 I contacted John Graves and requested financial information on the JROTC program. He asked Kevin Oxley to contact me. Kevin was very open and provided me with the information that I requested. In summary the ISD spends $240,000/yr. ($60,000 of that from Federal taxes) to provide military training for 100 children. In addition another $140,000 of Federal taxes are used for inventory items. If we subtract out the Federal dollars, that's $180,000 for a program that teaches conflict resolution by violence.
The military, for a variety of reasons, is treated by many as above reproach. The uniforms, the pomp, the medals, the titles, the use of the word "service", all these add to the illusion that killing is an honorable method for resolving conflicts.
As educators, I implore you to examine what you are trying to accomplish with the JROTC program. If its leadership and citizenship, there are many programs available at substantially less cost to the ISD and society, and with a much broader scope and positive impact. One example is Quest (www.lions-quest.org), a program sponsored by Lions International. There are many others.
As a society we are taught (via TV, movies, video games, etc.) that violence is not only acceptable, but necessary. Rarely do we see peaceful conflict resolution in the media. Schools need to be the agent of change. Rather than simply establishing rules against fighting, we need to establish programs that teach real citizenship - how to formulate opinions, how to have conversations, how to understand others, how to resolve conflicts.
Thank you for your time.
Let Them March, Lynn Meadows, April 16, 2007
Is our Federal Budget a statement about our country's moral values? I am appalled that 48% goes for Death and Destruction (War) and only 34% goes to Human Services. Think about what kind of a country this could be if that 48% were invested in peace initiatives and aid programs. Could we build a truly better and more secure world?
Can you imagine proportioning your family budget in a similar manner? Perhaps using 48% of the family income to surround your property with electric fences, plant mines, build a bomb shelter, stockpile guns and ammunition and 34% for housing, feeding and clothing the family, education, contributions to your church and charities. I would think that living under these parameters would feel very insecure, fearful and anxious.
In 1982, then U.S. Sec of State Alexander Haig stated "Let them march all they want, just so long as they pay their taxes."
If you think this war should end, don't pay for it! Withhold at least the war portion (or current war portion: 30%) of your Federal Income Taxes. Many do, including myself. I truly believe that killing is immoral.
Walberg Is Out of Sync, Suzie Morse and Kent Walton, March 1, 2007
I would like to respond to the editorial piece on Timothy Walberg Q&A. It appears that Mr. Walberg is out of sync with many of his constituents when he proposes that our country commit more troops and resources to fighting the war in Iraq.
Perhaps Mr. Walberg might agree that the United States would no longer be perceived in such a negative light by so many if we put our energies into negotiating with its declared enemies as we are currently attempting to do with North Korea. In the past fifty years, our "peaceful nation" has interrupted the peaceful functioning of many democratically elected governments and initiated numerous wars around the globe. The result is that just about everyone who doesn't support our way of life and our business interests become our enemies.
The war in Iraq has already swelled the ranks of terrorist organizations eager to defend themselves against our invasion of their homelands. The war in Iraq is taking a terrible toll on our military. It is also bankrupting our society and stealing our children's inheritance. Meanwhile, back at home, the big government that you, Mr. Walberg, feel so threatened by has done very little to protect the rights of its own citizens. Maybe you can vote to shrink tax breaks for corporations and give the common person a break.
In a recent poll by UNICEF, the United States and the UK ranked at the bottom of all industrialized countries for our lack of programs to care for and protect our children's welfare. Please, don't vote with your Republican colleagues to cut these programs even more. Prove to us now that you are ready to oppose injustice and corruption in Washington and not just do away with programs for the poor and middle class.
About Those CANOPAS People, Roy Schmidt, January 18, 2007
I've been waiting to write about those CANOPAS people (Chelsea Area Network of Peace Activists and Supporters) since January 2006. While jogging past the Post Office one Sunday I got this bright idea that had something to do with resolutions.
My resolutions for the year were to lose some punds, to floss every morning, and to write more often.
Think about the resolution, the resolve, of the CANOPAS people. They have been out there, rain, hail, sleet, or snow every Sunday since January 1, 2003.
Public opinion back then supported the invasion of Iraq. There was even a group of pro-war demonstrators in Chelsea who set up kitty-corner; they quickly dried up and blew away with the evaporating support for the invasion.
Public opinion is so fickle. It's saddening to think about how many Americans can't see beyond the spin, how many apparently don't use the God-given power of higher thinking. The peace-mongers knew back in 2002 that invading Iraq was wrong. Their level of support has not wavered. They were right back then, and they're still right now.
On Thursday night last week, the day after President Bush stubbornly announced his plans to send more troops, the CANOPAS people gathered in the cold. I couldn't help pulling over, parking, and walking up to see what these folks were all about.
They were all so nice. No Bush bashing, no bad mouthing of Republicans, no mention of Rumsfeld, Cheney, Haliburton. And no political signs. Peace only.
Now for the big admission: They talked me into holding a sign for 10 minutes.
I felt naked at first. Everyone driving by could see me. They would know exactly how I felt. But then I experienced the honks. The waves. The smiles. The thumbs ups. Anybody bitter just looked ahead, or turned away, or kept chatting on their cell phones. No middle fingers.
And I learned something, big time. Before Thursday, I have to admit, I secretly wondered whether the CANOPAS folk might not "get a life" on Sunday from noon until 1 p.m. Do you really need to express yourself for four straight years?
But while holding that sign, I realized just how many people these people touched: over the months, thousands of cars, thousands of people. I realized how many people saw us and were reminded: there is sissent out there, passionate dissent, and a lot of it.
Say "No" to More Troops in Iraq, Lynn Meadows, January 11, 2007
Americans say "no" to more troops in Iraq!
In a speech in 1956, then President Eisenhower said "We are rapidly getting to the point that no war can be won." It is past time to look for ways to "Win without war!"
If President Bush announces that his "new" plan is to send more troops to Iraq, the local CANOPAS (Chelsea Area Network of Peace Activists and Supporters) will be on the Post Office corner from 5 to 6 p.m. today, along with many other Americans across the nation, to say "Americans say no to more troops in Iraq!" Come join us." The Chelsea Area Network of Peace Activists and Supporters (CANOPAS) gathered for a pot luck supper Sunday, January 7, at the Michigan Friends Center north of Chelsea. John Titus, whose daughter died in one of the plane crashes on September 11, spoke to the group. He has reacted to his daughter's death by working to reduce violence in the world. He and his wife have found it healing to turn their grief into actions that encourage and spread peace. In particular, he rejects any solution to the events of September 11 that causes the deaths of more innocent people. For Titus, the solution to September 11 includes educating people about the alternatives to war. He has been been going into schools and training young people in non-violent conflict resolution. He also supports legislative initiatives, such as forming a United States Department of Peace. He believes that since we live in a democracy, everyone is part of the government and should be active. After listening to Titus the 25 CANOPAS members in attendance decided on future actions. Most immediately, CANOPAS will demonstrate today, Thursday, against any escalation of the war in Iraq, should the President announce it. At the Martin Luther King celebration Monday evening they will staff a table where they will collect signatures on a petition asking for the withdrawal of all American troops from Iraq. Also discussed were distributing yellow peace ribbons, publicly showing the movie, "Why We Fight", and staffing a Farmers' Market table next summer. CANOPAS will continue its Sunday demonstrations in front of the Chelsea Post Office from noon to 1 p.m. [For more information about these and other upcoming events, see the CANOPAS Events page.] John Titus and his wife, Bev, belong to a group "September 11 Families for Peaceful Tomorrows". They met on September 11th of this year and created an international group of victims of violence which includes people from Oklahoma City, Ireland, Palestine, Rwanda, Barcelona, London, and Afghanistan. Titus has discovered many other groups also working for peace throughout the world. He feels there is a ground swell in support of peace similar to what occurred in the 1960's, and CANOPAS is aiding this movement. Apparently, some campaigns are using a form of phoning that may violate federal law in an attempt to smear their opponents. The campaign places a call that appears to be from the opponent. If the caller listens to the whole message, it goes on to bash the opponent. But if the caller hangs up prematurely, the computer calls right back, and may automatically call the same number back as many as seven or eight times each time the caller hangs up (thus making it appear that the opponent's campaign is harrassing the recipient).
The call typically starts with something along the lines of "Candidate A has some information for you," then pauses, waiting for annoyed people to hang up, and then delivers a negative message about Candidate A. The calls apparently hit some people as much as 6 times, and at 5 - 6am as well. Presumably, the intent is to annoy people and stick Candidate A with the negative name ID as somebody who keeps robo-calling them.
Such calls appear to be in violation of federal regulations which mandate that these calls clearly identify their origin. The repetitive call back may also be a violation under state laws, although campaigns that use such tactics apparently consider whatever fines might be meted out as a small price to pay if this technique helps them to swing the election.
So what should you do if you are getting this type of call? The web site recommends that if you've gotten one of these calls, write down as much information about it as you can (time, phone number, etc.) and call your local paper (or its 'metro' desk for papers that also cover national news).
As the site says:
They're looking for political stories in the final days. And this is a good one.
Again, what we're talking about here are calls which purport to be from candidate A when in fact they're from candidate B and which call back repeatedly if you hang up before the call is finished. They're intentionally harassing calls -- meant to stick the blame on the other candidate.
You can help get the word out if you act now.
A few basic pointers, which are basically common sense: Be polite. Just give the facts. And just say what you yourself have experienced.
This is a form of election sabotage that everyone should know about -- not three weeks from now, but now, when voters are still making up their minds. Somewhat over a month ago, I extended my Sunday worship in away that is meaningful to me. I decided that I would stand where God and my conscience told me to be with a prayerful message. Every Sunday that I'm in town and attend church, I stand at the Peace Vigil from noon to 1 p.m. in front of the Post Office. I'm a late-comer to this Peace Vigil. People from various faith communities—Methodists, Catholics, Quakers—have been standing there for four years now. The other Sunday, Karen Neal joined me, and it was great to have someone else from our First Congregational Church of Chelsea present.
I've made four simple signs on cloth in permanent ink: pray for peace; act in peace, think peace; be peace. I would happily share these signs with anyone who wishes to join me. (I could make more, too!) Meanwhile, if you see me in church, you can be certain that I'll soon be standing on the Post Office corner a little after our worship and fellowship together. That's where God wants me to be. The CANOPAS Vigils are continuing on Sundays, from 12 to 1, and we are
very pleased that several new "regulars" are standing with us.
Generally, sentiment from passers-by (both in cars and walkers) has
become overwhelmingly positive, and those of us who are finishing up our
fourth year of vigiling hope and believe we have contributed to the
public change of heart in our local area.
One speaker some of us heard recently told of a small (1500) town in
Oregon, which conducted a similar weekly vigil starting with only about
5 attendees, was now up to over 100 people each week. They did this by
each "regular" person agreeing to bring one more person with them each
week. Perhaps this would be an excellent strategy for CANOPAS, as well.
This week would be an especially good time to start, as our community
has been touched by the tragic death of one of our own. Our wish is to
always be respectful of the grieving of the community, even as we stand
to bear silent witness to the critical need for peaceful solutions, a
need which is highlighted when the community is focusing on the
war-related loss of members of the military.
With local feelings running high, and against the background of the
coming election, we would like to review some of the group norms for
those whom we hope may be joining us for the first time in the next
couple of weeks.
We hope to see some new faces!
I opened my mailbox this week to find more dirty ads designed to catapult their political candidates into office. It wasn't the face of "greedy" welfare moms or the unsavory guy on death row that threatened our safety this time. Instead, I received a notice that Representative Schwarz voted to ban anti-war protestors for showing up at soldiers' funerals and harassing their families. This piece of mis-information was paid for by the American Medical Association's PAC money. A friend called Schwarz's Lansing office and was told that the flier was "misleading." The legislation Mr. Schwarz is so proud of voting for referred to stopping demonstrations by a small, anti-gay group, NOT anti-war groups. Thank God that this group was stopped from harassing innocent people but does this mean the end of our own civil rights? Just for the record, what kind of public does the AMA think would value a legislator who votes to ban free speech in appropriate and non-violent venues? Doesn't our Bill of Rights guarantee this freedom to every citizen? I called Mr. Schwarz's Jackson and D.C. offices and was told that the representative has no control over PAC ads run on his behalf. Sorry Mr. Schwarz but the helpless excuse, "I see no evil" doesn't fly well with constituents either. Tim Walberg's ads arrived and they weren't much better. He spent his ad dollars attacking Joe Schwarz as a " tax and spend liberal." When did the word "liberal" come to malign anyone who wants to put money back into the public sector instead of into the pockets of big corporate interests? So, Mr. Schwarz, Mr. Walberg, and everyone running in the upcoming elections, let's get our facts right when we share information with the public. I am interested in hearing from candidates who present a pro-active platform that outlines what they really intend to do if elected. Let's stop the mudslinging and cheap shots meant to distract and ask our candidates to challenge us to think about the REAL issues.
A letter March 2 ("Where was the reporting on Al Gore's comments") blamed comments by "far-left liberals" for endangering our country by promoting anti-American hatred around the world. How's that again? President George W. Bush's ill-advised invasion of Iraq was against world opinion and has been mismanaged at every turn. His circumvention of the rules against torture of prisoners there has created a scandal seriously undermining our claim of moral authority. The U. S. Justice Department also has found widespread abuse in detaining Arab-Americans in the United States after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. And Bush's critics are the cause of American's poor image around the world? Two thousand candles There were 40 participants in the CANOPAS demonstration against the War in Iraq on the 3rd anniversary of the war, Sunday March 19th, 2006. The response from those passersby's that chose to respond was overwhelmingly positive to the message presented. My count of negative reaction was only 5 opposed to our message. Two thumbs down, Two middle fingers (what we refer to as half a "peace sign") and one unprintable. There were hundreds of honking horns, thumbs up and waving and shouting YES! There were also a lot of people studiously ignoring us. I guess that could be considered negative also if one chose. My impression is that the community is turning against this war. The change in reaction over the last three years is noticeable. Once in a while we hear a statistic that encapsulates a much bigger story than you would expect from a couple of numbers. In a February 12 Ann Arbor News story it is said that there are 10 veterans of the Iraq war running for Congress this year, and 9 of the 10 are running as Democrats. Michigan peace activists from as far away as Traverse City met Saturday, February 4, in Ann Arbor to organize the Michigan Peace Network. There were 110 participants, as many as the venue could accommodate. They represented 22 communities in the state. It was exciting to see how strong and active the peace movement has become. There were the usual plenary and break-out sessions on priorities and organizational issues, and a notable speech over lunch by Nicholas Przybyla, a veteran of the invasion of Afghanistan. He spoke about his experiences in combat and his return to civilian life. One of his observations is that nearly everyone in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq has been complicit in prisoner abuse encouraged by their commanders. The Abu Ghraib scandal is unique only in that somebody took photographs. He was a photographer for the Marines, and was expressly forbidden to photograph the detainees taken while he was deployed. He also observed that symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder are probably universal among returning soldiers, but they don't report their symptoms because they fear being kept in the military longer. He has mostly recovered from his own PTSD, and says that the best therapy is to participate in the peace movement! Przybyla is now a film maker, and I bought his "Operation: Veteran Freedom", a documentary of the demonstration and first national meeting of Iraq Veterans Against the War outside Fort Bragg, North Carolina in March of 2005. It's entertaining and very true to life, showing veterans meeting, demonstrators marching, and a few counter-demonstrators howling. I'd be happy to loan it to anyone who wants to watch it. At Saturday's meeting, the Michigan Peace Network committed itself to supporting youth activism, especially balancing the information provided to young people by military recruiters, and holding coordinated actions on the March 18-19 weekend and throughout the week marking the third anniversary of the war in Iraq. I'm sure that CANOPAS can look forward to support and ideas from the network as it becomes more organized. Rep Schwarz, We are writing to you today with grave concerns. It has become readily apparent to all that President Bush has vastly exceeded the powers granted to him in The Constitution of The United States of America. We are asking you to join with Rep. Conyers, HR635, in establishing a select committee to investigate the White House and it’s misrepresentation of intelligence in the lead up to the (undeclared) war in Iraq. It has been clear to us, and has become clear to most, that the multitude of statements offered up by President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and Secretary Rice were inconsistent with the facts known to the Dept. of Energy, Dept. of State, many agents within the CIA and FBI, the IAEA and UNSCOM. As of the writing of this letter there has not been an investigation into what the Executive Branch knew, when they knew it and how they, in our opinion, abused select facts and incorrect information to frighten the citizens into supporting an unnecessary war. We also ask that you join with Rep. Conyers in HR 636, censuring the President for failing to respond to questions put to him by Congress, as well as HR 637, censuring VP Cheney for the same abuses We are pleading that Congress step out of its stupor and exercise it constitutional responsibility of being a check on power to the Executive. President Bush has far exceeded any authority granted in our Constitution. He has detained, indefinitely, citizens of the United States, refusing to allow them even the most basic right of access to legal staff. He has ordered the kidnapping of foreign nationals that were innocent of any crime against the United States. He has authorized the torture of people that he alone has declared terrorists. At least 100 people have been killed while in custody of American forces; dead people cannot reveal any information that may be valuable in our hunt for terrorists. Literally thousands of people are being held in detention with no avenue to a judicial system. The Pentagon has been authorized to spy on lawful gatherings that advocate peace and non-violent resolution to conflict. We learned this week that President Bush has illegally issued wiretaps on US citizens, using as his justification the bizarre rational that he, and he alone, can make up laws as necessary. If Congress is unwilling to pursue these avenues we are left with the disturbing belief that our troops are not fighting for democracy and freedom. If President Bush is allowed to continue down the path he has chosen what powers doesn’t he have? Is there anything he cannot do? These are dark times for our republic, we are asking that you perform your duties as a member of Congress and check the Executive Branches abuses before it is too late. I was born shortly after World War II. Growing up, I learned about the horrors of World War II: the Nazi attempted extermination of categories of people that they thought to be inferior and the U. S. dropping of nuclear bombs. I felt relieved that I had not lived then, so that I was spared having moral qualms about actions of omission and commission that contributed to these horrors. However, now I am an adult and, unfortunately, our world is facing new horrors: torture, renditions, disappearances, suggestions for new nuclear weapons, terrorism, killing innocents in order to kill the “suspected” guilty, denying basic humane treatment to nonenemy combatants and illegal immigrants. So now it is my turn, now I am responsible, we all are responsible. We must work to promote and assure the dignity, value, and equal treatment of ALL people regardless of their “category”.
Unlike some people, I enjoy and generally agree with Roy Schmidt's columns in the Chelsea Standard. I must differ with him, however, on his hopelessness about ending the Iraq war. I believe that we should withdraw our troops from Iraq promptly and feel good about doing it. Imagine, for a minute, an America-gone-crazy scenario where you and I are hunkered down in a basement hiding from the cross fire in a battle between neo-Nazis and neo-Black Panthers. Suppose we've heard that the U. S. Army is on its way to put a stop to the fighting and restore order. Think about your feelings at that moment. I, for one, would be ready to welcome the soldiers with open arms, and it wouldn't hurt my mood to learn that my daughter would be piloting one of the Blackhawks flying overhead. Is this the image that we project on average Iraqis hunkered down hiding from similar conflict in their country? Although it's appealing, I don't think it's right. Imagine a simple variation on that scenario. The army is coming to save the day, but it isn't the U. S. Army, it's the French Army, leading a coalition of willing European countries. They've been in our country for a couple of years trying to stem the racial conflict before it overflows into Europe. During that time we've heard that they've all but leveled Detroit and Denver, but we haven't dared travel to see for ourselves. And, you and I regularly have had to cross intimidating roadblocks manned by soldiers who do not speak English. The French insist that they only have only our best interests at heart, but how does this make you feel? I'm sure that I would be outraged, and I might even have caught myself secretly sympathizing with some of the guerilla tactics used by the Nazis and Panthers against the French occupation. I admit that this is a pretty fanciful story, and I have no intention of proposing an analogy between our government and the former government of Iraq. What I am trying to get at are feelings. I'm trying to imagine the feelings of ordinary Iraqis experiencing terrifying daily violence, Iraqis wondering if they are better off with or without an occupying army that doesn't understand them and that (possibly with the best of intentions) has inflicted great damage on their country. Polls show that as many as 80% of Iraqis want us out of their country, and this doesn't surprise me. It's naive for us to think that we know better than they do. Roy Schmidt and others have given good political and military reasons to end the war now. Let's not ignore these reasons because of worries about chaos or bloodbaths. Just like you and I would, the Iraqis want to deal with their domestic problems themselves. We should withdraw our troops promptly, and make it clear to the Iraqis and the world that we truly support their self-determination and that we have no designs on their country or resources. The news about the war in Iraq gets worse and worse, day by day. More than 2,000 American troops and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians are dead. There is increasing evidence of torture in Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, and other sites. There is alleged wartime profiteering by firms such as Haliburton that hold multi-bullion-dollar contracts. And there has been use of depleted uranium and outlawed chemical weapons. Meanwhile, White House officials try to smear war critics as unpatriotic, and Vice President Dick Cheney lobbies for legalization of torture. While Democrats and the media fell for the White House's fraudulent claims, millions of Americans were skeptical. Many of us, including the Green Party, spoke out publicly against the invasion. Now, the only rational action is an end to the occupation and immediate withdrawal of U. S. troops from Iraq. The demand by some Democrats for a withdrawal plan by the end of 2006 will only result in more U. S. troop and Iraqi civilian deaths. There is no honor or sense in "staying the course" that is obviously wrong. President George W. Bush, supported by the Democratic leadership and major media, has shamed the United States, breached international and U. S. constitutional law and weakened our security. We need to hold them all accountable, and we need new political leadership. If this is truly the greatest country in the world, we should certainly be able to do better than this mess. Tim Kelley, a Vietnam vet from Grass Lake, gave his views last week about war and the U.S. fulfilling its "commitment".† I am a Vietnam infantry veteran and, thanks to the Constitution (not the military), I will express my views. After Vietnam I pretty much shut that experience down and moved forward with life. I entered the business world, got married, earned an MBA, had a son.† But I was like a dormant volcano.† There were issues in my mind that caused some rumblings, some steam, and some tremors, but I kept them deep underground.† In January of 2003 I erupted.† Not in violence, but in research.† I was consumed by the question - why do we have wars.† I researched all the areas that I had ignored - Vietnam, politics, wars, justice, poverty, the environment, violence, religion, lobbyists, think tanks, conflict resolution, the media, and more. My conclusion is that war is, at best, the failure of leaders to solve problems.† At worst, war is a massive money generating machine with no regard for life.† The military is the pawn of the mega-rich.† The military does as they are commanded.† The only way to protect our troops is for the people to speak out. All of the wars that I have studied are based on lies, yes, even World War II.† Wars must be sold to the common people because they are the ones who give up their lives and the lives of their children.† Wars are typically sold via a major event.† Someone or a whole country is painted as evil.† The media hypes it.† There is an "attack", or a threat of an attack.† Congress votes for war or gives the President the authority to go to war.† And the mega-rich cheer and get ready for profits.† And the common people, not wanting to believe that their leaders lie, cheer and wave the flag, and hope it won't be their child (because it surely won't be the children of the mega-rich). One of the early keys I discovered in my research was a booklet by two time Medal of Honor recipient Marine Major General Smedley Butler.† After completing his military career, he reflected back and said he had spent his time as a thug for big business.† He destroyed countries and killed people for the expansion of markets and profits for the mega-rich.† His booklet is "War is a Racket".†† World War II was no different.† My research shows that the funders of Hitler, before and during the war, were mega-rich people from the USA.† They were covering their bets. The major event was Pearl Harbor.† An in-depth research book on Pearl Harbor is "Day of Deceit" by Robert Sinnett. I also researched Jesus.† Contrary to some TV preachers and some biblacists, I've found Jesus to be a very inclusive middle eastern guy who loved everyone.† He never hurt anyone.† He never asked anyone to go to battle for him.† He never retaliated, or asked his angles or followers to retaliate.† He was not passive.† He was very active and defied the political, military and religious leaders of the time by his words and actions.† He was murdered by those in power because leaders are afraid of people who challenge their authority. Another area of research is the budget and other comparative numbers.† If you want to know what a business values, look where it spends its money.† The same holds true with a country.† The USA spends over 50% of our tax dollars on the war machine and domination of other countries.† We are the only industrialized country in the world without universal health care.† We rank 37th in health care.† We have more children living in poverty than any other developed country.† We have more people in prison than any country.† We give huge tax benefits to the rich and to major corporations, and cut programs for the common people.† 70% of the people in the USA over 18 did not vote for Bush, and the election could not be certified by an independent agency.† So, do we have a democracy? Research is not rocket science.† With the internet its very easy to explore topics.† The hard part is putting all the pieces together, facing reality, and speaking up.† After all these years I finally got it.† I'm not a puppet anymore.† I will speak out.† I will be visible.† I will demand that political leaders follow the Constitution.† Most importantly, I will follow the example of the all inclusive, active, nonviolent Jesus.† Peace is not the absence of conflict.† It's the absence of violence within conflict.† Peace and happy holidays.
It's no crime to trust the President, but it's a terrible crime for the President to betray that trust. For this reason I'm utterly unmoved by the President's protests that two years ago most Americans, including Representatives and Senators, believed the President's assertions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and responsibility for 9/11. Now, most Americans have come to understand that they were misled, and they have lost confidence in the President. To address this lack of confidence, I'm writing to ask for your support on three related issues before Congress at this time: (1) The President says that we have no designs on the territory of Iraq or its oil. Please support Representative Murtha's call for a prompt and complete withdrawal of our troops from Iraq. Let the Iraqis decide their own destiny, and demonstrate to the Iraqis and the world that this is the true policy of the United States. (2) The President says that we don't torture, and that the prisoners we have detained around the world are treated according to the Geneva Conventions. Please support the McCain amendment to the Defense Appropriations Bill, without restrictions, to guarantee this fundamental moral principle for which our country has always stood. (3) The President says that law-abiding American citizens have nothing to fear from the gag rules and minimal judicial oversight allowed in domestic terrorism investigations since 9/11. Please support the Senate version of the USA PATRIOT Act Reauthorization Bill, reestablishing probable cause and conventional judicial oversight in FBI investigations, and requiring the administration to report on its use of its extraordinary powers. If Americans have nothing to fear, then the Administration will lose no flexibility due to reasonable restrictions. Let's make sure that the President who has lost the confidence of the American people at least does what he says.
I wanted to share with all of you some highlights from my trip south to the School of the Americas at Fr. Benning, Georgia. The actual event took place on the weekend of 11/19-20 but my activist friend Lynn, her friend, Bekah, and I arrived on 11/16 for an apprenticeship with the Puppetista Theater Co. The SOAW (School of the Americas Watch) is an organization begun by a Maryknoll priest, Fr. Roy Bourgeois, for the sole purpose of the closing down this school that trains military leaders for Central and South America. When copies of handbooks from the school were obtained in 1996 Americans were shocked to discover that one of our own military bases was teaching torture techniques. Throughout the week, we met many people who had experienced or witnessed torture by those trained at SOA. This was the hard part. The joyful part was meeting so many who feel the tide is turning. Over 125 Congress members have agreed to sponsor a bill to close the SOA. When their numbers reach 150 many say it will be much easier to swing the remaining members. The bill, HR 1217 may come up for a vote as early as next April. Please consider sharing this info with anyone you can. Since there has been so much focus on torture lately in the news, it seems that the public is more aware and ready to act on this issue. If you can write your congressperson ask them to vote on HR 1217 to suspend operations at the SOA/WHINSEC or eliminate funding for the school. Below is an excerpt, fleeting images, from my travel journal and a photo. Love and peace, Riding south reaching the Cumberland Gap before dark, photos of young women in the rest stop who have been kidnapped, raped or murdered, please help us find Roy ___, or Darryl ______ the boyfriends, the ex-husbands. Are they just more concerned here or is there more violence out there in the hills that swallow up villages with markers about the Civil War, wounds still bleeding? Reach Atlanta, Martin Luther King Drive amidst the affluent suburbs, a reminder of courage, strength and great love. There are small communities throughout the south where folks have taken refuge in hard times. Berea, KY — the college here was integrated early on to teach youth the old ways, arts, and skills of mountain folk. Koinonia, a Christian farm community of blacks and whites in central Georgia faced harassment by the Klan in the 30's and 40's. The leader challenges the Klan one night, "Don't just hide, come inside, get us if you have too." The Klan activities abate. I have an urge to read Flannery O'Connor and Carson McCullers, two of my favorite Southern writers. Bekah shares her poetry about 13 ways to speak of Blackbirds in the backseat. She is only 23, thin, blonde, vulnerable, and strong. She brings out my maternal instincts of protection. Realize how afraid I am beginning to feel as we get closer to Columbus and Ft. Benning. Here we are driving up to the gates Lynn, Bekah and myself. We find the Puppetistas at the Southgate Apartments, dilapidated old military housing like Tara from Gone with the Wind after the war. They are living in an abandoned apartment without windows in some parts. The FBI arrives in a large van to set up base next-door. They all look alike wearing dark glasses and black stocking caps. We imagine them ordering pizza and beer. We are the hippies cooking tofu and rice and sharing a sweet Mexican drink. Here the connection between poverty, racism and war seems so clear. The days are cool, sunny. Our neighbors begin to appear - young, black children helping to make the puppets and practicing walking on stilts. Everyone is playful, hopeful. I cut out crowns, paint masks. Lynn sews costumes. The Catholic Workers stop by from the Hospitality House. They cook for the busloads of folks arriving each day. Young people come from college campuses across the country. I am energized by their vitality, by their drumming and dancing. Katherine Jashinski, a female G.I., holds a press conference to declare her position as a conscientious objector. She is the first woman soldier to do this. Jamie from Columbia, MO tells me he plans to cross the line to be arrested on Sunday. He is matter-of-fact. Later he mentions missing "a bit of beef." I ask about Monsanto. It seems the terminator seed has been discontinued. Monsanto execs tell the activists they are going bankrupt. Yet, Mother Jones says 60% of all our food is now genetically modified. When I get a chance, decide to live dangerously and sneak some contraband barbeque sandwiches back for Jamie. I can't understand why the regulars to this event seem so peaceful and confident. Some of them have spent 6-12 months in prison. One Latina from the barrios of L.A. puts it this way. "In prison one learns how to love radically." Yet, despite this sign of hope, I feel overwhelmed and escape to the Columbus museum in the beautiful old part of town. Here I am saved by art from the markets of Kumasi in West Africa — paintings of women in colorful headdresses. Discover that Ma Rainey, "mother of the blues" was from Columbus. I also learn 34 alligators have been spotted in the Chattahoochee river between Columbus and the delta. Saturday and Sunday 19,000 folks swell the streets. Military helicopters hover overhead. The police are stopping cars along Victory Drive, so we watch our speed carefully. I slip between barricades to join the Puppetistas. In a small room the Madres, four large puppets of indigenous women, are waiting for us to pick them up. They, the mothers who have lost their children to violence, stare quietly down at me. It feels as if I have entered an ancient cave, a cathedral, and have seen the face of god (or goddess). I want to cry in their presence, in this sacred place. The ancestors are with us. Now, compensinos and others join us from Latin America. The Immokolee migrant workers share how their boycott of Taco Bell led to an increase in wages and a commitment that the fast-food giant will not tolerate indentured servitude. MacDonalds and Subway are next on the list. Women from Argentina tell how the workers have taken over bankrupted businesses and made them into cooperatives that are flourishing. Bolivians share about the uprising of the indigenous peoples that takes down the U.S. supported dictator. From Venezuela comes news of the Chavez Code, a new book that substantiates CIA operations in that country to depose the democratically elected president of this oil rich land. The Indians of Chiapas, Mexico are proposing a new constitution for the entire country that will protect the rights of all. I already know that Cuba, despite U.S. boycotts, has developed one of the most effective organic farming and holistic health systems in the world. Musicians from Peru play at the concert after torture victims share their stories. The students dance into the wee hours of the morning. On Sunday Sr. Helen Prejean, author of Dead Men Walking, exorts us all to find a place, any place to find our voice. "In my case," she tells us "I just started walking and talking to folks along the way." We march through the streets chanting the names of some of the thousands of people killed by SOA graduates. At some point, we are behind the stage, in front of the fence where people have left flowers, crosses and signs stuck in the barbed wire. I hear the crowd roar as young and old alike begin to slip past the fence line to be arrested. There is a woman near my mother's age that needs help getting under the fence. The Puppetistas have brought Jamie in a coffin from which he rises in a sign of resurrection and then is boosted over the barricades. I am sobbing uncontrollably and yet feel a great sense of hope as 41 persons cross the line for the rest of us. How privileged I am to witness one of the greatest acts of civil disobedience occurring in the country. Both Gandhi and MLK have spoken of the importance of this sacrificial act to transform reality. We are driving home. I feel peaceful and filled with hope after this rite of passage. We pass the old iron works factory that once made ironclad ships for the Confederacy now converted into a beautiful convention center. We pass the exit to Phenix, Alabama where an attorney named Patterson stood up to the local mafia and was gunned down. As the state's attorney general, his son carried on the fight that freed "sin city" from the control of the gangsters. For the first time in years, I sense the tide turning. It feels good to be alive at this time in history. At home I unpack a souvenir t-shirt. It says, "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed individuals can change the world. Indeed it's the only thing that ever has." (Margaret Mead).
Hon. Joe Schwarz Although we received no response from our letter of July 17 urging you to reconsider our support for the War on Iraq, we should like to appeal a second time to your good senses.
We strongly believe that the U.S. occupation is proving counter-productive as a strategy against terrorism. With the recent domestic disasters, President Bush’s foreign operation has proven too costly an adventure. (As an aside, we were pleased to hear your honorable suggestion several weeks ago that the Country ought to consider repealing Mr. Bush’s tax breaks to the wealthiest among us in order to address the burgeoning federal deficit.) We owe it to our taxpayers and servicemen and women to speak out in support of a clear and honorable exit strategy and a clear, unequivocal declaration that the US will not maintain permanent military bases in Iraq.
We urge you to support the "No Permanent Bases Resolution" (H.Con.Res.197). The measure would endorse a United States policy "not to enter into any base agreement with the Government of Iraq that would lead to a permanent United States military presence in Iraq."
We also ask that you support the bi-partisan "Homeward Bound Act" (H.J.Res. 55 ) which would have the president set a schedule for bringing the troops home.
Finally, the President must be held accountable for having led us into this war on false threats and trumped-up claims of the dangers posed to our country by Iraq.
With the Vice-President’s chief of staff having resigned after being indicted for lying to a federal grand jury and obstructing the justice of the inquiry of the grand jury, the time has come for President Bush to give the public an accounting of whether his march to war included punishing Joseph Wilson for challenging his Administration’s claims.
As you know, the grand jury has been investigating possible violations of Title 18, United States Code, Section 793, and Executive Order 12958 (as modified by Executive Order13292), prohibiting disclosure of classified information to persons not authorized to receive such
information, and otherwise to exercise proper care to safeguard classified information against unauthorized disclosure.
Given this indictment, it is simply unacceptable for the President of the U.S. States of America to refuse comment on the grounds that the investigation is continuing! As much as we do not want to believe that our Government has lied us into a war, the fact is that we - the American taxpayers - are paying for same and are Constitutionally entitled to an accounting from our government. We must pursue some petition for redress in this grave matter..
Given this indictment, your statement that the questions about the grounds on which we invaded Iraq "are academic," no longer suffices. This is no academic question. The Vice President’s chief of staff stands indicted for lying and obstructing justice in an inquiry of serious wrongdoing to an American citizen challenging the bona fides of our Government’s war claims. The public had been assured by the President’s press secretary long ago - in no uncertain terms - that Messrs. Libby and Rove were not involved. Although it is painful, the country must face answer this challenge to its honor.
Given this indictment, we are reminded that the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee has failed to pursue its long-promised phase two on the Administration’s use (and possible abuse) of pre-war intelligence.
As you know, Mr. Bush will not stand election again. The time for his accounting is now. We ask that you use your good offices to support H. Res 505, a Resolution of Inquiry into the marketing of the war by the White House Iraq Group (WHIG). The Resolution would require the White House to turn over all white papers, minutes, notes, emails or other communications kept by the White House Iraq Group. As we understand it, time is of the essence with respect to H.Res. 505.
Please let us know if you will support these resolutions and thank you for your leadership. I'm writing in response to Sharon Rising's letter in the Sept. 1 paper, entitled "War protesters should be respectful". Though her letter goes off in many directions, I think she was trying to say that our peace vigil on the evening of August 17, supporting Cindy Sheehan in her attempt to talk with President Bush, was somehow disrespectful of the troops in Iraq.
About 55 of us gathered quietly that evening behind a cardboard wall of names of those who have died fighting in Iraq. We held signs that said "Peace" and "We support Cindy". We held candles. We prayed. I see no disrespect in any of that.
In fact, I see far greater respect for our troops in what we did that night, and do every Sunday afternoon as we stand in front of the Chelsea Post office with our peace signs, than our government has given them. We actually care what happens to them. We don't want them to die needlessly. Our President doesn't seem to care. He rarely acknowledges their deaths. He doesn't visit with the bereaving parents or visit the wounded in Veterans Hospitals. He uses these young men and women for political gain. He hasn't sent them there to protect us. On the contrary, we are far more vulnerable now with our troops in Iraq than we'd be if they were home.
As for the comment that those serving in Iraq "have made a choice": what about those who signed up for the National Guard? I would bet the choice they made was to help the United States in times of crisis—a crisis like the hurricane that caused so much devastation. Instead, much of our National Guard was in a foreign country while US citizens were left for many days without aid.
With all due respect to Nolan Finley, his Sunday column—"America is obliged to 'impose' true freedom on Iraq"—doesn't persuade. Neither he nor Mr. McCotter begin to explain how our Country's "moral certitude" will now stabilize Iraq. To suggest that our expertise in democracy might now overcome our track record in Iraq is wishful thinking.
More importantly, suggesting that our role in erecting an Iraqi government is somehow divorced from our invasion and occupation is specious. If Iraq succeeds as a democratic state, it will despite our President's arrogance and bumbling in invading it
prepared for nothing more than any easy victory. Our trumped-up charges of WMD, failure in maintaining basic security after invading, and outrageous prison abuses have stripped us of our moral authority.
Most of the world sees this already; when will Mr. Finley? In a past column I called Bush supporters and conservatives "the stupid masses". I've been waiting for a chance to apologize. So today, let me say I'm sorry for that. A more accurate term might have been stubborn masses. Masses unwilling to recognize the obvious. Now those masses are dwindling. Those masses are starting to get the picture. The approval rating is down. Social Security privatization is dead. And President Bush's last national address (do you remember it?) drew the smallest TV audience of his term. Bush's last speech was another rerun, an attempt to urge the American people to stand firm, to be patient, that we are making progress, that we must "complete the mission". Haven't we been hearing that for three years? Wasn't "Mission Accomplished" already declared with Bush's staged photo op on the USS Abraham Lincoln back on May 1, 2003? I could sit here, as could many of my masses of non-stubborn, non-closed-minded, non-gullible friends, and say I told you so. I told you there were no WMD in Iraq. I told you Mr. Bush wanted to invade Iraq simply to get his revenge on Saddam. (Why did we need the Downing Street documents to prove that?) I told you Iraq and Osama were not connected, which we have known all along. I told you going into Iraq would create a civil war there. And I told you starting a fight against terrorism was like shooting a shotgun into a forest of beehives. Before our invasion, Saddam ruled Iraq with the proverbial iron fist. No terrorist could thrive there. And the borders were closed. President Bush has turned Iraq into a hotbed for terrorism. And 1,700 of our soldiers have died trying to complete his mission, which has nothing to do with lofty ideals like defending America. Tragically, there was never anything to defend America from. Please don't suggest that I don't support the troops. I'm deeply thankful for their sacrifice. They should be home with their families like we are. The good thing is that America is finally getting it. Not because anyone was stupid (and for that past implication I apologize dearly—never write an email while you're angry) but because we, as a country, are finally starting to allow the tough questions to be asked. We no longer believe it when we're told it's unpatriotic to question the government. We're not afraid to stand up to a president who says, over and over, "Really, only patriots can see my clothes. Anyone who can't see them is un-American." As well as, "We're making progress. We're turning the corner. And being president is hard work." In his speech, the president said his top job is to protect American life. Imagine if we had not invaded Iraq. There would still be no threat. Saddam would be under our thumb. Or dead, singly, if we had just sent in some Navy Seals. And we would have about $200 billion to use building our own roads and schools. What's not patriotic about that? The president continues to talk about a global war on terror. That's as oxymoronic as a war on stupidity or a war on stubbornness. You can't declare war on an idea. You can only fight dangerous ideals with education and example. Israel has been fighting a war against terrorism for years and years. Have they made any progress? Have the Palestinians stopped their suicide bombing? Now in Iraq, the insurgents are saying they won't stop blowing themselves up until we leave the country. And the president is saying we won't leave the country until the insurgents quit blowing themselves up. Who wins? Other than Halliburton and the Bush/Cheney machine's corporate cronies, no one. Without listening, without educating, without setting an example of understanding and peace, we just keep making more enemies, cultivating more and more terrorists worldwide. The last time anyone suggested a peaceful approach, the administration bluntly told us, "You can't negotiate with terrorists." Oh, wait a minute. We just found out on CNN that we have been negotiating with the Iraqi terrorists after all. Keep your minds open. Don't swallow the lies. What's wrong with trying to get at the truth? Let's all become "enlightened masses"—together. On May 19 the Chelsea Standard ran a story and guest editorial saying that peace groups should not participate in the Memorial Day Parade. The following week the paper published an overwhelming seven letters to the editor condemning the idea. Following is one of the seven letters, and then two reports from the parade itself. "Memorial Day organizers want a non-political event". Interesting idea, but war is a political event. War is encouraged by the mega rich, voted on by politicians, and fought by the common people. The highest tribute that the living can give to those who have died in war (on both sides) is to wage peace and speak up to end war. I am a Vietnam infantry veteran and I've marched in the Memorial Day parade as a veteran for peace. I disagree with the parade organizers and Jeff Gunnis that peace people should not participate. Peace people must be there to provide a voice of reason. Children must see that not everyone is pro war and pro military. There are many options to violence, and the children must see options. The most decorated Marine in history, two time Medal of Honor recipient Major General Smedley Butler, ended his career and wrote a booklet "War Is A Racket". He said he had been a thug for big business. And history agrees. Every war has been fought by the little people to give the big people more power, more money, more markets, more profits, more control. We are raised to believe that war and the military are glorious. If that's the case, the children of our leaders should be there, sharing in the glory. We are raised to believe that war and the military bring peace. If that's the case, after all these thousands of years, the world should be at peace. We are told that war and the military bring Democracy. If that's the case, we should be allowed to vote on war. War, at best, is the failure of leaders to solve problems. At worst, war is a massive money generating machine with no regard for life. For the children, I encourage people of peace to march in the Memorial Day parade. It is our responsibility to show them a better way. War is failure. Though there may have only been about 2 dozen of us we had the longest of processions. We were strung out in a single line in order to hold The List. I wasn't sure I was going to be in the parade but when I followed the sound of the childrens bands warming up I was drawn in by the size of The List. As the parade formed and the bands unified into recognizable song, we walked out of the alley into the bright sun of Main Street to applause for the contribution of peace consciousness and , I hope, for the 1,600+ names of each American soldiers the made up The List. It was a powerfull statement in the right place. The clapping continued to be directed at our procession all the way to the graveyard. Deacon Shaneyfelt gave a tender talk to start things off at the ceremony which ends our annual parade. He spoke to 'both sides', hawks and doves, in his short speach about there being a time for every purpose. The Professor/Soldier that gave the main address was bright and thoughtful, too. He spoke of America's hisotric role in battling out the world's problems. I felt I was hearing how we have created some big changes on the planet with our muscle and might but I was not hearing about the cost or sustainablilty of this old way.
It went well. We were last, right after the Middle School Band - almost. 2 old lady flag wavers with "patriotic" shirts snuck in between us and the Middle School Band. I think they were in the pro-war group that was ahead of us last year. Their act of heroism for corporate america! Palmer made a 100' banner with the names of the US soldiers killed in Iraq. The MC for the event (I didn't catch his name), dressed in his finest military uniform, asked Palmer not to carry the banner. Palmer did an excellent job of explaining our position. I thought I heard the military guy say as he was leaving "and that doesn't show the 100,000 others who were killed". I'd like to get a sanity check on that. Mike Muha and I had on our old military jungle shirts and we lead the group. I carried the VFP flag with a double sided sign on top - "Pax Christi" and "Love". There were about 20 people carrying the banner. We got one boo, 6/7 applause. There was a jet fly over. Disgusting! The main speaker at the cemetery was a military Major from EMU. Heads up the ROTC program. I had all I could do to keep from speaking out. His talk was how great the military is and how the military is "ambassadors" for the US, bringing freedom and democracy to the world. He even listed the war and conflicts. I kept thinking - if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. He told the kids that some day they may be called upon to sacrifice their lives for their country. I almost puked. I'm going to call this guy and see if wants to have a sit down with me and another VFP guy from AA. I need to know how his mind works. My focus is on the children. Without us the event would have been 100% "war is the answer". Like many Americans, I have experienced a deepening sense of insecurity with the escalation of fundamentalist Islamic militancy toward the United States. The more firepower we bring to bear, the more dedicated our enemies become in their crusade to seek their revenge.
Having campaigned a successful war of insurgency ourselves in 1776, and having experienced the ineffectiveness of "a bigger stick" when we faced the Vietnamese 30 years ago, you would think our leaders might begin to question the strategy of beating our enemies into submission.
According to a recent Pentagon report (November 24, 2004), "American efforts have not only failed ... (they) have paradoxically elevated the stature of, and support for, radical Islamists while diminishing support for the U.S." Is it not clear that this is a war no one can win?
In March 2004, U.S. Rep. Lynn Woolsey of California and 20 co-sponsors introduced the SMART Security Resolution in Congress. SMART stands for Sensible, Multi-lateral, American Response to Terrorism. The bill calls for a new U.S. security policy based on preventing acts of terrorism, strengthening international cooperation and rule of law, stopping the spread of dangerous weapons, and promoting disarmament.
Our military actions have served to decrease our security and marginalize us in the world. We will continue to pay enormous costs in reputation, dollars, and lives. Maybe war is not the answer to the terrorist threat.
Woolsey and her colleagues are expected to re-introduce the SMART Security Resolution this month. Find out more about it.
If our tactics in Iraq are starting to look like a quick road to national bankruptcy and humiliation, then write Michigan Congressman Joe Schwarz and ask him to co-sponsor House Resolution 392. America deserves a smarter security policy. President Aristide of Haiti was physically removed from Haiti by the United States last February, replacing him with Gerard Latortue who had been living in the United States. While United States citizens highly value their freedom of democracy and our government advocates democracy for all countries, we removed the first ever democratically elected president of Haiti. Over the past year there has been no new election nor is one scheduled in the near future. Haiti continues to be a very violent place. I have never been to Haiti, but I was planning to go last October with a local medical mission team to help at a Haitian hospital. Unfortunately, the trip was canceled due to the violence. I have read Aristide's biography. A former priest, it seems to me that he has good values and a large love for the Haitian poor. Our government is not threating to prosecute him for any crimes. Haiti is only 500 miles from the United States, many former Haitians live in the United States, and, like us, it was formed via a revolution against its European colonizer. Haiti is the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere. Haiti's health care and its infrastructure are abysmal. It needs a lot of help. I believe our country needs to bring Aristide back and work WITH him to improve the lot of the people of Haiti and to promote a just society based on law instead of force. Thirty five years ago I was told that I was fighting for democracy in Vietnam. Now we're fighting for democracy in Iraq. Our leaders tell us we have the greatest democracy in the world. I wonder. If our form of democracy is so good, why do we have to force people to accept it? Are we leading by example? Women and blacks couldn't vote until recently. Some areas still make it difficult. In 2000 we stopped counting votes and had to get the Supreme Court involved to pick a president. In 2004 there were over 30,000 voting irregularities reported. In some cases there were more votes cast than voters. An independent audit group could not certify our election. We have no national standard for casting votes, or counting votes. Seventy percent of the people of voting age did not vote for the president. Our system seems sick to me, but neither of our two major parties seem to care. A ticket to the inaugural ball only cost $100,000. I doubt if many of our young folks in the military, who are bing told that they are fighting for democracy, could have afforded that. Maybe our form of democracy is the greatest if you're very rich. About 30 people attended the pot luck, movie and discussion yesterday evening at the Michigan Friends Center.
There were quite a few new people. They learned about our group from recommendations by current members and from our web site. There was a real need among the people there to share and to support each other. These are trying times. The movie, "Waging Peace" started a lively discussion. The main topic was whether we are discouraged or optimistic regarding the political and military situation since the presidential election. Discouraged comments included, The U.S. government is SOOOOO powerful; Bush seems psychotic; People feel very alienated; Why is the government response always more punishment, more rules, not understanding, and resolution? Optimistic thoughts were, I'm glad that Bush won because now he has to suffer the consequences of his previous bad decisions. Our current poor financial status, i.e. deficit spending and falling value of the dollar, will force the government to change. We discussed topics for the upcoming day-long seminar with the national FCNL at the Friends Center in March. This will be a joint endeavor by CANOPAS, the Michigan Friends Center, and the Manchester peace group. If you would like to be involved in the planning, there will be a meeting on Saturday January 29 at 11:00 am. at the Main Street Coney Island Restaurant, 1555 S. Main, Chelsea. Please let John Gourlay know so we can reserve enough tables. Also, we would like to congratulate Arnie Stieber who has recently been placed on the national board of the Veterans for Peace. CANOPAS has placed an ad in the program for the Martin Luther King Day celebration being organized by One World One Family. The ad, designed by Kathie Gourlay, is below: "Peace on Earth" is the message of the season. On Sundays at noon, as our Chelsea peace group stands at the corner near the Chelsea Post Office with our evergreen festooned sign, that is our focus. We are grateful to all the passersby who support our message with their honks and thumbs up. We believe this is a universal hope that extends beyond the season and throughout the world. We are also grateful, particularly to the man who stopped by on this very cold day and offered to go get us hot drinks, and the second man who just walked up to us with a tray of hot chocolate. We did not get either name, but thank you so much who ever you are. Warming our hands and hearts, we truly would like to pass that warmth on to our American brothers and sisters who are enduring more than cold in far away places, trying to carry out our nation's attempts to create peace in other parts of the world. May the citizens of those countries soon be freed from their current suffering and be able to experience genuine peace. Thirty-four years ago, I spent my first holiday season away from my family. I am a Vietnam infantry veteran. I learned then that the holidays are not a place on the calendar, they are a place in your mind. Over the years I've learned many things. I have finally managed to look at myself and my country and throw off the indoctrination of my childhood. War is not glorious. If it were, the children of our leaders would be there. War does not bring peace. If it did, after all these thousands of years, we would live in a peaceful world. At best, war is the failure of leaders to solve problems. At worst, war is a massive money-generating machine that has no regard for life. If you want to "support the troops" this holiday season, then give them the best gift money won't buy—give them the gift of peace. It's very simple. The military does what they are told to to by politicians. Politicians are supposed to do what we the people tell them to do. So, tell your politicians that they have failed. Democracy is not a spectator sport. Our troops need you. The 1461st Transportation Company leaves for Iraq. We wave flags and play music and cry. Captain Christopher Rick says "It's critically important to the winning of this war that the home front remain strong". This scene has been played in this country for many, many years. Young folks sent off to war. The home folks told to remain strong. We are taught that war is necessary and right and just. We are taught to honor the military. We have cannons in our parks. We marvel at the latest war technology.
What's missing is the other side. I'm a Vietnam infantry veteran. At best, war is the failure of leaders to resolve conflicts. At worst, war is a massive money generating machine that has no regard for life.
The leaders cheer us on, but their kids don't go. Some of our folks may not return. Some may return with missing body parts. All who return will have permanent mental scars. And the leaders and the mega-rich won't care, except with words.
We need to question. We need to Protect Our Troops. Protect them from greed, from lies, from being pawns. We the People need to direct our "public servants" to use their brains to resolve conflicts. When they refuse, or say there are no options, we need to fire them and get better leaders. The price is too high if we don't.
You have more than two choices for U.S. Congress this year. In addition to Schwartz and Renier, you will find the name of Jason Seagraves on the Green Party ballot line. Following a debate with these candidates, an audience straw poll was taken and Seagraves won with 60 percent of the vote. Seagraves is new to politics, but not to hard work and dedication. He has run a strong campaign and everywhere he has had a chance to talk to people he has convinced Republicans and Democrats alike that he is the best person to represent the 7th District in Washington. Having been a small business owner, he has always lived in Hillsdale and Livingston counties, went to school at Siena Heights University and currently lives in Adrian. Mr. Seagraves vows to keep Americans' jobs at home, raise the minimum wage to $7.50 and enable business to pay as much as $10 through tax credits. He believes we need to get rid of mega-farms, offer health care for all Americans and end the war in Iraq. Check out his Web site at www.jasonseagraves.com to read extensive independent articles from the press, and remember to vote for Seagraves Nov. 2. I'm a Vietnam infantry veteran, a spouse, a father, a business person with an MBA, and a Catholic. I've researched Bush and Kerry and their associates. While Bush certainly has a knack for homey talk, feel good slogans, and photo opportunities, his actions leave much to be desired. He's out of touch with We The People. Take health care. Bush says we're the best in the world. The World Health Organization lists us as 37th. We have more children living in poverty than any other industrialized country in the world. And we're the only industrialized country without universal health care. Bush proudly claims to be a "War President". War is disgusting. War destroys the common people on both sides. War generates huge profits for some, but it doesn't solve problems. Look at your family or your community. Problems aren't solved by violence. In all of Bush's election campaigns, a group rises up to spread dirt about his opponents. This year its the "Swift Boat" crew. The leader of this crew is John O'Neil, a guy Nixon tapped in the early 1970s to attack Kerry for telling the truth about Vietnam. The group has received over $600,000.00 from a Bush supporter in TX. Bush had the opportunity to unite the world after 9/11. He did the opposite. His associates had a plan. The plan was written in the mid 1990s. Its called "Project For a New American Century", and its being carried out in Iraq and Afghanistan. Neither candidate is perfect. However, John Kerry is in touch with reality and will stop the assault on our own people and the world community. In the vice-presidential debate, the good news is that we were treated to two, not just one, articulate knowledgeable candidates. The debate, however, was soundly won by Edwards on all three dimensions: style, substance and underlying values. Edwards was a class act. He looked us "straight in the eye." He made a quick and genuine apology (when was the last time we had that from the current administration) for his albeit minor offense of inadvertently using Kerry's name when specific ground rules specified not doing so. He gave a politically risky, but apparently sincere, acknowledgement of Cheney's love for his lesbian daughter. This is a man we can be sure will make our nation proud in the many ceremonial, as well as substantive, tasks of the vice presidency. While both candidates were clearly in command of facts, Edwards was the one who quickly and succinctly articulated plans in a way the common man could understand. Cheney gave no plan, only a promise of four more years of the same —
four more years of values that were on display tonight, values which illustrate how Edwards also won on the third element of the debate. The debate showed a microscopic version of the values Cheney and the current administration has displayed for the last 3 1/2 years: Cheney's insults against Edwards' facts, Cheney's stonewalling as a defense against Edwards' charges of the indefensible, and Cheney's constant refrain of discredited facts and unsubstantiated allusions designed to cast fear against Edwards' vigor, courage and hope. Why would any of us choose Cheney's values? The majority of us did not choose them in the first place four years ago, and Nov. 2 is our chance to collectively reject them once and for all. Kerry-Edwards is the team our country needs to bring dignity and credibility back to our nation. I watched the first presidential debate online at C-span.org. I picked C-span because they covered the debate by having a split screen with both candidates shown for the entire 90 minutes. I was struck by the stark contrast in the amount of content conveyed by the candidates. President George Bush had practically none, just words repeated from stump speeches. Sen. John Kerry, on the other hand, provided specifics about his stands on policy issues and the differences between his and Bush's. My confidence in Kerry's ability to lead the war on terrorism and serve as our commander-in-chief got a definite boost. I'm looking forward to the vice presidential debate and the other two presidential debates, so I can see and hear for myself without the "spin" of the campaigns getting in the way. I came away from the presidential debate remembering two moments that haven't been widely commented upon, but that vividly illustrate the case for Sen. John Kerry and against President George W. Bush. The first was Kerry's explanation of how he expects to get the international support necessary from Arab countries, Europe and elsewhere that will allow us to start withdrawing our troops from Iraq. He said we need to make it clear through our actions and plans that the United States has no long-term designs on Iraq. This very simple and clear goal addresses perfectly everything that is wrong with the war. In very large part, the reason for our lack of allies and the resistance to our troops is the belief that we are in Iraq for ulterior reasons having nothing to do with the welfare of the Iraqis. Why doesn't Bush understand this issue? The second moment was Bush's proud proclamation of his warm, personal friendship with "Vladimir," President Putin of Russia. Putin is the unrepentant former head of the KGB, the Soviet Union's secret police, and he is showing his true colors right now, making anti-democratic changes in the structure of Russia's government. What does it mean that Bush is attracted to this kind of man and at the same time has managed to alienate most of the leaders of the world's democracies? In no way do these moments encompass the breadth of issues at stake in the coming election, but they do illustrate, as did most of the debate, that Kerry is a competent, clear-headed thinker, and Bush is lacking in understanding and judgment. I just finished watching the first debate, and I have several questions. Bush said "Sadam Hussein had no intention of disarming." Could it have escaped his attention that Hussein was, in fact, not armed? This fact would have come to light, without the loss of over 1,052 American lives, if Bush had kept the promise he made to Kerry and the rest of Congress and the nation: form a multilateral coalition with many respected nations to force the continuation of the inspections, and resort to war only as a last resort. Bush said, "100,000 Iraqi troops were currently trained," and that "we need to stay in Iraq until the Iraqi's can protect themselves." Could it have escaped his attention that this is twice the number of trained troops that Prime Minister Allawi claimed just last week, and more than 10 time the number cited in a recently released Pentagon report? It appears that the claimed 100,000 troops are insufficient for security, or else he simply failed to calculate that creating 100,000 trained troops will take 10 to 15 years at the current actual rate of 8,000 per year. Bush said "I never dreamed in 2000 that I would be sending troops to war." Could it have escaped his notice that presidents do make that decision? Or does he think we are still naive to the well established fact that planning for the Iraq invasion began immediately after his inauguration, months before 9/11, as a key part of his neoconservative agenda? It seems he lacks either competence or credibility. Bush said, "The best way to protect the nation is to stay on the offense." He showed that tonight. He was offensive with his bumbling style, offensive in his apparent belief in citizen's gullibility, and offensive when he offered the same badly failed bromides for keeping America safe. Our best bet for protecting America requires removing this offensive man from power, and replacing him with Kerry. Tonight, Kerry showed that he has the vision, courage, commanding presence and experience to defend, not offend, America.
I donít understand how any active duty military or veteran can support George Bush, given his and his administration's disrespect of the military. Most of the people in positions of authority avoided military service altogether. Dick Cheney said he had "other priorities". Bush, while he did serve in the National Guard, didn't have enough respect for the Guard or his fellow reservists to report for duty for months at a time, leaving his fellow troops to take on the extra burden of his responsibilities. While Bush talks tough—"Bring ëem on!" (over 770 US troops have died since then, over 830 have died since Bush announced "Mission Accomplished") and says he supports our troops, he shows his disrespect by proposing cutting veteran benefits, closing veteran hospitals, cutting combat pay for the very people who are fighting his war, and forcing many military families to resort to food stamps to survive. The Iraq war was so poorly planned, and so little regard was given to the troops fighting there, that many had to buy flack vests with their own money (or donations from those back home). When I was in Vietnam, at least I didn't have to write home and say "Please send bullets". A high-ranking Air Force officer recently complained that the Republican Convention was better planned that the Iraq war. To believe Bush supports our troops is unbelievable.
I am a Vietnam infantry veteran and a member of Veterans For Peace. I spent last weekend expressing my views on peace in Oak Ridge, TN. Oak Ridge is home to the world's largest weapons of mass destruction plant. This plant is currently upgrading our 10,000 nuclear bombs, and building more. This plant, via the Department of Energy, is requesting $12 billion of our tax dollars to continue this work. The House of Representatives bill (HR 4614) has a misleading title - "Making Appropriations for Energy and Water Development for the Fiscal Year ending September 30, 2005, and for other purposes". I saw eleven people arrested at Oak Ridge for peacefully expressing their views. Most of these people were women. Some of these women were over 70. One was a teenager in Germany during the Holocaust. If we as a nation truly want peace in the world, and peace for our children, then we must lead by example. We must reduce, or better yet, eliminate our weapons of mass destruction.
The day was so beautiful for our Sunday, June 20 demonstration that it deserved a photograph. I just finished watching the first debate, and I have several questions. Bush said "Sadam Hussein had no intention of disarming." Could it have escaped his attention that Hussein was, in fact, not armed? This fact would have come to light, without the loss of over 1,052 American lives, if Bush had kept the promise he made to Kerry and the rest of Congress and the nation: form a multilateral coalition with many respected nations to force the continuation of the inspections, and resort to war only as a last resort. Bush said, "100,000 Iraqi troops were currently trained," and that "we need to stay in Iraq until the Iraqi's can protect themselves." Could it have escaped his attention that this is twice the number of trained troops that Prime Minister Allawi claimed just last week, and more than 10 time the number cited in a recently released Pentagon report? It appears that the claimed 100,000 troops are insufficient for security, or else he simply failed to calculate that creating 100,000 trained troops will take 10 to 15 years at the current actual rate of 8,000 per year. Bush said "I never dreamed in 2000 that I would be sending troops to war." Could it have escaped his notice that presidents do make that decision? Or does he think we are still naive to the well established fact that planning for the Iraq invasion began immediately after his inauguration, months before 9/11, as a key part of his neoconservative agenda? It seems he lacks either competence or credibility. Bush said, "The best way to protect the nation is to stay on the offense." He showed that tonight. He was offensive with his bumbling style, offensive in his apparent belief in citizen's gullibility, and offensive when he offered the same badly failed bromides for keeping America safe. Our best bet for protecting America requires removing this offensive man from power, and replacing him with Kerry. Tonight, Kerry showed that he has the vision, courage, commanding presence and experience to defend, not offend, America.
I donít understand how any active duty military or veteran can support George Bush, given his and his administration's disrespect of the military. Most of the people in positions of authority avoided military service altogether. Dick Cheney said he had "other priorities". Bush, while he did serve in the National Guard, didn't have enough respect for the Guard or his fellow reservists to report for duty for months at a time, leaving his fellow troops to take on the extra burden of his responsibilities. While Bush talks tough—"Bring ëem on!" (over 770 US troops have died since then, over 830 have died since Bush announced "Mission Accomplished") and says he supports our troops, he shows his disrespect by proposing cutting veteran benefits, closing veteran hospitals, cutting combat pay for the very people who are fighting his war, and forcing many military families to resort to food stamps to survive. The Iraq war was so poorly planned, and so little regard was given to the troops fighting there, that many had to buy flack vests with their own money (or donations from those back home). When I was in Vietnam, at least I didn't have to write home and say "Please send bullets". A high-ranking Air Force officer recently complained that the Republican Convention was better planned that the Iraq war. To believe Bush supports our troops is unbelievable.
I am a Vietnam infantry veteran and a member of Veterans For Peace. I spent last weekend expressing my views on peace in Oak Ridge, TN. Oak Ridge is home to the world's largest weapons of mass destruction plant. This plant is currently upgrading our 10,000 nuclear bombs, and building more. This plant, via the Department of Energy, is requesting $12 billion of our tax dollars to continue this work. The House of Representatives bill (HR 4614) has a misleading title - "Making Appropriations for Energy and Water Development for the Fiscal Year ending September 30, 2005, and for other purposes". I saw eleven people arrested at Oak Ridge for peacefully expressing their views. Most of these people were women. Some of these women were over 70. One was a teenager in Germany during the Holocaust. If we as a nation truly want peace in the world, and peace for our children, then we must lead by example. We must reduce, or better yet, eliminate our weapons of mass destruction.
The day was so beautiful for our Sunday, June 20 demonstration that it deserved a photograph. BRAVO!!!! Joe and I just got to the tail end of the parade, and in spite of the letters in the paper to the contrary, we heard no silence, we saw and heard some applause and saw a few peace signs formed in peoples hands. We also stood by a group of people who looked on the surface to be staunch supporters of the military way, who were under their breath critiquing the speech and the RAH RAH about Tyranny, etc. An older woman by me said "then we need to protect ourselves from our own president" in response to fighting Tyranny! This town has a public facade and a private quiet voice. The letters to the editor seem more a part of the facade bracing, behind the National Facade of Patriotism, than the real picture of our country. Remember 65% of our population is baby boomer age, we lived thru Vietnam and Like Kerry we have come to the conclusion that war, is not the answer. But when we are in the middle of a terrible mess like Iraq/oil/terrorism and Osama bin Saddam double speak, we must now find our way out. There are many quiet voices questioning the truth of much, that we are being force fed these days: by a President who never truly served his fellow man in War, never risked his life for others, never faced his own mortality in a war that had no end. and by a media that seems as fickle and wavering as smoke in the wind. Mark the flags flying at half staff today in Michigan and remember those who are dying for our country's right to be conspicuous consumers of fossil fuels. Thanks for all your hard work and dedication. A quiet voice from behind the facade, In regards to recent letters to the Chelsea Standard that marchers promoting peace in the Chelsea Memorial Day parade were "inconsiderate," "offensive," and "inappropriate," did the letter writers fail to notice that some of these people they detest were in fact…veterans? As strange as it may seem to some people, veterans who have experienced war and the worst violence a person can imagine are some of the strongest proponents of resolving conflicts around the world peacefully. Members of the Washtenaw County Veterans For Peace Chapter chose to march in the Memorial Day parade not only to honor their fellow members of the military killed in duty, but to also to make a plea that we advance ourselves as a civilization so that the concept of war becomes unacceptable. And as far as one letter writer stating that those wanting to make political statements at the Memorial Day parade should have stayed at home, isn't that statement itself rather insulting to the veterans who where simply trying to promote peace at the parade? As veterans, we gave years of our lives serving our country, defending the Constitution and the right for a citizen to express their views, but we aren't welcome in Chelsea with a "Veterans For Peace" flag on Memorial Day? Talk about real hypocrisy! So again, for those who become very upset at seeing those speaking out for peace at Memorial Day or Veterans Day ceremonies, before you start condemning that person, keep in mind that person you are singling out could very well be a veteran who has seen the horrors of war and is just trying to say, there has to be a better way to resolve conflicts than fighting and dying. Sincerely, Negroponte is going to be our ambassador to Iraq? This admin is just too
rich for words!! This guy was convicted of lying to Congress over
Iran-Contra, (pardoned by Bush I) and had to have known about the
EL-Mezote' massacre in Honduras. This brings to at least two the number of
convicted felons helping us run our 51st state (Chalabi is the other). Note
his quote "To this day," he said, "I do not believe that death squads were
operating in Honduras." See no evil, hear no evil, speak evil only of your
political enemies, do lots of evil in the name of The Almighty. Lets get out
our pens and let the Senate know that this one should not be allowed.
See the article in the Sydney Morning Herald, http://smh.com.au/articles/2004/04/20/1082395820258.html. So...Bush is willing to stand publicly in front of the burned out towers
in his election campaign ad, even though he previously said he had "no
ambition whatsoever to use this as a political issue."
Yet...Bush is NOT willing to stand privately in front of the
Congressional committee investigating national preparedness for 9/11,
even though he previously said he would cooperate fully with their
investigations.
How ironic. How self-serving. How misleading. How predictable. How
foolish to consider him for another term.
A terrorist is one who uses terror as a means of coercion. I began to wonder where terrorists are trained. So I did some research. I was surprised to find that since 1946 the USA has funded a school that teaches terror. It was called the School of the Americas. It was located at Ft. Benning, GA. In 2001, under public pressure, the school was "closed". It reopened however, after one month, in the same location but with a new name - the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation. It still teaches coercion via violence. While the Ft. Benning school is the most infamous, it is not alone. There are over 270 other schools, on military bases in the USA, that teach coercion via violence. Countries from all over the world send their people here to learn these techniques. I'm a Vietnam infantry veteran, and I'm curious as to how we can have a War on Terrorism, and teach it at the same time. Maybe a better use for our tax dollars would be to fund our schools.
I'm a Vietnam veteran. I recently learned that a small group of Vietnam veterans are going into our schools and, by stories and songs, telling our kids that they must do whatever the President tells them to do. Bad advice. Here's some history. The invasion of Vietnam was instigated by the Gulf of Tonkin incident. Our government said that a North Vietnamese ship attacked a US Navy ship. The media jumped on the story. Congress quickly turned over its Constitutional power to declare war to the President. And the war was on. Over 3 million people were killed. Millions suffered and many are still suffering. Billion of dollars were made. We dropped more bombs on Vietnam than all previous wars combined. One major problem - The Gulf of Tonkin incident never happened. It was a ruse. It was misinformation. It was, flat out, a lie. A democracy requires people to think, to question, to hold leaders accountable. To blindly follow is dangerous, ignorant, and un-American. Our kids must be taught to be true Americans, not sheep. I live in Pinckney and am the local coordinator for Military Families Speak
Out (www.mfso.org). If you know of anyone who has a family member in
the military and who also opposes our continued involvement in Afghanistan
and Iraq, please ask them to contact me. Thank you! Deb Regal,
734.878.2818,
dlregal@chartermi.net Lynn Meadows recommends the documentary movie "Fog of War", now playing at the Michigan Theater. It's an interview with Robert McNamara, Secretary of State during the Vietnam War. According to one reviewer, he is "the only Vietnam era figure to have apologized for getting some critical things wrong." He finds parallels to today's war in Iraq. Jennifer Kundak recommends several readings. The March-April 2003 issue of Utne Reader reflects the theme, "Imagine the Amrica You Want". It has many articles relevant to our peace activites, with titles like, "You Say You Want a Revolution," "Learning from the Right," and "Connected We Stand." Also, the book, The Portable Sixties Reader, edited by Ann Charters, Penguin, 2003, contains interesting articles, including one by Allen Ginsberg teaching us how to organize a peaceful antiwar demonstration or "spectacle". These readings aren't available on line, but Jennifer (474-2424) is willing to share her copies, and they are available at our library through inter-library loan.
I would like to address several comments made two weeks ago in a letter to the editor by Mr. Hammet. First and foremost is Mr. Hammets' belief that the If you do not believe me then ask people who are in a better position to know. I would suggest Scott Ritter, 10 yr veteran of the Marine Corps and former member of the UN weapons inspection team (UNSCOM). A man Sec of State Powell called Not good enough? Then how about Hussein Kamal. Saddam Husseins son-in-law and the person in charge of wmd's in Iraq, who defected to the US in 1995 and gave testimony to UNSCOM about wmds. President Bush thought so much of his testimony that he used a select portion of it in his State of the Union speech last year to terrify Americans. What Mr. Bush failed to tell congress was that Mr. Kamal also told UNSCOM that he had ordered destroyed all wmd's in 1991. This has been confirmed recently by a note found from Hossam Amin, director of the Iraqi office overseeing U.N. inspectors, written five days after Kamals defection, confirming that they had destroyed all biological weapons in 1991. Ray Mcgovern, a CIA Analyst for 27 years and the man who gave daily security briefings to Bush the Elder wrote last week; This month The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace issued a report entitled Second, Mr. Hammet offers as proof of success the point that no Al-Qaida attacks have taken place in the US in two years. I would like to remind all of you that almost a decade passed between their first attempt to blow up the Twin Towers and the horrible attacks of 9/11. From 1993 to 9/11 Al-Qaida successfully carried off 5 terrorist attacks. Since then they have pulled off 17 attacks around the world. Why should we consider that success? In closing I would like to quote one of the Army War Colleges' assessments of George Bushes war in Iraq issued Jan 14- (it)"promises more than it can deliver, and threatens to dissipate US military resources in an endless and hopeless search for absolute security." If George Bush were using the resources of the US wisely, military families would not be soliciting money to buy body armor for Reserve soldiers.
A sarcastic letter to the Chelsea Standard on January 22 accused CANOPAS of being anti-American, and dismissed its demonstrations as a waste of time. CANOPAS members Suzy Morse and Gary Maveal were quick to respond with the following two letters: I am one of the peace vigilers criticized by Ms. Martell in last week's Sound Off for not putting our time to better use to make a difference in someone's life. By taking the time to write out and send in her opinion, she has affirmed one motivation that underlies our vigil, the value of expressing one's opinion in the public forum. We know our vigil makes a difference to many of our fellow Chelsea citizens because they go out of their way to tell us this every Sunday. On a larger scale we seek to make a difference in the lives of the people around the world who suffer as "collateral damage" of misguided American foreign policy. I was appalled that your paper saw fit to
print an item in Sound Off last week which suggested that
the CANOPAS anti-war demonstrators would better serve the
world by volunteering somewhere else. Any reasoned opinion disagreeing with the group's peaceful
goals—if there had been one stated—would have been
welcomed. Instead, the writer's message was a sarcastic
personal attack on a committed group of activists trying to
affect government policy in the time-honored American way.
The letter's musing was fundamentally unfair and did
nothing to promote honest debate. Shame on the Standard for not exercising its editorial
judgment. On Martin Luther King Day, CANOPAS's own Arny Stieber represented Veterans for Peace at the downtown Detroit United Methodist Church. He gave the following talk: My name is ARNY STIEBER. I was born in Detroit. I'm a small business person. I'm of German and Polish descent. I'm a Roman Catholic. I'm a spouse and a father. I followed the American dream—got an MBA and worked for some of the worlds largest corporations . . . . . . I'm also a trained killer. I was in high school and college during the 1960s and I didn't pay much attention to what was going on in the world. I graduated from Michigan State in 1969 and was drafted that summer. I was trained in the infantry and arrived in Vietnam 34 years ago—almost to the day. I spent 14 months in Vietnam—"liberating the people", "stopping the Communists threat" and stopping the "Domino Theory". I've seen massive violence first hand, and I'm here to tell you—VIOLENCE IS NOT THE SOLUTION. I see war and discrimination as part of the same family. One group—the "powerful"—wants to dominate the other—the "inferior". The "powerful" try to dehumanize the "inferior" by spreading fear and hatred. Dr. King was for the civil rights of ALL people, and for peaceful conflict resolution. He scared the power structure of this country. He discovered the problem in this country and he had his hand on the LEVER OF SOLUTION, and he was pushing it. The lever is UNITY, and the keys to unity are education and communication. During this past year I woke up. I read "The Peoples History of the United States" by Howard Zinn and I was shocked and awed. I joined Vietnam Veterans Against the War and Veterans for Peace. I learned that we killed over 2 million people in Vietnam. I learned that we killed over 20,000 people in Panama when we "arrested" Manuel Noriega. I learned that we hired the Rand Corp. to figure out how to solve the drug problem, and then ignored their advise. I learned that the Federal Reserve is not part of our government, but is a private corporation. I learned about Bishop Gumbleton and Pax Christi. I learned that our sanctions on Iraq killed over 1.2 million people and most of them were children. I learned about the School of the Americas. I learned about depleted uranium. I learned that Peter Drucker (a world famous business consultant) recommends that top executives of major corporation make no more than 25 times the wage of the lowest paid employee. I learned about Marine Major General Smedley Butler. I learned how screwed up, dishonest and racially biased the 2000 presidential "selection" process was. I learned that Bush was AWOL while I was in Vietnam. I learned that there are many, many great people working for peace and justice in this country. I learned that the major news media have forgotten how to do investigative reporting. I learned that there are many unanswered questions about 9/11. I learned about PFLAG, and I joined. I learned that anyone can join the NAACP, so I joined. There is so much more that I need to learn. I feel ignorant and embarrassed that I could get this far down the path, and not know so much. I guess I was a typical, white, middle class American male. Dr. King had his hand on the SOLUTION LEVER and was beginning to really push it when he was murdered. The solution is UNITY. Not a melting pot, but unity of the people - with all of our BEAUTIFUL DIVERSITY of colors, religions, sexual orientations, sizes, shapes and cultures. Unity with ourselves and the people of the world—in spite of the fear and hatred spread by some in our government. Unity with ourselves and the people of the world—in spite of the illegal and immoral acts promoted by some in our government. Dr. King knew the keys to unity are education and communication. We must learn about other people. We must communicate with other people. I leave you with two thoughts—Leaders are supposed to solve problems, not create them, and—If you have to hurt someone to solve a problem, YOU are the problem. Peace! It was tempting to cheer after the recent capture of Saddam Hussein. After all, by all accounts he was a brutal dictator, and without his commands and money, Iraq and the world would be a much safer place. Since his capture, however, there has apparently been an increase in violence in Iraq, not a decrease. And, now we're under a terrorism alert in our own country. We must be doing something wrong.
The problem is that our soldiers in Iraq are seen by most Arabs as a humiliating occupying army there to do them no good. We can be sure that most Iraqis know that the U. S. invaded their country against the wishes of most of the world. They know that the crucial weapons of mass destruction have never been found. They know that no links between Saddam and Al Qaeda have been proved. Our tactics include the intimidation and punishment of civilians in response to actions by insurgents. Why, at this point, would Iraqis believe our promises that we're there to help them?
In the meantime, Osama bin Laden is still at large, Afghanistan is still run by the war lords, and al Qaeda still operates with impunity. According to Newsweek, al Qaeda sees the occupation of Iraq as such a rallying opportunity that it has made it its new center of military activity.
We are much less safe now than we were on September 11, 2001, and we will continue to be at risk until the world becomes convinced that we are truly benevolent in our intentions. In the short run this means getting out of Iraq as soon as possible. If we really have Iraq's interests at heart, we should give our $87 billion to the United Nations to rebuild Iraq according to an international consensus.
Capturing Saddam Hussein must have been a mistake. Now, if he's not assassinated, he will have the stage to tell his story. It will be very difficult for the U. S. political and military-industrial complex to hear. Saddam was installed in power by our government. His methods of terrorism were known, but ignored by our government. Our government used him against Iran. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld met with him many times. His weapons were purchased from U. S. companies. The U. S.-led sanctions killed over 1.2 million Iraqis and most of them were children. I hope that Saddam is tried before a world court by impartial judges, and that prosecutors and defense lawyers are allowed to present their cases. I hope that his full story is released to We The People. Only by following rules of law and order can we move the world into peace. I'm a Vietnam infantry vet, and I've seen first hand that invasions and death and destruction are not the answer. In response to a portion of the Dec. 2 Detroit Free Press article "Peace activists are suddenly at a standstill": Perhaps one reason there are fewer peace signs recently is that freedom-loving Americans are stealing them from the front lawns of the true patriots. I have had three signs stolen and several damaged in the last few months. Members of my local peace network have reported dozens of stolen signs since January. This is just another piece of the Big Lie sold to America. Soldiers are not dying to protect our freedoms; they are dying from a case of nationalistic fear. We are afraid of Saddam Hussein; we are afraid of the truth; anybody who disagrees with us is a traitor and should be silenced. On Oct. 15 I was listening to C-SPAN coverage of the House Appropriations Committee discussions of the new $89 billion that Bush wants for his reconstruction buddies. A committee member asked what happened to the $78 billion that's already been spent. The chairman said he's asked the administration, but they don't respond. Someone else on the committee stated that the interest on this loan (yes, the bankers stand to make mega bucks on this, too) will be $4 billion a year. And that's enough to fund medical research on all the major diseases. I've had enough! I was in Vietnam and we were sprayed with Agent Orange and lied to. More than 300,000 veterans from Gulf War I & II are now suffering from exposure to depleted uranium, and being lied to. We can't fund health care or our schools, and people are losing their jobs and their homes. But the government of, by, and for the ultra-rich keeps going. When I was in Vietnam, we were told that we were fighting for democracy and to liberate the Vietnamese people. History has shown that the Gulf of Tonkin incident and the war were based on lies. More than 68,000 American troops died. Hundreds of thousands more were wounded, physically and/or mentally. We were treated to Agent Orange and denial, and benefit cuts by our government. Our service people in Iraq are facing a much worse fate. Our government is using depleted uranium to tip all of our shells and bombs. The explosions generate microscopic particles that contaminate everything, including the air. This substance infects the body and never goes away. It results in cancer, deformed children, and other yet unnamed malfunctions. We used depleted uranium in the first Gulf War and more than 300,000 troops are suffering. Our government denies it. The government and media encourage us to wave the flag and "support the troops." They are killing our troops. I say, "protect the troops" from a government, military, industrial and media complex that only cares about money. I was one of the Chelsea Area Network of Peace Activists who was quoted in the July 3 edition of The Chelsea Standard, "Activists continue protests." I am writing today to both correct several of the points made in letters published last week and to raise thoughts that seem relevant given the recent turn of national events. Patrick McDevitt's letter makes an erroneous assumption about the July 3 article written by Kent Ashton Walton. The decision to run the article as a news item on the front page was made by the editors of The Standard, not Mr. Walton. In my view, it does seem newsworthy for a community newspaper, when an ad-hoc, loosely knit, grassroots network like CANOPAS continues to exist and to draw committed people and increasing community interest over a six-month span. Letter writer Kerry Smyth made an erroneous assumption that CANOPAS is an organization with membership requirements, dues structures and formal connections to other groups. Each person standing vigil has his or her own reasons and speaks for himself or herself, but all share a belief that non-violent conflict resolution is far preferable to war, which represents a failure of the social order. One of those people has created a Web page, www.CANOPAS.org, which offers anyone who seeks it information about CANOPAS and the peace-and-justice movement in general, as well as links to other sites that might be of interest. No money is solicited. No pledges are requested. Those who wish to may register for updates, a response which continues to grow without lectures, coercion or offensive statements. It seems that some, including the two letter writers, perceive this position as "not supporting the troops." Many CANOPAS activists are veterans or have had family members in the military. In my own case, my father was a career Navy man, my mother was a veteran of the WAVES, my husband's father was career Air Force, my only brother served in the Marines, one of my sisters-in-law served in the Army Reserves, another married a career Air Force man, and my sister's husband served in Vietnam. Granted, I have never seen combat myself, but for myself, I certainly do not wish to ever be considered as non-supportive of the troops. It is, in part, because of my deep concern for the troops —
some of them fine young men and women I have known and watched grow up in Chelsea who are proudly serving their country now —
that I stand vigil. I believe that the troops have been placed in harm's way for policies that have little to do with protecting the United States. Who among us would have sent our troops into battle, if the facts which are now coming to light — facts previously well known to high administration officials — had been made public before the war? Others have written far more eloquently than I about the dilemma our nation now faces, but it seems that we must accept that our current administration is either foolish enough to ignore its own intelligence or arrogant enough to assume the citizenry could be misled without concern for consequences. Neither option shows an administration that supports our troops. Rather, our troops appear to be expendable pawns in some global chess game that serves purposes not consistent with our country's founding principles or highest ideals. It seems to me to be the strongest statement of support of our troops, to ask that they not be killed on behalf of either incompetent or dishonest leadership — the administration in Washington, D.C., not the one in Iraq. Had the weapons inspections been allowed to continue, former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein would have eventually — and peacefully — been revealed as the paper tiger that he was, a major victory that would have politically deposed the regime with no loss of American military or innocent Iraqi civilian lives. Not one. The U.S. Constitution applies to our sovereign states, not to all countries of the world. War to protect ourselves may be necessary, and is constitutional, but Iraq was no imminent threat to us. It is constitutional principles that our troops should be asked to support, and our homeland that they should be asked to defend. I am outraged — not with them, who are victims on the front line, but with the administration that put them there — that they are being asked to risk their lives for other purposes. These, then, are reasons I still show up every Sunday. I deeply love our country, and the high principles for which it stands — a view I am sure I hold in common with the war supporters. I am deeply troubled by the degree to which these high principles are being ignored in the current era. I am deeply saddened for the troops who are being asked to risk their lives for profit, revenge or political gain, not for homeland defense or constitutional principle. The war continues, so my protest of it will also continue, in the hopes that a critical mass of citizens will begin to ask the hard questions of a government run amok.
Thanks to Kent, for writing the Standard article, and kudos to Gary, who
started the ball rolling back in January. We are making a difference, as
can be seen by the following.
The Sunday vigils are continuing, with 8 to 12 people showing up each
week. Summer schedules are keeping the numbers a bit lower than in the
worst weather (literally and metaphorically), but someone comes every
week. This is important--having a group every week, even a small one,
gives weight to our issues, and physical security for those who are
there.
A couple of thoughts, which I shared with the others who were there
last Sunday. As the national events unfold, and people are forced to
examine their own culpability in believing the hype which preceded the
war, it is not unlikely that there will be an increase in negativity
toward those of us who never believed it in the first place. This
quirk of human nature, which makes all of us resist more strongly as a
precursor of changing any of our deeper paradigms, should not
discourage those of us who are actively trying to change hearts and
minds. It shows that the resistor, who may have not given much
critical thought to previously held ideas, is beginning to rearrange
the pieces--that is the process we want to encourage. The polls are
beginning to show significant changes in public perception, and I
personally believe that a "tipping point" is about to be achieved.
Tuesday's Free Press editorial pages were COMPLETELY given over to
raising questions about the WMD's and the administration's credibility.
The cover story in Time, this week, is on the same topic. These are
just two pieces of evidence, and I am proud that our efforts in Chelsea
have contributed at our local level in this--witness the Standard's
placement of Kent's story, and the subsequent responses from the war
supporters the following week.
I have contacted Congressman Smith's office, both by e-mail and phone. As of last Friday, his staff said they did not know his position on the Waxman resolution (calling for biparitsan investigation of the pre-war knowledge about WMD's)!!! I think contact with him is especially crucial--if Republicans begin to feel the heat from their constituencies, they are more likely to sign on to support such an investigation, which is the only way it will ever happen. Congress will recess on the 25th---the resolution won't die, but sentiment for it may not survive the recess. Calling is the easiest (517/783-4486)--to send an e-mail, you have to go to his web-site, www.house.gov/nicksmith/, and then go through several links including verifying your residency in the 7th district. He says he will respond, but it may be "several weeks". Calling forces a response of some sort from his staff, right then.
Secondly, a couple of anecdotes about our successes. As I was walking
home from Sunday's vigil, with my posters under my arm, a block away from
the corner I passed a retirement-age couple on the sidewalk, nicely
dressed. My impression was, "pretty conservative, out-of-towners,
dressed like Republicans, maybe strolling while waiting for the play or a
table at the Common Grill, they are probably wishing our vigil would go
away and not intrude on their pleasant social outing". We nodded breifly
while passing, and about three steps later, they called to me, "Ma'am,
excuse me". (Uh, oh, I thought, they're going to challenge me--be
cool!!). I turned, and they said, "We were wondering where we could get
one of those Peace signs your group had on display." !!! Of course, I
directed them immediately to Susie, who was still gathering signs for
return to her car. Where are they from, and what were their sentiments
in March? Who knows, but whatever they were, they clearly have become
more aware and are concerned enough now to want to obtain and display a
sign for themselves. This, it seems to me, is what we have been standing
on the corner--(finally in decent weather!) for all these months.
The second story is ruefully funny---Susie Morrison reported that, when
she was manning the table at the Farmer's Market, a small group of young
people (college age?) stopped to ask, with excitement, "Where did you get
all those signs?!" (meaning the No War and Peace signs). She answered
them, and then they said, "We were wondering, because we've been stealing
them from people's lawns in order to put them on our own!" :) Just
shows to go you-- there's more than one way to skin a cat!
BTW--I sent a letter to the Standard, in reply to the letters last week.
Hope they print it all, as it is long. Won't be in town this week, so
will miss whatever direct response it elicits. Oh, well.....
Let's say that you want to teach your neighbor about democracy. They don't look like you, but they have a family, and they want a better life for their kids. So you think about the best way to explain democracy. You can give them a copy of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, and some books. You can set up some time and explain democracy. You can show them examples of democracy and its benefits. Or, you can force them to understand democracy by breaking into their home, taking over their possessions and beating up the family. Hold your thoughts and change the names. You are the U.S. government and the neighbor is Iraq. The Fourth of July is over, but let's remember why this country was founded. There are many ways to explain democracy and to solve problems. If you have to hurt people to make your point or to solve a problem, you are the problem. Kathy Kelly has been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize for her work as cofounder of Voices in the Wilderness, which worked throughout the time between the two Iraq wars to publicize and mitigate the humanitarian crisis caused by the sanctions. She has travelled to Iraq many times in the past several years and was in Bagdad during the latest U. S. invasion. On June 30, 2003, she spoke to a group of nearly 200 people in Ferndale, just north of Detroit. Nothing we can write can express the combination of energy, compassion, grief, hope, and even humor, that she conveyed during this sober evening. We came away with a desire to work harder on changing the United States' use of overwhelming force to solve problems.
The major theme of her talk was the importance of keeping the spotlight on Iraq. The vast majority of Iraqi friends that she made during her visits were relieved that Saddam was deposed, but their relief was short-lived. Although it remains to be seen what the long term holds, they are not better off now than they were before the war. They have no security, no jobs or purchasing power, and no opportunity for self determination. The countryside is littered with unexploded bombs and depleted uranium. And, they're increasingly worried that the U. S. is not actually interested in correcting these problems. U. S. troops were prepared immediately to protect the oil fields, but they had no idea where the hospitals were. Our troops started to help organize municipal elections in An Najaf, registering voters, reproducing campaign literature for the thirteen candidates, building polling booths, etc., but then were ordered by their superiors to cancel the elections. Apparently it was too likely that someone would win the election who would not follow the orders of the U. S. administrators.
If our government had truly wanted to promote democracy in Iraq, they could have used the decade since the first war to promote education, health, and a prosperous middle class. Instead, they imposed sanctions that killed many thousands of children from malnutrition and water-borne diseases, and then they attacked the country again at a cost of a billion dollars a day, killing 5,000 to 10,000 civilians and many more soldiers.
Our government wants to change the subject, saying that it isn't important that no weapons of mass destruction have been found or that no links to terrorism have been found. At least, they say, Saddam is gone and the people of Iraq have been liberated. We need to continue to tell the truth about this war in the hope that in this way we can prevent the next one.
The real danger of weapons of mass destruction comes from our own country, and we should include economic sanctions, land mines, and depleted uranium in that category. The real danger of terrorism comes from our war against the environment and the terror of impending ecological disaster. We need to keep the spotlight on Iraq, but we also need to look at ourselves at home.
I marched in the Memorial Day parade. It was the first time I noticed the POW/MIA flag in downtown Chelsea. Then I read the article "Finding answers" by freelance writer Gail Turluck in the June 5 Chelsea Standard. I'm a Vietnam infantry veteran and I've just started to research this flag. It raises several issues. The intent was to remember those who never returned. To some it also means hate for the Vietnamese people. When we invaded Cambodia and Laos, our military did not wear U.S. uniforms, nor carry U.S. weapons, nor carry U.S. identification. Thus, when someone was killed, there was no way for the body to be identified. And, since we weren't supposed to be there anyway, the soldiers were listed as missing in action. There were also some cases of our military just walking out of base camps and never returning. I have personal experience with one. He liked Vietnam and wanted to stay. One day he was gone. I suspect he was listed as MIA. Our bureaucrats love war. It generates billions for a select few. And to have wars, you need hate and fear. We have enough hate in this country. We need to direct our efforts at our government. They generate the wars and the killing and the pain. It's not about "protecting our freedom," it's about money. I oppose anything that fuels hate. The symbolism of the POW/MIA flag has some things in common with the Confederate flag. We need to work at peaceful conflict resolution in families, in communities and in government. Combat in Iraq is largely over, but dispute will probably continue for decades among political scientists and historians over whether or not this war was necessary and has made the world a better place. There should be no dispute, however, over the principle that war is a last resort. Having just participated in the Iraq war, and having just celebrated Memorial Day, a day designated by Congress in 1950 as "a day of prayer for permanent peace," now is the time for us to work for a foreign policy that will do a better job of ensuring peace.
Motivated by some of the goals stated repeatedly by President Bush, here are some suggestions:
1. Suppress brutal dictators.
One of the reasons we invaded Iraq was to free the Iraqi people from a brutal dictator. We certainly should oppose abusive governments, anywhere in the world, and at any time abuses of their citizens become apparent. We should not pick and choose governments to support based on other short-term considerations, as we did when we supported Iraq in its war against Iran. We certainly should not arm other governments, as we did Iraq, only to find ourselves facing our own weapons a few decades later. If we opposed the human rights violations in Iraq, we must also oppose human rights violations in Zimbabwe, Congo, Burma, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, China, and many other places. Clearly we cannot invade all of these countries. We must find peaceful, diplomatic ways of controlling dictators and supporting democracy movements everywhere in the world, and we must do so consistently, or invite suspicions of our motives and roadblocks to our actions, as has been the case in Iraq.
2. Foster democracy and the rule of law.
We invaded Iraq to enforce United Nations resolutions and to create a democratic government. Unfortunately, we did so in violation of other United Nation resolutions and international law. How can we be taken for anything but a bully if we talk about obeying the law, but at the same time claim to be above it? How can we be taken for anything but imperialistic if we talk about democracy but we flout the only democratic organization that can give our actions legitimacy? How can we complain when other countries follow our example? We should promote democracy and the rule of law, but we must do it in a democratic way, working through the United Nations. Like all democratic organizations the United Nations has failings, but in order to support democracy we're obliged to work within the United Nations for necessary changes, not to abandon it.
3. Eliminate weapons of mass destruction.
We invaded Iraq to prevent it from using or selling weapons of mass destruction, but we have looked aside as South Africa, Israel, Pakistan, and other countries have developed their own. Our inconsistency, again, makes the world suspicious of our motives, and therefore uncooperative, as the case of North Korea illustrates. A nuclear or biological attack is equally horrifying whether it's triggered by a government or a terrorist, and whether the material originated abroad or at home. Recall that the anthrax attack, regardless of who perpetrated it, was accomplished using material made in the United States. The best way to prevent the use of these weapons is to eliminate them. So, we must work to secure and eliminate stockpiles of these weapons, not just in Iraq, but wherever they are in the world, especially in the former Soviet Union and in our own country, and return to a policy of repudiating them ourselves.
4. Stop terrorism and enhance our national security.
The best way to make ourselves secure is to surround ourselves with friends, but in our rush to bring justice, we've been making enemies instead. We must restore the strained friendships and cultivate new friends. We must remember that for generations the United States has been an example of a diverse people living in peace with opportunities for everyone. If we treat immigrants with suspicion and use our power to intimidate and exploit the rest of the world, we send the message that our prosperity and freedom is unattainable except for an elite few, and we engender the hopelessness that breeds terrorism. If, on the other hand, we open our doors, treat everyone with fairness and trust, and use our power to promote good health care, education, and economic opportunity throughout the world, our example will inspire the rest of the world to develop in the same way.
Please join with me in urging our elected officials to pursue these goals.
Two of last week's letters suggest that our country's military spending is necessary for our peace and security.
A review of the Bush administration's $400 billion defense budget request seeks to build more weapons of mass destruction. It is laden with projects for weapons that are clearly unnecessary to defend against al Quaeda and suicide bombers.
As one example, the 2004 defense budget includes $4 billion for a new fighter-bomber, the F-22, made by Lockheed Martin and Boeing. The F-22 has been dogged by technical problems and huge cost overruns. Each plane is now priced at $257 million, more than $50 million above estimates of only a few years ago.
Is it just a coincidence that our armed forces are stocked at the top with former executives of these military contractors? That Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz have served on boards and as consultants to the contractors?
The larger question is the administration's myopic focus on military might as a means for engaging the world community.
Is it not likely that our country's reputation is unfavorably affected by the presence of nearly 1,000 military installations around the world from Greenland to the Chinese border?
Is our security really enhanced by projecting a military American face around the world?
I am a Vietnam infantry veteran. I ask that everyone take a moment this Memorial Day weekend and think about those who have died or were injured physically or mentally in wars and conflicts.
Think about the military - ours and in other countries. Think about civilians - ours and in other countries.
Now, remove all hatred and fear from your heart and think about a world at peace, where everyone has good food, good water, good schools, good medical attention and a clean environment. We know how.
We teach our kids to get along with others and to resolve conflicts peacefully. We have laws and courts that lead us to peaceful conflict resolution. We know how.
In our form of government, we the people are supposed to be the leaders. And leaders are supposed to solve problems, not create them. We must lead ourselves, our families, our communities and our government to peaceful solutions to conflict.
On this Memorial Day weekend, show respect for all who have died. Resolve to never let it happen again. We know how.
The bomb is back, and in the newspaper headlines once again.
We have read about the suspicions of, but as-yet-undiscovered, development of a nuclear weapons program in Iraq; concerns about nuclear weapons capabilities in Iran; the urgency of the North Korean nuclear threat; the ongoing nuclear posturing between India and Pakistan; and the possible ripple effect that this could inspire in neighboring countries such as Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, to attain nuclear weapons, as well.
Common sense tells us that each new country that acquires nuclear weapons significantly increases the potential for a nuclear mishap, either intentionally or unintentionally.
Why, then, if the Bush Administration is expressing so much concern about halting nuclear proliferation, is it proposing the development of new nuclear weapons for its own arsenal?
Over the next few weeks, Congress will be voting on the annual Defense Authorization Bill for 2004. Included in this are two provisions introduced by the Bush Administration for the development of two new types of nuclear weapons.
One provision is an increase in funding to $15 million for a new "bunker buster" nuclear weapon called the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator.
The other provision would repeal a 1993 law called the Spratt-Furse provision that bans low-yield nuclear weapons, known as "mini-nukes."
Supporters of nuclear "bunker busters" suggest that these weapons would allow the destruction of deeply buried targets without causing massive collateral damage. The technical reality is that the Pentagon's current nuclear "bunker buster" can penetrate only 20 feet.
Even a one-kiloton nuclear warhead (less than one-tenth the yield of the Hiroshima bomb) requires a depth of 200 to 300 feet to contain its radioactive fallout.
At a depth of only 20 feet, shallow nuclear explosions produce especially severe radioactive fallout of a million cubic feet of radioactive debris from a crater the size of ground zero of the World Trade Center.
The Bush Administration wants a more powerful bomb to penetrate more deeply, with a yield of more than 100 kilotons. This is at least seven times the size of the Hiroshima bomb, which was 15 kilotons and incinerated 140,000 people.
There are other non-nuclear ways to destroy and disable underground bunkers. U.S. military leaders have concluded that using nuclear weapons is unnecessary and would pose significant danger to U.S. military personnel.
The Spratt-Furse prohibition, established in 1993, banned research and development that could lead to the production by the United States of a low-yield nuclear weapon of less than five kilotons, fearful of the proliferation of so-called "suitcase nukes."
It has remained in effect for a decade. Proponents in favor of repealing this prohibition argue that the United States will be more likely to avoid war by having additional nuclear options available.
Those opposed to the effort to repeal the Spratt-Furse provision banning "mini-nukes," emphasize that developing and possessing low-yield nuclear weapons increases the likelihood that they will be used in conflict situations, breaking a taboo that has been in place since 1945.
It could then lead to the resumption of underground testing, overturning a 10-year moratorium on U.S. nuclear testing. This, in turn, could cause other nuclear powers to feel compelled to resume testing, as well.
Folks, this is one you shouldn't sit out. We have been unimaginably fortunate so far to have escaped nuclear catastrophe, which has perhaps made us complacent about nuclear weapons. But we are truly at a historic moment, a turning point.
Congress must act now to help prevent the spread of these weapons of enormous violence and destruction. Over half the world's population now live in countries that either have or are allied with a nuclear weapon state.
Currently, 44 countries are technically capable of making nuclear bombs. It will be impossible to convince nations to abstain from developing nuclear weapons while the United States hypocritically maintains a huge nuclear arsenal and is developing new nuclear weapons of its own.
Please contact your representatives and senators to block funding to develop the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator "bunker buster" and to oppose any effort to repeal the Spratt-Furse prohibition banning low-yield nuclear weapons.
Developing new nuclear weapons will further weaken international efforts to stop nuclear proliferation and will undermine U.S. security.
By adhering to our obligations under the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, ratified in March 1970, moving toward the elimination of our nuclear arsenal, and demonstrating ways in which countries can develop a system of security that doesn't depend on nuclear weapons, the United States would have a much more effective strategy with which to work toward nuclear disarmament.
Some diplomatic tools available would include strengthening multilateral treaties; intrusive inspections and effective enforcement; economic trade, foreign aid, sanctions and deterrence; bolstering international efforts to account for, control and reduce nuclear weapons and materials worldwide; improvement of border and cargo monitoring; and systematically reducing the dangers in troubled regions by studying the motives that cause countries to pursue nuclear weapons and attempting to defuse regional grievances through creative solutions amidst the complex dynamics of the new global nuclear era.
There are 35,000 nuclear weapons in the world today, with an explosive power of 700,000 Hiroshima bombs. This dangerous path of renewed emphasis on the use of nuclear weapons in U.S. defense strategy has received little attention from the news media, but deserves vigorous public debate.
The bombastic rhetoric displayed by the Bush Administration proposing this aggressive policy increases the likelihood of nuclear proliferation. It is an alarming wake-up call for the urgent need of a well-informed and energetic citizen response that will approach this topic from a position of expertise and with a clear understanding of the reality of the use of this deadly force in the twenty-first century.
As Lao-tzu so lucidly wrote: "For every force there is a counter force. Violence, even well intentioned, always rebounds upon oneself."
Some excellent sources of information on nuclear issues can be found at the Center for Defense Information (cdi.org); The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists (thebulletin.org); Women's Action for New Directions (wand.org); Friends Committee on National Legislation (fcnl.org); and Union of Concerned Scientists (uscusa.org)
Eric Swager's letter last week in The Chelsea Standard challenging Chad Livengood's letter of May 1 was itself misleading.
The president's fiscal-year 2004 budget request included $782 billion for discretionary spending (the money the president and Congress must decide and act to spend each year), $399 billion of which will go to the Pentagon.
The "National Defense" category of the federal budget for fiscal year 2004 accounts for more than half (51.0 percent) of all discretionary spending.
The other category of federal spending is mandatory spending - money that is spent in compliance with existing laws that govern the particular program or function.
Mandatory spending includes entitlements, money or benefits provided directly to individuals through such programs as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps and federal retirement. It also includes interest payments on the national debt, which now exceeds $5 trillion.
Military spending continues to increase despite the fact that we have no military rivals.
Clearly, our country's military industrial complex is running the budget in Washington, D.C.
Taking time to touch on both letters written by Arnold Stieber and Sidney Olinyk last week, I find it appropriate to look at both of these fine perspectives.
Each deals with the issue of war, yet both shows a different side of the issues at hand.
While I understand Olinyk's concern that many of our anti-war protestors are hypocritical at a time when we should be supporting our men and women who support us, one must take the ideas that Stieber dwells on quiet seriously.
Yes, this war (and so many others) is not always about "liberating their countrymen from evil," but making money.
The "government" that makes the military, economic and political decision to go to war, which as Stieber began to allude to, consists of no more then a dozen people who sit on the National Security Council.
This group of people consists of the President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Colin Powell, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, along with cabinet secretaries from agriculture, treasury, commerce, and so on.
These people, all of whom are former CEOs, have vested interest in making money for what bleeding-heart liberal college professors refer to as the "Military Industrial Complex."
Again, Stieber is right. We, as citizens, did not vote for this war. And come to think of it, our elected officials never voted to declare war - another right swept away from our own feet.
Anyone remember the War Powers Act? As Stieber pointed out, most of our tax dollars go toward defense. If President Bush's 2003-2004 budget and tax cut proposal goes through, the United States will officially outspend the entire world in defense.
Yes, while many jobs are created, among other advancements, such as the Internet, many lives are lost at the hands of this group of people who meet at 8 a.m. every day to make long-term decisions for our country at its people that will affect us for generations to come.
They have been doing this since President Harry Truman formed the National Security Council, along with other pet projects such as the CIA, in 1947 at the end of World War II.
And what did they fight? The Cold War, a war based on propaganda pushed upon by the government and leaked into the press that led to a cultural uprising in the '60s, better known as the "counter culture."
Those anti-war protestors, while not treating their soldiers with the respect that they deserved then and still do now, were simply speaking their peace of mind, as is the group that stands in front of the post office every Sunday and hundreds of other street blocks from New York to Los Angeles.
People in this "Post 9/11 America" are so concerned about "safety" and "security" and "our freedom" that they will allow these 12 individuals to make decisions that could lead to outbreak of a world war all in the name of "homeland security" and "capitalistic imperialism."
Well, I don't know about you, but I'd rather live in danger of terrorism every day then to have my freedom to express myself ripped away. My freedom to worship whatever god I please (if any) and my freedom to do as I please, make an honest living, and not have to fear being censored or discriminated against in a society that takes naïvety to whole new level.
Someday I, too, would like to thank Cpl. Joshua Miles of the 3rd Battalion, 2nd Marines for his service to our country. His courage to volunteer and fight for his country is heroic and deserves the attention of both sides of the street.
But when he says to "please stop yelling, put down your signs and pray for those behind enemy lines," I respond (not speaking for the anti-war protestors necessarily) and say if I didn't have the right to question the motives of the "government," then I would have no rights at all.
You have a M16 to fight "for freedom." We have signs, editorial pages of newspapers, the First Amendment, classrooms, and a peace of mind to fight for both ours right to speak.
These are our weapons and we will not put them down.
I went outside this morning and found my "Peace" yard sign slashed to shreds. When I tried to back out of the driveway to purchase a replacement sign, I realized that my automobile tire had been slashed, as well.
Every day, I see many yard signs and bumper stickers that I disagree with. Some offend me. But would I trespass onto the offending property and destroy that person's right to express himself or herself? The answer is never.
I filed a report with the sheriff's department and learned that all this means on paper is a $70 tire and a $5 sign. Not much, I was told. But it's much more to me. Someone out there used violence in an attempt to intimidate me into silence.
Well, that person didn't succeed. A roll of wide tape and a marker patched up my sign just fine. And if it's shredded again, I'll just keep patching it. The tire, too.
If I am fortunate enough to catch the culprit in the act, the next "expression" that person will be making is "Good morning, judge."
I'm very tired of having the government use "patriotism" and slogans as the
tools to rally the masses to give up their lives, mental health and tax
dollars for wars or conflicts that are designed to generate huge profits for
a select few. The "support the troops" slogan is the one that really gets
me. Otherwise good people buy into it and allow our government to use our
people for their cause.
To take the higher ground I recommend that we adopt "PROTECT OUR TROOPS" as
our slogan. Protect them from greed, protect them from a government who
forgets them after they leave the military, protect them from the mental pain
of separation and fear, protect them from the physical pain of combat,
protect them from being used as a tool for global domination and oppression.
In a Democracy, WE are the ones who are supposed to have the power. Our
government is supposed to serve US. "Protect Our Troops" puts the ball back
in our court. Since the "troops" are part of us, WE must decide when and
where our military should be used. WE must decide if they are doing the
right thing, are paid enough, are treated fairly when they return.
When I read about the money being made by bureaucrats, "defense"
corporations, and many other military related companies I get sick. A recent
Boston Globe article said that the CEOs of the major "defense" companies make
$11,000,000.00/year. I also recently read that 356 executives of military
related corporations got bonuses of over $1,000,000.00 for the first quarter
of this year. We die, we suffer, we wave the flag - they vote for wars and
run to the bank.
Smedley Butler's booklet "War is a Racket", Sven Lindqvist's book "The
History of Bombing", Grossman & DeGaetano's book "Stop Teaching Our Kids to
Kill" and the C-SPAN video of "Veterans Against Iraq War" really affected
me. We, as Americans, believe the lies and historically stand back and let
it happen.
I was in the infantry in Vietnam. This gives me a perspective that most
Americans don't have. Much time has passed since Vietnam and recently I have
revisited that period of my life. I have read a great deal. I have talked
and listened to many people. I've seen politicians come and go.
The challenge we have in the USA is understanding. I was raised playing
cowboys and indians, cops and robbers, and "ARMY" and "guns". My brother and
I had the biggest collection of toy guns in the neighborhood. I learned that
the USA was great and most other places weren't. White people were good,
most others weren't. If you looked different, or dressed different, you were
probably bad.
When I was in Vietnam I was taught to fight "gooks" and the Communist threat
and was told that we were stopping the "Domino Theory." I was told that
killing was a good thing in "war", even by religious leaders. I was doing my
"duty", and "defending my country", and "protecting freedom".
Recently I began to ask questions. The more I asked, the more I questioned.
I draw my conclusions from four questions.
1. Who votes to have wars? In the USA we can vote (most don't) on many
things - from School Board to President. But no one asks us to vote on war.
I find that curious. Tax payers pay for war, some with their life, but we're
never asked for our opinion. We can't even vote on who heads the Department
of Defense (where most of our tax dollars go). Most of us have never heard
of the NSA (National Security Administration with 36,000 employees), or the
Defense Policy Board. They have a vested interest in war and the booty -
they never ask for our opinion either. Advisors, and lobbyist and
bureaucrats vote every day - and we don't have a say.
2. Who makes the money? Billions are made on wars. And the profits go to a
select few. Simply look at who makes the bombs and the bullets and the boots
(let's not forget the banks). What a great business. The taxpayers fund the
research to develop these items. Then, the govt. turns the information over
to the companies that can make these items. Then the tax payers buy these
items. Then the politicians have a war and use up these items. And the
cycle continues. Might explain why politicians campaigns are so well funded
by big money. Marine General Smedley Butler, a two time Medal of Honor
winner, wrote a booklet called "War is a Racket". You can buy it at
www.VeteransForPeace.org. "A History of Bombing" by Sven Lindqvist is at
your library. This book documents that all the wars in the 1900s could have
been avoided, or the damage could have been substantially less, if the
politicians had chosen different options. They choose the maximum death and
destruction path - and the rich got richer.
3. Who dies in wars? Civilians, children, the lower ranks of the military
mostly. They are the cannon fodder. For their life the civilians and
children receive tears and a burial. The military people also get tears and
a burial, and they may get some medals, a flag, and a monument. Politicians
and advisors and bureaucrats don't die. Most have never been in the
military, much less in combat. Their children don't die either. Their
children usually don't even see the military, much less combat. The rich and
the powerful cheer - the others die. If the politicians and company are so
anxious and committed to war, they should be on the front line, showing their
real "patriotism". If they are too busy or too old - then their kids or
grand kids MUST GO and lead the charge and face the enemy and pull the
trigger. (No planners, or button pushers, or bomb droppers please.)
4. Why we let them? Since we can't vote on war, what moves us to give up
our lives and money? It's really very simple - appeals to our gut. That is,
spend lots of our tax money (with the super rich) and use the media. Repeat
the same message over and over, convince us to give up our lives by INVOKING
FEAR ("War on Terrorism", "Weapons of Mass Destruction", painting the "enemy"
as evil, provoking an attack - yes, the USA funded Osama Bin Laden and Saddam
Hussein and many more), and INVOKING PATRIOTISM, usually by slogans or
symbols (Support our Troops, Freedom Isn't Free, Defend our Freedom, wave the
flag). Also, PROVIDE FEW EMPLOYMENT OPTIONS after high school, and promote
the military (why not the Peace Corp.?) as a great way to get an education
and make some money. Thus, a ready supply of soldiers to help the rich get
richer.
Leaders are supposed to solve problems (health care, unemployment,
environment, homelessness, education, transportation, etc.), not create them.
Thanks for your time. See - www.mfso.org, www.peacefultomorrows.org and
www.WeAreMichigan.com. Read - "Stop Teaching Our Kids To Kill" by Grossman
and DeGaetano. Understanding is the key.
We had two "another family for peace" signs ripped out of the wire frame last night. All that was left were the frames thrown on the grass in our yard. Signs were inside our fenced yeard, barley 6" from our house- which to me, is an act of intimidation (not to mention trespassing and vandalism). Ms. Sielstra (545 Howard) had the same happen to her sign. I called the Chelsea Police and an officer stopped by 20 minutes later. The officer was, understandably, "playing it down" by saying that a couple of real estate signs were also gone last night. I pointed out that this comes in the wake of over a dozen signs that disappeared from Main street and that it was not just generic sign-stealing, but had to be targted toward what the sign said.
He said that it was probably kids out of school who took the signs to plant a bunch in a friend's yard, just like they TP their friends' yards. When I pointed out that they were ripped out and could not be planted elsewhere, he says- "well, they were kids and were probably scared because they were inside our fenced yard and close to the house". I love it, when law enforcement starts making up excuses for vandals! I made it a point to mention that Ms. Siestra's sign was also ripped out of the frame, and hers was in an open yard, near the sidewalk.
So there it goes. Wonder if this is the same reaction they'll have if someone started ripping out red-white-blue signs or yellow ribbons from people's yards. Not that anyone should- we can't be in a race to the bottom. If this does not make it to the Chelsea Police Blotter in the Standard next week, I am planning to write to the editor.
This mess in Iraq is not over- it's probably going to get a lot worse and we have to keep speaking out.
20030410 Opinion - Letter to the
editor: America must defend itself- Don Krause 20030403 Opinion - Letter to the
editor: Reality of war sickening- Jerrod Mason 20030327 Opinion - Letter to the
editor: Why hasnít the Iraqi leader been killed?- Arnold Stieber 20030320 Opinion - Letter to the
editor: Freedom of speech should be respected- Carolyn Holland 20030313 20030306 Opinion - Just Another
Thought: Bush has one-track agenda- Kent Ashton Walton 20030227 Opinion - Letter to the
editor: Support military action- Gary Lillie 20030213 Opinion - Letter to the
editor: War- Art Klumpp 20030206 Opinion - Letter to the
editor: Potential war- Gary Maveal 20030130 Opinion - Letter to the
editor: Rally in Washington was a powerful sight- Oscar Marx IV Opinion - Letter to the
editor: Letter Writerís words disturbing- Mary Torrice Opinion - Letter to the
editor: Anti-war rhetoric sounds like Ann Arbor- Rod Anderson Opinion - Letter to the
editor: We deserve evidence that war is necessary- Christopher Meloche Opinion - Letter to the
editor: War is not the answer for the United States- Juli DeJonghe 20030123 Opinion - Letter to the
editor: War Should be our last line of defense- Lorin Kummer Opinion - Letter to the
editor: Peace activists donít want senseless war- Gary Maveal Opinion - Letter to the
editor: Letter of impending war was outrageous- Cheryl Moir 20030116 Opinion - Letter to the
editor: Pray for peace, but support troops- Mindy Martell 20030109 Opinion - Letter to the
editor: A new spin on an old tale- Kathie and John GourlayReport on CANOPAS Pot Luck, Kathie and John Gourlay, January 7, 2007
Campaign Phone Call Harrassment, Carolyn Holland, November 5, 2006
An Invitation to the CANOPAS Vigils, Jan Bernath, October 27, 2006
Another Invitation, Elizabeth Hammer, October 25, 2006
Dirty Campaigning—Still An American Way of Life, Marijo Grogan, August 3, 2006
Bush Responsible for the Image He Has Created, Gary Maveal, March 23, 2006, The Chelsea Standard
2000 Candles, C. S. MacFarlan
We can't bring them back
Two thousand candles
A war in Iraq
Two thousand candles
Let us mourn our nations' loss
Two thousand soldiers
who have paid the ultimate cost
Two thousand candles
We can't bring them back
Two thousand candles
A war in Iraq
Two thousand candles
Is there a name here you know?
Or didn't you meet them
before they had to go
Two thousand candles
We can't bring them back
Two thousand candles
A war in Iraq
Two thousand candles
Imagine in their glow
How much of our future was given
In exchange for a box and a ribbon
Two thousand candles
We can't bring them back
Two thousand candles
A war in Iraq
Two thousand candles
Illuminate the night
Retaliation does not make a war right
Let us follow the truth without sacrificing life
Two thousand candles
We can't bring them back
Two thousand candles
A war in Iraq
Two thousand candles
War should not be
Only death and brute force
Claim their hollow victory
Two thousand candles
We can't bring them back
Two thousand candles
A war in Iraq
If this is the price
for our freedom they've paid
Then let us all pray for a new better day
Where we resolve problems in a civilized way
Without all our young men and women sent marching away
Two thousand candles
We can't bring them back
Two thousand candles
Stop the war in IraqThird Anniversary of the War, John Rayer, March 19, 2006, submitted to The Chelsea Standard
Iraq Veterans Oppose Bush, John Gourlay, February 12, 2006
Michigan Peace Network Meeting Report, John Gourlay, February 8, 2006
President Bush Has Vastly Exceeded His Powers, John Rayer and Stacey Rayer, December 21, 2005
We All Are Responsible, Kathie Gourlay, December 16, 2005
The U. S. Should Withdraw Troops, John Gourlay, December 8, 2005
The United States Should Leave Iraq, Lynn Meadows, December 8, 2005
War Is Failure, Arny Stieber, December 4, 2005
Make the President Do What He Says, John Gourlay, November 28, 2005
A letter to Representative Schwarz and Senators Levin and Stabenow:
Journey into the Belly of the Beast, Marijo Grogan, November 24, 2005
Journey into the Belly of the Beast, Nov. 15-21, School of the Americas
Ending the Iraq Debacle / Holding the President Accountable / H. Res. 505, Gary & Jackie Maveal, November 4, 2005
U.S. House of Representatives
128 Cannon Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Mr. Schwarz:Demonstrating Respect for the Troops, Cathy Muha, September, 2005, Chelsea Standard
Wishful Thinking by Our President's Supporters, Gary Maveal, August 8, 2005, Detroit News
Masses Recognizing the Obvious, Roy Schmidt, June 30, 2005, Chelsea Standard
Chelsea Memorial Day Parade
Arnold Stieber, May 26, 2005
Paula Herzog, May 31, 2005
Arny Stieber, May 31, 2005
It's time to rethink our tactics in Iraq, John Deikis, March 17, 2005
Aristide Needs to be Returned, Kathie Gourlay, January 31, 2005
What Kind of Nation Are We Fighting For?, Arnold E. Stieber, January 24, 2005
Report on the CANOPAS Peace Potluck, Kathie Gourlay, January 16, 2005
MLK Day Ad
Wishes for Peace on Earth, Lynn Meadows and Suzy Morse, December 23, 2004
Support Our Troops with the Gift of Peace, Arnold E. Stieber, December 12, 2004
Local Troops to Iraq, Arny Stieber, November 7, 2004
Seagraves Would Serve the 7th District Well, Kurt Wheelock, October 21, 2004
John Kerry Is in Touch with Reality, Arny Stieber, October 15, 2004
Kerry-Edwards Will Bring Back Credibility, Elizabeth Hammer, October 14, 2004
Presidential Debate Offered Lots of Insight, Bernadette Malinoski, October 7, 2004
Bush Lacks Judgment, Understanding, John Gourlay, October 7, 2004
Defend, Don't Offend, America, Elizabeth Hammer, September 30, 2004
How Can Military People Support Bush?, Mike Muha, September 16, 2004
We Must Lead by Example,
Arnold Stieber, August 9, 2004
Demonstration Photo, Lynn Meadows, June 20, 2004
Defend, Don't Offend, America, Elizabeth Hammer, September 30, 2004
How Can Military People Support Bush?, Mike Muha, September 16, 2004
We Must Lead by Example,
Arnold Stieber, August 9, 2004
Demonstration Photo, Lynn Meadows, June 20, 2004
A Quiet Voice from Behind the Facade, Lorin Kummer, June 4, 2004
LorinSome of These People Were in Fact…Veterans, Bob Krzewinski, June 4, 2004
Bob Krzewinski
US Navy 1973-1979
Coordinator,
Washtenaw County Chapter - Veterans For Peace
Wait a Minute, John Rayer, April 20, 2004
Enemy Mine, C. S. MacFarlan
Bin Laden is not the enemy,
and sufficed to say,
whether he be alive or dead,
will bearly effect the day.
Is it the man that makes the moment,
or the moment that makes the man?
Will his breathless body
separate the blood from the sand?
Who will be the next we blame,
how many syllables in his name?
Can we turn the mirror around,
where one syllable me is found.
How much truth does justice seek?
Will we open the doors,
or just take a peek.
Justification is a time bound stance,
but infinite justice
remains in Gods hands.
Now you have a different name,
You point the finger at Saddam Hussein.
Once a friend,
Now a foe
Unilateral seeds of destruction
you begin to sow.
The cautious consideration of nations,
rebuked in a world gone mad,
further sacrificing
what little respect we had.
Clouded with accusations
everyone starts to hide
All in the name of freedom
Is this why our young men have died?
Bush's Stands, Elizabeth Hammer, March 7, 2004
Terrorist Training, Arny Stieber, March 17, 2004
True Americans Think, Arny Stieber, March 12, 2004
Deb Regal Promotes Military Families Speak Out, February, 2004
Members Recommend, February, 2004
Letter Spread Misinformation, John Rayer, February 5, 2004
question of weapons of mass destruction is still unanswered.
Allow me to answer this question for him and any others that may be confused; not a single wmd has been found in Iraq. None. This is after years of the most intrusive and complete weapons inspections in the history of man, the invasion by one of the most successful and professionally executed military operations ever and two separate 1400 member expeditionary forces dedicated to finding the alleged wmd's.a great American hero
who strives to speak the truth, regardless of the cost
. It is his belief that Iraq had no wmd's after 1998. Please read his book Frontier Justice
(context books).Does this mean that Kamel's testimony had been known in Washington and London more than seven years before Bush's address last January, and that during that entire period no evidence had come to light poking holes in the information he provided? Yes
WMD in Iraq
, here are some of the findings:
Defending CANOPAS, January 29, 2004
Suzy Morse
Gary Maveal
Veteran for Peace, Arny Stieber, January 19, 2004
Nothing to Cheer About, John Gourlay, January 8, 2004
Now Saddam Can Reveal His Links to the U. S.,
Arnold E. Stieber, January 4, 2004
Stolen Signs, John Rayer, December 6, 2003
Government Remains for the Ultra-Rich,
Arnold E. Stieber, October 31, 2003
We Should Protect Our Military Troops, Arnold Stieber, September 4, 2003
Protests to Continue, Elizabeth Hammer, July 17, 2003
A Perspective, Elizabeth Hammer, July 16, 2003
Democracy Should Not Be Forced on Iraq, Arnold Stieber, July 10, 2003
Keep the Spotlight on Iraq -- A Talk By Kathy Kelly,
John and Kathie Gourlay, July 1, 2003
MIA/POW Flag Has Another Meaning, Arnold Stieber, June 12, 2003
Action after Iraq, John Gourlay, June 5, 2003
Military Presence Affects Our Image, Gary Maveal, May 29, 2003
Mark Memorial Day by Honoring Veterans, Arny Stieber, May 22, 2003
Congress Should Act Against Nukes, Laura Schieb, May 15, 2003
The U.S. Military Is Running the Budget, Gary Maveal, May 15, 2003
Free Speech Is a Weapon of Choice, Chad Livengood, May 1, 2003
Thief Took Sign But Didn't Crush Spirit, Kelley Flint, April 24, 2003
Protect Our Troops, Arny Stieber, May, 2003
Arny Stieber, "Four Questions," April 24, 2003
Raj Rajan, April 19, 2003
Local Opinions on War and Peace As Voiced in the Chelsea Standard
Opinion - Letter to the
editor: Return anti-war signs- Gregory Parker
Opinion - Sidewinder: Today's
war coverage sanitized- Karl Ziomek
Opinion - Letter to the
editor: Americans should support the troops- Dan Kapela
Opinion - Letter to the
editor: Nationalism vs. patriotism- David Cleaver-Bartholomew and over 100
CANOPAS members
Opinion - Politically
Speaking: Fighters, dissenters Americans- Jack Lessenberry
Opinion - Letter to the
editor: Letter writer should research all the facts- Chad Livengood
Opinion - Letter to the
editor: We should stand together, not apart- Mary Lou Hahn-Setta
Opinion - Letter to the
editor: Support the country and President Bush- Mindy Martell
Opinion - Letter to the
editor: War not knee-jerk reaction- Dave Husak
Opinion - Letter to the
editor: Join peace group- Cathy J. Muha
Opinion - Letter to the
editor: Peacekeeping- Oscar Marx IV
Opinion - Letter to the
editor: Americans need to defend themselves- Tom Caplis
