The Latest
News and Notes from Chelsea Neigbors United Against the War
War funding would break Dem promises
May 6, 2008 | House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is about to lead her party into a major showdown over Iraq funding by violating two Democratic campaign pledges in one fell swoop.
To the critics, whether anti-war activists or House Republicans, Pelosi has made her feelings clear: Get over it.
This week’s maneuvering over a $200 billion war spending bill has revealed Pelosi self-confidently playing what she believes — with increasing evidence — is a strong hand.
Strong enough that she is expected to break one promise — her 2006 pledge for a more open and inclusive committee process — by circumventing the powerful House Appropriations Committee on the Iraq bill.
And when the final Iraq bill reaches the president’s desk, any troop withdrawal conditions are likely to be gone from the legislation. That is another 2006 pledge that has fallen by the wayside.
Pelosi’s calculation, say political analysts, seems clear. Democrats are using the Iraq bill as leverage for billions of dollars in domestic spending priorities. As for anti-war activists, they seem to accept the speaker’s logic: More than 40 previous Iraq votes have left Democrats maxed out in terms of legislative efforts to dictate an end to the war over a veto-wielding President Bush.
Most of all, the early signs are that there will not be a backlash from voters. Democratic victories in recent special elections — Don Cazayoux in Louisiana and Bill Foster in Illinois — suggest that individual candidates are not suffering from the low public approval ratings that are afflicting the Democratic Congress.
House Republicans, protesting the bypassing of the Appropriations Committee, promise floor theatrics, with numerous floor votes when the Iraq bill comes for a House vote.
Explaining the threatened tantrum, Jo Maney, spokeswoman for Republicans on the House Rules Committee, said: “You said you were going to do something and you didn’t. They are using process for political objectives.”
Democrats countered that Republicans wanted to slow down progress on the floor. “Voters are frustrated about Iraq, but they know Democrats have pushed to bring the war to a responsible end,” said Pelosi spokesman Nadeam Elshami.
Some important voices in the anti-war movement, meanwhile, are not blaming Democratic leaders for the inability to move war policy despite the 2006 campaign promises.
“People appreciate the leadership of the party have pushed this issue and advanced this cause,” said Tom Andrews, the head of Win Without War. “Are we frustrated? Yes. But do we understand the dynamics [of Congress]? Yes. We’re doing everything we can.”
Political analysts also say voters don’t care about procedural power plays, and those who care about the war realize that Democrats have stymied filibusters and vetoes when they tried to force troop withdrawals.
“In general, the public associates the war with Republicans and the president — there doesn’t seem to be any political fallout for Democrats,” said Julian Zelizer, a political science professor at Princeton University. “This [election] is not about the will of the Democrats to stop this war. ... And Republicans can’t focus on Democrats’ abuse of power. Democrats have only been in power two years.”
Even so, the next few weeks will be a tightrope walk for Democratic leaders as they negotiate what is essentially the last major bill of the year and the last big fight with the Bush administration.
First, Pelosi will have to soothe the egos of committee chairmen like Dave Obey (D-Wis.) and John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) if she bypasses the committee process and strong-arms a bill through the House.
In her campaign pamphlet in 2006, which is still posted on the speaker’s website, Pelosi declared that “bills should be developed following full hearings and open subcommittee and committee markups, with appropriate referrals to other committees.”
If that promise is not upheld, Republican strategists say the GOP will be justified in creating as much procedural havoc as possible over the next few days, and California Rep. Jerry Lewis, the top Republican on the House Appropriations Committee, has warned of GOP floor protests.
“The Democrat leaders of the House and Senate are attempting to jam a 200-plus-billion-dollar spending bill through the Congress, with absolutely no oversight or scrutiny by the vast majority of members, senators or their constituents,” Lewis wrote Monday in a letter to Obey. “Never in my 30 years in Congress has there been such an abuse of the processes and rules of the House.”
When Republicans ran the House, however, they frequently bypassed committee, engineered strict procedural rules and, most notably, once held a vote open for three hours on a landmark Medicare drug bill. Still, Lewis points out that the GOP never skipped committee on an Iraq funding bill.
Democratic leadership aides don’t dispute the fact that the majority has been unable to keep this promise of open committee debate, yet they lay the blame on Republicans in the House who have crafted one poison pill after another to wreak procedural havoc on otherwise noncontroversial bills.
The final version of the Iraq bill — the one that reaches the president’s desk — will inevitably fund the troops with no strings attached, aides from both parties admit. Sure, there will be a conscience-soothing vote on a troop withdrawal timetable, but Democrats acknowledge such provisions will yet again fail to make it to the final version.
“The troops will get what they need,” said one Democratic aide.
In 2006, Democrats promised to “ensure 2006 is a year of significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty ... with the responsible redeployment of U.S. forces.”
And even though anti-war activists have been hard on Democrats for failing to live up to this campaign promise, they believe the blame will lie with Bush and congressional Republicans for the failure to move war policy.
“Voters need to know Democrats are fighting for an end to this war,” said Nita Chaudhary, a top official at MoveOn.org, a leader in the anti-war movement. “Voters are smart enough to know who really stands in the way in terms of an end to the war.”
Politico
May 6, 2008
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=BB9F56AF-3048-5C12-0064FDC724B0CAD0
40 and 4
April 4, 2008 | by Cindy Sheehan
April 04, 2008
Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one's own bosom and in the surrounding world.
Martin Luther King, Jr. Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence
April 04, 1967
Martin Luther King, Jr, delivered his brilliant speech: Beyond Vietnam at the Riverside Church in NYC exactly one year before he was killed, 40 years ago on April 4, 1968, on that infamous balcony in Memphis, Tennessee. His most famous speech is the brilliant I Have a Dream that he delivered to the mass of people who gathered in front of the Lincoln Monument in DC for a Civil Rights' gathering in 1963. Dr. King's Beyond Vietnam speech, however, clearly makes the connections between poverty, racism and militarism and was very threatening to the out of control war machine that was waging a bloody, bloody catastrophe in Vietnam. Dr. King was an effective orator and great organizer, but when he gave his Beyond Vietnam speech, (which many of his colleagues begged him not to give) he became a threat to the pigs of war.
Four years ago on April 04, 2004, my son, Casey Austin Sheehan (24) was killed in Sadr City, Baghdad, Iraq: A beleaguered Shi'a tenement that has recently been the target of more US war crimes as civilians were killed by the hundreds in recent aerial bombings. Seven other soldiers were killed that tragic day. Sgt. Mike Mitchell of the 1st Armored Division was killed shortly before Casey and our families became entwined in pain and activism as we were all against the occupation and the policies of the Bush Regime. It took a little while for the reality that Casey and Mike were killed on the same day that Dr. King was, 36 years later. One tries to make meaning and sense out of twin tragedies that seem so senseless. Was the date just a coincidence, or something deeper?
Casey was killed just when the insurgency was heating up. L. Paul Bremer, and his Coalition Provisional Authority's orders which seem to have been calculated to provoke insurrection by disbanding the Ba'athists and putting Saddam's Army on the streets without money, but with their weapons. The bureaucracy that ran the country were put out of their jobs even if they were low-level workers who kept the lights on and the water running. Bremer used Blackwater paid mercenaries to carve swaths of destruction through the Iraqi people and when Casey was killed, a full-fledged rebellion was being waged against the American occupiers. Hundreds of thousands of Americans and Iraqis have been killed in the interim and millions have had their lives destroyed forever. After Dr. King gave his speech in 1967 the Vietnam War continued for 8 more years and in Iraq there seems to be no discernible end on the horizon.
Since Casey was killed, I too, have been trying to connect the dots. I was against Iraq and I was against George Bush and the rest of the neocons. I soon began to realize that where we were then was only the result of years of collaboration between our "two" political parties and I slowly came to the conclusion that peace is not just the absence of war and anti-war is not the same as pro-peace. As I began my struggle to enlighten America to the pain that the deceit caused, many Vietnam anti-war protesters would approach me after one of my speeches and say almost the same exact thing: "We thought we ended it after Vietnam. We NEVER thought we would be here again." My question to them now is "Why?" Why, after the last person was pulled off the embassy in Saigon did anyone think that the Military Industrial Complex was going to slink away to lick its wounds? Most of the people in the anti-war movement put their signs in their garages, garbage or attics and went about life relieved that the slaughter in Southeast Asia was finally over.
After many turbulent years, I think the country was ready for some "apathetic conformist thought" while the M.I.C. was growing ever more powerful through many conflicts from Grenada to the Persian Gulf and from Panama to Nicaragua and the Balkans. Since WWII, there has never been a moment when the US hasn't been spreading its cancer of militant-corporatism. The advent of the "free trade" agreements has just made it easier for the pigs of war to oppress and exploit populations. As Dr. King noted, the poverty of our inner cities has to be equated with the violence in Southeast Asia. Similarly, the continuing poverty and lack of opportunities for anyone but the children of the establishment must be equated with the vileness of the occupation of Iraq.
Racism, elitism, nationalism, imperialism, terrorism, militarism, religious extremism and corporatism all combine forces to feed the voracious war machine while the rich prosper and the poor pay for that prosperity with their very lifeblood. The violence is not going to stop until all of these "isms" are courageously and honestly confronted and overcome. This cannot be done through slogans, sophistry, or patriotic jingoism. Policies to share resources and contain rampant profiteering must be put in place all over the world. Our troops and war-profiteers must be fully removed from the Middle East and most of the US permanent bases must be closed around the world. The Pentagon's budget must be slashed and our military must be used for defense (as is required in International Law) only and free trade agreements must be abolished and fair trade and fair labor practices must take their places.
My travels have taken me all over the world and I have been confronted in places as diverse as Cuba and S. Korea with what inhumane US foreign policy does to our brothers and sisters. I have stood with people demanding peace and justice, globally, and it is always the same story: the rich stealing from the poor. We do not have to take it. We must not take it.
We are now beginning to feel the impact in our own country of the American "values" of greed, waste, and naked military aggression. Our militarism is draining our communities of needed services, good education and sound infrastructure. What has happened around the world because of our values is now coming home to roost in the USA. It has now been proven that we cannot sustain an economy based on consumerism combined with manufacturing destruction and exporting death. Our paradigms must radically shift to humane domestic and foreign policies and they must shift quickly.
A genuine revolution of values means in the final analysis that our loyalties must become ecumenical rather than sectional. Every nation must now develop an overriding loyalty to mankind as a whole in order to preserve the best in their individual societies. (MLK, Jr, Beyond Vietnam)
On April 04, 1968, humanity lost a shining star who courageously faced the challenges of his time that have only been magnified in our time. Nothing has improved since Dr. King's sacrifice; in fact conditions have only worsened for everyone except the self-appointed banking-political aristocracy.
On April 04, 2004, my family lost our shining star and each of us will mourn Casey until our last breaths are drawn. However, I realize that I am only one of millions of mothers who have had to needlessly suffer because of violence. Yet, we still kill one another, either as individuals or with state-sanctioned murder (which we sanction by our silent complicity).
So many have gone before us (RIP) giving the ultimate gift for humanity and we must not allow their sacrifices to be in vain.
Cindy is writing from Mexico City, Mexico, where she is the Key Note speaker at an anti-NAFTA conference with many other peace and justice advocates from all over North, Central and South America. Her blogs can be read and commented on at: www.CindyforCongress.org
To the Anti-war/ Peace and Justice Movements
March 31, 2008 | March 27, 2008
To the Anti-war/ Peace and Justice Movements,
Thank You For Your Support of Iraq Veterans Against the War and Winter Soldier
March 13-16, 2008 Iraq Veterans Against the War held Winter Solider: Iraq and Afghanistan (Eyewitness Accounts of the Occupations) in Silver Springs , Maryland . The event was a great success and I would like to thank the greater anti-war/peace movements for your support in helping IVAW, Vietnam Veterans Against the War and Veterans For Peace in our efforts.
There were many of us who wanted to have a large mass mobilization that weekend. IVAW asked all of us to hold off on a mobilization and local actions in Washington , DC during the testimonies so that the event would be the most prominent activity during that time period. Everyone was not in full agreement that this was the best tactic for this moment and a heated debate ensued. But over time the movements united, activists put their shoulders to the wheel and ensured Winter Soldier and the subsequent activities on March 19th to mark the end of the 5th and beginning of the 6th year of the occupation was well attended and in the spotlight. I am personally grateful to all of you for pulling together in our collective effort to make the war visible to the American public and demand that our government end the occupation of Iraq .
We all know we are in a critical time as we continue to resist the illegal and immoral policies of the Bush administration. Most of us are frustrated at the slow pace of change and the lack of an apparent end to this nightmare. We know President Bush will not change course. Congress has abdicated nearly all of its responsibilities to control the Executive Branch and the major parties’ presidential candidates give us little cause to celebrate. It should appear to the realist that the prospects of ending the occupation are bleak. Fortunately for us we do not use the eyes of realists to chart our future; we are activists. Of course we must be pragmatic in our assessments, decision making and planning, but as activists we are in the business of shaping the future and making the change we want to see. With the new tool of Winter Soldier we all possess the voices of Iraq and Afghan veterans to share with our friends, neighbors, relatives, Congress persons and political adversaries. We no longer need to find a person to talk about the occupation. We no longer have to wonder about the truth of the occupation. We now have the truth easily accessible. The tasks at hand are to show and tell the story, step up our organizing, continue to speak truth to power and turn out in mass numbers to demand an end to the occupation.
Lastly, I ask all of us not to fear, because our time is coming. There are far too many examples of those who have come before us facing insurmountable odds; armed with little or nothing, and yet they stood strong in the face of power and changed history. The names are too numerous to mention, but I will attempt to share a few of the movements. Shay’s Rebellion, the Abolitionist Movement to end slavery, the 1st Wave of the Women’s Movement, Labor Movements, the Civil Right Movement, the Student Movement, the Vietnam Veterans Movement, the 2nd Wave of the Women’s Movement, the American Indian Movement, The Gay, Lesbian, Bi Sexual, Transgender and Queer Movements, and others. We have a responsibility to take heart and move forward because our struggle to end this occupation and stop the onslaught of U.S. Imperialism is just beginning and like those who have come before us we will make the impossible possible.
Michael T. McPhearson
Executive Director, Veterans For Peace
Co-Chair, United For Peace and Justice
River to River—Join Hands for Peace
March 19, 2008 | Join Chelsea Neighbors United to End the War and the New York Metro Area Postal Union, APWU, AFL-CIO to commemorate the 5th Anniversary of the War in Iraq:
River to River—Join Hands for Peace
Saturday, March 22, 2008
12 Noon for Hands Across 14th Street
We will be gathering on the northwest corner of 8th Avenue and 14th Street at Noon. At 1 pm, we will march to the center of the formation for a commemoration and tolling of the bell, five mintues of silence and the playing of taps at 2 pm.
People will be carrying flowers, and photos of U.S. Service people, Iraqis, New Orleans, homeless vets—the casualties of
the war in Iraq.
We will remember and mourn and then leave with a stronger committment after 5 years of war to organize an even stronger movement to bring all the troops home now.
The event is being organized by United For Peace and Justice NYC.
For further information please call Chelsea Neighbors United to End the War at 212-726-1385. Confessions of a Gitmo Guard
February 26, 2008 | A Nightmare World of Torture and Prison Guard Suicides
By DEBBIE NATHAN
A psychiatrist who has treated former military personnel at Guantánamo prison camp is telling a story of prisoner torture and guard suicide there, recounted to him by a National Guardsman who worked at Guantánamo just after it opened.
Dr. John R. Smith, 75, is a Oklahoma City psychiatrist who has done worked at military posts during the past few years. He is also a consultant for the University of Oklahoma's Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Services, and is affiliated with the Veteran's Affairs Administration Hospital in Oklahoma City. The court-appointed psychiatric examination of Timothy McVeigh, who bombed the Murrah Federal Building in 1995, was conducted by Smith. A few years ago, he became a contract physician, treating active duty members of the US military in need of psychotherapy.
Smith spoke on February 22, 2008, at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, held in Washington DC. His presentation dealt with the psychological impact on guards of working at Guantánamo. He focused on a chilling case history, of a patient he called "Mr. H."
.
Smith described Mr. H as a blue-collar Latino in his 40s who had done routine service in the National Guard for years before being called up to Kuwait. Then, shortly after 9/11, he was diverted from Kuwait to Guantánamo . The detention camp had just opened. Mr. H was deployed there to work as a guard.
Untrained for the job, Mr. H was taken aback by the detainees. They threw feces and urine on him, said Smith, and tried to get him to sneak letters out, telling him that if he didn't, "they would see to it that his family suffered the consequences." The prisoners also mocked Mr. H, that his being in the military made him "a traitor" to Latinos and other minorities. Mr. H was confused and terrified.
Meanwhile, according to Smith, "this good Catholic man with a family who had pretty much always followed the rules" was called on to participate in torture. One of his jobs was "to take detainees to certain places and see that they were handcuffed in difficult positions, usually naked, in anticipation of interrogation." Mr. H often watched the questioning. He saw prisoners pushed until they fell down, then cut. They responded to the torture with "defecation, vomiting, urinating," and "psychotic reactions: bizarre screaming and crying."
Smith noted that Mr. H said he was "required to handcuff and push to the ground detainees who were naked." The prisoners were also made to "remain on sharp stones on their knees." Detainees, Mr. H told Smith, would try to avoid interrogation by rubbing their knees until they bled in order be taken to the prison hospital.
According to Smith, Mr. H's comment about these events "was poignant and simple: 'It was wrong what we did.'" While still at Guantánamo , he responded to being a participant in torture "with guilt, crying and tears. But of course it was forbidden to talk with anyone about what he was experiencing." He "became more and more depressed." Apparently, so did other military personnel. Smith said Mr. H told him that in the first month he was at Guantánamo , two guards committed suicide.
Smith said that by the time he saw Mr. H, he "had become very ill. He was suicidal, terribly depressed, anxious," and "riddled with insomnia and horrible dreams and flashbacks." He had already seen two military therapists and not improved. But those therapists "were active duty and he didn't dare tell them" what had happened at Guantánamo . Smith was not active duty, and after two or three sessions Mr. H opened up. With medication and psychotherapy, he became less suicidal but was still too sick to do any more military service.
Three years later after treating Mr. H, Smith got three new patients who were guards at Guantánamo on later tours. They said conditions were much improved --"they loved it at Guantánamo and went swimming in the Caribbean." Still, one guard was having problems directly related to his work there. He "described having to cut down a detainee" who tried to hang himself after chewing through an artery in his own arm. There was blood everywhere. When the guard left Guantánamo , he was suffering from "anxiety attacks, panic attacks."
Smith said his presentation at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences meeting was the first time he'd ever spoken publicly about his Guantánamo patients. He decided to talk, he said, because he is concerned that veterans are generally ineligible for PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) disability benefits if the condition is not caused by combat. He considers the guards of Guantánamo "an overlooked group of victims." But in making that case, Smith stepped into a unique role. Heretofore, almost all accounts of torture at Guantánamo have come from non-governmental human rights groups or detainees and their defense lawyers. The FBI accounts in 2004 were contradictory. Smith, a prestigious physician, relayed accounts from inside the military.
Debbie Nathan is a New York City-based journalist who writes frequently for CounterPunch. She can be reached at naess2@gmail.com
Anti-war groups dog Nadler on Bush impeachment
January 23, 2008 | By Jefferson Siegel
Chelsea Now
January 18 - 24, 2008
Anti-war groups from New York City and New Jersey descended on a Democratic candidate forum Sunday afternoon at the Hudson Guild Fulton Center to press Congressman Jerold Nadler to call for the impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.
Members of Chelsea Neighbors United to End the War and a slew of other groups attended the forum, “Decision ’08: The Democrats,” sponsored by the Chelsea Reform Democratic Club.
Surrogates played the parts of the Democrats vying for the presidential nomination. The most prominent among them was Congressman Jerrold Nadler, who was making the case for Senator Hillary Clinton.
But Nadler’s presence brought out several anti-war groups who are angry over his refusal to call for impeachment hearings against the president and vice-president, and they tended to dominate the proceedings.
Before the forum, members of Chelsea Neighbors United to End the War stood outside the Center passing out flyers, handing one to Congressman Nadler as he hurried inside.
Nadler spoke with Chelsea Now about the issues outside the Fulton Center.
“I’m supporting Hillary, and I think she’s the best candidate for president,” Nadler said, adding he had been her surrogate at other recent forums.
Asked about the dissatisfaction over the impeachment issue, Nadler replied, “I don’t think it makes sense at this point. I think that, in order to get Cheney or Bush removed from office, you need 67 votes in the Senate, which means 16 Republican votes, which you’ll never get.
“Since you’ll never get that,” he continued, “the question then becomes, Is it worth doing it simply for symbolic purposes? I believe that an impeachment proceeding, at this point, would suck all the oxygen out of what we should be doing, which is trying to end the war in Iraq, trying to get a decent budget for our people, and trying to elect a democratic president so we can turn the country around.”
Chuck Zlatkin, a co-founder of Chelsea Neighbors United to End the War, thinks Nadler is prevaricating. “In the five months since we met with Nadler on the issue [of impeachment],” Zlatkin said, “with all that’s transpired, with the destruction of the CIA tapes, the ongoing torture, $70 billion more for the war, Nadler still supports the party position that, regardless of what Bush and Cheney do, they should not have to face impeachment hearings.”
Last September, a dozen members of the Chelsea group met with Nadler in his Downtown Manhattan office to press their case for such hearings. At Sunday’s forum they circulated copies of a letter again requesting Nadler to support them. The letter maintains that, if impeachment hearings are not held before Bush leaves office next January, a dangerous precedent will be set, allowing future presidents to ignore the checks and balances of Congress.
A reported 133 people have already signed copies and sent them to Nadler. They are being circulated by Concerned Citizens for Impeachment, at www.AskNadler2Impeach.org.
Penn South resident Lee Sinovoi sat in the audience wearing a bright orange shirt reminiscent of the overalls worn by prisoners at Guantanamo with the words “Stop Torture” printed on it. “They’re important issues,” Sinovoi said. “We don’t suppport the war, and we think Bush and Cheney should be impeached.”
Two groups were so incensed at Nadler that they came from New Jersey to make their point. When it came time for Nadler to speak, eight members of New Jersey Labor Against the War and the New Jersey Impeach Now Coalition stood up in the back of the auditorium, holding up large letters spelling the word “Impeach.” They remained standing quietly as the forum proceeded.
Seated nearby, members of the group World Can’t Wait held up large orange cloths imprinted with their slogan, “Drive Out the Bush Regime.” On Jan. 2, some 15 members of WCW and the group Not in Our Name demanded to meet with Nadler in his Brooklyn office. Although Nadler was not there, four refused to leave and were arrested.
As State Senator Tom Duane sat in the audience with about 200 other people, the five surrogates for candidates Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards, Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel made their cases.
Their opening statements were pro-forma. It was when Nadler started speaking that the calls for impeachment rang out. When Nadler invoked the current campaign’s now popular invocation by saying, “Let’s have change,” someone in the audience yelled out to him, “Then impeach!”
Several activists said they intended to “bird dog” Nadler, to show up at functions he attends in order to keep the pressure on him to call for impeachment hearings. “Bird dogging” was also a tactic employed by the anti-war group Code Pink during Hillary Clinton’s Senate campaign. Members of that group attended numerous Clinton fundraising gatherings to protest her vote authorizing funding for the Iraq war. At one fundraiser held at the now-closed Chelsea club Crobar on West 28th Street, protesters managed to get inside, where they unfurled banners and chanted during Clinton’s speech until they were escorted out.
http://chelseanow.com/cn_69/antiwargroups.html
Worth Fighting For
December 29, 2007 |
Editorial
Jewish Daily Forward
Wed. Dec 26, 2007
Democratic leaders in Congress had their hands full in the past few weeks, trying to pass laws, keep the country running and show voters they could make a difference. It didn’t go well. Between the torture debate, President Bush’s war budget, the energy bill, free trade with Peru, the failed attempt to increase children’s health coverage and the Republican gambit to “recognize” Christmas, it wasn’t a banner season for the Democratic agenda.
With so much on the line, the last thing the party chiefs want now is a floor revolt from mavericks demanding an impeachment. It goes against the button-down image the Democrats want to cultivate, and makes them look like the 1960s radicals they’re often accused of being. They don’t want to sink to the level of the Republican inquisitors who tortured Bill Clinton.
Impeachment would be, in the words of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a “distraction” from the lawmakers’ job of making laws. Besides, they say, with only a year left to the Bush presidency, impeachment would be pointless even if it succeeded, which it won’t.
Nevertheless, an impeachment revolt is under way. A call for the impeachment of Vice President Dick Cheney was introduced in the House last April by left-wing presidential long-shot Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio. Kucinich argued that the party’s image is less important than its principles, and anyway the Bush administration is so unpopular that impeachment will probably help the Democrats, not hurt them. He and his allies believe that the contrast with the Republican’s Clinton witch hunt would only show how responsible the Democrats are. As for the clock running out, that’s precisely why it’s urgent — not to unseat anyone, which they won’t, but to get the facts on record.
Besides, they say, they have a duty to the Constitution, given the abundant evidence — betraying a covert American agent, falsifying intelligence to start an unjustified war, systematically violating individuals’ rights by illegal wiretapping and more. Under the circumstances, they say, removing a president or vice president from office is not optional but mandatory. The Constitution, Article 2, Section 4, says that executive officers, when found guilty of high crimes, “shall be removed from office.” Nothing there about “can be removed if you’re not too scared.”
Of course, the real game is about power. Kucinich’s resolution was hustled to the House Judiciary Committee, where it was buried by the chairman, Rep. John Conyers of Michigan.
On November 6, after being ignored for a half-year, Kucinich formally resubmitted his resolution. By now it had picked up 22 House co-sponsors (eventually growing to 24). The day after, a second resolution was introduced by Florida Rep. Robert Wexler, along with two Midwestern colleagues, demanding that the judiciary committee bring Kucinich’s bill promptly to a vote. This was ignored, too.
For what it’s worth, of the measure’s 27 signed backers — Kucinich and his 24 co-sponsors, Wexler and an ally plus one more who signed both — fully 18, or two-thirds, are either black or Jewish. It shows that the old coalitions for justice are hardier than you think. It also shows how limited is the power of minorities when they can’t mobilize the majority.
Two more months of silence followed, including a near-total press blackout. This month, Wexler submitted an opinion article to The Washington Post, The New York Times and Miami Herald. All three found it unfit to print. On December 14, failing all else, he launched a Web site, wexlerwantshearings.com. Within two weeks it gathered 100,000 signed supporters, despite press silence.
What happens next? That’s up to the Democratic leadership. They could hold firm, bury the Kucinich-Wexler initiative and spend the next year passing good laws, most of which will be vetoed, confirming the public’s worst images of Democratic fecklessness. They might ultimately take next year’s slam-dunk election and blow it, leaving us with four more Republican years.
Or they could choose courage over caution and begin impeachment proceedings. No, nobody will be removed from office. There’s neither time nor national will for that. But the nation will be served notice that not all impeachments are frivolous or nakedly partisan, and that there are limits to executive power in a democracy. That’s a principle worth fighting for.
Faith and War by Cindy Sheehan
December 27, 2007 | A friend of mine, who is Chair of the Economics Department, invited me to speak to the students and faculty at the University of Dallas (where the Veterans for Peace convention was that I spoke at the day before I went to Crawford on August 6th, 2005), which is a small, non-culturally or non-racially diverse, Catholic college.
Surprisingly, my friend Sam, received little protest over inviting me, but there was a "Support the Troops" rally in the room next to where I spoke. Some Camp Casey friends accidentally went into that room and only heard the speaker call me names like "scum" and he called the rest of the people at my event "peace fairies."
I was heartened to find the first three rows of my speech were filled with young people who were smiling and vigorously nodding their heads at everything I said. Most of the audience clapped or laughed in the right places so I was feeling pretty good. However, I was a little sad when there were some snide snickers when I had the unmitigated gall to call Iraqis "human beings."
During the "Q and A" part, the first question I received amazed me. Now, I was raised Protestant and received an excellent training in the Christian scriptures and I know after being a Catholic for 25 years and a Catholic youth minister for nine of those years, that the average Catholic does not know a great deal about the Bible as most of their religious training is in the tenets of the Catholic faith. Here's how many Catholics quote scripture: "It's somewhere in the Bible," when, in my experience, many times they are actually quoting: "Poor Richard's Almanac."
An emphasis on the biblical support for the teachings of the church was never used as long as I taught in the church using the approved teaching materials of the church, but the depth of ignorance of Jesus of Nazareth exhibited in the first question still had the ability to astonish me.
The question printed neatly on a 3 by 5 index card was: "How do you reconcile your progressive ideals with your faith?" I answered the question that Jesus cared about the poor. He admonished us to "feed the hungry" "clothe the naked" "heal the sick" "visit those imprisoned." Jesus performed a stunning feat of civil disobedience by over-turning the tables of the moneychangers in the temple and was subsequently executed by the Empire of his time. Jesus was the ultimate progressive radical. Jesus' name is exploited by our materialistic society at Christmas time when he changes from the right-wing Christian warmonger to the "Prince of Peace."
Jesus welcomed the "least of these" to his table. He didn't exclude sinners, lepers or prostitutes who were the pariahs of his day. Today, I am convinced that if Jesus returned he would welcome gays and non-white people (even "illegal" immigrants) to commune with him. The only people I ever heard Jesus speak badly about were the "brood of vipers" (Mt 3:7) that were the Sadduccees (Democrats?) and Pharisees (Republicans?) who in the parable, with hypocritical piety, walked right by the man who had been beaten, robbed and left by the side of the road to die without helping him and they turned his "Father's" house (the Temple) into a "den of thieves." (Mt. 21:12).
My question for the questioner was: "How do you reconcile your faith with supporting war and killing?"
If Jesus came back today and was a politician, I know, because of my faith in the inherent goodness of the Universe, that he would not be a "politician" but a public servant. Jesus would be in favor of single-payer health care, solar and wind energy, unions, free post-secondary education, Social Security, fair trade, free speech, civil rights, and human rights. Jesus would be against the death penalty, torture, extremist religions that exploit His Name for profit, extremist states that exploit His Name to kill innocent people, and the ultimate crime against humanity: war.
Whether one is a Christian, Jew, Muslim, or like me now: nothing, Jesus of Nazareth and his story is still worth studying and emulating. At the risk of sounding judgemental, I have a feeling that these reactionary Christian extremists are going to be shocked when they go to meet their maker and find out that Jesus wasn't kidding when he said "Blessed are the peacemakers for they will be called children of God" (Mt 5:9) The converse of that saying is: "Cursed are the warmakers for they are not the children of God." There is a very relevant saying of Jesus in the Bible that these self-proclaimed "Christians" should also pay closer attention to:
You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you. (Matthew 5:43)
Wise words for everybody to strive to live up to: From presidents to college students and everyone in between.
Let's work for true Peace on Earth and Goodwill to ALL!
DONATE TO CINDY'S CAMPAIGN
Comment on this essay at Cindy's Blog
"People before Politics"
Support Cindy for Congress!
www.CindyforCongress.org
Thank You, John Nirenberg
December 4, 2007 |
By Emily West
Consortium News
December 3, 2007
http://www.consortiumnews.com/Print/2007/120307b.html
Editor’s Note: Despite Official Washington's dismissive attitude toward the impeachment of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, rank-and-file Americans continue to press for action that would hold the President and Vice President accountable under the Constitution.
In this guest essay, writer and activist Emily West praises John Nirenberg for beginning a personal walk for impeachment:
John Nirenberg began his walk for impeachment on Saturday from Faneuil Hall - a walk stretching from Boston, Massachusetts, to Washington, D.C.
John is taking this walk to give Americans an opportunity to sign his petition written to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to impeach the neocon criminals in our White House and to draw attention to this important action by The People.
He will also take your personal letters, urging that impeachment begin, to Pelosi who is currently standing in the way of our American Democracy.
Nirenberg's march is south along Rte 1. Please feel free to join him and bring along your camera (to place your video on YouTube.) You can find where he is each day by checking John's blog. His goal is to walk up to 15 miles each day.
By the way, Cindy Sheehan now has a stack of letters 10 feet high from our earlier 10k Letters to Pelosi "rumor"!
Word went out that Pelosi would move impeachment forward post haste if she received 10,000 handwritten letters to impeach. It appears that the number is getting closer to 100,000, however, from letters sent to Cindy as well as those sent directly to Pelosi's San Francisco office.
Keep writing - she hasn't heard us yet - and feel free, California, to let her know her job is in jeopardy.
We The People do not support mass murder for a resource war (yet again) while allowing our democracy to be stripped of its freedoms and liberties in the name of fighting "terrorism."
As Howard Zinn says, "war is terrorism." And an illegal war on false claims (intentional lies) doesn't get any more terrifying.
We have a system that can work against external and internal attacks to this country -- if we use it.
The neocon coup of our government (via the stolen presidential elections of 2000 and 2004) and the events of Sept 11, 2001, created a shock wave which ripped across the country and the world in order to strategically place these neocon (neonazi) clamps on our legal system and to put their neoliberal corporate policies into our systems and our laws, across the board.
So the neocons in our government are in actuality the real terrorists, using fear and the American peoples' prejudices against themselves, strategically, to replace the democratic process with systems like those imposed by the Nazi party in Hitler's Germany. The Nazis were also funded by corporations, i.e. the moneyed elite.
Europe watches America with a clearer view of what is occurring and with horror. They are sensitive to these mass-manipulations (especially Germany of course) because they have seen this before in very recent history.
The corporations have identified the parts of our American population who are the most easily manipulated - those who were raised on fear and taught to hate. These are also often the people who join the military and are exploited with their lives or limbs, or the health of their minds. Many come back emotionally destroyed.
The government reports that about 2,500 youth have returned to commit suicide from their tours in Iraq to date, but a CBS study recently showed the number is actually closer to 15,000. What does this tell us?
The "draft" is a socio-economic draft - young people who were suppressed in some way and see the military as a way out as well as a way to empower themselves. Our tax dollars could do much more to educate and empower our youth!
These are the majority of the enlisted, including the private armies the neocons are funding with our tax dollars, as with Blackwater.
The media appeal to those of this mentality who cannot join but vote for the candidates who inspire fear and hatred instead. Their small-minded perceptions and predjudices are fueled through the twisted stories the corporate media report and the many stories they do not report.
Our media could expose the high level of corruption in American government - they choose not to as they are in bed with the moneyed elite who are pulling the strings on our governments today.
We The People can reach out to the misguided who vote against themselves and send their children to kill innocents and be killed, or return home damaged and suicidal, by sharing our views with patience. It's up to us to lead them to real information.
Remember that everything Hitler did in gaining power was legal - the people allowed him to replace their humane system of government by playing on their fear and ignorance as well as their hatred and bigotry! To base a social system on fear, hatred, bigotry and ignorance is to destroy a system entirely!
It's no wonder that corporate America does not care that they are taking jobs from Americans and hiring other countries and private companies to do what we used to do ourselves. The moneyed elite have no countries - only bank accounts.
To be silent is to allow our country to be lost to these madmen.
Our Congress has been insulated by 35,000 lobbyists and corporate moneys to fund their campaigns. Our system has turned itself inside out.
The Democrats in office now believe that impeachment is not politically correct. Talk to them! 202-224-3121. Ask for your rep or senator at this D.C. number and tell them what you think!
Include the obvious message that they can be replaced! It is not a question of politics or "other priorities" - it is a quesiton of corruption and despotism (so far they have not done anything they said they would do even when given the opportunity anyway!)
Ending this unprecedented climate of corruption is the issue. And Impeachment is the tool - our one and only tool - which we are required (by the U.S. Constitution) to use to remove criminals from powerful positions.
Pelosi is clearly not a historian, an attorney, or a Constitutional scholar - as all our best leaders have been. Impeachment is our only tool to remove tyrants, murderers, liars and crooks, and it's our job to let her know.
Our great nation was begun by those escaping the money lords and the tyranny of a very greedy and inhumane monarch, King George. The spirit of our early America colonists still resides in New England, a revolution of the fierce yet gentle people of this land to protect what they cherish most - liberty and justice, for all.
Our Founding Fathers ask us to persevere in the face of injustice; the tool they have given us (mentioned no less than 6 times in the Constitution) is Impeachment.
They fought for OUR futures and for the American Dream. We owe them at least this, to stand up to this tyranny - to defend our Rights and the future of our country.
So, thank you, John Nirenberg, for bringing this urgent impeachment resolution forward, with a "call" to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi at this time telling her to step aside and allow John Conyers and the House Judiciary Committee to begin the process of impeachment.
Emily West is a contributor to the pro-impeachment Web site,http://www.mass-impeach.org.
NYC Anti-War March Tnis Saturday October 27
October 24, 2007 | Dear Chelsea Neighbor,
Join with Chelsea Neighbors United to End the War and Chelsea for Peace this Saturday, October 27th as we join the Massive Rally and March to End the War in Iraq and to Bring the Troops Home.
Chelsea Feeder March will gather at the northwest corner of 8th Avenue and 23rd Street at 11:30 A. M. We will walk to the main rally site at Broadway north of Union Square. The main rally begins at 12 noon and the march will kick off at 1 P. M.
We have been invited to march with the New York Metro Area Postal Union who has supported Chelsea Stands Up Against The War on a number of occasions. This will enable us to be towards the front of the march.
For further information call 212-726-1385. |
