footprints for peace, flier

Filed under: Article 9 on March 9th, 2010 | No Comments »

Alec Baldwin, Emmy-award winning star of NBC’s comedy show 30 Rock, says safety problems at nuclear power plants — if known publicly — would kill any chance of an industry revival.

President Obama called last month for a “new generation” of nuclear power plants and approved $8.3 billion in loan guarantees last week for two new reactors in Georgia, which would be the first such nuclear construction in three decades.

Actor Alec Baldwin, star of NBC’s comedy show
CAPTION
By Robyn Beck, AFP/Getty Images
Baldwin doesn’t mention Obama, but in a commentary today on The Huffington Post, he recounts safety problems at various nuclear power plants. He says he’s studied them since 1996 with the Radiation and Public Health Project, which he continues to support. He writes:

We gathered information about Indian Point, and worried about implications of a containment breach there long before 9/11 heightened that risk. We gathered information about Oak Ridge, Tennessee, The Gaseous Diffusion plant in Piketon, Ohio. The problems with operations at Dresden, Illinois. At Turkey Point in Florida. And we immersed ourselves in the problems surrounding the Oyster Creek facility in Tom’s River, New Jersey.

I started going down to Oyster Creek in 1996. I returned there with a 60 Minutes camera crew a couple of years ago. I have a strong and abiding belief that true knowledge of what does and does not go on in Tom’s River, as well as in both Trenton and Washington, combined with unbiased knowledge about nuclear power in utility reactors could kill any of the talk about reviving this industry.

Filed under: Article 9 on February 23rd, 2010 | No Comments »

students protest Gen Patreus at Georgetown

Filed under: Article 9 on February 14th, 2010 | No Comments »

President Obama did not say that he would be leaving Afghanistan, but increasing the US presence there is not helping the current situation in that country. Below I have the Obama’s Death toll.

This is an easy reminder that too many people are dying.   As a fellow veteran has said, Peace is winning, War is losing.   I used to naively believe that peace could be achieved through war, but now I have realized that war is war, and you cannot achieve anything but war once you start one.   It is impossible to prevent a war by going to war, because you just started one!

Filed under: Article 9 on February 9th, 2010 | No Comments »

FOCUS: IMPERIUM The US as a great warrior tribe By Marwan Bishara, Al Jazeera’s senior political analyst Has the US become a ‘ruling warrior tribe’? [GALLO/GETTY] According to tribal Yemeni tradition, if a dispute has been resolved peacefully, any dagger that has been drawn cannot go back into its scabbard unless it tastes blood. Traditionally, an animal is slaughtered to satisfy its thirst and restore its holder’s honour.Since the Cold War ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact without a single shot, let alone nuclear warheads, being fired, the ‘Greater Middle East’ region has been turned into a real theatre of war. From the Gulf war in 1991 through to the invasion of Iraq in 2003, from Somalia in 1993 to Yemen in 2010, and through Afghanistan and Pakistan, the US military has gone to great lengths to demonstrate its strategic capacity to act in faraway places and to prove its ability to guard and advance US and Western interests. In no time, military means and out-right war and occupation replaced diplomacy and international law. In return, the Pentagon’s budget has almost doubled from the level it was before 9/11 to surpass the combined military expenditures of all the countries of the world, all under the guise of the ‘global war against terror’. Alas, the costly failures in Iraq and Afghanistan and other countries have demonstrated that the Muslim world is far too stubborn to be offered as a sacrifice in the pursuit of global leadership. Tribal vs. state identities Since then, the devastating wars of terror that have taken place in the shadows of accelerated globalisation have weakened state structures and institutions and reinforced tribal and sectarian identities. Regimes not directly affected, took preventative measures by strengthening their grip on power through increased security and tribal alliances. The US and its regional allies have empowered and financed tribal leaders, as in Iraq and Afghanistan, to defeat unrelenting Islamist opposition or nationalist insurgencies, just as America’s enemies have tried to gain the support of tribes for their cause against the “foreigners”. Washington followed in the footsteps of the UK, which boasts extensive experience of tribal politics in its former colonies, to arm and finance tribal leaders to fight its war in Iraq under the guise of “The Awakening” or ”The Sons of Iraq”. Likewise in Afghanistan, where the US built on its long experience with the northern tribes in the 1980s to regain the initiative against the Soviet supported regime in Kabul. In the process, salient – and not so salient – tribal power has been empowered in all the areas of conflict in the ‘Greater Middle East’ by undemocratic leaders. Yemen, Libya, Jordan, Palestine and, even failed states like Afghanistan and Somalia, have witnessed the emergence of tribal loyalties and power. But the failure of the US and its allies to attain stability - let alone to declare victory – has slowly but surely transformed the political landscape into a coalition of tribes or ‘a warrior ruling tribe’ over many. ‘Sons of America’ This transformation was not limited to the Middle East. Compromised by globalisation and market diktats, the most modern countries, such as the US, just like the least modern, such as Yemen, are increasingly acting in primordial ways and means. As their sovereignty is compromised by multinational corporate decisions, capital, labour and investment movements, as well as communication and cultural globalisation, many states make up for their diminishing role over their economy and culture through alternative means of collective identities such as rallying their people around the flag. With the advent of 9/11 and the ‘war on terror’, anger, humiliation and fear nudged the US into wars of ’shock and awe’, revenge, torture, and rendition – stripping their ‘enemy-combatants’ of their very humanity in far away prisons. The politics of fear engineered by cynical racism and nationalism drove wars that have compromised traditional republican values and civil liberties just as its wars of choice undermined its ’social contract’ and whipped US citizens into a collective frenzy. In short, the United States of America, the most powerful and advanced liberal democracy, began acting as the most aggressive of all the world’s tribes. And although much of this change was engineered by the Bush administration under the fog of the ‘war on terror’, Barack Obama’s election has defused war criticism, diminished the ‘peace movement’ and once again united the country under the flags of war. In the process, tribal loyalty replaced patriotism, revenge superseded legality, and “you’re either with US or against us” wrecked international solidarity and even sympathy with the US after the 9/11 attacks. War without end As asymmetrical warfare takes up the fight from conventional wars, battles are replaced by bombings and massacres, military bases by hideouts and remote control rooms, population control and policing by propaganda and terror, and national borders are surpassed by new fault lines passing through every minor Middle Eastern state and every major Western city. As Afghans, Pakistanis, Yemenis and Somalis volunteer to fight and even die on behalf of their cause and collective identities, against corrupt autocratic regimes, demoralised soldiers and private contractors with fancy gear, who do you think wins at the end of the day? Before you answer, consider two important lessons of asymmetrical war that have been ignored in the sweeping post-9/11 transformation. Firstly, in the long term, loyalty, kinship, sacrifice and a sense of justice and belonging is more potent than firepower. Secondly, “he who fights terrorists for any period of time is likely to become one himself”. All of which begs for a change in the whole paradigm of the ongoing ‘global war on terror’ that holds entire populations hostage to fear and war. To be continued …

Filed under: Article 9 on January 13th, 2010 | No Comments »

GENERAL McCHRYSTAL HAS PLANS FOR AFGHANISTAN

By: Bill D.  Vietnam Veteran

The New York Times Magazine recently had a long article about General Stanley McChrystal, commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan.  The article examined the general’s counterinsurgency plan for “success”.  The Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer recently claimed that General McChrystal is the world’s foremost counterterrorism expert because in his previous job in Iraq “he killed thousands of bad guys.”  (How many “bad guys” do they have in Iraq?)

A picture in the Times article showed that the general has Ranger and Special Forces patches on his sleeve.  These are very select units.  It means he is also airborne qualified.  General McChrystal also runs every day and is, according to one report, “a fitness nut”. He is strong and brave.  These may be qualities that are important to him, and that’s fine.  But for our country, the more important questions are:  is he compassionate and is he wise.?  Because strength and bravery without compassion and wisdom are worse than useless, they are destructive.  Is General McChrystal a destructive man?  I believe so.

If you read the N.Y.Times article carefully and critically, what comes across most strongly is that the general wants to win.  But what does he want to win?  He says he wants to win the military struggle by protecting the civilian population from the Taliban, by building up the Afghan Army and Police so that they can take over from our soldiers, and by convincing Taliban fighters to come over to the government side.  This is a formula for failure.

General McChrystal has been given the power of life and death over millions of Afghans.  Is he wise enough to use that power?  The answer appears to be “No.”  Does he know what the Afghan people want or need?  Has he asked?  Or is he just another in a long line of Americans whose chief export is arrogance?

The main U.S. goal is said to be getting the population on our side.  We have spent eight years not following through on this often stated goal.  General McChrystal is not following through on it yet, and his request for 40,000- 85,000 more troops shows that winning over the people is just a sound bite for him.  The plan offers nothing to the Afghan people except more fighting and dying.  Some Afghans will be protected while others will be left exposed.  General McChrystal wants to build up the Afghan security forces.  That will only put the people under the control of a corrupt force working for one of the most corrupt and brutal governments in the world.  The criminals, warlords and drug-runners surrounding President Hamid Karzai are, according to Ann Jones in a recent article, as cruel and anti-woman as the Taliban, but they are less disciplined in their fanaticism.  U.S. analysts and military commanders love to talk about “stabilizing” the country, but what are they planning on stabilizing:  misogyny, injustice,  hunger, homelessness, and early death?

What have we done for the Afghan people over the last eight years?  They are suffering from extremes of homelessness, the lack of basic necessities of life, and violence  We have spent over $200 billion, 90% of which has been for military spending.  Most of the 10% that is supposed to be for aid and reconstruction has been misspent or stolen.  We have supported Hamid Karzai, a man who has as much legitimacy as Diem did in South Vietnam.  The fighting itself creates wounded and dying people, but are we providing for those who are suffering?  It seems that if our generals and Congressional representatives understood or cared at all about what they are doing in Afghanistan, the ratio of military to civilian spending would be reversed and the spending for civilians would be increased until civilians were cared for, no matter what the cost.  What kind of a lying policy is  it when you claim to be protecting people and then you leave them to die from wounds, starvation, and sickness?

Our current debate doesn’t include the fact that the Afghans were credited with doing the fighting in the 1980’s that brought down the Soviet Union.  What kind of heartless government supplies the weapons and money for a fight like that and then walks away and leaves several million amputees and disabled people, including children, to fend for  themselves in a ruined country?  Our government has been bleeding Afghanistan for 30 years now and General McChrystal offers more bleeding.

There is one thing that should be the deciding question here and that is that, just as with the war in Iraq, George Bush started this war under false pretences.  The stated goal in the beginning was to find Osama bin Laden and destroy his ability to launch more attacks.  Bush demanded that the Taliban turn over bin Laden.  When they refused, Bush started bombing Afghanistan on Oct. 7, 2001.  On the weekend of Oct. 13-14, the Taliban offered to turn over bin Laden to a neutral third country for trial.  Bush said  “No.  There’s no negotiations.”  The corporate media, like the stinking jackals and corrupt parasites that they are, [Is this language too strong?  I'm a reasonable guy.  I can tone it down if I must] helped to make Bush look like a strong leader who refuses to negotiate with terrorists.  They helped to cover up the reality that Bush had just turned down an offer that could have ended the war almost at it’s start.  He didn’t want to end the war, he wanted to keep it going.

Filed under: Article 9 on November 29th, 2009 | No Comments »

Ash and I were emerging from store in Olympia, WA on Aug. 1st to hear a strangely familiar sound- the drumming and chanting of Napponza Miyogi!  It was Katada Shoni’s anti-nuclear peacewalk, from New Mexico to Seattle.  While we knew vaguely of this walk, we had been very busy with our own plans of moving cross country.  Stumbling into a parade of peace friends, then, seemed divinely planned.

We joined the walk until it rested at the state capital.  There, Ash introduced himself as another veteran peacewalk and celebration ensued.  We had a lovely talk and shared peacewalk, peacemaking stories over lunch.

This was another great opportunity to share our ideas about next summer’s peacewalk.  Definite dates have not yet been set but tentatively we will begin mid to late June and travel from NYC to Washington DC.  As we left Olympia and traveled eastward to Wisconsin, we were continually placed with people in our path with interest and skills in being involved in the peacewalk.  Veterans, especially, are encouraged to come and partake in this literal movement for peace.

As plans continue to develop, we will post them here.  See you in June!

Filed under: Article 9 on August 20th, 2009 | 1 Comment »

The conversation so far has been only a whisper, but it will grow as things do faster and faster, and pretty soon the conversation of a peace clause in the U.S. constitution will be heard very clearly.  This idea has been discussed in every part of American society, in every part of the American landscape.  The dialogue isn’t open yet and isn’t free, but with awareness and consideration more people will see that it is a vital component to a lasting world.  We see that in violence everyone suffers, and that in violence there is no way to avoid suffering.  We understand what our first grade teacher meant when she said,” don’t hit that kid, talk it out because hitting won’t solve our issues.” When one country hits another country to solve a problem, is that problem then solved? I have seen war myself, and the pain that we all suffer from its effects, and I want it to end.   As United States citizens we understand our inherent contributions even when these contributions are not conscious decisions to the constant state of war across the world, and want to stop the U.S. military being used as a tool of foreign diplomacy

Filed under: Article 9 on August 11th, 2009 | No Comments »

On July 29 I will have the opurtinity to introduce Military Families Speak Out(MFSO)Gold Star member Cindy Sheehan.

I remember the first mother of a soldier that was killed in Iraq that I had met.  She is also a Gold Star member of MFSO, it was with out a doubt one of the most life changing experience that I have had. I met her on the podium in Hiroshima Japan. I was just starting a speaking tour about the corporate greed that was influencing the United States foreign policy, and the effects of war on soldiers and the civilians involved. We were both speaking at the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park on the anniversary of the Hiroshima atomic bombing. We had the chance to speak side by side, and answer questions together after we spoke. Speaking with Gold Star mother Celeste Zappala mother of Sgt. Sherwood Baker was like speaking with any mother of any fallen soldier. Celeste could have been my mother, and I could have been Sgt. Baker.  This connection between Gold Star mothers and veterans is irreplaceable, the depths of which are inconceivable to a civilian.

Cindy Sheehan is a strong example of leadership, she has spotted the problem and aims to do everything in her power to eradicate it. I have immense respect for her and the work that she has undertaken after the loss of her son. I hope that we all soon realize the greed that influences the corporations our government.

“The belligerency of state will not be recognized.” is a line from the pacifist constitution of Japan, the same constitution that has kept Japan out of war since WW2, and the same constitution that the United States is trying to dis-assemble so Japan can fight in our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  We need to learn from Japan, and promote a pacifist constitution here in the United States, so that we do not relive Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan,  and Nicaragua etc. etc. etc. ever again.

Filed under: Article 9 on July 20th, 2009 | No Comments »

Veterans for Peace, CPL Jonathan Santos Memorial Chapter 111

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Local Veterans for Peace and Whatcom Peace and Justice to Host

Activist/Author Cindy Sheehan

WHEN: Wednesday, July 29, 2009
WHERE:  Christ the Servant Lutheran Church

2600 Lakeway Drive, Bellingham, WA at 7 pm

Bellingham’s Veterans For Peace Chapter 111, www.vfp111.org , along with the Whatcom Peace and Justice Center, is hosting an evening with Cindy Sheehan – Gold Star Mother, 2005 Nobel Peace Prize nominee, anti-war activist, author, and 2008 Independent Congressional candidate – on the last stop of her Myth America speaking tour on Wednesday, July 29.

Her recently published internet book entitled Myth America: 10 Greatest Myths of the Robber Class and the Case for Revolution follows three other books, including Not One More Mother’s Child, Dear President Bush, and Peace Mom: A Mother’s Journey Through Heartache to Activism.

Sheehan’s presentations have focused on her belief that it is social and class inequities that divide us.  She’s also expressed her frustration with what she describes as the narrowness of the peace movement today.  “War is wrong no matter who is president,” she has said.  “We have to be just as diligent under the new administration as we were under the old.”

Cindy is hoping to spark dialogue and re-invigorate activism.

Admission by donation.

###

­­­ Contact: Gene Marx

360-738-8462

info@vfp111.org

Filed under: Article 9 on July 20th, 2009 | No Comments »