Hi Everybody,
Well, we had a great day overall! Thanks to the united efforts of many folks, we succeeded in mounting actions at the Canadian Embassy and Consulates in 14 U.S. cities! The reports from the various cities are still trickling in. There were reportedly 60 people at the vigil in New York, 50 in San Francisco, “50 some” in Chicago, and respectable showings elsewhere. There was significant media coverage of these vigils in both the U.S. and Canada. Veterans For Peace president Elliott Adams was interviewed on Canadian Broadcasting Corp. television this morning and CBC covered the vigil in Washington too. Associated Press showed up at several rallies. We had local TV and radio coverage here in Seattle, along with AP and Free Speech Radio News. And the beat goes on.
Thanks to the collaboration of Courage to Resist, Veterans For Peace and Project Safe Haven, these were easily the largest nationally coordinated actions in the U.S. on behalf of our war resisters in Canada.
And we gained another victory today! Corey Glass will not be deported anytime soon. A Federal Court in Canada granted him a stay of his deportation, at least for several months while his lawyers are given a chance to appeal earlier negative rulings.
This is related to the legal victory of Joshua Key on the 4th of July. According to the Federal Court, the regular abuse of Iraq civilians at the hands of the U.S. military are systematic violations of the Geneva Conventions, and should be a basis for granting refugee status. The mobilizations being coordinated between Canada and the U.S. are definitely creating positive momentum. And time seems to be on our side.
But now we are faced with another emergency! The police in Nelson, British Columbia are at it again, along with the Canada Border Services Agency. Yesterday, while all eyes were on Corey Glass, they arrested another U.S. war resister, Robin Long, for supposed violations immigration law. They threatened to deport Long immediately, but Canadian Immigration, under legal and political pressure, have given Long’s lawyer until Monday to file for a stay of deportation. Neither Robin Long nor his lawyer had been informed of plans to deport him, and thus he was denied his legal right to appeal.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080710.BCDEPORTATION10/TPStory/National
So vigilance and political pressure remains important. To counteract their apparent eagerness to hand a war resister over as a prize to George Bush, the minority Conservative government needs to know that people in the U.S. and Canada are still paying attention.
Tomorrow is a National Day of Action in Canada. There will be rallies in several Canadian cities, including Vancouver, from where Robin Long could be deported as early as Tuesday. And people will continue to barrage the government with phone calls and emails.
We in the U.S. can continue to generate phone calls and emails to Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Immigration Minister Diane Finley (See alert and contact information from the War Resisters Support Campaign, below).
And those of us who did not actually send delegations in to meet with the Canadian Consuls should consider doing so by next Monday or Tuesday (and later too). The more Consulates that have to report to their government, the better. Consider broad-based delegations.
The letter sent by Canadian religious leaders might serve as a good model for religious leaders in the U.S. (See also below.)
Tomorrow morning I will be interviewed on CBC Radio in Vancouver for 15 minutes. They are most interested to know what kind of punishment awaits Robin Long if he is handed over to the U.S. Army. I will tell them that those AWOL resisters who are the most vocal, including those who go to Canada, are most likely to face persecution – harassment, court martial, imprisonment and less-than-honorable discharges. A bad discharge can be a life sentence of job discrimination, and keep someone from having access to healthcare, which means something to Canadians.
The question of what amounts to “persecution” will be the next legal and political battleground for Joshua Key, Corey Glass, Robin Long and nearly 200 U.S. war resisters in Canada. At least, until the government decides to follow the will of the Canadian people and Parliament...
By the way, there will probably be a federal election in Canada in the fall. The Liberal Party, who now are solidly on the record supporting war resisters, could form the next government.
Please check out the following alert and reports from the War Resisters Support Campaign in Canada. Or go to their website, www.resisters.ca.
And keep on keepin’ on!
for peace and justice,
Gerry Condon
*******************************************************
Federal Court grants stay of removal to Corey Glass!
Robin Long still facing deportation on July 14th In another positive decision for U.S. war resisters in Canada, Corey Glass was granted a stay of removal by the Federal Courty today. While not reasons for the decision have been issued yet, it reinforces the positive decision in Joshua Key's asylum case issued on Friday, July 4th.However War Resister Robin Long is still being held in jail in Nelson, B.C. and is threatened with deportation to the United States on Monday, July 14th. (See press release)July 10th actions are planned across the country to stop the deportation proceedings against Robin Long and let all the war resisters stay!
This is a critical week in the campaign to win asylum for Iraq War resisters in Canada. In spite of a Parliamentary motion calling on the federal government to allow war resisters to stay; in spite of a positive court decision in Joshua Key's refugee case which calls into question the decisions made by the Immigration and Refugee Board in these cases; and in spite of overwhelming public opinion in support of permanent resident status for war resisters, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Immigration Minister Diane Finley appear set to act against the wishes of Canadians and deport Robin Long.
Robin is the first of a growing number of Iraq war resisters facing removal proceedings. Every action taken between now and July 15th can make a big difference to the fate of Robin and all the other war resisters in Canada. Please take the time to make as many phone calls, send as many emails and write as many letters as you can, and then join an action on July 10th.
Let the government know that it is time they start representing the will of Canadians and stop acting as the enforcement arm of the Bush administration.
What you can do:
Call and email Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
613.992.4211
pm@pm.gc.ca
Call and email Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Diane Finley.
613.996.4974
finley.d@parl.gc.ca
finled1@parl.gc.ca
If you're Canadian and your riding is represented by a Conservative MP, please contact her or him to express your support for war resisters. To find contact information, click here.
Write letters to your local newspaper. Demand that Diane Finley and Stephen Harper to respect the will of Parliament and Canadians and let the war resisters stay!
Join the protests on Thursday, July 10. Events will be taking place in cities across Canada. Watch our events page for an action in your area.
"Thank You Canada" from U.S. Veterans for Peace
TORONTO/CNW – The major U.S. organization representing 7,000 U.S. veterans has issued a public “Thank You” to the people of Canada and an appeal to the government on behalf of Corey Glass and other U.S. Iraq War conscientious objectors seeking refuge.Veterans for Peace (VFP) whose members fought in WW II, the Korean, Vietnam and Iraq wars says: “Thank you, Canada, for providing a safe haven for young American men and women who, although they were in the military, decided they could not in good conscience participate in the illegal and immoral U.S. war and occupation of Iraq.” Read the full press release
Appeal from Canada's faith communities to the government of Canada
Dear Prime Minister Harper and Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Diane Finley:
Re: Iraq War resister Corey Glass: July 10 deportation looming
We are writing to request your quick action to stop the deportation and removal proceedings against U.S. Iraq War conscientious objector Corey Glass who came to Canada seeking refuge.The federal government’s July 10 deportation order against Glass is still in effect, creating enormous stress, anxiety and turmoil for him and for all the conscientious objectors and their families who are hoping the government will be guided by the will of Parliament. This was expressed June 3rd with the passage of a landmark parliamentary motion that called on the Government of Canada to allow U.S. conscientious objectors who have left military service related to the illegal invasion of Iraq, and their immediate family members, the opportunity to apply to remain in Canada as permanent residents, and to immediately cease any removal or deportation actions that may have already commenced against such individuals. Read the full letter
_______________________________________________
Soldier Say No / Project Safe Haven
projectsafehaven@hotmail.com, SoldierSayNo@yahoo.com
www.SoldierSayNo.blogspot.com
(206) 499-1220
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Tuesday, July 01, 2008
Join the July 2 "Phone-In" for U.S. War Resisters in Canada
Stop the Deportation of U.S. War Resisters in Canada!
Join with the War Resisters Support Campaign in their July 2 "Phone-In"
Join with the War Resisters Support Campaign in their July 2 "Phone-In"
STOP THE DEPORTATION OF U.S. WAR RESISTER COREY GLASS
On July 2nd…
On July 2nd…
CALL CANADA'S IMMIGRATION MINISTER DIANE FINLEY!
Yes, calls from supporters in the U.S. are encouraged too!
Yes, calls from supporters in the U.S. are encouraged too!
U.S. Iraq War resister Corey Glass is still facing deportation on July 10th, despite the Parliament of Canada having voted in favour of a motion to let Corey and other U.S. war resisters stay.
The federal government and the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration must respect the will of Parliament and implement the motion which calls on the government to “immediately implement a program to allow conscientious objectors and their immediate family members […] to apply for permanent resident status and remain in Canada; and … the government should immediately cease any removal or deportation actions … against such individuals.”
On July 2nd, the War Resisters Support Campaign is calling on all supporters to call Minister Diane Finley and ask her to:
• STOP deportation proceedings against Corey Glass and all U.S. Iraq war resisters; and
• IMPLEMENT the motion adopted by Canada’s Parliament to allow U.S. Iraq war resisters to apply for permanent resident status.
Here are the numbers to call:Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Diane Finley
613.996.4974
MP Diane Finley’s constituency office (Simcoe):
MP Diane Finley’s constituency office (Simcoe):
519.426.3400
Or email her at:
Or email her at:
or
finled1@parl.gc.ca
___________________________________________________________________
VETERANS FOR PEACE CALLS FOR JULY 9 VIGILS
AT CANADIAN CONSULATES
___________________________________________________________________
VETERANS FOR PEACE CALLS FOR JULY 9 VIGILS
AT CANADIAN CONSULATES
Dear Canada: Do Not Deport U.S. War Resisters!
The struggle of AWOL GIs to gain sanctuary in Canada is coming to a head.
On June 3, the House of Commons passed a motion calling on the Canadian government to stop all deportation proceedings against U.S. war resisters and allow them to immigrate to Canada.But the minority Conservative government is ignoring the will of the Canadian Parliament. Iraq veteran and war resister Corey Glass has been told to leave Canada by July 10 or face deportation. The War Resisters Support Campaign in Canada is calling for urgent actions across Canada and the U.S.
*****************
VETERANS FOR PEACE has joined with Courage To Resist and Project Safe Haven to organize July 9 vigils and delegations to Canadian consular offices throughout the U.S.
*****************
VETERANS FOR PEACE is sending an Open Letter to the Canadian Government and People and is encouraging its 7,000 members to contact the Canadian government directly.
The War Resisters Support Campaign is hoping for thousands of calls from both the Canada and the U.S. on Wednesday, July 2.
Write letters to the Canadian government. You can send your own letters or you can go online and Courage To Resist will do it for you. Either way, you can get the contact information at www.couragetoresist.org/canada.
Write letters to the Canadian government. You can send your own letters or you can go online and Courage To Resist will do it for you. Either way, you can get the contact information at www.couragetoresist.org/canada.
*******************
Can you help organize a local action on July 9? Contact us ASAP!
Gerry Condon
Project Safe Haven / VFP 92
206-499-1220
Jeff Paterson
Courage To Resist / VFP 69
510-488-3559
Betsy Reznicek
Veterans For Peace National Office
314-725-6005
_________________________________________________________
GI resisters are refusing to fight in the illegal and immoral U.S. occupation of Iraq.
By supporting them, we will encourage others to follow their example.
Help spread the word. Send this Call to Action to your networks!
We can make a real difference by acting NOW!
GI resisters are refusing to fight in the illegal and immoral U.S. occupation of Iraq.
By supporting them, we will encourage others to follow their example.
Help spread the word. Send this Call to Action to your networks!
We can make a real difference by acting NOW!
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Monday, June 23, 2008
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Soldiers: Know Your Rights!
By Jonathan Hutto, Sr., The Nation Institute
The following is an excerpt from Anti-War Soldier: How to Dissent Within the Ranks of the Military, from Nation Books.
On November 9, 1969, the New York Times published an open appeal by 1,365 active-duty service members calling for an end to the Vietnam War and for no punishment for participating in the historic Vietnam Moratorium march. The petition of these soldiers, representing 80 bases and ships throughout the world, had a huge impact and helped establish the (limited) civil liberties and rights GIs have today. The members of the GI Movement risked their careers and personal security by signing this petition and participating in subsequent actions.
One of those signers was David Cortright, who went on to write Soldiers In Revolt, the definitive 1975 chronicle of the GI Movement. He was part of an activist group of GIs at Fort Hamilton, New York. Thirty-five of the 60 personnel in his company signed the petition and several traveled to Washington, D.C. for the historic march.
I contacted David to arrange for a community meeting with some of my civilian and active-duty colleagues in June 2006 in Norfolk, Virginia. Its success led us to ponder whether something similar could be organized around the Iraq War. We wanted to build a movement where service members could express their dissent in a legal, constructive way. I began researching the rights and responsibilities of active-duty service members. The most comprehensive source I found was the website for the Central Committee for Conscientious Objectors (CCCO), which was very helpful in determining the limits for GIs in petitioning their government for redress of grievances.
I also found an old leaflet from the Military Project, an organization based out of New York, which seeks to educate active-duty service members about their civil liberties and constitutional rights. The leaflet had several DOD directives that listed limited rights to express dissent:
DOD Directive 7050.6
Military Whistle-blower Protection Act
This Act is the foundation for the Appeal For Redress, our organization. It establishes that every soldier can communicate individually with a member of Congress and Inspector General (IG) without reprisal. Punishment constitutes a violation of Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Failure to Obey Order or Regulation. Once a reprisal is initiated, the soldier can file a complaint with an IG and seek redress from his Commanding Officer (CO). If the CO fails to provide it, the military member has the right to file an Article 138 complaint against the CO seeking redress and restoration to the member of any rights, privileges, property or status to which the member would have been entitled had the wrong not occurred.
Guidelines for Handling Dissident and Protest Activities Among Members of the Armed Forces
This directive explained how to conduct the redress campaign.
Distributing newspapers and/or publications: Soldiers can distribute newspapers, even ones critical of government at official outlets on base such as post exchanges and military libraries.
Publication of Underground Newspapers: A member of the military may write for an underground publication if it is done off duty and on nonmilitary equipment. Articles in the publication may not contain slanderous language that is punishable under federal law.
Participation in political demonstrations: Soldiers can participate in political demonstrations while off base, off duty, in the United States, out of uniform and not acting on behalf of the military. Military members cannot attend demonstrations where violence is likely to occur.
DOD directive 1344.10
Political Activities by Members of the Armed Forces on Active Duty
Military members:
• may express their personal views on political and social issues.
• may make monetary contributions to a political organization.
• may attend political meetings, rallies, or conventions when not in uniform.
• may write a letter to a newspaper editor expressing personal views on public issues.
• are prohibited from making a contribution to and soliciting or receiving a contribution from another member of the armed forces or a civilian officer or employee of the United States to promote a political cause, including a political campaign.
• are prohibited from using contemptuous words against officeholders and government officials.
DOD Directive 1354.01
DOD Policy on Organizations That Seek to Represent or Organize Members of the Armed Forces in Negotiation or Collective Bargaining
Military members may:
• join or maintain membership in any lawful organization or association not constituting a "military labor organization."
• present grievances concerning the terms or conditions of the service of such member in accordance with established military procedures.
• petition the Congress for redress of grievances.
The Strom Thurmond Anti-Union Law
In 1976 the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) was considering a union drive in the military. The drive was based on the recent GI Movement and the American Service Members Union (ASU), the first attempt to organize a service members union within the United States. At its height in 1970 the ASU had 15,000 members. Although it had all but disappeared by 1973, with GI activists being discharged and transferred in the thousands, the ASU was a bold example of the political potential of lower-ranking GIs (it was solely for lower-level troops).
Strom Thurmond led the charge to outlaw unionization and organizing within the military when he introduced S. 3079 during the 94th Congress. Before the bill was signed, the military made it law in October of 1977 through the establishment of DOD Directive 1354.1, prohibiting all forms of "collective job-related action" within the ranks and banning union solicitation on base. The directive prohibits soldiers from joining, maintaining or soliciting membership in a labor organization and from striking.
The Appeal for Redress, however, has shown that active-duty troops can express themselves legally to the government and civil society at large. Using the limited rights we have under the Military Whistle-blower Protection Act and DoD regulations, we mobilized more than 2,000 U.S military members in 10 countries to send appeals to their congressional members to end the Iraq War.
But there are limitations to our work.
Commanders do not legally have to recognize active-duty organizations.
Many soldiers are unaware of their political options.
Most fear potential reprisals for speaking out.
Not breaking any laws does not prevent retaliation by the brass.
Only the fear of mass action by enlisted men and women can prevent retaliation.
The Appeal for Redress is a model for a successful GI movement for the 21st century. Human Rights training in boot camp and the support of the veteran/civilian community are key to success.
Human rights training in boot camp. Boot camp is where service members must receive a firm grounding on all of their rights and responsibilities. They must be educated about their rights under Article 138 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and their right to seek out an IG to correct misconduct by the chain of command and to appeal to higher authority if the wrong has not been addressed. These complaints are sent to the General Court-Martial Convening Authority, comprised of general and/or flag officers. Unlike Equal Opportunity advisors, IGs are independent of the command structure, DoD civilians mandated by federal law to investigate and report to commanders on mission performance, discipline, efficiency and the morale of the armed forces. They do not have the authority to correct the wrong, but their findings carry weight with commanders.
Veteran and civilian support is imperative. The appeal's success was largely due to the support of major veteran peace organizations, which formed a task force that supported the troops in terms of supplies, contacts, legal support and overall coordination.
Civilian activists and community organizers were also instrumental. The Military Project, a civilian organization in New York City, provided key support in their publications. It is my hope that with the support of these peace activists, the appeal will develop into a permanent active-duty support network.
This network must work with influential, established nongovernmental organizations and members of Congress.
Organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), and Amnesty International USA (AI) can be effective in helping GIs maintain, enhance, and become educated about their civil liberties. The ACLU can help publish manuals that educate GIs on their rights; the NAACP can help organize hearings with the Congressional Black Caucus addressing the surge in Nazis and white supremacists joining the military.
Former California Congressman Ron Dellums used his position on the House Armed Services Committee to investigate racism and other misconduct within the military in the wake of hate crimes committed by troops in the early nineties. This type of advocacy is needed today from Congress.
AI can help the GI movement by challenging the unionization ban using the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR). Countries such as South Africa, Belgium and Australia grant their troops unionization rights.
The history of social justice movements demonstrates that when all legal means are exhausted, those seeking relief will use unsanctioned strategies if the government fails to act. During the struggle for the abolition of slavery in the 1800s, the denial of Dred Scott's human rights in 1857 led to John Brown's raid in 1859. During the Vietnam era, the brutality of Chicago's police against antiwar demonstrators in 1968 led to a mass movement against the war. The Appeal For Redress gives our leaders the platform to address the concerns of GIs before they lose faith in their government.
Navy Petty Officer Jonathan Hutto is a founding member of Appeal for Redress. He can be contacted at antiwarsoldier@fourthfreedom.org.
© 2008 The Nation Institute All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/87757/
The following is an excerpt from Anti-War Soldier: How to Dissent Within the Ranks of the Military, from Nation Books.
On November 9, 1969, the New York Times published an open appeal by 1,365 active-duty service members calling for an end to the Vietnam War and for no punishment for participating in the historic Vietnam Moratorium march. The petition of these soldiers, representing 80 bases and ships throughout the world, had a huge impact and helped establish the (limited) civil liberties and rights GIs have today. The members of the GI Movement risked their careers and personal security by signing this petition and participating in subsequent actions.
One of those signers was David Cortright, who went on to write Soldiers In Revolt, the definitive 1975 chronicle of the GI Movement. He was part of an activist group of GIs at Fort Hamilton, New York. Thirty-five of the 60 personnel in his company signed the petition and several traveled to Washington, D.C. for the historic march.
I contacted David to arrange for a community meeting with some of my civilian and active-duty colleagues in June 2006 in Norfolk, Virginia. Its success led us to ponder whether something similar could be organized around the Iraq War. We wanted to build a movement where service members could express their dissent in a legal, constructive way. I began researching the rights and responsibilities of active-duty service members. The most comprehensive source I found was the website for the Central Committee for Conscientious Objectors (CCCO), which was very helpful in determining the limits for GIs in petitioning their government for redress of grievances.
I also found an old leaflet from the Military Project, an organization based out of New York, which seeks to educate active-duty service members about their civil liberties and constitutional rights. The leaflet had several DOD directives that listed limited rights to express dissent:
DOD Directive 7050.6
Military Whistle-blower Protection Act
This Act is the foundation for the Appeal For Redress, our organization. It establishes that every soldier can communicate individually with a member of Congress and Inspector General (IG) without reprisal. Punishment constitutes a violation of Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Failure to Obey Order or Regulation. Once a reprisal is initiated, the soldier can file a complaint with an IG and seek redress from his Commanding Officer (CO). If the CO fails to provide it, the military member has the right to file an Article 138 complaint against the CO seeking redress and restoration to the member of any rights, privileges, property or status to which the member would have been entitled had the wrong not occurred.
Guidelines for Handling Dissident and Protest Activities Among Members of the Armed Forces
This directive explained how to conduct the redress campaign.
Distributing newspapers and/or publications: Soldiers can distribute newspapers, even ones critical of government at official outlets on base such as post exchanges and military libraries.
Publication of Underground Newspapers: A member of the military may write for an underground publication if it is done off duty and on nonmilitary equipment. Articles in the publication may not contain slanderous language that is punishable under federal law.
Participation in political demonstrations: Soldiers can participate in political demonstrations while off base, off duty, in the United States, out of uniform and not acting on behalf of the military. Military members cannot attend demonstrations where violence is likely to occur.
DOD directive 1344.10
Political Activities by Members of the Armed Forces on Active Duty
Military members:
• may express their personal views on political and social issues.
• may make monetary contributions to a political organization.
• may attend political meetings, rallies, or conventions when not in uniform.
• may write a letter to a newspaper editor expressing personal views on public issues.
• are prohibited from making a contribution to and soliciting or receiving a contribution from another member of the armed forces or a civilian officer or employee of the United States to promote a political cause, including a political campaign.
• are prohibited from using contemptuous words against officeholders and government officials.
DOD Directive 1354.01
DOD Policy on Organizations That Seek to Represent or Organize Members of the Armed Forces in Negotiation or Collective Bargaining
Military members may:
• join or maintain membership in any lawful organization or association not constituting a "military labor organization."
• present grievances concerning the terms or conditions of the service of such member in accordance with established military procedures.
• petition the Congress for redress of grievances.
The Strom Thurmond Anti-Union Law
In 1976 the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) was considering a union drive in the military. The drive was based on the recent GI Movement and the American Service Members Union (ASU), the first attempt to organize a service members union within the United States. At its height in 1970 the ASU had 15,000 members. Although it had all but disappeared by 1973, with GI activists being discharged and transferred in the thousands, the ASU was a bold example of the political potential of lower-ranking GIs (it was solely for lower-level troops).
Strom Thurmond led the charge to outlaw unionization and organizing within the military when he introduced S. 3079 during the 94th Congress. Before the bill was signed, the military made it law in October of 1977 through the establishment of DOD Directive 1354.1, prohibiting all forms of "collective job-related action" within the ranks and banning union solicitation on base. The directive prohibits soldiers from joining, maintaining or soliciting membership in a labor organization and from striking.
The Appeal for Redress, however, has shown that active-duty troops can express themselves legally to the government and civil society at large. Using the limited rights we have under the Military Whistle-blower Protection Act and DoD regulations, we mobilized more than 2,000 U.S military members in 10 countries to send appeals to their congressional members to end the Iraq War.
But there are limitations to our work.
Commanders do not legally have to recognize active-duty organizations.
Many soldiers are unaware of their political options.
Most fear potential reprisals for speaking out.
Not breaking any laws does not prevent retaliation by the brass.
Only the fear of mass action by enlisted men and women can prevent retaliation.
The Appeal for Redress is a model for a successful GI movement for the 21st century. Human Rights training in boot camp and the support of the veteran/civilian community are key to success.
Human rights training in boot camp. Boot camp is where service members must receive a firm grounding on all of their rights and responsibilities. They must be educated about their rights under Article 138 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and their right to seek out an IG to correct misconduct by the chain of command and to appeal to higher authority if the wrong has not been addressed. These complaints are sent to the General Court-Martial Convening Authority, comprised of general and/or flag officers. Unlike Equal Opportunity advisors, IGs are independent of the command structure, DoD civilians mandated by federal law to investigate and report to commanders on mission performance, discipline, efficiency and the morale of the armed forces. They do not have the authority to correct the wrong, but their findings carry weight with commanders.
Veteran and civilian support is imperative. The appeal's success was largely due to the support of major veteran peace organizations, which formed a task force that supported the troops in terms of supplies, contacts, legal support and overall coordination.
Civilian activists and community organizers were also instrumental. The Military Project, a civilian organization in New York City, provided key support in their publications. It is my hope that with the support of these peace activists, the appeal will develop into a permanent active-duty support network.
This network must work with influential, established nongovernmental organizations and members of Congress.
Organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), and Amnesty International USA (AI) can be effective in helping GIs maintain, enhance, and become educated about their civil liberties. The ACLU can help publish manuals that educate GIs on their rights; the NAACP can help organize hearings with the Congressional Black Caucus addressing the surge in Nazis and white supremacists joining the military.
Former California Congressman Ron Dellums used his position on the House Armed Services Committee to investigate racism and other misconduct within the military in the wake of hate crimes committed by troops in the early nineties. This type of advocacy is needed today from Congress.
AI can help the GI movement by challenging the unionization ban using the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR). Countries such as South Africa, Belgium and Australia grant their troops unionization rights.
The history of social justice movements demonstrates that when all legal means are exhausted, those seeking relief will use unsanctioned strategies if the government fails to act. During the struggle for the abolition of slavery in the 1800s, the denial of Dred Scott's human rights in 1857 led to John Brown's raid in 1859. During the Vietnam era, the brutality of Chicago's police against antiwar demonstrators in 1968 led to a mass movement against the war. The Appeal For Redress gives our leaders the platform to address the concerns of GIs before they lose faith in their government.
Navy Petty Officer Jonathan Hutto is a founding member of Appeal for Redress. He can be contacted at antiwarsoldier@fourthfreedom.org.
© 2008 The Nation Institute All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/87757/
Public Employees Union Presses Prime Minister Stephen Harper to Allow U.S. War Resisters to Remain in Canada
James Clancy calls on minority Conservative government to respect the will of Parliament and stop the deportation of Corey Glass
Ottawa (9 June 2008) - The National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE) is asking the Harper government to honour a House of Commons motion that clears U.S. Iraq war resisters and their families to live permanently in Canada.
The non-binding parliamentary motion was approved June 3 with support from all three opposition parties by a margin of 137 to 110. Conservative MPs opposed the motion and the minority government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper has indicated it will ignore parliament on the issue.
The War Resisters Support Campaign, based in Toronto, estimates that as many as 200 American soldiers have come to Canada to avoid serving in Iraq. Many of those active in the campaign are resisters who were granted refuge in Canada during the Vietnam war in the 1960s and 1970s.In a letter to Harper, NUPGE president James Clancy urged Harper to intervene in the case of Corey Glass, who has been in Canada for the past two years. His application for citizenship on "humanitarian and compassionate" grounds was denied on May 21 and the Canadian Border Services Agency has ordered him to be deported on June 12.
"From all indications, your government is planning to ignore the democratic will of the House of Commons," Clancy wrote. "I am urging you and your government to reconsider this position. This is a matter of some urgency. The war resisters have taken a principled stand against participating in an illegal and disastrous war in Iraq. Their reasons echo those that Canada used when it, too, refused to participate in this war," Clancy said.
"Canada must continue to act to honour its own principles and maintain our status in the world community as a peace-building nation. We should quickly welcome the young men and women and their families who have come here to live in peace and who are already starting to contribute to our country's future," he said. Clancy urged Harper to "act now to make it possible" for the resisters to stay in Canada by:
● Stopping the deportation of people of conscience who have resisted an illegal war; and
● Supporting the democratic decision of the House of Commons and the will of the Canadian people.
National Union of Public and General Employees
More information:● War Resisters Support Campaign
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Monday, June 09, 2008
Friday, June 06, 2008
Tuesday, June 03, 2008
Big Victory for U.S. War Resisters in Canada!
Today, the Canadian Parliament made a historic vote in favor of U.S. war resisters who are seeking a safe haven in Canada rather than fight in the illegal occupation of Iraq. The vote in the House of Commons was 137-110, with all the opposition parties - the Liberal Party, the New Democratic Party, the Bloc Quebecois and the Green Party - voting for the motion, and the ruling Conservative Party voting against.
The Parliament called on the minority Conservative government to create a program that will allow war resisters to immigrate to Canada, and it also called for a halt to all deportation proceedings.
This is a VERY BIG victory for war resisters in Canada and everywhere. It will strengthen our hand considerably.
But the struggle for sanctuary in Canada is far from over. The Conservative government, a staunch ally of the Bush administration, may choose to defy the will of the Canadian people by ignoring this advisory motion.
Corey Glass, an Iraq veteran and war resister, was recently ordered to leave Canada by June 12 or face deportation.
So even as we celebrate this victory, we must step up the pressure on Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Immigration Minister Diane Finley. [See action alert from War Resisters Support Campaign, below, along with their press release and a news article.]
Yes, it does help for the Canadian government to hear from many people in the U.S. who want them to provide sanctuary for our war resisters. Courage To Resist (www.couragetoresist.org) has generated thousands of letters from people in the U.S. to Canadian government and political leaders and these have clearly helped, as have the vigils and delegations to the Canadian Embassy in Washington and Canadian Consulates around the U.S.
Project Safe Haven, a network of Vietnam War resisters who are supporting war resisters today, is calling for people to contact Canadian representatives in the U.S. this week.
* THANK the Canadian people and their Parliament for supporting our war resisters.
* CALL on the Conservative government to follow the will of the Canadian people and implement this motion.
* DEMAND an end to deportation proceedings against Corey Glass and other war resisters.
You can visit the Canadian Consulate in person.
In Seattle, we will have a Celebration outside of the Canadian Consulate, 1501 4th Ave. at Pike St., on Thursday, June 5, at noon. There will also be vigils and delegations in several other cities.
And you can call them, fax them, or email them.
Canadian Consular offices are in over 20 U.S. cities. Here are their addresses, phone numbers, and email addresses. http://geo.international.gc.ca/can-am/washington/offices/default-en.asp
If you want to participate in visits to the Canadian Embassy or Consulates, please send an email to projectsafehaven@hotmail.com or call Gerry Condon at 206-499-1220.
If you are a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War or Veterans For Peace, you may want to get in touch with your local chapter or national office to let them know you want to participate, and to help organize these events.
U.S. war resisters and their wonderful Canadian supporters have won a historic victory. By acting decisively at this time, we in the U.S. can participate in this victory and help to make it an even bigger one.
Thank you for whatever you may be able to do at this time.
for peace and justice,
Gerry Condon
(206) 499-1220.
Soldier Say No / Project Safe Haven
__________________________________________________________________________________ [The following Action Alert is from the War Resisters Support Campaign in Canada, www.resisters.ca]
Canadian Parliament votes to let US war resisters stay
The Canadian Parliament passed an historic motion today, June 3, 2008, that calls on the Canadian government to make a program to allow US war resisters to apply for permanent resident status in Canada and to cease all deportation and removal proceedings against US war resisters.
The next step is to write to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, Diane Finley, and prime minister Stephen Harper to ensure that they that the will of Parliament is implemented.
Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Diane Finley
phone 613.996.4974 fax 613.996.9749
email finley.d@parl.gc.ca and finled1@parl.gc.ca
The next step is to write to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, Diane Finley, and prime minister Stephen Harper to ensure that they that the will of Parliament is implemented.
Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Diane Finley
phone 613.996.4974 fax 613.996.9749
email finley.d@parl.gc.ca and finled1@parl.gc.ca
Prime Minister Stephen Harper
phone 613.992.4211 fax 613.941.6900
email pm@pm.gc.ca
phone 613.992.4211 fax 613.941.6900
email pm@pm.gc.ca
Monday, June 02, 2008
Sunday, June 01, 2008
Friday, May 30, 2008
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Sunday, May 25, 2008
Sunday, October 07, 2007
Random Thoughts on Supporting GI Resisters
by Gerry Condon, Soldier Say No / Project Safe Haven
Clinton, Obama and Edwards Would Leave Troops in Iraq (video)
http://news.aol.com/elections/story/_a/democrats-see-difficulty-with-iraq/20070926233209990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001
GI and Veteran Resisters Speak Out (video)
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/092807J.shtml
I wrote this memo last week and sent it out to several friends and contacts on my email list. I didn’t expect it to receive wide circulation but it has. So I have belatedly taken the time to correct some typos, to add information I received from the Military Law Task force of the National Lawyers Guild, and to acknowledge the excellent hard work of a number of organizations that are reaching out to GI’s and/or supporting war resisters (see final section). Thanks to all who have responded with positive feedback or further distributed my memo. Obviously, this is a conversation that interests many people. That in itself is a good sign.
-- Gerry Condon, October 1, 2007
Sometimes I am impatient, with myself and the antiwar movement of which I am a part. When will we get real about supporting GI resisters? I’m not just talking about the odd Conscientious Objector or AWOL soldier. I’m talking about building a support movement for GI resistance. I’m talking about reaching out to the troops and telling them they should not fight in an illegal, immoral war. I’m talking about challenging deeply embedded societal concepts concerning patriotism, fulfilling ones’ military “duty,” and being bound by the military “contract.”
I’ve been to meetings where counter-recruitment activists and war resister advocates have announced that their son or daughter will be deployed the following week to Iraq. And I ask myself: why are they not standing in their way, why are they allowing their children to be sent off to a war that they know is wrong? And I have talked to parents who se children have been killed in Iraq who say they didn’t agree with their children’s decision to enlist in the military but that they had tried to respect their right to make that decision, to respect that they were now adults (barely). Now they deeply regret that decision.
Sometimes I think we are running out of time to really build the kind of resistance movement, civilian and GI, that will be needed to end the Iraq War. But then I read that Hillary Clinton, the probable next president, will not promise to have the troops out of Iraq by the end of her first term. Neither will Barak Obama. Neither will John Edwards. (See the video clip above). Why? Because the president of the United States must be the executive director of U.S. imperialism. The Democrats want that Iraqi oil as much as the Republicans. Both parties are controlled by the uber-rich ruling class. Both parties believe that it is the U.S. destiny to dominate the world’s resources, markets and people. They debate strategy and tactics only.
Well, the Congress finally united this week to do something concerning the Iraq War. Both houses of Congress overwhelmingly condemned the anti-war ad of MoveOn.org that dared to challenge the credibility of General Petraeus, the latest shill for Bush’s failed war. The Senate vote was 72-25 and the House vote was 341-79. These are the kind of numbers that should be ending to the war and impeaching President Bush and his entire war cabinet. But that ain’t going to happen.
It would appear, then, that the antiwar movement has been focusing its precious energies in the wrong direction. Four years of focusing on the U.S. Congress has achieved no meaningful results. There is no democracy in Washington, DC. Arguably, those who have been doing counter-recruitment work have had more impact, although that is hard to measure. The Iraq War has been the greatest counter-recruiter of all. African Americans, in particular, are enlisting in historically low numbers.
David Zeiger did the world a great service when he made the film, Sir, No Sir! This film uncovered a profound historical truth that is hard for many people to comprehend: Widespread resistance within the military was the final nail in the coffin of the Vietnam War. Rap groups. Coffee houses. Black Power meetings. GI newspapers. “Search and avoid” missions. Massive desertions. Sabotage. Refusal to fight. Refusal to fly. Refusal to train. “Fragging” of gung ho officers and NCOs. Withholding of intelligence data. Deserter and draft resister exile bases in Europe and Canada. Campaigns to unionize and democratize the military.
These acts of GI rebellion and organizing were organic, both spontaneous and planned. The antiwar movement cannot will them into being. They also took place within the context of a political awakening in the U.S., the rise of anti-imperialist, socialist and Black Consciousness movements, and a “cultural revolution” of youth. In other words, they took place within a revolutionary climate. Perhaps that is what we are lacking now, more than anything.
GI resistance organizing must come from the GI’s themselves. However, it is somewhat unique in requiring lots of “outside” help from civilians. Some of this work must necessarily be clandestine, but much of it can be done in the open.
One can assume that any effective efforts at reaching out to GI’s or supporting their organizing will bring serious attention from various police and intelligence agencies. GI organizers will most likely be infiltrated by government agents, as will their civilian supporters. The government spies will be there to provide intelligence, to provoke disputes, to incite violence, to isolate and entrap leaders, and, in general, to attempt to undermine the resistance.
To my knowledge, not a single civilian was prosecuted during the Vietnam War for “aiding and abetting” AWOL GI’s or for stirring up resistance within the military. Why this is the case, I do not know. Perhaps government and military leaders did not want to bring attention to the GI resistance. There are certainly laws on the books they could use. In the age of Homeland Security, anything is possible. But until the government begins to aggressively pursue those who are supporting GI resisters, we should consider this activity to be relatively low risk.
There is a taboo in the antiwar movement against actually calling on the troops to resist. Only Iraq Veterans Against the War have begun to cross that line (see video above). What is behind this taboo? I believe there are a number of factors. One is fear of the perceived legal jeopardy. As I addressed above, this is somewhat of a myth. Nobody has been prosecuted for encouraging GI’s to resist, not during the Vietnam War and not since.
[Since I first wrote these Random Thoughts, friends at the Military Law Task Force of the National Lawyers Guild have informed me of several Vietnam era prosecutions of civilians who were working with antiwar GI’s, not for aiding and abetting, but for various other trumped up state and local charges.]
Another part of the taboo against calling on the troops to resist is that many antiwar organizations, especially the larger and more established, are organized as nonprofit organizations (501c3) for purposes of receiving tax-deductible organizations. They fear they might lose their nonprofit status if they advocate actions the government would consider illegal. To my knowledge, this has not happened. But nonprofits’ boards of directors tend to be pretty conservative about such matters. Many of them also wrongfully believe that their nonprofit status will be jeopardized if they engage in any advocacy or support legislative proposals.
Then there are the moral and ethical concerns. Some activists say that civilians don’t have the right to tell GI’s what they should be doing. Others say we should not put the moral burden for ending the war upon the soldiers. These concerns are worth exploring.
To me, the most compelling concern is this: If we encourage GI’s to resist, are we going to be there for them when they do? If they are court-martialed, will we bring legal and political support? If they go to jail, will we remember them? If they go AWOL, will we help them? Can we provide them with housing and money? Can we help them get to a safe haven outside the U.S.? Can we provide them with sanctuary within the U.S.? These are the very capacities that some of us are working to develop.
Underlying many of these concerns, I believe, is a very profound question: If we ask GI’s to take the risks involved with resisting within the military, or going AWOL, are we willing to share those risks? Not everybody is in a position to do so. And relatively few people are committed enough to risk the potential disruption of their lives, up to and including political persecution and possible imprisonment. In other words, if we aren’t ready to put our lives on the line, how can we ask these young soldiers to do so?
Well, some of us are willing to put our lives on the line. But this is more easily said than done. Most activists have families, jobs, careers and recreational activities that are important to them. They may be struggling financially or with health concerns. It is hard enough to attend meetings or to go to demonstrations. Even relatively tame civil disobedience actions will give many people pause. This is understandable, but should it mean that we do not call on GI’s to resist?
I do believe it is important for those of us who encourage GI resistance, directly or indirectly, to be prepared to come to the aid of those who heed our call. On the other hand, I do not believe that GI’s face any greater risk from resisting the war than they do from being part of the war. GI resisters do not generally risk their lives, their limbs, brain damage, PTSD, their ability to love their families, etc. But all of these horrible things are epidemic among those who go to war.
What does a GI actually risk by resisting? A lot. Persecution by military superiors. Disapproval and rejection by fellow GI’s. Disapproval and rejection by some family members. Self-doubt and loss of self-esteem. Jail time. The stigma of a less-than-honorable discharge. The inability to support their family. Jeopardy to educational and career goals.
And AWOL soldiers risk the trauma of prolonged separation from their families (but the war does that too). Those who leave the country may not be able to return without facing prosecution. And they face an uncertain future in their new country. There is plenty of stress and trauma, for sure. But how does that compare to the risks and trauma and moral consequences of going to war? GI’s who refuse, in one way or another, to go to war, are actually decreasing the risks to themselves – physically, psychologically and morally.
I believe it is time for the antiwar movement to relocate to the gates of every military base in this country, and abroad. Democracy has failed in Washington. Seventy percent of the U.S. people want the troops out of Iraq as soon as possible. But the Congress says no way. And the leading presidential candidates of both parties say no way. In this election cycle, the antiwar movement should not spend one ounce of its energy backing any candidate who is not credibly committed to ending the war and giving Iraq back to the Iraqis.
Instead of wasting our energy on the politicians, we in the antiwar movement should take democracy into our own hands. The slogan “Troops Out Now” should be directed at the troops themselves. We should encourage and assist our citizen soldiers to vote with their feet. As Bertold Brecht famously suggested, the war machine cannot function if the troops won’t fight. Even the drones and the robots require humans to direct and repair them.
This is somewhat of a revolutionary proposal. But it now appears that nothing short of a revolutionary movement will bring an end to the Iraq War. Nothing less than a revolutionary movement will prevent the next war. And nothing less than a revolutionary movement will finally put an end to the global warring that is a central component of U.S. imperialism.
I’m not saying we need to build a revolutionary party or prepare ourselves for armed revolution. But we need to think like revolutionaries and act like revolutionaries. We need to shed the illusion that we can end the cycle of U.S. war mongering though polite discourse with our congresswoman. We have to internalize the fact that we are, in fact, at war with our own government and system. We have to be willing to take risks. And we have to be willing to ask others to take risks, especially when it is in their own interests.
When we ask GI’s to take the risk of resisting, we will not be putting an unethical burden upon them. We will probably be saving their lives. And, yes, we must be there for them too. We must share the risks. Maybe we’ll be saving our lives too.
This is the context I see for supporting “war resisters.” Our goal should be to empower the soldiers to play their historical role in the worldwide movement to end to U.S. militarism. Not everyone will agree with me. But activists from many different perspectives and organizations can still provide war resisters with valuable support, be it counseling on their legal options, money, housing, transportation, political support, or helping them to make their voices heard.
It is one thing to oppose a war, it is another to actually resist it. Even many peace activists oppose actions that might violate the law. They consider it reckless to call for GI resistance, or even to tell GI’s they can go to Canada. What’s up with that? It’s time to change the paradigm.
Another thing that is holding us back is that hardly anybody really knows how to do this work. Few people have any relevant experience. And the mostly middle class and over-40 peace movement does not know how to talk to the poor and working class youth of today’s “volunteer” military. But it’s high time we started learning. By trial and error. For those of us in the Northwest, what better laboratory than Fort Lewis, one of the largest Army bases providing troops to the Iraq War. The local papers announce the deaths of Washington state GI’s almost daily. Where are we?
To be fair, there are groups in the antiwar movement who have been reaching out to GI’s and/or providing various kinds of support to war resisters. For example, Courage To Resist has publicized the cases of many war resisters and raised money for them online. Members of Iraq Veterans Against the War have been traveling to various military bases and talking one-on-one with GI’s. Citizen Soldier helped to establish the Different Drummer Internet Café, the first GI coffeehouse of this era, at Fort Drum, near Syracuse, New York. Not coincidentally, the first active duty chapter of Iraq Veterans Against the War has been established at Fort Drum. The GI Rights Hotline has been providing much needed counseling to thousands of GI’s who are considering their options. The GI Special has been providing Iraq War news and views from the perspective of the GI’s.
In Canada, the War Resisters Support Campaign is providing housing and basic needs to U.S. war resisters while leading a campaign to press the Canadian government to allow them to stay. These groups deserve credit for their excellent work. I encourage people to check them out and to consider joining or supporting their work.
Courage To Resist, www.couragetoresist.org
Iraq Veterans Against the War, www.ivaw.org
Veterans For Peace, www.vfp.org
Vietnam Veterans Against the War, www.vvaw.org
Military Families Speak Out, www.mfso.org
Guerrero Azteca, www.guerreroazteca.org
Citizen Soldier, www.citizen-soldier.org
Different Drummer Internet Café, www.differentdrummercafe.org
Ehren Watada support campaign, www.thankyoult.org
Catholic Worker/Jonah House, http://www.jonahhouse.org/refuse.htm
GI Rights Hotline, www.girightshotline.org
Military Law Task Force (NLG), http://www.nlgmltf.org
GI Special, http://www.williambowles.info/gispecial/2006/index.html
Soldier Say No / Project Safe Haven, www.soldiersayno.blogspot.com
In Canada: War Resisters Support Campaign, www.resisters.ca
Many groups have also rallied around GI resisters facing court martials, such as Camilo Mejia (now co-chair of Iraq Veterans Against the War), Pablo Paredes (now working with the GI Rights Hotline), Kevin Benderman, who with his wife Monica, has just published a book about their experiences, Letters from the Fort Lewis Stockade.), and Ehren Watada, whose court martial at Fort Lewis, Washington has been re-scheduled for October 9. The excellent work of these organizations is a strong base upon which to build a movement supporting mass GI resistance to the U.S. wars against the people of Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Gerry Condon
Soldier Say No / Project Safe Haven
SoldierSayNo@yahoo.com, projectsafehaven@hotmail.com
www.SoldierSayNo.blogspot.com
(206) 499-1220
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)