Sunday, May 25, 2008

And the war drags on . . .

Ms. Ford was a young married mother, living at Caddo Lake. "I worked in Marshall and I would stop by mom's house every morning on my way to the office. I had to be at work by 8:30. The minute I walked into the house that day, I knew what had happened. Our mother was crying. My little brothers and sister were crying."
The siblings said Johnson dropped out of Marshall High School in the 10th grade.
"A buddy of his had joined the Army and had come by the house in his uniform," Paul said. "Jimmy was so impressed by how he looked, he begged our mother to sign the papers so he could join."
Ms. Hill did and Johnson left for basic training at Fort Polk. There he stayed until his 18th birthday and was granted leave to return home before being sent to Vietnam.
Johnson was AWOL for three days, Ms. Ford said, adding: "I bear a great burden of guilt. I'm the one who talked him into" going back "and I took him to the plane in Longview. It is something I will always regret. I had the money to send him to Canada, which is what a lot of others did."
Johnson began his tour of duty Feb. 26, 1968, arriving in Vietnam on March 6. He died less than a month later.
"They were ambushed," Ms. Ford said. "Jimmy and another young man from Kentucky were killed."

LaVeda notes Sandra Cason's "'Vietnam cheated us:' Family remembers the life of local soldier killed in combat" (Marshall News Messenger and link also has audio). The sentiments are not surprising. From then to now, Courage to Resist's "War Resister Corey Glass loses bid to stay in Canada:"



First Iraq War veteran to face deportation
Courage to Resist. May 21, 2008
US Iraq war resister Corey Glass was told today that his application to stay in Canada for "humanitarian and compassionate" reasons has been rejected. He has been ordered to leave Canada by June 12. If this order is allowed to stand, Corey will be the first Iraq War resister to be deported from Canada.
Action Alert: Sign the "Dear Canada: Let U.S. War Resisters Stay!" letter. Courage to Resist will immediately send three letters to Canadian officials on your behalf via International First Class Mail.
Call Canadian Liberal Leader Stephane Dion at 613.996.6740 or 613.996.5789• to support the Parliamentary motion to allow Iraq War resisters to remain in Canada,• to oppose the deportation of people of conscience who have resisted an illegal war, and• to support the will of the majority of people, not the U.S. government’s endless war agenda. (Polls show that 64% of Ontarians believe resisters should be allowed to stay.)
Be on the lookout for a national day of vigils and actions at Canadian consulates nationwide if Corey is deported.
Corey Glass, 25, of Fairmount, Indiana went to Canada in August 2006 after serving five months in Iraq as a Military Intelligence Sergeant. "What I saw in Iraq convinced me that the war is illegal and immoral. I could not in good conscience continue to take part in it," said Corey. "I came here because Canada did not join the Iraq War."
On December 6, 2007, with Courage to Resist organizers in attendance, the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration called on the Canadian 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."
It is estimated that several hundred Iraq War resisters are currently in Canada, many of them living underground.
"The Government should implement that recommendation immediately," said author Lawrence Hill. "Corey Glass had the courage to listen to his conscience. He is working hard to build a new life in this country. He should be allowed to stay."
With political refugee status attempts rejected by the Canadian Supreme Court last year, Corey appealed to be allowed to immigrate to Canada for "Humanitarian and Compassionate" reasons. All of the war resisters who have already been rejected as refugees have applied for this status.
"Many had hoped that the Canadian government might find this avenue as a face-saving measure that would allow some war resisters to remain in Canada, but not as refugees," said Gerry Condon, Project Safe Haven.
Gerry Condon concluded, "The prognosis is that the status of U.S. war resisters in Canada will become more difficult. AWOL GI's will still be able to enter Canada as visitors and apply for refugee status. Because each case is reviewed individually, this will gain them a de facto sanctuary, however temporary."
It's critical that supporters of GI resistance here in the U.S. get ready to step up our efforts. It's inevitable that at least some of our U.S. war resisters in Canada will be coming home soon. They will be facing court martials and confinement, and what we do in response will effect these people's lives, and the momentum of the GI resistance movement.
With contribution and content from the War Resisters Support Campaign (Canada)

If you haven't used Courage to Resist form yet (it's a free contact form, if you're low on cash, they ask for a donation but they do not require one, anyone can use it) think about the Ford family looking back on Vietnam today.

They're just there to try and make the people free,
But the way that they're doing it, it don't seem like that to me.
Just more blood-letting and misery and tears
That this poor country's known for the last twenty years,
And the war drags on.
-- words and lyrics by Mick Softly (available on Donovan's Fairytale)

Last Sunday, ICCC's number of US troops killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war hit the 4,079 mark. And tonight? 4082. Today (check the "Sunday" at the top) the US miliary announced: "A Coalition force Soldier was killed as a result of injuries sustained from an improvised explosive device in Salah ad-Din Province, May 26. Two Soldiers were wounded as a result of the same attack and transported to aCoalition medical facility for treatment."
Just Foreign Policy's counter estimates that 1,213,716 Iraqis have been killed due to the illegal war since it began, up from 1,209,263 last week.

In "The Return of Iraq's Ayatollah" (Time magazine), Mark Kukis attempts to suss out what's going with regards to non-puppet leaders in Iraq:

High-profile visits by political figures are relatively rare in Najaf, the quiet holy city in southern Iraq where Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani lives. Sistani, the most venerated Shi'ite religious leader in the country, shuns the limelight. But it fell his way last week nonetheless when Iraqi Prime Ministry Nouri al-Maliki and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker appeared in Najaf separately within days of each other. It raised questions whether Sistani is making a comeback as a voice in political decision-making in Iraq.
For years Sistani and Muqtada al-Sadr have seesawed with each other as Iraq's two main Shi'ite power players. In the early days of the occupation, Sistani's call for calm undoubtedly allowed American troops to avoid fierce resistance to their presence in southern Iraq. But Sistani's repeated appeals for peace lost their weight as sectarian violence rose in Iraq, with Sadr leading the Mahdi Army militia in an inexorable year-long quest for Shi'ite revenge following the bombing of a revered shrine in Samarra in early 2006. As a result, Sadr, a mere cleric, towered as the most powerful Shi'ite figure in Iraq, eclipsing the more senior Sistani's prestigious status as ayatollah. Sistani became a voice in the wings on Iraq's political stage as the country's armed factions, including the U.S. military, warred through 2006 and 2007. Now with the situation quieter, and Sadr politically weakened following his military clash with Maliki, Sistani seems poised to renew a larger political role for himself.

Thank you to visitor Jerry (male or female, I don't know) who writes a ridiculous e-mail that gives us a topic for this entry. Ron Jacobs' "Washington, al-Maliki and the Militias: Who Do They Think They’re Fooling?" (Dissident Voice) went up last month and I disagreed here. To find out Jacobs' position, use the link. I disagree with it. I disagree even more strongly with it than what I wrote in April. The context should be: The puppet government in South Vietnam, supported with US aid, was able to use a morsel of that to help some Vietnamese so what's the problem with the US funding al-Maliki because, oh, it will be so horrible for Iraqis if they don't!
al-Maliki is an installed 'leader,' he is a puppet and he sits on huge sums of money (and stockpiles weapons and food). He does not help the Iraqi people and he was not installed to help them. The US funding his puppet regime non-stop prevents democracy and allows the deplorable conditions in Iraq to continue. Cutting off funds (by insisting the puppet government use some of the vast monies they possess) might mean some Iraqis would starve. Continue to fund his high rolling lifestyle means the illegal war drags on. It means he's got the money he's sitting on plus all the money the US government is tossing to him to buy influence. I did not buy a 'humanitarian' argument for funding the puppet government in Vietnam all those years ago and I don't buy it today. I also don't believe the US pays reperations while the illegal war is ongoing. Doing so rewards the puppets, not the people. The illegal war needs to end and, as soon as it does, reperations are owed to the Iraqi people. al-Maliki is just another exile who was a US asset before the start of the illegal war and is only the latest puppet the US has installed. Originally, he did nothing to protect the Iraqi people and, these days, he willingly and publicly takes part in actions to slaughter ('pacifiy') the Iraqi people. He is a thug, plain and simple.

Cutting off his US funding means he'll have to dip into the millions he controls to buy influence in Iraq. Possibly, like others participating in the puppet government since the start of the illegal war, he'll instead choose to relocate (England's become very popular) and leave right around the time huge amounts of monies go missing? I don't know. I do know he's living high while the Iraqis suffer. I do know he's using the US monies to buy 'support.' Repeating, the puppet government in South Vietnam was not legitimate and US monies allowed it to be propped up for many years. Had that been cut off, many Vietnamese might be alive today. They might not. But US tax payer dollars are going to support a puppet in charge of a corrupt regime. With all the moneys Iraq has -- at al-Maliki's disposal -- the US funding him as well (you have to feed your pets, I know, but that's one that should have been dropped off at the pound) allows him to continue to play leader.

My position, whether you agree or disagree, is not complex, it's not ahistorical and it's laughable to suggest that he's doing anything for the Iraqi people. Prior to the illegal war, the Iraqis had rations. With the start of the illegal war, the US has repeatedly attempted to kill that program (it's not 'free market' and isn't that the religion of the White House?). They couldn't kill it without a huge protest so they've instead chipped away at it. It's been chipped away more and more since the al-Maliki became puppet. While he sits on millions and millions of Iraqi moneys. While he is funded by the US with millions. Pull out his funding and the support he buys might dry up. My position is not a call for reperations to be dismissed. I support reperations. But reperations should be made to the Iraqi people and to their own legitimate government. That's not in place today. "Funding the war is killing the troops" is very true. "Funding the occupation" or "Funding the puppet" is killing the Iraqi civilians.

That is my reply to Jerry, not to Ron Jacobs. On Jacobs' stand, which you can read by using the link, I've already noted his position (he and Jerry differ on key points) is probably more ethical mine. I have no problem with that and have not insulted Ron. But I disagree with his position and noted why last month. I've now noted why I strongly disagree with Jerry and, with Jerry, I will not say his or her position is more "ethical." Jerry's position is uninformed. (al-Maliki was not elected by the Iraqi people to be prime minister -- learn how the Iraqi system works before you e-mail -- and he wasn't even the original choice. He was the choice imposed from DC.)

Last Sunday, we noted the shooting of a book and noted it was not the end of the world and better a book than an Iraqi civilian. This is an example of something worth taking offense at. From Raviya H. Ismail's "U.S. and Iraq forces raided Shiite areas during prayers" (McClatchy Newspapers):

U.S. and Iraqi forces detained nearly 200 people during operations that targeted two predominantly Shiite Muslim neighborhoods during Friday prayer services, the U.S. military said Saturday.
The searches occurred between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m. on the Muslim sabbath in the Bayaa and Amal sectors of Baghdad. U.S. and Iraqi forces stormed a prayer service that was being held in an office belonging to anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al Sadr and detained several of the participants.
More than 500 people were questioned, the military said, and a weapons cache was found near the office.
[. . .]
But the timing of the searches and the targeting of Shiite areas touched several nerves in a country where sectarian rivalries are deadly. The symbolism, too, was strong. Saddam Hussein banned Shiites from praying publicly, and one of the first acts of massive celebration, on the first Friday after U.S. troops helped topple a huge Saddam statue in central Baghdad, was a massive outdoor Shiite prayer service in Baghdad's Sadr City district.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.








mcclatchy newspapers

Posted by at