Untitled Document

Peace activists lock down
at Boeing headquarters'
go to article

US soldiers and families oppose
war aims, preparations
go to article

Bush deaf to protests, say marchers
go to article

Supreme Court rules against
stacking juries with whites
go to article

High school students hold march,
sit-in to protest Ridge visit
go to article

NATION BRIEFS
go to Briefs

Peace activists lock down
at Boeing headquarters

By Chris Geovanis

Chicago, Illinois, Mar. 13— Eleven peace activists shackled themselves together, blocked escalators and chanted anti-war pleas in the lobby of the downtown Chicago headquarters of Boeing Corporation early this morning, to protest the aviation giant’s role in the upcoming war on Iraq. The nonviolent civil disobedience action was designed to target Boeing’s role as a military contractor — and the devastating role its weaponry will have on Iraq’s civilian population when its products are deployed in the Bush administration’s anticipated full-scale military attack and invasion of the country.

“We want this war on Iraq to stop,” said Father Dave Corcoran, a chaplain at Loyola Medical Center and a participant in Thursday’s lockdown. “For years, sanctions have killed thousands of Iraqi children and adults, and now Bush and companies like Boeing want to start a preemptive war which is not moral and not right. It’s wrong to do something bad even if you say it’s to achieve a good end, so we’re going to continue these protests to stop this war before it starts,” he said.

Chicago police, who arrived on the scene at around 7:45am, reportedly initially barred reporters from filming or reporting the arrests, and were reportedly calling corporate press outlets and telling them not to send crews or reporters to Boeing headquarters. 1st District Commander John Risley threatened to arrest and jail this reporter if efforts to document the impending arrests did not immediately cease. One activist reported that the City News Bureau had subsequently sent a reporter to Police Headquarters to learn more about the press ban.

Chicago police apparently relented later and allowed press outlets to cover the arrests. Police had to bring in grinders and woodblocks to cut through the PVC pipes that protesters used to lock themselves down in what they described as a “circle of life.” Police arrested all eleven participants, whose extraction dragged on for hours.

Thursday’s action was coordinated by Voices in the Wilderness, and included members of the Iraq Peace Pledge, Chicago Peace Action, and Chicago School of the Americas Watch. VITW has aggressively protested sanctions on Iraq, which they say target the most weak and vulnerable Iraqi civilians and have directly contributed to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children and adults since being imposed 12 years ago. Unicef reported in 1999 that the mortality rate for Iraqi children under the age of five had more than doubled since the imposition of sanctions.

The groups who participated in today’s direct action have vowed to step up non-violent civil disobedience as the United States inches closer to full-scale war on Iraq.

Boeing is second only to Lockheed-Martin in the hierarchy of Department of Defense weapons contractors. The company’s military products include guidance systems for Tomahawk Cruise missiles, integration systems for nuclear weapons, AGM-130’s, Joint Direct Attack Munitions (or JDAM, a conversion system to create “smart bombs”), and Apache combat helicopters. The company has been widely vilified by human rights advocates for the deployment of its weapons against civilian populations in Occupied Palestine, Iraq, and Colombia.

Boeing received $63 million in subsidies and tax breaks from the City of Chicago and the State of Illinois in exchange for agreeing to relocate its world headquarters to Chicago, and Chicago also pledged $1 million to “retire” the former tenant’s lease on the space Boeing took over. Peace activists argue that the City’s financial support of the company is “inconsistent” with the resolution the Chicago City Council passed earlier this year opposing preemptive war on Iraq.

“How can we — the City of Chicago — oppose this war when we host and financially support a company which profits from the killing of our sisters and brothers in Iraq?” asked Lindsay Foreman of Voices in the Wilderness in the group’s press release.

Boeing has laid off more than 30,000 employees since Sept. 11, 2001, while netting billions in profits from arms sales alone, according to Voices in the Wilderness. The group reports that in 2002 the company’s sales to the US Department of Defense rose sharply by $3.3 billion from 2001 DOD spending levels.

“Thanks to Boeing’s tax breaks, they effectively have free rent in Chicago,” says Angela Garcia, one of the activists who locked herself to fellow protesters at the action. “Well, I live in Chicago, and I don’t have free rent, but my government is giving billions of our tax dollars each year to Boeing to kill and maim civilians with their weapons. I’m here to tell Boeing that’s not right, profiting from war is not right, and we’re not going to stand for it any more.”

Source: Chicago Indymedia

US soldiers and families oppose
war aims, preparations

By Haider Rizvi

New York, New York, Mar. 11 (IPS)— While military preparations continue, signs of doubt and mistrust about the legitimacy of a looming war against Iraq are becoming increasingly visible among US soldiers, their families and some lawmakers in Congress.

Worried about the fate of their loved ones, some families are turning to courts in an attempt to stop President George W. Bush from giving orders for military action against Iraq. Others are lobbying with members of Congress for a presidential guarantee that US soldiers would be fully protected from the possible use of biological or chemical weapons during the war.

“If President Bush wants to launch a military invasion against Iraq, he must first seek a declaration of war from the US Congress,” argued Charles Richardson, who filed a lawsuit against Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in a Boston Court recently along with many others. “Our constitution demands nothing less.”

Richardson, whose son is a Marine stationed in the Persian Gulf, believes that an attack on Iraq would be “unjust and unnecessary.”

“The hardest thing that can possibly happen to me is if someone comes and tells me that my son has died fighting an unnecessary and unjust war,” he said.

Filed by a number of military families and US legislators, the lawsuit accuses Bush of “acting as the king of a monarchy, not as the leader of a democracy where power is shared by the executive, legislative and judicial branches.”

The plaintiffs’ lawyers contend that waging war against Iraq without a congressional declaration would be “illegal and unconstitutional,” arguing that as commander in chief the US president is empowered to decide how to fight a war, but not to decide whether to fight one.

Dismissed by a lower court earlier, the case is now being heard by a three-judge panel of a federal appeal court.

Despite odds, the lawyers fighting this case are optimistic about the outcome.

“We are pleased that the federal appeal court recognizes that this case deserves immediate review,” said John Bonifaz, the plaintiffs’ leading lawyer. “It was taken up within 24 hours after dismissal from the lower court. We are hopeful this court will rule in our favor.”

US soldiers and their families did take the government to court during the Vietnam War, but that happened only after the fighting had already started.

Aside from legal and constitutional concerns, many families, and in some cases soldiers too, are refusing to accept Washington’s argument that attacking Iraq to end a dictatorship and establish democracy would be a “moral” war.

“This is my son Jessy,” said Shirley Young, showing a photo of her 20-year-old son, tears welling up in her eyes. “He volunteered to protect his country. He was prepared to do what he had to do. But now he tells me that President Bush is making a decision for the wrong reasons.”

The anti-war GI Rights Hotline, a non-profit group that provides confidential help to soldiers, says it has recently received more than 3,500 phone calls from military personnel and families seeking advice on “conscientious objector” status and other forms of military discharge.

During the 1991 Gulf War, about 500 enlisted men and women filed for conscientious objector status. The government approved about 60 percent of the cases, but several soldiers were jailed for refusing to fight, according to a General Accounting Office report.

Anti-war groups say many working class young people are lured by the US military’s advertising campaigns that promise everything they long for. “Where else can you get paid to train with the best, travel around the world, make lifelong friends, and get an education?” asks an Armed Forces website.

In addition to the moral and legal concerns about the war, many US lawmakers, former military leaders, Gulf War veterans and others are raising serious questions about the safety of hundreds of thousands of troops who are already, or will soon be, stationed in the Persian Gulf region.

In a letter sent to Rumsfeld on Thursday, eight legislators said they had strong concerns about the possible use of chemical and biological weapons against US soldiers in the event of war with Iraq.

“Our military personnel do not have adequate training or equipment to respond to a biological and chemical attack,” they said.

More than one-third of the 778,000 “defective” protective suits that the defense department ordered removed from its inventory in May 2000 are unaccounted for, according to the legislators.

The Defense Logistics Agency, according to the letter, confirmed that 80,000 gas masks with the “wrong filters” had been issued to the armed forces, and that 19,000 of these remain in circulation.

“No family will be eager to hear that their loved ones were killed because he or she had been given a mask with the wrong filter,” the legislators said in the letter, adding, “More than 10 years after the end of Persian Gulf War, we still don’t know why so many veterans are still experiencing medical problems.”

It is believed that more than 100,000 US soldiers suffered from various diseases as a result of exposure to pharmaceuticals, chemical toxins, smoke from oil well fires, and petroleum fuels. The lawmakers expressed their fears that soldiers today may face similar conditions.

Bush deaf to protests, say marchers

By Katherine Stapp

Washington, DC, Mar. 16 (IPS)— The US capital saw its third massive protest against a possible war in Iraq on Saturday, even as participants struggled to remain optimistic in the face of a massive military build-up in the Persian Gulf.

President George W. Bush was at his Camp David retreat, and traveled to Azores, Spain on Sunday for a summit with US allies to discuss Iraq.

Other large anti-war rallies were held across the globe, from Bangkok to Paris, Calcutta and Tokyo.

Many here expressed frustration that Bush has largely ignored nationwide demonstrations and opinion polls that show strong opposition toward the push for war.

Signs reading “Merci France” and “Got Fascist Fries?” — a reference to widely mocked efforts by some here to rename French fries as “freedom fries” after Paris opposed the US plan to attack Iraq — dotted the crowd, along with the more traditional “How Come He Never Mentions Oil?” and “The World Says No.”

“The French have been outspoken and they’re being trashed in US public opinion right now,” said Scott Macleod from Baltimore. “People are gullible here, largely because the press is not adequately covering the anti-war movement.”

Media analysts agreed, citing a distinctly hawkish spin to most US coverage.

“Peace activists are brought on Fox [news channel] to be stood up and pistol-whipped by Bill O’Reilly, but the really dangerous conservatism is provided more subtly: men in ties sitting in front of bookcases thoughtfully discussing the pros and cons of invading Iraq,” said David Davis, a writer and photographer in Colorado, who has written columns against the war. “It becomes so abstract.”

Sam Husseini, communications director for the Institute for Public Accuracy, said he believed the protests have given many people pause in the United States, but clearly have not changed government policy. “There is an extraordinary split between an active population on the one hand and the administration policy on the other. It’s been noted that the more people understand the situation, the more opposed they are to the Bush administration policy,” he added.

Gauging public support for the war is tricky, others said, although polls show US citizens more or less evenly divided about going to war without UN backing.

“It’s probably true that a large number of Americans are disconnected from politics, because of overwhelming personal or economic problems, or from confusion, distrust, or fear,” said Caroline Arnold, chair of the Kent Environmental Council in Kent, Ohio.

“What Bush has done, I think, is to awaken a sleeping giant of conscientious Americans who are not disengaged and not ill-informed,” Arnold said. “They may be disillusioned, especially after the inconclusive election of 2000 failed to reflect the will of the majority, and many are suspicious of politicians and angry about government failures. Is it a majority? I don’t know.”

While Saturday’s rally and march to the White House was dominated by veteran activists, there were also groups of people attending their first protest. Margie Thomas said she and her husband drove for five hours from New Jersey state despite having voted for Bush in 2000.

Holding a sign that read “Republicans Against the War,” Thomas said she was unconvinced by Washington’s arguments for invading Iraq.

“The general public and the administration will write off a lot of the people here,” she said. “But the fact that we got out from in front of our TV set in our nice middle-class home to come here really indicates that they haven’t made a case. Lots of people we know think like we do, but they’re just not the protesting types.”

US analysts stressed the broad base of the anti-war movement in this country, pointing out that anti-war rallies and demonstrations have erupted in unlikely places in recent weeks.

“It is not just that more people are joining in, but that the resistance is coming from all sectors of society,” said Bob Jensen, an associate professor of journalism at the University of Texas at Austin and author of the book Writing Dissent: Taking Radical Ideas from the Margins to the Mainstream.

“I am speaking this Saturday (Mar. 15) at a rally and meeting in Fargo, North Dakota, my hometown. It’s a city of 90,000 people and traditionally very conservative,” Jensen added. “I think the fact that an anti-war coalition has sprung up in Fargo says a lot.”

Even if the protests here fail to move the Bush administration, they are having a powerful impact abroad, many said.

“They’re having an enormous effect in the UK,” said Eamonn Dornan, who traveled to Washington with a newly formed group called Attorneys Against the War. “Tony Blair is under enormous pressure. His cabinet could resign, he could lose his post if he makes the wrong move.”

“The anti-war movement in the US isn’t that much different from voices around the world who support less destructive methods of resolving international conflicts,” noted Nancy Snow, an assistant professor of communications at Cal State Fullerton.

“If the US could get a second strong vote at the UN and signify full backing and support of the international community, the anti-war movement position in the US would not be as strong,” she said. “A pre-emptive strike on Iraq spells trouble for a country like our own that seeks to repair a growing image problem in the world, and people are becoming skeptical about what war will do to fuel more retaliatory strikes here at home.”

Supreme Court rules against
stacking juries with whites

Mar. 14— In a powerful 8-to-1 decision in late February, the US Supreme Court ruled that an appeals court had made it unduly hard for an African-American Texas death row inmate to get a hearing on a claim his jury had been unconstitutionally purged of blacks.

The ruling in the case of Thomas Miller-El, which technically sends the case back to the 5th Circuit, is likely to reverberate through district and appellate courts across the country — especially in states like Texas and Pennsylvania, where local prosecutors have already been accused of stacking juries with whites in capital cases. On Mar. 4, a study commissioned by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court called for a moratorium on executions in that state because of concerns about a disproportionate number of minorities on death row. One finding: Prosecutors were improperly barring black jurors in cases involving black defendants.

Miller-El would appear to be no saint. He stands convicted of first-degree murder for the ruthless 1985 execution of a Holiday Inn employee, whom he and two accomplices bound and gagged on the floor during a botched robbery. He was sentenced to death in 1986, along with his wife, Dorothy, who was one of his accomplices.

At his trial, Miller-El’s attorneys had protested what they said was the prosecution’s attempt to remove nearly all blacks from his jury. Of 11 black jurors who had confirmed they would be able to vote for a death penalty, the prosecution barred 10 using so-called peremptory challenges — challenges for which no reason has to be given. The only black person the prosecution accepted had told the court he believed that with murderers, the state should “pour honey on them and stake them out over an ant bed.”

The trial judge had rejected the defense claim of bias. Later state appellate courts likewise rejected claims of bias, saying the defense’s claims of deliberate prosecution efforts to remove blacks were “unconvincing.”

A habeas appeal to the federal district court also failed, with the judge declining to even consider the evidence submitted by the defense of a long history of racially motivated strikes of black jurors by the Dallas district attorney’s office. That evidence — a study by the Dallas Morning News of 100 cases between 1980 and 1986 — showed the district attorney was routinely barring 90 percent of qualified blacks from juries.

The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals subsequently denied Miller-El’s request for an appeal, saying he had not made a “substantial showing of denial of a constitutional right.”

The Supreme Court, with Justice Clarence Thomas, its sole black member, alone in dissent, said that both the district court and the appeals court had erred in setting too high a bar of proof. The district court, the Supreme Court held, “did not give full consideration to the substantial evidence petitioner put forth in support of” racial bias in the jury selection, and instead “accepted without question the state court’s evaluation” of the non-racial intent of the prosecution.

As for the 5th Circuit, the justices said it had erred in requiring Miller-El to prove with “clear and convincing evidence” that the state courts had been “unreasonable.”

“This,” the Supreme Court held, “was too demanding a standard.”

The ruling may lead to appeals of older death penalty decisions. In Pennsylvania, academic studies found that during the two terms of District Attorney Ed Rendell (former Democratic Party national chairman and now governor of the state), from 1978 to 1986, city prosecutors removed qualified blacks from juries 58 percent of the time (compared to 22 percent for whites). A training video produced by Rendell’s successor, Ronald Castille (later chief justice for the state’s Supreme Court), taught new young prosecutors tricks on how to remove blacks from juries without getting caught.

Says death penalty expert Robert Brady, former chairman of the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty: “The Supreme Court ruling should have a remarkable system-wide effect.”

Source: In These Times

High school students hold march,
sit-in to protest Ridge visit

Mar. 10— Area students got the word that Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Tom Ridge was coming to Montgomery Blair High School (BHS) in Silver Springs, Maryland, on Mar. 7 and mobilized a response, with over 300 students walking out of class.

Within hours of the announcement of Ridge’s visit, an “IMPEACH BUSH” banner was hung on the overpass directly next to the school, and a “RIDGE=NO RIGHTS” banner flew from the Blair flagpole while duct tape covered the entrance to the school.

BHS was blocked off from the public eye and traffic driving by on University Blvd. by about 15 empty school buses, which formed a barrier in front of the school. Behind the buses were a bomb squad vehicle, fire trucks, police cars, secret service, and the like. Protesters started gathering outside of the school around 10am. Approximately 30-40 non-BHS students from the University of Maryland and various other Montgomery County high schools, parents of BHS students, and other individuals gathered on the University Blvd. sidewalk, holding signs and chanting.

Later, around 300 BHS students walked out of class. Security and staff wouldn’t let them off BHS property to meet up with other protesters, so the students marched around the school. After making their way back to the front of the school they were able to merge with the protesters being kept on the sidewalk. The crowd made its way towards the school slowly; the American flag was pulled to half mast immediately. School security removed any non-BHS students they spotted from the property and back to the sidewalk. They wouldn’t let the students into the school, and the students ending up holding a sit-in in front of the building. After a stand-off with the administration, the student crowd started to decrease and eventually dispersed as BHS students went back inside.

A few students, however, remained outside and continued their presence when the others had gone.

Banners were dropped on the outside and inside of the school. Many news stations reported the event, but very few reported the protest that went with it. Many students expressed feelings of empowerment, and looked forward to walking out again, if needed, when war is declared.

Source: DC Indymedia