Troops Out Now! UIUC Campus Antiwar Network

CANference 2010 video

2010-02-03T01:34:00.002-06:00

Pete made this amazing video to promote the conference! Check it out.

CANference 2010

2010-02-01T07:52:00.005-06:00

UIUC is hosting the national CAN conference from Feburary 26-28. We've been working hard, along with the planning comittee, to put on a fabulous conference. A bunch of awesome speakers are coming and we have tons of interesting workshops/panels planned. COME COME COME and please feel free to contact us with any questions. We are always excited by discussion.

National Conference Schedule 2010
SATURDAY!

10:00 – 11:00

It Ain't Over 'Til It's Over: Hope Only Goes So Far
[welcome]
Sarah Jaine, Michael, and Stephen, members of the Coordinating Committee, contextualize the state of CAN and welcome everyone to the CANference!

11:15 – 12:15

Palestine 101
[educational]
Nancy and Drew discuss their recent trips to the West Bank. Historical introduction by Paul, rooted in International Law.

Environment & Imperialism
[educational]
Susan talks about the effect imperialism has on environmental degradation.

Torture & Health Care Professionals
[educational]
Abdul explains the study done by Harvard Law students on Dr. Larry James, former chief psychologist for both Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay.

12:30 – 1:30

AfPak
[educational]
Stephen and Pete explore the disconnect between the Obama administration's rhetoric and practices in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

What the ROTC and Military Recruiters Won't Tell You: The Truth About Enlistment
[educational/tactical]
Patricia discusses strategies to combat militarism including veterans' benefits, length of enlistment and stop-loss, PTSD, and other ways of paying for college.

Immigration & Imperialism
[educational]
Dan Moore, from the Interfaith Worker's Center, describes the link between U.S. Interventionism in Central and South Americas, immigration, and labor.

1:30 – 2:30 LUNCH!
[1:30 – 2:25: Mike gives info session on the new website. Bring your lunch!]

2:30 – 3:45

GFM Reportback and What We Can Do At Home
[educational/practical]
Shannon, Layney, Jad & Joel describe their experiences with the Gaza Freedom March; Katherine Fuchs, National Organizer for the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, discussing Boycott Divestment, and Sanctions

4:00 – 5:00

Iraq
[educational]
Anthony discusses the United States history of imperialism in Iraq and the current facts on the ground.

Peace of the Action
[tactical]
Robby Diesu, antiwar veteran working with Peace of the Action, reviews PotA's plan to engage in direct action during the week of the anniversary of the invasion of Iraq.

Budget Cuts
[educational]
Wes Strong, from Connecticut Students Against War (CT-SAW), explores the relationship between imperialism, budget cuts, and tuition hikes, and relates current initiatives for student power.

5:15 – 6:00

Soldiers Speak Out
[educational]
Members of Iraq Veterans Against the War and Vietnam Veterans Against the War share stories of their time spent in the military.

6:00 – 7:30 DINNER!

7:30 – 8:45

Why We're Really There & Stories From the Front
[educational/tactical]
Mike Schwartz details the neo-liberalism takeover of Iraq. Laura Slattery, antiwar veteran, relates her experience in counter-recruitment and non-violence.

9:00 – 10:00

The Insurgent Theatre
[entertainment]
The Insurgent Theatre performs a piece exploring violence and direct action.

10:00 – SLEEP

PARTY TIME!
[whoo!]
Boozin', schmoozin', and cruisin'.
SUNDAY!
9:00 – 9:15

Imperialism & the Democrats
[educational]
Kyle argues that dispelling the myth that the Democrats are the peace party and supporting political alternatives is crucial to building a lasting anti-war movement.

9:15 – 11:00

Chapter Building
[tactical]
Sarah Jaine and Chris lead an all-group discussion/brainstorming on how to more effectively build on campuses.

11:00 – 11:30 LUNCH!
[is delicious]
Provided by FOOD NOT BOMBS! <3 Let's make it quick! 11:30 – END NATIONAL DISCUSSION [oh yeah! alright!] Discussion on the role of off-campus and alumni organizers & roles of Regional Coordinators -breakout into REGIONAL CAUCUS voting for Regional Coordinators (back to full assembly) Discussions on Points of Unity, Resolutions, and National Actions

McChrystal to Recommend Troop Increase In Afghanistan

2009-09-21T22:17:00.000-05:00

This morning, the US Commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, warned in a confidential report leaked to the Washington Post and the New York Times, that without a significant increase in troops in Afghanistan, the US mission there “will likely result in failure” by next year.

The question we must ask is, “What is the mission, as McChrystal sees it?”

If the goal is to maintain US influence in the region, he may very well be correct. However, if the goal is to bring peace and stability to the region, a surge of troops is not the right way to go about it. As, Graham Fuller, former CIA Station Chief in Kabul, said:

What can be done must be consonant with the political culture. Let non-military and neutral international organizations, free of geopolitical taint, take over the binding of Afghan wounds and the building of state structures.

I could not agree more. The presence of US troops in the region exacerbates not only radical Islamists – those who see their ultra-conservative interpretation of Islam not only as a religion, but as a comprehensive socio-political system – but also the nationalist Pashtun people, who are the ethnic majority in Afghanistan and don’t take well to the presence of foreign troops on their homeland.

The fact that there are two very different groups people in Afghanistan and Pakistan who are opposed to the US presence is often lost in the dialogue, but it is of crucial importance to recognize if there is going to be the possibility for peace and stability in the region. The latter group, the Pashtuns, have fought invaders since the British in the 19^th century. They have no interests in seeing the US destroyed, and they do not, as many conservative pundits used to state, “hate us for our freedoms” or some similar drivel. Rather, they, like any peoples, want to be free from an occupation force.

The second group of peoples fighting the US are the radical Islamist. They also do not “hate us for our freedoms” but rather for our ongoing policy in the middle east. They oppose both our policy towards Israel and Palestine, and what they see as our undue and overbearing influence in propping up illegitimate governments in many countries. They hope that by driving the US out of the middle east, they can topple existing governments and set up their own hyper-conservative socio-political system.

Neither group of people can be properly combated with through military forces. In Islamists will simply move elsewhere, as we have seen with their surge in Pakistan, and the Pashtuns will into lay down their arms as long as foreign occupiers are on their soil. However, as Fuller suggested, non-military, non-US peacekeeping and NGO forces will have a much better chance of creating peace and stability.

However, a surge in troops will likely cause the opposite – increasing destabilization in Pakistan, a surge in violence in Afghanistan, and the frettering away of Obama’s international good will and political capitol.

This, then, is a crucial time for the Obama Administration, for the American People, and for the Antiwar Movement. It is no secret that the Antiwar movement is smaller now than it has been in recent years, yet this is the moment when we need to be pushing as hard as we can for a WITHDRAWAL of troops, rather than an INCREASE.

With increased opposition in congress – including from Sen. Carl Levine, Chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Sen. Diane Feinstein, Chair of the Intelligence Committee, and our own Sen. Dick Durbin, Majority Whip – and a war fatigue from many Americans tired of the years of senseless in Iraq, now is the time to pressure Obama to change his course.

It is imperative that we do not let Obama off the hook, in either Afghanistan or in Iraq – where we still are seeing Americans killed, and mercenaries such as Blackwater – or Xu, as they now call themselves – running the show. It is imperative that we do not let the antiwar movement, on campuses across the country, to whither away as the real and pressing issues of the economy and healthcare, and the fabricated issues such as the “birthers” or “Tea Baggers” take over the public discourse. It is imperative that we bring our troops back safely and as quickly as possible, imperative that we provide the people of Afghanistan and Iraq, Pakistan and Palestine, to be able to create the societies that they desire, free of US influence. It is a moral imperative, a social imperative, an economic imperative, and we need to ensure that for Obama, it is a political imperative.

We must continue to fight for peace, using every means at out disposal. Protests, letter writing, education, nonviolent direct action, boycott, divestment, and sanctions campaigns: every non-violent means at our disposal must be brought to bear on Obama and the Democrats.

The Struggle of Peruvian Indigenous!

2009-09-11T09:51:00.003-05:00

I am very inspired by the indigenous uprisings in Peru that have been taking place for the last three months. Everyone was paying attention to the "revolution" in Iran but almost no media attention was given to Peru or the coup in Honduras. The Amazonian indigenous are standing up against the government and President Garcia due to broken promises that have resulted in foreign companies destroying Amazonian land for resources creating pollution problems that threaten their way of life. It is led by the Association for the Development of the Peruvian Amazon (AIDESEP) and tens of thousands of people have occupied highways resulting in several clashes with police. Here is a good explanation from Wikipedia:

“On June 5 2009, President Alan Garcia ordered Police and military forces to stop Amazon Indians from blocking roads in the Bagua amazon region. The natives had been demonstrating against the signing by Alan Garcia of special decrees that allow foreign corporations to enter the Indians lands for oil drilling, mining and logging. As a result of the actions of the armed forces over 50 Indians have been killed and nearly two hundred disappeared[26]. Eyewitnesses claim that the bodies of the murdered amazon Indians have been dumped into the rivers” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Garc%C3%ADa)

It doesn’t mention that several police officers were also murdered in the clashes (they were brutally killed with machetes) which have led to some people to question the validity of the movement. It’s a good lesson we should always keep in mind…violence solves nothing. I am attaching some links, you should all check out the Real News clips. It’s so radical and awesome!

Real News:
Battle for the Amazon: People vs the government Part 1
http://therealnews.com/t/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=4117
Part 2
http://therealnews.com/t/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=4117

AIDESEP website (so badass): http://www.aidesep.org.pe/

Peru Natives complain of persecution, may restart protests: http://www.indiancountrytoday.com/global/latin/55733627.html

The fight for the Peruvian rainforest (A clip from the Guardian, mentions torture techniques used by the government forces) http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/video/2009/jul/03/peru-rainforest

In Solidarity,
Maura

Destroying Indigenous Populations

2009-08-25T20:49:00.003-05:00

Just to start off the band wagon this article really opened my eyes to how the war aboard is directly related to people here domestically. Native Americans are population that I know so little about and this article beautifully written. Jamail goes on to tie it to the struggles of Iraqi people. The basic gist is that Uranium is a huge problem for the Sioux population as well as being used as a weapon in Iraq.

Tearing Gaza Apart

2009-01-06T02:26:00.002-06:00

So, no one (A.K.A. Pete or myself) has blogged in awhile, so here we go! There has been a lot happening in Gaza and Israel in the past couple of weeks, and even the last couple of days. Even though C.A.N. has not taken a stand against the occupation of Palestine as a point of unity, I believe that our C.A.N. chapter, as a majority, is against the occupation of Palestine. Also, it doesn't hurt to become more educated about the ongoings in Palestine, especially with the hope of going into the next CANference united against the occupation of Palestine (if it still is occupied, hopefully not).

This artile describes the most recent attacks on Gaza, after the on-foot invasion by Israel. There are now over 500 dead Palestinians, and for what? Four dead Israelis? How is that "defending" Israel? Also, the article makes a good point that the reason Hamas was launching rockets into Southern Israel was because Israel broke the five month cease fire back in November by killing 6 Palestinians. So, whose fault is it?

Another point is that the U.S. is aiding Israel in the attacks on Gaza. The weaponry that Israeli troops are using was manufactured in the U.S. and given to Israel by the U.S. And, not surprisingly, the international community, including the U.N., is calling for a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas, which the U.S. is blocking. This shares the same disregard the U.S. has when the U.N. mandated the ending of torture at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.

Another point to be made is that Hamas is kind of the opposite of the Taliban. Whereas the Taliban started out as a political and humanitarian group, and turned into a terrorist organization, Hamas was a terrorist organization and is now turning over to a humanitarian group fighting for the rights of the Palestinian civilians.

This issue is most relevant to the conference call we had this past Sunday about including ending the seige on Gaza as one of our demands to Obama. There was dissention about calling Hamas a terrorist organization. We had to widdle down the demand of ending the total occupation to just ending the seige on Gaza, just to make it more relevant to what is currently happening. Also, I suppose Midwest C.A.N. wants to ease into its demands. Personally, I think we should just throw everything that we want at Obama. It seems, to be really effective, we need to stay strong with our demands, and not just "see what we can get." We need to DEMAND what we want, and what truly needs to happen.

So, everyone had better be at the demonstration on the 17th. It is our chance, as a grassroots organization, to make our demands heard by our new President. We need to let him know that the killings in Palestine can no longer be allowed to happen. That the aid and allowance of terrorism by Israel needs to be stopped.

-Patricia
College Not Combat, Troops Out NOW!

Blackwater accountability

2008-12-10T02:48:00.000-06:00

US guards charged over Iraq deaths

The suspects had earlier handed themselves in
to a court in Utah [Reuters]

Five US security guards employed by the Blackwater firm have been charged over the killings of at least 14 Iraqi civilians and injuries to 20 others in a 2007 shooting in Baghdad.

In a 35-count indictment, the five men were charged with manslaughter, attempt to commit manslaughter and weapons violations, the US justice department said on Monday.

"The government alleges in the documents unsealed today that at least 34 unarmed Iraqi civilians, including women and children, were killed or injured without justification or provocation by these Blackwater security guards in the shooting at Nisoor Square," said Patrick Rowan, assistant attorney-general for national security.

The five had handed themselves over at a federal court in Salt Lake City, Utah, earlier on Monday.

A sixth Blackwater guard had already pleaded guilty to charges on December 5.

If convicted, the men face 10 years in prison for each manslaughter charge, plus additional sentences for other charges.

The shooting by Blackwater's guards as they escorted a convoy of US diplomats through Baghdad on September 16 2007, angered Iraqis and led US officials to tighten controls on private security firms.

The shooting also enraged the Iraqi government, which wanted to put security contractors under Iraqi legal jurisdiction.

Identity protected

The five men's identities and the nature of the charges against them had been kept secret for more than a year, but were also released on Sunday.

They were named as Evan Liberty and Donald Ball, both 26-year-old former marines; Dustin Heard, a 27-year-old ex-marine; Nick Slatten, 25, an ex-army sergeant; and Paul Slough, a 29-year-old army veteran.

Paul Cassell, a Utah attorney on the defence team, said as the guards were being heard: "We think it's pure and simple a case of self-defence ... Tragically people did die."

IN VIDEO

Blackwater on trial

Khalid Ibrahim, a 40-year-old electrician who said his 78-year-old father, Ibrahim Abid, died in the shooting, said: "The killers must pay for their crime against innocent civilians.

"Justice must be achieved so that we can have rest from the agony we are living in. We know that the conviction of the people behind the shooting will not bring my father to life, but we will have peace in our minds and hearts."

An Iraqi government spokesman said that they believed that the attack was tantamount to deliberate murder.

Ali Al-Dabbagh told Al Jazeera that Baghdad would maintain the victims' right to a fair trial and would not accept anything less than "normal standards available in such cases".

Decorated veterans

The Blackwater guards are decorated war veterans who were contracted to protect US diplomats in Iraq.

FBI investigators found in late 2007 that most of the deaths had been unjustified and the incident created a furore about the perceived ability of private guards to act with impunity in Iraq.

FBI investigators found that most of the 17 deaths in Baghdad had been unjustified

Blackwater said that the guards were returning fire after their convoy was shot at in al-Nisoor Square.

The head of Blackwater appeared before the US congress shortly after the incident, saying that the men acted responsibly.

The case has also been complicated because, at the time of the attack, private contractors like Blackwater operated without any clear legal oversight and it could be argued they did not have to answer either to Iraqi or US laws.

Under the deal Blackwater had with the US government, it was allowed to repair the vehicles involved in the attack before investigators saw them, taking away key forensic evidence.

Challenging The Myths Of The "Good War"

2008-12-09T19:21:00.003-06:00

We are so fortunate to have one of C.A.N.'s points of unity be against the occupation of Afghanistan because it allows us to work as a group to educate others about why this occupation is wrong. This article offers a neat perspective. Some of the important things I got out of it were that the U.S. military is treating the occupation of Iraq and the occupation of Afghanistan as the same thing. This is shown because the troops who first went to Afghanistan and then to Iraq (or vice versa) did not receive training in between deployments. We must argue that the two are different conflicts. Yes, they are similar in that the justification to invade both nations was false, but they are two separate and distinct countries, with different cultures, histories, and peoples. Another point is that the Taliban, political turned terrorist group, has now gained more power because of the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan. Also, the people of Afghanistan are now angry about the destruction of their country.

This article also points to the horrible attrocities against women's rights, making the group RAWA (Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan) much more vital to the nation. It is unfortunate, because with all of the attacks on civil rights in Afghanistan, the people have been turning to the Taliban as a "lesser of two evils" approach.

The part of the article which I enjoyed most, and which I have never heard being argued before was, is the U.S. justified in being in Iraq and Afghanistan to capture Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, respectively. The argument against this is brilliant and simple: why should entire nations, civilians and all, be held accountable for the attrocities committed by one person, or a handful of people? Was the entire U.S. population held accountable for Timothy McVeigh? Another argument could possibly be to punish the supporters of Hussein and bin Laden. Wait a minute, though, because the U.S. government supported them, right? So, we can't possibly just do that!

To close, both of these occupations, though not the same, and yet not completely different, need to be ended immediately. The people of both nations deserve to live in sovereign states, free of the U.S. and free from having to turn to terrorist organizations as governments to have the "lesser of two evils."

-Patricia
College Not Combat, Troops Out NOW!

On The Side Of The Road In Iraq

2008-12-08T16:29:00.002-06:00

This article is the speech that Duane gave at our Winter Soldier event on Thursday, November 13 2008. His speech was of his experience in Iraq as a medic. It involved a huge miscommunication, and perfectly represents the misrepresentation of Iraqis as terrorists. It was quite gruesome, and descriptive. Also, another thing I got from the speech was that Duane was not that skilled in Arabic, and then had a hard time communicating with his patient. This, to me, showed the lack of cultural training for U.S. troops.

Proposed UK Counter Terror bill to criminalize publishing information about police

2008-12-02T01:43:00.001-06:00

UK Indymedia has some disturbing information about a new Counter Terror bill being discussed in the House of Lords:

We need to stand with our British brothers and sisters in stopping the criminalization of information - whether it be by fighting the CCTV panopticon that is London (and increasingly, many US cities), arresting or otherwise abusing journalists at demonstrations, or by criminalizing - or at the least creating a chilling effect around - the publication of police actions.

A CAN perspective of the SOA protest

2008-12-01T15:41:00.007-06:00

Ft. Benning, GA – On November 21-23, over 20,000 people gathered outside the gates of Ft. Benning to demand to end to Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (WHINSEC), formerly known as the School of Americas (and sometimes called the School of Assassins by its detractors). The demonstrators encompassed the full spectrum of American liberals and leftists, from progressive Catholics to Anarchistic Atheists.

Protests at the SOA/WHINSEC began 19 years ago, following the massacre of 5 Jesuit persists, their house keeper, and her daughter by paramilitaries in Latin America. Opponents of the school decry it as a training camp for oppressive militaries and paramilitaries in Latin America, with a curriculum ranging from the use of fear and oppression to torture and kidnapping, all infused with a pro-America, pro-corporate ideology.

Over a dozen members of the Campus Antiwar Network from across the country were part of the weekend-long demonstrations.

Saturday saw a large gathering outside the gates with speakers, musicians, and scores of tables. It was a very lively atmosphere, a sort of politically-infused Burning Man-esq festival celebrating life and condemning those who brutally destroy it. In downtown Columbus, there were workshops and lectures lasting long into the night, covering a wide array of political and social issues.

Early Sunday morning, six brave individuals crossed the line of Ft. Benning in an attempt to physically close the school. Crossing the line at the highway rather than at the main gates – which were blocked by a temporary chain link fence topped with barbed wire – the six were detained half a mile into the base. They are expected to face felony trespassing charges, with 6 months in jail and $5,000 in fines, on top of the $1,000 bail.

At the gates of Ft. Benning, Sunday saw the 20,000 protesters gather with wooden crosses adorned with the names of the victims of the Latin American state terrorism. The crowd filed solemnly past the gate, placing their crosses in the chain link fence until they literally blocked out the sun. As the crowd marched, speakers on the stage sang out the names and ages of the victims of over 40 years of repression. After each name was sung, the crowd raised their crosses and sang back “Presenté.”

In addition, some members of the demonstration carried coffins which they laid before the gates. Dressed in black robes and white face paint, these representatives of death lay before the gates all day in a die-in, their black robes stained with red paint to represent blood.

As the day progressed, a Puppetista celebration made its way to the gates. Telling the story of how the people will eventually crush the oppression of Imperialism and terrorist governments with tools such as Women Power and Worker Power, the Puppetistas and their accompanying drum corps added the perfect splash of color and culture to the procession.

For more than 500 demonstrators, the procession was not enough. Led by a number of the Puppetistas, the group – mostly youth – burst forth through the police barricades into the town of Columbus. With chants of “SOA? Tear it down!” and “Whose Streets? Our Streets!” the bloc marched down two major streets and a number of side streets in an unpermitted expression of the Democracy and opposition to the SOA/WHINSEC. CAN members then led the bloc to the gates of Ft. Benning, where a drum circle and impromptu speak out energized the crowd. However, due to the chain link fence, no one crossed the line.

Over all, the SOA protest was an incredibly successful event. There is great hope among the organizers that Obama will help close the school, prompting organizer and SOA Watch founded Father Roy Bourgeois – who is facing excommunication for ordaining female priests – to declare that if the SOA/WHINSEC is closed down this upcoming year, there will be a final gathering in 2009 – for a celebratory fiesta.

Terrorist attack in Mumbai ends after three day stand-off

2008-12-01T15:17:00.003-06:00

This past week, a group of approximately 10 armed extremists wrought havoc in Mumbai (formerly Bombay), the most populous city in India. Their motives are still unknown, and it is still unclear who was behind the attacks - while the organization Deccan Mujahideen claimed responsibility, the group was totally unknown before the attacks, and one of the terrorists claimed to have been trained by Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, a Pakistan-based terror group that opposes India over the disputed Kashmir region.

Over 150 were killed in the attacks, which targeted two hotels and a police station. The confrontation lasted for over three days until all the terrorists were either caught or killed.

The Independent has an excellent timeline of the events, while NPR has a good analysis of the fallout of the attacks - increasing tensions between Pakistan and India. Relations between the two nuclear powers have recently been fairly amenable, but with increasing pressure by the US on Pakistan's border with Afghanistan, this attack may have re-awakened tensions over the contentious region of Kashmir. The Pakistani army has already begun moving troops from from its western Afghanistan border to the east.

The Army's School For Terrorism

2008-12-01T11:34:00.003-06:00

This article talks about the protest that Pete and Chris just went to in Georgia over Thanksgiving Break. Since we have taken up the topic of torture as an important issue for C.A.N., this protest and article are interesting for our message.

Protesting Anti-Muslim Hate Crimes

2008-11-29T18:12:00.002-06:00

This is a short article describing an Anti-Islamophobia protest at UMass Amherst that was to raise awareness about the hate crimes that happened in Ohio back in September. There was a diverse coalition of people that got together for this protest, including C.A.N., M.S.A., I.S.O., etc.

SOA? Tear it down!

2008-11-25T17:25:00.006-06:00

The following is a speech I might have given at the School of Americas protest this weekend, if I had had the time to really plan out a speech. I ended up giving the first two paragraphs while standing on a barrel right in front of the gates of Ft. Benning, GA.

Brothers and Sisters!

We can all agree that the people of Columbia and Ecuador, of Nicaragua and El Salvador, are occupied people – occupied by their own US armed, funded, and trained governments, and by the extra-legal terrorist arms of those governments, the Paramilitary death squads. Only an unjust and illegal occupier would need to maintain control of the people through torture, disappearances, and murder – in short, through acts of terrorism against their own people.

However, we must also recognize that, in a much less deadly way, the US people are in a way occupied as well. From the repression seen at the DNC and RNC – where peaceful demonstrations were brutally disrupted with teargas and batons, pepper spray and horses, concussion grenades and snow plows, and also where the voice of the media was stifled and the healing hands of the medics handcuffed; to the case of the Hempstead 15 - where Iraq and Afghanistan vets were brutalized outside the final presidential debate as they tried to ask the candidates questions, where they and their peaceful supporters were trampled by horses causing one vet to sustain serious injuries to his skull and then denied proper medical attention by the Nassau County police; to the widespread government and corporate infiltration and surveillance of all manner of social justice and peace groups, from the RNC Welcoming Committee all the way to a group in Maryland organizing against the Death Penalty; from these cases and many more we can see that the current government is not one “Of the people, by the people, and for the people” but rather one set in opposition to the People!

The State claims a monopoly on violence – it controls the police who set up these fences and watchtowers, it controls the Army which trains the Latin American terrorists at the SOA/WHINSEC, it controls the electric chairs and lethal injection tables. What we must show the State is that all its violence, all its oppression, is useless in the face of mass nonviolent direct action. Together, we take to the streets of Denver, of St. Paul, of Columbus – together, we can tear down the fences and walls that separate us – together, we can tear down the SOA! Their jails cannot contain our numbers – we masses are not huddles and yearning for freedom, but are instead rising, as one, breaking the chains of oppression and injustice.

We stand today outside the gates of Ft. Benning with the people of Latin America, fighting a far more deadly struggle than the one we wage here. But we also stand with the people of the Congo and Darfur, of Palestine AND Israel, of Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan, of Pakistan and Chine; we stand with people across the globe occupied and repressed by each other, by their governments, and by the multinational corporations who destroy the global economy through their greed and then demand to be bailed out – we stand here today, and we declare,

“When People are Occupied
Resistance is Justified!”

A Guantánamo System After Guantánamo?

2008-11-24T01:35:00.000-06:00

The Truth Comes Out About Gulf War Illness

2008-11-24T01:33:00.000-06:00

Are U.S. Troops Coming Home?

2008-11-24T01:29:00.000-06:00

Student Walkout Against War

2008-11-18T22:49:00.001-06:00

This article made me smile because it is good to see some activity with the antiwar movement!

The Hempstead 15 go to Court

2008-11-17T22:41:00.001-06:00

They're our brother, they're our sisters, we support war resistors! And look who is in the picture!!! NATE!!!

Anti-war Groups Hold March on Campus

2008-11-17T11:06:00.000-06:00

Anti-War Protesters Rally Against Iraq and Afghanistan

2008-11-16T22:01:00.001-06:00

I cut this story out of the DI on Friday, so I have the full length thing... including the picture of Duane with the caption having his last name being Zinton...

Anti-War Groups Creates Display

2008-11-16T21:57:00.001-06:00

ROTC branches hold POW/MIA vigil on quad

2008-11-16T21:51:00.003-06:00

I actually saw this when I was going to class on Friday. At first, I thought it was the Army doing recruting, so I was going to start questioning them, but then I saw the wall that people were signing for POW MIA, and that they were reading off names of those who have been killed. This teaches me, and we can all take this away from this situation, that we need to look closer before we judge things (we all know that already, though, right?).

Proposition 8 Protest Calls for Equal Rights

2008-11-16T21:47:00.000-06:00

The Occupiers' Faltering Status in Iraq

2008-11-10T23:41:00.001-06:00

The Real Story of the Occupiers

2008-11-10T23:37:00.003-06:00

This article just gives you a little taste of the new book, Winter Soldier: Iraq and Afghanistan. Our own Nate Peld is on the cover, and I believe his testimony is in there. This is an important preview for our own Winter Soldier event that will be happening this Thursday, November 13. Nate should be attending.

Rebellion of Italy's Students

2008-11-10T23:01:00.002-06:00

To extend on the on-going strife in Italy, this article also talks about the strikes. It outlines the reasons why the students are protesting--- the huge cuts in education, and the beginning of the privatization of education. Also, a more disturbing outcome of the basically facist Berlusconi government is the evident racism. Immigrants are facing all kinds of discrimination, namely in the education sector. Children are being discriminated against!!! As an anti-war group that calls for the end to racism, and the right of people to organize, we should stand in solidarity with the students in Italy.

I have actually been talking to my Italian teacher about it, and she really is afraid about the fate of her country. She has expressed to me how much she wants to be there with the students, protesting. It is amazing, and I am glad I got to connect with her, and know that I agree with her stance in this struggle.

Student protests

2008-10-26T13:43:00.017-05:00

There have been several European student strikes recently around the issue of privatizing education and the global economic crisis. I think it is extremely inspiring to see how organized these students are! On October 17th, 10,000 students at the University of Rome demanded that the academic year be postponed in order to protest against law 133. A law that will cause definitive privatization of Italian university, massive job cuts and huge cuts of public fundings for research and education. Then on October 22nd, 96% of high school and secondary students and 70% of university students of Spain protested against the governments "Bologna Plan," which would mean further elitisation of higher education, which in the case of Spain would be accompanied by the replacement of student grants (which very few students get anyway) with student loans. The students also brought up issues of capitalism and the global economic crisis which has affected Spain more than it has other countries.

We can definitely take a lesson of the power students can posses in movements. Obviously, the students in the U.S. are not nearly that organized, but I think it is something we can strive towards. And I think this is proof that students are capable of making an impact in the world and what kinds of issues they can talk about.

Strike in Rome
http://slash.autonomedia.org/node/11461

Spanish Student Strike
http://www.marxist.com/spain-thousands-of-students-respond-to-strike-call.htm

The Criminalization of Dissent

2008-10-23T12:55:00.009-05:00

2008 has been a year of protests - the Democratic and Republican National Conventions being the focal point, but there have also been attempts to shut down the construction of I-69 in Indiana, and the most recent protest outside the final Presidential debate, where vets were attacked by mounted police (as Patricia talked about in a previous post).

All of these protests show an increasing criminalization of dissent, as non-violent protest have been violently suppressed by the police.

At the Democratic National Convention, police mass-arrested over 100 people who were engaged in completely non-violent protests. The police first pushed media out of the area, then unleashed a wide array of weapons against the protesters, ranging from tear gas to their batons. The police were not wearing any sort of identification, meaning that individual officers were able to do as they wished with relative impunity.

This feeling of impunity has continued even after the DNC. The Denver Police have created and are selling a shirt reading "We get up early to BEAT the crowds - 2008 DNC". Such contempt for protesters underscores a larger contempt for our right to be on the street. By assuming a framework wher the only response to non-violent protest is with violent repression, the sale of such shirts creates the possibility for greater violence and repression at future events. Without the ability to hold officers - or the police department as a whole - accountable for their actions, we allow them to escalate their tactics.

The Republican National Convention, a week after the Democratic Convention, underscored this point. As one observer noted, "In Denver they prepared for a riot. In St. Paul, they prepared for the apocalypse."

And an apocalypse is what they got - an apocalypse caused by the police.

The repression began the weekend before the convention, when the police, most notably Ramsey County officers under the commnd of Sherrif Bob Fletcher, conducted a number of illegal raids on activist houses and convergent spaces. Literature, maps, and computers were among the items confiscated. Individuals at the locations at the time of the raids report that the police did not present warrants even when they were asked to do so, and did not respect individual's personal privacy. In addition, all present - including, in one instance, children - were had their hands zip-tied during the hour-long raid, and were individually photographed. Only later was a warrant made public, and included items ranging from mason jars and paint cans to X-Boxes and iPods.

The four days of the RNC were a perfect example of a police state. Individuals were snatched off the street by plainclothes police, and peaceful protests were violently broken up by police using horses, baton, bikes, tear gas, pepper spray, and concussion grenades. On Tuesday, Rage Against the Machine was physically prevented from taking the stage in an attempt to silence not only the protesters, but the culture of resistance (they responded by performing an a capella version of their songs, and then leading the crowd on a march on the Excel Center, which was violently dispersed later that evening). Thursday saw a mass arrest of over 300 people as they both protesters, media, and random citizens of St. Paul who were caught in the wrong place were forced onto a bridge and arrested.

Much has been written about the 4 days of police repression in St. Paul - CAN's own experiances can be found here. For more information on both the RNC and the DNC protests and repression, I strongly recommend Ground Noise and Static - it's a half hour video, and well worth it.

The repression in St. Paul was particularly breathtaking becasue it was not simply directed against those protesters who used direct action techniques. After the first day, the police clamped down on all protests, hanging permit times and violently breaking up rallies that occurred after the protests.

Their unbridled use of force is partly due to the insurance policy the Twin Cities forced the RNC to take out for police repression. The RNC paid $9 million to cover the costs of law suits in the case of police brutality. Effectively, this gave the police a $9 million safety net to do what they wanted, without having to explain themselves to the taxpayers of the Twin Cities.

A month and a half after the RNC repression, the Hampstead police attacked and wounded veterans and supporters as they tried to ask the candidates questions at the final presidential debate. The unconscionable use of the mounted police for such an event, and the use of those horses as weapons against non-violent protesters who were already on the sidewalks, was just one more example of the increasing brutality of the police against nonviolent (albeit unorthodox) protesters.

But we will not be silenced! This November, hundreds will be joinging the yearly protest at Fort Bragg, Georgia, to attempt to put an end to the brutal School of Americas. This March, tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands will partake in bi-coastal protests against the War, called for by a coalition of antiwar organizations. Our voices will be heard in the streets, and if we are met by the violence of the police, we will meet it nonviolently, and their violence will backfire on them, exposing their injustice to the world.

Police torturer arrested on federal charges

2008-10-22T23:40:00.002-05:00

I think this sums up the call for action on torture that I believe is so very important. Torture is not just in practice in Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo Bay, but it is also used here at home. The point I really want to stress is that how can we expect the U.S. government to end the use of torture abroad when it is a practice here at home, which violates the eighth amendment to the constitution.

There will be more on torture when Steven and I give the talk we gave at the CANference on December 2. DON'T MISS IT!!!

Antiwar vets attacked by police outside debate

2008-10-17T10:35:00.002-05:00

This article describes the police brutality towards the antiwar protesters and IVAW members that attempted to ask the candidates questions at the final presidential debate.

Antiwar students discuss the struggle

2008-10-16T18:44:00.001-05:00

Here is a good summary of the CANference this past weekend. It was an awesome experience, and I really learned a lot. Also, it was very social. The workshop on torture Steven and I do went very well, and the people listening to us seemed really interested.

GO C.A.N.!!!

Protesting the recruiters at SFSU

2008-10-05T17:41:00.001-05:00

U.S. escalates attacks inside Pakistan

2008-10-05T17:40:00.001-05:00

Life Under the Occupiers

2008-10-05T17:32:00.002-05:00

If you have not yet read Dahr Jamail's book, Beyond the Green Zone: Dispatches from an Unembedded Journalist in Occupied Iraq, you'd better read it!!! Yes, I am threatening you!

Has the U.S. won in Iraq?

2008-09-28T21:53:00.000-05:00

Let's Talk Torture

2008-09-17T13:35:00.001-05:00

Let's Talk Torture

Since the September eleventh terrorist attacks on the United States, the Patriot Act was enacted in 2001 which allowed prisoners to be held in Guantanamo Bay without any due justice. With this sudden change in policy, many people of high standing, such as politicians, began to advocate the use of torture. "The treatment of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq focused worldwide media attention on the US practice of torture. Underlying such a practice was not only a self-serving debate in US political circles, academia and entertainment media on how a liberal democracy could justify such methods but also a history of counterinsurgency techniques which owed much to French warfare in Algeria," said Neil MacMaster. Since the Algerian war, featuring France, the U.S. picked up on the interrogation techniques and used them in Vietnam. Since then, the U.S. has not abandoned using torture, even with the terrible outcome of the Algerian war. The U.N. Convention Against Torture was adopted on December 10, 1984 and came into force on June 26, 1987. The Convention forbids torture and other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment committed by public officials. All states which have ratified the Convention Against Torture must make it a criminal offence to commit an act of torture. President Ronald Reagan signed the treaty, President George H.W. Bush formally sent it to the Senate for approval, and the Senate ratified it in 1994. Congress also passed legislation turning the treaty's provisions into domestic law, which President Bill Clinton signed. But after the 9/11 attacks, President Bush's legal team told him that he had the power to bypass domestic and international restrictions on the treatment of prisoners. . Democracies were the real innovators of 20th century torture. Britain, France, and the United States were perfecting methods of torture before the CIA even existed.
So, do torture methods really work? Army Col. Stuart Herrington, a military intelligence specialist who conducted interrogations in Vietnam, Panama and Iraq during Desert Storm, and who was sent by the Pentagon in 2003 to assess interrogations in Iraq, says torture is simply ‘not a good way to get information.’ In his experience, nine out of 10 people can be persuaded to talk with no "stress methods" at all, let alone cruel and unusual ones. Asked whether that would be true of religiously motivated fanatics, he says that the average might be lower: ‘perhaps six out of ten.’ And for the remaining four, ‘They'll just tell you anything to get you to stop.’" The FBI, which has been critical of such physically aggressive interrogation techniques at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib, asserted in late 2003 that these tactics had failed to produce any intelligence that has assisted in the neutralization of any threat to date, something the military disputes. As gruesomely described by Elizabeth Sepper, "Recent reports described the death of Manadel al-Jamadi, a detainee who asphyxiated during a CIA interrogation at Abu Ghraib prison, his head in a hood and his body shackled in a torture position known as a "Palestinian hanging." A CIA guard who witnessed that interrogation recounted that, after stripping Jamadi and dousing him in cold water, a CIA interrogator threatened to ‘barbecue’ him if he did not talk. Several hours later, Jamadi was dead, with six broken ribs and blood gushing from his mouth and nose."
It is no surprise that U.S. government agencies are torturing foreign civilians when our own citizens are also being tortured in U.S. state prisons. Kevin Johnson said, "And what about California’s Corcoran state prison where guards set up fights between prisoners, gambled on the outcomes and then shot the prisoners for fighting? Some 43 were shot and eight killed just between 1989 and 1994. Others were shot and killed with no justification." An even more disgusting torture use was in California, when a mentally ill prisoner, Vaughn Dortch, bit an prison guard and was smearing feces on himself and around his prison cell. The punishment for this was the guards deciding to boil Vaughn Dortch in 145 degree water. His skin peeled off, and was taken to the emergency room, as described by Holly J. Bourkhalter.
What are the implications of torture? The mental health impact of psychological torture is just as damaging as physical torture. A study on 279 torture survivors in former Yugoslavia proved this claim to be true. The ill treatment often labeled as another form of interrogation or ‘torture lite’ - including psychological manipulation, humiliation, threats of rape, isolation, sham executions, and sleep deprivation - caused just as much distress and feeling of uncontrollability as torture that inflicted physical pain. Victims who reported feeling more distressed and more helpless from either form of torture were more likely to develop post-traumatic stress disorder and depression later on. Dr. Allen Keller, associate professor of medicine at NYU School of Medicine and director of the Bellevue/NYU Program for Survivors of Torture, stated: ‘This study is a sobering reminder that torture and mistreatment - either physical or psychological - can have devastating health consequences.’"

Patricia Richardson
UIUC Campus Antiwar Network

Would Obama Bomb Pakistan?

2008-09-16T21:45:00.000-05:00

The US military presence in Afghanistan is now pushing its way through to Pakistan. President Bush has said that these raids should not be seen as an invasion but as self-defense. Is it really self-defense to invade a nation and people’s homes in the name of the “war on terror?”

What is most shocking is the fact that the Obama campaign praised these actions as “baby steps” in the right direction. How is it that a candidate who a large portion of his supporters are voting for his anti-war policies is able to say, “that the central front in the war on terror is Afghanistan and Pakistan,” and still be seen as anti-war? The antiwar movement needs to welcome Obama supporters into its ranks, but it also has to realize that this war is going to go on no matter who wins the elections in November.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=69518&sectionid=3510203

Lockdown in St. Paul

2008-09-12T11:16:00.002-05:00

This article describes the gross use of police power. It is not surprising that this is the way the U.S. military and law enforcement does things. Just look at Iraq, the military promises the people democracy, but at the barrel of a gun. That is how it is here. U.S. citizens, in a country OF democracy are not even allowed to have their constitutional rights. Apparently, the constitution should only be upheld for gun rights. If we have the right to assemble, and the journalists have freedom of the press to pressure our government to make change, why are those rights being beaten out of us? It is a shame that wanting democracy, and a better United States of America is now a terrorist act.

Campus Antiwar Network’s peaceful protest brutally attacked and maced by police

2008-09-10T00:19:00.002-05:00

From the Campus Antiwar Network's National website (written by myself and a number of other CAN members from across the country):

September 2nd 2008

On September 1st 2008, the Campus Antiwar Network (CAN) was faced with excessive police repression while staging a peaceful march in the streets of St. Paul. This was one of many demonstrations speaking out against the Republican Nation Convention, and the illegal and immoral occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Marchers were met with police brutality of varying extremes.
The force used upon us ranged from shoving and grabbing without warning to the deployment of mace. In other areas of St. Paul there was excessive use of mace, tear gas, and concussion grenades, as well as more extreme forms of violence, such as trampling protesters by horse mounted police.

One CAN member, Ian Chinich, was arrested in a moment of vulnerability after being violently struck by the St. Paul Police Department’s mountain bikes, without warning, and then severely maced. Chinich’s charges were never made explicit to him, and he was denied medical attention for his severe mace injuries. Furthermore, the Ramsey County Jail denied Chinich his cell phone upon his release at 2am, which was irresponsible and dangerous for Chinich since he didn’t have his glasses and was left to roam in the dark alone.

Maria Lewis, another CAN member, was maced at a close range, causing severe injuries. After receiving medical attention, Lewis rejoined the protest and was tear gassed and arrested. Charges are still pending. She is being held without bail until charges are officially brought against her. Updates about both cases will be forthcoming.

Other CAN members practicing their first amendment rights were knocked to the ground by bike police, using their mountain bikes as a weapons, and then maced. Another protester was rammed at a fast speed by a police motorcycle, and suffered injuries to the head.

The disproportionate use of violence was in response to a completely peaceful march. In no way did the marchers show any aggression towards the police.

CAN condemns such reckless, capricious, unnecessary, and violent acts of repression against peaceful protesters. Such actions stifle our most important rights to assembly, to freedom of speech, to freedom of press, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Look for more information concerning CAN and the RNC in upcoming posts!

Afghanistan: Mirage of the Good War

2008-08-18T12:13:00.002-05:00

Even on the left, many people consider the war in Afghanistan to be an acceptable war (espeically when compared to Iraq). Both Democrats and Republicans are talking about how the US needs to fight the "real war on terror" in Afghanistan. Why? Why must we be in Afghanistan? Because of 9/11? Because of the Taliban?

First of all, the 9/11 attackers were mostly from Saudi Arabia (a U.S. ally). The occupation of Afghanistan has killed well over the 2,746 who died in Manhattan. Also, we are not even attacking the people who were responsible for the attacks in the first place. The problem with military intervention is that the major losses are on the part of the civilians who have no economic or political influence.

While I, and most Afghans, can agree that the Taliban was harsh and oppressive, what do the Afghans think about the US occupation? Is it worse or better from their point of view? I think it's quite clear that the Afghan civilians are much worse off under US oppression than under Taliban reign, which is why many of them are turning to the Taliban for the first time. Comparatively, they are better off under a Taliban regime that has turned down it's religious requirements than they are under US occupation that kills indiscriminately.

We have to see the connections between the occupation of Afghanistan and the occupation of Iraq. The overarching goal of U.S. modern day imperialism and hegemony across the world is that connection and we need to recognize this if we are to put an end to the suffering. We have to ask ourselves if our intervention is what is best for the Afghan people, or the promotion of U.S. domination.

The solution for Afghanistan is political, not military, intervention.

http://www.newleftreview.org/?page=article&view=2713

A New Consensus on Iraq

2008-07-31T14:12:00.001-05:00

This shows that it is really time to reveal what the democrats really are: liars who wave the flag of democracy and then turn around and commit the same crimes as the Republicans do.

Iraqi PM supports Timetable for Withdrawal

2008-07-08T20:39:00.003-05:00

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has reversed his previous stance, and is now calling for a timetable for US troop withdrawal. And he's doing more than just calling for a withdrawal - Robert Dreyfuss of The Nation reports that he will likely attempt to link a timetable to the ongoing debates about the US "status of forces" agreement currently being discussed between US and Iraqi officials.

The UN mandate for the US in Iraq - what gives the US tentative legal authority to be in Iraq is set to expire in December, and US and Iraqi officials have been attempting to come to an accord that will keep US forces in Iraq after that time for a number of months now.

Initial US demands included total immunity for both US troops and private contractors, the construction of over 50 military bases (some permanent) and the ability to conduct military operations within Iraq without either informing or receiving the consent of the Iraqi government. In addition, the United States hopes to control Iraqi airspace up to 35,000 feet.

Iraqis understandably view many of these conditions as untenable, and a direct violation of their sovereignty. With only 5 months left until the end of the UN mandate, US officials are working overtime to try to maintain a lasting presence in Iraq, and craft an agreement which could conceivably limit future presidents' abilities to withdraw all troops from Iraq.

McCain Pastor: Islam Is a 'Conspiracy of Spiritual Evil'

2008-05-23T02:50:00.002-05:00

I find it interesting that all of these "Pastor Problems" are arising. However, in the case of Obama's Pastor, Jeremiah Wright, he was wRIGHT! This Prejudiced Parsley Prick (note the alliteration) really is off his rocker. I find it to be strange that Obama doesn't support what Wright is saying, even though he is right, just because Obama takes what the mainstream media is feeding him without question (maybe he should pull in to focus that if the media portrayed his wife's "anti-Americanism" wrong, then maybe, just maybe, they could've gotten Wright wrong... but I guess it has to hit closer to home to actually matter). Also, Obama rejects to agree with Wright to keep up his image with the democrats that have also gotten the incorrect mainstream version of Wright's speeches. On the other hand, McCain's Pastor is completely wrong, yet McCain has not yet rejected what Parsley has said... Interesting. Maybe McCain isn't as lovey-dovey about Islam as he claims to be.

US House blocks Iraq war money, sets pullout plan.

2008-05-16T20:13:00.001-05:00

I think this article is a good summary of how our executive branch will out-power any legislative branch power... WHICH IS WRONG! Stupid Bush.

Thoughts on Direct Action

2008-05-03T18:17:00.003-05:00

I am convinced that the antiwar movement is at a stage in which we need to start thinking about how to use direct actions in a tactical sense.

The recent quietness of UFPJ and ANSWER due to the election season has caused a resurgence in grassroots activism, especially on college campuses, against the war. This can be seen from the recent success CAN has been having with new chapters springing up and larger and dedicated member turnouts at the 4 regional conferences. Because of this, there is a melding pot of different ideas and opinions. Ideas on how to organize and what methods of direct action to implement. Before I go on, I do want to mention that even through these organizational differences, CAN has been able to maintain a more radical (and in my opinion) comprehensive stance against the war than UFPJ or ANSWER. While CAN doesn't officially denounce the occupations of Afghanistan or Palestine and the impending wars with Iran and Pakistan, most of it's membership is dedicated to anti-imperialism which is necessary to make sure that these same wars don't start after another 40 years. That is why I believe that CAN is in a position to make a bigger difference than UFPJ or ANWER. With this massive potential for a real student antiwar movement, we need to debate the decide on the best method for direct action.

There are so many different definitions for "direct action" that it is confusing when talking to someone with a different definition than your own. For simplicity sake, I like to define "direct action" into these categories:

1) Tabling on your Quad or at an event to get your organization visible to the public. Only risk is a few angry looks and heated arguments with right-wingers.

2) Peaceful protest - this could be anything from a vigil, to a march with a designated route, to a die-in that does not disrupt the everyday. Only risk is some disgruntled looks by passer-bys.

3) Civil disobedience phase 1 - this is another form of protest. It could be a march that goes outside of it's designated area (if there was one to begin with). If the crowd is big enough and on a national scale the police may be involved, and so may police violence.

4) Direct Action phase 1 - I think this would be along the lines of stopping the flow of traffic of a major highway to something such as the RNC. While you are directly engaging in action to stop the meeting of the "warhawks," you are still not doing something to physically stop the war. This is more "active" than "passive." Being arrested is a possibility along with the possibility of some minor police violence.

5) Civil disobedience phase 2 - this is another form of protest. I think of this to be like a sit-in at a senator's office. It is peaceful, but some criticize saying that you are still "asking someone to do it for you." The 1968 DNC protest would fit this category as would other civil rights actions throughout the 60's. It maintains a forceful voice while remaining non-violent. This remains more "passive" than "active" as opposed to Direct Action phase 1. Being arrested is a plausibility along with police violence and brutality.

6) Direct Action phase 2 - This is physically stopping the war machine from working by individual or mass effort. Stopping the transportation of war materials to port to be shipped to war would be a perfect example of this. There is a possibility of being arrested along with police violence and brutality as well as possible riots.

I am not claiming this to be a complete list, or even an accurate one. This is just how I perceive the different kinds of "direct actions" to break down into. Some people consider all of these actions to be "direct actions." I'm not here to debate that, because that is a pointless discussion. However, we, as movement organizers and activists, need to figure out how best to relate to these actions and when and how to implement them. I think that all of these actions are necessary and have a time and place. The problem is to find out which is the correct choice at any given time. This is usually difficult because we are so ingrained in our movement work, that it is hard for us to put ourselves in the potential antiwar activists' shoes.

The biggest question is how should CAN relate to the RNC Protest in St. Paul in September. Because there is such a large number of people congregating all for one protest, and possibly one of the largest grassroots organized protests of the year, there is huge potential that hasn't been seen in this country for about 30-40 years.

Direct action does need a tactic. You have to consider the political environment, what are you able to accomplish with however many people show up, what you want to achieve from the action, and how your direct action will play off to others who you want to join your movement. Although, this may change due to the environment or spontaneity of the protest or political climate. The trick is to be able to recognize this when it occurs.

There is an idea that CAN should engage in Direct Action phase 1 actions to shut down streets with the intention to shut down the RNC or shut down St Paul itself. My criticism of this is that this is a big overestimation of what is physically possible for the protesters to accomplish. Even beyond that, I do not think it is politically savvy for us to engage in that kind of action right now. Most people who will read about this will be upset if the protesters took this tactic. It will give more ammunition for the right-wing, moderate, and even some liberals to think that antiwar protesters are against "freedom of speech." They will reason that even if we disagree with the Republicans, that no matter how horrible and deadly their politics, that we should allow them to convene because they have the freedom of speech. Whereas the protesters know the Republicans have the right to convene, but are making a point and are protesting the ideas behind the Republican pro-war, anti-immigration, anti-gay policies. However, this message will get completely lost to anyone who does not attend.

It is on that basis that I think we need to engage in either Civil Disobedience phase 1 and if all is going great and we have the mass support, possibly even Civil Disobedience phase 2. Civil Disobedience phase 1 would be something like having protests that go outside the designated protest "free speech zones." Civil Disobedience phase 2 would be something along the lines of having a sit-in or die-in around the entrance of the center the convention will take place in, but not physically stopping them from speaking. Imagine the message it will send if people see politicians stepping over dead bodies to get to their convention! I think this would play out much more favorably for our movement because then we will be able to be seen as the victims of police brutality (if there is any). If there is no police brutality, then we will still be able to get our message across through peaceful means.

I have no disillusion that we will be able to stop the RNC from convening or be able to stop the war from this one action. Which is why I favor taking the route which will get us the best media attention that will be more inviting for the young liberals and radicals to join. We need to build the widest movement possible while not losing our clarity on opposing the war in Iraq on a moral basis, not as a tactical failure. I do not think that direct actions that have the intention of trying to "fuck shit up" or shut down the RNC or shut down St. Paul will be productive to building this kind of antiwar movement.

peace
Steven Wyatt

CAN Midwest Conference a resounding success.

2008-04-27T12:33:00.005-05:00

On April 18th-20th, over 150 antiwar activists from across the Midwest traveled to Iowa City, Iowa to join the Campus Antiwar Network for a Midwest Antiwar Conference. One of several regional antiwar conferences hosted by the Campus Antiwar Network this spring across the nation, the Midwest Conference helped show that the Midwest is the breadbasket for antiwar activism!

The weekend featured numerous workshops and speakers. On the morning of Saturday, April 19th, two Campus Antiwar Network members and one Iraq Veteran Against the War member spoke about the need for immediate withdrawal, one of the main demands of the Campus Antiwar Network. The rest of the day was full of workshops, ranging from activist art (“Artivism”) to the issue of Palestine.

One of the most pressing questions on the minds of Midwest activists, and antiwar activists across the nation, is the issue of direct action. With the Republican National Convention coming to Minneapolis/St-Paul in September, and the work that groups like RNC Welcoming Committee are putting into protesting the event, many antiwar activists are questioning the best tactics to use to effectively protest. This debate was manifest at the Midwest Conference, where three workshops were dedicated to talking about Direct Action and the RNC Protests. The workshops were marked by excellent, engaging debates about the definition of Direct Action and its place in the antiwar movement as a whole, as well as the tactics that the RNC Welcoming Committee and other organizations plan to use to “Crash the Convention.” Many in CAN, and unaffiliated activists, came away from the weekend with a better idea about when and where to use Direct Action, and discussion has already begun regarding CAN’s plans at the RNC protest, and to a lesser extant at the Democratic National Convention in Denver.

Sunday April 20th was a powerful day. 13 Midwest members of Iraq Veterans Against the War held a mini-Winter Soldier hearing during the morning. Their testimony was incredibly powerful and engaging, and was covered by numerous local and state news papers. That afternoon, the was an antiwar rally and march through Iowa City with the more than 150 antiwar activists chanting slogans such as “Whose Streets? Our Street! Whose War? Their War!” and “No Justice, No Peace! US out of the Middle East!” The march culminated in a die-in in Iowa City’s pedestrian mall, and an energetic rally.

In all, the conference was a huge success. A number of new CAN chapters are expected to form out of the event, and Midwest CAN chapters were able to form strong bonds with other antiwar organizations, such as Students for the Democratic Society.

In the past year, we have seen a huge resurgence of the Campus Antiwar Network across the nation. This conference has shown that in the Midwest, the antiwar movement is growing by the day, and shows no sign of stopping!

To close, UIUC CAN proudly presents a new CAN-specific chant, developed by Tim Kooy of Cincinnati:

"Bombs, Sanctions, Bullets they all hurt.
Rectify, we try we try -
CAMPUS ANTIWAR NETWORK!"

Torture, Revisted.

2008-04-14T14:59:00.001-05:00

I have written about torture before, and (surprise!) my position has not changed. Torture is never defensible. The “ticking bomb” scenario is fallacious scare-mongering, and the act itself is not only morally and ethically indefensible, but both nationally and internationally illegal. Tyrants are prosecuted at The Hague for torture.

Which puts into perspective President Bush’s recent disclosure that he approved of his national security team meeting, discussing, and formulating what can only be described as a torture policy – what kinds, how many times, and how often torture was acceptable. Present at these meetings were Vice President Dick Cheney, former National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and former Secretary of State Colin Powell, as well as CIA Director George Tenet and Attorney General John Ashcroft. Conspicuously absent: President Bush himself. His team did a good job of keeping him isolated, so that if asked under oath (not that the president would ever lower himself to be put under oath!) he could deny that he was at the meetings.

The fact that this story has not received a great deal of media play – Obama’s “elitist rhetoric” has been the major news story – stems from two causes.

The first is that the Bush media team did a good job. They released the information on a Friday afternoon – the perfect time to allow White House press releases to slip under the radar. Instant damage control, and every administration does it.

The second reason is far more insidious. The Bush Administration, in its effort to push their agenda of the Imperial (or dictatorial) Presidency – the Strong Unitary Executive, as they call it – has stated repeatedly that it should not be confined by international law, nor national law, nor checks and balances. Not in so many words of course, but by refusing to allow senior staff to testify before Congress, by using signing statements to completely undermine bills that the President signs, and by showing what can only be described of as contempt to the Congress and the American People, the Bush Administration has never stepped down.

They do the same with torture. They do not quibble whether torture is legal or not – they discuss the minutia of “Which torture IS legal? What counts as torture?” Unfortunately, the media and Congress have accepted Bush’s position that some torture is legal by engaging in the debates as he shapes them. By shaping the discourse from the outset, the Bush Administration is able to slowly turn the conversation away from the illegal nature of torture –all torture – to a legal semantics debate about what is torture, how often it can be done, and to whom.

I am reminded of a famous quote by the master of propaganda, Joseph Goebbels:

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie."

The Bush Administration had told the big lie, and they told that lie at the outset. There was furor over it, but that died down soon enough as the next Bush lie was told, smaller this time. As more lies were told, people became more bogged down in the mass of small lies, tacitly accepting the Big Lie that underlies the entire conversation. Instead of discussing if Water Boarding is legal, we should be discussing how long Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, and the others will be spending in The Hague.

Which, of course, will be no time at all. America does not acknowledge the International Criminal Court for just this reason. It would prevent our officials, elected or appointed, from committing torture or genocide, or continuing an illegal occupation. And America can’t have that. It would be… Un-American.

Or so another Big Lie goes.

“Impeach the Bastards!”

Teens Protest Against Iraq War

2008-04-14T14:37:00.001-05:00

I want to commend those of us who were out there, lying on the gross, wet, cold, and cigarette-littered street. Great job helping out the high school movement!!!

The Religious Left

2008-04-13T23:28:00.004-05:00

There are many problems with many Republicans and conservatives in power – their lying, blatant flaunting of laws and the Constitution, the illegal invasion and occupation in Iraq… the list goes on. But one of the most egregious problems with the Right is their stranglehold on Religion.

Many on the left are agnostics, atheists, religiously apathetic, or downright hostile towards religion. In the interest of full disclosure let me state that I myself am an ex-Catholic atheists, but not hostile towards religion (except when people bastardize religion for their own purposes). Between the cold reception that many religious people receive from the Left and the lies crimes being committed by the Right, many progressive or even independent religious or spiritual people are stuck with what seems like no choice.

In the antiwar movement at UIUC, we make a real attempt to bring in Muslim students and to work closely with Muslim student associations – ASA, MSA, CAIR, and SJP. This is for quite understandable reasons: the current US hegemonic interests lie in the middle east, and the War on Terror has also led to the creation and dissemination of the inherently fallacious idea of “Islamofascism.” Arabs and Muslims in general are targeted by racial profiling at airport and border checkpoints, and attacks on Muslims continues. The hajib is routinely criticized, the Qur’an and misquoted or quoted out of context, and the religion itself has been called a religion of hate. Muslims are routinely the bad guys in TV, movies, and video games, and the mainstream media coverage helps foster negative ideas about Muslims.

For these reasons and more, we actively seek out our Arab and Muslim brothers and sisters and invite them to join us in our cause. Yet at the same time we ignore our Christian and Jewish comrades. While we send representatives to the Atheists, Agnostics, and Free Thinkers organization on campus, we don’t even look to see if there are any Christian groups on campus that might be favorable to our cause.

Let us not forget that the Christian Extremists are also reviled in the mainstream media, and rightly so. Groups like the Westboro Baptist Church (whose homepage I will not link to) and documentaries like Jesus Camp show that there are many deranged individuals out there, following a belief that is as alien to the tenants of Christianity as the views of most Islamic extremists are alien to the very nature of Islam.

This is not supposed to give support to those Evangelical Christians who believe that the Earth was created in 6 days and is only 40,000 years old, or who seriously believe that Intelligent Design should be taught alongside Evolution in public schools. Nor am I giving any ground to people who claim that Hurricane Katrina was God’s wrath at New Orleans for the debauchery that goes on there. These Christian Extremists preach a rhetoric often just as bad as that preached by the Islamic Extremists, and often quite in line with them. These, and people less extreme, make up the Religious Right, who the Republicans have both maintained a hold on and in turn have themselves been molded by. And I say, let the Republicans have them.

However, focusing solely on the Religious Right is the narrow view of Christianity. There are many, many Progressive Christians who likely feel alienated by the Left. The fact that we do not reach out to them likely does not help at all. We in the antiwar movement must begin to make a real effort to reach out to Progressive and Leftist Christians, to make for them a safe and welcoming environment to protest the war. We may not see eye-to-eye when it comes to religion, but I think we can put that aside and focus on the more immediate problems facing us.

There is tricky situation when it comes to some Jewish people. Many in the Antiwar movement see clear parallels between the occupation of Iraq and the events occurring in Palestine. Some support the second Intifada, and call for a single state. Others call for a two state solution, but might show solidarity with Palestine. Many Jews have very strong opinions about the Israel-Palestine problem, with many supporting Israel. The problem of Palestine is not an easy one to confront, let alone solve. I take comfort in the fact that there are a growing number of Jews who support Palestine, either in a one state or two state solution, or at the very least think that Israel is approaching the problem the wrong way. But the issue of Palestine should not prevent the antiwar movement from reaching across the aisle and trying to embrace antiwar Jews as important members of the antiwar movement. It might mean toning down the pro-Palestine rhetoric during demonstrations put on with the support of Jewish organizations, which is obviously a contentious issue for some people.

There are many things the Right has claimed a monopoly on – Patriotism, the Flag, the Troops, and, yes, Religion. It is the job of the Left, especially the Antiwar Left, to reclaim these symbols, ideas, and people. Let it be OK to fly a flag at a protest, be it Iraqi, American, or upside down. Let it be OK to say, “Support the Troops: Bring them Home” as we so often do. IVAW has gone a long way towards showing people that the soldiers and vets are not the pawns of the Right, nor their property. They belong to themselves only, and can decide whom to support. Let it be OK to use the trite expression “Dissent is Patriotic” and mean both parts of the phrase, to reject the rhetoric that Patriotism is blind faith and support of the President and simply, mindless Jingoism. And let it be OK for religious people of all faiths to join the antiwar movement and find a welcoming, inviting environ in which to grow as activists. To quote two bumpersticker slogans, “Jesus wouldn’t own a gun and vote Republican” and “Who Would Jesus Torture?”

Iraq For Iraqis! Troops Out Now!

Candlelight Vigil Speech

2008-04-12T21:37:00.003-05:00

The following is from the speech I gave at the Candlelight Vigil UIUC CAN held on Friday, April 4th, to commemorate the Americans and Iraqis killed in Iraq. It was also the 40th anniversary of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

We are here to commemorate those who have lost their lives in the Iraq Occupation, both US and Iraqi. However, I think it would be a gross oversight on our part if we did not also mourn the loss of another antiwar activist 40 years ago today.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated 40 years ago today in Memphis, Tennessee while he was working to help the city’s sanitation workers, both black and white, obtain fair living wages. Dr. King is best known as a leader of the civil rights movement, as well he should be. A magnificent orator, Dr. King was one of the most pivotal people in the struggle for civil rights, and arguable one of the most important people in American history. However, it is important to remember that Dr. King did not devote himself solely to the struggle for racial equality.

It is a strange coincidence of fate that today also marks the 41st Anniversary of Dr. King’s first public statement opposing the Vietnam War, in his famous “Beyond Vietnam” Speech. It is important to remember that in the last years of his life, Dr. King struggled not only for racial equality, but for social and economic equality, and was an ardent opponent of the war, although many of his former allies in the Civil Rights movement vocally criticized Dr. King for becoming involved. The fact that he stood firm in face of this criticism is one more reason he is rightly venerated, and his untimely death mourned.

But the primary reason we are here is to remember those who have been killed in the illegal occupation of Iraq, both American soldiers and Iraqis. As of Tuesday, the Defense Department has listed the total number of Americans killed in Iraq as 4,012 with another 29,628 wounded. Estimates on the Iraqi death toll range from 650,000 to over 1,000,000, with another 2 million displaced internally and a further 2 million displaced internationally. Thus, if we take the estimate that 1,000,000 Iraqis have been killed, approximately 1/5 of Iraq’s pre-war population has been either killed or displaced by the invasion and illegal occupation.

And the occupation is illegal. The United States has failed to uphold the duties of an occupying force. Its continuing presence is creating more chaos and destruction, and also an environment ripe for exploitation by the likes of corporations such as Halliburton, KBR, Bechtel and mercenary groups accountable to no one, such as Blackwater USA. These corporations receive enormous contracts from the United States government and then fail to fulfill those contracts, pocketing American taxpayers money to further their own corporate profits, to the detriment of both Iraqis and Americans. They also commit gross crimes – KBR, a former Halliburton subsidy, has been accused of using slave labor abducted from India, and there are currently two suites being brought against the company, alleging that they have covered up cases of rape of American citizens. Bechtel has failed to provide clean water or electricity for Iraqis, creating widespread and deadly outbreaks of dysentery. Blackwater USA is still being investigated for causing unwarranted carnage in Iraq.

There are currently as many foreign contractors in Iraq as there are American troops, yet we do not know how many of these contractors have been killed. Nor can we know precisely how many Iraqis have been killed, either directly by Occupation forces or by the toll that 5 years of occupation take on a country. We can, however, commemorate their deaths, and work to enact positive change by bringing our troops and contractors home now.

While we may not know the names or numbers of the slain Iraqis or contractors, we do know these things about our troops. We will now read the names and hometowns of the 143 Illinois soldiers who have been killed so far.

Is al-Maliki on Crack?

2008-04-09T02:11:00.005-05:00

The Real News Network is totally kick ass and this story gives awesome insight into the violence still occuring in Baghdad even after a al-Sadar has called a cease fire. There is a question to who is actually attacking the Green Zone; whether it be members of the Mehdi Army or another group piggybacking on their success. The clip goes on to show part of al-Maliki's speech demanding the Mehdi Army disband in order for al-Sadar to participate in the October elections. Don't you have to win a battle before making demands? But even if he does decide to dispand the milita, it will be in response, according to Reuters, to the advice from Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani.

Resistance to Civil Government

2008-04-09T01:45:00.003-05:00

I have to read Resistance to Civil Government (commonly known as Civil Disobedience) by Henry David Thoreau for one of my classes and I never realized how kick ass he was until now. I highly suggest checking out even though it is sort of long.

"[When] a whole country is unjustly overrun and conquered by a foreign army, and subjugated to military law, I think that it is not too soon for honest men to rebel and revolutionize. What makes this duty the more urgent is the fact, that the country so overrun is not our own, but ours is the invading army."

As I read this quote, it came to mind that Thoreau is high credited in American public consciousness and he legitimizes the case for Iraqi resistance. It's a total up yours to any right winger who has a problem with the Iraqi people defending their civil rights. Man it sucks how we cannot learn from our historical mistakes of the past.

Group holds vigil for soldiers, civilians killed

2008-04-07T18:05:00.001-05:00

Getting the publicity we deserve!!! Plus, having a little amount of people for something like this is actually a good thing because it makes it more personal, and more respectful.

The Importance of Being A Protester

2008-03-30T20:05:00.009-05:00

Whenever activists protest, the debate is invariably sparked about the effectiveness of protests or direct actions. Some think that protests serve little purpose, and others argue that protests, and especially direct actions, do more harm than good.

The latter argument is quite problematic. The argument is that by disrupting people's lives, protesters or those partaking in a direct action alienate people who may be sympathetic to their goals or message. However, it is equally likely that people who would not have otherwise known about the protest, or might not have normally joined, might join in the protest. Speaking empirically, at the Chicago march on Wednesday, March 19, I was personally able to bring three or four people into the march from the sidelines. When I asked a pair of girls to join, they seemed surprised. "Oh, can we?" they asked, and when I told them that they could (and should), they willingly joined the group. If this were repeated down Michigan Avenue, as I have no doubt that it was, the march would have swelled from the just the people at at Federal Plaza to an even larger size as people from the sidelines joined in. Thus, the cost of alienating some people must be weighed against the benefit of having new people join the movement.

Additionally, protests and direct actions garner press attention. With the current state of the media, the antiwar movement needs all the media attention it can get. Before the 4,000 deaths and upsurge in violence in Iraq, the occupation had declined in both public opinion and media coverage. Thus, especially in times when the media is scarcely covering the war, protests serve an important role is brining it back to the forefront of the wider public's attention.

Along those lines, protests and direct actions serve as important symbolic ways to bring the war home. By interrupting the flow of normal life, protesters force people to confront the issue, something that rarely happens. This can prove effective, although one must be careful not to go overboard - the case of the "Holy Name 6" event which happened on Easter in Chicago. While I personally support these protesters, I feel that their actions might have caused more harm than good - although it certainly created great media attention and got people talking!

In answering common arguments against protesting, I have already begun stating benefits to protesting. It creates media attention, it creates discourse about the issues, and it forces people to confront the issue in a way that they normally are not forced to. Protesting does much more than just this, however.

Protesting can create tangible change. Public approval is critical for politicians, so they do pay attention when the people take to the streets. While national protests are the biggest, they also need to be, as they are, frankly, the least likely to actually create change. Local protests can easily create local change, and from these grassroots larger change can spread. This is not an argument against large national protests, however. National protests create national media attention, and can create large scale change. The important thing is to not be discouraged if a protest does not cause immediate change. We cannot think of the antiwar movement - or any movement of such a scale - in the short term. This is a long term struggle, and in it every protest is an important tool to the movement.

Finally, protests can help curb the omnipresent problem of Burnout. In my experience, protests are some of the most invigorating thing that one can do. As long as one understand that protests are the means to a long term end, and not an end to themselves - and, importantly, as long as one understands that protests are unlikely to bring about immediate change - protests can be incredibly fun and extremely energizing. They give you a sense of your own power, both as an individual and as a group, and it allows people to see the size of the group. Often, activists are unable to see the "big picture" because of either geography or the nature of people - many are willing to take to the streets to protest, but not to the planning room to figure out the logistics. By immersing oneself in large groups, one can truly gain a sense of how powerful The People are.

So, take to the streets. Be it a protest of 5, 50, 500, 5,000, or 500,000 - and I have been to a range similar to that - get out and take to the streets. Show them what Democracy looks like and show that what Democracy sounds like.

Whose Streets? Our Street. Whose War? Their War.

April showers...

2008-03-30T19:09:00.003-05:00

Well, spring break is over and April is gearing up to begin. A number of old adages spring to mind: the fact that March is in like a lion, and out like a lamb seems to be holding true this year, so we shall only see if April's showers do indeed bring May flowers (which, in turn, are set to bring pilgrims).

Aside from showers, however, April is shaping up to be UIUC CAN's busiest month ever! We have protests, rallies, conferences, and vigil all in the works! It's amazing to think that in one short year CAN could have grown so fast, but that seems to be exactly what has happened, and our current membership is amazingly devoted!

So, without further self-congratulations, I present to you UIUC CAN's April Schedule!

On Friday April 4th, we will be hosting a a candlelight vigil to mourn and commemorate the American and Iraqi deaths thus far. Join us at 8:00pm at the Alma Mater (intersection of Wright and Green) for this remembrance. We will have candles, but if you wish to bring your own, that would be groovy.

On Saturday, April 12th at 2:00 local High School will be staging a Die-In at the corner of Wright and Green. Come out and support these young activists, especially if the weather is nice.

Friday April 18- Sunday April 20 is our much-hyped CAN Midwest Conference! We would love for you to join us as we trek out to the University of Iowa at Iowa City for a weekend of workshops, activism, parties, famous speakers, culminating in a massive protest through Iowa City! For more information, contact Pete Rhomberg at prhombe2@uiuc.edu or call him at (708) 828-9926. And remember: other RSOs are more than invited! We want this conference to be for anyone who's opposed to this occupation!

Finally, CAN is planning some sort of demonstration on May 1st, the 5th anniversary of President Bush's now infamous "Mission Accomplished" speech. Detail will be forthcoming as we figure them out, but mark your calanders!

College Not Combat - Troops Out NOW!

How many more?

2008-03-24T22:02:00.002-05:00

They've finally hit 4,000 US troops killed in Iraq. This is on top of the over 1 million dead Iraqis, millions of displaced Iraqis, and literally uncounted killed private military contractors.

Now, maybe more than a quarter of Americans will be able to correctly identify the number of Americans troops killed.

And then we have Bush saying that these deaths will not have been in vain (so we must stay in indefinitely), and Cheney "supporting" the troops by explaining that they volunteered, so it's OK that they died.

yes we CAN!

2008-03-21T21:07:00.005-05:00

We needn't kid ourselves: Barack Obama is the more likely Democratic candidate to win the nomination, and when he does so he is rather likely to win the general election as well, if only because there is such a strong backlash against Republicans. Now, CAN doesn't endorse any politician as a matter of policy, but in an election year it is impossible to be an activist and at the same time ignore the ramification of candidates - especially if one is an antiwar activist.

I wasn't deep in the antiwar scene in 2004, when Kerry was running. I was opposed to the war, of course - I had been from the get-go - but as a Junior in High School, I was simply an individual opposed to the war, not connected with any group. I supported Kerry for the same reason many did - because he wasn't George W. Bush, and because ANYONE was better than Bush.

Unfortunately, this trend was mirrored in the antiwar community. The movement died down to a simmer as the efforts of the politically minded were directed to expelling Bush & co. from office. The student antiwar movement also fell into a lull, proving quite disheartening to many members.

For the antiwar movement on the whole, this is becoming the case once again. MoveOn.org has endorsed Obama for the presidency, and has devoted its efforts to electing him, away from the antiwar movement. Many people, either believing the myth that the "surge" is working or simply trusting the Democrats to get us out of Iraq in 2009, have also dropped out of the antiwar movement. Protests this year - the 5th anniversary of the war - were markedly smaller than they were last year.

However, all this is counter intuitive. If we have learned anything from the 110th Congress, it's that the Democrats - brought into power by a strongly antiwar electorate - has refused to take the steps necessary to bring an end to the war. The Democrats do not, of course, bear sole responsibility for this failure of leadership - the Republicans and the Administration have stonewalled and vetoed every measure to bring the troops home - but the Democrats have also not used their considerable political capital or clout to stand up to the Administration (excluding the current admirable fight they are putting up over the FISA fight), not has the Democrat-controlled 110th Congress used it's power of the purse to cut funding for the war, forcing the President to withdraw troops.

However, 2008 is shaping up to be a different year than 2004. As I've already mentioned, the antiwar movement is definitely taking what seems to be a hiatus - going into it's election year lull. However, on the student front, the antiwar movement is really heating up. CAN is growing at an ever increasing rate, and after during incredibly successful (and incredibly powerful) Winter Soldier testimonies, Iraq Veterans Against the War had so many requests to join that their server couldn't handle the load. Additionally, groups like the RNC Welcoming Committee are gearing up to make sure the war remains in the public eye - and is brought home to average Americans - when the media descends on Minneapolis/St. Paul for the Republican National Convention. While the antiwar movement as a whole might be waning, the student and veteran resistance is on the rise, with little sign of abating.

Thus, the obvious question needs be asked: Why? In a year when the population as a whole cares less about the war than ever before, why is the youth movement picking up steam?

I attribute it to a number of different causes. First, we have had the past three years (since the last presidential election cycle) to build a solid movement. For many in CAN, myself included, the antiwar movement is our first experience with taking part in a movement, much less building one. Here in UIUC, we have already experienced the pitfalls and joys of building a chapter from scratch, and learning as we go. The process creates a very organic and, I hope, democratic structure, but it also takes a lot of work and time before it can get off the ground. In 2004, CAN was much younger than it is now, with much less experience. The antiwar movement in the 1960s was able to draw on the success of the Civil Rights struggle - the modern student antiwar movement has no such recently history from which to build from, and thus we must rely on our own initiative and ideas.

However, this is also a blessing in disguise. It is my firm belief that in a few short years, a number of critical crises will afflict this country, from the environment to renewable energy, from healthcare to education to social security. Each of these will require capable activists to organize the movements around them, and the important building that we do now in the antiwar movement can hopefully prove a useful framework for future student activists. This is the benefit, and the burden which we willingly shoulder, of being on the vanguard of a new generation of activists.

Which brings me to my second point. Why was there no prior movement from which the modern student antiwar movement could draw on? For this, I blame "Generation X", the generation that grew up in the 1980s. They rejected the protests of the previous generation, and are stereotypically thought of as the "Me" generation - more concerned with their own well being than with larger social issues.

This new generation, however, is slowly coming back around to the idea that students and citizens in general can change the world for the better, and that direct actions and protests are an effective way to bring about change. The cause of this change? Frankly, in recent years I think much credit goes to Barack Obama.

Many in the antiwar movement - myself included - disagree with Obama. While he may now claim that he will withdraw troops within 6 months, many people feel that this is simply a ploy to win over primary voters, who typically are thought 0f as firther left than the general populace. Many still in the antiwar movement expect him to change his tune if and when he becomes the nominee for the Democratic Party.

However, Obama does have a very powerful message. His speeches and message of hope resonate with the younger set, and his chant of "Yes, we can" has caught on and resonates across the country and through the packed venues where he delivers his speeches. This message - and his incredibly Kennedyesque charisma - has not only energized students and youth, but has also (possibly subconsciously) put the idea that students can change the world into the minds of the youth. This makes Obama supporters - many of them college students - prime candidates to take the next step and become activists. It is much easier to convince someone to join a movement if they are already coming from a framework that affirms their ability change the world.

As more students flock to Obama's camp, it should be the job of the student antiwar movement to actively court these individuals. As mentioned earlier, CAN supports no candidate, because we believe that anyone opposed to the war - be they far right isolationists or far left pacifists, religious fundamentalists or fervent atheists - is and should be welcome within CAN. Thus, while many of us may reject the cult of Obama as nothing more than a charismatic veneer over what will be effectively "business as usual", we must recognize the incredible opportunity before us, and put our politics aside to work to build the strongest antiwar movement this country has seen since Vietnam.

And although it may not seem like it, we are well on our way there. In 1971, Vietnam Veterans Against the War presented the original Winter Soldier, featuring 100 former soldiers testifying about what they saw and did in Vietnam. By then, America had been fighting fiercely for 7 years (if we use the Gulf of Tonkin incident as a starting point - it should be noted that America had been involved for 4 years prior to that). In 2008, 5 years into the illegal occupation of Iraq, IVAW was able to present the testimony of over 200 soldiers, as well as the testimonies of Iraqi civilians and international journalists.

So take the spirit of Obama's message to heart - not as an ambiguous "Yes we can!" but as a strong and firm "Yes we CAN!"

College Not Combat - Troops Out Now!

Peaceful march for Tibet in Chicago ends with broken window at consulate

2008-03-18T16:36:00.002-05:00

I love watching the news now that I have time. And even though the U.S. news is not that good, they sometimes report important things. Though this isn't about Iraq, it is important and relevant to the protests we have done and will continue to do in the future, because we can learn from this as to what is eye catching. Also, this issue has to do with human rights, which is always important, but relates to what the U.S. is doing to the Iraqi people and what our government is doing to our own people as well. The issue also has to do with allowing outsider media sources into Tibet to report what is actually happening there, a problem that we have in the U.S. as well (as it relates to Iraq, Darfur, etc.). Also, just to make me happy, the protesters wish to strip China of the 2008 Olympics, something that will make it apparent that the world will not support the genocide in Tibet or Darfur, both of which China is supporting. We must learn from these issues and realize that C.A.N. goes beyond Iraq, and into more human rights issues.

McCain Visits Iraq to Meet With Officials

2008-03-17T12:34:00.002-05:00

I find this interesting that two Iraqis are interviewed and one thinks that McCain is great to keep promises to the Iraqi people, and another reports about the abhorrent conditions Iraqis have to deal with. I guess it has to do with which group is on the U.S.'s side that day... This is important because it shows McCain's evil policy to keep this war going, and most likely extend it throughout the middle east.

Clinton Attacks Obama, McCain on Iraq

2008-03-17T12:22:00.002-05:00

I was watching the wonderful "news" at home today, and saw this wonderful statement that Clinton was making about Iraq and how she is the best candidate for the issue. Though her statements are noble, and certainly correct about McCain and Obama, according to ontheissues.org, she hasn't really had a concise decision on what to do in Iraq:

Withdraw all combat troops: one or two brigades a month. (Feb 2008)
Calling for troop withdrawal pressures Iraqi government. (Feb 2008)
Some tactical success in Iraq, but no strategic success yet. (Feb 2008)
Would have never diverted attention from Afghanistan. (Jan 2008)
Bush must ask Congress to approve agreements with Iraq. (Jan 2008)
GovWatch: Withdrawal in 60 days has no timetable to finish. (Jan 2008)
After 9/11:Those helping terrorists would feel "wrath" of US. (Jun 2007)

Americans. Don't. Torture.

2008-03-08T10:30:00.003-06:00

One of the most irritating aspects of the Mr. Bush's administration (aside from all the other irritating aspects) is the insistence that the interrogation technique that America condemned when it was used by the Khmer Rouge - namely, water boarding - is now not only legal, but absolutely necessary to conduct the "War on Terror" ("War of Terror" might be more apt). With the wingnuts and Administration officials screeching about the "Ticking Bomb" scenario, many people also buy into the idea.

The are a number of problems with Mr. Bush's recent veto of a bill that would prevent the CIA and other groups from using water-boarding and other torture techniques.

First and foremost, waterboarding IS torture. The Japanese and Gestapo used the technique in World War II. And early form of it was used during the Spanish Inquisition. Most famously, it was used by Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge. US troops used it in Vietnam, but they did so illegally - during that other failed act of aggression 40 years ago, the generals designated the technique illegal.

Which brings me to the next point. Not only is waterboarding torture - and thus illegal under the Geneva Convention - but it is also illegal under US law. The fact that Mr. Bush has made it
legal by fiat - presidential signing statements and executive orders - shows how little respect he has for the Constitution and seperation of powers. Perhaps he never saw School House Roch as a child, but only Congress can make the laws, and the President cannot enact a line-item veto, which is effectively what his use of Presidential Signing Statements amount to. The truly egregious part is that he has not been hauled before Congress to at the least testify. We as a country have slowly moved from outrage over the actions of this Administration to apathy, as it becomes expected that the Executive can do whatever he or she pleases.

Thirdly, waterboarding and torture do not work. Let me repeat: waterboarding the torture do. not. work. People subjected to torture will say anything to have the torture stop, whether they know anything or now. Additionally, the "ticking bomb" scenario - the idea that we need to be able to torture, in case there is a bomb in a major city somewhere and the only choice is torture or destruction - is pure Hollywood fantasy. Such events might happen in 24, but in the real world they are not only unlikely - according to experts, "Ticking Bomb" scenarios are impossible.

Even if such a scenario were to occur, torture would not help. In order to obtain useful information from suspects, an interrogator needs to build a relationship with the suspect, which takes weeks. Psychological attacks work much more effectively than physical abuse.

The list could go on. The fact remains that Mr. Bush cannot veto a bill banning waterboarding because waterboarding is already illegal and immoral. The bill should never have gone through Congress in the first place: they had already passed an anti-torture bill a few years ago. What Congress should have done was object to Mr. Bush's signing statement on that bill - which effectively turned a bill designed to close loopholes into a massive loophole on the question of torture.

However, the political ramifications of this act - if it is properly publicized - could be enormous. While the Republicans will couch the veto in the language of National Security, the Democrats - if they are clever - will beat the Republicans over the head with this veto. I am no fan of the Democrats, mind you. I just desire some remuneration for what will be 8 long years of law breaking, illegal war, and the erosion of the economy. I say, send the war criminals off to the Hauge and let them answer for their crimes before the international community.

So it begins again

2008-03-07T10:15:00.005-06:00

The BBC has reported today that a station commander in Britain suggested that members of the RAF not wear their uniforms in public because of verbal abuse from people opposed to the Britain's involvement in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Slowly, then we can see the resurgence of the Vietnam myth: that antiwar activists hate the troops, that we spit on them or deride them, or verbally abuse them. Antiwar individuals run the gamut in their opinion about the troops, or the army, but on the whole the antiwar movement is, and has been, incredibly supportive of individual soldiers (especially veterans) while at the same time being incredibly critical of the system that creates soldiers - a position that is in no way contradictory.

We stage counter-recruitment events not out of a hatred of the troops, but out of a hatred of the war and the current Army, and out of a desire to keep more young men and women from the trials and tribulations of armed service.
This particular incident strikes a chord with me, based on an event that happened just yesterday while on the Quad, tabling for our Week of Action. An individual began a heated debate with us about how he had family over in Iraq, and how what we were doing was disgraceful. In his mind, antiwar activists since Vietnam have opposed the troops, and the troops have in turn opposed the antiwar community. While debating individuals can be cathartic and fun, it also does tend to reflect poorly on us when we are tabling. Shouting at people on the Quad makes us seem quite hostile, more radical than we are, and frankly, unapproachable and unfriendly. People like that will not be swayed in the two minutes we spend yelling at them, and in that time we may very well loose others who might have come out. I am not, of course, saying that we should not have civil discussions with people with whom we disagree, and I fully expect shouting to be a part of that. But when we table, I feel that discussions should try to be as civil as possible.

The idea that the antiwar community and the community of active and veteran soldiers are set at odds is, of course, a falacy, but one which unfortunately continues to exist. Education is the best way to combat this issue. By working closely with IVAW, we are able to show people that the antiwar community respects the veterans. By counter-recruiting, the antiwar community shows that it respects and values lives more than the Army does. By showing educational films - such as Sir! No Sir! and The Ground Truth - the antiwar community is able to show that we have a history of supporting the veterans and the troops, and that the myth of spitting on vets is just that - a myth.

A number of weeks ago, a fellow student told me that he really supported a sign that I had in my window for some time: "Support the Troops, Bring Them Home." He, like many others, has been taught only the myths of the antiwar movement, and he told me that the sign showed him that on the whole the antiwar movement is made up of normal people, and not fringe radicals.

Now, I won't say that such "verbal abuse" never happens, nor will I say that it never will happen. However, happily Brown's government has come out decrying this claim as rediculous, and the report mentions that no reports of such actions have been filed.

We must all be active in our rejection of the myth of the antiwar movement as a movement that is also opposed to the veterans, both in our words and in our actions.

Week of Action and Vets

2008-03-06T03:58:00.006-06:00

So our chapter is going to have a busy week next week. For the 5th anniversary of the war in Iraq (over a decade longer if you include sanctions and air strikes throughout the 90's) UIUC is on Spring Break. Therefore we decided to move our Week of Action forward a week. We have so many great events going on and so many dedicated members to help with it; our CAN chapter has come a long way from only a year ago.

Monday:
"Winter Soldier Film screening with Iraq Veterans Against the War"
Location - Illinois Disciples Foundation (IDF)
610 E Springfield
7:00 pm

Tuesday:
Counter-Recruitment protest at the new recruiting stations in Champaign
507 Town Center Blvd
4:00pm - 6:00pm
http://uillinois.facebook.com/event.php?eid=22160478088

Wed:
Lunch Lecture and Discussion on the Antiwar Movement at Hopkins Dorm
12:00-1:00

Thurs:
Walk-out, March, Rally, and Die-in on the Quad hosted with the Campus Greens.
11:00am - 1:00pm
Quad side of the Union
http://uillinois.facebook.com/event.php?eid=10419805759

Friday:
Live streaming of "Winter Soldier: Iraq and Afghanistan" with Iraq Veterans Against the War
Time - 6:00pm - 8:00pm
Place - TBA

Saturday:
Continuation of the live streaming of "Winter Soldier: Iraq and Afghanistan" with Iraq Veterans Against the War
Time: 3:00pm - 5:00pm
Location: TBA

I think my favorite events will be the ones on Winter Soldier! In 1971 the first Winter Soldier was held as a way for Vietnam veterans to stand up against the racist, illegal, and genocidal war of Vietnam. It ended up boosting the antiwar movement into the main stream and which in turn helped bring Vietnam to an end. Now there is a modern day Winter Soldier being put on by IVAW Iraq Veterans Against the War. It's happening the whole weekend of March 14-16! Our CAN chapter has a few people attending as invited guests because we work very closely with IVAW. A few of us who are staying behind are inviting the public and any remaining students to watch a live online video feed of the modern Winter Soldier. I encourage everyone who reads this to do the same.

All you have to do is go to www.ivaw.org and poke around some until you find it. You can watch a trailer for it right now on their front page! Here are the first few minutes of it.

I think it's just so inspiring that this is going on and has the potential to boost both IVAW and CAN into the national view of the antiwar movement. IVAW is bigger than VVAW when they held the first Winter Soldier. And CAN is bigger than SDS (the main grassroots antiwar organization from Vietnam) was in their earlier stages.

This just really gives me hope for the kind of movement we are trying to make. A movement that:
1) Calls for an end to the racism of arabs and muslims
2) Believes the Iraqi people have the right to self-determination free from American intervention
3) Calls for IMMEDIATE WITHDRAWAL of all troops from Iraq
4) Calls for the expulsion of private contractors in Iraq and calls for these jobs to be given to the Iraqis
5) Demands that veterans receive the full health benefits, education, and compensation they deserve
6) Demands that compensation be given to the Iraqi people for the invasion, years of sanctions and air strikes, and for years of supporting the dictatorship of Saddam.
7) Is grassroots and does not think that just by electing someone to office that this war is going to end. Afterall, the antiwar movement used to say "half the way with LBJ" to end the war but when he got elected he expanded the war into Cambodia. I think it's important that we do not have disillusions about ANY political candidate, meaning that we realize no matter who gets elected, we are still going to have a war to protest for many years to come.
8) Is opening trying to outreach to other organizations to create a unified left antiwar movement. That means connecting the issues between sexism, islamophobia, the economy, immigrant rights, health care, racism, homophobia, Palestine, Afghanistan, the pending war with Iran, and trying to get people to see how all of these issues are connected to each other through the war.
9) Probably most importantly, recognized the key role veterans play in the antiwar movement. Not as the "token veteran" but as an actual activist and organizer of the movement. Because it won't be possible to end this war unless we get the military on our side.

I'm ready to end this war, and I'm ready for CAN and IVAW to take off the ground and push itself into the national perspective of the antiwar movement. Now who's with me!

CAN Midwest Winter Retreat!

2008-03-02T20:39:00.007-06:00

This weekend, Urbana-Champaign was host to not only to the drunken debauchery that is "Unofficial". No, instead our campus was host to the amazing Campus Antiwar Network Midwest Winter Retreat, and it was an incredible success! With members from 6 different chapters across the Midwest, Midwest CAN was able to come together in a way that we have not done before, starting the important work on the regional conference in April and also developing what we hope will be an incredibly successful communication structure, so the gains and networking developed over the weekend aren't lost.

First, the retreat really did a great job of allowing the Midwest to network much better. We have decided to set up a system to ensure members are able to not only contact other branches with ease, but that branches stay in touch regularly through monthly conference calls. Such a system should ensure a much stronger unity among the Midwest, which can only be to the benefit of the movement and to the individual chapters.

Along that line, simply being able to discuss politics and local events with other chapters is eye opening. It was discovered by many of the chapters - Iowa, UIC, and Cincinnati, to name a few - that while they have a very solid logistical aspect of their group, they very rarely talk politics. Most of the members from those groups are likely going to return and encourage a real change in their organizations to allow for more political discussions. For our own part, UIUC suffers from the inverse problem. Our level of political discourse is very high, but because of that we have not focused on events and actions. This may have led to a decreased presence on Campus, which can only depress turnouts. With the weather warming up, however, it is very likely that UIUC will once again become more active in the eyes of the student body at large, as we stage more demonstrations and events.

Additionally, the retreat began to get the Sisyphusian boulder which is the Regional Conference rolling. We set a date (April 18-20), confirmed Iowa as the location, and developed both an overarching vision for the conference as well as a number of concrete suggestions of how to invite other groups into the Conference, whom to work with in particular, and what workshops to put on. Most importantly, we developed the system to get the Conference Planning Committee (the CPC) off the ground by next Sunday - in the first official Regional Conference Call.

That is going to be a very interesting and intense call. It is both the first call for the new Chapter Liaisons and the first call for the CPC, and it is also an open call, so anyone can participate (but only the CPC members can vote on issues relating to the Conference). The CPC will have their hands full, reading abstracts of suggestions for the conference and then debating on them, while the Liaisons, in my mind, will also be quite busy formalizing and finalizing what exactly they hope to accomplish.

Our own chapter will need to elect the Liaison and the CPC members (up to two of the latter, only one of the former) on Tuesday. Tuesday will likely be a busy logistical meeting, but it seems that with the high level of political discourse in our chapter anyway, it is OK to have the logistical meetings, especially with events coming up as they are.

We hope to jump on the Green Party's 5th Anniversary protest the week before Spring Break, and really take the lead in organizing it (since so far it does not seem that the Greens have been as aggressive as they could have been with their outreach to other groups - a charge that frankly could be level at us more often than we would like to admit). We also hope to show the film Winter Soldier with the local IVAW chapter the Monday of that Week of Action, and then show parts of Winter Soldier: Iraq and Afghanistan on either Friday or Saturday. The fact that that is the start of Spring Break could suppress turn out, but even so simply getting the information out to people to allow them to watch it on their own is important.

We can safely say that coming out of the Retreat we all feel much more energized and strengthened as a chapter, and as a movement as a whole. What we need to do now is translate that energy, that networking, and these wonderful ideas into actions and and events to strengthen the chapter. As was stated during the retreat by Madison's own Chris Dols, "The Midwest is only as strong as the sum of its chapters." And we feel that the chapters - all the Midwest chapters - have the potential to be much stronger now than ever before.

A Peaceful Call to Arms

2008-02-27T17:27:00.002-06:00

So, this was the article I had to read for my Speech Communication class. Our teacher thought it would be a hostile topic to talk about in class, which it was. This is actually quite relevant still, though printed in 2006, because it talks of reinstating the draft to make Iran afraid of possessing nuclear weapons. Of course, Kane talks about the instance where the drafts "worked", but does not mention when it failed (Vietnam). It shows a biased opinion, with no facts to back it up.

They learn from the best

2008-02-27T14:01:00.002-06:00

Turkey has refused to set a timeline for withdrawal from Northern Iraq.

And, just like here, Turkey is tightly regulating Turkish media's coverage of the events, leading to conflicting reports between what the PKK and the Turkish government are claiming as casualty figures.

Playing Both Sides

2008-02-26T18:05:00.005-06:00

With the recent invasion of Iraq's Kurdistan region by Turkey last week, the tenuous position of the US in Iraq was made even more evident.

The problem for the US is who should be supported in the incursion. Washington cannot risk isolating Istanbul any more than it already has, but it simultaneously has been supportive of the the Iranian branch of the PKK for a number of years. According to the Telegraph:

"US army helicopters are reportedly used to shuttle officers to regular meetings with Kurdish fighters.
There is a landing pad complete with spotlights near Mr Karayilan's headquarters, while four-wheel-drive vehicles belonging to a US private security contractor, are easily seen."

The PKK was also supported by the Washington during the invasion, much in the same way that the Mujahideen fighters in Afghanistan during the 1980s - and look how well that turned out. During the invasion, Washington relied on the Kurds in the north of Iraq to fight the Iraqi army there, allowing US forces to take the south with less resistance. This was even after the US government officially listed the PKK has a "terrorist organization," leading to an interesting question: why would Washington support the independence of Albanian Kosovo from Serb Serbia, while labeling the group dedicated to creating an independent Kurdistan a terrorist organization.

One answer may be that "destabilization" in the Balkans is far less threatening to US hegemony and international oil than if it happened in the Middle East. Another possible, albeit less likely answer is that the PKK is Marxist-Leninist and Nationalist organization. Holdover prejudice and fear from the Cold War may force Washington to target Leftist groups out of pure reflex, rather than analysis of the situations. Finally, alienating Turkey, Syria, Iran, and Iraq by supporting an independent Kurdistan made up of territory from the above countries would destroy US integrity and soft power in the Middle East - more so than has already been eroded by the war - and seriously threaten American interests in the region.

So when Turkey invaded Iraq last Thursday and ignored the fledgling new puppet government's national sovereignty, Washington was put in a bind. It had to support Turkey's actions, while simultaneously ensuring that the work it put into training Kurdish militants in Iran did not go to waste and also while enforcing Iraq's sovereignty. These three competing and mutually exclusive goals have led to a milquetoast statement by the US urging restraint on all sides.

The Iraqis, however, have not taken kindly to this unilateral action by Turkey. An Iraqi government spokesman has said,

"The cabinet in a meeting today expressed its rejection and condemnation of the Turkish military incursion which is considered a violation of Iraq's sovereignty.

"The cabinet stresses that unilateral military action is not acceptable and threatens good relations between the two neighbours."

All that remains now to is see how the US will react: whether it will defend the national sovereignty of Iraq as it is supposed to do as an occupying force, or whether it will allow Turkey to pursue it's unilateral actions in the north of Iraq. Either way, Washington will be in the wrong. If it fails to defend Iraq, it will be failing in its job as an occupying force - not particularly new for Washington, since it has already failed dramatically and continuously in this area, but rather one more example of the criminal incompetence of the occupation. If, on the other hand, it rejects Turkey's right to unilaterally and preemptively attack an enemy, it will show that the idea of American Exceptionalism is far from dead.

The Wheelchair Suicide Bomber

2008-02-25T20:29:00.008-06:00

I was listening to NPR this morning and on comes a story about a suicide bomber in Baghdad today attacked a police station. They went on to talk about how insurgents have brutally used the disabled in the past as weapons. Of course I was saddened by this news but I wondered to myself, where is the story about the shi'ite pilgrims (a large number women and children) that were wounded and killed on Sunday in the town of Iskandariya, 40km south of Baghdad on their way to Karbala to attend a religious ceremony? Or the report about the 33 dead PPK members in the Kurdish Northern Iraq as result of the "Turkish incursion" that commenced last Thursday?

Why did NPR decide to report about this particular bombing when they miss so many other events that take place in Iraq on daily basis? For me, it has to be the motivated by the need to make the Iraq resistance to look as evil as possible. While talking with my dad briefly about the war (we have to avoid it all costs because it just leads to a big fight) he cited a suicide bomber where a mentally challenged girl was used as the weapon and he had no information about the torture tactics used by the US military against innocent prisoners. Even from a liberal source such as NPR, the information is still skewed. I have so little faith in our media.

The Toll of the War

2008-02-21T15:19:00.002-06:00

I was listening to NPR online today and clicked on this sidebar link about the death toll in Iraq entitled The Toll of War . I think they really did a wonderful job showing statistics of both the American troops and the Iraqi civilians. Another great feature is that you can click on a particular month and a box pops up with a story pertaining to casualities in that month along with the option of listening to an excerpt from a sound clip of the story.

For example, in January 2007 the title reads: Schools Targeted and then gives an short summary. "In Baghadad car bombs kills 70 at a university..." You can click to see the whole story. Each month has another story. I totally recommend checking it out.

The Folly of Attacking Iran

2008-02-18T21:32:00.008-06:00

Yesterday afternoon U of I had the privilege of hosting Stephen Kinzer, the author of All the Shah's Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror (a book about the 1953 American coup of Iran), on his nationwide tour promoting diplomacy with Iran. Hadi Esfahani, a professor here and Iranian scholar, also joined Kinzer talking about his experiences in his homeland. I learned so much from both their talks and wanted to share some key points.

One of the most important things that I think everyone needs to understand is that the people of Iran do not hate Americans and in fact there is a long history of Iranians looking up to the US as a young superpower who battled the British, the main imperialist regime of their own country. Esfahani told a story about how over the summer an acquaintance of his who worked for the governor’s office in the Iranian region where he is from originally, asked him about how local political here in the US offices deal with economic policies, road rebuilding etc. He was trying to demonstrate that people there don’t view Americans as evil, as many of us (me included) think most of the Middle East feel, but still look admire the US as a country. These years of respect and esteem would be completely destroyed “in one hour” if we bombed Iran. I was really pleasantly surprised by this information and gave me hope that maybe could ally with Iran instead create yet another enemy. The American government needs to start giving the Iranian government the respect they deserve!

Another thing that real was a real mind fuck to me was how in 1953, it only took three weeks for top CIA official, Kermit Roosevelt (grandson of good ol’ Teddy), to completely destabilize Iran. These actions led to horrible consequences that took a democratically elected government out of power just because they wanted to take back control of their own oil. I couldn’t believe it only took three weeks to completely demonize Prime Minister Mohammed Mosaddeq who was just looking out for the best interest of his people.

During question and answer time, one guy brought up an article in the Economists from a couple weeks ago that pretty much advocated for bombing Iran. This just shows that that the idea to military measures in Iran is still very hot on the table of US political consciousness. I decided to checkout the their website and was disgusted by the way Iran was represented in several of their articles. I quote from the article Has Iran won? “Who would have thought that a friendless theocracy with a Holocaust-denying president, which hangs teenagers in public and stones women to death, could run diplomatic circles around America and its European allies?”

Mainstream media is feeding this garbage to US citizens to create an atmosphere of shock and appall so that military measures can be taken in the future if necessary. I refuse to see a repeat of Iraq! I yahooanswered "Iran Politics" and got these are some of the things people said:

~Iranian President: "Blah blah blah blah blah"Iranian Politician: "I don't agree with that!" Iranian President: "SHOOT THE INFIDEL!"Just a day in the life I suppose...,

~A theocracy gone very bad

~If a person agrees with dictatorships,and the agenda of world domination,then they will probably like the policies of Iran

~They are a corrupt nation who desperately wants power through hate of Israel and America..it plays well with an uneducated populace

It's pretty bad that people have such a tainted view of Iranian politics and the country in general. This totally comes from lack of understanding which is an underlying theme in many major catastrophes and disputes.

Both talks were rich with so much information and something pretty sweet happened. Timothy V. Johnson’s, Champaign’s representative in the House. press manager and right hand man came to the talk and was so impressed that he bought the Kinzer’s book and plans to talk to Johnson. Hopefully he’ll vote on some good bills, jo.

Overall I was totally impressed and it got me thinking about some crucial ideas.

CAN's Blog is up and running!

2008-02-16T16:20:00.004-06:00

Blogging today from the basement of the Espresso Royale on 6th and Daniel, the Campus Antiwar Network's newly formed media group is pleased to make our first blog post.

***
We are the Campus Antiwar Network! We are the students and community of the University of Illinois in Champaign-Urbana, and we are sick and tired of the illegal occupation of Iraq, and the continuing occupation in Afghanistan! As the predominant antiwar group on campus, we are dedicated to reaching out to other organization who sympathize with our position and goals, and are always trying to recruit more students to fight the illegal war in whatever way they can. We also try to reach across the gap separating undergraduate and graduate students, and the gap between students and teachers, and students and the community, to create one united antiwar community in Urbana-Champaign.

***
CAN calls for the immediate withdrawal of troops and contractors from Iraq.
CAN calls for an immediate end to US Imperialism in the Middle East.
CAN will not accept a redeployment of troops from Iraq to Afghanistan.
CAN understands, and helps to foster the understanding, that the war is directly linked to economic, environmental, educational, and social issues currently being discussed across the nation.
CAN supports war resistors and the Iraq Veterans Against the War.
CAN rejects Imperialism, Racism, Classism, Sexism, Hompohobia, and Islamophobia.

CAN promotes peace.