Wednesday, October 31, 2007

Soldiers of Conscience: Iraq War Still Sucks, According to Troops

Soldiers of Conscience: Iraq War Still Sucks, According to Troops

http://www.seattleweekly.com/2007-10-31/film/soldiers-of-conscience-iraq-war-still-sucks-according-to-troops.php

By Frank Paiva
October 31, 2007

More even-handed than you might expect, this SIFF 2007 documentary
about conscientious objectors in the U.S. military doesn't just
preach to the choir, it reaches five or six pews beyond.
Unfortunately, it's still not a very good movie. Focusing on a
repetitive series of soldiers who decline to bear arms in Iraq, the
filmmakers gloss over some important issues. Is there any moral
context that makes it OK to kill in wartime? Like the Holocaust,
maybe? Or if those WMDs had actually existed? And what makes Iraq
different from past wars, when conscientious objectors served with
honor? These questions linger on the periphery. Soldiers has the
virtue of including voices from across the ideological spectrum, yet
its unnecessarily long shots of brutal violence, its championing of
lefty dissent, and its overdramatic CNN-style score make clear where
its sympathies lie.

Runs Fri., Nov. 2–Thurs., Nov. 8, at SIFF Cinema. Not rated. 86 minutes.

.

Spitboaters Against the Truth

Spitboaters Against the Truth

http://www.philadelphiaweekly.com/articles/15724

Have you licked your troop today?

by Steven Wells
Oct 31-Nov 5, 2007

During the Vietnam War returning troops were spat on­spat on, I tell
you­by filthy, disgusting hippie antiwar protesters. This disgusting
spitting (on troops, by hippies) happened so often that it entered
folklore and was enshrined in the American consciousness by films
like First Blood and Hamburger Hill. And it's regularly dusted off
and wheeled out by right-wing talk radio chickenhawks as further
proof that pacifists are worse than Nazis.

This is a terrible burden for today's antiwar movement. But I have
the solution: Modern-day peaceniks should greet troops returning from
Iraq by symbolically licking the spit off them. And instead of
marching on Washington to shout abuse at the commander in chief (who
is, after all, a symbolic Super Troop), we should line up to
symbolically lick the symbolic spit off his fake symbolic cowboy boots.

Hell, while we're at it, maybe we should rethink this whole "antiwar"
thing. We should accept the argument made by the president and his
choir of house-trained right-wing howler monkeys that it's impossible
to support the troops and not support whatever illogical, unjustified
and illegal war the president feels like starting.

In which case, as we all desperately want to be seen as supporting
the troops, let's call for more wars, longer wars and bigger wars.
Because we just love our troops so much.

My god, that mass spitting (on troops, by hippies) must have been
horrible. All those thousands of verminous traitors coughing up
gallons of drug-clogged snot onto the troops must have made
horrifying news footage.

So isn't it odd that none exists? Or that the documentary evidence
for any demonstrator even breathing moistly in the general direction
of a troop is so thin that sociology professor Jerry Lembcke­himself
a Vietnam vet­wrote a book about it called The Spitting Image?

The reason being, of course, that the spitting almost certainly never
happened. And one of the reasons it never happened was that the
antiwar activists who stopped the Vietnam War weren't beamed down
from Planet Hippie. As we saw in the recently released documentary
Sir! No Sir!, the dudes who stopped the war were America's Marines,
soldiers and Air Force themselves, by refusing to fight and by
swelling the ranks of the antiwar movement. And despite the claims of
right-wing "spitboat" vets who've since come forward to claim they
were personally spit on, comrades don't tend to spit on comrades.

In which case perhaps we'd better shelve the troop-licking idea and
demand (as politely as possible) that all the troops are brought home. Now.

.

Tuesday, October 30, 2007

A war of words -- one veteran's view of the conflict in Iraq

A war of words -- one veteran's view of the conflict in Iraq

http://www.reformer.com/headlines/ci_7296511

By BOB AUDETTE, Reformer Staff
Saturday, October 27

SAXTONS RIVER -- The war in Iraq is a war of words and manipulated
emotions, said former Marine and anti-war crusader Liam Madden,
during a speech given to the student body of Vermont Academy Friday.

Madden, a Bellows Falls Union High School graduate, was a
communications specialist who served in Iraq from September 2004 to
February 2005.

As an example of this war of words, he talked about companies such as
Blackwater.

"Don't call them security contractors," said Madden. "They are cowboys."

Their only reason for being in Iraq, he said "is to cause mayhem."

"They are the worst kind of mercenaries. They are not beholden to any
laws. They're not held accountable to the Uniform Code of Military
Justice. They're not held accountable by U.S. law. And they are not
held accountable by Iraqi law. The role they play is criminal."

Another way the perception of the war has been manipulated, he said,
is how Americans have labeled those who have taken up arms against
what he called the occupation of Iraq.

"We never really say who is resisting in Iraq," he said. Though there
are plenty of labels -- the enemy, terrorists, al-Qaida, foreign
fighters and insurgents -- the truth is "Iraqi people are in the
resistance," he said.

And even more misleading words are used to explain the reasons the
United States went to war in Iraq -- weapons of mass destruction, the
alleged Iraqi link to Al Qaida and democracy.

"I should die for lies?" he asked.

The war in Iraq, said Madden, is not meant to improve the lies of the
people who live there.

"We are in Iraq because control of Middle East oil keeps America the
sole and unchallenged superpower," he said. "Our rivals are the
people who need the oil. China, India, Russia and Europe. It's about
being on top of the world's economic heap."

And as far as the reasons for not leaving Iraq, said Madden, "your
compassion is being manipulated. The moral obligation is to do what
the people in Iraq want us to do," and that's to leave. "People are
struggling against the war, but they're conditioned to think that
getting out is not an option."

Americans should respect the fact that 80 to 90 percent of Iraqis want us out.

"How arrogant to say we should stay because we know what's best for
you," he said. "Every Iraqi has eyes filled with fear, frustration,
anger and hopelessness and no amount of body armor I was wearing
could protect me from their eyes."

Soldiers coming back from Iraq are tired, frustrated and are sick of
being in harm's way, said Madden. And while many of them hope the war
will be over soon, a core group of soldiers still back the mission.

"Blind obedience is not a healthy loyalty," said Madden. "It doesn't
create a good citizen."

He came back from Iraq with more questions than answers, said Madden,
especially about how he could make a difference and help end the war.

"We are faced with examining the past," he said. Throughout America's
history, he said, when people were faced with injustice, they fought
back. He cited the abolition, suffragette and civil rights movements
as examples.

"Put your energy into a social movement. People who want change
without struggle want crops without plowing the ground," said Madden,
quoting abolitionist and former slave Frederick Douglass. "A good
protest sends its impact throughout society."

Madden, a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War, helped to form the
Appeal for Redress, a petition signed by active duty soldiers asking
Congress to end the war.

Oona Madden, Liam's mother, said that her son became who he is today
because of his experiences in the Marines.

"He needed to do something," she said. "He wasn't the best kid in
high school. He has really grown up a lot." Through the Marines, she
said, "he learned how to discipline himself."

A Marine reservist, a Vermont Academy alumnus who was to provide a
counter viewpoint to Madden's presentation, was forbidden to appear
at Friday's event by his superiors, according to school officials.
---

Bob Audette can be reached at raudette@reformer.com or 802-254-2311, ext. 273.

.

The courage of David Cline

The courage of David Cline

http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/11942/1/396

Author: Tim Wheeler
People's Weekly World Newspaper, 10/25/07

The death of Veterans for Peace leader David Cline on Sept. 15 in
Jersey City, N.J., touched off an outpouring of tributes from his
fellow veterans that continues to this day.

Cline was one of the antiwar movement's clearest thinkers and
certainly among its most inspirational mass leaders. The membership
of VFP tripled while he was president.

He spoke often of the special role of veterans, military families and
active-duty soldiers in countering President George W. Bush's
exploitation of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to justify
"preventive war."

A foot soldier with the 25th Infantry Division during the Vietnam
War, Cline was wounded three times. He came to understand that the
decade-long quagmire was a "rich man's war and a poor man's fight."

On his return to the U.S., Cline plunged into the GI antiwar movement
at Fort Hood, Texas. He edited the underground "Fatigue Press" and
co-founded the Oleo Strut Coffee House in Kileen, Texas, where GIs
learned the truth about the war.

The refusal of three Fort Hood soldiers, Black, Latino and white, to
go to Vietnam inspired a nationwide movement with the demand "Defend
the Fort Hood Three" led by the Young Workers' Liberation League.

Cline co-founded Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) with its
"Dewey Canyon II" march, in which hundreds of war veterans threw
their combat medals on the U.S. Capitol steps. The whole story is
told in the remarkable film "Sir! No Sir!"

I first met Cline March 29, 2003, while covering VFP's "Operation
Dire Distress" just as the invasion of Iraq began. Veterans in combat
fatigues marched near the White House, singing, "Hey, hey, Uncle Sam,
we remember Vietnam. War will mean that soldiers die. War will mean
that mothers cry … Bring our troops back to our soil. They shouldn't
die for Bush's oil."

Cline, a tall, thin, gravel-voiced man was singing out the lines. The
vets sang them back. Those "karma cadences" became the voice of the
entire antiwar movement. Cline was leading from the ranks.

I interviewed Cline many times after that.

When VFP and military families marched to Dover Air Force Base on
March 20, 2004, I walked with Dave for 45 minutes. An interview
turned into a conversation. "I read Sam Webb's piece on socialism,"
he said at one point, referring to a pamphlet by the chairman of the
Communist Party USA. "I liked it a lot. There's a lot in it I agree with."

A few weeks later, after a VFP rally at Faneuil Hall in Boston, Cline
spoke of the Democratic National Convention that was just opening.
"We have to remove the neo-conservatives from the White House and
Congress," he told me. "We have to have a movement with longevity to
push for progressive change in foreign and domestic policy."

In Fayetteville, N.C., near Fort Bragg, on the second anniversary of
the war, he told me, "Some upper-class people can ignore this war.
Those fighting and dying, mostly people of color, can't ignore it.
All across the country, they are saying, 'Support the troops in the
only way that is real: bring them home alive now.'"

The VFP convened in Dallas a few months later. Cindy Sheehan got the
idea of camping near Bush's ranch outside Crawford, Texas, while
addressing the convention. Cline assigned 40 vets to help her set up
"Camp Casey," named for her son who died in Iraq.

A few days later, the VFP bus was headed east when Hurricane Katrina
struck. At Cline's suggestion, the bus detoured to New Orleans where
VFP helped establish the first emergency medical center to serve
thousands of residents trapped in the flooded city.

A year later, Cline led "Walkin' to New Orleans," a march from Mobile
to New Orleans to protest the squandering of tax dollars in Iraq
while victims of Katrina along the Gulf were abandoned.

During the scandal at the Pentagon-run Walter Reed Hospital, I
telephoned Dave for his comment. He was outraged at the treatment of
these veterans. For years, he told me, he wouldn't go to the
Department of Veterans Affairs-run VA medical centers because he was
so angry about how veterans were treated. Yet he led a struggle to
keep open a VA clinic in lower Manhattan. We put his testimony on
keeping that clinic open on our op-ed pages.

David telephoned in March 2006 to ask us to write a feature on a VFP
delegation to Hanoi to form a joint U.S.-Vietnamese movement
demanding treatment of Agent Orange victims. David led that
delegation. He posted our article widely, including on the VFP web site.

A Vietnamese delegation made a return visit to the U.S. a few months
later led by Nguyen Van Quy, a Vietnam War vet. Nguyen and Cline
showed each other their wounds, joking about how long it was taking
them to heal. The next day, during a meeting, Cline presented his
Purple Heart to Nguyen, a man he now considered his friend and
comrade-in-arms.

"It was a gesture that could only come from David," wrote veteran
Billy Kelly, who was there. Soon after returning to Vietnam, Nguyen
died of complications from his Agent Orange exposure. "And now
David," Kelly concluded.

David Cline, presente!
---

greenerpastures21212 @yahoo.com

.

Sunday, October 28, 2007

Army ex-captains want US out of Iraq or a new military draft

[2 items]

Captains speak out on the war

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/10/17/EDTHSR1V1.DTL

Robert Scheer
Wednesday, October 17, 2007

When will we listen to the troops? I'm not talking about soldiers
used as props for a George W. Bush photo-op, telling reporters what
Washington wants to hear. The military is disciplined and thus
accustomed, from Gen. David Petraeus on down, to toeing the official
line. But the Iraq war has also produced brilliant messages of
dissent from the ranks that should cause us to stop in our tracks and
reconsider what we have wrought. First, a group of sergeants came
forward, and on Tuesday it was the captains' turn to speak out.

In "The War as We Saw It," an eloquent op-ed article published in the
New York Times in August, seven Army sergeants summarized the
futility of their 15 months fighting in Iraq: "To believe that
Americans, with an occupying force that long ago outlived its
reluctant welcome, can win over a recalcitrant local population and
win this counterinsurgency is far-fetched." After penning that cri de
coeur, two of the soldiers died in Iraq, and a third was severely wounded.

On Tuesday, the Washington Post printed, "The Real Iraq We Knew," by
12 Army captains, all of whom served in Iraq, that begins: "Today
marks five years since the authorization of military force in Iraq,
setting Operation Iraqi Freedom in motion. Five years on, the Iraq
war is as under-manned and under-resourced as it was from the start.
And, five years on Iraq is in shambles.

"As Army captains who served in Baghdad and beyond, we've seen the
corruption and the sectarian division. We understand what it's like
to be stretched too thin. And we know when it's time to get out."

How come those brave veterans know it's time to get out, but leading
Democrats, who voted for the war to be authorized, are still
pussyfooting about quickly removing the troops from this
ever-deepening quagmire? They're jockeying for political advantage,
knowing that drawing out the war hurts the Republicans. It is a
deeply cynical ploy that works only because, with our all-volunteer
military, most Americans don't have to face the choice of sacrificing
themselves or their loved ones in a futile and losing war.

Yes, it costs the taxpayers, but so do the "Halo 3" video games
Americans are purchasing in record numbers, and for most, Iraq is a
make-believe war. Even the cost seems unreal, as Bush is the first
president in U.S. history to cut taxes in a time of war, with the
result that more than a trillion dollars in long-term obligations
will not come due while his administration has to foot the bills.

If there were a military draft, people would be in the streets
demanding an end to this carnage, which now threatens to go on for
decades. That is precisely why the neoconservative ideologues who got
us into this mess built their fantasies on a volunteer force,
supplemented by hundreds of thousands of contractors (including
50,000 mercenary troops like those from Blackwater) and the purchase
of largely irrelevant but highly profitable high-tech weaponry -
although they forgot about simple armor for the troops.

The most fraudulent neocon claim was that pro-Western, even
pro-Israel Iraqis, such as their favorite, the now totally
discredited Ahmed Chalabi, would police the country as surrogates for
the United States, and that Iraqi oil sales would pay for it all. The
12 captains, who worked with the local Iraqi residents, are very
clear as to the forlorn outcome of that plan. "And, indeed, many of
us witnessed the exploitation of U.S. tax dollars by Iraqi officials
and military officers. Sabotage and graft have had a particularly
deleterious impact on Iraq's oil industry, which still fails to
produce the revenue that Pentagon war planners hoped would pay for
Iraq's reconstruction," they wrote.

As for that other ongoing illusion - that we are turning over power
to Iraqi forces we have trained - the captains write, "... Iraqi
soldiers quit at will. The police are effectively controlled by
militias. And, again, corruption is debilitating. U.S. tax dollars
enrich self-serving generals and support the very elements that will
battle each other after we're gone."

Building an empire on the cheap and by proxy doesn't work. If you
want one, and of course most of us shouldn't because only a few fat
cats benefit from such imperial adventures, you need a vast conscript
army. As the captains put it: "There is one way we might be able to
succeed in Iraq. To continue an operation of this intensity and
duration, we would have to abandon our volunteer military for
compulsory service. Short of that, our best option is to leave Iraq
immediately." Enough said.
---

E-mail Robert Scheer: RScheer@truthdig.com

--------

Army ex-captains want US out of Iraq or a new military draft

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jmKfBaxnNjJXMRIspoZrnru49qDA

Oct 16, 2007

WASHINGTON (AFP) ­ Twelve former US army captains Tuesday urged
Washington to either abandon Iraq or dramatically increase its
military presence there by reinstating mandatory military service.

The article, published in the Washington Post, also criticized
higher-ranking officers for believing they can still hold Iraq
together with the force available.

"There is one way we might be able to succeed in Iraq," wrote the
ex-captains, all of whom saw service in Iraq between 2003 and 2006.

"To continue an operation of this intensity and duration, we would
have to abandon our volunteer military for compulsory service. Short
of that, our best option is to leave Iraq immediately.

"A scaled withdrawal will not prevent a civil war, and it will spend
more blood and treasure on a losing proposition," they wrote.

The Iraq war "is as undermanned and under-resourced as it was from
the start," the authors wrote, stating bluntly that "Iraq is in shambles."

The authors say they have "seen the corruption and the sectarian
division. We understand what it's like to be stretched too thin. And
we know when it's time to get out."

The captains describe widespread corruption in the Iraqi government,
a country where the infrastructure is in "deplorable condition."

Iraq's oil industry "still fails to produce the revenue that Pentagon
war planners hoped would pay for Iraq's reconstruction," they wrote.

Even with the 'surge' of US forces this year there are not enough
troops in Iraq. Temporary regional success "may brief well on
PowerPoint presentations," but in practice "they just push insurgents
to another spot on the map."

Millions of Iraqis "correctly recognize these actions for what they
are and vote with their feet -- moving within Iraq or leaving the
country entirely.

"Still, our colonels and generals keep holding on to flawed concepts."

After widespread anger over the draft during the Vietnam war, the
United States went to an all-volunteer military force in 1973.
Currently there is little support to return to compulsory military service.

.

Labor leaders say politicians won't end war, urge workers to protest

Labor leaders say politicians won't end war, urge workers to protest

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/10/21/BA0GSTIOK.DTL

Susan Sward, Chronicle Staff Writer
Sunday, October 21, 2007

Labor leaders from around the world gathered in San Francisco
Saturday to call on workers to stand up and take organized action
against war in Iraq, saying that politicians can't be counted on to
halt the bloodshed.

Several speakers cited the civil rights movement of the 1950s and the
anti-Vietnam War movement of the 1960s as models to follow, saying
that both achieved change that would not have occurred if matters had
been left in the hands of those running the country.

"Until people get off their asses and do something, there won't be a
change," Clarence Thomas, past secretary-treasurer of the
International Longshore and Warehouse Union Local 10 and a
third-generation ILWU member, told the audience at the local's hall
near Fisherman's Wharf.

Jeremy Corbyn, a Labor Party member of Parliament in Britain, cited
the staggering number of civilian deaths in the Iraq war and the
thousands of returning soldiers who have needed psychiatric care to
deal with what they faced during battles in that country.

Corbyn told the audience of about 150 labor officials - who came from
countries including Japan, New Zealand, Canada and Australia - that
the war in Iraq is "a disaster of the grandest scale possible for the
people of Iraq and the rest of us."

In an interview later, Thomas said the lesson of the civil rights and
anti-Vietnam War movements is that people had to take it upon
themselves to bring about change. "The Republicans and Democrats
aren't going to do it - elected officials don't lead."

Thomas, whose local and ILWU local 34 co-hosted the conference, and
other speakers called on those attending the conference to go back to
their unions and begin a dialogue resulting in concrete actions that
highlight their opposition to the war.

Several speakers mentioned that while billions of dollars are being
funneled into the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan, there are urgent
needs for health care, education, disaster relief and housing that go
unmet or underfunded.

In interviews, several leaders acknowledged that they face a tough
challenge in trying to energize workers to take anti-war action in an
era when people are not prone to militancy.

Sometimes, they said, what protest does occur gets little attention.
Richard Cavalli, president of ILWU Local 34, said that in May "there
was an anti-war rally at the Port of Oakland, and we shut down the
port for a day. There was very little coverage of that event."

But he said labor's anti-war effort has to be waged against "this war
that came about on a lie about weapons of mass destruction" being
present in Iraq. "Today you get these people together in this hall -
it's a beginning."

E-mail Susan Sward at ssward@sfchronicle.com.

.

Thousands in US anti-war protests

Thousands in US anti-war protests

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7065975.stm

28 October 2007

Tens of thousands of people have taken part in demonstrations against
the war in Iraq in cities across the US.

Rallies took place in a dozen cities, with the biggest crowds
gathering in New York, Chicago and San Francisco.

They were timed to coincide with the fifth anniversary of a vote by
the US Senate to authorise the Iraq invasion.

Those taking part, who included relatives of servicemen fighting in
Iraq, urged the US congress to cut off funding for the war.

The 'national day of action' was called by the United for Peace and
Justice coalition.

Silence for dead

Mike Carano, who organised a march in Ohio, told Reuters news agency:
"This is across-the-country sentiment about ending the occupation,
redirecting funds for needs in this country, our attempt to get
Congress to stand up and have its prerogative to cut funding, to take charge."

One of the national co-ordinators of the protests, Leslie Kielsen,
told Reuters that the "half a trillion" dollars spent on the war was
money that could have been used for education, social housing and to
feed the hungry.

In New York participants gathered in Union Square, before marching on
to Foley Square, which is close to many of the city's largest
courthouses and government offices.

A two minute silence was held to honour those killed in the violence
which has blighted Iraq since the 2003 US-led invasion.

An estimated 10,000 people joined a march in Chicago and in San
Francisco there was an even greater turnout.

.

Antiwar protesters hit nation's streets

Antiwar protesters hit nation's streets

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-protest28oct28,1,6664368.story?coll=la-news-politics-national&ctrack=2&cset=true

30,000 reportedly join the biggest march, in San Francisco. L.A., New
York and other cities also stage events.

From the Associated Press
October 28, 2007

SAN FRANCISCO -- Thousands of people called for a swift end to the
war in Iraq as they marched through downtown San Francisco on
Saturday, chanting and carrying such signs as "Wall Street Gets Rich,
Iraqis and GIs Die" and "Drop Tuition Not Bombs."

Labor union members, clergy and others filled the streets, rallying
near City Hall before marching to Dolores Park.

The protest was the largest in a series of antiwar marches taking
place across the country, including in New York City, Los Angeles and
Philadelphia.

No official crowd estimates were available, though organizers of the
San Francisco march estimated 30,000 people participated. "I got the
sense that many people were at a demonstration for the first time,"
said Sarah Sloan, one of the event's organizers. "That's something
that's really changed. People have realized the right thing to do is
to take to the streets."

In Los Angeles, protesters marched up Broadway Street around noon to
City Hall. On Temple Street, a "die-in" was staged in which Iraq
veterans and supporters laid down as the sounds of air raid sirens
and bomb blasts filled the air, organizers said.

March participants included actors Martin Sheen and Mark Ruffalo and
Vietnam veteran Ron Kovic, organizers said.

In Philadelphia, in the shadow of the National Constitution Center
and Independence Hall, a few hundred protesters ranging from
grade-school-age children to senior citizens called on President Bush
to end funding for the war and bring troops home.

Marchers who braved severe wet weather during the walk of more than
30 blocks were met by people lining the sidewalks and clutching a
long yellow ribbon over the final blocks before Independence Mall.
There, the rally opened with songs and prayers by descendants of
Lenape Indians.

"Our signs are limp from the rain and the ground is soggy, but our
spirits are high," said Bal Pinguel, an official with the American
Friends Service Committee, one of the event's national sponsors.

"The high price we are paying is the more than 3,800 troops who have
been killed in the war in Iraq."

In New York, among the thousands marching down Broadway was a man
carrying cardboard peace doves.

Some others dressed as prisoners, wearing the bright orange garb of
Guantanamo Bay inmates and pushing a person in a cage.

In Seattle, thousands of marchers were led by a small group of Iraq
war veterans.

At Occidental Park, where the Seattle protesters rallied after the
march, the American Friends Service Committee displayed combat boots,
one pair for each U.S. soldier killed in Iraq.

.

Protesting war in Iraq, urging peace

Protesting war in Iraq, urging peace

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/20071028_Protesting_war_in_Iraq__urging_peace.html

Two thousand or more joined a march and rally ending at Independence Mall.

Oct. 28, 2007
By Tom Infield and Ashwin Verghese
Inquirer Staff Writers

They came marching and chanting along East Market Street, 10 to 20
people across, in a procession five blocks long.

"What do we want?

"Peace!

"When do we want it?

"Now!"

That call-and-response echoed off tall buildings yesterday as
Philadelphia witnessed its largest peace demonstration since the
first days of the Iraq war in March 2003.

Organizers estimated that 2,000 people joined in the march and a
rally that followed it on the sodden lawn of Independence Mall. The
police estimate was higher: 5,000.

The demonstrators ranged from graying peaceniks who protested the
Vietnam War 35 years ago to a community librarian from Union County,
N.J., to a Radnor High School sophomore who was handing out a radical
leftist newspaper.

"It is unbearable what is happening" in Iraq, said Kathy Muhn, 54,
the librarian, who drove down in the morning rain. "We need to take
to the streets and end this terrible war."

A supporter of Democrat Dennis Kucinich for president, Muhn said this
was only her second peace rally. Her brother, a Navy chaplain, is
going to Iraq in January with a Marine contingent.

"I'm afraid for him," she said. "But I was against this war long
before I knew about him going. It was an invasion based on lies. It
was wrong then, and it's wrong now."

The rally organizers, a coalition of more than 100 loosely connected
antiwar groups, billed the event as part of a "national day to end
the war in Iraq."

Similar rallies were organized in Boston, New York, Chicago, Los
Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, Salt Lake City, Orlando, New
Orleans, and Jonesborough, Tenn.

Rally speakers included Desiree Anita Ali-Fairooz of Washington,
whose photo was seen around the world last week after she ran up to
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice with red-painted hands and
screamed: "The blood of millions of Iraqis is on your hands. . . .
War criminal!"

She said she spent 30 hours in a federal lockup after the incident in
a congressional hearing room. Although released, she said she faces
three criminal charges.

"This type of thing helps to galvanize the movement," Ali-Fairooz
said of the march and rally. "When the people still at home see there
is a base of dissent, they will no longer be silent and watch this
criminal war continue."

At the hour the rally began, more than 100 U.S. military veterans
were gathering for the 20th anniversary rededication of the
Philadelphia Vietnam Veterans Memorial at Front and Spruce Streets,
five blocks over and four blocks down.

Police said the two groups seemed oblivious of each other and had no contact.

But a handful of people who support the U.S. war effort - protesters
against the antiwar protest - stood on the opposite side of Market
from the rally. Police kept them mostly separate from the larger group.

"Don't tell me you're here for peace. . . . You're saying it's OK to
kill American soldiers," Raoul Deming, 50, of West Chester, told a
peace activist with whom he was debating.

Even at an antiwar gathering, Michael Ladson, 15, the Radnor High
sophomore, had trouble giving away copies of the People's Weekly
World as he stood on the corner of Sixth and Market Streets.

Ladson said he had formed socialist views when his family was living
in New Zealand.

"If the nation had its priorities straight," he said, "it would be
spending more on health care than on warfare."

The march had begun with scatterings of people along a route to City
Hall from the Veterans Hospital in University City. It picked up
steam as it went along.

Al Zappala, 67, a retired federal employee from South Philadelphia,
was holding a photograph of his son, Sgt. Sherwood Baker, a
Pennsylvania National Guardsman who died in an explosion in Iraq in
April 2004.

Zappala, in a rain jacket and baseball cap, said he had been opposed
to the war from the outset but wasn't sure how Baker felt.

"He never really talked about it," Zappala said. "He said he couldn't
cloud his mind with the politics of it. His job was to get himself
and his men home safely."

Since his son's death, Zappala said, he has traveled the country
talking to other Iraq war families.

Many people in the march had other political agendas than just ending the war.

Rob Dewey, 26, of Upper Darby, carried a large Palestinian flag.

"I'm against the occupation in Iraq, but I'm a Palestinian activist,"
said Dewey, whose wife is Palestinian. "I'm against the occupation of
Palestine. The U.S. has been in Iraq since 2003. That's four years.
Israel's been in Palestine since 1967. That's 40 years."

Saleem Muwwakkil, the president of the Coalition for African Diaspora
Initiatives, said he was pleased by the diversity of the crowd.

"It's a coalition," he said. "There are veterans from all over the
tri-state area. There are people here for Darfur. There are African
Americans, Italian Americans, Jewish Americans. This is bringing
people together."
---

Contact staff writer Tom Infield at 610-313-8205 or tinfield@phillynews.com.

.

Corps approves fewer conscientious objectors

Corps approves fewer conscientious objectors

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/10/02/news/top_stories/1_04_3710_1_07.txt

By: MARK WALKER - Staff Writer
October 1, 2007

About one-third of Marine applicants are discharged

NORTH COUNTY -- The Marine Corps granted conscientious objector
status to only a third of the nearly 100 active-duty troop and
reservists who applied for that designation in the last four years, a
rate far lower than that of the other major services, according to a
report released Monday.

The report, prepared for Congress, said Marines accounted for 93 of
the 425 U.S. troops who sought to leave the military as conscientious
objectors between 2002 and 2006.

Conscientious objectors must show convincing evidence they oppose war
on religious, ethical or moral beliefs and that those convictions are
sincere and deeply held. Opposing a specific conflict, such as the
war in Iraq, won't earn someone a conscientious objector discharge or
a reassignment.

While the Marine Corps and Coast Guard had the lowest approval rates
at the 33 percent figure, Army officials approved conscientious
objector applications in 55 percent of the cases. The Air Force
approval rate stood at 62 percent.

The rate was lower than the average 54 percent approval recorded in
all the branches of the military combined, and far lower than the 84
percent approval rate in the Navy, according to the report from the
Government Accounting Office.

The Marine Corps often looks to reassign troops who've filed for
conscientious objector status to non-combat roles, according to a
spokeswoman in Washington.

Capt. Amy Malugani said a review of a conscientious objector
application begins immediately upon receipt with one of the first
tests being whether the troop can be reassigned.

"There are many factors ... such as the service members' ability to
serve in the military and the ability for them to continue to serve
at another location to reach their enlistment obligation," she said.

The overall approval rate throughout the military shows the
applications are from troops able to convincingly demonstrate sincere
opposition to war and not because they are afraid of war, said Eugene
Fidell, president of the National Institute of Military Justice in Washington.

"It shows the system is generally working and that these cases cannot
simply be dismissed as someone trying to get out of combat," Fidell
said. "People who leap to that conclusion are often wrong."

Officials at Camp Pendleton could not immediately say if any of the
applications came from Marines stationed at that base.

The vast majority of Marines who filed conscientious objector
applications between 2002-06 had been in the service four years or
less, the report said. Fifty-three had served in Afghanistan, Iraq or
on U.S. soil as part of the military's guarding of airports and other
facilities following the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.

Most of the 425 applications from throughout the military came from
enlisted ranks. Just 33 officers sought conscientious objector
status, according to the study.

After submitting an application, a military chaplain or psychiatrist
conducts interviews and the applicant's commanding officer appoints a
hearing officer. That officer oversees the application, submitting a
recommendation based on the hearing and interviews. A final decision
rests with the applicant's commanding officer and can be appealed if denied.

The 425 applications from the 2.3 million service members during the
study period represents an application rate of far less than 1 percent.

Seeking conscientious objector status was much more prevalent when
there was a draft during the Vietnam War in the 1960s and early 1970s.

The policies in place today recognize that even though today's
military is all-volunteer and recruits are asked if they oppose war,
religious, moral or ethical beliefs can change after entering the service.

While most applications are handled administratively, some reach the courts.

Last year, Fidell represented a Marine lance corporal who was sent to
Iraq after his petition for conscientious objector was
administratively denied, a decision subsequently upheld by a federal court.

But in another case in San Jose earlier this year, a federal judge
order the Marine Corps to discharge Lance Cpl. Robert Zabala from the
reserves. Zabala first applied for conscientious objector status in 2004.

-- Contact staff writer Mark Walker at (760) 740-3529 or mlwalker@nctimes.com.

.

The Whole World Will Be Watching

The Whole World Will Be Watching

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/100607Z.shtml

By Bill Simpich
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Saturday 06 October 2007

Until today, the story about the impending second trial of
United States v. Lt. Ehren Watada was how the Army was planning on a
proceeding with very little publicity and almost no witnesses.

It almost worked. In a last-minute ruling at 4:48 pm on Friday,
the Hon. Benjamin Settle stayed the Watada trial from beginning on
Tuesday, October 9 and set a hearing for Friday, October 19. His
ruling also states that the trial cannot begin until at least October
26. The bigger question is whether it will ever happen at all. Now
there is no chance that this case is going to escape strict
international scrutiny. None.

Antiwar activists are jubilant at this unexpected turn of
events, as the anticipated media coverage of this clash will
inevitably encourage participation in the nationwide "Iraq
Moratorium" community events on October 19 and the national
mobilization against the war in eleven major cities on Saturday,
October 27. (Source: http://www.unitedforpeace.org/.)

During the first trial in February 2007, Lt. Watada and his
defense team put on a stunning display of resistance before a
bull-headed judge in the heart of Fort Lewis and in the eyes of the
mainstream media. Every prosecution witness had attested to the stout
heart and integrity of the defendant. Lt. Watada was about to tell
his story about his belief in the illegality of the war in Iraq,
based on his officer's oath to the United States Constitution,
(Source: http://www.thankyoult.org/content/view/1039/74/.) to what
seemed like the entire world. (Source for this and succeeding trial
description: http://www.thankyoult.org/content/view/1014/70/#Day%201.)

Abruptly, the judge halted the trial. Lt. Watada had submitted a
document in open court at the beginning of the trial admitting that
he had knowingly not boarded a plane to Iraq. The judge ruled that
the lieutenant had made a fatal admission that would prejudice his defense.

It was the kind of argument that one might expect from a
desperate defense attorney, but not from a judge. To top it off, Lt.
Watada's own lawyer was asking for the trial to go forward even while
the judge had ruled out all of Watada's defenses! It was apparent to
observers that there was a real possibility that the military jury
would be extremely lenient in deciding on Watada's guilt and sentence.

Since then, the question in activist and legal circles has been
whether Lt. Watada should be forced to endure a second trial. The
basis of the doctrine of double jeopardy is to ensure that the
prosecution doesn't get a "mulligan" ( i.e., "do-over") whenever
things aren't going their way.

The word was out that the Army Court of Criminal Appeals had
granted a stay, and the assumption was that judges would spend years
hoping that this would all somehow go away.

However, when the Army Court of Criminal Appeals ruled this
summer in favor of the prosecution, the army saw an opening for a
"snap trial". Activists were not following the case closely,
believing that the stay was still in effect. Although the appellate
court's decision dissolved the stay, that word didn't get out due to
lack of publicity.

Two weeks ago, Watada's lawyers had gone to the next level - the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces - and that court was
apparently happy to do nothing and watch Lt. Watada go down. (Source:
10/5 Seattle P-I.)

The general rule is that a civilian judge will not interfere
with a military proceeding. That's apparently why Watada's legal team
waited until Wednesday to file their motion for stay. At that point,
they could legitimately argue that they had exhausted their remedies.

The squeeze play to avoid publicity was in full effect. Early on
Friday, Fort Lewis Public Affairs announced that media wanting to
cover the trial had until Saturday at 4:30 pm to register with their
office. (Source: David Mitchell and Gerry Condon, Courage to Resist;
CtR organizer Jeff Paterson's letter.)

Rather than seek the testimony of journalists as in the initial
trial - which only resulted in even further publicity - the Army
subpoenaed regional anti-war organizers in an attempt to use their
testimony against Lt. Watada.

It was a big moment for Northwest activists, who had been
struggling to ensure at least a respectable showing of support for
this unexpected trial. Their hands were already full in handling the
campaign for Iraq war resister Robin Long, who was arrested on Monday
in a small town just north of the Washington state line. Will Iraq
War resisters be given sanctuary in Canada, like the Vietnam war
resisters? The question is not yet settled, but the outpouring of
support persuaded Canadian officials to temporarily release Long on
Wednesday rather than deport him back to the US. The Watada victory
was their second big win of the week. (Source: Courage to Resist, 10/3)

What has not changed is that Lt. Watada is facing six years in
prison. One year of his looming prison term is based on a "conduct
unbecoming an officer" charge, solely for a few well-chosen words in
a historic speech last year to the Veterans For Peace Convention,
with fifty Iraq War veterans standing by his side:

"Today, I speak with you about a radical idea. It is one born
from the very concept of the American soldier (or service member). It
became instrumental in ending the Vietnam War - but it has been long
since forgotten. The idea is this: that to stop an illegal and unjust
war, the soldiers can choose to stop fighting it ...

"I tell this to you because you must know that to stop this war,
for the soldiers to stop fighting it, they must have the
unconditional support of the people. I have seen this support with my
own eyes. For me it was a leap of faith.

"For other soldiers, they do not have that luxury. They must
know it and you must show it to them. Convince them that no matter
how long they sit in prison, no matter how long this country takes to
right itself, their families will have a roof over their heads, food
in their stomachs, opportunities and education."
---

Bill Simpich is a civil rights attorney based in San Francisco.

.

Our Bonhoeffer moment

Our Bonhoeffer moment

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_2494.shtml

By Jeff Leys
Co-Coordinator, Voices for Creative Nonviolence
Oct 4, 2007

The Bonhoeffer Moment of nonviolent civil resistance and disobedience
to the world war being waged by the United States is clearly at hand.
As Congress considers an additional $190 billion to fund the Iraq and
Afghanistan wars through September 2008 and as the threats of war
against Iran become increasingly loud, it is time for us to learn
lessons from the German resistance to Hitler, to the Nazi regime and
to the war waged by the German nation-state. We must engage in the
Long Resistance to this current world war, using every nonviolent
means to bring about its end.

I was set to be tried on October 2 for an act of nonviolent civil
resistance at the U.S. Military Entrance Processing Command. The
judge dismissed the charge the day of the trial. Following is the
closing statement I prepared for the jury trial in Waukegan, Illinois.

Our Bonhoeffer Moment:

In 1942, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a Lutheran theologian engaged in
resistance work to bring about an end to the Nazi regime, penned the
following lines in his letter, "After Ten Years." He was in prison
and under investigation when he wrote:

"We have been silent witnesses of evil deeds; we have been drenched
by many storms; we have learnt the arts of equivocation and pretence;
experience has made us suspicious of others and kept us from being
truthful and open; intolerable conflicts have worn us down and even
made us cynical. Are we still of any use? What we shall need is not
geniuses, or cynics, or misanthropes, or clever tacticians, but
plain, honest, straightforward men. Will our inward power of
resistance be strong enough, and our honesty with ourselves
remorseless enough, for us to find our way back to simplicity and
straightforwardness?"

Silence.

Silence is golden.

Silence is Death.

Silence in the face of our country waging a world war is complicity
in the war; is complicity in the deaths of thousands of U.S. soldiers
and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens; is complicity in a crime
against humanity.

I chose to break the silence at the U.S. Military Entrance Processing
Command (MEPCOM) on July 5, 2006. I choose to break the silence today.

I chose to act at MEPCOM last July for a number of reasons. MEPCOM is
the command headquarters for the system of Military Entrance
Processing Stations. Each person entering the military takes their
oath of enlistment at one of these stations. MEPCOM, as the command
headquarters of this system, is the focal point of injustice being
done to those who serve in our country's military.

I acted to oppose the injustice of stop-move orders which force
service members to extend their tour of duty beyond its scheduled end date.

I acted to oppose the injustice of stop-loss orders which force
service members to remain in the military beyond the agreed upon end
of enlistment date.

I acted to demand that our country provide the highest quality health
care for veterans and their families, as well as for all who live
within the U.S.

I acted in solidarity with those members of the military who have
chosen to risk prison for refusing to comply with orders to deploy to
Iraq to fight in an unjust war.

I acted to demand that our country immediately withdraw from Iraq and
recommit itself to rebuilding the Common Good in Iraq and in the
United States -- funding hospitals, health care clinics, schools,
jobs programs and the like, rather than funding war, death and destruction.

I acted to engage in a conspiracy of Life with Iraqi citizens
suffering over these past 16 years of economic and military warfare
and to act in a conspiracy of Life with U.S. soldiers, citizens and
others who are engaged in nonviolent action to end the U.S. war in
and occupation of Iraq.

Does this form of civilly disobedient action accomplish anything? I
don't know. I believe it does, but I simply don't know within the
context of a world war -- the first world war begun by a democracy.
For guidance, I look to those German citizens who engaged in
resistance work to bring an end to the Nazi regime and to end the world war.

In 1943, German students formed the group the White Rose which
advocated for the overthrow of the Nazi regime and for an end to the
war. Their simple, yet profound, act was to distribute flyers
advancing their positions calling for resistance to Hitler and his
regime. Once discovered and arrested, they were executed by the
German state. Yet 50 years later, everyone in Germany would come to
know of Hans and Sophie Scholl and their comrades in the struggle to
end the war and the regime.

In 1945, Dietrich Bonhoeffer and many others were also executed by
the German state for engaging in resistance activities to overthrow
Hitler. Bonhoeffer, in 1939, had the option of remaining in the U.S.
where he would have been able to ride out the war in the safety of
academia. Instead he chose to return to Germany to participate in
resistance work. Writing as a Christian theologian about his country
in which the Church was a willing accomplice in crimes against
humanity, Bonhoeffer stated his reason for returning:

"Christians in Germany will face the terrible alternative of either
willing the defeat of their nation in order that Christian
civilization may survive, or willing the victory of their nation and
thereby destroying our civilization. I know which of these
alternatives I must choose; but I cannot make this choice in security."

Bonhoeffer knew what choice he had to make, he made it, and he paid
the price for it.

Let this be our Bonhoeffer Moment of resistance to our country's
world war in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere that the guns are being aimed.

The examples of Hans Scholl, Sophie Scholl and Dietrich Bonhoeffer
echo down through the years. In 1983, German judges and prosecutors
recalled the example set by the German resistance efforts to Hitler
and the Nazi regime and crimes against humanity and determined that
it was their obligation to act to prevent nuclear genocide from
occurring. German judges and prosecutors actively blockaded the U.S.
military bases to which Pershing nuclear cruise missiles were being
deployed. They acted to uphold international law even though that
meant violating national law.

So does an act of entering the U.S. Military Entrance Processing
Command do any good? I don't know. I do know that my action did not
stand alone on that day. I do know that others are engaged in active
nonviolent civil disobedience to end the Iraq war. Since February 5
of this year, over 700 people have been arrested across the U.S. in
actions to end the Iraq war -- with many more arrests to come.

I ask you today to join with us in this conspiracy of Life. You have
the opportunity today to find me guilty or not guilty. If you believe
that the war in Iraq is proper and just, you should find me guilty --
regardless of what the law says. If you believe the war in Iraq must
be brought to an end today, you should find me not guilty --
regardless of what the law says.

The choice is clear and stark. Life or Death. Not guilty or guilty.
The future of the war is in your hands today. I urge you to follow
your conscience -- regardless of the law.
---

Jeff Leys is Co-Coordinator of Voices for Creative Nonviolence and a
national organizer with Seasons of Discontent: A Presidential
Occupation Project as well as the Occupation Project. He can be
contacted via email, jeffleys@vcnv.org.

.

'Back-door' draft gets attention to help keep military numbers up

'Back-door' draft gets attention to help keep military numbers up

http://news.medill.northwestern.edu/washington/news.aspx?id=62501

by James Foley
Oct 03, 2007

In this fourth year of the war in Iraq, the word "draft" has once
again emerged as the Bush administration has pressed to maintain the
troop surge.

Although most informed sources on either side of the debate believe
there isn't the political will or strategic rationale for a draft,
many speak of a "back-door draft," extending military service for
some active and reserve troops beyond the end of their contract.

Stop-Loss

Under the law, the president as commander-in-chief has broad powers
in managing the armed forces. This right essentially allows the
military to retain the service members with their combat units for as
long as those units are deployed. That could mean a soldier who
signed up for a four-year hitch could have his or her duty extended
for the length of another tour in Iraq or Afghanistan.

It's called "stop-loss." John Boyce, in the Army office of Public
Affairs, said that stop-loss is a, "statutory tool that allows the
Army to sustain a force that has trained together to remain a
cohesive element throughout its deployment."

Stop-loss, said Boyce, "is used sparingly, affecting only about 1
percent of the total force, for limited periods of time. This
balances the need for unit effectiveness against the impact on
individual soldiers."

Army statistics released at the end of April show there are 5,185
active troops doing extended duty under stop-loss -- 1,432 in Reserve
and 2,103 in the Guard, making for a total of 8,720.

The highest reported level of stop-loss was May, 2005 when 14,288
total troops were called to extended duty. In all, more than 50,000
troops have been held in stop-loss since December 2004, according to Army data.

Marti Hiken, co-chair of the military law task force of the National
Lawyers Guild said, "I think the numbers are much higher, we've had
over 32,000 calls in the GI Hotline -- most from stop-loss issues."

Evan Knappenberger, a former intelligence analyst based out of Fort
Hood, who was deployed in Iraq for all of 2006, said that more than
half his old unit is currently serving under stop-loss in Iraq.

"Their contracts are up or will be up before their deployment is
over, but they're being forced to go."

A separate issue is the legality of keeping or deploying the solider
when it violates his or her contract with the military.

Lawyer Steven Goldberg represented reservist Emiliano Santiago in the
case, Santiago vs. Rumsfeld, in 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in
2005, the highest court test yet of stop-loss appeals. Goldberg
argued that without the backing of Congress, President Bush (with
Rumsfeld as his agent) did not have the authority to unilaterally
bypass the terms of a soldier's contract when a soldier is not
already on active duty.

"It's hard for anybody to understand the terms of these contracts,"
said Goldberg in a phone interview, "but at least the Army should be
held to what's in the contract."

Santiago lost the case decisively and was shipped to Afghanistan
later that year.

Draft

Meanwhile the draft is still being tossed around as a potential
instrument of maintaining troop levels. The "War Czar," Lt. General
Douglas Lute, created a minor firestorm when questioned in August by
Michelle Norris of NPR about whether he foresaw a return to the draft.

The general responded, "I think it makes sense to certainly consider
it, and I can tell you, this has always been an option on the table,
but ultimately, this is a policy matter between meeting the demands
for the nation's security by one means or another." He quickly
modified his statement the following day.

But, according to Lieutenant Colonel Jonathan Withington, a spokesman
for the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs, "There is
absolutely no consideration being given to reinstituting the draft."

Withington said a draft would return the armed services to a younger,
less-capable force at a higher cost.

"The Department of Defense supports continuing with an all-volunteer
force because it has resulted in a higher caliber of people serving
our country. The people serving are doing so because they want to,
and it is more cost-effective than a conscripted force."

He said the current volunteer force is cheaper than a draft force by
more than $4 billion annually.

Kelly Dougherty, executive director of Iraq Veterans Against the War,
and a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom as a member of the Army
National Guard, said, "People say it's an all-volunteer army, but the
truth is many people's contracts have been extended, some
involuntarily extended. That's not only against an all-volunteer
military, but putting the same people in a combat zone again and
again and again… We get a lot of calls (asking) 'What should I do?
Should I go back?'"
---

Draft Time line:

September, 1917- November, 1918- During U.S. involvement in World War
I, almost three million men entered military service through the draft..

1940- President Franklin Roosevelt created the country's first
peacetime draft and established the Selective Service System.

1943- Year of highest draft inductions- more than 3.3 million service members

November, 1940- October, 1946- World War II, over 10 million U.S. men
drafted into service

1948-1973 The draft functioned to fill vacancies in the armed forces
that were not be filled through voluntary means.

June 1950- June 1953- Korean War, 1.5 million and a half are drafted
into service

August,1964- February, 1973- Vietnam Conflict, almost two million are
drafted into service

1969- First draft lottery drawing since 1942. All men assigned a
certain lottery number were classified available for military service
and were called to report for possible induction.

1973- The draft ended and U.S. converted to an all-volunteer military

1975- Selective Service registration requirement was suspended

1980- President Carter resumed the registration requirement in
response to the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan.

2007- Registration continues as a hedge against underestimating the
number of servicemen needed for a future military conflict.

-Time line data compiled by Selective Service Web site

.

Second Trial Illegal, Watada Argues

Second Trial Illegal, Watada Argues

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/100407R.shtml

By Mike Barber
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer
Wednesday 03 October 2007

Lawyers turn to federal judges in Seattle to stop new court-martial.

Lawyers for Fort Lewis 1st Lt. Ehren Watada, who in June 2006
went public with his refusal to serve in Iraq and said the war is
illegal, asked the U.S. District Court in Seattle on Wednesday to
halt his court-martial, which is only days away.

Watada's second court-martial is slated to begin Tuesday. His
first court-martial earlier this year ended in a mistrial before a
jury could deliberate.

Watada's lawyers said they hope for a decision Friday. Monday is
a federal holiday, Columbus Day.

Before Watada's lawyers announced their move, Fort Lewis
officials issued a news release saying the court-martial was slated
for 9 a.m. Tuesday.

Watada is charged with missing movement with his unit to Iraq
and of conduct unbecoming an officer for anti-war statements he made
in the media and as a speaker at the national convention of Veterans
for Peace in Seattle in the summer of 2006. If convicted, he could
face up to six years in prison.

Watada's case is being appealed on grounds that a second
court-martial violates his constitutional protections against double
jeopardy - being tried twice on the same charge - because he was
court-martialed earlier this year on those charges. But, over his
objection, a mistrial was declared "without there being the requisite
manifest necessity for such declaration," said court papers filed
Wednesday. The military judge, Lt. Col. John Head, ordered a second trial.

The U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals and Head have ruled
otherwise, dismissing the double-jeopardy claims. The issue last
month was presented to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed
Forces, the military's highest court and made up of civilian judges
who hear military issues.

"We believe we have a strong case and are looking forward to
litigating the double-jeopardy issue in federal court," one of
Watada's lawyers, Ken Kagan, said.

Kagan and Jim Lobsenz, both of the Seattle law firm Carney
Badley Spellman, Wednesday filed a writ of habeas corpus and a
request for an emergency stay in Seattle federal court because the
Appeals Court for the Armed Forces has not ruled and the trial date
is quickly approaching.

Among other remedies, Watada's lawyers have asked the federal
court in Seattle "to issue a writ of habeas corpus releasing (Watada)
from all restraint imposed by the pending court-martial charges, and
declaring any trial on such charges to be barred and prohibited by
the double-jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment."

After learning of the new court challenge, Fort Lewis officials
said in a statement that they had followed the law in scheduling a
second court-martial.

"We've not seen the filing or heard a ruling on it from the
court, so we will not speculate on what effect it may have on next
week's scheduled trial. However, the government has followed the law
and rules throughout the process of bringing this case to trial. The
U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals in Balston, Va., determined that
this case was not prohibited by double jeopardy and may properly
proceed to trial. The court issued its ruling after considering
comprehensive briefs and arguments from the parties."

Kagan said he thinks that there's a likelihood a federal judge
will accept the case because military officers are federal officers
who fall under the Seattle federal court's jurisdiction.

Kagan said he believes there is "a good chance" the
court-martial will be delayed because local federal judges feel bound
by precedents of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and other
higher civilian courts. "Those circuits have looked at this issue and
concluded when there is a decent double-jeopardy claim, you have to
stop the trial, and you've got to review it," Kagan said.

.
Court documents show that Watada's term of service as an
active-duty military officer ended in December, but he has been held
over because of the legal proceedings. He refused to go to Iraq in
June 2006 with the 3rd Stryker Brigade.

'I Don't Think This Place Is Worth Another Soldier's Life'

'I Don't Think This Place Is Worth Another Soldier's Life'

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/26/AR2007102602402.html

After 14 months in a Baghdad district torn by mounting sectarian
violence, members of one U.S. unit are tired, bitter and skeptical.

By Joshua Partlow
Washington Post Foreign Service
Saturday, October 27, 2007; Page A01

BAGHDAD, Oct. 26 Their line of tan Humvees and Bradley Fighting
Vehicles creeps through another Baghdad afternoon. At this pace, an
excruciating slowness, they strain to see everything, hoping the next
manhole cover, the next rusted barrel, does not hide another bomb. A
few bullets pass overhead, but they don't worry much about those.

"I hate this road," someone says over the radio.

They stop, look around. The streets of Sadiyah are deserted again. To
the right, power lines slump down into the dirt. To the left, what
was a soccer field is now a pasture of trash, combusting and smoking
in the sun. Packs of skinny wild dogs trot past walls painted with
slogans of sectarian hate.

A bomb crater blocks one lane, so they cross to the other side, where
houses are blackened by fire, shops crumbled into bricks. The remains
of a car bomb serve as hideous public art. Sgt. Victor Alarcon's
Humvee rolls into a vast pool of knee-high brown sewage water -- the
soldiers call it Lake Havasu, after the Arizona spring-break party
spot -- that seeps in the doors of the vehicle and wets his boots.

"When we first got here, all the shops were open. There were women
and children walking out on the street," Alarcon said this week. "The
women were in Western clothing. It was our favorite street to go down
because of all the hot chicks."

That was 14 long months ago, when the soldiers from the 1st
Battalion, 18th Infantry Regiment, 1st Infantry Division, arrived in
southwestern Baghdad. It was before their partners in the Iraqi
National Police became their enemies and before Shiite militiamen,
aligned with the police, attempted to exterminate a neighborhood of
middle-class Sunni families.

Next month, the U.S. soldiers will complete their tour in Iraq. Their
experience in Sadiyah has left many of them deeply discouraged, by
both the unabated hatred between rival sectarian fighters and the
questionable will of the Iraqi government to work toward peaceful solutions.

Asked if the American endeavor here was worth their sacrifice -- 20
soldiers from the battalion have been killed in Baghdad -- Alarcon
said no: "I don't think this place is worth another soldier's life."

While top U.S. commanders say the statistics of violence have
registered a steep drop in Baghdad and elsewhere, the soldiers'
experience in Sadiyah shows that numbers alone do not describe the
sense of aborted normalcy -- the fear, the disrupted lives -- that
still hangs over the city.

Before the war, Sadiyah was a bustling middle-class district, popular
with Sunni officers in Saddam Hussein's military. It has become
strategically important because it represents a fault line between
militia power bases in al-Amil to the west and the Sunni insurgent
stronghold of Dora to the east. U.S. commanders say the militias have
made a strong push for the neighborhood in part because it lies along
the main road that Shiite pilgrims travel to the southern holy cities
of Najaf and Karbala.

American soldiers estimate that since violence intensified this year,
half of the families in Sadiyah have fled, leaving approximately
100,000 people. After they left, insurgents and militiamen used their
abandoned homes to hold meetings and store weapons. The neighborhood
deteriorated so quickly that many residents came to believe neither
U.S. nor Iraqi security forces could stop it happening.

The descent of Sadiyah followed a now-familiar pattern in Baghdad. In
response to suicide bombings blamed on Sunni insurgent groups such as
al-Qaeda in Iraq, the Shiite militias, particularly the Mahdi Army,
went from house to house killing and intimidating Sunni families. In
many formerly mixed neighborhoods of Baghdad, such as al-Amil and
Bayaa, Shiites have become the dominant sect, with their militias the
most powerful force.

"It's just a slow, somewhat government-supported sectarian
cleansing," said Maj. Eric Timmerman, the battalion's operations officer.

The focus of the battalion's efforts in Sadiyah was to develop the
Iraqi security forces into an organized, fair and proficient force --
but the American soldiers soon realized this goal was unattainable.
The sectarian warfare in Sadiyah was helped along by the Wolf
Brigade, a predominantly Shiite unit of the Iraqi National Police
that tolerated, and at times encouraged, Mahdi Army attacks against
Sunnis, according to U.S. soldiers and residents. The soldiers
endured repeated bombings of their convoys within view of police
checkpoints. During their time here, they have arrested 70 members of
the national police for collaboration in such attacks and other crimes.

The Interior Ministry, which oversees the national police, has said
that officials are working hard to root out militiamen from the force
and denied that officers have any intention of participating in
sectarian violence.

But in one instance about two months ago, the American soldiers heard
that the Wolf Brigade planned to help resettle more than 100 Shiite
families in abandoned houses in the neighborhood. When platoon leader
Lt. Brian Bifulco arrived on the scene, he noticed that "abandoned
houses to them meant houses that had Sunnis in them."

"What we later found out is they weren't really moving anyone in, it
was a cover for the INP to go in and evict what Sunni families were
left there," recalled Bifulco, 23, a West Point graduate from
Huntsville, Ala. "We showed up, and there were a bunch of Sunni
families just wandering around the streets with their bags, taking up
refuge in a couple Sunni mosques in the area."

As the militiamen and insurgents battled it out, the bodies mounted
up. U.S. troops said that earlier this year it was common for them to
find at least half a dozen corpses scattered on the pavement during
their daily patrols.

Militiamen in BMWs rode around the neighborhood with megaphones,
demanding that residents evacuate. Mortar rounds launched from nearby
Bayaa, a Mahdi Army stronghold, began crashing down regularly in
Sadiyah. Three mosques in the neighborhood were rigged with
explosives and destroyed.

The national police erected checkpoints outside other mosques and
prevented Sunnis from attending services. The U.S. soldiers began
facing ever more sophisticated armor-piercing roadside bombs known as
EFPs, short for explosively formed penetrators. Some of them were
linked in arrays that blasted out as many as 18 heated copper slugs.

Over time, the neighborhood became a battleground that residents fled
by the thousands. Hundreds of shops shut down, schools closed, and
access to basic services such as electricity, fuel and food
deteriorated. "The end state was people left. They felt unsafe," said
Timmerman, the operations officer.

"We were so committed to them as a partner we couldn't see it for
what it was. In retrospect, I've got to think it was a coordinated
effort," Timmerman said. "To this day, I don't think we truly
understand how infiltrated or complicit the national police are" with
the militias.

Lt. Col. George A. Glaze, the battalion commander, says his soldiers
are playing the role of a bouncer caught between brawling customers.
Alone, they can restrain the fighters, keep them off balance, but
they cannot stop the melee until the house lights come on -- that is,
until the Iraqi government steps in.

"They're either going to turn the lights on or we're all going to
realize they've moved the switch," he said.

"I'm frustrated. After 14 months, I've got a lot of thoughts in my
head. Do they fundamentally get giving up individual rights and power
for the greater good?" Glaze said. "I'm going to leave here being
skeptical of everything."

Over the past two months, the U.S. soldiers have recruited more than
300 local residents, most of them Sunnis, into a neighborhood defense
force. This has proved more controversial in Sadiyah than elsewhere;
the Iraqi government has openly accused the force's members of
abusing residents and has limited their freedom of movement. In
September, after Glaze led an eight-month campaign to kick out the
Wolf Brigade, soldiers from the Iraqi army's Muthanna Brigade, which
has clashed with Sunni volunteers in the Abu Ghraib area, arrived in Sadiyah.

The Iraqi army's arrival and the emergence of the Sunni volunteers
have coincided with some positive signs, the soldiers said. Some of
the shops along the once-busy commercial district of Tijari Street
now open for a few hours a day. The number of violent incidents has
dropped, although it rose again over the past two weeks, officers said.

"This is a dangerous place," said Capt. Lee Showman, 28, a senior
officer in the battalion. "People are killed here every day, and you
don't hear about it. People are kidnapped here every day, and you
don't hear about it."

On Oct. 14, Washington Post special correspondent Salih Saif Aldin
was killed while on assignment in Sadiyah.

Those who patrol the neighborhood every day say the fight has left
them tired, bitter, wounded and confused. Many of their scars are on
display, some no one can see. Sgt. 1st Class Todd Carlsrud has a long
gash on the right side of his neck and carries a lump of shrapnel
lodged against his spine that his doctors would not risk cutting out.
Another sergeant felt the flaming pain of a bullet tearing through
his cheek and learned the taste of his own warm blood. He was one of
three soldiers that day to get shot in the head -- a fourth was hit
in the biceps -- when his squad walked into a house and found two
gunmen waiting.

"The closer we get to leaving, the more we worry about it," said
Alarcon, 27, sitting at a plastic table with several other soldiers
outside their outpost in Sadiyah. "Being here, you know that any
second, any time of the day, your life could be over."

"Gone in a flash," said Sgt. Matthew Marino.

"We had two mechanics working in the motor pool get hit by mortars,"
Alarcon said. "You would have never thought." Both died.

Many of the soldiers from the battalion are on their second tour in
Iraq. Three years ago, they were based in Tikrit, the home of Saddam
Hussein, a city they entered expecting to fight a determined Sunni
insurgency. By the end of their tour, with much of the violence
contained, many of them felt optimistic about progress in Iraq.

"I honestly thought we were making a difference in Tikrit. Then we
come back to a hellhole," Marino said. "That was a playground
compared to Baghdad."

The American people don't fully realize what's going on, said Staff
Sgt. Richard McClary, 27, a section leader from Buffalo.

"They just know back there what the higher-ups here tell them. But
the higher-ups don't go anywhere, and actually they only go to the
safe places, places with a little bit of gunfire," he said. "They
don't ever [expletive] see what we see on the ground."

.

Thousands march against the war in S.F., across the country

Thousands march against the war in S.F., across the country

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/10/28/BAJHT0ULT.DTL&tsp=1

Jim Doyle,Susan Sward, Chronicle Staff Writers
Sunday, October 28, 2007

On cue from a bullhorn's blast, thousands of protesters fell to the
pavement on Market Street in a symbolic "die-in" Saturday as part of
a coordinated protest staged in cities across the country against the
war in Iraq.

For three minutes the demonstrators lay on the pavement, representing
what organizers said were more than 1 million Iraqis killed since the
war began in 2003. The protesters then resumed their march from San
Francisco's Civic Center to Dolores Park.

March organizers put their number at 30,000 - old, young, workers,
students, religious leaders. Police declined to give a formal
estimate, but onlookers said the demonstrators definitely numbered
more than 10,000. They filled up Market Street for several blocks,
shouting that U.S. troops should be brought home and carrying banners
decrying the war.

At the head of the marchers was a band of Native American drummers
who pounded a steady beat as protesters chanted, "No more war!"

Before the march began, demonstrators gathered in front of City Hall
to hear speakers berate the Bush administration and call on Americans
to stand up against the war. Organizers said part of the reason for
staging this protest was to mark that it is now five years since
Congress voted to authorize the use of U.S. force in Iraq.

"Silence shows compliance," Nicole Davis, a leader of the Campus
Anti-War Network group, told the crowd at the San Francisco event,
which was organized by the Oct. 27th Coalition of several groups,
including ANSWER - Act Now To Stop War and End Racism. "If you
disagree with this war," she added, "it is your duty to stand up and
let the world know."

Sarah Sloan, an ANSWER spokeswoman, said her group estimated the size
of the crowd "based on the number of blocks - about seven - that the
march takes up and the density of the crowd."

In New York, thousands demonstrated in the rain, marching to Foley
Square. In Chicago, thousands of protesters gathered at Union Park
and marched to the Federal Plaza. Organizers said anti-war rallies,
sponsored nationally by a coalition of groups headed by United for
Peace & Justice, also took place in Seattle, Salt Lake City,
Jonesborough, Tenn., Philadelphia, Orlando, Los Angeles, New Orleans,
Boston and other cities around the country.

"It would be one thing if it were just San Francisco, but it's not,"
Jim Haber, a Bay Area chapter representative of United for Peace &
Justice, told The Chronicle.

"We've helped organizers mobilize their communities in places like
Jonesborough, Tenn., and Salt Lake City, which you don't typically
associate with anti-war demonstrations. This underscores the broad
opposition to the war in Iraq."

At Dolores Park, hundreds of black boots were placed in rows on a
hillside in memory of the U.S. soldiers who died in Iraq. A tag
bearing the name of a dead soldier was attached to each pair of
boots, and many of the boots had daisies and other flowers placed in them.

At the park, demonstrators listened to an array of speakers,
including American Indian Movement leader Dennis Banks and anti-war
activist and congressional candidate Cindy Sheehan. She asked people
to vote for her instead of her opponent, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, in 2008.

Banks told his audience: "As I look out over this crowd, I see many
young people. That gives me great hope." He recalled that it was the
young - many of them students - during the Vietnam War in the late
1960s who took to the streets to pressure the United States to end that war.

Anne Roesler, of the group Military Families Speak Out, said her son
was a U.S. soldier who had been deployed to Iraq three times and
returned with post-traumatic stress disorder. "This is Congress'
war," she said. "They have the blood of this war on their hands -
they are building their political careers with the blood of our loved
ones and Iraqis."

Clarence Thomas, past secretary-treasurer of the International
Longshore and Warehouse Union Local 10, said, "We have to take a
lesson from the civil rights movement. We have to wake up and
understand we are all in this together."

In the throng of San Francisco demonstrators was a trio of Code Pink
members, including one attired as the Statue of Liberty, who belted
out, "I am going to sing until the world is free, down by the
riverside." One group, the Raging Grannies, entertained the crowd
with protest lyrics sung to classic songs such as "Anchors Away."

Labor groups made a special effort to get their members to turn out,
with hundreds of workers showing up - among them sign installers,
teachers, roofers, nurses, security guards and communication workers.

Sharon Cornu, secretary-treasurer Central Labor Council of Alameda
County, said it would be the first time that seven Bay Area labor
councils - San Francisco, Monterey Bay, North Bay, South Bay, San
Mateo, Contra Costa and Alameda - worked together to urge members to
attend the protest.

Although Bay Area labor groups have been involved in earlier protests
against the war, Cornu said, this was the biggest effort yet. "More
and more union members are seeing the war's impact on our schools,
transportation and health care systems because money is being spent
abroad that could be spent at home," Cornu added.

"We are working people - we make things in this country, and we want
to be heard," said Oakland roofer Leroy Cisneros, echoing Cornu's
words about the pressing need for expenditures on education and health care.

Wendy Bloom, a nurse from Children's Hospital in Oakland, said, "Our
priorities are distorted. We are spending billions on an unnecessary
war instead of health care."

In the days before the protest, organizers used anti-war videos on
the Internet to encourage participation in the rallies across the
country. One video was a two-minute short by the Brave New Foundation
in Culver City that invited viewers to be part of something "huge and
meaningful."

Another two-minute video, "Confront the War President," featured a
series of wrenching images of the Iraq war's dead and dying, grieving
relatives and the wounded. It included film clips of President Bush
in interviews - one in 2006 saying, "To assume I wanted war is just
flat wrong," and another in 2004 stating: "I am a war president. I
make policy decisions here in the Oval Office on foreign policy
matters with war on my mind."
---

Chronicle news services contributed to this report. E-mail the
writers at jdoyle@sfchronicle.com and ssward@sfchronicle.com.

.

Friday, October 26, 2007

US Army Lures Foreigners With Promise Of Citizenship

US Army Lures Foreigners With Promise Of Citizenship

http://www.countercurrents.org/meyer231007.htm

By Cordula Meyer
23 October, 2007
Spiegel

More than 30,000 foreign troops are enlisted in the US Army, many of
them serving in Iraq. Their reward for risking their lives for their
adopted country is US citizenship.

When Anna Maria Clarke, 26, was a teenager living in the western
German city of Mannheim, she already had a weakness for smart
uniforms, particularly on American soldiers, and for war movies like
"Full Metal Jacket." It was an attraction that Clarke, a German
citizen, felt early on and still feels today.

The parents of 25-year-old Julieta Ortiz immigrated to the United
States from Mexico City, dirt-poor but ambitious. They worked hard
picking strawberries in California, determined that their daughter
would have a better life. Four years ago, Julieta suddenly found a
way to that better life -- a difficult path, but one that would lift
her out of the poverty of her childhood.

Jose Figueira, 31, spent much of his life listening to his father
proudly recount his experiences as a soldier in the Portuguese army.
Figueira, who grew up in Massachusetts, yearned to have something he
could be just as proud of. "I wanted to prove that I'm a good
citizen, that I'm willing to stand up for everything I love about
this country."

They may have different reasons for joining the US Armed Forces, but
all three are now among the more than 30,000 foreign soldiers
fighting for America -- not as Americans, but as a Mexican, a
Portuguese and even a German. Without its foreign soldiers, the
United States would have trouble coming up with enough troops to meet
the demand in Iraq. The foreigners, for their part, take the
dangerous job mainly for its biggest reward: US citizenship.

Since Sept. 11, 2001, the United States has granted US citizenship to
32,500 foreign soldiers. In July 2002, US President George W. Bush
issued an executive order to expand existing legislation to offer a
fast track to citizenship to foreigners who agree to fight for the US
Armed Forces. About 8,000 non-Americans have joined the US military
every year since then.

The foreigners already represent 5 percent of all recruits. They even
make up the majority of soldiers from some New York and Los Angeles
neighborhoods. Four years and 3,800 US deaths after the beginning of
the Iraq campaign, fewer and fewer American citizens are willing to
fight in a war opposed by a majority of the US population. But
despite the Iraq war's lack of popularity, US generals are demanding
180,000 new recruits a year.

The Pentagon already spends $3.2 billion a year on recruitment, even
sending its recruiters to high schools to persuade 17-year-olds still
a year away from graduation to enlist.

The US military learned long ago that foreign recruits are often the
most dedicated Americans. Anna Maria from Mannheim, looking girlish
with her red ponytail, had always dreamed about the US military. She
was attracted to the American soldiers living in Germany, who seemed
so relaxed about life. When she fell in love, it was always with an
American GI. Her soft spot earned her the nickname "Ami-Anna"
("Yankee Anna"). Of course, she married a GI. She began secretly
watching her husband's fellow soldiers doing their push-ups and
sit-ups in the morning. Then she started exercising, lost 25
kilograms (55 pounds), passed the admission test and survived US Army
boot camp in Texas.

Over 100 Germans

Now Airman First Class Clarke works in the human resources department
at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland. But the reality of the war
shows up on her desk sometimes. Part of Clarke's job is to make sure
that the bodies of soldiers killed in Iraq make it home as complete
as possible.

Of course, Clarke expects to be sent to Iraq herself at any time. She
says that she would even have enlisted without the promise of her new
US citizenship, but it's important to her nonetheless. "After all,"
she says, "I could be killed for this country. It's nice to know that
it's actually my country." There are currently 128 Germans serving in
the US military -- more than from any other European country except
Great Britain.

Most foreign recruits come from Latin America and the Caribbean.
Latino rights groups in the United States, fearful that immigrants
are being used as cannon fodder, object to the somewhat shady
practice of offering citizenship in return for military service. But
it happens to be a fact of life "that immigrants always have the more
difficult jobs," says military expert Michael O'Hanlon of the
Brookings Institution. He is more concerned about the fact that many
US citizens are already serving their third tours of duty at the
front. Increased recruitment of foreigners, says O'Hanlon, could help
lighten the burden.

O'Hanlon has even proposed recruiting potential new citizens for
military service in selected countries, like the Philippines or
Uganda, a proposal the Pentagon is considering.

Military recruiters have been particularly successful in immigrant
communities. "Immigrants want to prove to American society that they
are especially patriotic," says Bill Galvin of the Center on
Conscience and War, a liberal anti-war organization. "The recruitment
officers take advantage of this and promise citizenship in return."
Patriotism was a strong motivator for Jose Figueira to join the US
military. "I wanted to prove that the Americans could trust me," he
says. "I wanted to prove that I belong here."

Sergeant Figueira, a member of the National Guard, is no military
buff. He's realized, after serving in Iraq, that the reality of war
is more than he expected. He talks about Baghdad, about roadside
bombs and snipers. He also talks about the many hours he spent under
enemy fire repairing the vehicles in his convoy after a bomb attack.
He saw soldiers being killed, and the tears come to his eyes when he
talks about the experience. Nevertheless, he says, he would return to
Iraq at any time.

It's people like Figueira who demonstrate that immigrants "are
indispensable for the military," says Margaret Stock, a lawyer and
lecturer at the legendary US Military Academy at West Point. "They
are more successful and they're less likely to give up," she adds.
Besides, immigrants are a good investment for the military. "You get
more bang for your buck," says Stock.

It is for these reasons that the military is now deliberately
targeting immigrants for recruitment, especially those who speak
Arabic or Farsi -- but also Latinos, the largest immigrant group in
the United States. Corporal Julieta Ortiz, Mexican by birth, joined
the Marines "because I wanted to make something out of myself and
because citizenship means a lot to me." Being a US citizen helps her
advance in her career, because, as she says, "I couldn't become an
officer" as a foreigner in the US military. She is now an
architecture student and wants to work for the government in the
future. She glosses over the potential risks of serving in Iraq.
"It's worth it to me," says Ortiz.

"People with no prospects see the military as a way out of poverty,"
says Jorge Mariscal, a professor of Latino Studies at the University
of California, San Diego. The uniform means money -- money for
college and money to pay bills. "Immigrants are taken advantage of,"
says Bill Galvin, who is against the war and advises soldiers in
Washington who want to get out of the military before their contracts
are up. "Those who have no other options are the most likely to end
up in combat."

A US Flag, and a Certificate of Citizenship

One of them was Juan Alcantara, 22, the son of immigrants from the
Dominican Republic who grew up in New York's Washington Heights neighborhood.

Alcantara survived his first year in Iraq, but then the recent troop
surge began and, under an executive order issued by President Bush,
Corporal Alcantara was told he would be kept on in Iraq for another
six months. He had been scheduled to return home on June 28. His
girlfriend gave birth to their daughter on June 29. On Aug. 6, a bomb
exploded while Alcantara was searching a house in the town of
Baqubah, north of Baghdad. Alcantara was killed in the blast.

His mother, Maria, now sits in her apartment in Washington Heights,
wiping the tears from her eyes. She once told her son that the three
most important things in life are: "God, family and your country."

She says that the army promised Juan "up to $50,000 for college, plus
a $20,000 bonus, his choice of any of 200 jobs and a full-time
position." He filled out the application on the plastic-covered couch
in her living room. The mother says that she wept the first time her
son came home in his new dress uniform. "He was so elegant, so handsome."

She prayed when he was ordered to go to Iraq. Was Corporal Juan
Alcantara really convinced that he was defending his country? The
mother nods. She truly wants to believe all the things the officers
told her during the memorial service and at the funeral, when they
handed her a US flag, the Purple Heart, an award for wounded soldiers
-- and Juan's certificate of citizenship. Everyone at the ceremony
assured her that her son was a hero.

Juan Alcantara is the 103rd foreign soldier to become a US citizen
posthumously -- after dying in the Iraq war. His mother keeps the
framed certificate and the letters of condolence in a blue plastic bag.

Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan

.