Side Two - May 24, 2004

"In my judgment, this new paradigm renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions,"
-- White House counsel Alberto Gonzales in a memo to President Bush 

Obsolete?  Quaint?  Really?

Besides being morally objectionable and really quite impractical (One of the reasons that nations adhere to the Geneva Conventions is because they know that to do otherwise would put their own citizens at risk of similar treatment.), there are laws against torture and abuse of prisoners that the United States is obligated to follow.

 The Geneva Conventions consist of treaties formulated in Geneva, Switzerland that set the standards for international law for humanitarian concerns.  Nearly all 200 countries of the world (including the United States) are "signatory" nations, in that they have ratified these conventions.
Ref. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions

Article 6, Section 1 of the United States Constitution states:  “This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding. “

Here is one of the definitions of torture contained in a convention to which the United States is also a signatory: ''any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession.'' (The definition comes from the 1984 Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Similar definitions have existed for some time in customary law and in treaties, starting with Article 3 -- common to the four Geneva conventions of 1949 -- and many recent human rights conventions.) The 1984 convention declares, ''No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.''” http://www.worldpolicy.org/globalrights/treaties/torture.html

What can you do?  Write, speak, vote!  Let your opinions be known!  Hold people accountable.   Call or write to your elected representatives.

 Pres. George Bush: (202) 456-1414  
Sen. Maria Cantwell: (206) 220-6400
Sen. Patty Murray: (206) 553-5545  
Rep. Jim McDermott: (206) 225-3106

Fire Rumsfeld –
contribute to MoveOn ad https://www.moveon.org/hooded/

Side 2 - March 20, 2003

It isn't unpatriotic, naive, or futile
to oppose a war on Iraq.
In a democracy, dissent isn't treason.

Are we traitors to our country for opposing the will of this administration?  A president is not a king.  It is our duty as citizens to speak up when a president's acts are threats to freedom and justice.

Who's naive?

We must stop Saddam, they say, before he destroys the world.  But Iraq is making no threats against us.  The United States leads the world in amassing weapons of mass destruction - and using them.  Iraq, Afghanistan, Serbia and Kosovo have been poisoned with depleted uranium from US and NATO weapons.  Even Washington State's own fishing grounds have been contaminated by irresponsible testing.

Why does the president want us to go to war?

·              War is a distraction from the mess he's made of the economy, tax breaks for big business and the super-rich, massive unemployment, cuts in vital services and a soaring national debt.

·              War means profits for the multinational corporations that manufacture arms.

·              War means an excuse to take over Iraq’s oil – again, for the benefit of big corporations.

·              War means an excuse to pour more money into Israel’s apartheid and genocide in Palestine.

What about supporting our troops?

We do not wish any harm to the ordinary people who make up the majority of the US armed forces, but we hate what they may be asked to do to the ordinary people of another land.  We support them by taking every peaceful means to keep them safe at home instead of being sent forth to do those things.  To our brothers and sisters in the military, we offer the example of the Refusniks, Israeli reservists who refuse as a matter of conscience to take part in Israel’s brutal oppression of Palestine.  Some refuse to defend settlements on Palestinian land outside Israel’s legal borders.  Many say they’d gladly serve in their nation’s defense, but that Israel’s present unjust actions are threatening its long-term safety.

What about Israel and Palestine?

We cannot ignore the increasing horror of the atrocities taking place in Palestine and the slow but sure ethnic cleansing occurring there daily.  Carried out with American aid, such acts create rage and despair that has resulted in increasing, not decreasing, violence on both sides.  It is a very real possibility that massive transfer and expulsion of Palestinians from their homes will occur in the wake of an Iraq war.  Opposition to Israel’s unjust acts is not anti-semitic.  Israeli and Palestinian women together formed Women in Black to protest this destructive conflict.  The Israeli peace movement is strong.  American Jews too oppose these acts, for the well-being of Israel and America as well as Palestine.  One says:  “Our nation’s policies regarding the Israel-Palestine conflict are a catalyst for anti-American sentiment around the world, and the conflict itself is a major obstacle to peace and stability in the region.”

BUT DON’T DESPAIR. 
TOGETHER WE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
CAN STOP THIS WAR.

Tell Bush and your senators: 
no Iraq war, no money for Israel’s genocide in Palestine.
President Bush:  (202) 456-1111;  president@whitehouse.gov
Senator Cantwell:  (206) 220-6400;  maria@cantwell.senate.gov
Senator Murray:  (206) 553-5545;  senator_murray@murray.senate.gov