A.N.S.W.E.R.: 'Why we're marching on the Pentagon'

Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine... Occupation is A Crime

We are organizing a Mass March on the Pentagon on Saturday, March 21, and it is important that you and your family, friends, co-workers and fellow students put on your marching shoes that day. People are coming from all over the country. Simultaneous demonstrations are taking place in San Francisco and Los Angeles.

Why are we still marching even after the war criminal George W. Bush has left office? Because the people must speak out for what is right. More than 1 million Iraqis have died and tens of thousands of U.S. troops have been wounded or killed.

The Iraq and Afghanistan war will drag on for years unless we act now. The cost in lives and resources is criminal regardless of whether the Democrats or Republicans are in charge of the government.

We must also act to end U.S. support for Israel's ongoing war against the Palestinian people. The Bush Administration gave the green light and provided the weapons and the money for Israel's recent war against the Palestinian people in Gaza. More than 5,000 Palestinians were killed or wounded; the majority of casualties were civilians, including hundreds of children, in this high-tech massacre. “We the People” pay the bill as the U.S. provides $2.5 billion a year for Israel's massive military machine.

Why We Say: Bring All the Troops Home Now Not Later!

If Bush's war and occupation of Iraq was an illegal action of aggression—and it was—how can the new government say that it can only gradually end the war over a number of years? The Iraqis don't want foreign military forces running their country. No one would!
 
The Pentagon has employed 200,000 foreign contractors (mercenaries) and 150,000 U.S. troops to maintain the occupation of Iraq. They have no right to be there. A few thousand are being brought out of Iraq only to be redeployed to occupy Afghanistan, and the fools in the media proclaim “the war is winding down.” That is not true.

President Obama decided to keep the Pentagon just as it was under Bush. He even selected Bush appointee Robert Gates to keep his position as chief of the Pentagon. Gates announced that the new administration would double the number of troops sent to Afghanistan. That is certainly not the “change” most people thought was coming following the end of Bush's tenure.

These are wars for domination in the Middle East and Central Asia.

The people of the United States want change. We are sick and tired of wars of aggression waged abroad under false slogans of “national security.” These are wars that reap massive profits for corporate weapons-makers with the promise of winning control over the vast oil and natural gas reserves in the Middle East and Central Asia.

Working people may have another definition for “national security.” What really makes the people “insecure?” Ask the 2.3 million families who are losing their homes because they are being foreclosed when they can't pay their steep debts to the banks. Ironically, when these same parasitic bankers couldn't pay their debts, the federal government rushed in with a $2.5 trillion bailout using our tax dollars.

Or ask working-class students who are being laid off from their jobs just as tuition costs soar out of reach. What defines “security” for millions of young people whose future is at stake? Do they want tax dollars spent to kill poor people abroad or to finance education?

We will march on Saturday, March 21, the sixth anniversary of the start of the Iraq invasion, to demand that taxpayer dollars be used to meet people's needs—here and everywhere. This year's real Pentagon war budget will top $1 trillion.

This amount could create 10 million jobs, provide healthcare and education for all, rebuild New Orleans, and repair much of the damage done in Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine. We need money for jobs, housing, health care and education, not for wars of aggression.

The occupation of Iraq alone costs $12 billion each month. This amounts to $400 million each day, $16.7 million per hour and $278,000 per minute.

The Pentagon war machine does not act in our interests. Its wars benefit the biggest corporations and banks that seek to control the markets and riches of the Middle East. The people of Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine are not our enemies. They want to live free from colonial-type domination. Only a people's movement demanding an end to U.S. wars and militarism can win justice for people here and abroad.

Go to PentagonMarch.org for details about transportation, meetings and to get involved. Buses will be traveling to Washington, D.C. from across the country.

~ Act Now to Stop War and End Racism ~

[ via Links by George ]

Suspicious deaths of those who knew too much under Bush`s watch

As of January 20, 2009, George W. Bush finally made his exit from the Oval Office, leaving his fingerprints as the U.S. 'terror' president who has not only brought the once proud nation to its knees but also opened a Pandora box of plagues to the world - global 'terror' fear, Islamophobia, financial doom and incessant wars. He also left a trail of mysterious deaths that appear to be cover-ups for his surreptitious constitutional coup d'état of the United States for eight long, devastating years.

Not surprisingly, the Bush-Cheney administration has covered its tracks of criminal activities by closing files on some major unsolved cases: stolen elections, anthrax, Iraq-related government deceptions and lies, and corporate-related corruptions. As Bush no longer controls the government and its agencies, these suspicious deaths need to be reopened and thoroughly investigated for the sake of truth, justice and accountability.

Some of these untimely death cases were officially ruled as “suicides” and others were tagged as “accidents”. But all victims met their deaths at a time when they were about to reveal damaging secrets of the Bush's corrupt regime or they stood in Bush's way to usurp power for fascism over the American society. Although there were many lives extinguished that didn't get media attention during the 'torturous reign' of Bush-Cheney, the compiled list below contains the high-profile cases that expose the Bush gang as 'thieves', 'thugs' and worse still, 'traitors' to the United States of America. 

Election Fraud

-- Bush insider, Michael Connell, who has been directly implicated in the rigging of George W. Bush's 2000 and 2004 elections, was killed in a plane crash on December 19, 2008. He planned to tell all after he was served with a subpoena to testify in court on September 22, 2008.

Key Points Raised: a) Michael Connell, who was an experienced pilot, had abandoned two flights due to sabotage of his plane two months before his fatal “accident” on a cold but calm day. b) A credible source disclosed that Connell was afraid for his life after Karl Rove had threatened him and his wife.

-- Raymond Lemme, who was an official from the Florida Inspector General's office investigating the election rigging charges of whistleblower Clint Curtis, was found dead with his arms slashed in a motel room

Key Points Raised: a) His body was found in the motel room on July 1, 2003, but he signed a check-out receipt dated June 30, 2003, 6:54 a.m. b) The inconsistency of police report and photographs raises doubts of his apparent “suicide” that occurred not in Florida but in Georgia.

~ more... ~

Them and us child register: Politicians and celebrities can keep their details off a controversial new database

 Tens of thousands of politicians, celebrities and local bigwigs will be able to keep their addresses and details about their families off the Government's new children's database, it was revealed yesterday.

They will be allowed to withdraw everything but their children's names, sex and ages from the controversial computer record.

Powerful and influential parents who believe they will be in danger from others who may be 'hostile' will have their details struck off the ContactPoint database along with domestic violence victims and those in witness protection programmes.

But the great majority of ordinary families will be compelled to display their contact details alongside information about their children and their schools, doctors and social workers.

News of the 'get-out' clause will only add to the anger and suspicion that has greeted the £224million project. It has already has been hit by a string of delays over concerns over the security of the highly sensitive data it holds.

Ministers released details about the numbers likely to be able to take advantage of the 'get-out' rules as they launched the database.

Officials estimate that hundreds of parents in each local authority will be included in a 'shielding' system which will limit information about them on ContactPoint because they are judged to be 'at risk of significant harm'.

Across all the 150 town halls that will run the database, that adds up to at least 50,000.

~ more... ~

How likely is a partition of Turkey?

It is generally held that the right to self-determination may be viewed as a certain group's entitlement to determine its fate and mode of governance; however, the groups which are entitled to exercise this right are not clear in specific cases. There are no generally accepted rules and standards on this matter. The principle, currently formulated as the right to self-determination, was not designed by Wilson to be universally applicable. It was conceived as a resolution to ensure that the peoples ruled by the states that were defeated in World War I had an independent and sovereign state.

No generally acceptable rules have been formulated to ensure the application of the principle of self-determination. In addition, there are a number of vague and controversial points with respect to its implementation. These include the fate of the peoples who apparently have no ability to govern themselves but a strong aspiration for independence. Secondly, it is not obvious as to what extent the rights of the majority will be undermined in the presence of the minority's right to self-determination. Thirdly, if the exercising of the right is to be made via a referendum, it will not be easy to determine the scope and content of these popular votes. Fourth, when an ethnic group is recognized as having a right to independence, there will most probably be another minority. For instance, what will happen to the Georgian minority if the independence of South Ossetia is recognized?

The UN Charter makes mention of a peoples' right to self-determination; however, the emphasis on the principle is pretty weak. The charter treats the notion as a principle -- and not as a right or standard. But it is possible to talk about two periods where self-determination met with wider acceptance both as a right and a principle. It should be noted, however, that this right was recognized in both periods for specified ethnic groups and had a limited application. The first period is the aftermath of World War I, during which Wilson sought to ensure the independence of some communities in Europe. The second period is the aftermath of World War II, where the overall tendency in the practice of self-determination was to conclude the partition of overseas empires without causing instability to the international system. It is obvious that self-determination, which was frequently consulted during this period, also known as the process of decolonization, lost its impact and popularity when this era was over.

If self-determination refers to the right of a people to choose their modes of governance, future regime and political institutions, obviously this contradicts the right of a state to remain territorially intact. For this reason, the UN has remained cautious with separatist movements and has not endorsed and legitimized secessions based on the principle of self-determination. The primary reason is that it is rather likely that the UN will be in a difficult position if it allows such threats to the territorial integrity of its members.

Considering this brief explanation, it is impossible to suggest that Turkey may be partitioned by virtue of the principle of self-determination. It does not seem possible to argue that the practices of self-determination in the modern world can be presented as justification or as a model for Turkey's partition. For this reason, groups and communities in Turkey cannot ask to secede from Turkey just because peoples have the right to determine their future in principle. Therefore, neither the basic principles that shape the international system, nor the principle of self-determination allow the partition of Turkey.

How could Turkey be partitioned?

But this explanation should not be taken as a guarantee suggesting that Turkey cannot be partitioned. The current international system is significantly different than the one prevalent in the 20th century. Superficially, it is possible to say that this change and difference is partially about the shift in the focus of the system. While the 20th-century world placed emphasis on national states, the current global system also considers human security -- at least in principle. Of course, it would be naïve to argue that the system is entirely focused on individuals and their rights. But it is at least possible to assert that there is an overall tendency in which human security and human rights are seriously considered.

The concrete consequences of this tendency have become visible in the independence of some states in the post-Cold War era. Even though it is possible to talk about self-determination in the cases of independence in Central Asia, the Caucasus and the Balkans, a different custom and pattern has become influential in other examples, including the independence of East Timor and Kosovo.

~ more... ~

Bangladesh: Urge to 'form special war crime tribunal, commission'

Sector Commanders, intellectuals, lawyers and academicians yesterday suggested that the new government form a special tribunal and a commission to try the war criminals and collect evidences of war crimes.

However, some of them proposed holding the trial under international laws involving the United Nations for its acceptance to all.

They also congratulated the new government and the lawmakers on passing the resolution in the parliament unanimously on 'immediate' trial of war criminals on Thursday.

Terming the move 'the first victory of their movement,' Sector Commander Maj Gen (retd) KM Shafiullah said the trial of war criminals has become a national demand.

He said the trial should begin under the international laws involving the United Nations.

"I know that it will take a little longer to complete the trial if the United Nations is involved in it. But the United Nations' involvement in the trial process will leave no scope for any other government to overturn it," KM Shafiullah told The Daily Star.

He said the government will have to submit charge sheets against those who perpetrated war crimes.

Another sector commander Lt Gen (retd) Mir Shawkat Ali proposed that the government form a commission to collect all evidences of war crimes.

"The trial of war criminal must be held as per the laws of the country. We can engage an expert from international war crimes tribunal in the trial process. But it is the government, not any individual, that needs to file cases as these are crimes against humanity," he told The Daily Star.

He said it is the responsibility of the Awami League government to fulfil their election pledge of trying the war criminals because the new generation cast vote for them in the December 29 polls because of the pledge.

~ more... ~