US Veterans Demonstrate Against the Iraq Occupation

August 28, 2008

Bleeding Afghanistan

August 28, 2008

This is worth watching: Sonali Kolhatkar (author of Bleeding Afghanistan) on Democracy Now last week–

Peace Action Maine Live from the DNC

August 28, 2008

Dear friends,

I am writing to you today from the Democratic National Convention, where Peace Action Maine will be reaching out to fellow activists, meeting with Maine delegates and legislators, and speaking at a number of events in Denver.  Peace Action Maine will also be at the Republican National Convention in St Paul, and we encourage our supporters to visit to find out more.
Starting tomorrow, Peace Action Maine will be sending live reports to our website, from both conventions.
For members of the media who wish to speak to Mainers at the conventions, email, or call our office at 207 772 0680.
Danny Muller
with Peace Action Maine

Why we Protest

August 28, 2008

It works!  Our own Jonathan Williams – Peace Action’s SPAN Coordinator marched with IVAW and thousands of other protestors to block the way of Democratic delegates until they let an IVAW representative speak with the Obama camp.

From the IVAW website:

IVAW members in Denver on Wednesday where they led a march of ten thousand to the Democratic National Convention to deliver a message to Barack Obama calling on the Democratic nominee to endorse the three main goals of IVAW: Immediate withdrawal, full veterans benefits, and reparations for the Iraqi people.

Following a packed show at the Denver Coliseum where Rage Against the Machine and the Flobots encouraged the crowd to join IVAW’s march, two squads of 25 IVAW members each formed up outside the venue and began marching to the Pepsi center. The squads were led by members in dress uniforms and combat uniforms, with thousands of supporters marching behind them in support.

When they arrived at the DNC, representatives of IVAW asked to meet with Barack Obama to present their message. After negotiations with the

Former Texas Lt Governor Ben Barnes came out of the convention to accept a letter from the IVAW members. Jeff Key, a former Marine said the IVAW members intended to stay in place until a representative from Obama’s campaign came out to talk with them.

“I’m a patient man. I’m not going anywhere,” Key said.

Key, a former Marine from Salt Lake City, and Liam Madden, a former marine from Boston, were then escorted into the convention where they met with Phil Carter, head of veterans affairs for the Obama campaign. IVAW is now waiting for a formal response to their request address the delegates from the podium.

Lt. Vince Porter of the Denver Police Department said the department coordinated the meeting with the secret service and Obama’s office.

“The police in Denver have been exceptional and very, very supportive,” Key said. “This cannot be an easy job for them either, and they’ve just been incredible.”

Iraq & Afghanistan Tolls

August 27, 2008
Those who died in Iraq from Aug 17 to 23:

Cpl Travis Stottlemyer 20  Hatfield PA
George Stanciel  40  Greenwood MS

77 were seriously wounded.
96 were returned to occupation.

95 Iraqi sisters and brothers were killed.

In Afghanistan were killed:

Sgt Brian Studer  28  Roseau MN
Cpl Dustin Wasden  25  Canada
Pvt Stephen Stock  25  Canada
Sgt Shawn Eades  33  Canada
Sgt David Paquet  26  Rising Sun MD
Pvt Pawel Brodziikowski  25  Poland
Pvt Pawel Szwed  27  Poland
Cpl Waldemar Sujdak  28  Poland
Sgt David Todd Jr  36  Marrero LA
10 French soldiers by friendly fire reportedly
Cpl Barry Dempsey  29  England
Pvt Jonathan Luscher  20 Scranton PA
Sgt Kristopher Rodgers  29  Sturgis MI


Larger than Expected Protests at the DNC

August 26, 2008

Thousands more will work to steer the election on this issue after the conventions in one million homes across the country.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Democrats may have believed that most activists would concentrate their efforts at the Republican National Convention; but, public sentiment against the war in Iraq has equally marred the opinion of a Congress controlled by Democrats.

“There are lots of activists here with different issues but the one salient issue which we all can agree on is Iraq,” said Jonathan Williams, Student Peace Action Coordinator in an interview from Denver. He continued, “The Democrats are just as accountable as the Bush administration for keeping us in Iraq. People here know that – the American people know that.”

In response to the overwhelming public opinion condemning both Republicans and Democrats for compliance with Bush administration policies in Iraq a collation of peace groups working to end the war in Iraq announced plans for the year’s largest anti-war mobilization to follow-up on the conventions. Million Doors for Peace, scheduled for Saturday, Sept. 20, will ask at least one million people throughout the country to sign petitions urging the next Congress to bring U.S. troops home from Iraq within one year.

The coalition launched its website,, last week and is encouraging activists protesting at the conventions to continue their activism in their neighborhoods at home. The action combines the best of grassroots activism and support from the netroots. The campaign will allow tens of thousands of volunteers to download a neighborhood “walk list” from the coalition website. Volunteers will use this public information to talk to and identify neighbors who oppose the Iraq war and will invite them to join the efforts to end the war.

Leslie Cagan, National Coordinator of United for Peace and Justice, said, “The antiwar sentiment throughout the country has never been stronger. To help bring greater visibility to the depth of opposition to the war in Iraq, on Sept. 20th the Million Doors for Peace project will put thousands of people out on the streets in communities in all 50 states. This massive, national mobilization will send a clear message: it is time to bring all the troops home! Cagan concluded, “Too many people have died, and precious resources have been squandered while the needs of our communities continue to go unmet.”

The coalition organizing Million Doors for Peace includes: Catholics United, Cities for Peace, CodePink,, Pax Christi USA, Peace Action, Progressive Accountability, Progressive Democrats of America, United for Peace and Justice, USAction &, Voters for Peace and Win Without War.

Combined, the coalition boasts a membership in the millions and hundreds of state and local affiliates. The overarching goal of recruiting over one million war opponents is to broaden and expand the nation’s anti-war constituency so that when the next Congress convenes it will not be able to ignore the call for immediate action to end the war in Iraq.

Paul Kawika Martin, Organizing and Political Director of Peace Action; said, “Peace Action is proud to be part of this initiative. It is important to bring the issue of Iraq into people’s homes if we want to make an impact on the next Congress. The American people have had enough of this war and will not tolerate a complacent Congress.”

PEACE ACTION is the nation’s largest grassroots peace network, with chapters and affiliates in 30 states. It organizes its grassroots network to place pressure on Congress and the Administration through write-in campaigns, internet actions, citizen lobbying and direct action.

Live from the DNC

August 25, 2008

I’ll be getting updates from our affiliate network in Denver and St. Paul. For now, here’s the first report from The Nation. They’ll have coverage in special online issues for both the DNC and RNC all this week.

The Party Crashers

By Michael Gould-Wartofsky

August 19, 2008

Laura Hanna
Is street protest relevant in the age of Obama?

At some point during the upcoming Republican National Convention, delegates will look out the windows of the Xcel Energy Center, or down from swank hotels and grand old after-parties, and there, past the security fences and the legions of taser-toting police and private security guards, they will see the other America spilling into the streets of St. Paul, Minnesota.

That is, if the Republicans even make it that far. From September 1-4, the RNC will be besieged by a panoply of protesters–including antiwar activists, Iraq War veterans, Hurricane Katrina survivors, immigrant workers, labor unionists, anarchists, environmentalists, feminists and queers. At the frontlines will be America’s young dissidents who will walk out of class, lock down intersections and dance in the streets to “Funk the War.”The view from Denver at the Democratic National Convention at the end of August will look a little different. That’s because in the age of Obama many of these same movements, so united against the RNC, are deeply conflicted over the Democrats and the party system itself–perhaps none more so than the youth movement. At issue, say organizers across the country, is not only their relationship to the Obama campaign and the presidential elections but the very meaning of democracy in 2008. Is true democracy possible inside the party system and on the campaign trail? Or is democracy to be found and made by the people in the streets outside? Will the two ever meet?

Not if the conventioneers have their way. Uncredentialed activists are to be fenced off and kept away from the Pepsi Center in Denver by parking lots the size of football fields. The protesters descending on the RNC will be cordoned off into designated “free speech zones,” guarded by thousands of police officers to the tune of $50 million at this “National Special Security Event.”

The streets will also be haunted by the ghosts of conventions past, from the cracking of skulls at the 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago to the pre-emptive arrest and detention of nearly 2,000 protesters at the 2004 Republican convention in New York City. Like their predecessors outside those arenas, this year’s dissidents have come to see the party conventions, advertised as the ultimate showcases of American democracy, as exhibits A and B of the nation’s deficit of democracy instead. And they cast themselves in opposition, as the keepers of the flame.

“It really will be a collision of opposites,” says Minneapolis activist Katrina Plotz when asked about the RNC, which she is organizing against with the Coalition to March on the RNC and Stop the War. “A scripted and sanitized spectacle for a homogenous group of wealthy elites inside the convention hall versus a thriving, organic movement of the masses outside.”

Perhaps the starkest contrast will be between the plutocrats of the Grand Old Party and the Poor People’s Economic Human Rights Campaign, a coalition led by poor and homeless families fighting for the right to housing, healthcare, education and a living wage. They will be camped in a “Bushville,” a tent city evoking the Depression, and setting out on the March for Our Lives. “It’s to say to the whole country, ‘We are here,'” says Minneapolis native Rickey Brunner, who, at 16, has become a spokesperson for the group. “We plan to show that this is a crisis, this is something that needs to be looked at with a little more urgency…. We don’t have enough housing. We don’t have enough healthcare. And it’s killing the people.”

The RNC for many has become a symbol of everything the protesters believe is wrong with America. They are moved to action by all-too-familiar litany of injustices–the occupation of Iraq and beyond, class war and racism, sexism and homophobia, torture and repression, corporate power and the climate crisis, rising tuition and an economic bust that’s hitting this generation hard. Yet what they have in common, beyond a penchant for ruckus and a loathing of the GOP, is a persistent belief in democracy from below, in the power of ordinary people to transform the conditions of life in this country and worldwide–a power they believe must be exercised in the street, not just in the voting booth.

“Democracy is not waiting to vote once every four years. Democracy is getting out in the streets,” says Sgt. Matthis Chiroux, a 24-year-old member of Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) who refused orders to deploy to Iraq this June and now plans to show up to the conventions with IVAW. “They [the politicians] are not gonna do it by themselves. We’re gonna force their hand, because that is the nature of democracy.”

The dissent at the Democratic National Convention–though less “mass” than at the RNC, especially after the recent withdrawal of some national organizers–is set to feature events like an open-air Festival of Democracy, a Restoring Democracy Parade and a base camp with free housing and medical care, organized by groups like Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), the Alliance for Real Democracy, the Recreate ’68 Alliance and the immigrant coalition the We Are America DNC Alliance.

Activists with these groups report getting the critical questions from their friends and peers about plans to protest Denver: “Especially now, with a candidate who talks a lot about hope and change, people talk about, ‘Why do you need to protest?’ ” says Zoe Williams, a local organizer with Code Pink: Women for Peace and a spokesperson for the Alliance for Real Democracy. Her answer? “I think that we need to define what hope and change are. We need to decide what that means to us as a people.”

Even among the activist crowd, there are those who hope the youth movement outside the convention will join with those inside to toast the “new era” they believe the Obama campaign represents–as well as hold Obama accountable and engage the hundreds of thousands of newly politicized young people who have joined in the campaign. “For people who are disenfranchised by the system, some of them for the first time are being motivated into politics,” says Rachel Haut, a member of SDS and labor activist at Queens College who is working on the 100 Days Campaign, intended to pressure the next President during his first 100 days in office. “We want to create a broad progressive movement that can invite these newly politicized people in. And we want to create a campaign that can take that beyond the voting booth.”

Organizers like Haut feel the stirrings of a new youth movement, newly mainstreamed. Some say it’s about the power of the stories that are told on the campaign–and about what stories will be told at the conventions. Madeline Gardner, an activist from the Twin Cities who now organizes with the Energy Action Coalition, sees a political opening for movements like hers: “The story Obama tells, about how we’re gonna change this world by regular people taking action,” she says, “creates more space for social movement organizing in a way we haven’t had since the ’60s. I would like to see the conventions and the protests around them take full advantage of that opportunity.”

That sentiment is shared by Joshua Kahn Russell, an organizer with the Rainforest Action Network in the Bay Area who feels that the youth movement should “use both conventions to put forward a narrative that we are starting a new chapter in American history…. Our job is to be part of that progressive wave and to pull it to the left as much as we can.”

Still, many in the youth movement are riding on a different wave, and they do not want to be swallowed up by the one depicted in Obama’s campaign logo–especially following what they see as his betrayals of the movement’s values. Some of them are tired of being taken for granted, whether as young people or as people of color. “Because Obama’s running, they think, ‘We’ve got them, they’re coming out, they’re gonna support Obama no matter what,’ ” says Troy Nkrumah, a chair of the National Hip-Hop Political Convention in Las Vegas, which is convening this summer to forge a national agenda for the hip-hop generation. “Some of us aren’t so sure that it’s gonna make a difference.”

Likewise, young people like Adam Jung, a farm boy from Missouri who is helping to organize the DNC tent city with Tent State University, are questioning whether Obama and the Democrats are ever going to represent them: “The Democrats, they count on and expect our votes. We’re saying, ‘If you’re not representing me, I don’t have to vote for you. You need to start listening to the youth [and] the 65 percent of the people in this country who want the war to end.’ ”

Most determined of all are the anarchists and anti-authoritarians, as many of the youth activists describe themselves, including two of the most active groups preparing to crash the conventions: the RNC Welcoming Committee and the Unconventional Action network. Unconventional Denver organizer Clayton Dewey acknowledges that “the candidacy of Obama is a reflection of the public’s desire for something different.” But as an anarchist, he explains, “we believe that despite the rhetoric Obama uses, genuine change will always come from the bottom up, and that means countering the system as a whole.”

“An anti-authoritarian vibe is what’s going on,” says Carina Souflee, an activist with Anarchist People of Color and the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán (MEChA) at the University of Texas-Austin, who was radicalized by the immigration protests and is planning to be in the streets at the RNC. “People have learned that a top-down approach to things doesn’t work.”

To young radicals like Souflee and Dewey, the question remains one of democracy, and to them, democracy has very little to do with the 2008 presidential elections. “What we have in common is a desire to break the spell that elections have over the US left,” says a member of the RNC Welcoming Committee who goes by the pseudonym ‘Ann O’Nymity.’ “Our message is one of direct participation in democracy, bypassing corrupt politicians who don’t represent us but instead further corporate interests.”

Still, in the age of Obama, some in the youth movement are bypassing protests that directly confront the Democratic candidate and his party, opting instead to aim their dissent at the Republicans. “The RNC is a very easy target, because they are so visibly to blame for what’s happening in this country,” says Samantha Miller, who recently graduated UCLA and is now organizing members of DC SDS to bring the group’s notorious Funk the War street parties to the RNC. “There’s a whole lot more energy for the RNC than the DNC,” she reports.

Thousands of youth from dozens of groups from across the country are coming together to blockade the Republican convention, using direct democracy not just as an end but as a means. Inspired by the Battle in Seattle and the global justice movement of the ’90s, they are deploying a well-organized web of leaderless “affinity groups,” “assemblies” and “spokescouncils.”

Always the bete noire at a convention (“Anarchists Hot for Mayhem!” screamed a typical headline at the last RNC), this direct action wing of the youth movement has already sparked a media frenzy, along with an internal debate, over what tactics they will employ in the streets. Some activists are wary of the plans to blockade the convention. “I don’t know what to make of shutting down the RNC,” says Uruj Sheikh of New Jersey, who has worked with the War Resisters League and with the new SDS since its inception. “I’d like to see more of a consciousness raising thing. I don’t want the left to be perceived as crazy.”

Yet most activists in the Twin Cities agree that the likeliest scenario will be violence from those in blue, more than those in black: “We know that it is the police, not protesters or activists who will have the tasers, guns, rubber bullets, concussion grenades, chemical weapons, helicopters, the media spin machine and millions of dollars on their side,” says the Welcoming Committee.

The same story can be heard over at the DNC protest headquarters. “We’re just hoping that the Denver police don’t recreate the violence that happened in Chicago [in '68],” says Glenn Spagnuolo of the Recreate ’68 Alliance, “since they’re the only ones capable of doing that.”

The group’s call to “Recreate ’68” at the 2008 DNC has become a point of contention all its own, even among activists born decades after 1968 and bred amid a new world order. The collective memory of ’68–not just of Chicago, but of the assassinations of Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy, of Black Power and women’s liberation and youth revolts worldwide–persists among this generation. But while some in the youth movement may look back on ’68 as a usable past, as a memory of mass democracy they can mobilize and learn from, few activists see it as a moment to recreate. “It provides inspiration and an example of what can be possible,” says Arya Zahedi of New York City SDS. “But it can also prove a disservice. If we just ‘recreate ’68,’ we will be destined to also recreate its problems.”

Not everyone is counting on the conventions, the campaigns and the protests. Not Senia Barragan, who helped found the new SDS at Brown University and in Providence: “That culture of activist summit hopping, I’m not really into that. I do think it is important to show a resistance to both parties. I just think that there are different ways that people go about doing that. And I hope we don’t lose steam over this election. We’ve got a long way to go.”

Already youth organizers are looking beyond September, even beyond November 4, 2008, and January 20, 2009. They are looking to the long haul, to the work of movement building, rooted in their communities but linked in solidarity with a global movement. For, they say, the whole world is still watching. “Our task today,” says NYC SDS’s Zahedi, “is to get to work organizing where we are, at our campuses, workplaces, and in our communities, while at the same time building links with people struggling all around the world.”

For many, this push begins by showing ordinary people, and especially young, newly politicized people, their own power beyond Election Day. “We really need to find a way to engage the people who are excited, and really do think that Obama’s gonna change something,” says DC SDS’s Miller. “We have to do a lot of popular education to say that it isn’t politicians who make real change, it’s the movements that politicians have to follow.”

    About Michael Gould-Wartofsky

    Michael Gould-Wartofsky, a writer from New York City, is a recent graduate of the new homeland security campus. He has written for, Z Magazine, Common Dreams and The Harvard Crimson, where he was a columnist and editor. His work has appeared in Poets Against the War (Nation Books). This article will also appear on more…

    The Real McCain

    August 21, 2008

    Blood in August: On Avoiding World War III

    August 21, 2008

    by John Zmirak

    Students of history will always find the month of August a little ominous. In August 1920, the Red Army invading Poland (led by neoconservative hero Leon Trotsky) nearly captured Warsaw and spilled into central Europe, whence it might well have conquered a prostrate Germany, Austria, and Hungary — just for starters. The heroic Polish defeat of the Soviet forces will always be known in that land as the “Miracle of the Vistula,” since the battle raged in the octave of the Feast of the Assumption, and many Polish soldiers claimed that they saw Our Lady appear over the battlefield, which spurred them on to fight.
    It was on August 25, 1939, that Adolph Hitler sealed an alliance with Joseph Stalin to jointly invade the very same Poland — a country that had relied on empty promises of protection from faraway England and France, and defied his demands for territory.
    On August 6 and August 9, 1945, our country became the only nation in history to use atomic weapons — on cities, not on armies — to end the war begun six Augusts before.
    It’s easy to forget that all these appalling Augusts have their origin in August 1914, when a series of diplomatic blunders, crossed signals, and bureaucratic mechanisms (such as interlocking alliances and automatic mobilizations) set loose the monsters that would rage for the rest of our history’s bloodiest century — when more civilians were murdered by governments, the numbers suggest, than in every other century of recorded history combined. Unlike the Second World War, whose brutality can be blamed on the sociopathic hatreds of a single man, the First began in a welter of confusing claims and counterclaims over disputed territory, demands by ethnic minorities for autonomy, and crackdowns by central governments. Then followed appeals by those minorities to neighboring Great Powers, which set off a chain reaction as other Great Powers stepped in to “safeguard their interests” and “contain aggression” on the part of rival nations.
    In other words, the First World War started in the same way that the Russian-American War of 2008 might well begin. It ended with the destruction of three of the regimes that had entered it, 40 million casualties, a bankrupt continent, and the replacement of fairly benevolent monarchies with ideological dictatorships. (For instance, almost every square inch of the Habsburg monarchy would be ruled in turn by Hitler, then Stalin.)
    The Europe of July 1914 was a place much like America today: Despite rapid social change and intellectual ferment (Darwin, Freud, Nietzsche, and Marx had recently made their marks), the Continent had seen 60 years of nearly uninterrupted peace and economic expansion. New technologies made it possible to build things faster and cheaper than ever, while improved communications and transport knit together distant lands as never before. I don’t think they used the word “globalization,” but that was certainly what was happening, as foreign trade linked Asia to Europe and America, and a web of global investment broke down historic barriers. It was an age of “progress” that inspired utopian visions of a future without drudgery, social classes, or widespread poverty. It was thought that the sufferings that had led men to seek in Faith an “opiate” were gradually disappearing, as would the churches.
    The Europe that waltzed its way up to and over the brink in the 1914 was the world you read about in the stories of Sherlock Holmes, and the novels of Edith Wharton — where the worst monsters prowling the earth were petty criminals and gold-digging bachelors. But once it passed the brink, as if crossing the unmarked border separating Earth from Hell, it would find itself in the blood-soaked mud of No Man’s Land, huddled behind barbed wire under clouds of poison gas. Both C. S. Lewis and J. R. R. Tolkien would slog through those trenches, along with millions of others, and see their closest friends mowed down.
    What led the men of 1914 to throw it all away? How did Christians in so many nations convince themselves that this conflict over petty, squalid stakes — the competing claims of Serbia and Austria Hungary over godforsaken Bosnia — met the high threshold set by the Christian churches for what constitutes a just war? Just as men had fooled themselves in every preceding century, I suppose. And their bishops duly lined up behind their governments, eager to avoid accusations that they were “unpatriotic,” and essentially in defiance of the pope. Pope Pius X died just after war broke out — of heartbreak, it is said — and Pope Benedict XV renewed his peace offensive, which gained the support of only a single ruler, the Habsburg Emperor Karl I.
    One difference comes to mind. In previous centuries, most wars had been declared by rulers with more or less arbitrary power to make war or not. No popular assembly had to approve Louis XIV’s vicious campaigns of conquest, much less Napoleon’s wars. But in 1914, nearly every nation in Europe (except Tsarist Russia) had some form of representative government. Had popular opinion been strongly against the outbreak of conflict, even Tsar Nicholas would have thought twice about mobilizing to stand behind “brave little Serbia.” But popular opinion offered no such barrier. In every nation, the crowds who thronged the streets in August 1914 were cheering the prospect of standing up to the “bullies” in the neighborhood (to the Germans, the Russians, the Austrians, the French). They decked the streets with flowers and cheered the bumbling bureaucrats and hapless kings as they sent their nation’s young men into the meat grinder.
    And in each nation, a strong case could be made that this was the time for war. Each country had deep historic grievances that negotiations had never rectified. Every government could offer evidence of abuses by its enemies, and warn of the grave consequences that would ensue if they didn’t draw a line in the sand right here, right now — to halt the advance of (respectively):
    • Germanic militarism
    • the Russian hordes
    • the bloodthirsty and bigoted Serbs
    • the scheming, haughty Austrians
    • the anti-clerical Third Republic (still engaged in a persecution of the Church)
    • perfidious and hypocritical England
    And so on and on until by November 1918, some 20 million men lay dead in the muck.
    And for what? In the end, when all the propaganda was exposed and the hidden agendas held up wriggling in the light, the war was the product of short-sighted and unimaginative leaders who wished to seem strong and resolute in the eyes of the public, their kings, and sometimes their women. (One highly placed Austrian warmonger, we have learned, pushed for war to impress his mistress.) With the distance of history, we can see that World War I was not a crusade for democracy or anything else — but rather a snuff version of Seinfeld: a War about Nothing.
    Each nation, it seems, was largely lied into war, with incomplete or false information and self-serving accounts of the issues at stake. As this fact sank in with the war-weary, shell-shocked populations of Britain and France, those nations lost the taste for self-defense, and allowed their military establishments to dwindle. They elected even more short-sighted leaders — but instead of jingoistic land pirates, they voted in time-servers keen on keeping peace at any price. The power vacuum created was quickly filled by Hitler, and then (for some 40 years) by Stalin.
    I hope that Americans making policy in the face of a Russian state dominating its neighbors will remember that other August, so many years and millions of lives ago. When we’re urged to indignation by one-sided news reports, when a nation most of us have never heard of is magically transformed into a “vital security interest,” when a politician whose closest aide has worked as a flak for that country calls on us to intervene on its behalf, and his opponent competes to prove he’s every bit as “tough,” even though he’s a Democrat, I hope . . . that we’re a little skeptical.
    As we would be in other circumstances where life and death were at stake — say, if a doctor told us that a pregnancy was ectopic and needed to be removed to save the mother’s life. Even if it proved necessary to commit an act that indirectly ended an innocent life, which was justified by the principle of double effect, we would undertake it with grim reluctance, perhaps with tears. Starting a war deserves the same grave consideration. It is nothing to cheer about.
    I hope that we will exercise the prudent, solemn judgment demanded of us as Christians when we nudge up to the brink of that horrible abyss we call modern war — in which whole cities can be obliterated in minutes, in which we are told no one is innocent and every target is a legitimate military objective, in which the whole of morality is tossed over the side in the first few hours of conflict. I hope we’re a little smarter than those crowds that thronged the streets in London, Paris, Vienna, and Berlin and St. Petersburg on those hot summer days in 1914. That we sift the words of our own rulers, and resist the temptation to paint the leaders of rival nations as rising Hitlers, and raise the assertion of our power to the status of a principle. That for every time we read something on Fox News or in The Weekly Standard banging the drums for war, we would fact-check it at, a first-rate resource run by Old Right, small-government activists who constantly cite Catholic just war teaching.
    I hoped for the same things in November 2002, and paid no price for being contrary. Of course, the warmongers paid no price for being dead wrong: They still dominate leading wings of both political parties. Apart from the enormous Iraq-shaped hole in our country’s budget, most of us have paid rather lightly for our callous willingness to “trust the president — he’s pro-life!”
    Except, of course, for those veterans at Walter Reed being fitted for artificial limbs, those children who’ll grow up fatherless or motherless, those bodies decaying in neat little rows at Arlington. They trusted their government, they signed up to fight for their country. They believed that its civilian leaders would only send them on missions vital to its survival, that we would ask of them the ultimate sacrifice only in the last emergency. That is what Christ demands of us. If we wage war recklessly, we are no better than the pagans. We’re worse, since we should have known better.
    And on the Day of Judgment, those men we sent to kill and die in the worst circumstances imaginable — to end their lives not in quiet contemplation of the Cross but in a frenzy of bullets and screams and burning flesh — will rise, restored to wholeness, bright with glory. They will gather beside the “awesome judgment seat of Christ.” And they will accuse us.

    John Zmirak is author of, among other books, the graphic novel The Grand Inquisitor. He is Writer-in-Residence at Thomas More College in New Hampshire.

    The Real McCain?

    August 20, 2008

    I picked this up on Craigslist and thought I’d share.  It’s interesting how most of the comments wonder why Obama doesn’t use this information for his campaign.  It’s up for debate – do you think Obama should challenge McCain’s dedication to this country?  Or, do you think playing that card would be as ‘dirty’ as the swift boating of John Kerry?


    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 13,089 other followers

    %d bloggers like this: