GI SPECIAL 4C26

Iraq Veterans Against The War
Photographed by Shirley H. Young, Veterans For Peace at the wreckage of a miniature golf course in Mississippi, March 16, 2006

ENDGAME:
Colossal Command Stupidity Turns Even Shia Collaborators Against The Occupation:
“We Are Ready To Resist The Americans And Strike Their Bases”
“The US Is Now Caught Up In A Growing Confrontation With Iraq’s 15 Million Shias”

28 March 2006 Patrick Cockburn in Arbil, Independent News and Media Limited & (AP) & Richard Boudreaux and Zainab Hussein, L.A. Times & By KIRK SEMPLE, NY Times

The killing of what the Americans say were 16 “insurgents”, and what Shias claim were 37 unarmed worshippers in the Mustafa mosque, may turn out to be a turning point in the three-year-old Iraq crisis.

Iraq’s Shias, 60 per cent of the population, have hitherto largely co-operated with American occupation while Sunni Arabs have resisted. But the Shias increasingly see the US as trying to deny them power despite the electoral success of its Alliance.

Critics of the killings at the mosque included the most powerful members of the Iraqi government.

“Entering the Mustafa Shia mosque and killing worshippers was unjustified and a horrible violation from my point of view,” Bayan Jabr, the Interior Minister, told Al-Arabiya television. “Innocent people inside the mosque offering prayer at sunset were killed.”

The US is now caught up in a growing confrontation with Iraq’s 15 million Shias.

The governor of Baghdad, Hussein Tah-an, said the city’s provincial council had cut ties to the US military and diplomatic mission, “because of the cowardly attack on the al-Mustafa mosque”.

The local police said shots had been fired at a joint US-Iraqi patrol but not from the mosque. They confirmed the claim by Shia leaders that all the dead, whom they estimated to number 22, were in the complex for evening prayers and none were gunmen.

The US-Iraqi special forces were patrolling an area loyal to Muqtada al-Sadr, the nationalist cleric, who has a huge following.

An Iraqi political scientist said: “The mosque incident was the Americans trying to de-claw Muqtada al-Sadr. The Americans want to show they are the most powerful force on the ground. But this will encourage Iraqis to support Sadr.”

The Shias were already suspicious of US efforts to force them to accept a national unity government whose composition goes against the election results. The US, UK and the Gulf Arab states want Iraq’s government to include Iyad Allawi in a powerful position although he only won 25 out of the 275 seats in parliament.

The US now faces the prospect of hostility from the Shia, the community from which most of the Iraqi army and police are recruited.

The Baghdad governor said he cut ties with U.S. forces and diplomats.

And all 37 members of the Baghdad provincial council suspended cooperation with the United States in reconstruction projects planned for the remainder of the year, as well as political and security coordination, said council chairman Moeen al-Khadimi.

There were 18 dead, all males, three in their 60s and one in his teens.

At least 13, including a guard, were identified as members of Dawa, the party of Prime Minister Ibrahim Jafari.

“My shop was full of people trying to escape the shooting,” said Sayaid Thamir, a 50-year-old merchant who works across the street from the mosque. “Soldiers were shooting randomly everywhere. Cars were not allowed to move.”

“What happened was terrifying,” he said. “If they were looking for terrorists, why couldn’t they do it quietly?”

No gunfire came from the mosque, several witnesses said.

“The Americans started the raid without giving us a chance to negotiate or to find out what they wanted,” Sheik Safa Timimi, the imam of the mosque, said in an interview Monday on Iraqi radio. “Some young men tried to approach them but were shot at.”

“The government must find out the truth about these special units of the Iraqi army that function outside government control and perpetuate massacres with the support of the U.S. Army,” said the statement by the Alliance, the Shiite coalition that leads the interim government.

Anti-American sentiment stirred up by the killings filled the airwaves of Al Iraqiya, the state-run television network, and other broadcast media for a second day Monday.

It spilled into the working-class streets of Ur as seven pickup trucks and other vehicles bore 16 wooden coffins in a slow cortege, followed by hundreds of mourners on foot. Residents said two other bodies had been sent away earlier for burial.

“No, no to America!” chanted a man identified only as Sheik Jalel, standing in the back of the lead truck. “No, no to the devil! No, no to Israel!”

The procession and its police escort wound past the crumbling white walls of the mosque compound, which bore banners denouncing the attack.

People spilled out of nearby shops and modest homes to march with the coffins. Others watched and wept from behind iron gates.

Neighbors of the mosque said Sadr’s militia did not show up and confront the U.S. and Iraqi forces, dismissing early reports of a clash.

Mahdi fighters brandishing weapons took to the streets in Ur and Sadr City in a show of force and warned they were prepared to attack American troops.

Many accompanied a solemn and tense funeral cortege for the victims through the streets of Ur.

But Shiite leaders, including Mr. Sadr, urged calm.

“We are ready to resist the Americans and strike their bases,” vowed Katheer Abdul-Ridha, 22, a member of the Mahdi Army, who was guarding a roadblock in Sadr City.

“The Sunnis have nothing to do with this, and we shouldn’t accuse them of everything that’s going on.”

IRAQ WAR REPORTS

BAGHDAD SOLDIER KILLED BY SMALL-ARMS FIRE

3/28/2006 HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES CENTRAL COMMAND NEWS RELEASE Number: 06-03-02C

BAGHDAD: A Multi-National Division Baghdad Soldier was killed by small-arms fire at approximately 4 p.m. March 28 south of Baghdad.

SOLDIER KILLED, THREE WOUNDED BY HABBANIYAH IED

3/28/2006 HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES CENTRAL COMMAND NEWS RELEASE Number:

BAGHDAD, Iraq: One U.S. Soldier was killed and three were wounded when their Humvee was struck by an improvised explosive device outside Habbaniyah March 28.

Marine Injured For Third Time While Serving In Iraq

3.28.06 By JEFFREY CUNNINGHAM, Advance Newspapers

A Ravenna man was injured in a recent truck explosion in Iraq the third time he has been injured while serving there.

U.S. Marine Cpl. Jared Smith suffered second-degree burns on his face about three weeks ago when the seven-ton vehicle he was driving hit an improvised explosive device.

He is the son of Duane and Becky Smith, of Ravenna, and a 2003 graduate of Calvary Christian High School in Fruitport.

According to his mother, Smith was driving a seven-ton transport vehicle and carrying at least 10 men in the back of the truck when the rear axle hit the IED and caused the explosion. “We received a call from a sergeant who is stationed in Camp Pendleton in California the day after the incident who told us about Jared’s injuries,” Becky Smith said last week.

Smith reportedly returned to his unit a few days after the incident, his mother said. He was able to call his family a few days after the incident and assured them that he was all right. “Apparently he has second-degree burns on his face and he has no eyebrows, but he said he was fine,” she said.

“My heart was so much lighter after he called. I’m not worried about him because I know that he is in the Lord’s hands.”

This is not the first time that Smith has been injured since he was deployed to Iraq last September, his mother said.

“In October, he was in a truck convoy and the truck that was two behind his truck hit and IED and exploded,” she said. Smith reportedly lost his hearing for nearly two weeks from the explosion. His hearing returned and he was able to return to his unit.

On Dec. 10, the fuel truck he was driving rolled as he tried to avoid a hole in the roadway. “Apparently the fuel in the tank shifted and the truck rolled and caught fire,” Mrs. Smith said. “He was thrown off the truck’s gun turret and as he was thrown out, he apparently got wrapped in the turret’s rubber protector. The report said that when he hit the ground 15 feet away, he bounced.”

Smith reportedly saw that the truck was on fire and ran back to the truck. He was able to pull another crewman from the vehicle and reportedly saved the crewman’s life by his actions. “He lost the tip of right ring finger and chipped a tooth,” his mother said. “He spent more than a month in the hospital and had just returned to his unit when the last incident happened.”

Smith said that her son is scheduled to return from Iraq by the end of April. Last week his company headed to Kuwait and left the war in Iraq behind.

“He’ll be home for a two-week leave sometime in May, we hope, and then we aren’t sure what will happen next.”

His unit is scheduled to return to Iraq in September, she said, but his hitch is up in February so he doesn’t know at this time if he will return to Iraq with his unit or not.

TROOP NEWS

THIS IS HOW BUSH BRINGS THE TROOPS HOME:
BRING THEM ALL HOME NOW, ALIVE

The flag draped coffin of Lance Corporal Holly Charette of the U.S. Marine Corps as Charette was buried at the Rhode Island Veterans Cemetery in Exeter, Rhode Island July 2, 2005. Corporal Charette was killed in Fallujah, Iraq when her convoy was attacked in June 2005. REUTERS/Brian Snyder

“There’s A Lot Of Stuff That You Pick Up From Being With The Soldiers That The Military Would Hate You To Have Out There On Air”

March 26, 2006 CNN RELIABLE SOURCES, HOWARD KURTZ, HOST INTERVIEWING CBS’s Laura Logan: [Excerpt]

CBS’s Laura Logan:

And I really — the soldiers ask about it, but I think that, you know, the smarter ones realize that journalists report what they see. And we’re very, very fair.

And there’s a lot of stuff that you pick up from being with the soldiers that the military would hate you to have out there on air.

And if you’re, you know, if you’re smart enough and you can put in it your context, you realize that may be the view of an individual soldier who is tired of being here after six months, and so you don’t put it out there.

Major General (Ret’d) Says Rumsfeld
“Has Shown Himself Incompetent Strategically, Operationally And Tactically”

March 19, 2006 By PAUL D. EATON, The New York Times Company. Paul D. Eaton, a retired Army major general, was in charge of training the Iraqi military from 2003 to 2004. [Excerpts]

DURING World War II, American soldiers en route to Britain before D-Day were given a pamphlet on how to behave while awaiting the invasion. The most important quote in it was this: “It is impolite to criticize your host; it is militarily stupid to criticize your allies.”

By that rule, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is not competent to lead our armed forces. First, his failure to build coalitions with our allies from what he dismissively called “old Europe” has imposed far greater demands and risks on our soldiers in Iraq than necessary.

Second, he alienated his allies in our own military, ignoring the advice of seasoned officers and denying subordinates any chance for input.

In sum, he has shown himself incompetent strategically, operationally and tactically, and is far more than anyone else responsible for what has happened to our important mission in Iraq. Mr. Rumsfeld must step down.

In the five years Mr. Rumsfeld has presided over the Pentagon, I have seen a climate of groupthink become dominant and a growing reluctance by experienced military men and civilians to challenge the notions of the senior leadership.

I thought we had a glimmer of hope last November when Gen. Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, faced off with Mr. Rumsfeld on the question of how our soldiers should react if they witnessed illegal treatment of prisoners by Iraqi authorities. (General Pace’s view was that our soldiers should intervene, while Mr. Rumsfeld’s position was that they should simply report the incident to superiors.)

Unfortunately, the general subsequently backed down and supported the secretary’s call to have the rules clarified, giving the impression that our senior man in uniform is just as intimidated by Secretary Rumsfeld as was his predecessor, Gen. Richard Myers.

Mr. Rumsfeld has put the Pentagon at the mercy of his ego, his cold warrior’s view of the world and his unrealistic confidence in technology to replace manpower. As a result, the Army finds itself severely undermanned — cut to 10 active divisions but asked by the administration to support a foreign policy that requires at least 12 or 14.

Only Gen. Eric Shinseki, the Army chief of staff when President Bush was elected, had the courage to challenge the downsizing plans. So Mr. Rumsfeld retaliated by naming General Shinseki’s successor more than a year before his scheduled retirement, effectively undercutting his authority.

The rest of the senior brass got the message, and nobody has complained since.

Mr. Rumsfeld has also failed in terms of operations in Iraq. He rejected the so-called Powell Doctrine of overwhelming force and sent just enough tech-enhanced troops to complete what we called Phase III of the war — ground combat against the uniformed Iraqis. He ignored competent advisers like Gen. Anthony Zinni and others who predicted that the Iraqi Army and security forces might melt away after the state apparatus self-destructed, leading to chaos.

It is all too clear that General Shinseki was right: several hundred thousand men would have made a big difference then, as we began Phase IV, or country reconstruction. There was never a question that we would make quick work of the Iraqi Army.

The true professional always looks to the “What’s next?” phase. Unfortunately, the supreme commander, Gen. Tommy Franks, either didn’t heed that rule or succumbed to Secretary Rumsfeld’s bullying. We won’t know which until some bright historian writes the true story of Mr. Rumsfeld and the generals he took to war, an Iraq version of the Vietnam War classic “Dereliction of Duty” by H. R. McMaster.

Last, you don’t expect a secretary of defense to be criticized for tactical ineptness. Normally, tactics are the domain of the soldier on the ground. But in this case we all felt what L. Paul Bremer, the former viceroy in Iraq, has called the “8,000-mile screwdriver” reaching from the Pentagon.

Commanders in the field had their discretionary financing for things like rebuilding hospitals and providing police uniforms randomly cut; money to pay Iraqi construction firms to build barracks was withheld; contracts we made for purchasing military equipment for the new Iraqi Army were rewritten back in Washington.

Donald Rumsfeld demands more than loyalty. He wants fealty.

And he has hired men who give it.

Consider the new secretary of the Army, Francis Harvey, who when faced with the compelling need to increase the service’s size has refused to do so. He is instead relying on the shell game of hiring civilians to do jobs that had previously been done by soldiers, and thus keeping the force strength static on paper. This tactic may help for a bit, but it will likely fall apart in the next budget cycle, with those positions swiftly eliminated.

So, what to do?

First, President Bush should accept the offer to resign that Mr. Rumsfeld says he has tendered more than once, and hire a man who will listen to and support the magnificent soldiers on the ground.

More vital in the longer term, Congress must assert itself.

Too much power has shifted to the executive branch, not just in terms of waging war but also in planning the military of the future.

Our most important, and sometimes most severe, judges are our subordinates. That is a fact I discovered early in my military career. It is, unfortunately, a lesson Donald Rumsfeld seems incapable of learning.

Do you have a friend or relative in the service? Forward this E-MAIL along, or send us the address if you wish and we’ll send it regularly. Whether in Iraq or stuck on a base in the USA, this is extra important for your service friend, too often cut off from access to encouraging news of growing resistance to the war, at home and inside the armed services. Send requests to address up top.

Wonderful News!!
All Troops Can Now Leave Iraq:
Rumsfeld’s Criteria For Victory All Met!!!

March 27, 2006 By Al Kamen, Washington Post

President Bush’s comment last week that U.S. troops would be in Iraq three more years provoked some consternation.

Bush had always said the troops would be there until “the job is done and not a day longer,” but few assumed that the troops would remain through his presidency.

Actually, Bush is being way too pessimistic.

On April 9, 2003, three weeks after the invasion of Iraq, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld clearly set out the 10 objectives to be achieved “before victory can be declared.”

— “Baghdad is in the process of being liberated” and the Hussein regime must be run out of there and other cities, he said. CHECK — been run out of just about everywhere at least once.

— “We still must capture [or] account for Saddam Hussein and his sons and the senior Iraqi leadership.” CHECK.

— “We still must find and ensure the safe return of prisoners of war in this war as well as any still held from the last Gulf War.” CHECK — save for one missing soldier.

— “We still must secure the northern oil fields.” CHECK — although the pipelines keep getting hit.

— “We still need to find and secure Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction facilities…” CHECK — they are tightly secured.

— “…and secure Iraq’s borders so we can prevent the flow of weapons of mass destruction materials and senior regime officials out of the country.” CHECK — no outward flow.

— “We need to locate Iraqi scientists with knowledge of these programs.” CHECK.

— “We must also capture or kill the terrorists still operating in Iraq and prevent them from gaining access to weapons of mass destruction.” CHECK — at least for those there in ‘03 and none are getting access to that WMD.

— “We must locate Baath Party members, records and weapons caches,” records of elite intelligence and military units and regime millions outside the country. CHECK.

— “And we must begin the process of working with free Iraqis … and those returning home from exile, to establish an Iraqi interim authority and help to pave the way for a new Iraqi government.” CHECK — done that several times now.

Candidate In Illinois Congressional Race Running Under The “Bring Our Troops Home” Party Name.

From: Tom Condit tomcondit@igc.org
Sent: March 28, 2006
Subject: Peace candidate in Illinois congressional race

Bill Scheurer for Congress
8th District – Illinois
www.BringOurTroopsHome.com

Fellow Citizen,

Help us put the Iraq War on the 2006 ballot. We’re almost there! Only $15,000 more!

Bill Scheurer is running for Congress under the “Bring Our Troops Home” party name.

The “Bring Our Troops Home” party name will appear with 25,000 petition signatures this spring, on 270,000 ballots this fall, and in millions of Chicago newspapers before the election.

You can help in 2 easy ways:

1) Contribute from $1 to $2100 to this campaign.

2) Forward this email to everyone you know who opposes the Iraq War, and ask them to keep forwarding it to others.

The Republican and Democratic candidates both support the war, so the choice is clear.

Voters will have a mandate — right here in the heartland — to bring our troops home, and take care of them when they get here.

Please visit our www.BringOurTroopsHome.com website to contribute and to learn more.

Thank you,

Citizens for Bill Scheurer
387 Northgate Rd
Lindenhurst, IL 60046-8541
www.BringOurTroopsHome.com

IRAQ RESISTANCE ROUNDUP

Assorted Resistance Action

Mar 28, 2006 (AP) & News World Communications & (KUNA)

Police exchanged fire with two attackers outside a police station south of Baghdad. Eleven police and a female bystander were wounded. A series of mortar rounds then hit the police station, but nobody was harmed.

A police source explained that a bomb placed by the governorate headquarters in Kirkuk resulted in injuring four policemen. And another roadside bomb targeting a police patrol exploded in Kirkuk, wounding five policemen.

Six other policemen were also wounded by a bomb targeting their patrol 20 kilometers (12 miles) west of Kirkuk, with three of them listed in critical condition.

Two policemen were injured when a similar bomb went off against their patrol near the northern town of Samarra, police said.

In other attacks around Baghdad a member of the interior ministry’s public order brigade was injured by gunfire in the southern Dura district.

On Monday night an Iraqi intelligence agent was shot by gunmen in the southern Risala neighborhood, security sources said.

11 policemen were wounded when gunmen attacked a police station on the main road between Iskandariya and Latifiya.

In another development, a physician confessed to killing no less than 35 Iraqi policemen and soldiers with lethal injections and other means as they were treated in one of Kirkuk’s hospitals.

The confessions of the physician, Dr. Luay Omar Al-Tae, were broadcast by a Kurdish television station.

Al-Tae explained that the persons he killed were suffering minor injuries, adding that he used to also cutoff electricity from operation rooms and reopening wounds.

An intelligence official from the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) said Al-Tae’s cover was blown by a terrorist who was apprehended by security forces, noting that Al-Tae’s crimes were first brought up by Britain’s The Independent newspaper.

Al-Tae, added the official, was driven to commit these crimes by “hate for Americans.”

Al-Tae, who received USD 100 after each killing, was responsible killing Kirkuk’s deputy police director, General Ajman Abdullah, through lethal injection.

IF YOU DON’T LIKE THE RESISTANCE
END THE OCCUPATION

FORWARD OBSERVATIONS

A Man’s Word:
“My Husband Has Now Served 8 Months In Jail, Apparently Because The Commanders Of The Us Military Are Not Bound By The Oaths They Take”

[www.geocities.com]g]

From: Monica Benderman
To: GI Special
Sent: March 28, 2006

March 27, 2006 By Monica Benderman.

Monica Benderman is the wife of Sgt. Kevin Benderman, Conscientious Objector to war and the current status of this country, and currently serving a prison sentence at the RCF at Ft. Lewis, WA. To learn more, please visit www.BendermanDefense.org and www.BendermanTimeline.com

Kevin and Monica Benderman may be contacted at mdawnb@coastalnow.net

When a soldier no longer wants to fight, when his conscience tells him that he can no longer believe in the mission and commanders order that soldier back to combat against his will, there is something wrong. There is something very wrong when commanders send that soldier to jail simply because they cannot control what he believes, and what he believes scares them.

In Afghanistan, we are witnessing a tragic violation of basic human rights – rights given to all people simply for being alive. A man has made a choice – a personal choice – and he is being threatened with death because of his choice.

Our government officials have stepped in and offered their thoughts on how the Afghan government should proceed in their treatment of this man.

Members of our administration have publicly stated that freedom of religion is a personal choice, one afforded all human beings; the man should be set free and allowed to practice his religion as he chooses.

This is the same administration that allowed my husband to go to jail for making a choice – a personal, moral choice based on his ethical beliefs.

My husband, Sgt. Kevin Benderman, chose to no longer participate in war.

He followed the Army regulations, filed a Conscientious Objector application, and acted honorably every step of the way.

His unit commanders chose to punish him for not allowing them to control him with their threats, and my husband went to jail simply because his commanders had no integrity, no honor and no respect for the very constitution they had given a sworn oath to uphold.

Sadly, the military administration has sided with my husband’s commanders to this point. At any time, any member of the military hierarchy could have stepped in and ordered the command to abide by the regulations. Instead, the military powers that be chose to turn a deaf ear to the truth and the facts, and allow the continued mistreatment of one of their own – a veteran who has served with distinction for ten years.

The sworn testimony given verbatim in the Record of Trial from my husband’s court martial, clearly shows an incompetent command; a command that lied, mishandled their administration of my husband’s request, and fabricated evidence after the fact. It shows a command that had no knowledge of the regulations, no idea how to respond to my husband’s request and admittedly made no effort to learn.

The company commander stated for the record that “Sgt. Benderman is just one soldier out of 191 that I command. I did not have time to worry about him.”

He went on to admit that he “was not aware of the proper procedures for handling Sgt. Benderman’s request, but if he had been he would have taken steps to correct his actions.”

On five separate occasions, the Command Sgt. Major of the battalion gave sworn testimony regarding a meeting he requested with my husband to discuss his Conscientious Objector application. These sworn testimonies contradicted each other with regard to several of the facts that, had the truth been told, would have exonerated my husband before there ever was a court martial.

On the witness stand, this Sgt. Major was questioned about the fact that his sworn statements contradicted each other, and was asked if they were indeed his statements.

He confirmed that he had made each one, and went on to state that none of those had been the truth; that he was telling the truth in the courtroom that day.

The first statement given was most accurate, having been made right after the meeting with my husband. Subsequent statements appeared to change as the prosecutors needed to bend the rules to make their allegations fit. The “truth” on the stand was remembered 7 months later, noticeably altered from the original testimony, also given under oath.

Also included in the Record of Trial for my husband’s court martial was a statement made by the Convening Authority overseeing the court martial – the Acting Commander of Ft. Stewart, Georgia. During the first week of February 2006, this commander had a meeting with the Staff Judge Advocate at Ft. Stewart.

He stated that he would not accept a plea bargain, and he wanted to make sure that my husband went to jail for “no less that 18 months.” This is the man who would ultimately determine whether all procedures and regulations had been properly followed during the court martial process, and approve the final outcome of the trial.

The question here – why had he already determined my husband’s guilt – and for what crime was he expecting to sentence my husband? There was not even an investigation into the charges that they would consider bringing against my husband until a week after the commander held this meeting.

My husband has now served 8 months in jail, apparently because the commanders of the US military are not bound by the oaths they take.

The commanders of the US military have a choice – they can abide by their personal integrity and lead by following the rules, or they can make up the rules as they go along — so much for integrity.

My husband was eligible for parole on January 27, 2006.

According to the Dept. of the Army Regulations 190-47, the rules governing the operations of military corrections facilities, the command of the correctional facility where he is incarcerated should have held a hearing regarding my husband’s request for parole in December 2005; no later than 30 days prior to his eligibility date.

The command did not set the date for his hearing until mid-January, and it was finally held on February 15, 2006. Three weeks later they got around to sending their recommendations to the Parole Board in Virginia.

Apparently, it does not matter where the commanders of the US Army are stationed, or what their assignment – few of them seem bound by the oaths they take.

For ten years, Sgt. Kevin Benderman served the Army of this United States with honor and integrity. He received nothing but commendations and outstanding evaluations, and not one derogatory counseling statement.

Kevin went to Iraq and performed his duties with the same integrity and honor that he gave to all aspects of his service.

After firsthand experience, knowing that he could no longer participate in war, recognizing it as “the greatest form of man’s inhumanity to man” he prepared to leave the military when his enlistment expired. The US Army refused to let him go peacefully and issued him a stop/loss order.

Following regulations, and staying true to himself and his beliefs, Kevin submitted a Conscientious Objector application in spite of a Company chaplain who would rather “debate” Kevin than assist him in his legal request and a Company commander who believed that threats, intimidation and character attacks would convince my husband to bend to his will.

The actions of the command make a statement loud and clear. It is not the statement they would like us to believe however.

While their public statements mentioned that the sentencing of my husband was meant to “show other members of the military that they could not use Conscientious Objection as a way to avoid service in Iraq,” their actions show nothing more than cowardice in the face of moral courage and personal integrity; two character traits sorely lacking in many of the commanders my husband has been forced to serve with for the past 3 years.

When called to hold themselves accountable to the oaths they took, these men failed miserably.

At a time when leadership at all levels is sorely needed these men showed clearly why this country is in the mess we’re in.

The RULES are there for a reason, and an oath taken is one that is meant to be kept unless the party to whom the oath is given has broken their word.

Perhaps that is the problem in a nutshell.

The oath that is taken relies on the integrity of an individual to keep his word.

For the commanders in the military to understand the meaning of keeping their word, they would require an example in those who lead them.

Every member of the military and our government has taken an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States.

My husband went to jail because he refused to compromise on the oath he took, nor on his personal principles, and continues to defend the right to freely choose how he will live.

Integrity: the true measure of a man is in the word he keeps.

“The Attempt To ‘Humiliate’ The Iraqi People Has Failed”

From: C
To: vice_president@whitehouse.gov;
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 6:46 PM
Subject: humility?

Dear richard cheney,

Having humility isn’t that bad of a thing but, humility is a condition of the heart. Since humility forms in the heart, it is something that each individual must choose from within him or herself.

Of course, people can influence each other but, when it comes right down to the end result of how we perceive life, God has given each one of us a distinct uniqueness.

Oppressors may succeed in stifling some forms of human expression; however, no one can force true virtues on anyone else.

That is why criminal justice focuses first on stopping crime; and that is why the attempt to “humiliate” the Iraqi people has failed.

www.thememoryhole.org/war/iraqis_tortured/

Your policies are not “humiliating”. They are torture.

You are embarrassing our nation and you will stop.

Living the rights of our constitution;
C

P.S. – Thanks for getting right on those questions I sent you in my last e-mail; even though I haven’t got any real response back yet. Your form letter was great though. I appreciated it.

I would also like to point out that I intentionally did not capitalize your name in this letter because, I do not respect you.

The Bush Traitors Got What They Came For

27 March 2006 By William Rivers Pitt, Truthout Perspective [Excerpt]

I am going to find a china shop somewhere in the city and walk in with a free-swinging baseball bat. My goal, which will be clearly stated, will be to improve upon the place. I will spend the next three years meticulously destroying everything I see inside, from the cash registers to the display cases to the nice Royal Albert tea sets in the corner.

Along the way, I will batter the brains out of any poor sod unfortunate enough to get in my way. When I am done, I will claim with as much self-righteousness as I can muster that none of the mess is my responsibility. I will then, of course, refuse to leave.

Hey, if the president can do it, it must be legal, right?

Unfortunately, the difference between my china shop analogy and what the Bush administration is doing in Iraq is that I won’t get anything out of it except an arrest record and a chance to enjoy my state’s municipal accommodations.

Bush and crew are reaping far better benefits from the mayhem they have caused.

Here’s the deal, in case anyone is wondering: none of this, not one bit of it, can be or should be chalked up to “incompetence” on the part of Bush or anyone else within his administration.

This was not a mishandled situation. Bush and the boys have gotten exactly, precisely what they wanted out of Iraq, and are now looking forward to fobbing it off on the next poor dupe who staggers into the Oval Office.

They got what they came for, and have quit.

Consider the facts. For two elections in a row, 2002 and 2004, the GOP was able to successfully demagogue the rafters off the roof about supporting the troops and being patriotic, placing anyone who questioned the merits of the invasion squarely into the category of “traitor.”

Meanwhile, military contractors with umbilical ties to the administration have cashed in to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars.

The same goes for the petroleum industries; did you know there are gas lines today in oil-rich Iraq? It’s true. The oil infrastructure is fine; indeed, it is the most well-guarded point of pressure in Iraq.

There are gas lines because companies like Halliburton are not pumping the oil. They are sitting on it, keeping it as a nice little nest egg.

One would think this administration would be worried about the violence and chaos in Iraq. They aren’t, because the violence has become the justification for “staying the course.”

Bush will mouth platitudes about bring democracy to the region, but that is merely the billboard. What he and his friends from the Project for the New American Century wanted in the first place, and what they have now, is a permanent military presence over there.

There was never any consideration of a timetable for withdrawal, because there was never any intention to withdraw.

The violence today is a self-perpetuating justification, a perfect circle lubricated by blood, oil and currency.

What do you think? Comments from service men and women, and veterans, are especially welcome. Send to thomasfbarton@earthlink.net. Name, I.D., address withheld unless publication requested. Replies confidential.

NEED SOME TRUTH? CHECK OUT TRAVELING SOLDIER
Telling the truth – about the occupation or the criminals running the government in Washington – is the first reason for Traveling Soldier. But we want to do more than tell the truth; we want to report on the resistance – whether it’s in the streets of Baghdad, New York, or inside the armed forces. Our goal is for Traveling Soldier to become the thread that ties working-class people inside the armed services together. We want this newsletter to be a weapon to help you organize resistance within the armed forces. If you like what you’ve read, we hope that you’ll join with us in building a network of active duty organizers. www.traveling-soldier.org/ And join with Iraq War vets in the call to end the occupation and bring our troops home now! (www.ivaw.net)

OCCUPATION REPORT

2003: SOWING THE WIND
2006: REAPING THE WHIRLWIND

A US soldier keeps guard as a bulldozer razes to ground one of several houses in Ramadi suspected of insurgent activity. June 3, 2003. (AP Photo/Saurabh Das)

[Fair is fair. Let’s bring 150,000 Iraqis over here to the USA. They can kill people at checkpoints, tear down their houses without hesitation, overthrow the government, put a new one in office they like better and call it “sovereign,” and “detain” anybody who doesn’t like it in some prison without any charges being filed against them, or any trial.]

[Those Iraqis are sure a bunch of backward primitives. They actually resent this help, have the absurd notion that it’s bad their country is occupied by a foreign military dictatorship, and consider it their patriotic duty to fight and kill the soldiers sent to grab their country. What a bunch of silly people. How fortunate they are to live under a military dictatorship run by George Bush. Why, how could anybody not love that? You’d want that in your home town, right?]

OCCUPATION ISN’T LIBERATION
BRING ALL THE TROOPS HOME NOW!

So Much For That “Sovereignty” Bullshit:
Collaborator Army Recruits “Screened By U.S. Officials”

March 28, 2006 AP

RAMADI, Iraq: Beyond the army recruiting center’s maze of blast walls and barbed wire, a roadside bomb targeted an Iraqi Humvee. From a rooftop across the street, a gunman popped up and took aim, drawing a brief hail of return fire.

In the building next door, a mortar round crashed through the roof.

Nobody ever said recruiting for the Iraqi army would be easy. And by the end of the first army recruiting drive in this insurgent-infested [translation: resistance liberated] city Monday, just 31 young men had stepped through the door to join up.

The low turnout highlights the difficulty of filling the army’s ranks in Ramadi, where Sunni residents both distrust the Shiite-dominated Iraqi military already deployed here and fear joining up will mark them as insurgent targets.

“For a place like Ramadi, we’re doing well to have any recruits at all,” said U.S. Marine Capt. Selden Hale, a recruiting adviser. “But it’s a start, and it’s progress, whether it’s one (recruit) or 1,000.”

Aware of the issue and keen to spread the word, U.S. officials said some 400 “invitation cards” to join the army were sent out for distribution to tribal sheiks, government officials and Iraqi army units.

Nobody showed up with the cards.

Turnout for the one-day event may have been hurt because word of mouth didn’t spread far.

Authorities did not want to announce the date they’d be receiving candidates, for good reason — insurgents for years have been targeting recruiting centers for both the police and army.

“I wouldn’t trust any of these guys,” said Mohamed, a Shiite, gesturing toward the line of half a dozen Sunni recruits among the 31 allowed to enter.

Two people who stopped by were suspected of trying to gather intelligence about the glass factory for insurgents. Both were detained, blindfolded, questioned and released.

Monday’s would-be recruits were screened by U.S. officials and given literacy tests. American soldiers took down their identities and conducted iris scans to determine whether they had been detained before.

Leading Collaborator Calls Condi Rice A Liar

March 27, 2006 Juan Cole, juancole.com

Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, the Iraqi Shiite cleric who heads the largest bloc in the elected parliament, denied Sunday that Iran is directly intervening in Iraq.

He said that no proof has ever been presented of these allegations. It doesn’t help Condi Rice to make her case when a close US ally like al-Hakim directly contradicts her.

DANGER: POLITICIANS AT WORK

“ Remember The Dead”
“Resist The War”

Anti-war protester being arrested for civil disobedience in front of the White House on September 26, 2005.

By then, 1,900 American soldiers had been killed, and untold thousands of Iraqi citizens had perished.

In Vietnam, the U.S. government was obsessed with a body count.

In Iraq, the U.S. military will keep that a well guarded secret.

Mike Hastie
Vietnam Veteran

Photo and caption from the I-R-A-Q (I Remember Another Quagmire) portfolio of Mike Hastie, US Army Medic, Vietnam 1970-71. (For more of his outstanding work, contact at: (hastiemike@earthlink.net) T)

Imperial Democrats And Imperial Republicans Agree:
Keep The War In Iraq Going;
Only 71 Vote No

March 27, 2006 Jeff Leys, www.commondreams.org/views06/0327-28.htm

Once again, Congress is poised to approve “emergency” funding to prosecute the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The House already approved $67.5 billion on March 16, 2006-rushing the bill through the Appropriations Committee and the House floor in order to get home in time for St. Patrick’s Day.

This time around, 71 Representatives voted against the “emergency” spending.

FBI Clowns Target Vegetarian Food Bank, Indymedia, And Anarchist Group That Didn’t Exist As “Terrorist” Threats

[Thanks to PB, who sent this in.]

March 27, 2006 By Nicholas Riccardi, L.A. Times Staff Writer [Excerpts]

The FBI, while waging a highly publicized war against terrorism, has spent resources gathering information on antiwar and environmental protesters and on activists who feed vegetarian meals to the homeless, the agency’s internal memos show.

The murky connection that the federal government makes between some left-wing activist groups and terrorism was illustrated in a Justice Department presentation to a college law class this month.

An FBI counterterrorism official showed the class, at the University of Texas in Austin, 35 slides listing militia, neo-Nazi and Islamist groups. Senior Special Agent Charles Rasner said one slide, labeled “Anarchism,” was a federal analyst’s list of groups that people intent on terrorism might associate with.

The list included Food Not Bombs, which mainly serves vegetarian food to homeless people, and – with a question mark next to it – Indymedia, a collective that publishes what it calls radical journalism online. Both groups are among the numerous organizations affiliated with anarchists and anti-globalization protests, where there has been some violence.

Elizabeth Wagoner said she was one of the few students who objected to the groups’ inclusion on the list. “My friends do Indymedia,” she said. “My friends aren’t terrorists.”

Denver, where the ACLU fought a lengthy court battle with local police over its spying on political groups, has the most extensive records of encounters between the FBI and activists. Documents obtained by the ACLU there revealed how agents monitored the lumber industry demonstration, an antiwar march and an anarchist group that activists say was never formed.

In June 2002, environmental activists protested the annual meeting of the North American Wholesale Lumber Assn. in Colorado Springs. An FBI memo justified opening an inquiry into the protest because an activist training camp was to be held on “nonviolent methods of forest defense, security culture, street theater and banner making.”

About 30 to 40 people attended the protest; three were arrested for trespassing while hanging a political banner. Colorado Springs police faxed the FBI a three-page list of demonstrators’ license plate numbers.

The FBI’s Denver office also monitored a February 2003 antiwar demonstration in Colorado Springs.

A bureau memo said that activists planned to block streets and an Air Force base entrance, and that a more “radical” faction had announced online that it would meet near the demonstration but break away for unspecified purposes. The memo said an agent would watch the breakaway group and report to local police and FBI agents monitoring the march.

“We’ve kind of gathered up our skirts and pulled in,” said Sarah Bardwell, who works for the American Friends Service Committee, a Quaker group. Along with some activist roommates, she has also volunteered for Food Not Bombs.

“In our house, we don’t talk about politics anymore,” Bardwell said. “There’s been a toning down of everything we do.”

That change came after six FBI agents and Denver police officers visited her house in July 2004.

Months earlier, the FBI had obtained a flier advertising a meeting near Bardwell’s house to form a chapter of Anarchist Black Cross. That movement has two wings; one, according to the FBI, has been associated with “some of the most violent left-wing groups of the past 40 years.”

The organizer of the meeting, Dawn Rewolinski, said the prospective chapter would have been part of the movement’s other wing, which writes letters to prisoners.

The chapter was never established, Rewolinski said. “All we did is eat some cookies and talk about various prisoners and realize we didn’t have enough money for a P.O. box.”

Nonetheless, FBI investigators believed a Denver chapter had been launched.

They discovered that Anarchist Black Cross was affiliated with Food Not Bombs, and authorities ended up on Bardwell’s doorstep, asking about the anarchists’ plans for protests at the upcoming Democratic and Republican national conventions.

Received:

REMEMBERING FALLUJAH, RESISTING OCCUPATION

Naming the Dead: Mass Civil Disobedience Against the Occupation of Iraq on the 2nd anniversary of the April 2004 US massacre in Fallujah.

12 noon, Sunday 2 April
Parliament Square
London

Organised by the Mass Action Group and supported by Nadje al-Ali, Anglican Pacifist Fellowship, Pax Christi, Chumbawamba, Maya Evans, Hastings Against War, Iraq Occupation Focus, Ewa Jasiewicz, London Catholic Worker, Caroline Lucas MEP, Movement for the Abolition of War, Harold Pinter, Milan Rai, Sami Ramadani, Mark Thomas, Voices UK, Jo Wilding, the Wrexham Peace and Justice Forum, Haifa Zangana.

“We buried many in the stadium for football until it became full. When you are burying you cannot stay long because (the Marines) will just shoot you” – Iraqi doctor working in Fallujah, April 2004

REMEMBERING FALLUJAH

On 2 April 2004 US forces sealed off the Iraqi city of Fallujah in what became the first of two major assaults on the city. At least 572 civilians – including over 300 women and children – were killed in the subsequent siege (see www.rememberfallujah.org for more info).

Fighter bombers were used to attack residential areas, US snipers targeted ambulances and at least one US battalion had ‘orders to shoot any male of military age on the streets after dark, armed or not’ (New York Times, 14 April).

Since then, numerous other Iraqi towns and cities have been attacked by US-led forces for whom “mass detentions and indiscriminate torture appear to be the main tools” (Financial Times, 29 June 05). Thousands of Iraqis have been killed and tens of thousands forced to flee their homes. Hospitals have been attacked and white phosphorus used as a weapon. Unmanned Predator aircraft are now attacking targets in Iraq and Afghanistan “almost every day” (AP, 12 Dec 05).

RESISTING OCCUPATION

On Sunday 2 April 2006 hundreds of anti-war and peace activists – including Jo Wilding, who personally witnessed US war crimes in Fallujah in April 2004, and Maya Evans, who last December became the first person to be convicted of participating in an “unauthorised” demonstration within 1km of Parliament – will be gathering in Parliament Square for a mass act of civil disobedience, reading the names of 1,000 Iraqis who have died as a result of the invasion and occupation and demanding:

an immediate end to the US/UK military occupation of Iraq

massive reparations and debt cancellation so that Iraqis can rebuild their country free from foreign interference

prosecution of those responsible for war crimes

PLEASE JOIN US

Wear black if possible and come prepared for a long ceremony and possible arrest.

PLEASE NOTE: This is an “unauthorised” demonstration within 1km of Parliament. Under the new restrictions on protest contained in the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act (April 2005) participation in such an event is a criminal offence punishable by a fine of up to £1000. For more info come to the legal briefing or check back here shortly. There will be post action support for anyone arrested.

A Nonviolent Direct Action Workshop & Legal Briefing will take place on Saturday 1 April. at The Front Studio, Diorama 1, 34 Osnaburgh St, London NW1. (tube Great Portland St). Times: 11.30am-4.30pm (NVDA workshop); 4.30pm-5.30pm (legal briefing). The workshop will be run by Seeds for Change (www.seedsforchange.org.uk).

Please try and make this if you can! IF YOU CAN’T MAKE THE WORKSHOP OR THE BRIEFING BUT CAN MAKE IT TO THE WORKSHOP VENUE FOR 5.30PM THERE WILL ALSO BE A SHORT RUN-THROUGH OF THE PLAN FOR SUNDAY’S EVENT THEN.

For more info: voices@voicesuk.org or 0845 458 2564.

Received:

IRAQ AND THE UK
The Corporate Carve-Up
PUBLIC MEETING

Thursday, 30th March, 7pm – 9pm
SOAS College Building, Thornhaugh Street, WC1
London
Nearest tubes: Russell Square or Goodge Street

Amnesty International and other human rights organisations have opposed forced returns to Iraq, however the UK has been running a programme of removal of Iraqi refugees. In the most recent asylum statistics from the Home Office (4th Quarter 2005), Iraq is top of the list of nationalities removed; this includes both ‘voluntary’ removal programmes and forced deportations.

Whilst Iraq is confronting a dark scenario and there is no security, the people are under the threat of a horrendous ethnic, sectarian, and religious war.

At the same time a report by PLATFROM reveals that Britain stands accused of plundering Iraqi oil in a deal which would severely restrict current and future Iraqi governments’ ability to plan or regulate the country’s oil industry for the 40-year life of the contracts.

Added to this Corporate Watch, with The Independent, has produced a new report detailing the role of UK corporations in the restructuring of Iraq.

The question is what kind of country is the UK returning people to?

Speakers include
Loukas Christodoulou – Corporate Watch
Dashty Jamal, International Federation of Iraqi Refugees
Greg Muttitt – PLATFORM

Meeting called by:
The REFUGEE PROJECT
For further information info@therefugeeproject.org
www.therefugeeproject.org

OCCUPATION ISN’T LIBERATION
BRING ALL THE TROOPS HOME NOW!

NEED SOME TRUTH? CHECK OUT TRAVELING SOLDIER

Telling the truth – about the occupation or the criminals running the government in Washington – is the first reason for Traveling Soldier. But we want to do more than tell the truth; we want to report on the resistance – whether it’s in the streets of Baghdad, New York, or inside the armed forces. Our goal is for Traveling Soldier to become the thread that ties working-class people inside the armed services together. We want this newsletter to be a weapon to help you organize resistance within the armed forces. If you like what you’ve read, we hope that you’ll join with us in building a network of active duty organizers. www.traveling-soldier.org/ And join with Iraq War vets in the call to end the occupation and bring our troops home now! www.ivaw.net

All GI Special issues achieved at website
www.militaryproject.org/
The following have also posted issues; there may be others:

gi-special.iraq-news.de
www.notinourname.net/gi-special/
www.williambowles.info/gispecial
www.traprockpeace.org/gi_special/
www.albasrah.net/maqalat/english/gi-special.htm
www.uruknet.info/

GI Special distributes and posts to our website copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of the invasion and occupation of Iraq. We believe this constitutes a “fair use” of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law since it is being distributed without charge or profit for educational purposes to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for educational purposes, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. GI Special has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of these articles nor is GI Special endorsed or sponsored by the originators. This attributed work is provided a non-profit basis to facilitate understanding, research, education, and the advancement of human rights and social justice Go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml for more information. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

If printed out, this newsletter is your personal property and cannot legally be confiscated from you. “Possession of unauthorized material may not be prohibited.” DoD Directive 1325.6 Section 3.5.1.2