Friday, January 27, 2012

#NoIranWar: #AfghanistanTuesday times TEN!

This week I'm encouraging all the top #AfghanistanTuesday tweeters to focus on getting the word out about #NoIranWar. Here's why:

* Saturday, February 4 is a National Day of Action to Stop a U.S. War on Iran. Over 25 cities in the U.S. and Canada already have #NoIranWar rallies planned!

* If we really want to get the U.S. out of Afghanistan, the very best thing we could do is to act NOW to PREVENT the U.S. entry into ANOTHER war. The sooner the talk of war against Iran stops, the sooner we can return to the difficult problem of getting the U.S. out of Afghanistan.

* This is an opportunity to build the #AfghanistanTuesday network. We've talked a lot about the need to dramatically increase the number of Tuesdayistas and get the antiwar word out. This is an opportunity to make that real.


"Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which
to place it and I shall move the world."

Archimedes


That's why I'm reaching out to top #AfghanistanTuesday tweeters to ask yourself, "How can I use my Twitter network to increase the reach of the #NoIranWar effort by a factor of TEN?"


THANKS EVERYONE!


Related posts

After a call to resist U.S. war moves against Iran went out just a few days ago, the list of February 4,2012, rallies to say "No Iran War!" is growing FAST.

(See No Iran War Rallies EVERYWHERE! )





If the Occupy movement has taught me one thing, it is that every time I hear some person or group of people being described as "different," I should stop and think. And think again. Would it really be possible for U.S. leaders to be talking about war with Iran if people here stopped to think about how different people there aren't?

(See Why OWS Should Lead the "No Iran War!" Resistance)








Tuesdayistas are people who (a) take time each week to participate in a national (and now global) conversation about ending the war in Afghanistan; AND (b) help spread the word by reaching out to others (who will reach out to others (who will reach out to others .... to do the same!

(See I'm a Tuesdayista!)








Here are seven big reasons people should be VERY wary of any and all statements that about how Iran is "asking for it" . . . why they are tweeting every Friday with the #NoIranWar hashtag . . . and why they are reaching out every day to members of Congress to resist the "Iran Threat Reduction Act" . . . .

(See #NoIranWar )

Thursday, January 26, 2012

Why OWS Should Lead the "No Iran War!" Resistance

A national call went out just a week ago for a National Day of Action to resist U.S. war against Iran. Will the Occupy movement be the leading voice saying "No Iran War!" ?


NDAA = Guantanamo for EVERYONE!
World Can't Wait


COURAGE TO THINK DIFFERENT
Some people might argue that the problem of preventing the newest U.S. war is not squarely within the area of concern of Occupy. I would argue that, in fact, there is no one better-positioned to take up this resistance than the biggest group of people in the U.S. who have gotten first-hand experience of U.S. government threats and repression.

It is not a coincidence that legislation that aimed at both Iran and at the Occupy movement was signed into law on New Year's Eve. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) provides sanctions on Iran, and it also has sweeping provisions for indefinite detention of U.S. citizens that amount to "Guantanamo for EVERYONE!" and are clearly aimed at the Occupy movement (among others).

The Occupy movement is not the first group within the U.S. to find itself in the federal government's cross-hairs -- but it's quite clearly the one that's there right now. It takes courage to stand up to that, and that's why every day more and more people are signing on to the call to support OWS and help it resist its suppression.

It also takes courage to talk sense when a large part of the U.S. population has been convinced that another country is full of "bad" people, and is "asking for" a confrontation with the United States. This situation needs mass courage of the kind that few but OWS today possess.


IRAN: surrounded by U.S. military bases


COURAGE TO THINK DIFFERENT
OWS is a movement that is about ideas and debate and analysis. There is no problem as urgently in need of ideas and debate and analysis in American life today, as the threatened war with Iran. Consider some of the issues I raised in early December in my #NoIranWar blog post:

(1) "WMD?" Haven't we see this movie before?
(2) Where does the real threat of nuclear weapons lie?
(3) What is the role of oil in this conflict?
(4) What is the role of the U.S. military enterprise in the Mideast in this conflict?
(5) How do we evaluate the role of Israel in this conflict?
(6) Are we proceeding from a deeply flawed understanding of the Iranian people?
(7) What role does history play in this conflict?

OWS should lead the "No Iran War!" resistance because OWS is prepared to tackle the range of ideas that the current threat of war against Iran poses.

COURAGE TO THINK DIFFERENT
To me, the most important reason that the Occupy movement must take a leadership role in pushing back against the current demonization of Iran is that the idea of accepting people -- even those who look different from oneself -- is so central to the entire Occupy movement.

Over the course of many teach-ins that I have attended at Occupy Chicago, and many conversations with people there, I have come to recognize the power of the idea that we are NOT isolated knots of people who have to be at odds with each other. We have a common humanity, and that's what allows us to have a movement together.


A glimpse of the real Iran . . .
from Persepolis:The Story of a Childhood by Marjane Satrapi


At Occupy Chicago, we've talked about the way the prison industrial complex lures people into thinking that there is an isolated group of people called "prisoners" who are "different" ... we will never be able to understand each other, and so I should just think and behave as if they don't count. We've talked about how people get recruited into the military, and the rest of the society writes them off ("we will never be able to understand each other, and so I should just think and behave as if they don't count . . . "). We've talked about people on every part of the sexual orientation and gender spectrum -- how many times are people written off on these grounds ("we will never be able to understand each other, and so I should just think and behave as if they don't count . . . ")? Pretty soon, I and other people at these events started to realize that people aren't really that different from each other; or, at least, 99% of them aren't, anyway . . . .

If the Occupy movement has taught me one thing, it is that every time I hear some person or group of people being described as "different," I should stop and think. And think again.

Would it really be possible for U.S. leaders to be talking about war with Iran if people here stopped to think about how different people there aren't?

Related posts

In my post about the Occupy movement, I pointed out that standing against U.S. aggression toward Iran was a position that not many people wanted to take, and that luckily a movement had arisen consisting of people who were willing to go beyond the conventional wisdom and were not afraid to take unpopular positions. For me, it boiled down to the "courage to think different." Today, when people in Gaza are once again being slaughtered by an Israeli state that operates with the full backing and material support of the U.S. government, who has the "courage to think different"?
(See Should OWS lead the overthrow of the U.S. support of Israeli crimes? )



A large number of people are marked for exclusion and deprivation -- and worse -- because they have characteristics that are susceptible to the whole apparatus of power:  they are easily recognizable as  NOT "normal" or "right" or "acceptable" . . . under the gaze of surveillance this condition is recorded and propagated . . . for perpetual recording and processing within the data centers of power . . . accompanied by intermittent acts of physical and cultural injury -- random, senseless -- to reinforce their unshakeable status. 

(See Drone Gaze, Drone Injury: The War on Communities of Color)


Especially important is the fact that the Occupy movement understands the systemic nature of the problems our country is mired in. And they have a determination to go to the root of those systemic problems. That's essential to the antiwar movement. We don't just have a war problem ... we have a war economy problem!


(See #OWS + #ANTIWAR on #AfghanistanTuesday )


As the Obama administration prepares in the days ahead to pivot from its focus on Syria to something truly startling -- talking to Iran! -- it is important that the American public devotes some time and energy to learning and thinking about Iran, the history of the U.S.-Iran relationship, and what the U.S.-Iran relationship means in the larger context of the effort to reduce the risk of war and violence in the world.

(See IRAN: 3 Reality Checks on the Emerging U.S. Narrative)


I was at a national gathering of fellow Lutherans and we were saying that we need to forthrightly ask ourselves: "Who's being left on the margins? Isn't that exactly who we should be working to be in relationship with?" A big part of this is creating a safe space for people who are most often marginalized to be present and be heard.  As I thought about this, I harked back to the high tide of Occupy Chicago, when there were teach-ins every day - veterans explaining "How Veterans Are Part of the 99%"; formerly incarcerated people explaining "How Prisoners Are Part of the 99%"; transgender people explaining "How Transgender People Are Part of the 99%".

(See Get Outside Your Comfort Zone and Have A Conversation Today (Welcome to the Ministry))

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

The Bankruptcy of U.S. Nuclear Doctrine

An analysis in today's New York Times, characterized as a "diplomatic memo" and entitled, "Sanctions Against Iran Grow Tighter, but What's the Next Step?" by Helene Cooper, shows just how bankrupt the United States' nuclear doctrine is.

The central, abhorrent idea of Cooper's analysis is that, while there is a distinction between possessing nuclear technology and pursuing military power based on nuclear weapons, the only acceptable model for that distinction is Japan, "which has a deep aversion to nuclear weapons dating to the atomic bomb attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki." It is outrageous that such a suggestion could be made in a United States newspaper, and even more outrageous that it almost certainly reflects the nuclear doctrine of the United States government.



In other words, the stability of the world hangs on three axioms: (a) one nation -- the United States -- and its allies control the ability to wield nuclear death; (b) other countries have nuclear technology but have already tasted nuclear devastation at the hands of the United States, so they know their place; and (c) everyone else must be prevented from having nuclear technology. How long does anyone imagine the rest of the world is going to put up with that model of stability?

It is in this context that so many of the other suggestions in the article would be laughable, if they were not so disgusting. It is Iran that must "demonstrate that it could be trusted" and it is Iran that must "drop its veil of secrecy." Cooper speaks cavalierly of tactics which, oh, just happen to be war crimes: "What could also shove Iran to the negotiating table are the kind of covert programs that have slowed its development of a nuclear program," such as the assassination of nuclear scientists.

Over and over, Cooper talks in the most naive terms: about how to "calibrate the impact of sanctions" . . . "tightening the noose" . . . officials who have "gamed out" the possibilities . . . choosing between more or less "unpalatable" alternatives . . . . It is terrifying that, when war is in the balance, a publication with the level of readership of the New York Times could engage in such irresponsible talk.

With the New York Times publishing "analysis" like this, is it any wonder that Americans can say things like . . . "It won't be a war. We're just going to drop a few well placed bombs on them" . . . "the object of fighting a war is to 'cause devastation'" . . . "my finger is on the button. Run back to your mud hut or I am going to press it!" . . . "when war is devastating, then people will do everything possible not to get into it!" . . . as some of my high school classmates wrote on Facebook today?


Related posts

As the Obama administration prepares in the days ahead to pivot from its focus on Syria to something truly startling -- talking to Iran! -- it is important that the American public devotes some time and energy to learning and thinking about Iran, the history of the U.S.-Iran relationship, and what the U.S.-Iran relationship means in the larger context of the effort to reduce the risk of war and violence in the world.

(See IRAN: 3 Reality Checks on the Emerging U.S. Narrative)

So there are these terrible things called nuclear weapons, and it just turns out that they hover around the Korean peninsula, as if "Korea" and "crazy nuclear terror" belonged together. And I thought to myself, "Where have I heard this before?"

(See The Cynical American Scapegoating of Korea as a Cover for Nuclear Terror )






How do you formulate a statement that can somehow convince the United States to eliminate its threatening nuclear weapons?  How do you formulate the 10th request? Or the 100th? Knowing all the time that the United States is in the position -- will always be in the position -- to say, "No" ?  At what point does it dawn on you that the United States will never give up its nuclear weapons, because it has the power and the rest of the world doesn't?

(See 360 Degree Feedback in New York (2014 NPT Prepcom and How the World Views the United States))

No Iran War Rallies EVERYWHERE!

After a call to resist U.S. war moves against Iran went out just a few days ago, the list of February 4 rallies to say "No Iran War!" is growing FAST.


February 4, 2012: No Iran War! rallies across the U.S.


To date, actions are listed in:

U.S. NORTHEAST
CONNECTICUT: New Haven
D.C.: Washington
MARYLAND: Baltimore
MASSACHUSETTS: Boston, Fall River
NEW HAMPSHIRE: Plymouth
NEW JERSEY: Jersey City
NEW YORK: New York City, Albany, Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Saratoga Springs, Delhi, Patchogue
PENNSYLVANIA: Harrisburg, Philadelphia, Lewisburg

U.S. SOUTHEAST
ALABAMA: Huntsville
ARKANSAS: Little Rock
FLORIDA: Tampa, Pompano Beach, Gainesville
GEORGIA: Atlanta, Athens
LOUISIANA: Baton Rouge
NORTH CAROLINA: Raleigh, Brevard, Tarboro
SOUTH CAROLINA: Rock Hill
TENNESSEE: Nashville
VIRGINIA: Norfolk, Richmond, Blacksburg

U.S. MIDWEST
ILLINOIS: Chicago, Bloomington, Champaign
INDIANA: Highland
IOWA: Des Moines
KANSAS: Wichita
MICHIGAN: Detroit, Kochville (Saginaw, Midland & Bay City), Kalamazoo, Lansing
MINNESOTA: Minneapolis
NEBRASKA: Omaha
OHIO: Columbus, Defiance, Cincinnati
WISCONSIN: Madison, Milwaukee, Green Bay, Racine

U.S. - TEXAS & SOUTHWEST
ARIZONA: Phoenix, Tucson
COLORADO: Colorado Springs
NEW MEXICO: Albuquerque
OKLAHOMA: Oklahoma City, Tulsa
TEXAS: Austin, Dallas, Houston, Waco, Amarillo
UTAH: Salt Lake City

U.S. WEST
CALIFORNIA: Los Angeles, Palm Springs, San Francisco, Truckee, Vista, Sacramento
HAWAII: Honolulu
OREGON: Portland, Astoria
WASHINGTON: Seattle

CANADA
ALBERTA: Calgary, Lethbridge
BRITISH COLUMBIA: Vancouver

. . . and the list just gets longer, almost by the hour.

Please check out the list of February 4 "No Iran War!" rallies and encourage organizers you know to add their events to the list. Let's show that this is a NATIONAL movement to stop the next war before it happens!
* * * * *

Related "No Iran War!" rallies:

Dublin - call for Feb 4
London - January 28
Leeds
Oslo - February 4


Related posts

In my opinion, February 4 should be used to make it clear that this is just the beginning ... and that Americans have embarked on sustained resistance to the attempts of the U.S. government to start yet another war!

(See What Comes After February 4? )







Women Without Men is a recent movie by the artist Shirin Neshat, based on the novel by Shahrnush Parsipur.. The first time I saw it, at the end I walked straight to the ticket window and bought another ticket and walked right back in and watched it again. The film contains haunting scene after haunting scene, and it makes it clear that Iran is a place where people are able to ask questions about patriarchy and about what it is going to take to overcome it.

(See Women Without Men as a US-Iran Cultural Bridge)


As the Obama administration prepares in the days ahead to pivot from its focus on Syria to something truly startling -- talking to Iran! -- it is important that the American public devotes some time and energy to learning and thinking about Iran, the history of the U.S.-Iran relationship, and what the U.S.-Iran relationship means in the larger context of the effort to reduce the risk of war and violence in the world.

(See IRAN: 3 Reality Checks on the Emerging U.S. Narrative)


If we are going to stave off a U.S. war against Iran, we are going to have to have some very difficult conversations with other Americans. Some people are extremely hostile. It's confusing and a bit frightening, but we're going to have to confront it.

(See Why Does Iran Arouse So Much Hostility?)

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

J'ACCUSE: The Beneficiaries of Permawar


[UPDDATE 2013: This post dates from 2012 was written at that height of U.S. threats of an attack against Iran. Today perhaps the first line should be re-written, "Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan ... drone strikes in Yemen and Somalia ... a threatened attack against Syria thwarted ... widespread demand for peaceful discussion with Iran ... so now we're back to Libya and Somalia?"]

Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan ... and now Iran. It's clear the United States pursues permanent war: "permawar." For whose benefit?

THE PRIME BENEFICIARIES
In contrast to people who focus on war profiteers and the military-industrial complex, and those who focus on the corporatocracy (i.e. capitalist system) that thrives in the shadow of permanent war, I believe that we must look first at the people who benefit much more directly from permawar.

More than anyone else, the beneficiaries of permawar are the politicians who thrive on the power to make and control wars.


* The number one prime beneficiary is the President, as well as presidential aspirants.


* The second set of prime beneficiaries are the President's cabinet members: National Security Advisor, Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of the Treasury, Attorney General, and others.


* The third set of prime beneficiaries are the leading members of Congress whose power comes from the eternal wrangling over just how much war the U.S. is going to make in the current period.


* The fourth set of prime beneficiaries are the leading party supporters -- both Democratic and Republican -- that draw energy and power from their involvement with these war gangs.


* The fifth set of prime beneficiaries are the politicos -- including political consultants, lobbyists, journalists, and pundits -- that draw energy and power from their involvement with these war gangs.


* The sixth set of prime beneficiaries are the executive branch and congressional aides that draw energy and power from their involvement with these war gangs.

Until the American public shows its willingness to cut this group of prime beneficiaries of permawar off ruthlessly, we will never be free of U.S. war-making.

It's virtually axiomatic that a candidate cannot be "antiwar." For anyone who cares about ending war, the only choice is to REJECT the election charade being carried out in 2012, and to help others understand why they should do so, too.


Who else benefits from permawar?


Related posts

How might an uprising against inequality and dismantling the military-industrial complex dovetail?

(See WHERE'S MINE? Inequality in the US and the Military-Industrial Complex )







The U.S. narrative goes something like this: Somebody "bad" (e.g. ISIS) is doing bad stuff . . . . The U.S. wants to "help" -- without overcommitting. We'll just start with a few advisers (to instruct, not to fight) and a few drones (to survey, not to kill) . . . .One thing leads to another and there's yet another fight. (Lucky we were there . . . )  Does it every occur to us that we've got the narrative (and the causality) backwards?

(See Drones, ISIS, and Permawar )







To many people, the relationship between finance and war is obvious: banks finance the military-industrial complex. In my opinion, however, that misses the point. Banks finance everything (in our society); so why, in particular is it so desirable to have all these ongoing wars?

(See Why Permawar? It's All About the "Vol" .... )






It's important to recognize that Goldman, Bloomberg, and the CME -- and ALL of the entities and individuals that profit from the "vol" -- can live with more or less taxation, or more or less regulation, or more or less business-friendly legislation. The one thing they can't live with? Peace . . . .

(See Finance's Unholy Trinity of Permawar: Goldman, Bloomberg, and the CME ) 

Feb 4 - Resources About Iran

Below is a working list of resources that might be used during Feb 4 "No Iran War!" actions and teach-ins scheduled around the U.S. and around the world.


"Yes, they're friends with each other.
They should be friends."

(Rick Steves visits Iran.)


SHORT INTRODUCTORY VIDEOS
IRAN Documentary Yesterday and Today : Rick Steves - Light travelogue and historical intro. Good for helping people get a first glimpse into the human side of Iran. (60 minutes)

Thanks to Bob Bossie for the following video suggestions:

The Folly of Attacking Iran: Lessons from History (6 minutes)

Democracy Now interview with Stephen Kinzer - Kinzer is the author of All the Shah's Men, listed in the "Books" section below. (26 minutes)

Iran: the side you don't see - Short video with Yusuf Islam (Cat Stevens "Peace Train") (4 minutes)

FILM RESOURCES
Persepolis -Contemporary Iran introduced through the eyes of a little girl, based on Marjane Satrapi's graphic novel.

BOOKS
All the Shah's Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror by Stephen Kinzer - Contemporary history of Iran, centering on the 1953 overthrow of Iran's democratic ruler, Mossadegh, in a CIA-backed coup.

ARTICLES
Israel vs. Iran: The Truth Slips Out (Thanks to Bob Bossie for this suggestion.)

WEBSITES
Code Pink: We Need Diplomacy with Iran, Not War
Peace with Iran
Fellowship of Reconciliation: Iran
Thanks to Mary Dean at Voices for Creative Nonviolence for sharing the three websites above!

RESOLUTIONS
Charlottesville, VA, has passed a City Council resolution opposing war against Iran.

THE VOICE OF THE PRO-DEMOCRACY OPPOSITION - Thanks to Danny Postel for the following links!

In "Raising Their Voices: Iranian Civil Society Reflections on the Military Option," the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran presents the viewpoints of 35 prominent Iranian civil society and cultural figures living inside Iran. Those interviewed are people outside the ruling establishment; many have faced censorship, harassment, and imprisonment for their opinions or activities. The interviewees unanimously expressed their grave concern that a military conflict would exacerbate the human rights situation and provide a pretext for the full militarization of the Iranian state, all the while increasing civil and political repression. The report concluded that a pre-emptive attack would be ruinous for human rights and democratic change in Iran.

View interactive website

View full report (PDF)

See also the works of Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian American Council and author of the new book A Single Roll of the Dice: Obama’s Diplomacy with Iran as well as Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States


Related posts


Women Without Men is a recent movie by the artist Shirin Neshat, based on the novel by Shahrnush Parsipur.. The first time I saw it, at the end I walked straight to the ticket window and bought another ticket and walked right back in and watched it again. The film contains haunting scene after haunting scene, and it makes it clear that Iran is a place where people are able to ask questions about patriarchy and about what it is going to take to overcome it.

(See Women Without Men as a US-Iran Cultural Bridge)


I often refer to how important the films of Iran have been in helping me open my mind to the possibilities of a peaceful relationship with that country.  I have been fortunate to be able to go see some of the best films from Iran every year at the wonderful Siskel Film Center in downtown Chicago. The will be another Festival of Films From Iran showing there in February, 2014.

(See A Force for Peace: Getting to Know Iran Through Film)








It would be good if we could present this whole collection of learning opportunities -- this "virtual antiwar university" -- in a way that captures the public's imagination. Particularly since the occupy movement has done so much to mobilize people, to wake them up, and to lead them. Is there an opportunity to elevate this into something bigger than isolated teaching events? How could we make something like this happen?

(See Virtual Antiwar University )



Monday, January 23, 2012

#Permawar

The United States perpetuates a state of permanent war. The names change -- hell, sometimes they change by just a single letter -- but the result is the same. Call it "permawar."

The fatal error of all those who oppose these wars is to focus on individual outrages: U.S. out of Iraq! Rethink Afghanistan! No Iran War!

When are we going to step back and see the forest for the trees? All of the wealth and power of the United States is dedicated to perpetuating a state of permanent war, and we are all swept along in it.


In my opinion, the vast majority of Americans have internalized this reality, and that's why, confronted with the suggestion that they oppose the wars, they look the other way. "What do you expect me to do about it?" they seem to say. Most people have been rendered helpless.

That would tend to explain why so few people vote.

Of course, there are still a minority of people who will proffer counter-arguments when you suggest that they should oppose war, say, against Iran. "Oh, but those guys in Iran are really bad guys!" I'm becoming more and more certain, however, that those arguments are just a cover for helplessness: "I know my voice isn't heard, and I'm sure my vote doesn't count; perhaps I can still retain a shred of self-respect by repeating the government line; maybe then this person will leave me alone ...."

Now, this theory of "permawar" only makes sense if there is somebody -- or some group of somebodies -- who benefit from perpetuating a state of permanent war. Who might that be?

Who benefits from war? and who benefits from "permawar"?

Related posts

More than anyone else, the beneficiaries of permawar are the politicians who thrive on the power to make and control wars. The number one prime beneficiary is the President, as well as presidential aspirants. But it doesn't end there . . . .

(See J'ACCUSE: The Beneficiaries of Permawar )



To many people, the relationship between finance and war is obvious: banks finance the military-industrial complex. In my opinion, however, that misses the point. Banks finance everything (in our society); so why, in particular is it so desirable to have all these ongoing wars?

(See Why Permawar? It's All About the "Vol" .... )



It's important to recognize that Goldman, Bloomberg, and the CME -- and ALL of the entities and individuals that profit from the "vol" -- can live with more or less taxation, or more or less regulation, or more or less business-friendly legislation. The one thing they can't live with? Peace . . . .

(See Finance's Unholy Trinity of Permawar: Goldman, Bloomberg, and the CME )





It is time now to turn to the dirty secret of American life and the primary dilemma of the antiwar movement: the military money that flows to EVERY Congressional district, and in particular the "good jobs" that members of Congress think they are protecting when they vote for ever-higher levels of military spending.

(See Drones, Permawar, and the Problem of "Good Jobs")

Saturday, January 21, 2012

The Midwest Protests Guantanamo Detention

January 11, 2012 -- the 10th anniversary of Guantanamo Bay Detention Center -- was a global day of action to protest indefinite detention, unfair trials, and torture by the U.S. in Guantanamo, Bagram, and other prisons around Afghanistan and around the world.

Major protests were held in Washington, D.C. Below is information on protests in Chicago and other Midwest cities. Please post links in the comments section to other Midwest J11 actions!


Chicago, January 11, 2012: Protesters against Guantanamo detention
march in front of Federal Court Building


CHICAGO
January 7 teach-in
January 11 rally - Federal Plaza, Chicago
VIDEO: January 11 rally - Federal Plaza, Chicago
January 14 screening - Andy Worthington and "Outside the Law"
Other J11 events in Chicago


Protest against Guantanamo detention in Minneapolis, January 11, 2012


MINNEAPOLIS
Minneapolis January 9 protest - including focus on Guantanamo memo co-author Robert Delahunty, now a St. Thomas Law School professor


Related posts

Chicago was the site of major protests against U.S. detention practices in Guantanamo, as well as in Bagram, other prisons throughout Afghanistan, and elsewhere in the world, on and around January 11, 2012. We called for an end to indefinite detention, unfair trials, and torture.

(See Chicago Protests Guantanamo Detention)







Year after year, hundreds of thousands of people from Chicago and the surrounding area gather on the lakeshore to watch aerial displays by an array of planes. Most don't suspect that they are being subjected to an intense propaganda effort by multiple branches of the U.S. military.  The Chicago Coalition to Shut Down Guantanamo views this as a perfect opportunity to engage with the public and enlist them in the growing movement against U.S. war, torture, surveillance, and other crimes.  We will join activists from many other peace and justice groups who have had a growing presence at this event in recent years.

(See August 16-17: Protest U.S. Kidnapping, Torture, and Drone Assassinations at the 2014 Chicago Air and Water Show Protest )


In the tallgrass prairie native to Chicago, there are certain flowers that are very pretty but if you try to cut them down, they just come back ten times as strong.

(See Never Try to Silence a Tuesdayista )

Friday, January 20, 2012

#IranTuesday: Obama's Moment of Truth?

Next Tuesday, January 24, President Obama will give the State of the Union Address.

On Tuesdays, many of us in the antiwar community attend to resistance to the war in Afghanistan. This week, however, I propose that we substitute #IranTuesday for #AfghanistanTuesday. February 4 is a National Day of Action to prevent U.S. war against Iran; we have arrived at a moment of truth.

What can we expect on #IranTuesday?


One possibility is that the President will indicate that he has come to his senses, and that he will eschew saber-rattling against Iran in lieu of a course of seeking peace. This is the course that his Republican opponents fear the most, because it gives Obama the opportunity to appear "presidential," to take the high road, to place some real distance between himself and everyone else in this election year.

Such a course would come as a welcome relief the many, many people who previously voted for Obama but have now lost faith in him. A sensible pronouncement by Obama is their last hope for a saving grace that will allow them to support him again. (Of course, some people have figured out that Obama is a lost cause.)

Unfortunately, a far more likely possibility (in my opinion) is that Obama will issue stern talk about Iran. The silver lining in that possibility is that it would offer the Republicans a chance to upstage Obama by talking sense in their "response." Just imagine: Republicans could paint the young president as reckless, the kind of person who should be gently but firmly ushered out of his position of power. The Republicans could achieve a kind of political miracle by appearing more presidential than a sitting president, simply by showing forbearance. (And I'm not even talking about something that might actually rise to the level of responsible governance, like hearings into the assassinations in Iran!)

The irony is that, although there is one Republican who is prepared to use a peace platform to go on the offensive, the official Republican respondents could never, ever be expected to retreat from a position of absolute belligerence.

So just what good can come out of #IranTuesday? Just this: it will serve as proof, for anyone who still needs it, that the mainstream U.S. parties constitute a distinction without a difference, and offer no kind of choice for people who want to change the future direction of the country.

Election 2012 is a joke. The answer lies in the streets. Spread the word.

The Revelations of "Beneath the Blindfold"

"Beneath the Blindfold" is a film about torture survivors. It is an important film, and I encourage everyone to look for an opportunity to see the film as soon as possible, and to share it with others in their community. This is especially important in light of the recent unanimous vote in Chicago City Council to make Chicago a torture-free city and the opportunity it provides to advance an anti-torture platform to many, many other places.

Much will be written about "Beneath the Blindfold." Below is a quick sketch of several elements of the film that were particularly revelatory to me.


SENSORY DEPRIVATION
A critical part of "Beneath the Blindfold" is the information it provides about sensory deprivation and how it constitutes torture.

I have only recently confronted the truth that solitary confinement -- so widely practiced in the United States -- constitutes a form of torture.

In the hearings on the resolution to make Chicago a torture free city, there was ample first-hand testimony about the fact that "solitary confinement" is a misnomer -- that what is really being practiced is sensory deprivation, and that the result is to destroy minds and bodies.

In fact, for those who have been paying attention, the truth about solitary confinement/sensory deprivation has already begun to intrude into mainstream culture. See, for instance Atul Gawande, Hellholes, in The New Yorker - "The United States holds tens of thousands of inmates in long-term solitary confinement. Is this torture?"

"Beneath the Blindfold" provides additional information about the effects of sensory deprivation. In particular, I was struck by the information provided in the film about how the effects of sensory deprivation have been well-known since the '50s -- particularly as a result of the "Hebb experiments". Under the circumstances, the terrible impact of sensory deprivaiton on prisoners can only be intentional. As one speaker summarized those experiments, "It became clear that within 48 hours of sensory deprivation, the mind starts to break down."

TRAUMA
One common thread among the torture survivors profiled in "Beneath the Blindfold" is the continuing trauma of those who have experienced torture. It is perhaps the signal achievement of the film that it portrays four different survivors, each of whose experience of torture was distinct from that of any of the others, and each of whom has an otherwise unique personality, and yet each makes clear that they share a long-lasting trauma. One leaves the film with a deeply-felt sense of the lasting trauma caused by torture of any kind.

In addition to the testimony of the survivors themselves, the witness provided by medical and psychological professionals -- notably Dr. Frank Summers and Mary Fabri of the Kovler Center -- begins to lay the foundation for the viewer of an understanding of the trauma that follows torture.

FORGETTING/NOT FORGETTING
For me, a telling statement was that survivors simultaneously yearn to forget torture experiences, and yet, at the same time, are desperate that their experiences not be forgotten. I think part of what that refers to is a purely internal battle -- to hold on to experience or discard it? But another part of that, I think, refers to social memory, and perhaps it is easier for us to know how to attend to that.

If "desperate that those experiences not be forgotten" means that it is important that society know what happened, and take responsibility for it, and assure that it never happens again, then I think that is something all of us can and should agree to participate in. It is certainly a goal that is ably supported by "Beneath the Blindfold."

Related posts

The Chicago Coalition to Shut Down Guantanamo holds weekly vigils at Dearborn and Jackson in Chicago every Friday at 4:30 p.m. to support the Guantanamo Hunger Strikers and to demand that Guantanamo be shut down. (Learn more about weekly vigils by the Chicago Coalition to Shut Down Guantanamo.)


 

BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Mayor and the City Council of the City of Chicago stand firm against all forms of torture and inhuman treatment, and hereby proclaim Chicago to be a torture free zone; and . . . (See Chicago: A Torture-Free City?)
 


 


What would Christians think if someone proposed carving out a slice of their Sunday services to worship the God of Entombment? Wouldn't they think that was absurd? After all, if Christianity is anything, isn't it the religion of "UN-entombment"?

(See When is Christianity Going Back to Being the Religion of "UN-entombment"?)