In his recent address in Berlin, President Obama issued a strong statement against the threat nuclear weapons pose to our planet, saying "so long as nuclear weapons exist, we are not truly safe". As the nation with the greatest number of nuclear weapons, the United States has the responsibility to play the leadership role in international collective efforts to reduce and eliminate these horrible weapons. Click here to ask President Obama to lead in reducing nuclear weapons In the next several months there are several critical international conferences scheduled to undertake significant work to diminish the threats of nuclear weapons. These include a United Nations high level meeting on Nuclear Disarmament, a Geneva meeting on establishing a Nuclear Free Zone in the Middle East, and a conference in Mexico on the humanitarian costs of nuclear weapons. In the past the U.S. has too often been a reluctant participant in such efforts or even played a negative role, refusing to commit to international collective action against nuclear weapons when its own weapons or those of allies are involved. Please sign a petition which specifically asks President Obama to attend and lead at these critical upcoming international conferences to limit and eliminate nuclear weapons. For Peace and Diplomacy, Shelagh Foreman Program Director Massachusetts Peace Action

Join Massachusetts Peace Action - or renew your membership today! Dues are $40/year for an individual, $65 for a family, or $10 for student/unemployed/low income. Members vote for leadership and endorsements, receive newsletters and discounts on event admissions. Donate now and you will be a member in good standing through December 2013. Your financial support makes this work possible! Massachusetts Peace Action, 11 Garden St., Cambridge, MA 02138 617-354-2169 • info@masspeaceaction.org • Follow us on Facebook or Twitter

Monday, July 15, 2013

   

Zimmerman: Not Guilty of Cold-Blooded Murder

by Stephen Lendman

When is killing a non-threatening unarmed teenager not murder? When civil rights don't matter. When Jim Crow justice prevails.

When the victim is black. When mostly white women jurors call cold-blooded murder self-defense.

(Note: Juror B29 was the sole Hispanic. Zimmerman's white. He's Hispanic. His voter registration form identifies him that way. His father calls himself white. His mother's Peruvian).

Killing Trayvon Martin's not murder when a jury of peers representing both sides fairly is verboten. When killing black males in America is OK when whites do it.

When a culture of violence prevails. When institutionalized racism is longstanding. When conventional wisdom says black males aren't victims. They're prone to violence.

When equity and justice are four-letter words. When human life has no value. When society doesn't give a damn if a black male dies. When lawlessness is part of the national culture.

George Zimmerman murdered Trayvon Martin. He did so in cold-blood. He's free to kill again. Wrongfully claiming self-defense saved him. It's the American way. It's always been this way.

Cold-blooded murder's not self-defense. Not now. Not ever.

The ACLU responded to Trayvon's killing saying:

His death "once again laid bare the reality that, too often in our nation’s history, police actions have been motivated by racial bias and that crimes with an undeniable racial motive have too often been overlooked or swept under the rug."

Florida's Seminole County Court Judge Debra Nelson concluded proceedings telling Zimmerman: "You have no further business with the court."

Benjamin Crump represented Trayvon's family. He expressed their outrage saying:

"Trayvon Martin will forever remain in the annals of history next to Medgar Evers and Emmet Till as symbols for the fight for equal justice for all."

He appealed for calm, adding: "For Trayvon to remain in peace, we must all be peaceful."

NAACP President Ben Jealous issued a statement saying:

"I know I am not alone in my outrage, anger, and heartbreak over this decision."

"When a teenager's life is taken in cold blood, and there is no accountability for the man who killed him, nothing seems right in the world, but we cannot let these emotions alone rule."

"In these most challenging of times, we are called to act. There is work left to be done to achieve justice for Trayvon."

"The Department of Justice can still address the violation of Trayvon's most fundamental civil right - the right to life, and we are urging them to do so."

"We continue to grieve the loss of Trayvon with his parents, his family, and all who loved him. Do not forget what brought us to this day."

"(W)e have a choice. We can be felled by our sorrows over the jury's decision, or we can turn our frustration into action. We can demand the Department of Justice address the travesties of this tragedy. We can take a step forward in our efforts to finally end racial profiling in America once and for all."

Legal proceedings against Zimmerman's wife remain active. Shellie Zimmerman faces perjury charges. She lied last summer. She did so during her husband's bail hearing.

She wrongfully pled poverty. She did it after she and her husband raised $130,000 through online donations.

Nationwide protests followed Zimmerman's acquittal. Public anger is real. It's visceral. Twitter messages read:

"My heart is aching with disappointment."

"My tears haven't fallen this hard in years."

"The justice system in America is RIP."

"US jury acquits on black teen death!! Makes me sick to my stomach."

"It's now legal. You can chase someone, start a fight…pull out a gun, kill him & walk away scot-free."

San Francisco protesters marched down Mission and Valencia streets. They called for justice. They held signs saying: "The people say guilty," "No justice, no peace," and "The whole system is racist."

Riots erupted in downtown Oakland. Chicago protesters shouted "Who killed Treyvon Martin? The whole damn system!"

Washington, DC protesters blocked a busy intersection. Marchers in Seminole County's seat, Sanford, Miami, and elsewhere demand justice.

Trayvon was aged 17. He was an African American high school student. He lived in predominantly white Sanford, FL.

On February 26, 2012, Zimmerman murdered him in cold blood. He faced second-degree murder and manslaughter charges.

Trayvon was unarmed. He carried a can of iced tea and some cash. He threatened no one. Neighborhood watch captain Zimmerman claimed self-defense.

Critics called killing Trayvon a hate crime. Police tapes showed Zimmerman obsessed with law and order, suburban life minutia, and black males. He called them "assholes who always get away."

A 2011-established Neighborhood Watch group appointed him captain. It was set up to help local police. He's a former altar boy turned killer.

In 2005, he faced assault charges. He accosted a police officer during an altercation. It was over a friend's underage drinking arrest.

He was a first-time offender. He avoided a felony conviction. The same year, his former fiancee accused him of domestic violence. He counter-charged in response. In 2006, the case ended when both injunctions expired.

Stand your ground laws facilitate anything goes. They legitimize vigilante justice. They permit killing.

Most US states have them. So does Florida. They wink and nod at murder. They do so if authorities or individuals fear assailants pose serious threats. They expand on the so-called Castle Doctrine.

US Legal.com defines it as follows:

"In criminal law, (it's) an exception to the retreat rule. The retreat rule allows a person the use of deadly force while protecting his/her place of abode, its premises and its inhabitants from attack such as from a trespasser who intends to commit a felony or inflict serious bodily injury or harm."

"This defense justifies such conduct constituting a criminal offense. This is also termed as defense of premises, defense of habitation and dwelling defense."

According to Jacksonville, FL State Attorney Angela Corey:

"The stand-your-ground law is one portion of justifiable use of deadly force."

"And what that means is that the state must go forward and be able to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt."

"It makes the case in general more difficult than a normal criminal case."

Florida's law states:

"A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."

Law Professor Jonathan Turley calls Stand Your Ground, Make My Day, and Castle Doctrine laws abusive and unnecessary.

They "address a problem that does not exist," he said. There are ample protections under the common law for individuals to use the privilege of self-defense, including reasonable mistaken self-defense."

"Legislators are now feigning complete shock at the potential for abuse under these laws after refusing to consider" clear warnings about passing them.

Shoot first laws assure trouble. Needless deaths follow. Killers get off scot-free. Wild west justice prevails.

Zimmerman wasn't initially charged. Public outrage forced Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi to act. She appointed a special prosecutor. She pressed second-degree murder and manslaughter charges.

Under Florida law, second degree murder is lawlessly killing someone. It excludes premeditation. Proving it requires prosecutors show defendants evinced a "depraved mind" without regard for human life.

They must convince jurors that they acted with enmity toward victims or that both parties had an ongoing interaction or relationship. Proving an intent to kill isn't required.

Second degree murder's mandated if victims die while committing a felony. They include burglary, home-invasion robbery, kidnapping, sexual battery, and other offenses.

Prosecutors must show victims died as a result of an act committed by a non-participant in the felony. If the defendant or other criminal participant caused the killing, state law requires first degree murder charges.

Second degree murder defenses include:

• justifiable use of deadly force to "prevent the commission of a forcible felony," or using it "to prevent death or great bodily harm;"

• excusable homicide committed by accident; or

• spontaneous or negligent killing qualifying as manslaughter.

If found guilty, Zimmerman faced up to 30 years imprisonment. Life sentences may be imposed if defendants had other felony convictions, including murder.

Acquitting Zimmerman reflects Jim Crow justice. Killing a nonthreatening unarmed black teenager doesn't matter. Stand your ground laws make it easy. It's the American way.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

His new book is titled "Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity."

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

It airs Fridays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour

http://www.dailycensored.com/zimmerman-not-guilty-of-cold-blooded-murder/

***In The Time Of The Time Of An Outlaw Country Music Moment- The Belfast Cowboy Rides Again Van Morrison’s “The Best Of Van Morrison, Volume Two”

CD Review

The Best Of Van Morrison, Volume Two, Van Morrison, Polydor, 1993

The basic comments here have been used, used many times, to review other Van Morrison albums from various points in his long and honorable career.

Apparently just now, although this time rather accidentally, I am on something of an outlaw country moment tear, again. I have mentioned on previously occasions when I have discussed county music, or rather more correctly outlaw country music, that I had a very short, but worthwhile period when I was immersed in this genre in the late 1970s. After tiring somewhat of Willie Nelson, Waylon Jennings and other more well know country outlaws I gravitated toward the music, eerily beautiful and haunting music, of Townes Van Zandt whose Steve Earle tribute album Townes I have recently reviewed in this space. As I noted there, as well, while this outlaw country thing was short-lived and I scrambled back to my first loves, blues, rock and folk music I always had time to listen to Townes and his funny mix of blues, folk rock, rock folk, and just downright outlaw country.

And that brings us to the album under review, The Best Of Van Morrison, Volume Two, and another “outlaw” country music man, the Belfast cowboy Van Morrison. Wait a minute, Van Morrison? Belfast cowboy? Okay, let me take a few steps back. I first heard Van Morrison in his 1960s rock period when I flipped out over his Into The Mystic on his Moondance album. And when I later saw him doing some blues stuff highlighted by his appearance in Martin Scorsese PBS History of Blues series several years ago I also flipped out, and said yes, brother blues. But somewhere along the way he turned again on us and has “reinvented” himself as the “son”, the legitimate son, of Hank Williams. But Van Morrison is no one-trick pony as his long and hard-bitten career proves.

If you do not believe me then just listen to him ante up on his cover of Bob Dylan’s It’s All Over Now Baby Blue, a classic folk bluesy number; the thoughtful Sense Of Wonder; the pathos of Real Real Goner; the song I’ll Tell Ma; and, something out of time, Hymns To The Silence . The Belfast cowboy, indeed, although I always thought cowboys wore their emotions down deep, not on their blues high white note sleeves.

From The Marxist Archives-The 90th Anniversary of the February Revolution

Workers Vanguard No. 887	2 March 2007

TROTSKY

LENIN

The 90th Anniversary of the February Revolution

(Quote of the Week)

Sparked by an International Women’s Day demonstration on March 8 (February 23 by the old Russian calendar), where women workers in St. Petersburg (Petrograd) demanded bread and opposed the interimperialist First World War, the February Revolution toppled the autocratic rule of Tsar Nicholas II. Alongside the new bourgeois Provisional Government arose workers and soldiers soviets (councils), posing a situation of dual power. Writing before his return from exile in Switzerland, Bolshevik leader V.I. Lenin outlined a course toward the seizure of power by the working class, supported by the peasantry, which he would elaborate in Letters from Afar and the “April Theses.” Lenin’s struggle for this strategy, not least against leading Bolsheviks who urged critical support to the bourgeois regime, prepared the way for the proletarian socialist October Revolution.

The new government that has seized power in St. Petersburg, or, more correctly, wrested it from the proletariat, which has waged a victorious, heroic and fierce struggle, consists of liberal bourgeois and landlords whose lead is being followed by Kerensky, the spokesman of the democratic peasants and, possibly, of that part of the workers who have forgotten their internationalism and have been led on to the bourgeois path. The new government is composed of avowed advocates and supporters of the imperialist war with Germany, i.e., a war in alliance with the English and French imperialist governments, a war for the plunder and conquest of foreign lands—Armenia, Galicia, Constantinople, etc....

The new government cannot give the people peace, because it represents the capitalists and landlords and because it is tied to the English and French capitalists by treaties and financial commitments. Russian Social-Democracy must therefore, while remaining true to internationalism, first and foremost explain to the people who long for peace that it cannot be won under the present government....

The new government cannot give the people bread. And no freedom can satisfy the masses suffering from hunger due to shortages and inefficient distribution of available stocks, and, most important, to the seizure of these stocks by the landlords and capitalists. It requires revolutionary measures against the landlords and capitalists to give the people bread, and such measures can be carried out only by a workers’ government....

The truth about the present government and its real attitude on pressing issues must be made known to all working people in town and country, and also to the army. Soviets of Workers’ Deputies must be organised, the workers must be armed. Proletarian organisations must be extended to the army (which the new government has likewise promised political rights) and to the rural areas. In particular there must be a separate class organisation for farm labourers.

Only by making the truth known to the widest masses of the population, only by organising them, can we guarantee full victory in the next stage of the revolution and the winning of power by a workers’ government.

Fulfillment of this task, which in revolutionary times and under the impact of the severe lessons of the war can be brought home to the people in an immeasurably shorter time than under ordinary conditions, requires the revolutionary proletarian party to be ideologically and organisationally independent. It must remain true to internationalism and not succumb to the false bourgeois phraseology meant to dupe the people by talk of “defending the fatherland” in the present imperialist and predatory war.

—V.I. Lenin, “Draft Theses, March 4 (17), 1917”

************
V. I. Lenin

Draft Theses, March 4 (17), 1917^[1]

---

Published: First published in 1924 in Lenin Miscellany II. Published according to the manuscript.
Source:Lenin Collected Works, Progress Publishers, 1964, Moscow, Volume 23, pages 287-291.
Translated: M. S. Levin, The Late Joe Fineberg and and Others
Transcription\Markup:R. Cymbala
Public Domain: Lenin Internet Archive 2002 (2005). You may freely copy, distribute, display and perform this work; as well as make derivative and commercial works. Please credit “Marxists Internet Archive” as your source.
Other Formats: Text• README

---

Information reaching Zurich from Russia at this moment, March 17, 1917, is so scanty, and events in our country are developing so rapidly, that any judgement of the situation must of needs be very cautious.

Yesterday’s dispatches indicated that the tsar had already abdicated and that the new, Octobrist-Cadet government^[2] had already made an agreement with other representatives of the Romanov dynasty. Today there are reports from England that the tsar has not yet abdicated, and that his whereabouts are unknown. This suggests that he is trying to put up resistance, organise a party, perhaps even an armed force, in an attempt to restore the monarchy. If he succeeds in fleeing from Russia or winning over part of the armed forces, the tsar might, to mislead the people, issue a manifesto announcing immediate conclusion of a separate peace with Germany!
That being the position, the proletariat’s task is a pretty complex one. There can be no doubt that it must organise itself in the most efficient way, rally all its forces, arm, strengthen and extend its alliance with all sections of the working masses of town and country in order to put up a stubborn resistance to tsarist reaction and crush the tsarist monarchy once and for all.
Another factor to bear in mind is that the new government that has seized power in St. Petersburg, or, more correctly, wrested it from the proletariat, which has waged a victorious, heroic and fierce struggle, consists of liberal bourgeois and landlords whose lead is being followed by Kerensky, the spokesman of the democratic peasants and, possibly, of that part of the workers who have forgotten their internationalism and have been led on to the bourgeois path. The new government is composed of avowed advocates and sup porters of the imperialist war with Germany, i.e., a war in alliance with the English and French imperialist governments, a war for the plunder and conquest of foreign lands—Armenia, Galicia, Constantinople, etc.

The new government cannot give the peoples of Russia (and the nations tied to us by the war) either peace, bread, or full freedom. The working class must therefore continue its fight for socialism and peace, utilising for this purpose the new situation and explaining it as widely as possible among the masses.
The new government cannot give the people peace, because it represents the capitalists and landlords and because it is tied to the English and French capitalists by treaties and financial commitments. Russian Social-Democracy must therefore, while remaining true to internationalism, first and foremost explain to the people who long for peace that it cannot be won under the present government. Its first appeal to the people (March 17) does not as much as mention the chief and basic issue of the time, peace. It is keeping secret the predatory treaties tsarism concluded with England, France, Italy, Japan, etc. It wants to conceal from the people the truth about its war programme, the fact that it stands for continuation of the war, for victory over Germany. It is not in a position to do what the people so vitally need: directly and frankly propose to all belligerent countries an immediate ceasefire, to be followed by peace based on complete liberation of all the colonies and dependent and unequal nations. That requires a workers’ government acting in alliance with, first, the poorest section of the rural population, and, second, the revolutionary workers of all countries in the war.
The new government cannot give the people bread. And no freedom can satisfy the masses suffering from hunger due to shortages and inefficient distribution of available stocks, and, most important, to the seizure of these stocks by the landlords and capitalists. It requires revolutionary measures against the landlords and capitalists to give the people bread, and such measures can be carried out only by a workers’ government.


Lastly, the new government is not, in a position to give the people full freedom, though in its March 17 manifesto it speaks of nothing but political freedom and is silent on other, no less important, issues. The new government has already endeavoured to reach agreement with the Romanov dynasty, for it has suggested recognising the Romanovs, in defiance of the people’s will, on the understanding that Nicholas II would abdicate in favour of his son, with a member of the Romanov family appointed regent. In its manifesto, the new government promises every kind of freedom, but has failed in its direct and unconditional duty immediately to implement such freedoms as election of officers, etc., by the soldiers, elections to the St. Petersburg, Moscow and other City Councils on a basis of genuinely universal, and not merely male, suffrage, make all government and public buildings available for public meetings, appoint elections to all local institutions and Zemstvos, likewise on the basis of genuinely universal suffrage, repeal all restrictions on the rights of local government bodies, dismiss all officials appointed to supervise local government bodies, introduce not only freedom of religion, but also freedom from religion, immediately separate the school from the church and free it of control by government officials, etc.
The new government’s March 17 manifesto arouses the deepest distrust, for it consists entirely of promises and does not provide for the immediate carrying out of a single one of the vital measures that can and should be carried out right now.
The new government’s programme does not contain a single word on the eight-hour day or on any other economic measure to improve the worker’s position. It contains not a single word about land for the peasants, about the uncompensated transfer to the peasants of all the estates. By its silence on these vital issues the new government reveals its capitalist and landlord nature.
Only a workers’ government that relies, first, on the overwhelming majority of the peasant population, the farm labourers and poor peasants, and, second, on an alliance with the revolutionary workers of all countries in the war, can give the people peace, bread and full freedom.


The revolutionary proletariat can therefore only regard the revolution of March 1 (14) as its initial, and by no means complete, victory on its momentous path. It cannot but set itself the task of continuing the fight for a democratic republic and socialism.
To do that, the proletariat and the R.S.D.L.P. must above all utilise the relative and partial freedom the new government is introducing, and which can be guaranteed and extended only by continued, persistent and persevering revolutionary struggle.
The truth about the present government and its real attitude on pressing issues must be made known to all working people in town and country, and also to the army. Soviets of Workers’ Deputies must be organised, the workers must be armed. Proletarian organisations must be extended to the army (which the new government has likewise promised political rights) and to the rural areas. In particular there must be a separate class organisation for farm labourers.
Only by making the truth known to the widest masses of the population, only by organising them, can we guarantee full victory in the next stage of the revolution and the winning of power by a workers’ government.
Fulfilment of this task, which in revolutionary times and under the impact of the severe lessons of the war can be brought home to the people in an immeasurably shorter time than under ordinary conditions, requires the revolutionary proletarian party to be ideologically and organisation ally independent. It must remain true to internationalism and not succumb to the false bourgeois phraseology meant to dupe the people by talk of“defending the fatherland” in the present imperialist and predatory war.
Not only this government, but even a democratic bourgeois republican government, were it to consist exclusively of Kerensky and other Narodnik and “Marxist” social-patriots, cannot lead the people out of the imperialist war and guarantee peace.
For that reason we cannot consent to any blocs, or alliances, or even agreements with the defencists among the workers, nor with the Gvozdyov-Potresov-Chkhenkeli Kerensky, etc., trend, nor with men who, like Chkheidze and others, have taken a vacillating and indefinite stand on this crucial issue. Those agreements would not only inject an element of falseness in the minds of the masses, making them dependent on the Russian imperialist bourgeoisie, but would also weaken and undermine the leading role of the proletariat in ridding the people of imperialist war and guaranteeing a genuinely durable peace between the workers’ governments of all countries.

---

Notes

[1]The first news of the February bourgeois-democratic revolution in Russia reached Lenin on March 2 (15), 1917. Reports of the victory of the revolution and the advent to power of an Octobrist-Cadet government of capitalists and landlords appeared in the Zürcher Post andNeue Zürcher Zeitung by the evening of March 4 (17). Lenin had drawn up a rough draft of theses, not meant for publication, on the tasks of the protetariat in the revolution. The theses were immediately sent via Stockholm to Oslo for the Bolsheviks leaving for Russia.

[2]Lenin uses the appellation Octobrist-Cadet to describe the bourgeois Provisional Government formed at 3 p.m. on March 2 (15), 1917 by agreement between the Provisional Committee of the State Duma and the Socialist-Revolutionary and Menshevik leaders of the Executive Committee of the Petrograd Soviet of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies. The government was made up of Prince G. Y. Lvov (Prime Minister and Minister of the Interior), the Cadet leader P. N. Milyukov (Minister of Foreign Affairs), the Octobrist leader A. I. Guchkov (Minister of War and Acting Minister of the Navy) and other representatives of the big bourgeoisie and landlords. It also included A. F. Kerensky, of the Trudovik group, who was appointed Minister of Justice.

The manifesto of March 4 (17) mentioned by Lenin later on was originally drawn up by Menshevik members of the Petrograd Soviet Executive Committee. It set out the terms on which the Executive was prepared to support the Provisional Government. In the course of negotiations with the Duma Committee, it was revised by P. N. Milyukov and became the basis of the Provisional Government’s first appeal to the people.

 

Free Bradley Manning Now!

Rally in front of Maj. General Buchanan’s office!

Organizer Email: emma@bradleymanning.org
Organizer Phone #:

JOIN OUR DAY OF ACCOUNTABILITY – defend whistleblowing and speak truth to power!
After three years of confinement, Army whistleblower and peace prize winner Bradley Manning’s trial is drawing to a close. Join us before it’s too late on July 26 from 3-5:30pm at Ft. McNair (4th St and P St SW, near the Waterfront metro, Washington DC) outside the office of Major General Jeffrey Buchanan, the Convening Authority overseeing Bradley Manning’s trial.
General Buchanan is a powerful figure who can reduce any sentence resulting from a conviction. While he reigns over Bradley’s destiny, we’re calling upon him to do the right thing!
The information that Bradley gave the public exposed the unjust detainment of innocent people at Guantanamo Bay, showed us the true human cost of our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, helped fuel pro-democratic movements in the Arab world, and changed journalism forever. There is no evidence that anyone was harmed as a result of the leaked information, yet Bradley faces life in prison.
This is our opportunity to bring home to Gen. Buchanan the importance of his sentencing decision, not only for fair American justice, but for government accountability, international human rights, and the protection of other whistleblowers, including NSA Edward Snowden.
Enough is enough. The public has a right to know. So join us on Friday, July 26th and let the military feel the heat!
DC/MD/VA area folks please spread the word by downloading the poster from our website and posting it around your neighborhood or workplace. To volunteer or help with outreach, contact: Carrie 202-714-8530 / carrie@bradleymanning.org
E-mail emma@bradleymanning.org if you’d like to endorse this event.
P.S. We understand that many supporters work 9-5PM so we are asking you to plan on leaving work early so we can have maximum impact on the base.
Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/events/479855288757353/
When: 07/26/2013, 3:00 pm - 5:30 pm

Ft. McNair
Ft. McNair - Washington DC
Details

Map DataMap data ©2013 Google, Sanborn - Terms of Use

Map Data

Map data ©2013 Google, Sanborn

Map data ©2013 Google, Sanborn

Report a map error

38.8682702-77.01388709999998

Location
Ft. McNair
Ft. McNair
Washington DC
DC


United States

The Latest From The “Veterans For Peace” Facebook Page-Gear Up For The Fall 2013 Anti-War Season-Troops Out Now!

Click on the headline to link to the Veterans For Peace Facebook page for the latest news on what anti-war front the organization is working on. 

 

Re-posted from the American Left History blog- Thursday, November 11, 2010

A Stroll In The Park On Veterans Day- Immediate, Unconditional Withdrawal Of All U.S. Troops From Iraq and Afghanistan!

Markin comment:

Listen, I have been to many marches and demonstrations for democratic, progressive, socialist and communist causes in my long political life. However, of all those events none, by far, has been more satisfying that to march alongside my fellow ex-soldiers who have “switched” over to the other side and are now part of the struggle against war, the hard, hard struggle against the permanent war machine that this imperial system has embarked upon. From as far back as in the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) days I have always felt that ex-soldiers (hell, active soldiers too, if you can get them) have had just a little bit more “street cred” on the war issue than the professors, pacifists and little old ladies in tennis sneakers who have traditionally led the anti-war movements. Maybe those brothers (and in my generation it was mainly only brothers) and now sisters may not quite pose the questions of war and peace the way I do, or the way that I would like them to do, but they are kindred spirits.

Now normally in Boston, and in most places, a Veterans Day parade means a bunch of Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) or American Legion-types taking time off from drinking at their post bars (“the battle of the barstool”) and donning the old overstuffed uniform and heading out on to Main Street to be waved at, and cheered on, by like-minded, thankful citizens. And of course that happened this time as well. What also happened in Boston this year (and other years but I have not been involved in previous marches) was that the Veterans For Peace (VFP) organized an anti-war march as part of their “Veterans Day” program. Said march to be held at the same place and time as the official one.

Previously there had been a certain amount of trouble, although I am not sure that it came to blows, between the two groups. (I have only heard third-hand reports on previous events.) You know the "super-patriots" vs. “commie symps” thing that has been going on as long as there have been ex-soldiers (and others) who have differed from the bourgeois party pro-war line. In any case the way this impasse had been resolved previously, and the way the parameters were set this year as well, was that the VFP took up the rear of the official parade, and took up the rear in an obvious way. Separated, if you can believe, this from the main body of the official parade by a medical emergency truck. Nice, right? Something of the old "I’ll take my ball and bat and go home" by the "officials" was in the air on that one.

But here is where there is a certain amount of rough plebeian justice, a small dose for those on the side of the angels, in this wicked old world.  In order to form up, and this was done knowingly by VFP organizers, the official marchers, the bands and battalions that make up such a march, had to “run the gauntlet” of dove emblem-emblazoned VFP banners waving frantically directly in front of their faces as they passed by. Moreover, although we formed the caboose of this thing the crowds along the parade route actually waited as the official paraders marched by and waved and clapped at our procession. Be still my heart. But that response just provides another example of the "street cred” that ex-soldiers have on the anti-war question. Now, if there is to be any really serious justice in the world, if only these vets would go beyond the “bring the troops home” and embrace- immediate, unconditional withdrawal of all U.S./Allied Troops from Iraq and Afghanistan then we could maybe start to get somewhere out on those streets. But today I was very glad to be fighting for our communist future among those who know first-hand about the dark side of the American experience. No question.