A response to Ron Suarez’ A New Ann Arbor City Council Resolution to End the War in Iraq?
A response to Ron Suarez’ A New Ann Arbor City Council Resolution to End the War in Iraq?
Note: the antiwar resolution mentioned on Ron’s site was passed by the Ann Arbor City Council in March, 2007.
Ron said:
I received this request from Michigan Peaceworks to support a new Ann Arbor City Council resolution that would hopefully push Congress to bring an end to the war in Iraq…
Here is their [Michigan Peaceworks] Proposed wording for a City Council Resolution:
We urge Congress to move in a bi-partisan way to address war policies in the Middle East. The United States now spends more on military defense than all other nations combined, but the world is less safe than when we embarked on our present policies. It is time for Congress to provide leadership by:
* re-establishing its on-going, joint authority with the President over war powers and war expenditures
* using Congressional appropriations authority to protect our troops by establishing conditions for their mobilization and deployment, conditions and time-lines for their return home, and needed assistance to veterans of our recent wars
* providing international humanitarian leadership
* developing a humanitarian budget to meet non-military needs of the worlds’ people, including our own
* using Congressional oversight to help strengthen international cooperation in peace-building…But, I could use help identifying other government officials who could use a nudge in the correct direction.
John Dingell. He often wears red.
His recent antiwar resolution, HR 3938 sounds good at first in that it reportedly withdraws the use of force authorization. The full text was not yet on Thomas when I wrote this. But the 2009 timeframe is too long. And this is a political cover for Dingell in that it distracts from what matters, which is his votes for the appropriations for the wars. Dingell’s resolution won’t pass both houses, and if it did it would be vetoed. He knows that.
If a majority of the House would refuse any more defense authorizations the war would end. Soon. Maybe some mainline Democrats want the war to continue. It is good for the business of the people who give them money. One hopes Dingell would not be in this category.
We need to focus in the short term on amending or defeating war appropriations. Resolutions like the proposed council resolution and HR 3938 give political cover to mainline Democrats who feel pressure from an increasingly frustrated public. But they don’t end the war. They give it political cover to continue.
What does Peaceworks mean that Congress should “move in a bi-partisan way?” Isn’t that kind of like a three-legged sack race? Seriously are the Democrats supposed to wait to defund the war until the Republicans turn into a pro-peace, anti-war party? This is a poor idea at best.
The Peaceworks resolution’s reference to “joint authority” between the president and Congress over “war spending and war powers” is inaccurate. The Constitution reserves these powers to Congress alone.
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; ….
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; …
US Constitution, Article I, Section 8
The president is an executive of the People, who acting through their Legislature, make the laws and raise taxes. We rely on the President to obey and fairly enforce the laws, not to ignore, make, or break them. The president is not a sovereign. Bush is not “King (or warlord) of America”.
We oppose:
HR 2638: Making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes, in committee.
HR 2642: Making appropriations for military construction, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes, in committee.
HR 3222: Making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes, resolving differences.
And we need to oppose any more continuing resolutions like Democratic sponsored H.J.RES.52: Making continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2008, and for other purposes, which Bush signed September 29, 2007.
Bush and the House and Senate Democrats like Dingell and Stabenow are pretending to disagree over the war to appeal to their base constituencies, while they are collaborating in continuing to fund it. I don’t have the same issue with Carl Levin, he and John Rockefeller have been fighting very hard behind closed doors on the war, concentration camps, and surveillance issues for a long time now.
What’s the cost to the citizen? Tens or hundreds of thousands of Iraqi dead; Thousands of American casualties; Military suicides and fragging incidents on the rise; America’s democracy and reputation in ruins; and $8,000 per person in the US through the next ten years. Or, if you want to look at it another way, $80,000 per person in Iraq. We could have bought all of Iraq intact for less than what it is costing to destroy it.
Feel-good resolutions without the force of law are a distraction and an impediment to holding our legislators accountable for real effective actions to end this garrison state of permanent war and neoconservative-neofascist oppression.
A New Ann Arbor City Council Resolution to End the War in Iraq?
Dingell bill sets date for Iraq pullout
War costs may total $2.4 trillion
See also, Bush on Iraq: ‘We’re Kicking Ass’
Letter to the youth of America
Scanlyze tag: Stabenow
Copyright © 2007 Henry Edward Hardy
Man tasered, arrested for asking good questions of Sen. John Kerry
I just found on youtube this video of a young man at a University of Florida q and a session with Senator John Kerry. The man, Andrew Meyer, congratulates Kerry for being (in his view) the real winner of the 2004 election, asks Kerry why he doesn’t support the impeachment of Bush and then asks is it true that he and Bush are both members of Skull and Bones. Whereupon the uniformed officers grab him and begin to try to manhandle him out. He is shouting that he didn’t do anything. The officers wrestle the young man to the ground and taser the poor fellow. A member of the audience then begins shouting, “police brutality! police brutality!”
This video is shocking, and horrible. It depicts Nazi-like behavior from those who are sworn to uphold the law. And the man’s questions are good questions and deserve answers, not torture and abuse.
The Andrew Meyer
Search on “taser” at Digg.
Skull and Bones (wikipedia)
Student Tasered at campus forum for Kerry
Kerry Responds to Taser Incident
CNN: Your e-mails: Reaction to police using Taser on student
Students stunned — and tired — about Taser incident
College cop: After being shocked, student said we ‘didn’t do anything wrong’
Instant Political Martyrdom via YouTube
A interesting comment on the subject posted by Benjamin Wood:
“When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his assailant is killed, he is justified.” Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80; Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.
“These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence.” Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State, 43 Tex. 93, 903.
“An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery.” (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).
“Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a case, the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self- defense.” (State v. Mobley, 240 N.C. 476, 83 S.E. 2d 100).
“One may come to the aid of another being unlawfully arrested, just as he may where one is being assaulted, molested, raped or kidnapped. Thus it is not an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an officer, even though he may have submitted to such custody, without resistance.” (Adams v. State, 121 Ga. 16, 48 S.E. 910).
“Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer’s life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529.
Comment by Benjamin N. Dictor, Student, University of Florida
google news comment
Google Comment – 10 hours agoThe conduct of the police officers at Monday’s forum with John Kerry is nothing short of an embarrassment for both the University of Florida and the City of Gainesville as a whole.
We will not be quick to recover from the wounds that we all suffer as a result of the complex betrayal on behalf of the University of Florida Police Department. As if the suppression of thought is not in itself, heinous enough a crime, the unabashed abuse of physical force by those sworn to protect us leaves trust broken and wounds open.
This incident will be remembered as a physical assault as well as an assault on reason itself. How dare law enforcement act in such a manner! We, the students of this university, must not allow this aggression to stand!
Benjamin N. Dictor
skull bones & bush & kerry a WIN WIN for the skull & bones
Another case of alleged police overkill: Death Squad in Delaware: The Case of the Murdered Marine
Submitted to The Lede blog on nytimes.com:
In the case of the Tazing of the Bro, I am reminded of the words of Frederick Douglass:
“Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground.”
Andrew Meyer, whatever his motives, was asking reasonable and legitimate questions which the speaker had agreed to address. This is not a police state; the police may not use force to subdue someone for saying “blowjob” or “Skull and Bones” or taking 90 seconds to ask three questions in a row.
The democratic system of government is dependent on the free market of ideas. The widest possible range of views, correct and incorrect, must be aired and debated, so that the people may choose the best policies and the representatives to implement them. In the United States, it is We the People, not the government, which is sovereign. In the words of our first Republican President, Abraham Lincoln, in his First Inaugural Address:
“This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember, or overthrow it.”
Andrew Meyer acted in the finest patriotic tradition of Paul Revere, Crispus Attucks, Tom Paine and Patrick Henry. Bravo, Sir. Bravely and well done. Bravo!
HENRY EDWARD HARDY
Ann Arbor, MI
scanlyze.wordpress.com
Dahlem memorial tagged with Meyer quote
Comment: Florida cops were out of line Tasering student at speech
Interesting poll on Washingtonpost.com, at this writing, 42% of respondents say along with Benjamin Dictor (quoted above), “This incident is ‘an assault on reason itself.’ America has become a police state and this is evidence of that.” An additional 11.5% opine, “If you have to Tase anyone bro, Tase John Kerry. FREE SPEECH RULES!”.
Note the snide photo caption (probably falsely) attributed to AP: “Could public forums benefit from more Tasering? (AP)”
How can this caption possibly be considered appropriate to the circumstances by the Post?
It seems that the Post is exploiting this incident for its “entertainment” value. How sick and wrong of the once-respected Washington Post.
Andrew Meyer, Free Speech and the Joy of Tasers: Were the Police Justified Or Should They Be Punished?
Florida Student Is Shocked at Kerry Forum
Beck said he “enjoy[s] watching” Taser videos; O’Reilly rolled out “Don’t Taze me, bro!” bumper stickers
Google “Andrew Meyer” (276,000 references on google 2007-09-20)
Hentoff on the Tasering of the First Amendment
Why are students getting Tasered on video?
THE SHOCK HEARD AROUND THE WORLD.
Andrew Meyer, John Kerry and Campus Security: Clusterfuck Royale.
Emotional Responses to the Andrew Meyer & John Kerry Incident: A Psychological Study in Issues of Power, Anger and Authority
University comes away shocked, burned
Copyright © 2007 Henry Edward Hardy
About Scanlyze
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Scanlyze is an online magazine of essays, commentary, satire, and analysis. Were we half as clever, for inspiration we would take Mark Twain, Ambrose Bierce, Swift, Montaigne, or Seneca.
“The men who create power make an indispensable contribution to the Nation’s greatness, but the men who question power make a contribution just as indispensable, especially when that questioning is disinterested, for they determine whether we use power or power uses us.”
John F. Kennedy, October 26, 1963
Show your support for Scanlyze!
Click the “Make A Donation” link below to make a donation through PayPal using either your PayPal account or any major credit card.
Paypal or credit card donation
Copyright © 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 Henry Edward Hardy.
Recent Comments
Scanlyze 