Focus on Peace’s First Action

King of Prussia, PA – Focus on Peace held its first action the "Sign Wave for Peace on the Anniversary of the Invasion of Iraq" on Saturday, March 19, 2011. It was a success with five peace lovers coming out to mark the 8th anniversary of the invasion of Iraq. We stood on a very busy street corner in King of Prussia, PA. Our message seemed well received there compared to other places I've done this kind of peace advocacy at. There were many "honks for peace" and few insults.

Focus on Peace is a politically neutral peace movement. The website states:

Our purpose is to have a peace movement that welcomes people of all ideologies, creeds, and beliefs. One that makes everyone feel not only comfortable but a part of the movement. No one should feel that they are endorsing someone else's political agenda when standing up for peace. To this end we have only one focus: ending the wars abroad.

Please visit the Focus on Peace web page on the event at: http://fopeace.blogspot.com/2011/02/come-back-soon.html

Pictures of the rally:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why They Torture (video)

Last Saturday the weekly demonstrations for and against the wars in West Chester, PA were joined by some special visitors. One was an activist I only know as Barbara advocating the closure of the Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp in Cuba. This is a US military facility that has been the subject of much controversy. Terror suspects are kept there and many are tortured.

The other visitor was local conservative talk show host, and advocate of torture, Dom Giordano. He spent most of his time with the pro war demonstrators though he did come across the street to talk to us peaceful people a couple of times. The video below records two of his interviews. He engages Barbara in a lively debate on the subject of torture and Guantanamo. She handles Giordano's arguments extremely well:


In all of the debate about torture the real reasons for it are sometimes missed. Please read the explanation this author gave for it. The article below was originally published at OpEdNews.com on April 30, 2008:

Why They Torture

There's been much debate for the last several years about the US government and it's allies use of torture. The articles are too numerous to mention and there's been at least one movie, Rendition.

The arguments pro torture generally revolve around gathering intelligence. I'd like to suggest that this is largely false. Extracting information from people is just the excuse used to cover the real reasons for torturing. There are basically two.

The first is to break enemy leaders and potential leaders. Leave them in such a broken state of mind that they can't effectively organize opposition to the US government. This is bad enough, but it begs the question of who's being tortured? Going after potential leaders inevitably means that many innocents will be hauled in.

The second reason for torturing is intimidation. Trying to strike fear in those who would oppose the US government. Submit or this could happen to you.

History will judge the US as harshly as it has the Roman Empire, which we have equaled if not surpassed. For all the Roman's technical and scientific achievements they are most remembered for their brutality. Sadly, so it will be for the US. This is what people will see of us one thousand years from now. This is the monster that the quest for empire has turned the republic into.

In advocating the adoption of the Declaration of independence, Richard Henry Lee said, "Why then, sir, why do we longer delay? Why still deliberate? Let this happy day give birth to an American republic. Let her arise, not to devastate and to conquer, but to reestablish the reign of peace and of law." How far we have strayed from the ideals of the Founders.

Take a Stand for Peace, Dec. 16, 2010 (video)

A great example of how people of diverse views can come together to stand for peace and against the empire. This protest took place at the White House in Washington, DC.

We met several libertarians there, hopefully more will turn out for future peace rallies. Below are pictures and two videos of the event:

Lockheedville 2010 Anti-war Protest

The Brandywine Peace Community held a protest on November 27, 2010 at the defense contractor, Lockheed Martin, property in King of Prussia, PA, outside of Philadelphia. About ten protesters attended.

This libertarian had some good conversations with the other protesters who were of varying left wing ideologies. They were quite open to the idea of working with libertarians and anti-war conservatives for peace.

Pictures of the protest below:

 

 

 

 

"They’re Democrats here!"

"They’re Democrats here!". That’s what a man said when he saw me standing on the anti war side of the street. This was last Saturday in West Chester, PA where there are pro war and anti war factions demonstrating opposite each other each weekend. What got him started was seeing me holding up my Gadsden flag and a sign that reads "End the Fed - End the Wars" *:

(This picture is actually from a previous Saturday not the one this article is about.)

We had a pleasant conversation during which he said that I was on the wrong side of the street. This seemed like a very strange thing for him to say since I was with the people advocating peace and that is my stance as my sign makes clear. He explained that I was standing with Democrats that have insulted the troops and hate America. When I said that I stand here representing only my own libertarian views this man went on to say that he too was a libertarian and also a Ron Paul supporter. Continuing he claimed that he stands with the other side not supporting the war but supporting the troops and the country. That is how most on his side of the street feel, he added, though he did admit that some were neocons (his word).

During the whole conversation I kept feeling that this man was terribly confused. One cannot support the troops without supporting their mission. One cannot stand for their mission, imperial wars, while standing for the republic of the Founders (as one does by supporting Ron Paul).  Not to mention, I have to assume, that he thinks the Republicans are the good guys and the Democrats evil. (For the record, I think both parties are corrupt and evil.)

At this point it is worth looking at a picture of the pro war crowd:

(This picture is also from a previous Saturday not the one this article is about.)

In the picture we see many signs advocating victory also thanks to and support for the troops and their mission. None about liberty or bringing the troops home. There is a predominance of American flags too.

This brings to mind the warning by President John Quincy Adams from way back in 1821. On the 4th of July that year he gave a speech concerning the issue of whether or not the United States should support the Greeks in their bid for independence from the Turks. The she he refers to is the United States:

Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been unfurled, there will her  heart, her benedictions, and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own...

The reason why the United States should not go abroad is made clear:

She well knows that, by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself, beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy and ambition, which assume the color and usurp the standard of freedom.

President Adams went on to explain why this is a problem:

The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force. The frontlets upon her brows would no longer beam with the ineffable splendor of freedom and independence; but in its stead would soon be substituted an imperial diadem, flashing in false and tarnished luster the murky radiance of dominion and power.

After speaking to that man on Saturday and reflecting on the pictures from the previous demonstrations two parts of President Adam’s speech really stand out. The first is, "…wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy and ambition, which assume the color and usurp the standard of freedom." This, sadly, is an apt description of the wars the United States is now fighting and how the government propagandizes about them.

The second is a part of the speech not shared above that very accurately describes the United States today, "She might become the dictatress of the world; she would no longer be the ruler of her own spirit." We will only find our spirit, the spirit of liberty, when we put fear aside, stop being an empire, and end the wars.

* The Fed is the Federal Reserve System, the American central bank.

An Inclusive Antiwar Movement?

The International Action Center (IAC) is having a conference this Saturday, November 6, 2010. Named the "Regional ANTIWAR Conference and a National meeting to STOP FBI Repression", they’re hailing it as "…a discussion of a new kind of unified & inclusive antiwar movement that can challenge the wars abroad and at home". As is usually the case with left wing antiwar organizations this one too comes with their social agenda as part of the package. On their website they state that part of the discussion is to be about "…a massive movement to bring  the war $$, troops, and mercenaries home now, rebuilding our cities, providing jobs, schools and health care that we all have a right to". Bringing the troops and mercenaries home sounds great. It is the part about then using the money saved to finance the government’s spending on social programs the is a problem for the liberty minded. Given these realities the question has to be asked, is this really an inclusive antiwar movement?

No doubt that by now progressive readers are rolling their eyes wondering how this crazy libertarian can be against spending money on health care and education. This isn’t the time or place to engage in a debate about these subjects, we can do that later after we end the wars. Now is the time to agree to disagree on some things and unite to stop the wars and oppression.

Libertarians are reaching out to the left to stand together for peace. (See "Organizing a Left-Right Alliance Against the War Parties ") This author approached the organizers of the October 16, 2010 peace rally in Philadelphia (See "Raising Eyebrows at a Peace Rally") at their planning meeting a few days before the event. There I was politely, but firmly, told that they were completely unwilling to change their agenda for future rallies to accommodate other points of view.

When the left tacks on a social agenda to their antiwar coalitions that the liberty minded can not endorse they tell us we’re not welcome. We’re not asking any of the organizations and individuals that are part of IAC or similar groups to change their advocacy. Their speakers can advocate all the same things they have before. Same with the signs they carry. All we ask is that the antiwar coalitions themselves be politically neutral so we can all join them in good conscience.

Imagine the strength of a truly united and inclusive peace movement. We can do it. All it takes is a little tolerance and understanding.