Service for VFP's O'Kelly on March 13
At 3 pm next Saturday, March 13, VFP 92 will mourn the passing of its co-founding member, O
’Kelly McCluskey, and celebrate his passionate activism for peace and justice.
The memorial celebration will be held at Trinity United Methodist Church, 6512 23rd Ave. NW in Ballard. O’Kelly’s immediate family will be present and Rev. Rich Lang will preside.
After the formal part of the celebration, there will be light snacks and socializing at the church. About 5:30 pm, several members are planning to head over to Hattie’s Hat Bar & Grill on Ballard Ave (next to Tractor Tavern) to hoist a few drinks in the tradition of the Irish wake.
For more information, email Gerry Condon at president@vfp92.org or call him at 206-499-1220.
Support the March 20th National March on Washington
On Saturday, March 20, 2010, there will be a massive National March & Rally in D.C. A day of action and outreach in Washington, D.C., will take place on Friday, March 19, preceding the Saturday march. There will be coinciding mass marches on March 20 in San Francisco and Los Angeles.
Veterans and military families are joining with tens of thousands of others who will be marching on Washington, D.C., on Saturday, March 20. If you are a veteran, active-duty service member or a member of a military family and would like to join the veterans, active-duty service members and military families contingent, click here.
VETERANS FOR PEACE SALUTES
HOWARD ZINN
The death of a loved one or someone significant in our life often leaves us saying, "There weren't many like him," or "she'll really leave a hole in this world."
In the case of Dr. Howard Zinn, there was no one else like him and his passing will leave a hole we can only hope will be filled some day. He was a longtime member of Veterans For Peace.
The day before he passed, VFP received an email from Howard Zinn to confirm arrangements for June to film a video greeting for our 2010 convention. In an earlier exchange, Howard had written, "Of cour
se my heart is with VFP, but I'm not free to come. Thanks for inviting me, and best wishes for a great event. Howard."
As a renowned historian, he made no attempt to appear objective, indeed he thought it impossible. In an opening section of "A People's History of the United States," he said he preferred "to tell the story of the discovery of America from the viewpoint of the Arawaks, of the Constitution from the standpoint of the slaves...the Gilded Age as seen by southern farmers." He believed history should "emphasize new possibilities by disclosing those hidden episodes when, even if in brief flashes, people showed their ability to resist, to join together, occasionally to win. I am supposing, or perhaps only hoping, that our future may be found in the past's fugitive moments of compassion rather than in its solid centuries of warfare." Then, as only Howard Zinn can, he wrote, "The reader may as well know that before going on."
From the spring in his step to the joyful, incisive wit of his words, few would have guessed his age. But at 87, his great heart, which clearly guided his remarkable intellect, finally stopped.
There may be others with great hearts and intellects to match, but Howard Zinn will be missed because he combined those with something much rarer: courage.
Some would point to his time in World War II as a B-24 bombardier, flying missions through the red-hot shrapnel of German anti-aircraft fire and Messerschmitt machine guns. Surely that is one kind of courage. It is tempered, however, by accepting that death can strike at any moment.
In his youth, Howard Zinn had the courage of a warrior. Over many decades as an adult he had another kind of courage that he practiced often, publicly and boldly, unfettered by the usual shackles of career ambitions, money or even social acceptance by ones peers.
This kind of courage, arguably the least common, Zinn frequently brought to bear in his lifelong mission of articulating uncomfortable truths and acting against injustice.
How else to explain this historian's ability to not only recognize the importance of the moment in the civil rights movement, but to encourage and join his students, eventually getting fired by Spelman College because they refused to participate as an institution; to speak publicly and early against the war in Vietnam when few with a safe job in academia dared; and most significantly, to fly into the hurricane of our most powerful myths and institutions by challenging "Three Holy Wars."
In one of his last speeches he explained that these wars were not religious, but sacrosanct, "the three wars you cannot say anything bad about: the Revolutionary War, the Civil War and World War II."
Examining his treatment of just one, the Revolution, is to begin to understand the significance of his intellect and the depth of his courage.
Zinn said that according to population differences then and now, the equivalent number of deaths today would mean "two and a half million people dying in a war to get England off our backs. Well, you might consider that worth it, or you might not."
Challenging the customary tale of our revolution, Zinn pointed out that the year before Lexington and Concord, farmers in much of western Massachusetts drove the British government out without firing a shot. "They had assembled thousands upon thousands around court houses, around official offices and they had taken over and they said good bye to the British officials."
Further challenging the standard story, he observed, "Canada is independent of England aren't they? I think so. Not a bad society. They have good health care. They have a lot of things we don't have. They didn't fight a bloody revolutionary war."
One problem he noted was we rarely take time to differentiate between various parts of the population "because we don't think in class terms. We think we all have the same interests. We all have the same interests in independence from England. We did not all have the same interests."
Perhaps most challenging, he asked, "Did blacks benefit from the Revolution? Slavery was there before; slavery was there after. No, we remained a slave society after the Revolution. Not only that, we wrote slavery into the Constitution. We legitimized it. It is always good if you want to get people to go to war to have a good document and have good words like life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness...Of course, when they write the Constitution it's not, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness...it's life, liberty and property. Have you noticed that difference? You should notice. You should take notice of these little things."
Howard Zinn took notice of all those "little things." He took them and, in the crucible of his intellect, forged a new story of how we came to be; a story that took great courage to articulate; a story that has the power to take us a long way down the road of freedom and peace.
Blocking War Funding Just Got Easier
By David Swanson
Last June we were handed an opportunity to block the funding of our illegal, murderous, counterproductive, catastrophic, and hated wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The president insisted on an off-the-books "emergency supplemental" bill, and the Senate added an IMF bailout to the bill, leading all the Republicans in the House to commit what for years they'd called treason: they all voted No on war money.
So, we only needed 39 Democrats to vote No, and we could have stopped the thing, at least temporarily. We had a week-long knock-down drag-out fight, with the White House telling freshmen Democrats they would be "dead to us" if they didn't vote Yes. And we still persuaded 32 Democrats to vote No.
Then we continued building opposition to the wars, and awareness of the need to choose between wars and jobs. But we had to hope that we would again be handed a "supplemental" vote and that again some crazy scheme would be found to get all the Republicans to vote No. If these wishes could be granted, then we would only have to find 40 Democrats to stand with the majority of Americans, soldiers, Iraqis, and Afghans. Otherwise, we'd need 218 congress members.
Our wishes have come true. President Obama has insisted on another "supplemental" this spring for $33 billion. And funding to close Guantanamo and move "the Terrorists" to "the Homeland" has been added into the bill.
Of course, the Democrats think this will force the Republicans to vote for closing Gitmo. Democratic loyalists and president worshippers are celebrating this genius stroke, oblivious to the fact that the funding of wars will destroy our nation along with those the wars are waged against, nevermind exactly where we imprison people. In reality, this maneuver will force the Republicans to vote against the war funding. And that will give us a chance.
We only need 40 No votes from Democrats in the House if the Republicans are voting No, and we can get them. Here's the whip list: http://defundwar.org Have at it!
No $$$, No War!
We need every member of Veterans For Peace to contact their Congressperson and demand that they stop funding illegal war and occupation.
This bill is ONE sentence long: “No funds appropriated or otherwise made available under any provision of law may be obligated or expended to increase the number of members of the United States Armed Forces serving in Afghanistan so that the number of members serving in Afghanistan exceeds the number so serving on the date of the enactment of this Act.”
Ask Rick Larsen to co-sponsor HR 3699, a bill to prohibit any increase in the number of troops in Afghanistan.
Bellingham - Phone: (360) 733-4500
Washington, DC - Phone: (202) 225-2605
Thursday, January 21, 2010
VFP ENDORSES "PEACE OF THE ACTION"
The VFP Board recently endorsed, "Peace of the Action" (POTA). Their object is: "Clog Washington, DC every week day through diffuse Civil Resistance (CR) actions to have the affect of tampering with 'business as usual' in the Capital of the United States of America."
They have two demands:
- Troops out of the Middle East, which includes drones, permanent bases, contractors and torture/detention facilities.
- Reparations for the peoples of these war torn regions and a fully funded VA system to reintegrate our soldiers healthfully into our society.
Monday night, July 14, 2008, after almost an hour of testimony and a unanimous City Council 7 to 0 vote, Bellingham became the first community in Washington State to take a stand against possible U. S. military intervention in Iran.
Testimonies during the public open discussion period unanimously supported the city of Bellingham's opposition to Bush Administration rhetoric, equating recent sabre-rattling by proponents of a pre-emptive strike against Iran to the misinformation force-fed a gullible post-911, flag waving public during the run-up to shock and awe in Iraq. It was obvious from the first speaker that blind patriotism wasn't going to sell this time, in spite of the Bellingham Herald's, eleventh-hour attempt to editorialize the Council's supposed misplaced involvement in national issues in its Monday edition, calling a city of Bellingham resolution on such issues "meaningless".
Bellingham joined thirteen other cities with similar resolutions and organizers were hoping this effort would lead to a groundswell of support in Washington State and elsehere.
"Bellingham has once again - as in 2006 - been given the opportunity to define itself, for the rest of the State," said Marx, a Vietnam vet and parent of a two-tour Iraq veteran. "I am immensely proud of Bellingham - again - and proud of the courage our city council demonstrated tonight."
To thank the Bellingham City Council, phone (360) 778-8200 or email at www.cob.org/contact/council.aspx. Additional updates on Cities for Peace (www.citiesforpeace.org).