In our area

Next march for peace and to protest "Bush Wars Inc."

Sunday, November 3rd on the Boston Common at 1pm

Anti-War Protests 2002
Happening NOW in a city near you

a picture archive
the media is trying to ignore them!

PeacePoster.org

Print your own posters
on your own printer and display them as proud Americans!

What to do

Alliances with the left are appropriate on the single issue of stopping the war:

STOP THE WAR
AGAINST IRAQ
BEFORE IT STARTS!

SATURDAY, OCTOBER 26

NATIONAL MARCH ON WASHINGTON DC
Rally @ 11 am
Constitution Gardens adjacent to the
Vietnam Veterans War Memorial
21st St. & Constitution Ave. NW

**March to the White House**

JOINT ACTION IN SAN FRANCISCO
11 am at Justin Herman Plaza

International A.N.S.W.E.R.

What to do

17 October 2002 - Why Won't Congress Declare War?, by Ron Paul, BankIndex.com

"By transferring its authority to declare war to the President Congress violates the Constitution....."

What to do

15 October 2002 - Taking Care of Peewee, by Joe Sobran, Sobran's

President Bush reminds one of the Cowardly Lion. Unable to make headway against the al-Qaeda terrorists, he figures he can at least take care of a Peewee, Saddam Hussein -- that supposed "threat" whose military forces are at a fraction of their strength in 1991, when they were badly mauled.

...Maybe neither we nor the government has any real idea of how well the War on Terrorism is going, but the persistent official use of slippery, evasive, even meaningless language isn't encouraging. We aren't being informed with the respect due to mature people who deserve the unvarnished truth. Instead, we're being treated like the dupes of advertising hype -- like kids being sold on the latest sugared and dyed breakfast cereal.

What to do

John Quincy Adams once uttered these fine words:

America 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. She will recommend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example.

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 colors and usurp the standards of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force.

The present administration obviously doesn't agree with this sentiment - time for "regime change!" What to do

Congress Passes
Iraq War Resolution

Note that these votes were anything but unanimous, or anywhere near the overwheming votes of the Tonkin Gulf Resolution that started the Vietnam War - that vote only had 2 opponents in the Senate.

This is certainly a day that will live in infamy. This vote is not good news for the American people, but our individual battles now will just shift from trying to stop the Congress from passing a resolution to trying to stop the war from starting, then it'll change to something else to maintain civilization. This administration and Congress certainly aren't on the side of that. Perhaps they will experience "regime change" soon!

What to do

...the senior Senator from West Virginia, Robert Byrd...has for days been the leader of a small but vocal minority of Senators who see the passage of this resolution as an absolutely contra-constitutional abdication of responsibility by the Congress.

Mr. Byrd, in an editorial in Thursday's New York Times, stated, "How have we gotten to this low point in the history of Congress? Are we too feeble to resist the demands of a president who is determined to bend the collective will of Congress to his will - a president who is changing the conventional understanding of the term 'self-defense'? And why are we allowing the executive to rush our decision-making right before an election? Congress, under pressure from the executive branch, should not hand away its Constitutional powers."

The editorial continued, "Why are we being hounded into action on a resolution that turns over to President Bush the Congress's Constitutional power to declare war? This resolution would authorize the president to use the military forces of this nation wherever, whenever and however he determines, and for as long as he determines, if he can somehow make a connection to Iraq. It is a blank check for the president to take whatever action he feels 'is necessary and appropriate in order to defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq.' This broad resolution underwrites, promotes and endorses the unprecedented Bush doctrine of preventive war and pre-emptive strikes - detailed in a recent publication, 'National Security Strategy of the United States' - against any nation that the president, and the president alone, determines to be a threat.

On the floor of the Senate on Thursday night, in a chamber emptied of every member but those vocal few who had stood with him in his determined opposition, Byrd held forth a copy of the Constitution in one trembling, aged hand. Mr. Byrd is considered by every Senator to be the master parliamentarian in that body, and he keeps at all times that copy of the constitution in his breast pocket, next to his heart.

Senator Byrd concluded his comments in the New York Times by stating, "We are at the gravest of moments. Members of Congress must not simply walk away from their Constitutional responsibilities. We are the directly elected representatives of the American people, and the American people expect us to carry out our duty, not simply hand it off to this or any other president. To do so would be to fail the people we represent and to fall woefully short of our sworn oath to support and defend the Constitution. We may not always be able to avoid war, particularly if it is thrust upon us, but Congress must not attempt to give away the authority to determine when war is to be declared. We must not allow any president to unleash the dogs of war at his own discretion and for an unlimited period of time. Yet that is what we are being asked to do. The judgment of history will not be kind to us if we take this step."

What to do

EMAIL FROM A READER [to WhatReallyHappened.com]:

I just called Kerry’s main district office.

The man who answered, very politely, tried to explain me his boss position.

He also said that Senator Kerry was going to speak on the floor in few minutes, and what he really wants is a resolution, but he does not want a war.

I replied that this resolution is the first step Bully Bush needs to start the war, because after getting the resolution passed by the Congress something very bad will happen to Americans (don’t know when and where…) and that attack will be indisputably linked to the Baghdad Tyrant, then throwing us into WW3…

The assistant said he understood my position and couldn’t oppose it.

Also he pointed out he HAS PAGES AFTER PAGES of similar comments received from constituents and non-constituents of Massachusetts and those pages and comments will be given to Senator Kerry.

When I asked how many pages he had with comments in favor of a war, he answered “NONE”.

[Note: Kerry is a "Bonesman" (member of Skull and Bones), so his feigned opposition to the war for a while serves to support his image, while his eventual caving indicates his true agenda.]

What to do

Don't stop calling now - they are getting the message:

House and Senate members say their constituent mail is running overwhelmingly against a unilateral attack on Iraq, although several Republicans say that has started to change.

"It's overwhelming numbers, something like 300 to 29," said Sen. Lincoln Chafee, Rhode Island Republican.

Others reported even more lopsided responses opposed to war, and said phone calls seemed to be genuine outpourings from constituents, not a concerted drive by war opponents to flood offices.

3 October 2002 - War foes get word out to Congress, by Stephen Dinan, THE WASHINGTON TIMES --- What to do

From MoveOn:

I want to thank those of you who have responded to previous alerts on Iraq. We've had an enormous response -- over 70,000 phone calls in the last two weeks -- and we know that members of Congress are hearing that their constituents overwhelmingly oppose a war with Iraq.

But since some of our elected representatives still aren't listening, and since the stakes for our democracy and world stability could not be much higher, I'm asking for your help once again.

As the Senate and House rush toward a vote authorizing Bush's unilateral attack on Iraq, some heroic Senators and Representatives have spoken out against this blank check for war. Senator Robert Byrd, a moderate Democrat from West Virginia, is so angry about the haste with which we're moving to war and the unanswered questions that still remain that there's a good likelihood that he will launch a filibuster by Tuesday.

In a filibuster, a Senator is allowed up to 30 hours to voice his opinion, unless 60 of his colleagues vote for the filibuster to end. The use of a filibuster indicates that a particular piece of legislation is so odious to a Senator that he or she is willing to stop all Senate business until a compromise is reached.

If the majority of the members of Congress will not do their jobs, ask the hard questions, and represent the will of a very large segment of the American public, it's time for the brave few to filibuster. It's the Senate's form of civil disobedience -- a procedural monkey wrench that may be our last, best hope for substantive changes to the resolution authorizing Bush's unilateral attack on Iraq.

When Senator Byrd and several of his courageous colleagues launch a filibuster, pro-war Senators will immediately try to end it. By contacting your Senators and asking them to support a filibuster against the Iraq resolution, you can play a key role in ensuring that President Bush doesn't get a blank check for war.

Please take action today. The vote could come as soon as Tuesday if the filibuster is not supported.

Please contact your Senators right now at:

Senator Robert C. Smith
Local Phone: 603-634-5000
DC Phone: 202-224-2841

Senator Judd Gregg
Local Phone: 603-225-7115
DC Phone: 202-224-3324

Calling the local office is more effective than calling the Washington, D.C. office. Even if your Senators have indicated that they will support the resolution, it's still worth calling -- we need to keep the pressure on.

When you reach a staffer, tell him or her that you're a constituent of the Senator's. Then simply say that you hope the Senator will support a filibuster against the use of force resolution on Iraq. - What to do

"Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such purpose - - and you allow him to make war at pleasure. Study to see if you can fix any limit to his power in this respect, after you have given him so much as you propose. If, to-day, he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada, to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him? You may say to him, 'I see no probability of the British invading us' but he will say to you 'be silent; I see it, if you don't."

Abraham Lincoln - What to do

WhatReallyHappened.com:AMERICA: IF YOU DO NOT CHOOSE TO FIGHT THIS MADMAN [G.W. Bush] NOW, YOU WILL HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO FIGHT FOR HIM FROM NOW ON!

It is time to face a hard truth. The United States as we have known it is no more. There is no question that the current leadership of the United States has abandoned virtually every principle upon which our Constitution and system of laws is based, and has demonstrated a willingness to use any means, ANY means, to achieve their goals of initiating a war of global conquest, for which you will pay and for which your children shall bleed. Those who want this war have gone too far and spent too much to back down now. Any who imagine that tomorrow the war hawks will change their minds, even in the face of a million protestors, are dreaming. Long ago was the point of no return passed on the road from Republic to Dictatorship. The war hawks could not go back even of they wanted to. The future course of the nation, and indeed that of the entire world, depends on WE THE PEOPLE remembering that we are the nation, that the government works for us, not the other way around, and that we have a right, more than a right we have a moral duty, to decide for ourselves and our children whether there will be war upon the rest of the world or not, and to enforce that decision upon the government. What to do

WhatReallyHappened.com:
FOX NEWS IS REPORTING THAT PRESIDENT BUSH WILL MAKE A "MAJOR IRAQ ADDRESS" MONDAY NIGHT

Now, if Bush were going to call off the war, he would announce it today, Friday, to allow the issue to fade over the weekend before the Monday Morning talk-radio shows have at it. Therefore, I conclude that Monday's address will amount to a declaration that Bush doesn't need the UN's approval to invade Iraq (thereby destroying the claim that concern for UN Resolutions was the motive for the invasion) and that the attack is already underway (which it has been, from the air, for several months now). Take time this weekend to think about what you may have to do if the US Government declares a war that you do not want, that the world condemns, that Congress has not voted for, that has no popular support among Americans, and for which your wealth and the lives of your children will be sacrificed. This nation belongs to the people, and with that ownerships comes the terrible responsibility to deal with a government gone bad. History will judge us harshly if we stand silent while mere individuals in government take the entire nation into a war of conquest. What to do

EMAIL FROM A READER:

I live in New York and called Sen. Byrd's office today at 12:30PM and got an answering machine. I wanted to talk to a live person so I called back 1 minute later and got through! I voiced my opposition to the war and my agreement to his planned filibuster. I asked if they are taking a poll on the filibuster issue and she said yes. Many calls were received. Keep trying people! This could be our last chance to get this resolution stalled in the senate. The country needs this vital time to debate this thing. We must not rush off to war as Bush would like us to!! We need every single call we can get! YES, IT IS THAT IMPORTANT! DO NOT PASS UP AN OPPORTUNITY TO POTENTIALLY MAKE THE MOST IMPORTANT CALL OF YOUR LIFE! It took me less than 60 seconds to call. And I want you to know that I never would have known about the filibuster if it were not for this site. Keep up the good fight!

WhatReallyHappened.com - What to do

“If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may be even a worse fate. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”

Sir Winston Churchill
[In this case, our fight is against this needless war itself!] What to do

EMAIL FROM A READER: BUSH TRIES TO PULL A FAST ONE

"I was watching the early report from Washington this morning and before, during and after the report, Dermot and Sophie used such phrases as "Now, President Bush has gained the resolution from Congress", "the support of Congress", "backed by Congress" and so on. You showed a clip of Mr. Bush standing with what were described as "Congressional leaders" (how many leaders do 2 parties need?) demonstrating the level of support. I am now confused as I cannot find any mention of a vote or decision having been made by Congress on military action in Iraq.

There wasn't one. This is a stunt to persuade the public that the decision has already been made so that they quit hounding Congress to call it off. That gives the public relations companies a better chance to flood congressional office with fake emails and calls to "reverse the trend”. The hope is that by implying that the Congress has already made it’s decision, you will be tricked into stopping the calls, visits and FAXes. Don't fall for it. Keep up the pressure. Join a protest. Hang a warhawks in effigy (it is free speech to do so).

WhatReallyHappened.com -- What to do

Well, folks, let's stop World War 3 before it gets started!

What to do

"Fighting in a city is probably the most complex environment for military operations. It has been compared to a knife-fight in a telephone booth. Casualties in the average rifle company can run as high as 30%."

General William Kernan, head of the U.S. joint forces command - What to do

"There has never been a just one, never an honorable one -- on the part of the instigator of the war. I can see a million years ahead, and this rule will never change in so many as half a dozen instances. The loud little handful -- as usual -- will shout for the war. The pulpit will -- warily and cautiously -- object -- at first; the great, big, dull bulk of the nation will rub its sleepy eyes and try to make out why there should be a war, and will say, earnestly and indignantly, "It is unjust and dishonorable, and there is no necessity for it." Then the handful will shout louder. A few fair men on the other side will argue and reason against the war with speech and pen, and at first will have a hearing and be applauded; but it will not last long; those others will outshout them, and presently the anti-war audiences will thin out and lose popularity. Before long you will see this curious thing: the speakers stoned from the platform, and free speech strangled by hordes of furious men who in their secret hearts are still at one with those stoned speakers -- as earlier -- but do not dare to say so. And now the whole nation -- pulpit and all -- will take up the war-cry, and shout itself hoarse, and mob any honest man who ventures to open his mouth; and presently such mouths will cease to open. Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception."

Mark Twain, "The Mysterious Stranger!"

What to do

New, libertarian-oriented buttons to wear to show you are against the War from Carol Moore in D.C.

High intellect button depicted :-)

After both houses of Congress passed this "Presidential blank check" war resolution, we are considering what should be done next and are entertaining suggestions, some of which follow:

• "Regime change" - encourage votes against reps and Senators who voted for the war resolution at their next election.
• Actions (in the Courts?) against the representatives and Senators for violation of their oaths of office (to support and defend the Constitution) for shirking off the war-making power to the executive.
• Organize - form local anti-war groups to raise awareness of local people to the horrible possibilities of this war - in preparation for whatever other actions may be necessary.
• re-read the Pentagon Papers, Daniel Ellsberg's leak of a Pentagon Study on the futility of the war in Viet Nam (for which he was unsuccessfully prosecuted under the "Official Secrets Act").
• display your sentiments - print out the posters available on the internet, wear the buttons, discuss the issue with friends and people who ask about the button or poster.

What we previously listed as the "to do":

Each of you has one Congressman and 2 Senators

To find out their names and numbers, call your town or city clerk and ask them - they always know. Or try: http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/peace/senate.html for Senators.

Bush's resolution before the Senate, introduced as S.J. Res. 45:

after all the whereas's, it states:

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES. The President is authorized to use all means that he determines to be appropriate, including force, in order to enforce the United Nations Security Council Resolutions referenced above, defend the national security interests of the United States against the threat posed by Iraq , and restore international peace and security in the region.

This last little kicker is what will make this the war that lasts a lifetime - It's an authorization for the US government to take the region as an imperial conquest (through the installation of governments and leaders to our liking, as in the failing experiment in Afganistan). The result will be more terror against Americans here at home and abroad.

Final vote in the Senate (link to follow)

Bush's resolution in the House, introduced as H.J. Res. 114: to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq:

Final vote in the House