Democracy for New Mexico

Rep. Luján to Host New GI Bill Benefits Sign Up on Memorial Day in Santa Fe

Rep. Ben Ray Luján announced that he will host a New GI Bill sign up on Memorial Day in his Santa Fe district office. Veterans and their families can visit the office and sign up for education benefits under the New GI Bill. May 1 was the first day that veterans could sign up for new college benefits under the new GI Bill for the 21st Century that takes effect on August 1. Last year, Congress enacted the bill to restore the promise of a full, four-year college education for Iraq and Afghanistan veterans.

“Iraq and Afghanistan veterans have an opportunity to receive significant education benefits under the new GI Bill,” said Rep. Luján. “I encourage Iraq and Afghanistan veterans to apply for this program on Memorial Day at my Santa Fe district office.”

The New GI Bill benefits sign up and meet and greet with Rep. Ben Ray Luján will take place on Monday, May 25, from 1:30-3:00 PM (MT) at Rep. Luján’s Santa Fe District Office, 811 St. Michael's Dr., Suite 104. Staff will be available in the office from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM.

Members of the military -- including activated reservists and members of the National Guard -- who have been honorably discharged from service with at least 90 days of active duty service on or after September 11, 2001 could receive up to four academic years of education benefits. These benefits include stipends for housing and books, and are correlated on a sliding scale relative to years served. To receive full benefits you must have served on active duty for three years. Veterans will have up to 15 years after they leave active duty to use their education benefits.

The new college benefit program will pay for:

· tuition and fees up to the maximum in-state tuition and fees at a public institution in your state;

· a monthly housing allowance at the location of the school, based on the Basic Allowance for Housing for an E-5 with dependents; and

· an annual books and supplies stipend of up to $1,000.

At 10:00 AM on Memorial Day, Rep. Luján will deliver the closing prayer at the Santa Fe National Cemetery Memorial Day Service, Santa Fe National Cemetery, 501 North Guadalupe St., Santa Fe, NM.

Terry Riley Guest Blog: Memorial Day

This is a guest blog by Terry Riley of Veterans for Peace Albuquerque:

Memorial Day, holiday in the United States observed in late May. Previously designated Decoration Day, it was inaugurated in 1868 by Gen. John A. Logan for the purpose of decorating the graves of Civil War veterans and has since become a day on which all war dead are commemorated.

The Columbia Encyclopedia. Copyright © 2001-09 Columbia University Press. All rights reserved.

Veterans Memorial Park, Albuquerque, New Mexico. This park, located at 1100 Louisiana Blvd. SE in Albuquerque, focuses on Veterans of all wars and all branches of the military. Memorial Day and Veterans Day veterans and their families fill the park for services and speeches commemorating military service and the sacrifices people have made for our country.

The Memorial Day and Veterans Day events in Albuquerque have excluded participation of Veterans for Peace, as though speaking out against war is somehow not patriotic. The Albuquerque Veterans for Peace have had to stand outside the park on these days, holding signs expressing an anti-war and non-violent message. This year the Albuquerque Chapter of Veterans for Peace will be inside the park with a display table on equal ground with other veteran’s organizations. With the help of the Albuquerque ACLU an appeal was filed with the City of Albuquerque asking for equal opportunity to table alongside other veteran’s organizations.

As we remember the veterans of our military branches who have served our country, enjoy that this year all veterans organizations will be able to participate at the Albuquerque Veterans Memorial Park. Please thank the American Civil Liberties Union for providing the legal expertise and legwork that has brought justice and equality to the day that we are all celebrating those who gave their lives for these values; equality, rule of law, justice, etc.

This is a guest blog by Terry Riley of Veterans for Peace Albuquerque. To submit a piece for consideration as a guest blog, contact me by clicking on the Email Me link on the upper left-hand corner of the page.

Memorial Day: Memory, War and the Memory of War

Dr. Louis Bickford, who manages the Memory, Memorials, and Museums program at the International Center for Transitional Justice, provides a timely and thought-provoking piece for Memorial Day entitled, Memory, War, and the Memory of War. Excerpt:

Memorial Day is meant to remind us of the hardship of war, and on this Memorial Day I find myself asking how we will remember the "war on terror." What will our children's children know about this period?

We choose in the present how future generations will remember the past. One of the great contributions of the human rights movement is showing that how we remember and memorialize trauma in the past -- torture under brutal regimes in Argentina or during the apartheid era of South Africa, the evil committed during the Holocaust -- can help prevent abuses in the future.

... Imagining the future, we may choose to remember the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, for example, more in terms of heroism than error, since that is the tendency of all nations. We may remember the irreparable loss of life of those who went to fight, and we will think about their families and the suffering they endured. Our national memory may focus on the deaths of the Americans, in the same way that our memories of Vietnam focus largely on American causalities.

Will we remember that there was a place called Abu Ghraib on the dusty outskirts of Baghdad, and that torture took place there, for which we were responsible? Will we remember that we acquiesced to a terrible policy put forward by our leaders and with the endorsement of many -- Democrats, Republicans, journalists, legal scholars -- that allowed for us to ignore international and American law prohibiting torture?

If we care about the future, we must, first, clarify the truth. Second, we must find ways of clearly condemning torture wherever and whenever it was committed. Third, we must take steps so that we remember our rejection of those acts. Our thinking about future memory is one way of preventing torture in the future.

...If former officials succeed in making us forget that there was torture and that it was contrary to our values, they will establish impunity for the present and also for the future. That must not be allowed to happen. Extreme violations of human rights in any context, including a war, are too important to forget. We want future generations to remember that we insisted on accountability for them. Those are good reasons to have Memorial Day.

On his PBS show last night, Bill Moyers ended the program with a commentary on Dr. Bickford's piece and what Memorial Day means. You can view video and text of Moyers' statement here.

Memorial Days Past: Time flies, but the Iraq war continues. Last year we posted on a visit by then presidential candidate Barack Obama and Gov. Bill Richardson to a Memorial Day gathering in Las Cruces. In 2007, we featured a piece by paralyzed Viet Nam war veteran Ron Kovic on the forgotten wounded of the Iraq war. In 2006, I wrote a post contemplating Iraq war casualties after watching HBO's Baghdad ER. And in 2005, I posted on veterans and others I believe should be honored as we remember American sacrifices and American history.

Senators Udall and Bingaman Vote for Supplemental War Funding

On Monday, all three of New Mexico's Congressmen voted in favor of the $97 BILLION supplemental appropriations bill to fund the war spending and foreign aid efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq through September 30. Yesterday, Senators Tom Udall and Jeff Bingaman did the same with a Senate version of the bill totaling $91.3 BILLION. The measure passed by a margin of 86-3, with 10 abstentions. The only Dem to vote no was Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold.

As I'm sure you know by now, the Senate version of the bill stripped $80 million in funding for closing Guantanamo prison -- ostensibly because Dems wanted more info on Obama's plans. Apparently, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid also was concerned that the prisoners would be set loose to hang out in our neighborhoods: "“You can’t put them in prison unless you release them ... we will never allow terrorists to be released in the United States." The only problem with his statement? A prison transfer isn't a release and nobody has ever proposed releasing any Guantanamo prisoners in the US.

The Senate bill also contains less for weapons procurement and foreign aid than the House version. It also fulfills Obama's request to extend up to $108 billion in credit lines to the International Monetary Fund for helping countries suffering from the global financial crisis, and backs up the IMF's plan to sell 400 tons (12.97 million ounces) of gold. After the Memorial Day break, the House and Senate will confer on a compromise measure to present to Obama in June.

Don't you wish the Congress was instead voting to spend $97 billion on things like commuter trains and light rail? In our dreams, as the seemingly never-ending military missions continue in their 8th year. The war in Afghanistan began on October 7, 2001, with the US invading Iraq on March 20, 2003. I'm well aware that there are cogent arguments for continuing on this path in order to try to rectify -- in some way -- the grave errors and tragedies perpetrated by Bush et al. But is that even possible?

Will $97 billion more dollars thru September really make a difference in the outcomes in Iraq and Afghanistan? What the heck is the exit plan for Afghanistan? What does "winning" there entail? Does anybody really know what's going on in Iraq right now and what will change if we stay there for who knows how long? While dealing with the supplemental, members of Congress asked few questions, demanded no detailed plans and challenged no assumptions in the conduct of the wars, as far as I can tell. Instead, they seemed to be content to take Obama's word that more billions are needed, 22,00 more troops must go to Afghanistan and the military and diplomatic strategies being pursued are the right ones.

As I noted before, the supplemental bill is in addition to Obama's regular budget request now before the Congress for $205 BILLION for Iraq and Afghanistan over the next 18 months. More than $75 BILLION of that is earmarked for the rest of the year.

According to the Cost of War counters provided by the National Priorities Project, as of today we have spent a total of $859,684,211,796 on our wars-occupations since 2001 -- $671,225,383,000 for Iraq and $188,458,925,442 for Afghanistan. The numbers don't exactly add up because the counters keep moving at a rapid pace as the dollar amounts continue to increase by the second. And the conflicts drag on and on and on and on.

Compare Language of Obama and Cheney Speeches on National Security

These are word clouds created by the language used in the speeches about national security given today by President Barack Obama and Dead-Ender Dick Cheney. The bigger the word, the more it was used in the speech. Click on the images to see larger versions. Notice any big differences? Like use of the words TERRORISM and 9/11 by Cheney vs. the words WILL, AMERICAN, PEOPLE and GUANTANAMO emphasized by Obama? Click for the complete texts of the speech by Obama -- and the one by Cheney. There he goes again. Hey, Dick, go back to your bat cave!

US House Votes $97 Billion More in Supplemental War Spending; Heinrich, Teague, Lujan Vote Yes

When you start hearing more about how we don't have enough money to achieve genuine health care reform that includes universal care in America, or that we have to "rein in" what have erroneously come to be called "entitlements" -- like Medicare and Social Security -- think about this vote.

On Thursday, the U.S. House passed a $96.7 BILLION request from President Obama for war spending and foreign aid efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq through September 30 by a roll call vote of 368-60. All three of New Mexico's Congressmen -- Rep. Martin Heinrich (NM-01), Rep. Harry Teague (NM-02) and Rep. Ben Ray Lujan (NM-03) -- followed the House leadership's urging and voted in favor of the funding. Only 51 Democrats and 9 Republicans voted no.

Democrats against the supplemental explained they fear Obama is escalating the war in Afghanistan without a clear exit strategy or goals. For example,

"When George Bush was president, I was on this floor saying we need an exit strategy," said Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.). "The same applies with Afghanistan. I'm tired of wars with no deadlines, no exits and no ends."

However, Dem leaders balked at making any demands:

House Democratic leaders refused to back an effort by McGovern and other antiwar legislators that would require Obama to provide Congress a detailed exit strategy for Afghanistan by the end of the year.

Note that this is a SUPPLEMENTAL spending bill that is in addition to Obama's regular budget request now before the Congress for $205 BILLION for Iraq and Afghanistan over the next 18 months. More than $75 BILLION of that is earmarked for the rest of the year.

According to the Cost of War counters provided by the National Priorities Project, we have spent a total of $858,230,959,582 on our wars-occupations since 2001 -- $670,041,506,063 for Iraq and $188,189,686,116 for Afghanistan. The numbers don't exactly add up because the counters keep moving at a rapid pace as the dollar amounts continue to increase by the second.

I know the party line is to give Obama's plan a chance to work; in effect, to give him the benefit of the doubt. I understand that position, but I don't understand why that should negate any effort to ask the hard questions and demand a clear delineation of our goals and the exit strategy we will employ to finally bring the troops home.

There does seem to be a sense among many Dems that they should go along with Obama's plan, at least for now, even though they have serious misgivings:

"This is a bill that I have very little confidence in," Rep. David R. Obey (D-Wis.), an outspoken liberal, said of the $97-billion measure to finance military operations in the region. "But we have a responsibility to give a new president who did not get us into this mess the opportunity to get us out of it."

... Rep. Melvin Watt (D-N.C.) said he had to hold his nose to vote for the bill. "A year from now," he said, "I'll be asking some serious questions."

Unfortunately the Dem leadership in the House seems reticent to make any demands on the new President:

Democratic critics in the House and Senate have objected to giving more aid to Afghanistan and Pakistan without setting preconditions or benchmarks for progress by their governments. The administration and its supporters have argued against tying Obama's hands.

That is a reversal for Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco), who had demanded that Bush set such benchmarks in Iraq.

Others don't see it that way:

"It's time for Americans to come to our senses," said Rep. Marcy Kaptur, a Democrat from recession-ravaged Ohio. "Isn't it time to pay more attention to the fraying economy in our homeland?"

This Weekend: ABQ Protests of Wars of Occupation, Rally to Bring Troops Home

From the Y6C: The New Mexico Year 6 Coalition (Y6C) will hold an “Occupation is a Crime” rally on Saturday, March 21, 2009 from 11 AM to 1 PM at the corner of Second and Copper NW, Albuquerque, at the Galleria Plaza, next to the Convention Center, downtown. The New Mexico Iraq Veterans Against the War will be joining the demonstration.

This local rally is in solidarity with the massive national March on the Pentagon being organized by ANSWER in Washington, DC on the 6th anniversary of the illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003. The rally is calling for an end to the expansion by the administration and Congress of the wars of occupation taking place in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Palestine, and the impending invasion or Iran.

The Y6 rally is addressing in specific the vote of the new 1st Congressional District representative, Martin Heinrich, who voted on his first day in office for HR 34. This resolution was the political green light for Israel to continue the massacre in Gaza in January which was only made possible due to their large supply of U.S. weapons. About 1,500 people died, many of them women and children. Many new experimental weapons such as the DIME were tested on the civilian population, which is also a war crime.

Politically many people are calling for a democratic one-state solution, not a two-state apartheid arrangement.

The Y6 Coalition is calling on Rep. Heinrich to work with the national S30 movement to stop the next $30 billion installment of U.S. weapons to Israel. A representative for the Congressman’s office will also address the rally.

Participants are being encouraged to bring signs, bring banners, shout loud. There will be political speakers and music.

PLUS: Early Friday morning, in support of the Saturday rally, the local chapter of the Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) will set up a Tower Watch at the rally site. They will stay all day and night through Saturday. The Tower Watch is a national campaign by Iraq war veterans to demand an end to the colonial occupation of Iraq. They are asking supporters to come join them Friday and Saturday.

The Y6C is composed of the following organizations:

• Albuquerque Another Jewish Voice
• Albuquerque Center for Peace and Justice
• Albuquerque Chapter Veterans for Peace
• Albuquerque Raging Grannies
• Columbia Solidarity Committee of New Mexico
• Grassroots Press, www.grass-roots-press.com
• Gray Panthers of Greater Albuquerque
• Green Party of Bernalillo County
• Iraq Veterans Against War - Albuquerque
• Los Alamos Study Group
• Middle East Peace and Justice Alliance
• Nob Hill Tutoring
• Nukes Out of Duke City
• The Mission Committee of the Albuquerque Mennonite Church
• Pax Christi Holy Rosary
• School of the Americas Watch Albuquerque
• Social Justice Council of the First Unitarian Church
• Stop the War Machine
• Stop $30 Billion Coalition
• Unitarian Universalist Fellowship Social Concerns Committee

Will Dems Use Their Power to Reverse Bush-Era Abuses?

Must read as Dems prepare to take control of the executive branch and both houses of Congress: Glenn Greenwald astutely dissects the disastrous attacks on American civil liberties and constitutional protections over the last decade -- many of them conducted with Democratic approval or acquiescence -- and challenges Dems to have the backbone to reverse course. Excerpt:

For the last seven years, Democrats have repeatedly cited GOP political dominance to excuse their wholesale failures to limit, let alone reverse, the devastating war waged by the Bush administration on America's core liberties and form of government. With a new Democratic president and large majorities in both Congressional houses, those excuses will no longer be so expedient. As dark and depressing as these last seven years have been for civil libertarians, culminating in an almost entirely grim 2008, there is no question that the Obama administration and the Democrats generally now possess the power to reverse these abuses and restore our national political values. But as the events of the last 12 months conclusively demonstrate, there are substantial questions as to whether they have the will to do so.

Jury Absolves ABQ Cops in Dr. Fogarty's Iraq Protest Civil Rights Suit

Personally, I don't see how anyone in their right mind could side with the cops on this one, but too many Americans seem to be supportive of police state tactics in this era. As long as they believe they won't ever be abused, of course. As reported in the Albuquerque Journal:

In less than two hours Friday, a federal jury dispatched a civil rights lawsuit over a 2003 anti-war demonstration that had been fought for more than five years in the courts. The cops won.

Dr. John Fogarty, a family practice physician working for the Indian Health Service in Santa Fe, alleged excessive force and wrongful arrest at the protest in a federal lawsuit. He had joined protesters speaking out against the newly launched war in Iraq, and was performing on an African drum near the University of New Mexico bookstore, when officers who were never identified yanked his drum and took him to a police holding van.

For the past week, the eight-person jury heard testimony and watched videos about police handling of the event. Defense attorneys representing the city, Capt. John Gonzales and five officers heard divergent views on police actions during the protest.

... "I think the jury understood how professional the Albuquerque Police Department, the officers and commander were during these very trying times," Deputy City Attorney Kathryn Levy said.

Well, that's not exactly how roughhouse tactics by some APD officers are viewed by those who have intimately come into contact with them. Unfortunately, it's apparent that too many citizens who have never witnessed such behavior have a tendency to believe whatever the cops say. I wonder how the jurors in the case would feel if they were treated in the same manner while sitting and drumming in an out of the way area close to a peaceful demonstration.

(Updated) Shoe Fly Pie: Duck, George

No comment.

Update: The New York Times is reporting that the reporter who threw his shoes at Bush is becoming a folk hero and celebrity in the Arab world and beyond. Also, a petition has been posted demanding the immediate release of the journalist, Montather Al-Zaidi.
**********
Here's a version that includes Bush's responses to the shoe event. I guess he believes shoe "tho-ing" is an acceptable way to express one's self in a democracy.

And last, but not least, here's a new net game generated by the incident. If the shoe hits ....