question about eating locally

Many of us, myself included, are trying to buy and eat more locally grown and produced food. I'm not attaching myself to any set plan, such as the now-popular 100 Mile Diet, as that strikes me as yet another "how to eat" book, albeit one with a social conscience. But it is something I'm trying to work more into my life, and I'm looking for ways to expand on the theme.

But some things don't make sense to me. If you are really sticking to an all-local diet, what do you do in the winter? Do you can and preserve fruits and vegetables during the warmer months, for winter consumption? That's something that most modern people are not going to do. In my own life, I can put that aside in the "not going to happen" category.

Do you not eat fruits and vegetables all winter? That wouldn't be a very healthful eating plan. Our ancestors might have "put up" fruits and vegetables, but they also didn't eat a balanced diet.

Even in the warmer months, there are foods we North Americans grew up eating that have never been local. I'm not thinking of foods once considered exotic that are now available in supermarkets everywhere. I'm thinking of foods we've always considered ordinary in my lifetime and my mother's, such as oranges.

In the northern latitudes, will you give up eating citrus fruit? Inland, will you not eat seafood? While I very much intend to eat more locally - and I've been trying, on a small scale - these are changes I would not make, as they would be so personally unhealthy.

One of my nieces is an organic/conscious-eating chef, and is learning about working in the farm-to-table movement. But she lives in California. It's easy to cook and eat locally there; in fact, that's a primary reason she close to live there. Living in Ontario, how could I possibly eat locally, and healthfully, in the winter?

If there's some basic tenet I'm missing, please forgive my ignorance, and educate me and other readers.

Allan and I are out today, so comments will sit in moderation for a while, but we'll get them through as soon as we can. Thanks in advance.

horse slaughter in canada

I've been reading about horse slaughter in Canada for a while now. After much pressure from activists, the US outlawed the slaughter of horses in March of 2007. Immediately after, the same people began to ship horses to Canada for slaughter.

The animals are transported under brutal conditions - why would you spend money on the comfort of a creature you're about to kill? - then slaughtered under terrifying conditions. Their meat is then exported to countries where horse meat is consumed. These animals were not raised for meat; humane slaughter, if one believes such a thing is possible, has not been designed for them.

Today CBC News has this story.

A CBC News investigation into the horse slaughter industry in Canada, including hidden-camera footage from one slaughterhouse in Saskatchewan, is raising questions about how horses are being killed.

The footage, obtained from the Canadian Horse Defence Coalition but shot by an unidentified videographer, documents slaughter practices at Natural Valley Farms in Neudorf, just east of Regina. It appears to show what anti-animal cruelty activists say is the inhumane treatment of horses.

A vet from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency is posted at the plant but doesn't appear on the footage to have done anything to stop the practices.

Many of the horses slated for slaughter are race or workhorses no longer fit for their former jobs, or unwanted pets. The horses are shipped to any one of seven slaughterhouses in Canada from the U.S. The meat is sent to parts of Europe and Asia where it is considered a delicacy.

Horse slaughter businesses in Canada have grown by 75 per cent since laws were passed in the United States in 2006 making it illegal to kill horses for food, according to figures from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. It is still legal to ship horses outside the country for slaughter.

John Holland, an engineer from West Virginia, was one of those responsible for getting the slaughter ban passed in the U.S.

"Those people have simply moved over to your border," he told CBC News. "So Canada is basically being used to get around the fact that we don't want our horses slaughtered."

One of the arguments Holland and others used in advocating for the ban on horse slaughter was that it is extremely difficult to slaughter horses humanely.

Experts such as Dr. Temple Grandin, an American professor who has designed dozens of slaughter facilities in the U.S., said it is possible to deliver a humane death if the right slaughter infrastructure is in place.

The key to humane horse slaughter is a stunning box, or kill pen, that is designed specifically for horses and high enough so the animals cannot see over the side in order to contain their large bodies, Grandin said. Non-slip flooring is also essential.

"Animals panic when they start to slip. People need to be calm. No whistling, no yelling, no hitting and you can do it where they can just walk right in," Grandin, who did not review the hidden-camera footage from Natural Valley Farms in Neudorf, told CBC.

A veterinarian who did see the footage said the kill pen being used at Natural Valley was designed for cattle, not horses.

Dr. Nicholas Dodman, a professor of veterinary medicine at Tufts University in Medford, Mass., and a founding member of Veterinarians for Equine Welfare, said the pens at the farm are too large.

He said the pens allow the horses space to move around and back away from the captive bolt operator responsible for shooting them with a device called a captive bolt pistol, sometimes referred to as a bolt or cattle gun, which is used to stun horses before slaughter.

The footage shows the operator is not always able to stun the horses properly to render them fully unconscious before they are slaughtered by slitting of the throat, Dodman said.

The footage also showed horses slipping on the kill pen floor, which appeared extremely slippery.

"Its legs are spinning around; it's like it's on ice. The legs are just spinning around in circles, it's trying to go backwards, it's trying to go forwards — it's just sheer terror, sheer panic," Dodman said of a horse on the videotape.

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency allows for about five per cent of animals to wake up during the slaughter process. But in the worst cases, the horses are incorrectly shot, usually as a result of struggling, Dodman said.

"There are parts of the animal that are still moving that let you know that for at while at least, it's conscious," he said.

Twyla Francois, central region director of the Canadian Horse Defence Coalition, said she is trying to raise awareness among horse owners who don't realize the horses they take to auction could end up at slaughter.

In the 10 to 12 hours of hidden-camera footage she watched, a CFIA inspector was never present at the kill pen, Francois said, despite government regulations that require a vet from the agency be present to oversee the slaughter process at the plant.

The CBC left repeated phone messages at the plant that weren't returned. Requests for an interview with someone from the organization that represents the horse slaughter industry were turned down.

Two months after CBC News filmed compost heaps at the facility from outside the property, the hidden camera operator returned to the compost area to find large exposed mounds of horse remains dumped in a field that were not covered, as required under Saskatchewan environment ministry regulation.

When CBC reporters arrived at Natural Valley Farms to speak to the man who runs the operation, Ken Pillar, he also refused a request for an interview and a tour of the plant. But he did say that the facility follows all regulations.

"We have trained and went through every possible thing to unload horses carefully. They are euthanized here in a perfect manner, as humanely as possible," Pillar said.

The CFIA said it has investigated complaints about the plant in the past, but never found any problems.

One scene from the video footage shows a stun gun operator repeatedly hitting an unco-operative horse with a stick. There was also evidence horses had been transported with their horseshoes still on, which violates regulations, unless the animals are separated in the truck, because the horses could hurt each other.

In accepting the hidden camera footage, CBC agreed not to contact government officials for comment until after the footage was released publicly.

Full disclosure time. I eat meat. I care about animals. And I know there's a contradiction inherent in those two statements. After being a vegetarian for a few years, then returning to being an omnivore, I've decided to live with the contradiction.

I want all animals to be treated as humanely as possible, including ones that are raised and killed for meat. I believe humans, being animals ourselves, have a right to eat other animals, but I also believe we have a responsibility to minimize the damage we do.

Animal activists in the US were able to change laws to protect horses. I hope Canadian animal activists can do the same.

more stories on war resisters

Here's a small round-up of some recent stories on Iraq War resisters in Canada, in addition to what I've already posted.

Toronto Star columnist Joe Fiorito supports Corey Glass's right to remain in Canada, and Juana Tejada's. Tejada is originally from the Philippines. She has been living and working legally in Canada since 2003. Now, ill with cancer, she is being deported.

Fiorito seems very optimistic that Corey and other resisters will not be deported. I can only hope he's right.

These two pieces in neighbourhood Toronto papers spotlight Corey Glass and his fellow resister Chuck Wiley. We've had a lot of press like this, in small papers from wherever resisters are living. Even in generally conservative areas - Kingston, Sudbury, Simcoe, Owen Sound - the media has been extremely supportive.

There also has been a lot of French-language coverage in Quebec, and several local and national radio stories.

The Guardian (UK) ran this piece. It concludes:

Opposition MP Olivia Chow, who introduced a motion calling on the government to allow Glass and others to stay, said: "The government had to listen, even though they didn't want to in the beginning," she said. "Canadian values haven't changed that much in terms of we are a peaceful country and we want to allow people that would be deported to jail to stay in Canada."

But the citizenship and immigration minister, Diane Finlay [sic], said Stephen Harper's administration would not be swayed by emotional pleas. "The emotion in the House does not change the law in the country."

Ms. Finley, the laws in Canada are supposed to be made by people. And the people, through their elected representatives, have already spoken. They said: Let Them Stay.

What you dismiss as "the emotion in the House" is called democracy.

summer in toronto, spring in newfoundland

I happened to notice a national weather broadcast on CBC the other day. Reading west to east, it went something like this.
Vancouver 22
Calgary 23
Regina 20
Winnipeg 25
Toronto 28
Montreal 23
Halifax 18
St. John's 7

Whoa. Everyone has told me that June is not yet summer in Newfoundland, but looking at the difference was still starling. Here's the forecast in three Newfoundland towns we'll visit.

St. John's
Today 7
Thurs 11
Fri 6
Sat 7
Sun 8

Twillingate
Today 10
Thurs 12
Fri 6
Sat 7
Sun 8
Monday 9

Deer Lake
Today 23
Thurs 18
Fri 11
Sat 12
Sun 15
Mon 13
Tues 12

Lucky for us we don't like hot weather! A Campaigner friend who grew up in Grand Falls says they refer to a brief period in July as "summer week".

We leave Tuesday.

PS: US friends, I'm not bothering with conversions anymore. This is a good site if you need help.

letter exchange on war resisters in toronto star

From this week's Toronto Star, first, we have this:

In defence of the United States
Re: MPs vote to give asylum to U.S. military deserters

As a retired U.S. army officer, I can no longer remain silent while apologists for Iraq war deserters accuse my country of war crimes and denigrate our armed forces. I would remind them that the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison were reported by a soldier, just as the massacre at My Lai in Vietnam was reported to an army chaplain by a soldier.

In war, just as in civilian society, people may commit crimes. However, it is not the policy of the U.S. or its army to violate the Geneva or Hague conventions. I have taught the "law of war" to many soldiers, and I can tell you that they are taught to disobey any order that they believe to be illegal or immoral. This training works: Our soldiers do refuse illegal or immoral orders, and they do report violations of the law of war.

The deserters from the U.S. army were not draftees; they were volunteers. They joined the army of their own free will. These people who have come to Canada are not heroes. It is moral and physical cowardice masquerading as principle. The only "asylum" they should be granted is at the U.S. military prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kan.

Do not embrace these fugitives from justice. I can guarantee you this: If Canada were attacked, these deserters would desert you, too.

James R. Reese, Major, U.S. Army (Ret.), Toronto

Can you spot the holes in this man's reasoning? I mean the holes big enough to drive a Humvee through? These five Canadians did!

James R. Reese, a retired U.S. army major, writes, "I can no longer remain silent while apologists for Iraq war deserters accuse my country of war crimes and denigrate our armed forces."

In what appears to be a feeble attempt to put a positive spin on two dark points in U.S. history, he argues that the abuses at both Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and My Lai in Vietnam were reported by soldiers. He fails to note, however, that both of these heinous events were perpetrated by U.S. soldiers.

Reese also notes that "it is not the policy of the U.S. or its army to violate the Geneva or Hague conventions." Sure, while it may not be a formal policy to violate either of these noted conventions, they are being violated just the same. Consider extraordinary rendition and waterboarding.

Finally, he says, "The deserters from the U.S. army were not draftees; they were volunteers. They joined the army of their own free will. These people who have come to Canada are not heroes."

The argument that current U.S. deserters are professional soldiers and not draftees has been uttered many times by people who hold viewpoints similar to those of Reese. However, the argument is largely irrelevant. If a war is illegal and unjust, it is illegal and unjust to all aggressors, not just to those who didn't volunteer.

Reese is fully within his rights to consider U.S. military deserters as cowards, but he is wrong to imply that the U.S. always takes the moral high road. It clearly doesn't.

R. Glenn McGillivray, Oakville

Retired U.S. army major James R. Reese says he is opposed to Canada granting asylum to U.S. military deserters. He also states that he has taught the "law of war" to many soldiers, and that they are taught to disobey any order that they believe to be "illegal or immoral."

With that reasoning, all of the U.S. armed forces deployed in Iraq would have been fully justified in laying down their arms and deserting once they realized that the war had been waged on spurious grounds and was deemed illegal by the United Nations.

Mohamed M. Jagani, Markham

As a retired officer of the U.S. army, a force guilty of documented excesses and various corrupt and illegal acts, James R. Reese is hardly qualified to lecture Canadians on morality and justice. And if "it is not the policy of the U.S. or its army to violate the Geneva or Hague conventions," perhaps he can explain why U.S. troops are in Iraq under false pretenses, killing, maiming and torturing innocent citizens.

Our Prime Minister may do as he's told, but for now, Canadians are still free to think for themselves.

Randy Gostlin, Oshawa

Retired U.S. army officer James R. Reese states that U.S. soldiers are taught to "disobey any order that they believe to be illegal or immoral." If this is the case, all U.S. military personnel should have refused to take part in the Iraq war, which is illegal and immoral.

Unlike Reese, I believe that those soldiers who decided not to participate in this war and have taken refuge in this country should be supported by Canada and given the chance to stay here.

Ramin Farsangi, Innisfil, Ont.

I wonder if James R. Reese, a retired major in the U.S. army, would consider an order to wage an illegal war based on distorted intelligence and false premises grounds for disobeying orders. He then says, "If Canada were attacked, these deserters would desert you, too."

I wonder if Reese could let us know when Iraq attacked the United States. I would remind him that his country was the last to attack Canada. (We won that one.)

Howard Kaplan, Toronto

Terrific letters! Perhaps you will take a minute and write one of your own.

an apology, a shame, a crime, a genocide

Tomorrow is an important day for many First Nations people in Canada, as Stephen Harper, on behalf of the country, apologizes to Canada's aboriginal people for the horror that is euphemistically known as "residential schools". I think "concentration camps" is more appropriate.

As in Australia, Sweden, and several other countries*, aboriginal children in Canada were forcibly removed from their homes and sent to boarding schools, where they were forbidden to use their own languages, practice their own religions or cultural traditions, and were forced to assimilate into the culture of their oppressors.

As if this wasn't bad enough, many of them were horrifically abused - physically, sexually and emotionally. Like abused children everywhere, these victims were wholly dependent on their abusers, and so entirely helpless.

Many died from preventable diseases, spread by overcrowding, lack of sanitation and neglect. The deaths of sick or abused children were covered up; many were buried in unmarked, mass graves.

These concentration camps were run by various mainstream churches, beginning in the early and mid 19th Century; the last church-run school didn't shut its doors until Native peoples forced its closure in the 1970s. Through the 1970s, management of the remaining schools was assumed by Native councils. The widespread abuse was uncovered and made public by activists in the 1990s.

This is surely one of Canada's most terrible legacies and greatest shames.

That sentence is so pale. It feels impossible to articulate how disgusting and shameful this is. It is vitally important to acknowledge and always remember these human-rights crimes, perpetrated by governments and churches, right here in Canada. And to never forget what is happening now, in our own backyard.

* * * *

From Wikipedia:

In 1998, the government made a Statement of Reconciliation – including an apology to those people who were sexually or physically abused while attending residential schools – and established the Aboriginal Healing Foundation. The Foundation was provided $350 million to fund community-based healing projects focusing on addressing the legacy of Indian residential schools. In its 2005 budget, the government committed an additional $40 million to continue to support the important work of the Aboriginal Healing Foundation.

In June 2001, the Indian Residential Schools Resolution Canada (IRSRC) emerged as a new department of the federal government. Its mission is to address the legacy of the residential schools system and its effects on former students by providing alternative means of compensation and support to the victims.

In the fall of 2003, after some pilot projects launched since 1999, the Alternative Dispute Resolution process or "ADR" was launched. The ADR was a process outside of court providing compensation and psychological support for former students of residential schools who were physically or sexually abused or were in situations of wrongful confinement.

On November 23, 2005, the Canadian government announced a $1.9 billion compensation package to benefit tens of thousands of survivors of abuse at native residential schools. National Chief Phil Fontaine of the Assembly of First Nations said the package covers, "decades in time, innumerable events and countless injuries to First Nations individuals and communities." Justice Minister Irwin Cotler called the decision to house young Canadians in church-run residential schools "the single most harmful, disgraceful and racist act in our history." At a news conference in Ottawa, Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan said: "We have made good on our shared resolve to deliver what I firmly believe will be a fair and lasting resolution of the Indian school legacy."

This compensation package became a Settlement Agreement in May 2006. It proposes, among other things, some funding for the Aboriginal Healing Foundation, for commemoration and for a "Truth and Reconciliation" program in aboriginal communities, as well as an individual Common Experience Payment. Any person that can be verified as attending a federally run Indian residential school in Canada is entitled to this Common Experience Payment. The amount of compensation is based on the number of years attended by a particular former student of residential schools: $10,000 for the first year attended plus $3,000 for every year attended thereafter.

The Settlement Agreement also proposed an advance payment for former students alive and who are 65 years old and over as of May 30, 2005. The eligible former students had to fill out the advance payment form available for download on the IRSRC website to receive $8,000 that was deducted from the Common Experience Payment. The deadline for reception of the advance payment form by IRSRC was December 31, 2006.

Following a legal process including an examination of the Settlement Agreement by the courts of the provinces and territories of Canada, an "opt-out" period occurred. During this time, the former students of residential schools could reject the agreement if they did not agree with its dispositions. This opt-out period ended on August 20, 2007.

The Common Experience Payment became available to all the former students of residential schools on September 19, 2007. All former students (including those 65 years of age and over as of May 30, 2005) have to fill out the Common Experience Payment application form to receive their full compensation. The deadline to apply for the CEP is September 19, 2011. This gives former Indian Residential School students four years from the implementation date of the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement to apply for the Common Experience Payment (CEP).

Similar forced residential boarding schools for native communities were operated in the United States (under the name Indian boarding schools) and in Australia (the Stolen Generation).

In June 21, 2008, the Indian Residential School Museum of Canada is scheduled to open on Long Plain First Nation, near Portage La Prairie, Manitoba.

Tomorrow's apology by Prime Minister Stephen Harper is expected to be lengthy and detailed. Nothing can change the past, but a full accounting by the perpetrator can help heal wounds. In this case, the perpetrator is an entire country, and someone has to speak for it.

CBC's FAQ page on residential schools, including video.

An abstract of a paper called Schooling As Genocide by two Swedish scholars.

Plans for the Residential School Museum

The Legacy of Hope Foundation, "healing the legacy of residential schools".

If you haven't seen the movie "Rabbit Proof Fence," about forced-assimilation schools in Australia, I highly recommend it. The film features aboriginal actors and survivors of these concentration camps, and the DVD has lots of very good extras about the history and how the film was made.


------
* There were forced-assimilation schools in the US, but the US's methods of dealing with its "Indian problem" was quicker and more direct: outright massacre, then complete neglect of the survivors.

u.s. plan to control iraq through the 21st century

To everyone who is excited about the Democrats, I wish you good luck. For my part, four stolen elections (two presidential, two midterms) plus an enormous expansion of executive power equals the junta's not going anywhere. People don't drastically change a legal and legislative framework to give themselves unchecked power, then turn that power over to someone else. Never mind that "someone else" is a liberal black man!

I'll be beyond happy to be wrong. I'll be ecstatic. I'll be immensely relieved. I hate the Democrats - they are at least half the reason the US is in the shape it's in - but I'll be glad to see an actual election and a change of administration. I'll also be very surprised.

Here's another scrap to throw on my evidence heap.

A secret deal being negotiated in Baghdad would perpetuate the American military occupation of Iraq indefinitely, regardless of the outcome of the US presidential election in November.

The terms of the impending deal, details of which have been leaked to The Independent, are likely to have an explosive political effect in Iraq. Iraqi officials fear that the accord, under which US troops would occupy permanent bases, conduct military operations, arrest Iraqis and enjoy immunity from Iraqi law, will destabilise Iraq's position in the Middle East and lay the basis for unending conflict in their country.

But the accord also threatens to provoke a political crisis in the US. President Bush wants to push it through by the end of next month so he can declare a military victory and claim his 2003 invasion has been vindicated. But by perpetuating the US presence in Iraq, the long-term settlement would undercut pledges by the Democratic presidential nominee, Barack Obama, to withdraw US troops if he is elected president in November.

The timing of the agreement would also boost the Republican candidate, John McCain, who has claimed the United States is on the verge of victory in Iraq – a victory that he says Mr Obama would throw away by a premature military withdrawal.

America currently has 151,000 troops in Iraq and, even after projected withdrawals next month, troop levels will stand at more than 142,000 – 10 000 more than when the military "surge" began in January 2007. Under the terms of the new treaty, the Americans would retain the long-term use of more than 50 bases in Iraq. American negotiators are also demanding immunity from Iraqi law for US troops and contractors, and a free hand to carry out arrests and conduct military activities in Iraq without consulting the Baghdad government.

The precise nature of the American demands has been kept secret until now. The leaks are certain to generate an angry backlash in Iraq. "It is a terrible breach of our sovereignty," said one Iraqi politician, adding that if the security deal was signed it would delegitimise the government in Baghdad which will be seen as an American pawn.

The US has repeatedly denied it wants permanent bases in Iraq but one Iraqi source said: "This is just a tactical subterfuge." Washington also wants control of Iraqi airspace below 29,000 ft and the right to pursue its "war on terror" in Iraq, giving it the authority to arrest anybody it wants and to launch military campaigns without consultation.

Mr Bush is determined to force the Iraqi government to sign the so-called "strategic alliance" without modifications, by the end of next month. But it is already being condemned by the Iranians and many Arabs as a continuing American attempt to dominate the region.

More here.

kevin brooker of calgary herald: do the canadian thing, let them stay

From Calgary Herald columnist Kevin Brooker:

"Bittersweet" was how many news accounts described last week's parliamentary vote on whether or not Canada should offer asylum to Americans who deserted their military service rather than fight in Iraq.

On one hand, the NDP-sponsored motion to grant permanent residency to otherwise non-criminal deserters and their families -- or as many prefer to call them, war resisters -- passed by a vote of 137-110. Since the motion was non-binding, however, the Conservatives who represented that minority are expected to do nothing to implement it.

Yet there was much more bitterness than honey in that outcome, as far as I could see. I have strong feelings about the shameful abdication from Canada's traditional approach, and many of them are deeply personal. More about those in a moment.

There are many outward reasons why granting sanctuary to an estimated 200 former soldiers should be an automatic gesture for Canada. Foremost is the simple fact that the United Nations itself, not to mention enlightened voices around the world, declared the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq to be a violation of the UN charter. It also would support the Nuremberg Principles, which compel a soldier to withdraw from military acts, like this one, which are patently illegal.

Second, the ultimate penalty for the crime of desertion from U.S. military service is execution, although that has apparently never occurred in the modern era. Still, Canada normally denies extradition for convicted murderers if they are sought by a death-penalty state. I would suggest that these soldiers are even more deserving of our reprieve.

Third, there are indications that many soldiers were fraudulently inducted into service. Conservative opponents of asylum like Edmonton MP Laurie Hawn have been quick to point out that the U.S. army is an all-volunteer service. "People do not join with their eyes closed," Hawn said in the House of Commons. "If they do, then they have their own problems."

In fact, young men have reported that during the post-Mission-Accomplished period, if not up until today, chummy military recruiters routinely said things like, "Dude, don't worry about going to Iraq. That's over and done with. You won't be seeing any combat."

But let me explain why I'm so incensed by the Tories and their leader, Stephen Harper, a man who claimed Canada made a mistake by not joining the coalition of the strong-armed in 2003.

I refer to the era of the Vietnam war, when Pierre Trudeau personally sparked the compassion which led to Canada welcoming some 50,000 to 80,000 young American draft-avoiders.

I would never have met my partner, a wonderfully principled woman, had she not fled the U.S. with her fiance back in 1971. They arrived at our border on a cold, rainy night in a state of dull terror, on little more than the strength of a rumour that Canada would welcome them. She still emotionally recalls the female customs agent in Creston, B.C., who went out of her way to comfort the young couple.

She wound up staying in Canada as a single mother, put herself through school, and became a therapist and counsellor. For the last three decades, she has offered comfort and advice to thousands of grateful Calgarians.

Like most of her cohorts, she brought sterling qualities to this country. Without the imaginative contributions of those draft evaders -- as academics, founders of theatres, filmmakers, entrepreneurs, environmentalists, social workers and many other vital occupations -- Canada would be inestimably worse off.

The argument that, this time around we would simply be importing cowards is a ridiculous one. If granted reprieve, these young people, like their earlier counterparts did even after President Jimmy Carter amnestied them in 1977, would suffer gravely the loss of their country. As for a potential opening of the floodgates, that alone makes it highly unlikely.

Mr. Harper, it's time to set aside your kowtowing to hawkish U.S. interests and do the right thing. The Canadian thing.

corey glass safe for one more month, but our fight continues

Corey Glass, the Iraq War resister whose deportation is pending, is free to live in Canada for at least one more month. A long appeals process has been going on in court, and it was finally accepted last Friday.

But the fight to keep Corey and all the Iraq War resisters safe in Canada continues. We need to keep the issue visible. Your calls to the Prime Minister's office and to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, your letters to the editor in newspapers, and phone calls to your own MPs are vital.

From today's Toronto Star (emphasis added):

He was told to have his bags packed by this Thursday, but it appears U.S. war resister Corey Glass will remain in Canada for at least another month.

Initially ordered to leave the country by June 12, Glass's departure date has been extended to July 10, after a month-long appeal process by his lawyer was finally approved last week.

The former American soldier was set to become the first Iraq-war resister to be deported from Canada, after his application for refugee status was rejected more than two weeks ago.

Glass said his lawyer put forward the appeal so he would have sufficient time to properly settle his accounts and allow him to leave his job in a professional manner.

This week, all three opposition parties in the House of Commons passed a motion urging the government to allow U.S. military deserters and their families to remain in Canada as permanent residents – instead of deporting them to face possible jail time. The motion passed 137-110, but it is non-binding and the government can choose to ignore it.

The motion that was passed in parliament had nothing to do with Glass's extension.

New Democrat MP Olivia Chow (Trinity-Spadina), who brought the conscientious objector's motion forward, says Glass's extended stay is an opportunity for people to speak out, and ensure war resisters like Glass are not sent to prison.

In the late '80s, the Canadian government was planning to deport Vietnam draft dodgers and war resistors, Chow said.

"There was a huge outrage – it was phenomenal," she said.

That public outcry moved the government to reverse its decision, Chow said, adding it's the kind of response needed to ensure sanctuary for the estimated 100-plus American war resisters currently in Canada.

Through the counsel of his lawyer, Glass says he is planning to file for a three-year temporary resident visa, which may buy enough time for the outcome of the coming U.S. election to possibly change the consequences he will face at home. When he returns to the U.S., Glass will face jail time – a reality, he says, that will make his life a permanent struggle.

"I probably won't be able to get a job. I'll have a felony charge – I won't be able to vote," he said.

Glass said Wednesday's motion, and word that he'd been given an extra month in Canada, boosted his optimism.

"I feel like things are maybe going to turn around for the best," Glass said. "People are working really hard on this. I hope they'll be successful."

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Diane Finley
613.996.4974
finley.d@parl.gc.ca / finled1@parl.gc.ca

Prime Minister Stephen Harper
613.992.4211
pm@pm.gc.ca

Letters to your local newspaper, the Globe and Mail, the CBC, CTV and other media outlets are very helpful, too.

canada a.m. this morning

Don't forget, watch TV this morning if you can.

There's also an online poll about the war resisters on the CTV website. Please take a minute to show your support.

us govt makes an honest move: quits human rights council

From another wmtc reader:

The news that the US has completely withdrawn from the Human Rights Council spread like wildfire Friday afternoon (June 6) through the corridors of the Palais des Nations in Geneva. There was general consternation amongst diplomats and NGOS. Reached by phone, the American mission in Geneva neither confirmed nor denied the report. Although unofficial, the news comes at a time of long opposition by the Bush administration to the reforms which created the Human Rights Council in June 2006. Washington announced from the beginning that the US would not be an active member but its observer status would mean that it could intervene during the sessions. To date even this has rarely happened.

. . .

Human Rights Watch is still worried about the withdrawal. "The message is worrying", says Sebastien Gillioz. "Ever since September 11, 2001, the US has constantly interpreted international standards in an "a la carte" manner that has eroded human rights. Its behaviour has served as an example to a stream of states, including Pakistan, Egypt and other, who are not embarrassed to review human rights standards on homosexuality, abortion, capital punishment. It is a step backwards."

The US government has no business sitting on any international body that has anything to do with human rights. This could be the most honest move the junta ever makes.

"soldiers who will do almost anything not to go back"

A reader sent me this story from Newsweek.

As an internist at New York's Mount Sinai Hospital, Dr. Stephanie Santos is used to finding odd things in people's stomachs. So last spring when a young man, identifying himself as an Iraq-bound soldier, said he had accidentally swallowed a pen at the bus station, she believed him. That is, until she found a second pen. It read 1-800-GREYHOUND. Last summer, according to published reports, a 20-year-old Bronx soldier paid a hit man $500 to shoot him in the knee on the day he was scheduled to return to Iraq. The year before that, a 24-year-old specialist from Washington state escaped a second tour of duty, according to his sister, by strapping on a backpack full of tools and leaping off the roof of his house, injuring his spine.

Such cases of self-harm are a "rising trend" that military doctors are watching closely, says Col. Kathy Platoni, an Army Reserve psychologist who has worked with veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan. "There are some soldiers who will do almost anything not to go back," she says. Col. Elspeth Ritchie, the Army's top psychologist, agrees that we could see an uptick in intentional injuries as more U.S. soldiers serve long, repeated combat tours, "but we just don't have good, hard data on it." Intentional-injury cases are hard to identify, and even harder to prosecute. Fewer than 21 soldiers have been punitively discharged for self-harm since 2003, according to the military. What's worrying, however, is that American troops committed suicide at the highest rate on record in 2007 — and the factors behind self-injury are similar: combat stress and strained relationships. "It's often the families that don't want soldiers to return to war," says Ritchie.

Soldiers have long used self-harm as a rip cord to avoid war. During World War I, The American Journal of Psychiatry reported "epidemics of self-inflicted injuries," hospital wards filled with men shot in a single finger or toe, as well as cases of pulled-out teeth, punctured eardrums and slashed Achilles' heels. Few doubt that the Korean and Vietnam wars were any different. But the current war — fought with an overtaxed volunteer Army — may be the worst. "We're definitely concerned," says Ritchie. "We hope they'll talk to us rather than self-harm."

No one wants to die for someone else's profit. And few people want to kill innocent civilians who have done them no harm.

Supporting military resistance saves lives.

watch tv tomorrow morning

Canadian readers who can watch TV in the morning, check out Canada AM on CTV tomorrow, Monday, June 9, at 8:40 a.m.

Iraq War resister Phil McDowell and Charley Richardson of Military Families Speak Out will be featured. It could be an important opportunity to bring our point of view to the public.

harriet mcbryde johnson

Harriet McBryde Johnson - lawyer, author, activist, mover-and-shaker, person with disability - died this week at the young age of 50.

McBryde Johnson famously debated philosopher Peter Singer in 2001, and wrote about it for the New York Times Magazine, among other places.

Rolling into an auditorium at the College of Charleston on April 22, 2001, Ms. Johnson went to the microphone during a question-and-answer session to confront Peter Singer, a philosopher from Princeton, who was giving a lecture titled "Rethinking Life and Death."

Professor Singer had drawn protests by insisting that suffering should be relieved without regard to species. That, he said, allows parents and doctors to kill newborns with drastic disabilities, like the absence of higher brain function or an incompletely formed spine, instead of letting "nature take its course."

In Professor Singer's view, infants, like other animals, are neither rational nor self-conscious.

"Since their species is not relevant to their moral status," he said, "the principles that govern the wrongness of killing nonhuman animals who are sentient but not rational or self-conscious must apply here, too."

Ms. Johnson had been sent to the lecture by Not Dead Yet, a national disability-rights organization. Describing the event in The Times, she wrote: "To Singer, it's pretty simple: disability makes a person 'worse off.' Are we 'worse off'? I don't think so."

(By the way, Peter Singer's position on disability is the reason I could never accept his views on the ethics of eating meat.)

This obituary in New Mobility speaks to McBryde Johnson's importance to people with disabilities, and to human rights and equality.

Harriet McBryde Johnson, an irrepressible voice for disability rights, died unexpectedly the morning of June 4, in her sleep. A disability and civil rights attorney who lived and practiced in Charleston, S.C., Johnson was also a gifted writer whose latest works had won her critical acclaim and a growing mainstream audience. She was 50 years old.

Her friend and fellow attorney, Susan Dunn, said Johnson had worked on June 3. "It's a shock to everybody," she said in the June 5 edition of the Post and Courier. The Charleston newspaper also quoted State Supreme Justice Jean Toal, characterizing Johnson as a titanic figure in state legal history, and her father, David D. Johnson, as saying he had spoken with her by phone the night before she died. "I'm a little stunned right now. I don't know what happened. I'm just in mourning," he said.

New Mobility readers will remember Johnson for her signature articles, among them her personal account of her trip to Cuba in 1997 to attend the Second International Conference on the Rights of People with Disabilities. "I can't help being impressed by this ramshackle society tackling the biggest social problems under the most trying circumstances," she concluded.

Her life was marked by an overriding concern for and commitment to defending human rights. Besides being a practicing attorney, Johnson was a well-known political figure in the Charleston area, having served as chair of the Democratic Party executive committee from 1988 to 2001. In 1996 she was a delegate to the Democratic Party National Convention. But it was in her two decades-long opposition to the "pity tactics" of Jerry Lewis' Muscular Dystrophy Telethon that she began to gain national attention as a voice for the dignity of people with disabilities.

Her crowning achievement as a writer may have come with the publication of the February 16, 2003 cover story for the New York Times magazine, in which she described her series of public debates and letter exchanges with controversial Princeton bioethicist, Peter Singer. In that essay, "Unspeakable Conversations," she put forth the seminal disability issue of our time, the right to exist, while exposing the questionable ethics of Singer with her wit and intellect, Southern manners, and her extraordinary writing ability.

"At this stage of my life, I'm Karen Carpenter thin, flesh mostly vanished, a jumble of bones in a floppy bag of skin," she wrote. "To keep myself upright, I lean forward, rest my rib cage on my lap, plant my elbows beside my knees. Since my backbone found its own natural shape, I've been entirely comfortable in my skin."

Johnson was chosen New Mobility's 2003 Person of the Year for persuasively challenging "the myth that people with disabilities are of inherently less value than nondisabled people." In March, 2006, she spoke at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum on "Deadly Medicine," a disability rights perspective on the Nazi "euthanasia" program, which resulted in the gassing of hundreds of thousands of people with disabilities.

Johnson was a familiar figure in Charleston, having lived there since the age of 10. Besides her father, she is survived by her mother, Ada A. Johnson, her sister, Ada A. Johnson, and three brothers, David McBryde Johnson, Eric Austin Johnson and Ross L. Johnson.

Thank you, Harriet. You will be remembered, and always missed.

wmtc3: a success

We had a great day! Lots of people came, about half Campaigners (including two couples who are resisters) and about half other friends of ours. Everyone seemed to have a really good time.

It was hot, but the backyard is shaded in the afternoon and it didn't rain. I did learn that our backyard isn't really big enough for volleyball. People played - but some of them ended up hopping over fences to retrieve the ball from our neighbours' gardens - many times!

The dogs - our two and their two friends - were big hits. Two other dogs hung out in the basement, apparently friendly to people but not their own species.

After everyone ate and drank for a while, I gave a brief spiel about the war resisters. A lot of people watched "Let Them Stay", a short film produced by Alex Lisman for the Campaign. People bought books and t-shirts, dug into their wallets, and pulled out their chequebooks. After everyone left, I counted the money; to my astonishment, we raised around $600! That well exceeded my expectations.

Bloggers and commenters who attended: M@ (with partner), Tom and Emilio, Kim_in_TO, James and L, Nancy (who moved to Canada a week ago!), Ferdzy, a brief appearance by Nick (get well soon, Cian!) and Gito and Mr. Tew. (A special appearance by Idealistic Pragmatist was cancelled due to illness.) Several other wmtc readers who don't blog were there, plus most of the Campaigners.

Overnight guests are still here: my brother and sister-in-law from New Jersey, and Ray and Lindy from Vermont. Now I have to make sure folks get coffee and bagels!

Update: Recount! We raised more than $700! Whoo-hoo!

wmtc3

It's today! People will be arriving in an hour or so. And it's not raining. Yay!

stephen harper: "the prime minister has the moral responsibility to respect the will of the house"

On April 13, 2005, during Question Period, Stephen Harper, then the Leader of the Opposition, said:

Mr. Speaker, last night the House voted to hold a public inquiry into the Air-India tragedy. In fact, members representing every party in this House voted for that motion. The Prime Minister has the moral responsibility to respect the will of the House and the wishes of the families.

Will the Prime Minister respect this vote and immediately call a public inquiry into the Air-India tragedy?

Emphasis added.

Mr. Harper, will the Prime Minister respect this vote and immediately implement a program to allow conscientious objectors and their immediate family members to apply for permanent resident status and remain in Canada; and immediately cease any removal or deportation actions against such individuals?

Don't forget to ask him.

Ask him daily: 613.992.4211 / pm@pm.gc.ca.

our day in ottawa: a few photos

I've updated this post with some photos from our day. Thanks to Charlotte for the photos.

amnesty international statement in support of iraq war resisters in canada

I don't have a link for this yet; I received it by email. Public Statement from Amnesty International:

USA: James Corey Glass has right not to serve in Iraq

Amnesty International believes James Corey Glass to have a genuine conscientious objection to serving as a combatant in the US forces in Iraq, and would consider him to be a prisoner of conscience if imprisoned on his return to the USA. He is facing deportation from Canada on 12 June.

James Glass joined the army in 2002, enlisting in the National Guard where he was assigned to non-combatant duties in the USA. His unit was later ordered to deploy to Iraq, where he served five months of active service in 2005.

According to his statement, he had concerns about the legality of the war before his deployment to Iraq. While serving there, he developed further serious objections to the war, including what he saw as the abusive treatment of civilians by the US military and failure within the system to address such abuses. He stated that, whilst in Iraq, he reported his concerns to his superiors and asked to be relieved of duty. His request was denied but he was granted a two-week leave. He refused to return to his unit and went absent without leave (AWOL) in February 2006.

Since being in Canada, James Glass has become a member of the "War Resisters [Support] Campaign" and has spoken out publicly about his objection to the Iraq war.

US law recognizes the right to conscientious objection only on grounds of opposition to war in any form. James Glass was therefore unable to seek a claim for discharge from the army on grounds of his objection to the Iraq War. Other similar cases where US soldiers have sought to register their conscientious objection and apply for non-combatant status have been turned down.

If returned to the USA he faces a possible court-martial, where he could be imprisoned for between one and five years.

Background Information

Some US military personnel who have refused to deploy to Iraq or Afghanistan due to their conscientious objection to US policy and practice in the "war on terror" have been imprisoned solely for their beliefs. Amnesty International has considered some to be prisoners of conscience who should be released immediately and unconditionally.

Some of these conscientious objectors have been court-martialled and sentenced despite pending applications for conscientious objector status, others were imprisoned after their applications were turned down on the basis that they were objecting to particular wars rather than to war in general.

Amnesty International has declared a number of conscientious objectors in the USA to be prisoners of conscience. They included Camilo Mejia, who was sentenced to one year's imprisonment for his objections to the war in Iraq, and Abdullah Webster, who refused to participate in the same war due to his religious beliefs. Another, Kevin Benderman, was sentenced to 15 months' imprisonment after he refused to re-deploy to Iraq because of the scenes of devastation he witnessed there. Agustín Aguayo was sentenced to eight months’ imprisonment for his refusal to participate in the war in Iraq. All four have since been released.

Amnesty International is of the view that the right to refuse to perform military service for reasons of conscience is inherent in the notion of freedom of thought, conscience and religion as recognised in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

Amnesty International considers a conscientious objector to be any person who, for reasons of conscience or profound conviction, refuses either to perform any form of service in the armed forces or applies for non-combatant status. This can include refusal to participate in a war because one disagrees with its aims or the manner in which it was being waged, even if one does not oppose taking part in all wars.

Wherever such a person is detained or imprisoned solely for these believe, Amnesty International considers that person to be a prisoner of conscience. AI also considers conscientious objectors to be prisoners of conscience if they are imprisoned as a consequence of leaving the armed forces without authorization for reasons of conscience, if because of those reasons; they have taken reasonable steps to secure release from military obligations.

good story on our recent parliamentary victory

Excellent story about the House Of Commons vote on Bloomberg.com.

Canadian opposition lawmakers urged the government to freeze deportations of U.S. soldiers who fled to Canada after refusing to fight in Iraq, passing a non-binding resolution to pressure Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

Opposition parties with a majority of seats in Parliament asked the government to allow "conscientious objectors" to wars not sanctioned by the United Nations, such as the Iraq conflict, to apply for permanent resident status. The resolution urges the Conservative Party government to stop deportations ordered by immigration tribunals. The motion passed by 137 to 110, with the Conservatives voting against.

Harper, who came to power in 2006 promising improved relations with the U.S., hasn't tried to overturn any tribunal decisions ordering U.S. resisters deported. Today's vote conjures up controversial images from the Vietnam War era, when Canada took in thousands of Americans seeking to avoid being drafted or serving when called.

Read it here.

dunkin' donuts responds

In response to my complaint to Dunkin' Donuts regarding pulling the Rachael Ray ad because of rampant wingnuttery, I received this email:

Thank you for sharing your comments. We always appreciate hearing from our customers. The intent of the online ad featuring Rachael Ray wearing a paisley silk scarf was to promote iced coffee. Given the surprising and truly unfortunate interpretation of this ad from some of our consumers, we decided to pull the ad and replace it with another as it is no longer serving its intended purpose, which was to simply promote our iced coffee---nothing more, nothing less.

At Dunkin' Donuts, we value all of our customers and remain steadfastly committed to making your experiences with us both memorable and pleasant. Thank you, again, for making us aware of your concerns; it is appreciated.

Not bad. Basically, we don't need controversy, we need profit, so goodbye controversy. I like their characterization of the bigoted interpretation as "truly unfortunate"; I also like noting that the scarf was paisley.

Keep in mind that an innocuous, predictable response does not mean your message is not getting through. It's still worth complaining. And so easy!

seattle peace activists say "thanks, canada!"

Peace activists held a "Celebration Vigil" in front of the Canadian Consulate in downtown Seattle today. They were celebrating this week's vote in the House of Commons in support of Iraq War resisters in Canada.

Gerry Condon, a Vietnam-era war war resister and long-time anti-war activist, said:

We are here today to thank the Canadian people for providing shelter to our war resisters. You have provided them with homes, with food, with friendship, with legal representation and with political support. We especially want to thank the Canadian unions, churches, artists and activists who make up the War Resisters Support Campaign, which has worked so hard to ensure that war resisters are treated as refugees and not as criminals. Peace-loving people in the United States will be forever grateful.

But this will be a hollow victory if the Conservative government is allowed to flout the will of the Canadian people and act more like a surrogate for George Bush. We demand an end to deportation proceedings against Corey Glass and all war resisters.

Gerry runs Project Safe Haven, an advocacy group for Iraq War resisters. Project Safe Haven plans to present the Canadian Consul with a cake that says, "Thank You, Canada," and a t-shirt reading, "Support Our AWOL Troops."

Gerry again:

George Bush does not support our troops. He has lied to them, and he is using them as cannon fodder in a war that never should have happened. The taxpayers are paying billions of dollars for this war, much of it going to US corporations. But George Bush says we cannot afford a decent GI Bill.

Is it any wonder that opposition to the war is growing among active duty GIs? These brave Soldiers, Sailors, Marines and Airmen have the power to bring an end to the illegal U.S. occupation of Iraq.

Gerry, Canada thanks you back!

chris hedges and "collateral damage"

You'll recall that when I read Chris Hedges' modern classic War Is A Force That Gives Us Meaning, I couldn't stop posting about it. (Here, here, here and here.) It's a gripping, stomach-churning and eye-opening account of the psychology and reality of war.

Hedges has a new book, Collateral Damage - America's War Against Iraqi Civilians, co-authored by Laila al-Arian. TomDispatch describes it "two-person version of . . . Winter Soldier".

You can read an extended excerpt here. I'd warn you not to read this before sleep, or while you're eating, or anytime you don't want to cry.

When you support military resistance, you are supporting people who said no to this horror, and who said yes to peace.

wmtc3 minus 2 and counting

Two days until our party/fundraiser. Time to start obsessing on the weather and last-minute cancellations. (It's going to rain! No one's going to show up! A disaster!)

Just kidding.

Sort of.

Ten days until we leave for Newfoundland. On the bus up to Ottawa, I sat with a Campaigner who is a Newfie and learned lots of fun stuff. Guess what? We don't fly back from Deer Lake. We fly back from Deer Lake.

And of course, that's in Newfoundland. Rhymes with understand.

how the us supports its troops

What about the Iraq War veterans still in the US? How are they doing? (All emphasis added.)

Eighteen American war veterans kill themselves every day. One thousand former soldiers receiving care from the Department of Veterans Affairs attempt suicide every month. More veterans are committing suicide than are dying in combat overseas.

These are statistics that most Americans don't know, because the Bush administration has refused to tell them. Since the start of the Iraq War, the government has tried to present it as a war without casualties.

In fact, they never would have come to light were it not for a class action lawsuit brought by Veterans for Common Sense and Veterans United for Truth on behalf of the 1.7 million Americans who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan. The two groups allege the Department of Veterans Affairs has systematically denied mental health care and disability benefits to veterans returning from the conflict zones.

And:

Within a six-week period in 2002, three Special Forces sergeants returned from Afghanistan and murdered their wives at Fort Bragg in North Carolina. Two immediately turned their guns on themselves; the third hanged himself in a jail cell. A fourth soldier at the same Army base also killed his wife during those six weeks.

At the beginning of this wartime period, the cluster of murder-suicides set off alarms about the possible link between combat tours and domestic violence, a link supported by a study published that year in the journal Military Medicine. The killings also reinvigorated the concerns about military domestic violence that had led to the formation of the Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence two years earlier.

National attention to the subject was short-lived. But an examination by The Times found more than 150 cases of fatal domestic violence or child abuse in the United States involving service members and new veterans during the wartime period that began in October 2001 with the invasion of Afghanistan.

. . . .

Connie Sponsler-Garcia, another task force member, who now works on domestic violence projects with the Pentagon, agreed.

"Whereas something was a high priority before, now it's: 'Oh, dear, we have a war. Well get back to you in a few months,'" she said.

The fatalities examined by The New York Times show a military system that tries and sometimes fails to balance the demands of fighting a war with those of eradicating domestic violence.

According to interviews with law enforcement officials and court documents, the military has sent to war service members who had been charged with and even convicted of domestic violence crimes.

Deploying such convicted service members to a war zone violates military regulations and, in some cases, federal law.

Take the case of Sgt. Jared Terrasas. The first time that he was deployed to Iraq, his prosecution for domestic violence was delayed. Then, after pleading guilty, he was pulled out of a 16-week batterers intervention program run by the Marine Corps and sent to Iraq again.

Several months after Sergeant Terrasas returned home, his 7-month-old son died of a brain injury, and the marine was charged with his murder.

Deployment to war, with its long separations, can put serious stress on military families. And studies have shown that recurrent deployments heighten the likelihood of combat trauma, which, in turn, increases the risk of domestic violence.

"The more trauma out there, the more likely domestic violence is," said Dr. Jacquelyn C. Campbell, a professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Nursing who also was a member of the Pentagon task force.

The Times examined several cases in which mental health problems caused or exacerbated by war pushed already troubled families to a deadly breaking point.

In one instance, the Air Force repeatedly deployed to Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere Sgt. Jon Trevino, a medic with a history of psychological problems, including post-traumatic stress disorder.

Multiple deployments eroded Sergeant Trevino's marriage and worsened his mental health problems until, in 2006, he killed his wife, Carol, and then himself.

The military declared his suicide "service related."

And:

U.S. Air Force Technical Sergeant Jeffrey VerSteegh, who repairs F-16 jets for the 132nd Fighter Wing, departed Des Moines, Iowa, in April for his third tour in Iraq. The father of four may lose his home when he returns.

The four-bedroom farmhouse he and his wife, Kathleen, own near the Iowa State Fairgrounds went into default in December after their monthly mortgage costs doubled to $1,100. Kathleen missed work because of breast cancer and they struggled to keep up the house payment, falling behind on other bills. Their bankruptcy was approved by the court a week after VerSteegh left for Iraq.

In the midst of the worst surge in mortgage defaults in seven decades, foreclosures in U.S. towns where soldiers live are increasing at a pace almost four times the national average, according to data compiled by research firm RealtyTrac Inc. in Irvine, California. As military families like the VerSteeghs signed up for the initial lower rates and easier terms of subprime mortgages, the number of people taking out Veterans Administration loans fell to the lowest in at least 12 years.

"We've never faced a situation like this, not in the Vietnam War, World War II, or the Korean War, where so many military are in danger of losing their homes," said Paul Sullivan, executive director of Veterans for Common Sense, a Washington-based advocacy group started in 2002 by Iraq and Afghanistan War veterans. "No one asked them for their credit score when we asked them to fight for us."

War Resister Corey Glass has been widely quoted as saying he joined the National Guard to help people in times of emergency, that he should have been filling sandbags in Louisiana, but instead was shipped to Iraq.

While the US is draining its people's tax dollars to protect KBR shareholders, what about those people Corey wanted to help? Many of them are still homeless - or about to be.

Joe Stevens used to be a commercial fisherman - until diabetes took his legs.

He used to have a daughter - until her suicide left him caring for two of her three children.

He used to have a house in the Lyman community - until a tornado spun from Hurricane Katrina took that too.

Stevens, 52, now is facing the loss of the mobile home he has been living in for the better part of two years.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency is working to draw its emergency-housing program to a close by March 2009, but some deadlines are earlier. Stevens said he was told he had until today to find an apartment, although FEMA officials deny threatening anyone with that deadline.

"They are trying to get us out of here," Stevens said. "I'm just having trouble getting up a deposit."

It has been 33 months since Hurricane Katrina hit the Mississippi Gulf Coast. Much has been accomplished since that day, Aug. 29, 2005, but the toughest part of the recovery lies ahead.

There are 6,334 FEMA trailers and mobile homes still in use on the Coast, housing about 16,600 people. Approximately 1,200 others are in motel rooms, having been moved out of trailers by FEMA because of high formaldehyde levels.

As the Coast enters its third hurricane season since Katrina, advocates say those without a permanent home are most vulnerable.

An analysis of FEMA households at the beginning of May by the Back Bay Mission, a faith-based organization assisting Katrina survivors on the Coast, found that 82 percent of occupants made below-average income and one in three were over 60, had special needs or both.

Dena Wittman of Back Bay said many of them have been left out of the recovery.

"It's those with the lower incomes, those who are on fixed incomes who often are disabled, and those who are the working poor who essentially were able to make it without any type of subsidies from the government prior to Katrina," she said. "They are not able to afford to live in their communities now."

Wittman said housing prices have risen 40 percent since the storm but salaries have not. Add to that higher food and gas prices, and the situation has gotten worse.

Looking at this from another angle, is it any wonder that people living under these conditions join the military in order to get food, shelter and healthcare?

Canada needs to stand behind the people who managed to break free of this terrible cycle of forced poverty and violence. And in fact, Canada has already spoken: we want to be a refuge from militarism. Put it on your daily to-do list to call Stephen Harper and Diane Finley.

Remind them that Canada is a democracy. They're supposed to carry out the will of the people, and that is: Let Them Stay. Details here.

the day in ottawa

Although wmtc has become Resister Central, it is also still my personal blog, and the only place I record my observations of my world. So if some newer readers who have come over from the War Resister Support Campaign website thinking "wtf?" about this post, at least long-time readers will understand.

Allan gave you the run-down of the day while I was gone; now I'll fill in the blanks.

I almost had nothing to report: a lane closure on the Gardiner almost made me miss the bus! That was a little hairy, but Allan got me to 25 Cecil Street before the bus pulled away - and I was grateful to learn I wasn't the last one to get on. Thankfully a resister family with children showed up a bit later, and you know we weren't leaving without them!

On the ride up, people were tense. The younger resisters were joking around, but the banter sounded strained. The older resisters were quiet. Campaigners were more buoyant, but everyone was nervous.

One of my favourite things about this Campaign is how multigenerational it is. On the bus I had an opportunity to connect with one of our elder campaigners, a Quaker who has housed several resisters. I would have thought he was old enough to be my father, but I learned I am the same age as his grandchildren.

This man has been an activist all his life. On the same bus are former soldiers just out of high school, getting their first taste of working for change. And everyone else on the bus spans the ages in between.

We were told if we got there before 1:30, we would get into Question Period. The gallery was expected to be packed, so there was an overflow room set up in Jack Layton's office where we could also watch the proceedings on TV. Olivia Chow arranged passes for the members' gallery, where there would be more room than in the public gallery.

So we queued up, and waited. And waited. And waited. We weren't being allowed in, and we were starting to worry that the vote would go on while we were stuck in limbo.

Finally we were told there was only room for ten more people in the members' gallery, five from our group and five others. So five resisters - including Corey Glass and Josh Key (who came in from Saskatoon) went in - and the rest of us waited for Jack Layton's aide to get us upstairs.

But guess what? Later, at the pub, those guys told us there were two rows of empty seats in the Members Gallery. We were kept out.

Question Period ran late, and thank something, because we had barely squeezed in the two little board rooms when the vote was called. As you know, all our hopes hung on the Liberal Party, as we knew the NDP and the Bloc were on our side. When Stéphane Dion stood up, a huge whoop went up, and the same for Ignatieff.

It was very hard to sit through all the Tory nays. They seemed to go on for a very long time. Harper wasn't there for the vote. (Neither were some of our key Liberal supporters. We don't yet know why.)

And then, we won! And then the business of Parliament resumed. Just like that. We won.

People hugged and cried, but honestly, it was a little muted. I think people were stunned, and exhausted, and even a little confused. My friend Jamine Aponte, who is married to war resister Phil McDowell, was sobbing uncontrollably.

From there we went to the senate room, where Olivia Chow - who I call the Patron Saint of the Resisters - had a reception prepared for us. (She joked that the war resisters had taken over the Senate.) That's when I called Allan, so I was able to report to the campaign that wmtc had the news up immediately, and the Canada News Wire story had appeared within minutes of the vote.

Olivia spoke briefly, as did Meili Faille, our champion in the Bloc Québécois. Campaign coordinator Lee Zaslofsky acknowledged our supporters and our guiding light Michelle Robidoux. (More on Michelle later.) Lee acknowledged a few resisters who had done extraordinary work - Josh Key and Phil and Jamine - then all the resisters in the room. Jack Layton also made a short statement, and presented a miniature of the House of Commons to the Campaign.

Olivia also had certificates of honourary Canadian citizenship for all the resisters, in leather-bound folders like a diploma. I haven't even gotten one of those yet!

From there, thankfully, we went to a nearby pub, the same place we celebrated after our Committee victory in December. Only then did I realize how tense and quiet people had been. Drinking and laughing with Phil and Jamine, I realized it had been weeks since I'd seen Phil smile. Corey's smile can light up a room, and when I saw how happy he looked, I swear I almost started to cry again. (How convoluted is that?) So we drank and laughed and savoured.

All but one of us, whose cell phone never left her ear, and who won't let herself stop to enjoy this, because more work remains on the horizon. But as I said, more on that later.

Then it was back on the bus. Turns out we didn't stop at the LCBO (although a flask made the rounds), but we'll have plenty of time to celebrate.

I called Allan from the bus and he was waiting for me on Cecil Street. The Campaign meets tomorrow night to plan a Saturday action in Port Dover, riding of one Diane Finley. I'll skip this meeting, because when the Port Dover action ends, everyone is coming to our house!

I have a big pile of things to blog about - non-resister topics, even - but this Saturday is wmtc3 and time is tight. Going up to Ottawa the week before our party wasn't exactly on my schedule! I'm not sure how much time I'll have to blog or what I'll be able to get up.

Thank you for reading, and my deepest thanks for your support.

* * * *

Here are a few photos from the day; click to enlarge.

Nervously watching the vote.



Looks like we're on the verge of a win here.



Meili Faille and Olivia Chow address the group. The woman in the white jacket is Sue Barnes, Liberal MP from London, Ontario, who supports the Iraq War resisters in Canada.



Olivia Chow with war resister Patrick Hart. Alex Atamanenko, NDP MP from British Columbia is in the background.



Jamine Aponte and Phil McDowell. Phil volunteered for the army after 9/11. He was sent to Iraq, where he witnessed war crimes, and saw the reason for the invasion was a lie. After he was honourably discharged, Phil intended to separate from the army. But he was stop-lossed: involuntarily re-enlisted with no legal way out.



A group of happy resisters.



All the resisters who were able to go to Ottawa for the vote.

Many thanks to Charlotte for these terrific photos.

best. day. ever. (so far)

What a day! What a friggin wonderful day!

As you already know, we won our recent and long-fought-for battle. The House of Commons voted 137 to 110 to allow Iraq War resisters to stay in Canada.

Now one more piece of the puzzle remains: to persuade the Harper Government to carry out the will of the people.

As you know, the motion that passed yesterday is technically non-binding. It does not technically compel the Government to act.

I use that word "technically" because, if Canada is a democracy, the motion must be morally binding. Stephen Harper leads a minority government. He is not supposed to be a dictator. He is not supposed to have the final say.

In Canada, the final say is supposed to come from Parliament, the elected representatives of the Canadian people. And the majority of those elected representatives have now spoken.

So if we want to keep Corey Glass - and all his brother and sister resisters - safe and free in Canada, we must continue to work. We have a short window of opportunity before Corey's threatened deportation date, after which Parliament will rise. So we will be very busy.

Two things you can do right now.

First, please email or call your own MP. If she or he voted yes yesterday, say thank you. If she or he voted no, express your disappointment.

Second - and third, fourth, fifth - call Diane Finley, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. You can do this every day. I sure will. You can call Mr. Harper's office, too.

Tell both Harper and Finley that you expect them to carry out the will of the Canadian people: to cease all deportation proceedings against Corey Glass and other Iraq War resisters, and to implement a program that will allow them to stay in Canada.

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Diane Finley
613.996.4974
finley.d@parl.gc.ca / finled1@parl.gc.ca

Prime Minister Stephen Harper
613.992.4211
pm@pm.gc.ca

parliament says: "let them stay!"

[Guest post from Allan/redsock]

The motion has passed!

The House of Commons has voted in favour of the resolution that demands the Harper government immediately cease all deportation proceedings against any Iraq War resisters currently in Canada and allow all resisters and their families to remain in Canada and apply for permanent residence.

Vote total announced as Yea: 137 & Nay: 110!!

It was a very simple procedure: The motion was read and then voted on. Yeas stood and were counted, then the Nays. The totals were announced, the speaker declared the motion passed, and they moved on to the next item.

***

First news item I found (posted 3:16 PM):

House of Commons votes to let U.S. War Resisters stay in Canada

OTTAWA, June 3 /CNW/ - The Opposition parties in the House of Commons joined together today to adopt a recommendation which, if implemented, would make it possible for U.S. Iraq War resisters to obtain Permanent Resident status in Canada.

The recommendation was adopted by a majority of Members of Parliament from the Liberal, Bloc Québécois, and New Democratic Parties. The Conservatives voted against the motion.

The motion, which originated in the House of Commons Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration in December 2007, calls on the government to "immediately implement a program to allow conscientious objectors and their immediate family members ... to apply for permanent resident status and remain in Canada; and ... the government should immediately cease any removal or deportation actions ... against such individuals."

Corey Glass, 25, a war resister who came to Canada in 2006 and was recently told to leave Canada by June 12 or face removal to the United States, welcomed the vote. "I'm thankful that the MPs voted to let me and the other war resisters stay in Canada. I'm also thankful to all the Canadians who urged their MPs to support us."

"This is a great victory for the courageous men and women who have come to Canada because they refuse to take part in the illegal, immoral Iraq War, and for the many organizations and individuals who have supported this campaign over the past four years," said Lee Zaslofsky, Coordinator of the War Resisters Support Campaign and a Vietnam War deserter who came to Canada in 1970.

The War Resisters Support Campaign is calling on the Conservative government to respect the democratic decision of the Canadian Parliament and immediately implement the motion and cease deportation proceedings against Corey Glass and other war resisters.

house of commons: watching the vote

[Guest post from Allan/redsock]

Laura is in Ottawa today with the rest of the Toronto members of the War Resisters Campaign for this afternoon's historic vote in the House of Commons to allow Iraq War resisters from the US to remain in Canada.

The three opposition parties have indicated that their members will vote Yes on the motion. If that happens, Harper's minority government, while in power, cannot defeat the motion. Once it passes, Harper has two choices: obey the motion or give a huge middle finger to Parliament and a clear majority of Canadian voters.

I'll be watching on CPAC (watch online here) and will provide running commentary in comments. Feel free to tune in and follow along!

This is the text of the motion:

The Committee recommends that the government immediately implement a program to allow conscientious objectors and their immediate family members (partners and dependents), who have refused or left military service related to a war not sanctioned by the United Nations and do not have a criminal record, to apply for permanent resident status and remain in Canada; and that the government should immediately cease any removal or deportation actions that may have already commenced against such individuals.

As I said in the thread below, I'm not sure if the vote is at 3 PM or if the session that will include the vote begins at that time. Either way, I'll be back at 3 PM.

house of commons votes today: let them stay!

Well, this is it. We're going up to Ottawa today to watch the historic vote. You can watch too, on CPAC if you get it, or here, at 3:00.

I'm so excited! My stomach is in knots. If I feel like this, I can only imagine what my friends the resisters are feeling, and the campaigners who have been working on this three times as long as me.

Thank you to everyone who made those phone calls yesterday. Allan will guest-post with updates. Stay tuned!

bo diddley

Rock pioneer Bo Diddley is dead at age 79.

Diddley never shied away from speaking about how African-American musicians of his generation were ripped off by producers and promoters.

His music was often imitated and built upon, but the man himself was a pure original. How many musicians have a beat named after them?

today: day of action in support of iraq war resisters in canada

The Campaign is on the verge of a huge victory, and it didn't materialize out of thin air.

Tomorrow's historic vote in the House of Commons will be the product of years of patient hard work and dedication on the part of Campaigners, resisters and supporters - community organizations, labour unions, faith groups - peace activists, immigration activists and regular old concerned people.

One thing is extremely obvious: public support - letters, emails, phone calls, and petitions - has made all the difference. I can't emphasize this enough.

Some Members of Parliament have supported the war resisters all along. The NDP and the Bloc have been on board from the start. But although some Liberal MPs did personally support allowing Iraq War resisters to remain in Canada, the Liberal Party was noncomittal. Now they have made it their issue.

The Liberals didn't change their stance only because it was the right thing to do. They were persuaded that it was politically advantageous for them to do so.

So what I'm asking you to do today is not an empty exercise. It's how we have built this movement and how we will win.

Today, we need to ensure two things: that all of our MPs know how we want them to vote tomorrow, and that the Harper government knows how we feel.

Canadian readers, today, please take a few moments and make three phone calls. Please call and e-mail:

1. Your own Member of Parliament. Tell her or him that you want them to support the motion and appear for the vote in the House of Commons on Tuesday.

Find your MP's contact info here or Google their name for their website and contact info.

2. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Diane Finley
613.996.4974
finley.d@parl.gc.ca / finled1@parl.gc.ca

3. Prime Minister Stephen Harper
613.992.4211
pm@pm.gc.ca

Tell them you want the Government of Canada to:

drop the deportation order against US war resister Corey Glass, and cease all deportation proceedings against war resisters,

support US war resisters, not Bush's war in Iraq, and

support the motion to allow Iraq war resisters to remain in Canada.

As wmtc readers have said in comments, if you are not familiar with calling your representatives, it is very painless! You can say something like "I live in ____ and I'd like to leave a message for _____." (Sometimes the first person who answers has to transfer you to someone else.) Then say "I'm calling to urge ______ to _____."

The person on the other end is always friendly and will say nothing more than "thank you for calling, I'll pass on your concerns". You don't even have to leave your name if you don't want to.

Readers outside of Canada, you can call the nearest Canadian embassy and leave the same message. Here is a list of Canadian embassies in the U.S. In other countries, Google "Canadian Embassy in [your country]".

Thank you! Tomorrow I will be in Ottawa for the vote; Allan will update wmtc as we have info.

the truth about the supposedly volunteer u.s. army

From the Rutland (Vermont) Herald:

Because of the arrogant, corrupt lies of George W. Bush and his neocon handlers my nephew is dead, and I am mad as hell.

My nephew, my sister's son, died in Iraq a few days before this Memorial Day.

Jason Dene was not killed by enemy fire nor friendly fire but by Bush's brutal and cynical stop-loss program.

Jason grew up in Orwell and Rutland. He was in his mid-30s, a career Army officer due retire next month. His wife and children were planning his homecoming.

Because of Bush's abusive stop-loss policy, Jason had been sent into an unwanted third tour of duty. He was a father of three and could not afford to lose his pension. Some "volunteer Army".

During his three 15-month tours in Iraq, exposure to roadside bombs and other job-related injuries caused Jason to be hospitalized several times for concussion and internal bleeding and other injuries. Recently, Jason's condition was such that the Department of Defense flew him from Iraq to Dover Air Force Base for surgery. He was released from the hospital into the loving arms of the government who sent him directly back into Iraq. He was put on active duty while he was still on a liquid diet, unable to eat solid food because of a throat hemorrhage due to a botched surgery at a military hospital.

To date all the family has heard from the Army is that Jason variously died "in his sleep" and "in his bunk" and "in his quarters" and my favorite "sleep apnea complicated by smoking cigarettes," in other words, natural causes.

After his second tour Jason returned home with severe mental and physical issues. He was certainly in no condition to be pressed into a third tour. He wanted out of the army. But Jason was a victim of the liar's back-door draft.

The administration knows the war could not continue if the draft was reinstated, hence the criminally deceptive stop-loss program. At all costs, the administration wants to avoid Vietnam-scale student protests. In this case the cost fell on Jason, whose death will not be included as a war casualty. Jason Dene will not be buried at Arlington National Cemetery; he will just sort of ... disappear quietly (they hope).

How many others have died in Iraq of "natural causes," the soldiers we will never hear about?

Because of George Bush, the arrogant, the corrupt, the liar, the war criminal, my nephew is dead and my sister and the rest of my family are devastated.

Yes, I am very, very angry. How would you feel?

Patrick V. Farrow
Castleton, Vermont

Patrick Farrow is the brother of actor and activist Mia Farrow. Jason Dene was their nephew.

Thank you to Greg Mitchell, editor of Editor and Publisher and a steadfast steadfast voice for peace, for highlighting this and to Allan for the heads-up.

war resisters visit minister finley

This weekend, a group of resisters and campaigners did their usual tabling and petitioning in an unusual place: the small town of Port Dover, Ontario. Near Simcoe, in Norfolk County, on the shores of Lake Erie, Port Dover is a Conservative riding.

Port Dover's Member of Parliament is the Honourable Diane Finley, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.

In this small, mostly Conservative town, people went out of their way to sign the petition in support of allowing Iraq War resisters to stay in Canada, to donate money, to meet the war resisters and wish them well. Of course support was not unanimous. But it was strong.

Here's a video snapshot of the day.

If When things go our way on Tuesday - when the House of Commons votes in favour of resolution - Ms. Finley is going to be hearing a lot from us.

eyes on the prize

After a huge organizing and strategy meeting with the War Resisters Support Campaign, I am thinking of the lyrics to a song from the US civil rights movement. Most recently, Bruce Springsteen recorded it as part of "We Shall Overcome: The Seeger Sessions".

"The Seeger Sessions" is a tribute to legendary folk singer and activist Pete Seeger, and to people's movements in general. Springsteen took some standard (and, frankly, dusty) folk tunes and cranked them full of rootsy rythmn. The results bubble with the sounds of gospel, country, Irish, mountain and blues music.

Eyes On The Prize is also the title of an amazing documentary about the civil rights movement, created by activist producer Henry Hampton.

Anyway, these are the lines going through my head.

The only thing that I did wrong
Was stayin' in the wilderness too long
(Keep your eyes on the prize... hold on)

The only thing that we did right
Was the day we started to fight
(Keep your eyes on the prize... hold on)

Note the shift from the singular I to the plural we.

For the past year, it has been my honour and privilege to be part of this we. We are so close to winning this fight. This will be a win for war resistance - a win for Canada - a win for peace.

More soon. Get ready to help us.

welcome to the blogosphere, kim in t.o.

Friend of wmtc Kim_In_TO has graduated from commenter-only to blogger!

My Canada Includes Justice is where Kim K will be "fighting war, racism, sexism, homophobia, and injustice - anywhere and everywhere". Nicely done!