The St. Patrick's
Four Return to Trial
By Leigh Saavedra
17 September, 2005
Countercurrents.org
"If you
fall on the side that is pro-George, and pro-war, you get your ass over
to Iraq, and take the place of somebody who wants to come home. And
if you fall on the side that is against this war and against George
Bush, stand up and speak out." --
Cindy Sheehan,
mother of Casey Sheehan, who was killed in Iraq.
On
Monday, September 19, the rights of all peace activists go on trial.
Representing us are four Catholic anti-war activists who have already
stood trial for their stand against the invasion of Iraq. Now, more
than two years later, cleared of the original charge of criminal mischief,
they are being charged with conspiracy and will be tried again.
THE ACCUSED: Four
Catholic Workers from Ithaca, NY. Daniel Burns works in the film industry
and traveled to Iraq in 2003 to promote peace and reconciliation. Clare
Grady has worked for seventeen years as a kitchen coordinator at Loaves
and Fishes Community Kitchen, a ministry that feeds the hungry. Peter
De Mott is a former marine who served in Vietnam, then joined the army
and took a NATO post as a linguist. Peter too has traveled to Iraq as
part of a Christian Peacemaker Team. Teresa Grady is a dance instructor
and founder of the Ithaca Catholic Worker community with a long history
of working with the homeless.
THE CRIME: On March
17, 2003, Dan, Clare, Peter, and Teresa entered a military recruiting
center in Lansing, New York, and poured a half cup of their own blood
around the vestibule. No one was prevented from entering or leaving
the recruiting center as they then knelt and read the following statement:
"Our apologies,
dear friends, for the fracture of good order. As our nation prepares
to escalate the war on the people of Iraq by sending hundreds of thousands
of U.S. soldiers to invade, we pour our blood on the walls of this military
recruiting center. We mark this recruiting office with our own blood
to remind ourselves and others of the cost in human life of our government's
war making.
"Killing is
wrong. Preparations for killing are wrong. The work done by the Pentagon
with the connivance of this military recruiting station ends with the
shedding of blood, and God tells us to turn away from it. Blood is the
symbol of life. All life is holy. All people are created in the image
and
likeness of God. All people are family, and everyone is loved by God.
"Dr. Martin
Luther King reminds us that'...we are called to speak for the weak,
for the voiceless, for the victims of our nation, for those it calls
"enemy," for no document from human hands can make these humans
any less our brothers [and sisters].'
"We come here
today with pictures of Iraqi people -- mothers, children, those who
have been the victims of U.S. bombardment and sanctions for the past
twelve years. We also come here with love in our hearts for the U.S.
service people, also victims of war making.
"We find hope
in these dark times when sisters and brothers around the world resist
the spirit of hatred and violence, lift up prayers for peace -- together
with works for peace.
"The St. Patrick's
Four"
The following month
the four were tried for criminal mischief. Nine of the twelve jurors
voted to acquit them, and after twenty hours of deliberation, the judge
declared a mistrial. At such declaration the crowded courtroom gave
the Four a standing ovation. The District Attorney said that he would
not re-prosecute them, expecting that another jury would yield the same
verdict.
A year later, however,
the U.S. government decided to retry the four peace activists, this
time on the more serious charges of conspiracy. Technically, they are
charged with conspiracy to impede "by force, intimidation and threat"
an officer of the United States and three lesser charges. The trial
begins Monday, September 19, and if the four are convicted, the penalty
could be up to six years in prison and $250,000 in fines.
This will be the
first federal conspiracy trial arising out of civil resistance to the
invasion of Iraq. It will also be the first federal conspiracy trial
of anti-war protesters since Viet Nam.
When Dan, Clare,
Peter, and Teresa cut themselves and drew their own blood to make a
powerful statment about the feared invasion they were not alone. A month
earlier, throughout the world, primarily in Europe but including such
remote places as Antartica, people appeared by the millions to demand
that no such war be started. The U.N. Security Council had not sanctioned
it, so that aside from the immorality of attacking a sovereign country
without the means to defend itself, the invasion was illegal both through
lack of U.N. approval and through the breaking of the Nuremberg Principles,
ratified by the U.S. in 1950.
Since that day,
much has happened. The people of the world, even in those countries
where a leader sides with George Bush, such as Britain and Italy, remain
staunchly against the invasion and occupation.
From recent personal
experience I saw the popular response of people that Bush considers
"allies." In May, in Italy, I noticed anti-Bush graffiti on
the walls of the narrow streets of Rome and Florence, some of it strongly-worded.
While we were there, there was one demonstration against the so-called
war. An artist near the Uffizi got into a heated conversation with me,
though we were both on the same side.
"At first,"
he said, "we just thought the people of your country didn't know
better. Bush wasn't that well-known. But then, he broke all the rules.
He ignored the world and started a criminal war. We thought he was through,
but then he was re-elected. WHY?"
I couldn't answer,
still can't. I also couldn't find an Italian who supported the so-called
war against Iraq.
The great blind
nationalism that props up support for what Bush did and does is eroding
now, according to all the polls. The initial reason for attacking Iraq,
to rid the country of its weapons of mass destruction, was rendered
null when it was discovered that Iraq had no wmd. Further, there have
been strong indications that the planning of the war began long before
the attack on the New York Trade Center on 9-11, so that many now think
that weapons of mass destruction was never an issue, only a call to
raise fears and consequent war support. The "evidence," it
began to appear, was created to support the neocon desire to conquer
Iraq, whether for its oil or for a better foothold in the mideast or
for the economic boon to a few who profit at exponential rates from
war.
The erosion of support
for the so-called "war" (I do not refer to the invasion/occupation
as a war, as Iraq had no real means of defending itself) seems to be
based primarily on costs - monetary and human lives. Over a hundred
and ninety-four BILLION dollars have been spent, and we do not yet have
the man who was allegedly behind 9-ll, Osama bin Laden. Many would question
whether the handful of true terrorists the U.S. has killed are worth
that much, an amount that could have fully funded global anti-hunger
efforts for eight years, or could have provided four-year scholarships
at public universities for almost TEN MILLION STUDENTS.
Worse for many is
the cost in human lives. Approximately 1900 U.S. soldiers have been
lost in Iraq. Another 94 British and a total of 94 more from other countries
who have sent token support. The numbers of Iraqi deaths, mostly civilians,
soars, estimated to be as high as 35,000 by some counts (www.iraqbodycount.com)
and closer to 100,000 by other independent studies.
This was the "war"
that the St. Patrick's Four spilled their own blood to try to stop.
And now, with the war machine down in the polls and the civil war in
Iraq growing more violent and claiming more lives each day, it appears
that breaking the Nuremberg Principles is something that will haunt
the United States for years, as we fight to regain a measure of world
respect. Many people from many countries have voted George Bush the
greatest terrorist threat on earth.
None of these points,
none of the evidence that the war was based on mistakes and lies, is
allowed as part of the defense of the St. Patrick's Four. Not in the
coming trial. Further, the Four are under a gag
order, unable to discuss their reasons for demonstrating their objections
as they did.
To counter the gag
order, a large support group for the Four has been set up in Binghamton,
New York, where the trial will be held. I spoke with William Meyer of
the group today, and he hesitantly mentioned the number 200 for the
number of people expected. A moment later, he added, "A thousand
is possible."
For such numbers,
Citizens Tribunals are set up as seminars on what is happening in Iraq,
the facts that the Four are not allowed to mention. These meetings and
speeches will continue throughout at least the early days of the trial,
certainly throughout jury selection. Among the moderators are James
Petras, author and editor of over 60 books, including the acclaimed
Globalization Unmasked: Imperialism in the 21st Century. Ray McGovern,
former CIA analyst, and Ann Wright, who resigned from the U.S. Foreign
Service on March 19, 2003 to protest the invasion of Iraq, will be involved
in the tribunals.
It is in this way,
this control over us when we don't conform to the neocon notion of "patriotism,"
that all of us who fight media manipulation of news and the ongoing
fighting itself are in danger. If four ordinary parents are not allowed
to make a somewhat graphic display of their objections to the war, then
how can we assume that to write of the blundering mistakes and deceit
of George Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld is not an invitation
for a knock on the door, an arrest, a trial?
My empirical bent
does not allow me to be lax with conspiracy theories. I'm not cut that
way, nor are most of the writers I know. But if Clare Grady, who has
spent most of her adulthood working to feed the hungry is not allowed
to cut herself and mark a spot with her own blood, how can a writer
who regularly accuses George Bush of being a liar feel secure about
his or her ongoing freedom. What about the very act of attending a march,
such as the one approaching on September 24, the walking and chanting
and carrying a sign that says, "Bush lies" or "No more
blood for oil"?
How safe is dissent?
As much as we care about four brave individuals who did what they could
to stop the invasion in 2003, we must go beyond them and consider the
thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands, who wear anti-war or anti-Bush
tee-shirts, who attend rallies, who write letters to the editor. Dare
they keep their bumper stickers?
The fact that these
four pacifists are being tried again, even after the war has been shown
to most people's satisfaction to have been a mistake, and worse, that
they are not allowed to express their feelings or use the illegality
of the war in their defense throws open doors and windows that even
the
most cynical weren't truly expecting two years ago.
Whether our constitutional
right to freedom of speech will live or not is the point. What happens
in Binghamton, New York in the coming week or weeks will probably be
a barometer. If Daniel, Clare, Peter and Teresa are found to be guilty
of conspiracy, then all those who vocally support them are guilty.
And if we are, then
our darkest fears grown out of the so-called Patriot Act have grown
as real as a match being held out, then tearing our constitution into
flames and ashes.
__________
Further details
about the accused and about the case are in a detailed and abundant
website at:
http://www.stpatricksfour.org/index.php
Along with other
information available through the website is a letter that people may
sign, showing support for the Four. There is also contact information
for those who want to actively expose this event and show their objections
not only to the invasion and occupation of Iraq but to the re-trying
of four people who attempted with their own blood to do their part in
stopping the invasion of a sovereign country.
Please go to the
website. Please sign the letter. And if you're near Binghamton in New
York, consider attending the trial and lending your support.
For all of us who
speak out, this is about US.
__________
Leigh Saavedra has
written poetry, fiction, and political essays for several years under
the name Lisa Walsh Thomas. Her second book, "The Girl with Yellow
Flowers in her Hair," is a collection of dissident articles, available
through http://www.whatIdidinthewar.com