Thursday, January 20, 2022

OMNI RUSSIA NEWSLETTER #9, 1-20-22

 

OMNI

RUSSIA NEWSLETTER #9,

Compiled by Dick Bennett for a Culture of Peace, Justice, and Ecology.

(#1 March 21, 2014; #2 April 10, 2014; #3 May 16, 2014; #4 July 22, 2014; #5 March 10, 2015; #6 Sept. 1, 2016; #7, October 3, 2017; #8, Nov. 10, 2021)

http://omnicenter.org/donate/

 

 CONTENTS RUSSIA NEWSLETTER #9

WAYS US WARRIORS GO TO  WAR

Bruce Gagnon.   What is the US Agenda? NATO Expansion And Regime Change in Russia

George Paulson.  Russophobia

Biden. Putin a Killer
John Pilger. “In Ukraine, the US is dragging us towards war with Russia.”

Matt Taibbi.  10 Ways to Call Something Russian Disinformation Without Evidence.”

Alan MacLeod.  False Bounty Claim.
McGovern, Russiagate
Boyd-Barrett, Russiagate as “puerile narrative.”
Galloway.  Macron: the Problem is USA
Russia’s 100,000 Troops
Grossman.  NATO Maneuvers.
WAYS TO PEACE
Hobson. Reverse NATO Expansion and US Leave NATO
Dick.  Critical Thinking Through Language

 

TEXTS  #9

Bruce Gagnon, The US Agenda
Clinton violated U.S. promise to Mikhail Gorbachev that after the fall of the former Soviet Union, NATO would not expand ''one centimeter' eastward toward Russia.

This recent meeting between Russia and U.S. in Geneva proved to me that Washington does not recognize Russia as an equal bargaining entity. Instead the US arrogantly believes it can pre-determine its policy - in this case aggressive NATO expansion and regime change in Russia. This is clearly the US agenda.

 

Washington and Brussels (and London of course) can't afford to recognize Russia as an equal. They must keep demonizing Moscow and Putin to stay 'relevant' in the world today as the west declines and China, Russia, Iran and others in the global south rise.

Plus we must always remember that there is big money at stake for the military industrial complex as they believe they can ride this aggressive wave another 50 years. So what if it leads to WW III and nuclear Armageddon.

 

Thus the US delegation left the meeting on January 11 and said, "We have your demands. We'll let you know in a week our response." I don't expect much.

 

Just so we all remain clear, these so-called 'unreasonable' demands by Russia (listed below) are quite rational and appropriate when you consider that the US-NATO are deep in the process of creating a Cuban Missile Crisis in reverse for the Russian Federation.

 


Russian demands in negotiations with US:
 

· NATO will cease all efforts to expand eastward, notably into Ukraine and Georgia.

· NATO guarantees that it will not deploy missile batteries in nations bordering Russia.

· An end to NATO military and naval exercises in nations and seas bordering Russia.

· The effective restoration of the treaty covering intermediate-range nuclear weapons. The U.S. abandoned the INF pact in August 2019.

· An ongoing East-West security dialogue.


I went looking for some comments on this current situation and of course the Washington Post and New York Times buried the story. So the only thing the people in the US know is that Joe Biden sent his team to Geneva to threaten Russia not to invade Ukraine.

 

Below are some good comments that I think cover many elements of this story. First though we must hear from Washington officialdom.

 

George Paulson on Russophobic hysteria 2020

5:34 PM (2 hours ago)

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/images/cleardot.gif

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/images/cleardot.gif

Hello Dick,

 I’m a big fan of Taibbi, and read this article [below] earlier today.   

 The Russia-hysteria, embraced by most Democrats, especially the more rabid members of the Hillary Clinton Fan Club, functions, for all practical purposes, as a religion.   It explains the otherwise unexplainable—how else could Hillary, with her famed resume, lose to an openly corrupt, vulgar, politically inexperienced game show host?  It is, to steal a line from my late father in law, the stupidest fucking thing I’ve ever seen, in all its glory, from Adam Schiff telling us that we need to arm Ukraine so we can fight nuclear-armed Russia “over there” rather than over here, to the non-existent pee tape based on the fictitious Steele dossier, to the Washington Post telling us that the vegan website nutritionfacts.org is doing the Kremlin’s bidding.   Think of it as a Red Scare, just without any Reds.   The chief purpose of the Russia-hysteria seems to be to deflect attention from the fact that it was the collective failure of the Democratic party—especially since Bill Clinton’s abandonment of the New Deal and embrace of Wall Street-friendly neoliberal economic policies--that gave us Donald Trump.   Of course, it’s also great for the military industrial complex.

 Be well, George

 

Putin a Killer

Calling Putin a ‘killer’ with ‘no soul’ is not exactly diplomatic
finesse
.  Mronline.org (3-22-21). 
Eds.

Meanwhile, Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov called the “killer” jab a “very bad statement by the U.S. president,” ​that indicated “he doesn’t want to normalize relations.”

MR Online |March 22, 2021 | Newswire   

 

Let’s go back a few years to 2014
RUSSIA IS GOING TO INVADE?  Article by John Pilger forwarded by Abel Tomlinson:
Dear friends,  1-17-22
My mom sent me a message this morning, "Russia is going to invade Ukraine!".  I thought, "great, The US political & media Establishment are banging their satanic war drums louder & louder, even my mom is worried (for inverted reasons). Their ocean of lies about Ukraine are immense & their escalations toward war with Russia are f**king apex insanity.  To help dispel their lies, I refer my mom to journalists with integrity, like John Pilger here:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/13/ukraine-us-war-russia-john-pilger


 “In Ukraine, the US is dragging us towards war with Russia” by John Pilger.  Washington's role in Ukraine, and its backing for the regime's neo-Nazis, has huge implications for the rest of the world

The Ruskies and the USies Are Up to Their Old Tricks?  US Disinformation Alleges Russian Disinformation
 principles of American Newspeak, vol. 1 ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌

10 Ways to Call Something Russian Disinformation Without Evidence
The principles of American Newspeak, vol. 1

Matt Taibbi

Oct 27, 2020

How do you call something “Russian disinformation” when you don’t have evidence it is? Let’s count the ways.

We don’t know a whole lot about how the New York Post story about Hunter Biden got into print. There are some reasons to think the material is genuine (including its cache of graphic photos and some apparent limited confirmation from people on the email chains), but in terms of sourcing, anything is possible. This material could have been hacked by any number of actors, and shopped for millions (as Time has reported), and all sorts of insidious characters - including notorious Russian partisans like Andrei Derkach - could have been behind it.

None of these details are known, however, which hasn’t stopped media companies from saying otherwise. Most major outlets began denouncing the story as foreign propaganda right away and haven’t stopped. A quick list of the creative methods seen lately of saying, “We don’t know, but we know!”:  MORE
https://taibbi.substack.com/p/10-ways-to-call-something-russian

 

 

HOSTILE, BIASED  REPORTING BY US MEDIA

In ‘Russian Bounty’ story, evidence-free claims from nameless spies became fact overnight.
Posted Jul 06, 2020 by Alan MacLeod

 Empire , Inequality , Media , Strategy  Russia , United States  Newswire

Originally published: FAIR (July 3, 2020)   |.  Monthly Review Essays  mronline.org (7-6-20)

The New York Times (6/26/20) front-paged what “intelligence says”—while offering very little explanation of why they say they believe it, or why we should believe them.

Based upon a bombshell New York Times report (6/26/20), virtually the entire media landscape has been engulfed in the allegations that Russia is paying Taliban fighters bounties to kill U.S. soldiers.

The Washington Post (6/27/20) and the Wall Street Journal (6/27/20) soon published similar stories, based on the same intelligence officials who refused to give their names, and did not appear to share any data or documents with the news organizations. “The Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post have confirmed our reporting,” tweeted the Times article’s lead author, Charlie Savage. The Post’s John Hudson seemed to back him up: “We have confirmed the New York Times scoop: A Russian military spy unit offered bounties to Taliban-linked militants to attack coalition forces in Afghanistan,” he responded. . . .

The information on the Russian bounties appears to have been both minimal and vague, with officials refusing to show any corroborating evidence or the documents they claimed to have, and were unable to link the accusations to any concrete, real-world events. MORE https://fair.org/home/in-russian-bounty-story-evidence-free-claims-from-nameless-spies-became-fact-overnight /  

Russiagate’s last gasp.  Mronline.org (7-5-20).
One can read this most recent flurry of Russia, Russia, Russia paid the Taliban to kill GIs as an attempt to pre-empt the findings into Russiagate’s origins.  | more…
Originally published: Consortium News by Ray McGovern (June 29, 2020 )  |  - Posted Jul 04, 2020.  On Friday The New York Times featured a report based on anonymous intelligence officials that the Russians were paying bounties to have U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan with President Donald Trump refusing to do anything about it.  Over the weekend, the Times’ dubious allegations grabbed headlines across all media that are likely to remain indelible in the minds of credulous Americans–which seems to have been the main objective. 

Jeremy Kuzmarov’s reply to my query regarding the allegations of Russia paying Afghans to kill US troops in Afghanistan 7-2-20:

“I don't think the allegations with regards to Russia have been proven. It’ probably designed to deflect attention away from the war in Afghanistan and question of why the US is stlll there after 19 years, and also to channel popular sentiment against a foreign enemy rather than in supporting of a revolution against the ruling elite.”

 

Russiagate as organized distraction.  Mronline.org (8-2-19).

Oliver Boyd-Barrett looks at who benefits from having the corporate media suffocate their public with a puerile narrative for over two years.

 

Macron Knows: For Europeans the ‘Problem’ Country Is Not Russia but USA

George Galloway – RT   TMS Weekly Digest, 9-2/8-19
28 Aug 2019 – ‘The End Times of Western Hegemony’, I wish this were written by Macron although it might as well have been. He said exactly this after the G7 gathering which could be summed up in Shakespeare’s words as “much ado about nothing.”

 

 

RUSSIA HAS 100,000 TROOPS INSIDE ITS BORDER WITH UKRAINE?

HOW MANY US/NATO TROOPS ARE OUTSIDE RUSSIA’S ENCIRCLED BORDERS?

 

Defender and spearheads by Victor Grossman.  Berlin Bulletin. 

Troop movements today promise anything but peace. Every two years military maneuvers encircle Russian borders; every nine months a new brigade of 4500 U.S. soldiers was flown over to “gain experience”. This year it will be a division of 20,000, joined by soldiers from 18 countries, 37,000 in all.

mronline.org (1-18-20).

 

SOLUTION TO COLD WAR II: REVERSE NATO EXPANSION EASTWARD AND US GET OUT OF NATO

America is too pushy in Eastern Europe”

Russian fear of NATO is legitimate

Art Hobson, ahobson@uark.edu NWADG, 11 January 2022

 

         As I've said before in these pages, U.S. global "leadership" is overly aggressive and militaristic.  America cannot run the world. 

         NATO expansion into Eastern Europe poses a threat to Russia that could develop into a confrontation similar to the 1962 Cuban missile crisis.  NATO began in 1949 as a military alliance between several Western European nations, the U.S., and Canada that would provide security in the event of invasion by the Soviet Union.  Throughout the Cold War, NATO forces, including hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops stationed in Europe, faced off against NATO's eastern counterpart, the Warsaw Pact military alliance.  The Cold War ended in 1989 as Eastern European nations rebelled against Soviet dominance.  Although the Warsaw Pact collapsed, NATO's military alliance persisted and even expanded to include Poland, Czech Republic and Hungary.  It then continued, over the years, into Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, North Macedonia, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia.

         This expansion flies in the face of the advice of the first NATO supreme commander, General (and U.S. President) Dwight D. Eisenhower.  He stated in February 1951:  "If in 10 years, all American troops stationed in Europe for national defense purposes have not been returned to the United States, then this whole project [NATO] will have failed." 

         Other Cold War participants voiced similar views.  George Kennan, the American diplomat and historian who formulated the policy of "containment" that was our basic strategy for fighting the Cold War, stated in 1997:  "Expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the post cold-war era.  Such a decision may be expected...to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking."  

         President Eisenhower's granddaughter, Susan Eisenhower, sent an open letter to President Clinton in 1997 that described plans to expand NATO as "a policy error of historic proportions."  The letter was co-signed by an impressive group of 49 military, political and academic leaders.  

         There is good reason for this advice.  Russia's greatest fear is Western aggression.  Russia suffered invasions by Turkey (1571), Poland (1605), Sweden (1610), France (1812), and Ukraine/Belarus (1814).  This fear was re-confirmed in spades when Germany invaded Poland in September 1939, initiating World War II, and then invaded the Soviet Union in June, 1941.  24 million Russians--10 percent of the Russian population including at least 12 million civilians--died in that war.

         Today, Russia finds itself largely surrounded by a hostile NATO military alliance.  Now Ukraine, a large nation that has received significant U.S. military assistance and that shares a long border with Russia, seeks membership in NATO.  It was entirely predictable that Russia, fearing above all the possible placement of offensive missiles at Ukraine's border, would view this as an existential crisis and vehemently resist. 

         A similar situation developed just after World War II.  Finland, a democratic Western nation with a free economy, felt threatened by the huge Soviet Union to its immediate east.  Amid postwar tensions, Finland signed a Treaty of Friendship with the Soviets, declaring neutrality in superpower politics and guaranteeing that the USSR need not fear attack from or through Finnish territory.  This preserved peace. 

         Russian President Vladimir Putin has submitted a statement of security measures it wants to negotiate with the U.S. and NATO.  These measures include guaranteed Ukrainian neutrality, precluding it's membership in NATO.  Putin warns that mounting tensions could push Russia into a showdown similar to the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis that put the world on the verge of nuclear war.  The comparison is apt:  In 1962, the Soviet Union had secretly stationed intermediate-range nuclear-capable missiles in Cuba.  When informed of this by American intelligence agencies, President John Kennedy vehemently opposed such missiles near the U.S. border and resolved to remove them despite the inevitable risk of nuclear war arising from this decision.  Putin today voices a concern similar to Kennedy's concern.  A hostile Ukraine, allied militarily with the West, could place offensive missiles at Russia's border, five minutes from Moscow.  A pledge of neutrality from Ukraine, similar to Finland's 1947 pledge, is reasonable and desirable for all sides. 

         The U.S. has long overplayed its hand in NATO and in the world.  Last September, the French Foreign Minister suggested Europeans need to define their own strategic interests relative to nations such as China (and, by implication, Russia).  I agree, and have a modest suggestion:  America should withdraw from NATO and allow Europe to follow its own strategic interests. 

Revised bio for this week only: 

Art Hobson is a professor emeritus of physics at the University of Arkansas, also co-author and co-editor of The Future of Land-Based Strategic Missiles published by the American Institute of Physics.  Email him at ahobson@uark.edu

References:

• Guterres at the United Nations:  NWADG 22 Sep 2021, page 5.

• NATO history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO#History.

• Quotes from Eisenhower and Kennan, letter from Eisenhower's granddaughter:  https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1997-jul-07-me-10464-story.html.

• Deaths in World War II: https://www.nationalww2museum.org/students-teachers/student-resources/research-starters/research-starters-worldwide-deaths-world-war.

• Western invasions of Russia:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Russia, 

• Finland history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Finland.

• Putin's desire for security, and fear of missiles placed in Ukraine.  NWADG 10.12.21, page 8.  Also NWADG 17.12.21, page 6. 

• France needs to define its own strategic interests: NWADG 22 Sep 2021, page 5. 

 

Editorial.  “Cooking the Numbers.”   NADG (3-25-20). 

     The Editor alleges that “Tsar Vladimir the Permanent” is a gigantic liar about Russia’s covid cases, and those lies typify everything he says.  “That is, he appears to be just as honest about this crisis as anything else.  More’s the pity.  More’s the deadly.” 

      That Putin is 100% untrustworthy is what’s deadly, since it casts doubt on all previous agreements and poisons every future effort.  It’s a type of the informal fallacy of over-generalization and more specifically of poisoning the well, where adverse information about an opponent is alleged with the intention of discrediting something that the target person is about to say or do. Poisoning the well can be a special case of argumentum ad hominem, of which the US is expert in dealing with Russia ever since the Russian Revolution (with only 2 or 3 brief reliefs).   --D 

 

The Fuller Story: OMNI’s 8 newsletters on Russia.  The first four were titled Russia and Ukraine.  Nos. 5-9 are Russia (and recently back to Ukraine).

#5 http://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2017/03/russia-newsletter-5-from-violence-to.html

 

END RUSSIA NEWSLETTER #9, 1-20-22

 

 

 

Wednesday, January 19, 2022

WAR WATCH WEDNESDAYS #57

 

   WAR WATCH WEDNESDAYS, #57, January 19, 2022 

 

Peacemaking

January 22, Celebrate! The First Anniversary of the Entry Into Force of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW)
Helen Keller v. War; Strike Against War
Nonviolence International
US Peace Prize
About Face v. Permanent War
Struggle against AUMF and Iraq War Power continues

It’s the WAR Department!

OMNI’S WWW IS DEDICATED TO ENDING THE US ENDLESS WARFARE STATE

 

January 22, Celebrate! The First Anniversary of the Entry into Force of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW).  Link globally around the world at orepa.org.
Also Bring the Treaty and the Struggle to End Nuclear Weapons to Arkansas: by subscribing to
The Nuclear Resister.   Some of the articles in the Dec. 15, 2021 number:  “Digging for Peace: Resisting Nuclear Weapons; “Resisting the International Arms Trade Across England”; “Surprise Arrests in Two States for Drone War Foe”; “Day of Mourning Statement” by Leonard Peltier;

 

HELEN KELLER AGAINST WAR

Strike Against War, delivered before the Women's Peace Party ...

https://www.afb.org › helen-keller › books-essays-speeches

Strike against war, for without you no battles can be fought. Strike against manufacturing shrapnel and gas bombs and all other tools of murder. Strike against ...
Transcription for Helen Keller's speech "A Protest Against ...

https://www.afb.org › HelenKellerArchive › p=helenkeller...

It is doubtful if the workers themselves can stop war: but they can do much to defend themselves against attacks upon their rights by by their fellow-workers in ...

 

NONVIOLENCE

Past, Present, and Future  11-19-21

David Hart, Nonviolence International <info@nonviolenceinternational.net>

)

Dear Dick,
I’ve been reflecting on the power of learning from the past, the challenges of the present, and deep fear of the future. This weekend I had the joyous opportunity to celebrate with founders of the Movement for a New Society (MNS) as they gathered for their 50th Anniversary and later to join the War Resisters League (WRL) for their 100th. Both groups had enormous influence on my personal and political development and helped sustain me for the long and difficult work of social change. 

This time looking at our proud past came at the end of a week when the current team of interns welcomed back previous interns for a conversation (led by the great Sarah Nahar). We gathered to reflect on: Despair and Personal Power in a Time of Crisis: Strengthening ourselves for the work ahead.  . . .

At Nonviolence International, I am lucky to get to work with exceptional young leaders and I want you to meet them, learn from them, and have the opportunity to support them. 

We’ve just posted a new page on our website where you can get a sense of each of our interns and the work they are doing. For this email let me tell you this… they are amazing! Each one of the four are diving in to take on significant leadership on core projects. Click here to learn about their background, education, and plans for the future. 

NVI is committed to celebrating and learning from our proud history, grappling with the challenges of this moment, and rising to our obligation to help shape a better future. That commitment is made real in many ways including our Spotlight on Nonviolence video series at YouTube.com/Nonviolence . In that series you will find inspirational conversations conducted by our young interns with NV leaders of all ages. You can meet our three wonderful Spotlight cohosts here. Recent videos include conversations with George Lakey of MNS and Joanne Sheehan of WRL. Both of these exceptional leaders shaped my life through their powerful examples and deep intellects. Seeing them in conversation with NVI interns is a joy for me. Hope it will be for you too. 

I’ll close with a few inspirational quotations from Civil Rights Legend, Rev. James Lawson, who recently led a workshop I attended. He said, “In the 21st century, we must have bold NV movements that make all we did in the 20th century look anemic. If we don’t create these sustained creative campaigns humanity may not be able to sustain itself.” 

Jim said, “I am neither hopeless about this or helpless. I marvel at the awakening that has been going on for the last 60 years. It is astonishing to me. Having grown up in the 30s and 40s, the awakening that I see is the consequence of intense struggle that has been largely the impact of a NV awakening."

He told us, “Somewhere in the US today there is a group that is planning NV campaigns that will eclipse all we’ve done in the past.”

Someone asked an important question, “Can we build an intergenerational NV movement for peace and justice?” This wise elder answered… clearly and without hesitation… "YES, YES YES, of course we can. We are already doing so.”

Please help us make that vision a reality by:

1.    Watching the new Spotlight on Nonviolence videos they have created and sharing them with friends, family, and your larger networks. The almighty algorithm requires me to say, “please like and subscribe.” 

2.    Following us on all social media - YouTubeTwitter and Facebook and ask others to do so. 

Be Well, 

David Hart, Co-Director

PS Our wonderful new partner Solidary 2020 and Beyond organized recent impressive webinars we were proud to co-sponsor. Please check them out.

Nonviolence International
http://www.nonviolenceinternational.net/
Nonviolence International
PO Box 39127, Friendship Station NW, Washington, DC 20016, United States
This email was sent to 
j.dick.bennett@gmail.com.

US PEACE PRIZE Presentation 

The US Peace Prize will be awarded on November 4. This year’s nominees are: Julian Aguon, Bruce Gagnon, David Hartsough, National Network Opposing the Militarization of Youth, and World BEYOND War. You may read about their antiwar/peace work in the US Peace Registry.
The announcement and 2021 presentation will be made at the beginning of this online event. Click here to 
register.
The US Peace Memorial Foundation honors Americans who stand for peace by publishing the 
US Peace Registry, awarding the US Peace Prize, and working to promote and raise funds for the US Peace Memorial in Washington, DC. We celebrate these role models to inspire other Americans to speak out against war and work for peace.

US Peace Memorial Foundation is a 501(c)(3) charity.

 

A "peacetime" military  10-26-21

Natasha - About Face Veterans via email.actionnetwork.org 

6:30 AM (1 hour ago)

Hi Dick-

I remember the moment I realized my service in the military wasn’t what it was supposed to be. It’s a moment a lot of us remember - September 11th, 2001. And thanks to About Face, I am able to do something about it.

Serving the Air Force, we were told that our work was being done during ‘peacetime’ - that is, I was supporting a global network of hundreds of bases that were constantly monitoring shipping routes, conflict zones, and countries we determined as threatening to democracy.

Truth is, we were never at peace, but I didn’t know it.

After 9/11, there has never been a return to even a pretense of peace. Permanent war is now justified as a fight against terrorism.

With your investment in our work, together, we can stop it. Make a donation to About Face today and help us bring an end to endless war.

One of the strongest ways we stop war is by having the people who fought them speak out against it — to expose what’s really happening behind closed doors.- For example: - why is Biden asking for the biggest military budget ever even after the war in Afghanistan is ‘over’? Why is congress approving a 5% raise for the military? Will we ever return to a peacetime military? We witness war profiteering first hand, as trillions are handed over to contractors in no-bid contracts while aid for people decimated by war evaporates and veteran’s benefits are privatized out of reach.

We will make all war profiteers pay and are organizing to speak out this veteran’s day. Can we count on you to support us in ending these wars?

Thank you for having our back. Together, we will take on the deadly forces of war and win.

Sincerely,
Natasha Erskine
CO-Director, About Face
About Face: Veterans Against The War

Effort to Repeal AUMF removed from National Defense Authorization Act, Push to repeal Iraq war powers snags in overloaded Senate
As the NDAA goes down to the wire, the congressional attempt to reclaim AUMFs is a casualty of war.
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/12/07/congress-aumf-war-powers-repeal-scrapped-523888

What can I do?  Your car is a mobile, miniature billboard: Two good ads: I’m Goin’ Broke Payin’ for War.    It’s the WAR Department.

Dick's Wars and Warming KPSQ Radio Editorials (#1-48)

Dick's Wars and Warming KPSQ Radio Editorials (#1-48)