July, 16 2014, 01:38pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Jack Gilroy, Binghamton NY (607) 748-8105, jgilroy1@stny.rr.com
Judy Bello, Rochester NY (585) 733-4058, jb.papillonweb@gmail.com
Ed Kinane, Syracuse NY (315) 478-4571, edkinane@verizon.net
Another Hancock Anti-Drone Protester Convicted of a Misdemeanor
Jack Gilroy of Binghamton, NY was convicted after a two-day jury trial in DeWitt Town Court of charges stemming from his arrest during a nonviolent protest at Hancock Air National Guard Base on April 28, 2013. Jack was convicted of Trespass, a violation, and Obstructing Governmental Administration, a misdemeanor by a jury of five women and one man. He will be sentenced by Judge Robert Jokl on October 1st, a year and a half after his arrest. The sentence for the latter charge may be up to one year in jail and a fine of $1000. Jack&rs
DeWitt, NY
Jack Gilroy of Binghamton, NY was convicted after a two-day jury trial in DeWitt Town Court of charges stemming from his arrest during a nonviolent protest at Hancock Air National Guard Base on April 28, 2013. Jack was convicted of Trespass, a violation, and Obstructing Governmental Administration, a misdemeanor by a jury of five women and one man. He will be sentenced by Judge Robert Jokl on October 1st, a year and a half after his arrest. The sentence for the latter charge may be up to one year in jail and a fine of $1000. Jack's Order of Protection was also reissued today as a 2 year Permanent Order protecting Commander Greg Semmel, the commanding officer at Hancock Base.
Jack testified that he joined the Army out of high school, and was stationed in Austria in the early 50s at a time when the Cold War was hot. He says that despite a climate of distrust and contempt towards Russians, when he actually had to look a young Russian soldier in the eye during a ceremonial event, he didn't see the evil he'd been trained to expect. Since then, Jack has spent 30 years as a teacher. A member of Veterans for Peace and Peace Action New York, Jack is currently working with Peace Action at Binghamton University to convince the college to offer a Peace Studies Program.
Regarding the April 2013 protest, Jack testified that the boundaries of the base were unclear and unmarked at the time. He said his intention was to send a message to base personnel and the public, not to disrupt the operation of the base. Only one gate was affected by the symbolic die-in he participated in, which blocked the inbound lane of the access road. Jack was arrested and removed 30 seconds after lying in the road so he had little effect on potential base traffic.
Hancock Air National Guard Base, home of the 174th Attack Wing, is a domestic hub for MQ-9 Reaper drone support. It is a training site for pilots and technicians, a drone test location and an active site in the ongoing wars overseas. Heavily armed Reapers piloted at Hancock fly lethal missions over Afghanistan and possibly elsewhere. Hancock pilots also fly test flights from Fort Drum over Lake Ontario.
Upstate Drone Action has been protesting the Drones at Hancock Base since 2009 with bimonthly vigils, annual rallies and a Gandhian Wave of civil resistance. Mary Anne Grady Flores was convicted of violating an Order of Protection by standing in the road in front of Hancock Base and sentenced on July 9 to one year in prison. There are 11 trials scheduled for Hancock protesters in DeWitt between now and next July stemming from the April 28 protest. Several more trials are pending. On July 30th and 31st Russell Brown will be tried pro se, serving as his own defense council, on the same charges Jack Gilroy faced today.
For more information go to upstatedroneaction.org
LATEST NEWS
Arizona Supreme Court Upholds 1864 Abortion Ban—But Voters Will Get 'Ultimate Say' in November
"Arizona is what happens when abortion policy is, as Donald Trump claims he wishes, left up to the states," said one columnist.
Apr 09, 2024
Reproductive justice campaigners in Arizona on Tuesday vowed to make sure voters "have the ultimate say" on abortion rights after the state Supreme Court upheld an 1864 ban that includes no exceptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest.
"This is a horrifying ruling that puts the lives and futures of countless Arizonans at risk," said Leah Greenberg, co-founder of progressive advocacy group Indivisible. "It's devastating and cruel—and we're fighting back."
The court ruled that since Roe v. Wade was overturned by the right-wing majority on the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022, no law exists to prevent Arizona from reinstating a measure passed in 1864—before Arizona was even a U.S. state.
The law outlaws abortion care from the moment of conception with exceptions only in cases of a pregnant person who faces life-threatening health impacts. Such "exceptions" have been shown to threaten the health, including reproductive health and future fertility, of pregnant people in several states since Roe was overturned in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ruling.
Under the Arizona law, doctors who are prosecuted for providing abortion care could face fines and 2-5 years in prison.
State Attorney General Kris Mayes, a Democrat, called the ruling "unconscionable and an affront to freedom."
"Today's decision to reimpose a law from a time when Arizona wasn't a state, the Civil War was raging, and women couldn't even vote will go down in history as a stain on our state," said Mayes. "This is far from the end of the debate on reproductive freedom, and I look forward to the people of Arizona having their say in the matter. And let me be completely clear, as long as I am attorney general, no woman or doctor will be prosecuted under this draconian law in this state."
Democratic organizer Amanda Litman noted that local prosecutors "have jurisdiction to decide whether or not to press charges on people seeking care under this ban."
Last week, organizers with Arizona for Abortion Access announced that they had collected more than the number of signatures needed to support placing a referendum on a constitutional amendment enshrining the right to abortion care on state ballots in November.
The ruling was handed down in Planned Parenthood v. Hazelrigg, a case that centered on an anti-abortion doctor's appeal of a December 2022 ruling which upheld the state's 15-week abortion ban. Dr. Eric Hazelrigg, who owns a chain of anti-abortion clinics in the state, urged the high court to instead reinstate the 1864 ban.
Planned Parenthood Arizona, Inc. said the "deplorable decision will send Arizona back nearly 150 years."
"This ruling will cause long-lasting, detrimental harms for our communities," said the group. "It strips Arizonans of their bodily autonomy and bans abortion in nearly all scenarios. And it does so following the troubling example of the U.S. Supreme Court in Dobbs: with judges ignoring long-settled precedent and principles of law to reach their preferred policy result."
Columnist Helaine Olen noted that the ruling was handed down a day after former President Donald Trump, now the Republican Party's presumptive 2024 presidential nominee, said states should be allowed to impose "whatever they decide" in terms of abortion restrictions and bans.
"Remember," said U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). "This is brought to you by Trump. He supports cruel bans like these, and he made them possible by overturning Roe."
The ruling was put on hold for 14 days, and advocates emphasized on Tuesday that abortion care is still legal in Arizona for the time being.
Since Roe was overturned, pro-forced pregnancy legislators in Wisconsin and Michigan have supported imposing abortion bans dating back to 1849 and 1931, respectively. A judge ruled last July in Wisconsin that the 19th-century law did not make abortion care illegal, and Michigan voters approved a constitutional amendment protection abortion rights, clearing the way for the 1931 law to be repealed.
Voters in Florida, where the state Supreme Court last week effectively approved a six-week abortion ban, will also vote on a constitutional amendment on abortion rights in November.
Since 2022, voters in states including Kansas and Kentucky have voted in favor of expanding, rather than restricting, access to abortion.
"With abortion on the ballot in November, anti-choice extremists will feel the power of pissed off women voters," said Rep. Becca Balint (D-Vt.). "No doubt about it."
Kari Lake, the Republican Senate candidate in Arizona, quickly attempted to distance herself from the 1864 ban, saying she was calling on the state Legislature to "come up with an immediate commonsense solution that Arizonans can support."
U.S. Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), who is running against Lake, noted that just two years ago after Roe was overturned, the former TV newscaster and gubernatorial candidate said she was "incredibly thrilled that we are going to have a great law that's already on the books... It will prohibit abortion in Arizona except to save the life of a mother."
"This November," said Gallego, "Kari Lake will find out, yet again, that Arizonans have no interest in politicians who threaten their rights."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'No One Deserves Power for Life': Coalition Demands Supreme Court Term Limits
"The TERM Act is necessary because lifetime tenure on the United States Supreme Court leads to a court that is insulated from, and unaccountable to, the American people," said Rep. Hank Johnson, the bill's sponsor.
Apr 09, 2024
As the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to weigh in on presidential immunity and other major issues in the months ahead, more than 50 advocacy groups on Tuesday endorsed legislation that would create 18-year terms for current and future justices and provide two appointments for each presidential term.
"Extremists on the Supreme Court have undermined our democracy and fundamental freedoms by gutting voting rights, opening the floodgates to unlimited corporate money in our elections, and reversing 50 years of precedent by overturning Roe v. Wade," said Stand Up America executive director Christina Harvey in a statement.
"No one deserves power for life," she argued. "That's why 49 out of 50 states have either term limits, elections, or age limits for their highest courts. To protect our democracy and our fundamental freedoms, Congress should enact term limits for the U.S. Supreme Court."
"To protect our democracy and our fundamental freedoms, Congress should enact term limits for the U.S. Supreme Court."
Along with Stand Up, organizations calling on Congress to pass the Supreme Court Tenure Establishment and Retirement Modernization (TERM) Act include Accountable.US, Alliance for Justice, Brennan Center for Justice, Color of Change, Center for Popular Democracy, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, Demand Justice, Greenpeace USA, Indivisible, March for Our Lives, MoveOn, NextGen America, People for the American Way, Public Citizen, and Working Families Party.
The TERM Act (H.R. 5566) is led by Congressman Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), who reintroduced the bill in September and said during an event outside the Supreme Court that "our system is broken, and Congress must act if we are to save freedom, liberty, and democracy for all."
Noting that the bill is part of a reform package that includes the Judiciary Act and the Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act, Johnson argued that "the TERM Act is necessary because lifetime tenure on the United States Supreme Court leads to a court that is insulated from, and unaccountable to, the American people, which is bad for democracy."
As Johnson's office detailed at the time, along with establishing term limits and the new appointment schedule, the bill would:
- Require current justices to assume senior status in order of length of service on the court as regularly appointed justices receive their commissions;
- Preserve life tenure by ensuring that senior justices retired from regular active service continue to hold the office of Supreme Court justice, including official duties and compensation; and
- Require a randomly selected senior status Supreme Court justice to fill in on the court if the number of justices in regular active service falls below nine.
The legislation now has 28 co-sponsors—including key House leaders: Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Rules Committee Ranking Member Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), and Oversight Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.).
Since former GOP President Donald Trump worked with Senate Republicans to create a right-wing supermajority on the country's highest court by appointing Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett, people and advocacy groups across the country have been increasingly demanding reforms.
Those calls have been bolstered by revelations about multiple justices' relationships with ultrawealthy individuals and the Supreme Court's November response to mounting concerns: a nonbinding code of conduct that critics decried as a "toothless PR stunt."
In contrast with his predecessor, Democratic President Joe Biden has so far only appointed one member of the court: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson—who in 2022 replaced a retiring liberal, keeping in place the 6-3 ideological split.
After beating Trump in 2020, Biden is set to face him again in the November presidential election, thanks in part to the Supreme Court's 9-0 ruling last month that states can't remove federal candidates from their ballots—as Colorado had, determining that the former president was constitutionally ineligible to return to elected office because he had engaged in insurrection.
The court is set to hear arguments in another Trump-related case later this month. The Republican is trying to dodge federal charges for interfering with the 2020 election—one of his four ongoing criminal cases—by claiming presidential immunity. In amicus briefs submitted Monday, advocacy groups, business leaders, constitutional scholars, former government and military officials, historians, and national security professionals warned that a finding in Trump's favor would endanger U.S. democracy.
The three Trump appointees have not recused themselves from the cases; neither has Justice Clarence Thomas, whose activist wife Ginni Thomas was involved in right-wing efforts to block certification of Biden's win.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Refuting Jurists, Lloyd Austin Says US Has No Evidence of Gaza Genocide
The U.S. defense secretary's remarks came after Sen. Elizabeth Warren and other law experts around the world asserted that Israel's Gaza onslaught meets the legal definition of genocide.
Apr 09, 2024
U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on Tuesday became the latest Biden administration official to deny that Israel's six-month bombardment, invasion, and siege of Gaza constitute a genocide, a statement that came after Sen. Elizabeth Warren joined a growing number of international jurists asserting that Israeli policies and actions are genocidal under the letter of the law.
After pro-Palestine protesters wearing T-shirts with the message "Austin's Legacy = Genocide" interrupted a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing Tuesday morning, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) asked the Pentagon chief if Israel was committing genocide in Gaza.
"We don't have any evidence of genocide being created," Austin replied after a short pause.
After telling the defense secretary his response was "better than" the replies from CIA Director William Burns and Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines—whom Cotton said "dodged that question" before the committee last month—the senator asked Austin to respond to allegations of "greenlighting genocide" in Gaza.
"From the very beginning, we committed to help assist Israel in defending its territory and its people by providing security assistance, and I would remind everybody, you know, that what happened on October 7 was absolutely horrible," Austin said, referring to the Hamas-led attacks in which more than 1,100 Israelis and others were killed—at least some of them by so-called "friendly fire"—and over 240 others were kidnapped.
Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, when asked if he believes Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza: "We don't have evidence of that."
So, Israel's killing of more than 33,000 Palestinians—44% of whom are children—in 6 months, after top Israeli officials… pic.twitter.com/50cznisMxn
— Rachel Blevins (@RachBlevins) April 9, 2024
Austin's remarks followed reports that U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) told constituents that Israel's war on Gaza—which has killed and wounded more than 116,000 Palestinians including people believed dead and buried beneath rubble while displacing around 90% of the population and causing mass starvation—meets the legal definition of genocide.
"If you want to do it as an application of law, I believe that they'll find that it is genocide, and they have ample evidence to do so," Warren—a former law professor with three decades of experience—told an audience Friday at the Islamic Center of Boston in Wayland, Massachusetts.
In January, the International Court of Justice in The Hague
issued a preliminary ruling in a case brought by South Africa and supported by over 30 other nations that found Israel is plausibly committing genocide in Gaza. The ICJ ordered Israel to prevent genocidal acts—a directive that numerous international human rights experts say is being ignored.
A March draft report by the United Nations Human Rights Council found "reasonable grounds to believe" Israel is perpetrating genocide against Palestinians.
At least hundreds of legal scholars around the world have accused Israel of genocide. So have some Israelis, including Raz Segal, one of the country's preeminent Holocaust scholars, who in October said that Israel is perpetrating "a textbook case of genocide" in Gaza.
Progressive U.S. lawmakers including Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.)—the only Palestinian American member of Congress—Cori Bush (D-Mo.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) have also accused Israel of genocide.
“We have to re-humanise the people whose death has been normalised.”
Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez discussed her decision to use the term "genocide" in Congress when describing Israel's actions in Gaza during an interview on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert pic.twitter.com/tKAJQTD0XT
— Middle East Eye (@MiddleEastEye) April 9, 2024
Meanwhile, President Joe Biden and members of his administration have been called genocide deniers for dismissing the assessments of legal experts on the matter, including a federal judge in California who—while absolving the United States of complicity—found that South Africa's ICJ allegations are "plausible."
In late October, Biden publicly cast doubt on Gaza casualty figures provided by Hamas-run agencies, even though Israeli and international media, human rights groups, and his own administration have relied upon those same sources—which have held up under scrutiny—for years.
In February, Austin acknowledged that "over 25,000" Palestinian women and children had been killed by Israeli forces at that point in the war, although the Pentagon subsequently attempted to walk back the defense secretary's remarks.
Biden—who early in the war declared his "unwavering, rock-solid" support for Israel—is seeking an additional $14.3 billion in armed assistance for Israel atop the nearly $4 billion it already receives from Washington. The president has also repeatedly sidestepped Congress in order to fast-track emergency military aid to the key Middle Eastern ally.
The Biden administration has approved more than 100 arms transfers to Israel during the war, including shipments of 2,000-pound bombs that can wipe out entire city blocks and have been used in some of Israel's deadliest strikes, including the October 31 bombing of the Jabalia refugee camp that killed more than 120 civilians.
Biden now wants to sell Israel $18 billion worth of F-15 fighter jets, even after the president acknowledged Israel's "indiscriminate bombing" of Gaza. In addition to progressive members of Congress—who have long opposed unconditional U.S. military aid to Israel—a growing number of centrist Democrats, including former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who recently called on the FBI to investigate peace activists demanding a Gaza cease-fire, are now urging Biden to halt arms transfers to Israel.
The United States—which committed genocide against the Indigenous peoples of North America—has a long history of supporting genocidal regimes. Since the end of World War II, the U.S. has provided military, financial, and diplomatic support for the perpetrators of genocides in Guatemala, Paraguay, Bangladesh, Kurdistan, and East Timor.
The U.S. has also been accused of turning a blind eye to genocides in countries from Nazi Germany to Rwanda, which on Sunday marked the 30th anniversary of the mass murder of around 800,000 people, most of them ethnic Tutsis, in a campaign of state-sanctioned slaughter.
During her speech, Warren said that responses to Gaza should transcend a "labels argument."
"For me, it is far more important to say what Israel is doing is wrong. And it is wrong," she said. "It is wrong to starve children within a civilian population in order to try to bend to your will. It is wrong to drop 2,000-pound bombs in densely populated civilian areas."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular