December, 08 2008, 04:48pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Sean Donahue,,Communications Director -- 617-983-0710 (w), 978-809-8054 (c),,press@mfso.org
MFSO Greets Shinseki Nomination With Cautious Optimism
Nationwide
Members of Military Families Speak Out,
a national organization of military families advocating an end to the war in
Iraq and for better care for veterans of that war, are cautiously optimistic
that the nomination of Gen. Eric Shinseki (USAR, ret.) to serve as Secretary of
Veterans Affairs will usher in an era of change at the troubled Veterans
Administration.
Shinseki gained national attention in 2003 when, as Army Chief of Staff, he
clashed with then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld over estimates of the
troop levels needed to stabilize post-war
Iraq.
Adele Kubein, the mother of a permanently disabled Iraq Veteran, and a member
of Military Families Speak Out, said:
"Though general Shinseki was correct
regarding the number of troops needed to maintain order during the
Iraq invasion and occupation, the invasion of
Iraq was wrong. Our loved ones have paid the
price as have the Iraqi people, particularly those most vulnerable. I sincerely
hope that General Shinseki will use his good judgment to help people like my
daughter who in addition to living in pain both mental and physical, has had to
struggle for almost five years to gain care from an overburdened Veteran's
Administration. I am heartened that we will have a person in the General's
position who knows what war is about and the challenges which face returning
troops. Ours is but one of thousands of families facing these ordeals. We need
help; I pray he will provide it."
Kubein's daughter served in the
Oregon National Guard in 2003 and 2004.
Stacy Hafley is a member of
Military Families Speak Out and the wife of a soldier who served in
Iraq with the
Army Reserves from 2004-2005. Her
husband has suffered from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Social Anxiety
Disorder, and severe depression since returning from
Iraq and has
been fighting to get the Veterans Administration to recognize his psychological
injuries as combat-related.
She said:
"Under the leadership of Dr. James Peake,
the Veterans Administration has shown callous disregard for the intense
suffering of Veterans like my husband who are struggling with psychological
injuries. My husband has described
his treatment at the hands of the Veterans Administration as frustrating and
belittling -- and has been outraged at the dismissive attitude the leadership of
the VA has demonstrated toward the epidemic of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder
and suicide plaguing veterans of the war in Iraq.
"Gen. Shinseki has a reputation as a man
with integrity who is not afraid to face difficult truths. I hope that as Secretary of Veterans
Affairs he will confront the Veterans' Administrations failure to recognize that
psychological wounds are just as real and just as debilitating as physical ones,
and will get our Veterans the compassionate care that they need."
That optimism is tempered with
caution on the part of those who have experienced some of the Veterans
Administrations' worst failures.
Military Families Speak Out members Kevin and Joyce Lucey are the parents
of Corporal Jeffrey Lucey, who served in
Iraq with the
Marine Corps Reserves in 2003.
Corporal Lucey killed himself in 2004, just days after being denied
treatment for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder at a Veterans Administration
hospital. Joyce Lucey
said:
"We have lost faith in our government
over the past years due to what our son and so many others
experienced,. They returned home to a broken health care system
unprepared to deal with the hidden wounds that this tragic
conflict caused.
"We now have another government who will
nominate another General who will say that he will truly care for our
Veterans. We have to ask though
where does his true allegiance lie - is it with the administration or will it be
with each and every veteran who will come to the agency seeking help? Will this
person pursue the establishment of an effective, efficient caring system which
will give birth to a creative and innovative environment which
will embrace the veteran and their loved ones or will we remain with the status
quo which has resulted in one tragedy after another - without any true
caring, just an effort to try to present one rationalization after another
imposing the responsibility on the traumatized veteran. This nation can no
longer tolerate the negligence towards her heroes; they have endured so many
tragedies. We now need to commit this nation and her government to truly give
the care and resources to those who have sacrificed so much for
all."
Kevin Lucey added:
"As we watched the past government fail so
miserably, we will stay ever so vigilant for all our warriors who have yet to
return to our shores. This administration must know that being a government
of, by, and for the people, we will never allow our loved ones to be abused or
neglected again. It is time
for all of us to work together for our veterans and their loved ones. It is time
that all of us - as one nation - honor and truly care for the warrior and the
warriors' loved ones -- all of whom have sacrificed so
much."
Military Families Speak Out (MFSO) is an organization of people opposed to the war in Iraq who have relatives or loved ones who are currently in the military or who have served in the military since the buildup to the Iraq war in the fall of 2002. Formed by two families in November of 2002, we have contacts with military families throughout the United States, and in other countries around the world. Our membership currently includes over 3,400 military families, with new families joining daily.
LATEST NEWS
'People Power Works': Shell Backs Down in Anti-Protest Lawsuit Against Greenpeace
"Shell thought suing us for millions over a peaceful protest would intimidate us, but this case became a PR millstone tied around its neck," said the co-executive director of Greenpeace U.K.
Dec 10, 2024
The United Kingdom-based oil giant Shell agreed Tuesday to settle a major lawsuit the company brought against Greenpeace after activists from the group boarded and occupied a company oil platform last year to protest fossil fuel expansion.
Greenpeace said in a statement that as part of the settlement, it agreed to donate £300,000—roughly $382,000—to the Royal National Lifeboat Institution, a charity that helps save lives at sea, but will pay nothing to Shell and accept no liability. The donation represents a fraction of the over $11 million in damages and legal costs defendants faced, the group said.
The Greenpeace defendants have also "agreed to avoid protesting for a period at four Shell sites in the northern North Sea."
"Shell thought suing us for millions over a peaceful protest would intimidate us, but this case became a PR millstone tied around its neck," said Areeba Hamid, co-executive director of Greenpeace U.K. "The public backlash against its bullying tactics made it back down and settle out of court."
"This settlement shows that people power works. Thousands of ordinary people across the country backed our fight against Shell and their support means we stay independent and can keep holding Big Oil to account," Hamid added. "This legal battle might be over, but Big Oil's dirty tricks aren't going away. With Greenpeace facing further legal battles around the world, we won't stop campaigning until the fossil fuel industry stops drilling and starts paying for the damage it is causing to people and planet."
"These aggressive legal tactics, the huge sums of money, and attempts to block the right to protest pose a massive threat."
Shell brought the case, which Greenpeace characterized as a "textbook" strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP), in February 2023 and sought $1 million in damages from activists who boarded a Shell-contracted ship carrying equipment to drill for oil in the North Sea.
"When the protest ended, the only damage Shell could find was a padlock which, they alleged, our activists broke. That's it," Greenpeace U.K. said Tuesday. "Yet they came after us with a million-dollar lawsuit, which they justified for their spending on safety."
The group, which warned that the case had dire implications for the right to protest, credited a "sustained, year-long campaign against the suit" for forcing the oil behemoth to back down. The campaign, according to Greenpeace, "turned the legal move into a PR embarrassment for Shell."
"The case was dubbed the 'Cousin Greg' lawsuit by Forbes after a scene in the Emmy-awarded drama Succession, in which the hapless character threatens to sue Greenpeace to universal dismay," the environmental group noted Tuesday.
Greenpeace is currently facing several other SLAPP suits, including one brought by Energy Transfer, majority-owner of the Dakota Access pipeline. The group said Tuesday that the Energy Transfer suit "threatens the very existence of Greenpeace in the U.S."
"These aggressive legal tactics, the huge sums of money, and attempts to block the right to protest pose a massive threat. It could stop Greenpeace being able to make a real difference on the things that matter most," the organization said Tuesday. "It's part of a growing trend by powerful corporations and governments to crush peaceful protest—using draconian laws or intimidation lawsuits like this."
"It seeks to silence the people most impacted by the climate crisis. This threatens the global fight for climate justice," the group added. "We won't give up. This is Shell versus all of us."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'This Needs to Stop': UN Envoy Condemns Israeli Military's Advance on Syria
"What we are seeing is a violation of the disengagement agreement from 1974," said Geir Pedersen, the United Nations' special envoy to Syria.
Dec 10, 2024
The United Nations' special envoy to Syria said Tuesday that the Israeli military's rapid move to seize Syrian territory following the Assad government's collapse is a grave violation of a decades-old agreement that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claims is now dead.
"What we are seeing is a violation of the disengagement agreement from 1974, so we will obviously, with our colleagues in New York, follow this extremely closely in the hours and days ahead," Geir Pedersen said at a media briefing in Geneva.
Hours earlier, Pedersen told Zeteo's Mehdi Hasan that "this needs to stop," referring to Israel's further encroachment on the occupied and illegally annexed Golan Heights.
"This is a very serious issue," Pedersen said, rejecting Netanyahu's assertion that the 1974 agreement is null. "Let's not start playing with an extremely important part of the peace structure that has been in place."
"The message to Israel is that this needs to stop, What we are seeing in the Golan is a violation of the 1974 agreement. This is a very serious issue."
The UN's Syria Special Envoy tells me on 'Mehdi Unfiltered' that Israel's unlawful actions in Syria need to stop. pic.twitter.com/G7jSWJ8oP0
— Mehdi Hasan (@mehdirhasan) December 9, 2024
Netanyahu, who took the stand for the first time Tuesday in his long-running corruption trial, made clear in the wake of Assad's fall that he views developments in Syria as advantageous for Israel, writing on social media that "the collapse of the Syrian regime is a direct result of the severe blows with which we have struck Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran."
The prime minister also thanked U.S. President-elect Donald Trump for "acceding to my request to recognize Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights, in 2019," adding that the occupied territory "will be an inseparable part of the state of Israel forever."
The Washington Postreported late Monday that "within hours of rebels taking control of Syria's capital, Israel moved to seize military posts in that country’s south, sending its troops across the border for the first time since the official end of the Yom Kippur War in 1974."
"Israeli officials defended the move as limited in scope, aimed at preventing rebels or other local militias from using abandoned Syrian military equipment to target Israel or the Golan Heights, an area occupied by Israel after the 1967 Arab-Israeli war," the Post added. "On Monday, more troops could be seen outside this Druze village adjacent to the border, preparing to cross."
The United States, Israel's main ally and arms supplier, also defended the Israeli military's actions, with a State Department spokesman telling reporters Monday that "every country, I think, would be worried about a possible vacuum that could be filled by terrorist organizations on its border, especially in volatile times, as we obviously are in right now in Syria."
Watch StateSpox justify Israel’s invasion of Syria based on hypotheticals.@shauntandon: Israel has gone across the Golan Heights, the UN said it’s a violation, does the US agree
Miller: Every country would be worried about a possible vacuum that could be filled by terrorist… pic.twitter.com/AA7lNhfSt1
— Assal Rad (@AssalRad) December 9, 2024
On Tuesday, Israel denied reports that its tanks reached a point roughly 16 miles from the Syrian capital as it continued to bomb Syrian army bases.
"Regional security sources and officers within the now fallen Syrian army described Tuesday morning's airstrikes as the heaviest yet, hitting military installations and airbases across Syria, destroying dozens of helicopters and jets, as well as Republican Guard assets in and around Damascus," Reutersreported. The U.S. also bombed dozens of targets in Syria in the aftermath of Assad's fall.
The governments of Iraq, Qatar, Iran, and Saudi Arabia have each denounced the Israeli military's seizure of Syrian land, with Qatar's foreign ministry slamming the move as "a dangerous development and a blatant attack on Syria's sovereignty and unity as well as a flagrant violation of international law."
"The policy of imposing a fait accompli pursued by the Israeli occupation, including its attempts to occupy Syrian territories, will lead the region to further violence and tension," the foreign ministry warned.
Keep ReadingShow Less
New Jersey Governor Signs Freedom to Read Act Barring Book Bans
The law, said the Democrat, "cements New Jersey's role on the forefront of preventing book bans and protecting the intellectual freedom of our educators and students."
Dec 09, 2024
Democratic New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy on Monday signed legislation protecting librarians and prohibiting public schools and libraries from banning books—a move that came as Republican state lawmakers are proscribing a record number of titles, many of them works addressing sexual orientation, gender identity, and racial injustice.
Flanked by educators, librarians, and other advocates, Murphy signed
A.3446/S.2421—known as the Freedom to Read Act—in the Princeton Public Library.
"The Freedom to Read Act cements New Jersey's role on the forefront of preventing book bans and protecting the intellectual freedom of our educators and students," said Murphy. "Across the nation, we have seen attempts to suppress and censor the stories and experiences of others. I'm proud to amplify the voices of our past and present, as there is no better way for our children to prepare for the future than to read freely."
According to a statement from Murphy's office:
Under the law, boards of education and governing boards of public libraries are barred from excluding books because of the origin, background, or views of the material or of its authors. Further, boards of education and governing boards of public libraries are prevented from censoring library material based on a disagreement with a viewpoint, idea, or concept, or solely because an individual finds certain content offensive, unless they are restricting access to developmentally inappropriate material for certain age groups.
The legislation "also provides protections for library staff members against civil and criminal lawsuits related to complying with this law."
New Jersey Association of School Librarians President Karen Grant said that "the Freedom to Read Act recognizes the professionalism, honor, work ethics, and performance of school and public library staff" and "promotes libraries as trusted sources of information and recognizes the many roles that libraries play in students' lives."
"The bill will protect the intellectual freedom of students as well as acknowledge that school libraries are centers for voluntary inquiry, fostering students' growth and development," Grant added. "Additionally, we are grateful for the broad coalition of support from so many organizations for this legislation."
The leader of one of those groups—Garden State Equality executive director Christian Fuscarino—said, "Gov. Murphy just made it clear: In New Jersey, censorship loses, and freedom wins."
"At a time when access to diverse and inclusive materials is under attack across the nation, this legislation sends a powerful message that New Jersey will stand firm in protecting intellectual freedom and fostering a culture of understanding and inclusion," Fuscarino added.
The New Jersey law comes amid a near-tripling in the number of books banned or challenged by Republican state lawmakers and right-wing organizations over the past year, with PEN America counting over 10,000 such titles during the 2023-24 academic year—up from 3,362 titles during the previous scholastic year.
With Murphy's signature, New Jersey joins Minnesota and Illinois in passing state legislation to counter GOP book-banning efforts.
As the Chicago Tribunereported Sunday, "a number of school districts, many of them in deeply conservative areas of south and central Illinois," are giving up state grants rather than adopting principles against book-banning."Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular