November, 30 2009, 09:06am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Mike Ferner, President, Veterans for Peace 419-360-3621
Michael McPhearson, Exec. Dir., Veterans for Peace 314-303-8874
United Anti-War Movement Tells Obama: No Escalation!
Letter ties economic pain at home to suffering in Afghanistan Urges widespread, massive protests day after announcement
WASHINGTON
On November 30th, representatives of 34 antiwar groups delivered an
open letter to President Obama strongly opposing his anticipated decision to
escalate the war in Afghanistan with the commitment of tens of
thousands of additional U.S. troops.
The
document called increased war spending, in light of the ongoing U.S. economic
crisis, an "utter folly" and named the war "a war against ordinary
people, both here in the United States and in Afghanistan," which "if
continued, will result in the deaths of hundreds if not thousands of U.S. troops
and untold thousands of Afghans" and "cause other people in other lands
to despise the U.S." as "the world's richest nation making war on one of
the world's very poorest."
The
signatories pledged "to keep opposing this war in every nonviolent way
possible. We will urge elected representatives to cut all funding for war.
Some of us will be led to withhold our taxes, practice civil resistance, and
promote slowdowns and strikes at schools and workplaces."
Signed
by veterans and peace activists and religious leaders the document represents
one of the most widespread antiwar coalitions in decades, including many of the
organizations which, in 2003, brought millions onto the streets to oppose the
U.S.-Iraq war.
Signers to the letter
are urging their colleagues to participate in local demonstrations the day after
an announcement of troop escalations is made.
The letter ends by warning
President Obama, "we will do everything in our power, as nonviolent peace
activists, to build the kind of massive movement -- which today represents the
sentiments of a majority of the American people - that will play a key role in
ending U.S. war in
Afghanistan. Such is the folly
of your decision and such is the depth of our opposition to the death and
suffering it will cause."
###
President
Barack Obama
The White
House
Washington, D.C.
November
30, 2009
Dear
President Obama,
With
millions of U.S. people feeling the fear and desperation of no longer having a
home; with millions feeling the terror and loss of dignity that comes with
unemployment; with millions of our children slipping further into poverty and
hunger, your decision to deploy thousands more troops and throw hundreds of
billions more dollars into prolonging the profoundly tragic war in Afghanistan
strikes us as utter folly. We believe this decision represents a war against
ordinary people, both here in the United
States and in Afghanistan. The war in Afghanistan, if continued, will result in the
deaths of hundreds if not thousands of U.S. troops, and untold thousands of
Afghans.
Polls
indicate that a majority of those who labored with so much hope to elect you as
president now fear that you will make a wrong decision -- a tragic decision that
will destroy their dreams for America. More tragic is the price of
your decision. It will be paid with the blood, suffering and broken hearts of
our young troops, their loved ones and an even greater number of Afghan men,
women and children.
The
U.S. military claims that
this war must be fought to protect U.S. national security, but we believe it is
being waged to expand U.S. empire in the interests of oil
and pipeline companies.
Your
decision to escalate U.S.
troops and continue the occupation will cause other people in other lands to
despise the U.S. as a menacing military power
that violates international law. Keep in mind that to most of the peoples of the
world, widening the war in Afghanistan will look exactly like
what it is: the world's richest nation making war on one of the world's very
poorest.
The war
must be ended now. Humanitarian aid programs should address the deep poverty
that has always been a part of the life of Afghan people.
We will
keep opposing this war in every nonviolent way possible. We will urge elected
representatives to cut all funding for war. Some of us will be led to withhold
our taxes, practice civil resistance, and promote slowdowns and strikes at
schools and workplaces.
In short,
President Obama, we will do everything in our power, as nonviolent peace
activists, to build the kind of massive movement --which today represents the
sentiments of a majority of the American people--that will play a key role in
ending U.S. war in Afghanistan.
Such would
be the folly of a decision to escalate troop deployment and such is the depth of
our opposition to the death and suffering it would cause.
Sincerely,
(Signers names listed in alphabetical order)
Jack
Amoureux, Executive Committee
Military
Families Speak Out
Michael
Baxter
Catholic
Peace Fellowship
Medea
Benjamin, Co-founder
Global
Exchange
Frida
Berrigan
Witness
Against Torture
Elaine
Brower
World
Can't Wait
Leslie
Cagan, Co-Founder
United for
Peace and Justice
Tom
Cornell
Catholic
Peace Fellowship
Matt
Daloisio
War
Resisters League
Marie
Dennis, Director
Maryknoll
Office for Global Concerns
Robby
Diesu
Our
Spring Break
Pat
Elder, Co-coordinator
National
Network Opposing Militarization of Youth
Mike
Ferner, President
Veterans
For Peace
Joy
First, Convener
National
Campaign for Nonviolent Resistance
Sara
Flounders, Co-Director
International
Action Center
Sunil
Freeman
ANSWER
Coalition, Washington,
D.C.
Diana
Gibson, Coordinator
Multifaith
Voices for Peace and Justice
Jerry
Gordon, Co-Coordinator
National
Assembly To End Iraq and
Afghanistan Wars and
Occupation
Rabbi
Lynn Gottlieb
Shomer
Shalom Network for Jewish Nonviolence
David
Hartsough
Peaceworkers
San
Francisco
Mike
Hearington, Steering Committee
Georgia
Peace and Justice Coalition, Atlanta
Larry
Holmes, Coordinator
Troops
Out Now Coalition
Mark
C. Johnson, Ph.D., Executive Director
Fellowship
of Reconciliation
Hany
Khalil
War
Times
Kathy
Kelly, Co-Coordinator
Voices
for Creative Nonviolence
Leslie
Kielson , Co-Chair
United
for Peace and Justice
Malachy
Kilbride
National
Campaign for Nonviolent Resistance
Adele
Kubein, Executive Committee
Military
Families Speak Out
Jeff
Mackler, Co-Coordinator
National
Assembly to End Iraq and
Afghanistan Wars and
Occupations
Imam
Abdul Malik Mujahid, Chair-Elect
World
Parliament of Religion
Michael
T. McPhearson, Executive Director
Veterans
For Peace
Gael
Murphy, Co-founder
Code
Pink
Michael
Nagler, Founder
Metta
Center
for Nonviolence
Max
Obuszewski, Director
Baltimore
Nonviolence Center
Pete
Perry
Peace
of the Action
Dave
Robinson, Executive
Director
Pax Christi USA
Terry
Rockefeller
September
11th
Families
For Peaceful Tomorrows
Samina
Sundas, Founding Executive Director
American
Muslim Voice
David
Swanson
AfterDowningStreet.org
Carmen
Trotta
Catholic
Worker
Nancy
Tsou, Coordinator
Rockland
Coalition for Peace and Justice
Kevin
Zeese
Voters
for Peace
Keep reading...Show less
LATEST NEWS
National Team Member Becomes at Least 265th Palestinian Footballer Killed by Israel in Gaza
Muhannad al-Lili's killing by Israeli airstrike came as the world mourned the death of Portugal and Liverpool star Diogo Jota and his brother André Silva in a car crash in Spain.
Jul 04, 2025
Muhannad Fadl al-Lili, captain of the Al-Maghazi Services Club and a member of Palestine's national football team, died Thursday from injuries suffered during an Israeli airstrike on his family home in the central Gaza Strip earlier this week, making him the latest of hundreds of Palestinian athletes killed since the start of Israel's genocidal onslaught.
Al-Maghazi Services Club announced al-Lili's death in a Facebook tribute offering condolences to "his family, relatives, friends, and colleagues" and asking "Allah to shower him with his mercy."
The Palestine Football Association (PFA) said that "on Monday, a drone fired a missile at Muhannad's room on the third floor of his house, which led to severe bleeding in the skull."
"During the war of extermination against our people, Muhannad tried to travel outside Gaza to catch up with his wife, who left the strip for Norway on a work mission before the outbreak of the war," the association added. "But he failed to do so, and was deprived of seeing his eldest son, who was born outside the Gaza Strip."
According to the PFA, al-Lili is at least the 265th Palestinian footballer and 585th athlete to be killed by Israeli forces since they launched their assault and siege on Gaza following the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel. Sports journalist Leyla Hamed says 439 Palestinian footballers have been killed by Israel.
Overall, Israel's war—which is the subject of an International Court of Justice (ICJ) genocide case—has left more than 206,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing, and around 2 million more forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened, according to Gaza officials.
The Palestine Chronicle contrasted the worldwide press coverage of the car crash deaths of Portuguese footballer Diogo Jota and his brother André Silva with the media's relative silence following al-Lili's killing.
"Jota's death was a tragedy that touched millions," the outlet wrote. "Yet the death of Muhannad al-Lili... was met with near-total silence from global sports media."
Last week, a group of legal experts including two United Nations special rapporteurs appealed to the Fédération Internationale de Football Association, the world football governing body, demanding that its Governance Audit and Compliance Committee take action against the Israel Football Association for violating FIFA rules by playing matches on occupied Palestinian territory.
In July 2024, the ICJ found that Israel's then-57-year occupation of Palestine—including Gaza—is an illegal form of apartheid that should be ended as soon as possible.
During their invasion and occupation of Gaza, Israeli forces have also used sporting facilities including Yarmouk Stadium for the detention of Palestinian men, women, and children—many of whom have reported torture and other abuse at the hands of their captors.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Highly Inspiring' Court Ruling Affirms Nations' Legal Duty to Combat Climate Emergency
"While the United States and some other major polluters have chosen to ignore climate science, the rest of the international community is advancing protections," said one observer.
Jul 04, 2025
In a landmark advisory opinion published Thursday, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights—of which the United States, the world's second-biggest carbon polluter, is not a member—affirmed the right to a stable climate and underscored nations' duty to act to protect it and address the worsening planetary emergency.
"States must refrain from any conduct that reverses, slows down, or truncates the outcome of measures necessary to protect human rights in the face of the impacts of climate change," a summary of the 234-page ruling states. "Any rollback of climate or environmental policies that affect human rights must be exceptional, duly justified based on objective criteria, and comply with standards of necessity and proportionality."
"The court also held that... states must take all necessary measures to reduce the risks arising, on the one hand, from the degradation of the global climate system and, on the other, from exposure and vulnerability to the effects of such degradation," the summary adds.
"States must refrain from any conduct that reverses, slows down, or truncates the outcome of measures necessary to protect human rights in the face of the impacts of climate change."
The case was brought before the Costa-Rica based IACtHR by Chile and Colombia, both of which "face the daily challenge of dealing with the consequences of the climate emergency, including the proliferation of droughts, floods, landslides, and fires, among others."
"These phenomena highlight the need to respond urgently and based on the principles of equity, justice, cooperation, and sustainability, with a human rights-based approach," the court asserted.
IACtHR President Judge Nancy Hernández López said following the ruling that "states must not only refrain from causing significant environmental damage but have the positive obligation to take measures to guarantee the protection, restoration, and regeneration of ecosystems."
"Causing massive and irreversible environmental harm...alters the conditions for a healthy life on Earth to such an extent that it creates consequences of existential proportions," she added. "Therefore, it demands universal and effective legal responses."
The advisory opinion builds on two landmark decisions last year. In April 2024, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the Swiss government violated senior citizens' human rights by refusing to abide by scientists' warnings to rapidly phase out fossil fuel production.
The following month, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea found in an advisory opinion that greenhouse gas emissions are marine pollution under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and that signatories to the accord "have the specific obligation to adopt laws and regulations to prevent, reduce, and control" them.
The IACtHR advisory opinion is expected to boost climate and human rights lawsuits throughout the Americas, and to impact talks ahead of November's United Nations Climate Change Conference, or COP30, in Belém, Brazil.
Climate defenders around the world hailed Thursday's advisory opinion, with United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk calling it "a landmark step forward for the region—and beyond."
"As the impact of climate change becomes ever more visible across the world, the court is clear: People have a right to a stable climate and a healthy environment," Türk added. "States have a bedrock obligation under international law not to take steps that cause irreversible climate and environmental damage, and they have a duty to act urgently to take the necessary measures to protect the lives and rights of everyone—both those alive now and the interests of future generations."
Amnesty International head of strategic litigation Mandi Mudarikwa said, "Today, the Inter-American Court affirmed and clarified the obligations of states to respect, ensure, prevent, and cooperate in order to realize human rights in the context of the climate crisis."
"Crucially, the court recognized the autonomous right to a healthy climate for both individuals and communities, linked to the right to a healthy environment," Mudarikwa added. "The court also underscored the obligation of states to protect cross-border climate-displaced persons, including through the issuance of humanitarian visas and protection from deportation."
Delta Merner, lead scientist at the Science Hub for Climate Litigation at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a statement that "this opinion sets an important precedent affirming that governments have a legal duty to regulate corporate conduct that drives climate harm."
"Though the United States is not a party to the treaty governing the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, this opinion should be a clarion call for transnational fossil fuel companies that have deceived the public for decades about the risks of their products," Merner added. "The era of accountability is here."
Markus Gehring, a fellow and director of studies in law at Hughes Hall at the University of Cambridge in England, called the advisory opinion "highly inspiring" and "seminal."
Drew Caputo, vice president of litigation for lands, wildlife, and oceans at Earthjustice, said that "the Inter-American Court's ruling makes clear that climate change is an overriding threat to human rights in the world."
"Governments must act to cut carbon emissions drastically," Caputo stressed. "While the United States and some other major polluters have chosen to ignore climate science, the rest of the international community is advancing protections for all from the realities of climate harm."
Climate litigation is increasing globally in the wake of the 2015 Paris climate agreement. In the Americas, Indigenous peoples, children, and green groups are among those who have been seeking climate justice via litigation.
However, in the United States, instead of acknowledging the climate emergency, President Donald Trump has declared an "energy emergency" while pursuing a "drill, baby, drill" policy of fossil fuel extraction and expansion.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Admin Quietly Approves Massive Crude Oil Expansion Project
"This thinly analyzed decision threatens the lifeblood of the American Southwest," said one environmental attorney.
Jul 04, 2025
The Trump administration has quietly fast-tracked a massive oil expansion project that environmentalists and Democratic lawmakers warned could have a destructive impact on local communities and the climate.
As reported recently by the Oil and Gas Journal, the plan "involves expanding the Wildcat Loadout Facility, a key transfer point for moving Uinta basin crude oil to rail lines that transport it to refineries along the Gulf Coast."
The goal of the plan is to transfer an additional 70,000 barrels of oil per day from the Wildcat Loadout Facility, which is located in Utah, down to the Gulf Coast refineries via a route that runs along the Colorado River. Controversially, the Trump administration is also plowing ahead with the project by invoking emergency powers to address energy shortages despite the fact that the United States for the last couple of years has been producing record levels of domestic oil.
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) issued a joint statement condemning the Trump administration's push to approve the project while rushing through environmental impact reviews.
"The Bureau of Land Management's decision to fast-track the Wildcat Loadout expansion—a project that would transport an additional 70,000 barrels of crude oil on train tracks along the Colorado River—using emergency procedures is profoundly flawed," the Colorado Democrats said. "These procedures give the agency just 14 days to complete an environmental review—with no opportunity for public input or administrative appeal—despite the project's clear risks to Colorado. There is no credible energy emergency to justify bypassing public involvement and environmental safeguards. The United States is currently producing more oil and gas than any country in the world."
On Thursday, the Bureau of Land Management announced the completion of its accelerated environmental review of the project, drawing condemnation from climate advocates.
Wendy Park, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, described the administration's rush to approve the project as "pure hubris," especially given its "refusal to hear community concerns about oil spill risks." She added that "this fast-tracked review breezed past vital protections for clean air, public safety and endangered species."
Landon Newell, staff attorney for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, accused the Trump administration of manufacturing an energy emergency to justify plans that could have a dire impact on local habitats.
"This thinly analyzed decision threatens the lifeblood of the American Southwest by authorizing the transport of more than 1 billion gallons annually of additional oil on railcars traveling alongside the Colorado River," he said. "Any derailment and oil spill would have a devastating impact on the Colorado River and the communities and ecosystems that rely upon it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular