Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth

Welcome to Infoshop News
Thursday, September 09 2010 @ 07:49 AM UTC

Grand Rapids Wobbly Participates in Occupation of Senator Office in Response to Troop Escalation

Anti-War Activism

Why We Occupied Senator Levin’s Office Today, we occupied Senator Carl Levin’s office in Grand Rapids as a protest against the current administration’s decision to escalate the US war in Afghanistan. We do this not simply because we are against war, but because this decision by the Obama administration is unjust.

Grand Rapids Wobbly Participates in Occupation of Senator Levin's Office in Response to Troop Escalation in Afghanistan

IWW.org - 12/01/2009

Today, we occupied Senator Carl Levin’s office in Grand Rapids as a protest against the current administration’s decision to escalate the US war in Afghanistan. We do this not simply because we are against war, but because this decision by the Obama administration is unjust.

The US is not in Afghanistan to bring Democracy – Since 1979, the US has supported anti-democratic forces such as the Mujahadeen, the Northern Alliance, the Taliban and a variety of individual warlords. The US has also supported the current regime of Karzai, knowing full well that his administration has been corrupt from the beginning.

The US is not in Afghanistan to protect the rights of Women – The groups of armed men that the US has supported for decades, like the Mujahadeen, are some of the most misogynist groups in that country. Even under the current government of Karzai, a law was passed that essentially legalized the rape of women. Afghan Women’s groups like RAWA and the Afghan Women’s Mission have made it very clear that if those of us in the US want to support women in Afghanistan then we should work for an end to the US military occupation of their country.

The US is not in Afghanistan to Prevent Terrorism – Many credible members of the US intelligence community have stated in recent years that there is no link between the Taliban and Al Qaida. The Taliban did not attack the US on September 11, 2001. The Taliban are a nationalist group that wants the US out of their country. In fact, we would say that the US occupation of Afghanistan only gives rise to potential acts of terror and feeds a growing anti-American sentiment.

What the US is doing in Afghanistan has more to do with long-term strategic interests. We believe that the US recognizes that Afghanistan is a bridge between the Middle East and Central Asia, that it borders Iran, Pakistan, China and other important countries. We believe that the US sees Afghanistan as playing an important role in the control of future resources in that region, both because it will likely be a major trans-shipment point to move oil and gas in the region, but also because it can act as a US outpost to prevent China, India and Russia from gaining access to the region’s resources.

The US is currently expanding military bases it has had there since 2001, as well as constructing new bases in strategic locations throughout Afghanistan, which implies that the US, like in Iraq, has no plans to leave that country for a long time to come. The US recently built a 1,100 person prison facility at Bagram Air Base, which is another indication that the US has no timely withdraw plans.

We are occupying Senator Levin’s office today because this war is now primarily at the feet of the Democratic Party. The Democrats control the White House and the Congress and is therefore the major force behind this escalating war in Afghanistan. Senator Levin may have tactical disagreements with how the war is being prosecuted (he has supported more training for an Afghan Army), but he supports the fundamental premise of the White House that the US occupation of Afghanistan is in the National Security interest of the US.

We know that our occupation of Senator Levin’s office will not stop the escalating US war in Afghanistan, but we cannot be silent. Senator Levin needs to know that he cannot support President Obama’s prosecution of this brutal war in our name.

We also act today in order to send a message to those who call themselves progressives. We strongly encourage all progressives to ask themselves if they really believe the lies about Afghanistan and to stop supporting this escalating war. We ask them to stop being silent and to take action that leads toward an end of the US occupation in Afghanistan.

We ask people of good will to think about the escalating cost of this war, which as of today, has cost over $232 billion dollars for the country and $122 million from the residents of Grand Rapids. Considering the current economic struggles that people face in this community, how can we support a war that costs so much?

We ask people to think about the relationship between the US military industrial complex and global warming (see the book Green Zone: The Environmental Costs of Militarism). The US military is one of the single largest polluters on the planet and exists primarily for the purpose of stealing other countries fossil fuels. (see the film Blood & Oil, by Michael Klare).

We ask people to think about whether or not they want their family members or their friends who might be deployed to Afghanistan to participate in the killing of innocent Afghani civilians or to come home traumatized, wounded or dead. There is a growing movement of US troops who oppose the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and we need to hear their voices.

We ask people to talk about this war, to educate themselves and to take action – write letters, sign petitions, yes, but more importantly engage in direct action! Take to the streets, prevent young men and women from entering the US military, confront the corporations that are profiting from this war, don’t pay your taxes, don’t vote for people who support war, organize a march, organize a sit in, shut down a military recruiting center . . . do something!

End the US Occupation of Afghanistan Now!

Bring the Troops Home!

Pay Reparations to Afghanistan for the Damage We Have Done to Their Country! >

Related Links

Share
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Ask
  • Kirtsy
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • Twitter
  • SlashDot
  • Reddit
  • MySpace
  • Fark
  • Del.icio.us
  • Blogmarks
  • Yahoo Buzz

Trackback

Trackback URL for this entry: http://news.infoshop.org/trackback.php?id=20091205230123263

Here's what others have to say about 'Grand Rapids Wobbly Participates in Occupation of Senator Office in Response to Troop Escalation':

http://www.withoutadjectives.com/?p=122
[...] in Occupation of Senator Levin’s Office By Lounge DⒶddy, 6 December, 2009, No Comment From a statement posted up at Infoshop News , and also at the Industrial Workers of the World website: Today, we occupied Senator Carl Levin’s office [...] [read more]
Tracked on Sunday, December 06 2009 @ 06:16 PM UTC

http://www.withoutadjectives.com/?p=106
[...] The answer, thankfully, seems to be a rip-roaring no. The anti-war movement is sincere. From  a statement posted up at Infoshop News , and also at the Industrial Workers of the World website: Today, we occupied Senator Carl Levin’s office in [...] [read more]
Tracked on Saturday, December 12 2009 @ 08:10 PM UTC

http://www.datelinezero.com/?p=106
[...] The answer, thankfully, seems to be a rip-roaring no. The anti-war movement is sincere. From  a statement posted up at Infoshop News , and also at the Industrial Workers of the World website: Today, we occupied Senator Carl Levin’s office in [...] [read more]
Tracked on Monday, July 12 2010 @ 07:33 PM UTC

Grand Rapids Wobbly Participates in Occupation of Senator Office in Response to Troop Escalation | 7 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Grand Rapids Wobbly Participates in Occupation of Senator Office in Response to Troop Escalation
Authored by: engine summer on Monday, December 07 2009 @ 03:39 AM UTC

calling activist sit-ins "occupations" is the bummer trend of the year

Grand Rapids Wobbly Participates in Occupation of Senator Office in Response to Troop Escalation
Authored by: Admin on Monday, December 07 2009 @ 10:08 AM UTC
Might be a bummer trend, but in the U.S. at least, building sit-ins on college campuses have long been called occupations. I remember when students used that word for our building occupations over South Africa apartheid in the 1980s. It's just a slightly different meaning for the word.

Chuck
Grand Rapids Wobbly Participates in Occupation of Senator Office in Response to Troop Escalation
Authored by: communitycntrl on Monday, December 07 2009 @ 01:59 PM UTC

at least people are beginning to get oriented better conceptually, even if actions don't keep up. that is always the case.

but yes: occupations make no demands, they take. occupations don't have a definite end. occupations are not civil disobedience.

perhaps that should be made clearer, as to how they differ from activism / voluntarism.

Grand Rapids Wobbly Participates in Occupation of Senator Office in Response to Troop Escalation
Authored by: MagonistaRevolt on Monday, December 07 2009 @ 02:28 PM UTC

You don't just redefine terms because a dozen people in New York tell you to. Occupations have demands infinitely more often than they don't. Occupations even become more widespread and popular when they incorporate demands (see the UC occupations). Get off of your fucking high horses.

Great job, Grand Rapids IWW!

Grand Rapids Wobbly Participates in Occupation of Senator Office in Response to Troop Escalation
Authored by: redsdisease on Tuesday, December 08 2009 @ 01:53 AM UTC

Goddamnit. An occupation is just that: occupying space and refusing to leave. This whole no demands thing is nonsense and more about semantics than anything.

Grand Rapids Wobbly Participates in Occupation of Senator Office in Response to Troop Escalation
Authored by: engine summer on Tuesday, December 08 2009 @ 11:41 AM UTC

actually, i think all of you are wrong.

 

the distinction i would make, anyway, is that an occupation attempts to control a space and keep agents of the state out. "peacefully entering and refusing to leave" is a sit-in protest which does not contest control of a space, but interrupts its function and waits to be either humored sufficiently or dragged out.

 

this is also why some of us have had issues with the description of some of the recent campus study-ins and sit-ins as "occupations". there is a qualitative difference between a situation where occupiers control the doors of a building, either with physical barricades or through sheer numbers and political will, versus one where cops and bureaucrats circulate freely (as in any other space within capital).

Grand Rapids Wobbly Participates in Occupation of Senator Office in Response to Troop Escalation
Authored by: communitycntrl on Tuesday, December 08 2009 @ 11:53 AM UTC

totally agree. i guess i felt it was implied by saying "occupations take" that non-occupiers would not be allowed in....

but good clarification.