The Tulsa Peace Fellowship's Counter-Recruitment Update/Digest, for June 2010

[Tony Nuspl]

Truth in Recruiting - "Don't Believe the Hype!"
The Tulsa Peace Fellowship's Counter-Recruitment Update/Digest, for June
2010


Lead story from the past month's news:

Md. 1st to bar schools releasing tests to military
--The Maryland law was signed last month and bars schools from automatically releasing personal/private information to
military recruiters

Al Goldis / AP

Toria Latnie is shown Wednesday, May 12, 2010, outside her home in Lansing, Mich. Latnie said a counselor at her
son's Florida charter high school told seniors in late 2008 that a
military aptitude test was a requirement for graduation. She
researched the exam online and refused to allow her son to take the
test.

"I was angry, very angry," said Latnie, a mother of five. "I felt lied to, deceived, like people were
trying to go behind my back and give my child's private information
to the military."

related story:
Father supports son's decision to ignore military recruiters
--author of Rethinking the Good War gives youth reasons not to join
the military

quote:
"The Marines may be looking for a few good high school students, but my son is not available. Is yours?"

Pentagon targets undocumented Hispanic youth in the so-called "DREAM" act
--the militarization of the immigrant civil rights movement
--the vulnerable Spanish-speaking population without legal papers are being promised
the world in exchange for becoming foreign
legionnaires

quote:
"What one has to realize about the DREAM Act is that the military option wasn’t attached. The military option was there at the beginning. The Pentagon
helped write the DREAM Act. That’s what people have to
realize.
~Jorge Mariscal, Vietnam veteran and professor of Chicano studies at the University of California in San Diego.

facts & figures:
It is illegal to enlist a U.S. immigrant who does not already have a "green card." 
Without this green card, a Hispanic in the U.S. forces has no legal
standing, and no contractual basis for defending their rights, if
they agree to enlist.  The promises made to illegal immigrants
by military recruiters are constrained by many conditions, which is
to say, the military is making no promise at all.
(DISCLAIMER: TPF makes no claim about the accuracy of this information; legal
issues are subject to change at any time. If you are in need of legal
representation, contact a lawyer.)

The term "foreign legionnaires" is a general term for troops joining a
foreign army. The practice has a long imperial history, dating back
at least as far as the Roman Empire, which recruited non-citizens
into Auxiliary units on the promise of them receiving Roman
citizenship for themselves and their descendents at the end of their
service.

As of 2006: Of the more than 2,400 U.S. casualties in Iraq since 2003, 270 have been Latino, according to the Department of
Defense.

Since 1980, there have been 1,606 dead soldiers of Hispanic or Latino
origin involved U.S. conflicts.
(source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), report dated 26 Feb 2010. under "Active Duty
Military Deaths—Race/Ethnicity Summary," as of July 25,
2009)

N.B. If you have updated figures for Latino soldiers killed in Iraq and/or
Afghanistan, please send the information and cite your source for
your figures, in an email to TPF: [e-mail]

US Military Targets Latinos with Extensive Recruitment Campaign
--video report from Marco Amador of Producciones Cimarrón will be screened at the US Social Forum in
Detroit in June

quote:
"The increased militarization of American schools is not happening without a fight. Anti-militarism activists are waging their own
struggle."
~Marco Amador

"It seems like a setup to me. I feel like there’s a setup that we are really pushing
certain kinds of kids into the military, and it always impacts upon
those who are the poorest and those who are the darkest, who don’t
see the opportunities or don’t have the opportunities."
~Arlene Inouye, a teacher in the Los Angeles Unified School District and the
coordinator of Coalition for Alternatives to
Militarism in Our Schools

"Who are going to be the first ones on the front lines? Like always, Operation Brown Shield—young Raza or African students who are going to be thrown
into the front lines to defend American capital while living
in one of the poorest parts of America."
~Ron Góchez, a community organizer and teacher at Santee High School in South
Central Los Angeles and a member of the Association of Raza Educators

“The Guard is being sent overseas without authorization from Congress,” says Vermont state representative Mike Fisher
--The Founding Fathers did not envision the state “militias”
being used in foreign invasions and foreign occupations, 7,000
miles away
--The National Guard has become virtually indistinguishable from the nation’s active-duty forces in the
Iraq/Afghanistan war zones

quote:
“Certainly, these deployments are not what members of the National Guard signed up for – it was not what they were advertised when they were  recruited, it’s not the
mission of the National Guard, which should be homeland defense,”
insists Ben Manski, a Wisconsin attorney who serves as the executive
director of the Liberty Tree and works with the Bring
the Guard Home project.

facts & figures:

• As of April 24, 2010, some 622 members of the Guard have been killed in the dual occupation of Afghanistan & Iraq since 2001,
  although in neither case was the Guard "repelling an invasion"

• It is estimated that more than half of veteran suicides – 53 percent – are among National Guard members returning home from war.
  

• Since 1933 the law has recognized the Guard as having “dual enlistment,” in that soldiers serve as part of both the federal Army and the state
  militia. It was in 1902 that state militias became an appendage of
  the federal government.
  

AP tally: 1,000th US military death in Afghanistan
--More than 430 of the U.S. dead were killed in Afghanistan after Obama took office in January 2009

more facts & figures:

So far in Iraq, 4,400 Americans, 318 allied forces, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died to advance the agenda originally touted by the Cheney crowd
that led America into a war to depose Saddam. The goal: to turn Iraq
into an American protectorate in order to make tens of billions of
dollars for themselves and their corporate allies.
source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mj-rosenberg/the-coming-iran-war_b_59...

Veterans for Peace reminds us that the military casualty count, in Afghanistan or any other war, is miniscule in comparison to civilian casualties.

	U.S. Military Deaths	Civilian Deaths
Iraq	4,254	1,366,350
Afghanistan	1,036	32,969

source: http://rootswire.org/content/1000-us-dead-afghanistan-how-many-more

file under: increasingly aerial occupation

Operators of Drones Are Faulted in Deaths of 23 Afghan Civilians

epitaph for this edition of "Truth in Recruiting"
The "basic rule"  of the Geneva Conventions regarding the protection of civilians

lead story

Md. 1st to bar schools releasing tests to military
By KATHLEEN MILLER, Associated Press Writer

May 12, 2010

Annapolis, Md. (AP) -- A first-of-its-kind law bars public high schools in Maryland
from automatically sending student scores on a widely used military
aptitude test to recruiters, a practice that critics say was giving
the armed forces backdoor access to young people without their
parents' consent.

School districts around the country have the choice of whether to administer the Armed Services Vocational
Aptitude Battery exam, and ones that offer it typically pass the
scores and students' contact information directly to the
military.

The Maryland law was signed last month and bars schools from automatically releasing the information to military
recruiters. Instead, students, and their parents if they are under
18, will have to decide whether to give the information to the
military. The law takes effect in July. One other state, Hawaii, has
a similar policy for its schools, but not a law.

Roughly 650,000 U.S. high school students took the exam in the 2008-2009
school year, and the Department of Defense says scores for 92 percent
of them were automatically sent to military recruiters.

Defense Department spokeswoman Eileen Lainez said in an e-mail that "parents
and other influencers are in the best position to help advise
students of various career opportunities, and the pros and cons
associated with each of the choices."

Members of the Maryland Coalition to Protect Student
Privacy, which pushed for the legislation, argued the
military isn't upfront about the test's real purpose. Coalition
member and high school teacher Pat Elder said he became involved in
the issue after volunteering on a phone hot line for troubled
soldiers. Many told him they hadn't considered the military until a
recruiter who'd seen their scores contacted them.

"I've spoken to 'C' or 'D' students who are called by a recruiter and told
'Dude, you're really good at this kind of stuff,' and that's what it
takes for them to join," said Elder, who teaches at the Muslim
Community School in Potomac, Md. "There is an insidious,
psychological element to these tests."

While Maryland is the first state to pass a law prohibiting the automatic release of
scores to military recruiters, some individual school districts
elsewhere, including the Los Angeles school system, have policies to
the same effect. Hawaii's Department of Education implemented its
statewide policy last year. Four Maryland counties — Howard,
Frederick, Montgomery and Prince George's — also blocked the direct
release of scores to recruiters before the state law was
passed.

Maryland state senator Jamie Raskin, D-Montgomery, said he sponsored the bill partly
because school districts' approaches varied. He said constituents
also told him they didn't think local school districts knew their
options.

"They thought they had to turn over information to recruiters," Raskin said.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2010/05/12/nationa...



related story:
Military recruitment pamphlets and brochures belie the facts

U.S. Military involved in foreign wars of illegal invasion and occupation, not so-called "defense"
by Laurence M. Vance
May 7, 2010

The theme of defense shows up on all four pages of the recruiting brochure plus the two reply cards. But how
much of what the U.S. military does is actually related to defense?
What do the following practices of the military have to do with the
defense of the United States?

    * Nation building in foreign countries
    * Launching preemptive strikes in foreign countries
    * Fighting wars in foreign countries
    * Establishing democracy in foreign countries
    * Changing regimes in foreign countries
    * Assassinating people in foreign countries
    * Stationing troops in foreign countries
    * Maintaining bases in foreign countries
    * Training armies in foreign countries
    * Opening markets in foreign countries
    * Enforcing no-fly zones in foreign countries
    * Rebuilding infrastructure in foreign countries
    * Reviving public services in foreign countries
    * Promoting good governance in foreign countries
    * Invading foreign countries
    * Occupying foreign countries
    * Unleashing civil unrest in foreign countries

All the while, of course, perpetuating the myth that the military is defending our freedoms.  The
Department of Defense couldn’t even defend its own headquarters on
September 11th. It was too busy occupying, defending, and building
golf courses in other countries.

Although World War II ended in 1945, the United States still has tens of thousands of soldiers
stationed in Germany, Italy, and Japan. I recently documented that
the U.S. military has over 700 foreign military bases with troops
stationed in 148 countries and 11 territories in every corner of the
globe.

The U.S. military should be engaged exclusively in defending the United States, not defending other countries, and
certainly not attacking, invading, or occupying them. Using the
military for any other purpose than the actual defense of the United
States perverts the purpose of the military.

The Marines may be looking for a few good high school students, but my son is not
available. Is yours? Do you want your son to be a bomber pilot for
Obama? Aside from the military’s lack of actually providing defense
services, I have given other reasons for people not to join the
military.

By the way, my son will not be sending in the reply card this time either.

byline: Laurence M. Vance writes from Pensacola, FL. He is the author of Christianity and War and Other
Essays Against the Warfare State and The Revolution that
Wasn't. His newest book is Rethinking the Good
War.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance202.html

More by the same
author:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance163.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance125.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance124.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance102.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance21.html

Pentagon targets undocumented Hispanic youth in the so-called "DREAM" act
--the vulnerable Spanish-speaking population without legal papers are being
promised the world in exchange for becoming foreign legionnaires

"On the DREAM Act: An Open Letter to Latino and Latina students and all
leaders of immigrant rights organizations"
By Fernando Suárez Del Solar

In the wake of the failed immigration reform, passionate discussions have arisen among various organizations both
for and against the DREAM Act.
It give me great joy to see students taking non-violent action to find a solution to the
immigration question. Many of them came to the United States as
children and have finished their high school education. Now, because
they lack legal documents, they face an uncertain future that may
deny them the opportunity to attend college or find a decent job. The
DREAM Act offers them a light at the end of an otherwise dark and
uncertain road.
I see students on fasts, in marches, lobbying elected officials, all in the name of the DREAM Act's passage. But
BEWARE. Be very careful. Because our honorable youth with their
dreams and wishes to serve their new country are being tricked and
manipulated in an immoral and criminal way.
Why do I say this? Simply put, the DREAM Act proposes two years of college as a pathway
to permanent residency but it also includes a second option linked to
the so-called war on terror-"two years of military service."
Our young people may not see that this is a covert draft in which
thousands of youth from Latino families will be sent to Iraq or some
other war torn nation where they will have to surrender their moral
values and become a war criminal or perhaps return home in black bags
on their way to a tomb drenched with their parents' tears.
How many of our youth can afford college? How many will be able to take
the educational option? Unfortunately very few because the existing
system locks out the children of working families with high tuition
and inflated admissions criteria. Most will be forced to take the
military option to get their green card. But what good is a green
card to a dead person? What good is a green card to a young person
severely wounded in mind and body?
I ask our undocumented youth to read the following passages regarding the plans of the Pentagon and
the Bush administration:
In his testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee on July 10, 2006, Under Secretary of Defense David
Chu said: "According to an April 2006 study from the National
Immigration Law Center, there are an estimated 50,000 to 65,000
undocumented alien young adults who entered the U.S. at an early age
and graduate from high school each year, many of whom are bright,
energetic and potentially interested in military service...Provisions
of S. 2611, such ! as the DREAM Act, would provide these young people
the opportunity of serving the United States in uniform."
More recently, Lt. Col. Margaret Stock of the U.S. Army Reserve and a
faculty member at West Point told a reporter that the DREAM Act could
help recruiters meet their goals by providing a "highly
qualified cohort of young people" without the unknown personal
details that would accompany foreign recruits. "They are already
going to come vetted by Homeland Security. They will already have
graduated from high school," she said. "They are prime
candidates."
(Citations from research by Prof. Jorge Mariscal, UC San Diego)
As you can see, our undocumented youth are being targeted by military recruiters. And equally important is
something that few people have mentioned-there is no such thing as a
two year military contract. Every enlistment is a total of eight
years.
Given these facts, I invite all young people who are filled with hope and dreams and energy to fight for human rights and for a
fair pathway to legalization. But they must also demand that the
military option of the DREAM Act be replaced by a community service
option (as appeared in earlier drafts of the legislation) so that
community service or college become the two pathways to permanent
residency. Only then will they avoid becoming victimized by a
criminal war as my son Jesús Alberto did when he died on March
27, 2003 after stepping on an illegal U.S. cluster bomb. Through
education or community service our undocumented youth can contribute
to their communities and their future will be filled with peace and
justice.
Fernando Suarez del Solar
Proyecto Guerrero Azteca por la
Paz
www.guerreroazteca.org

http://aztecapp.netrootz.com/web_pages/view_web_page.asp?group=104&...

TPF comment:  The underhanded military
recruitment provisions should be
stripped from the bill, before it is brought up for a vote. Hispanics
are being targeted by the Pentagon in
this proposed legislation, only due to enlistment shortfalls. 
The military recruitment provisions of
the act only make things worse for undocumented Hispanics;
Spanish-speaking youth do not "dream"
of being killed or of committing atrocities in far off Afghanistan or
Iraq.  Putting their lives at risk in the military, only for the
conditional promise of citizenship, is unconscionable. 
Would these already vulnerable youth really be worse off returning to
their country of birth, compared to risking their lives in a hostile
country like Iraq or Afghanistan?  Can
they really ever get out of the U.S. military, if they agree to be
foreign legionnaires?  They would have absolutely no rights, if
they agreed to enlist.
 What kind of bargain is that?


US Military Targets Latinos with Extensive Recruitment Campaign
--Do the youth that are involved in the DREAM movement fully understand
the implications of accepting the militarization
of the immigrant rights movement?
May 18, 2010

excerpt from the interview of Marco Amador by Amy Goodman on Democracy
Now!

For us, the DREAM Act became part of the film as we started looking into the military recruitment of the Latino community
and how the Pentagon was spending millions and millions of dollars
into studying this community and seeing how they can bring them more
into the military life. We saw that, along that, one of those issues
was the DREAM Act. The DREAM Act was introduced back in 2001. Senator
Durbin was—is one of the main vocal supporters of this. But what
people don’t understand is that there’s also West Point
intellectuals that have been involved in the creation of the DREAM
Act.

Now, within the military ranks, within these intellectuals, as it says in our films, they have a quite a bit of an
understanding of the socioeconomic background that the Latinos come
from. They understand that they come from poor, working-class
communities, and they see that the DREAM Act is a way to bring in
more of these undocumented citizens that are here in this country, to
bring them into the ranks. They understand that college is an
expensive alternative for a lot of these folks, so they’re offering
the military. And they say it very blatantly. They say, you know,
"Well, we’ll give them a job, we’ll put them in the ranks,
unfortunately, because they’re not citizens. We can—the only
places they can work at within the military is, you know, infantry,
its transportation." So again, we have this channeling
of a new population into the most dangerous positions within the
military. And that’s where we see the contradictions of the
DREAM Act.

Now, we’re not, you know, focusing or saying that the students, you know, the youth that are involved in the DREAM
movement are at fault here. What we’d like to understand is, do the
organizations fully understand the implications of accepting the
militarization of the immigrant rights movement?

video link and transcript available online:
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/5/18/yo_soy_el_army_us_military

Proyesto Guerrero Azteca por la Paz NUESTRA MISÍON

Guerrero Azteca Peace Project OUR MISSION

1. Ayudar a Familiares que sufran la perdida de un miembro dentro de las Fuerzas armadas en cualquier conflicto armada. (Económica).    2. Ayudar a familiares con pláticas profesionales para soportar la incertidumbre en tiempos de guerra y la perdida de algún familiar. (Ayuda Sicológica.)    3. Promover la paz en el mundo.    4. Buscar apoyos para crear otras oportunidades de estudio fuera de las fuerzas armadas de USA.    5. Dar pláticas, seminarios, conferencias con el apoyo de profesionistas y activistas hispanos y no hispanos en bienestar de los jóvenes latinos.    6. Impulsar el orgullo de ser hispano y el respeto por sus raíces.

1. Help families by offering moral support and possibly economical support who lose a loved one in the miltary service or any other armed conflict and offer moral support and resources for military families and individuals actively serving in the military.    2. Help families cope with the loss of a family member who died in war.    3. Promote peace in the world.    4. Find resource and alternatiave opportunities other than the military service including but not limited to scholarships for students.    5. Give talks, presenations and conferences with the help of professionals and Latino activists to help our youth consider peace and higher education as their goals.    6. Instill pride and respect for Latino communities and for their cultural heritage

http://aztecapp.netrootz.com/web_pages/view_web_page.asp?group=104&...




End the unlawful overseas deployment of our National Guard
Slogan of National movement of state campaigns : "Bring
the Guard Home. It's the Law."
by Kelly Vlahos, for antiwar.com
May 3, 2010

Today’s National Guard has become virtually indistinguishable from the nation’s active-duty
forces in the war zone. The majority of these so-called part-time
soldiers have served combat duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, with many–
if not most – deployed more than once.

As of April 24, 622 members of the Guard have been killed [.pdf] in the two-front war
since 2001. Forget the whole bit about “weekend warriors” –
reservists have become indispensable to the ongoing overseas
operations since Bush himself launched the country into war nine
years ago.

But activists in several states are saying that the founding fathers did not envision the state “militias” being used
in foreign invasions and occupations, especially those against
enemies that do not pose an imminent threat to the continental United
States. Plus, the constant redeployment of the Guard has left local
first-responders such as fire and police departments struggling to
fill staff, families under mental and financial strain, and domestic
emergency response capability increasingly at risk.

This is not to mention the psychological toll on the soldiers themselves. It
has been estimated that more than half of veteran suicides – 53
percent – are among National Guard members returning home from
war.

That’s why citizens are demanding – more than ever – “Bring ‘em home!”

“Certainly, these deployments are not what members of the National Guard signed up for – it was not
what they were advertising in recruiting [these soldiers], it’s not
the mission of the National Guard, which should be homeland defense,”
insists Ben Manski, a Wisconsin attorney who serves as the executive
director of the Liberty Tree and works with the Bring the Guard Home
project.

Activists in states such as Wisconsin, Vermont, Oregon, Idaho, Maryland, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and New Mexico
have been pushing legislation telling their governors to review –
and stop – the orders sending the National Guard into Iraq. While
the language varies, the proposals all suggest that the mission in
Iraq no longer corresponds to the initial 2002 congressional
Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) [.pdf] against
now-dead Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, and therefore the continued
use of the Guard is inappropriate and perhaps even
unconstitutional.

“The Guard is being sent overseas without an authorization from Congress,” says Vermont state representative
Mike Fisher, who managed to get 77 of his fellow legislators – more
than half of the House membership – on board for a bill that would
require the state attorney general to review and explain the state’s
plan to deploy – or not deploy – its National Guard in light of
what the bill [.pdf] calls a lack of federal authority to do so.

But it is illegal?  Depends on whom you ask.

While the U.S. Constitution (Article 1, Section 8) says Congress has the power to call up the state “militia” (the
progenitor of today’s Guard) to “execute the Laws of the Union,
suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions,” the role of the
militia has been further defined and guided by numerous laws and
amendments over the last 100 years. The modern National Guard was
born with the Dick Act in 1903, and a later amendment allowed the
president to send Guard units overseas for duty.

In a series of acts from 1916 to 1933, the National Guard eventually became a
regular component of the Army that would be under the control of the
state and the federal government, which retained the authority to
federalize the Guard in times of emergency. In 1952, the Armed Forces
Reserve Act allowed for the call-up of the Guard, including overseas
training, without an emergency, but not without the consent of the
governors impacted by the order. In 1986, the Montgomery Amendment
partially rescinded the consent requirement, charging that governors
could not object to the federal deployment of their Guard troops over
the “location, purpose, type, or schedule of [federal] duty.” The
Supreme Court affirmed this in Perpich v. Department of Defense,
saying in that case that governors cannot object to the training
of troops overseas under federal orders. [emphasis
added]

Attorney Benson Scotch, in a legal memo for the Wisconsin backers of proposed state legislation questioning the
continued use of National Guard soldiers for federal duty in Iraq,
claims that, based on the orders that federalized the reserves in the
first place, “there is no authority under the Constitution or the
laws of the United States for the continued presence of National
Guard members in Iraq, and indeed no authority for the use of force
at all in Iraq.”

That 2002 AUMF is now moot, argues Scotch, because Saddam is dead and the search for the so-called weapons of
mass destruction that were the basis of the UN resolutions has long
been aborted. These facts form the basis the state’s legal
argument.

Fisher says there is a similar case to be made against the Guard’s involvement in Afghanistan, too, noting that
the 2001 AUMF against the 9/11 terrorists is too broad, and must be
examined for its legitimacy as well.


http://original.antiwar.com/vlahos/2010/05/03/state-activists-want-...


TPF editorial comment: State campaigns are active in Alaska,
California, Florida, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts,
Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Vermont,
Virginia, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Washington D.C.,
Washington, Wisconsin, but not yet Oklahoma. 
WassamatterwifOklahoma?

further info: http://www.bringtheguardhome.org/


Vermont Representative Fisher speaks to Wisconsin Legislature about Bringing
the Guard Home
March 9, 2010

By Daniel Barlow
Vermont Press Bureau

MONTPELIER – Rep. Michael Fisher has spent the last four years talking about what he sees as
the illegal use of the Vermont National Guard in overseas conflicts,
with little luck in moving a bill that could challenge the
practice.

He's now hoping lawmakers in Wisconsin might be more understanding.

Fisher, a Lincoln Democrat, is scheduled to testify today before the Wisconsin State Legislature's Veterans and
Military Affairs Committee on their version of his bill, which would
require a sitting governor to confirm war orders calling for the use
of state's National Guard units.

"This is not about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan," Fisher said during a phone call
in route to Wisconsin on Monday. "This is about ensuring that
the law now in place is followed."

Fisher and other members of the national Bring the Guard Home movement say the 2002
congressional declaration that launched the Iraq War that following
spring focused on a specific mission: Remove Saddam Hussein from
power.

That mission has clearly been accomplished, Fisher said, but the U.S. government continues to use state's National Guard
units to supplement military deployments. The bill under
consideration in Vermont, Wisconsin and dozens of other states would
require the governors to certify that the law was followed.

"I'm not talking about anything revolutionary here," Fisher said.
"This is in the Constitution."

Rep. Spencer Black, D-Madison, is the chief sponsor of the Wisconsin bill.

Like the Vermont bill, Wisconsin's bill orders the state governor to
review all orders mobilizing the state National Guard for overseas
duty. If that order is not lawful, Black said, the governor would
have to block the
deployment.

http://www.bringtheguardhome.org/news/vt_times_argus_rep_says_bring...



Operators of Drones Are Faulted in Deaths of 23 Afghan Civilians
NYTimes.com
28 May 2010

KABUL, Afghanistan — The American military released a scathing report on Saturday on the deaths of 23 Afghan civilians,
saying that “inaccurate and unprofessional” reporting by a team
of Predator drone operators helped lead to an inadvertent airstrike
this year on a group of innocent men, women and children.

The report said that four American officers, including a brigade and
battalion commander, had been reprimanded, and that two junior
officers had also been disciplined.

General McHale blamed the “inaccurate and unprofessional reporting of the Predator crew
operating out of Creech A.F.B., Nevada, which deprived the ground
force commander of vital
information.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/30/world/asia/30drone.html?ref=globa...


Epitaph
for this edition of "Truth in Recruiting"

Article 48 of the Geneva Conventions speaks to the "basic rule" regarding the protection of civilians:

"In order to ensure respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects, the Parties to the conflict shall at all times
distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and
between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly
shall direct their operations only against military objectives."

further information

IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND
EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. The Tulsa Peace Fellowship IS NOT ENDORSED OR
SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATORS OF THE ARTICLES HEREIN.

SOURCE ARTICLE LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE
VERSIONS POSTED MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN
CLICKING THE SOURCE ARTICLE LINKS, OR INDEED, THE WEBPAGES MAY NO
LONGER EVEN EXIST.