grassrootspeace.org November 5, 2007: This
website is an archive of the former website, traprockpeace.org,
which was created 10 years ago by Charles Jenks. It became one of the
most populace sites in the US, and an important resource on the antiwar movement,
student activism, 'depleted' uranium and other topics. Jenks authored virtually all of its web pages and multimedia content (photographs, audio, video, and pdf files. As the author and registered owner of
that site, his purpose here is to preserve an important slice of the
history of the grassroots peace movement in the US over the past decade.
He is maintaining this historical archive as a service to the greater
peace movement, and to the many friends of Traprock Peace Center. Blogs
have been consolidated and the calendar has been archived for security
reasons; all other links remain the same, and virtually all blog content
remains intact. THIS SITE NO LONGER REFLECTS THE CURRENT
AND ONGOING WORK OF TRAPROCK PEACE CENTER, which
has reorganized its board and moved to Greenfield, Mass. To contact Traprock
Peace Center, call 413-773-7427 or visit its site.
Charles Jenks is posting new material to PeaceJournal.org,
a multimedia blog and resource center.
|
 
Books of the Month
The
War on Truth
From
Warriors to Resisters
Army of None
Iraq:
the Logic of Withdrawal
|
Dear Sir/Madam:
Can there be any doubt what the US will do with any vague resolution from the UN.
It already got the US Congress to wash its hands by giving the President authority to wage war at his discretion. As Senator Robert Byrd said, Congress may as well put up a sign that says "Out of Business, gone fishing." He said that all the fancy clauses amount to window dressing. In simple terms, Congress abandonned it's role to declare war when the country is facing an imminent threat or has been attacked. No such situation exists.
Does any other nation in the world, on its own accord, see a need to wage war against Iraq? The UK? According to Blair, it would "pay with its blood" to preserve its "special relationship" with the US. The British people don't support the war, the Labour Party does not support the war. (See Labour Against War's Counter-Dossier for a definitive argument against this war. It's Addendum by Dr. Glen Rangwala of Cambridge University rebuts Tony Blair's Dossier. http://grassrootspeace.org/counter-dossier.html.)
President Bush may start a war whatever the UN does. His spokesperson recently said the administration has sufficient authority under the Congressional resolution. Still, they would prefer to have UN acquiescence. Secretary Powell has recently said that disarmament would be enough. Does anyone believe this is sincere after the long build up to war?
It comes down to this - does the UN, and particularly France, want to play a supportive role in this tragic war? Will history reflect on France's role someday in acting as a catalyst for war? Or will history say that France stood firm. I can imagine what Charles DeGaulle would do! I pray that France will stand firm. Many people all over the world are counting on France. And in the US too - where there is deep and widespread opposition to this march to war.
Merci -
Charles Jenks
President
Traprock Peace Center
Page created October 21, 2002 by Charlie Jenks.