By William Fisher
The five elderly women stood in front of an Army recruiting office in Tucson, Arizona, and began to sing. To the tune of “There’s No Business Like Show Business”, they belted out the lyrics they wrote:
There’s no business like war business
The worst business we know
Never mind the homeless and the hungry,
Never mind the people without jobs
Nowhere can you get that special feeling
Than when you’re – piling up the bombs.
There’s no business like war business
The best business we know
Multinational profits going through the sky
They multiply while children die
The same amount buys food and clothes
For everyone all over the world.
The group, known as the Raging Grannies of Tucson (RGT), have been performing their ‘act’ outside the recruiting office every Wednesday for the past three years as a protest to the war in Iraq.
But this Wednesday was different. They decided to go inside the office – to enlist in the Army.
“We would rather offer ourselves up and have our grandchildren brought home out of harm’s way, ” said RGT spokesperson Pat Birnie.
“We were told protesters weren’t allowed on the premises but we said we were there to enlist,” she said.
"We went in saying we were here to enlist, but they didn't believe us. We read a statement, sang songs, and then we left."
Ms. Birnie, 75, said the protesters were well outside the recruiting office when police arrived and said they were trespassing, a criminal offence.
The group -- five ‘grannies’ and two journalists – were charged with trespass and appeared in court earlier this week. They entered not guilty pleas and told to appear an Aug. 19 pretrial hearing.
The women, who range from 55 to 81 years old, are decades older than the maximum allowable age for recruits.
Ms. Birney said the charge was an "overreaction", and that the grannies had been serious about joining the army.
Nancy Hutchinson, an Army spokeswoman in Arizona, told the Associated Press that those opposed to the Iraq war should contact their legislators rather than bother recruiters. "They need to direct their frustrations at people who have the power to change things," she said.
She added that the protesters were not serious about enlisting and were harassing recruiters.
Beau Grosscup, professor of international relations at the University of California, warned that “Anti-war grannies could become a new target for FBI surveillance” He told IPS, “We can expect the authorities to deal more harshly in the legal system with the Grannies than the Pentagon has with soldiers in Iraq accused of murder who have gotten off scott free.”
The RGT are associated with the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF).
The women are "pretty thoroughly anti-war; we're concerned about the environment and what's happening to civil liberties," said Ms. Birnie, who was with the women when they entered the recruiting center on July 13, but was not charged.
She said two recruiters told the group not to enter, but the women said they had come to enlist, read a statement and sang two protest songs. By the time they returned to the sidewalk outside, police had arrived.
The RGT members contend that recruits have been lied to, said Ms. Birnie. "We feel that our lives are pretty well used up and that the young people so many times are killed in battle or come home traumatized," she said.
The Raging Grannies was first initiated by Canadian activists 19 years ago. The idea has spread throughout the world, and can be traced on the Internet.
The mission of the Tucson Raging Grannies, according to its website, is to promote global peace, justice, and social and economic equality by raising public awareness through the medium of song and humor.
“Our goal is to challenge our audiences to work to bring about the social changes that are required in order to end economic oppression, particularly of women and children, and to end racial inequality, environmental destruction, human rights violations, and arms proliferation.”
An ‘indy-journalist’ (independent) who was with the Grannies when they entered the recruiting center wrote that they “were hoping the recruiters would have shown more humor with the activists. Instead, (the sergeant in charge) called Tucson police and had everyone cited.”
“The mood before the action was light and joyous. Protestors have been showing up in front of the military recruiting offices on Speedway each Wednesday morning since the pledge of resistance began over 3 years ago.
“Nearly 20 people lined the sidewalk this morning with signs and American flags with peace symbols. Most motorists honked and waived at the rally, which delights Granny Pat Birnie.
“They can hear the honks inside,” she said.
“At 9:00 am, the Grannies split off from the rally and made a plan of action.
The Grannies stood in front of the office and sang more songs, prompting (the sergeant) to close the door to his office.
“After a few minutes, they began to enter the office, stating that they wished to enlist. The recruiters tried to turn them away, saying that protestors are not allowed on their property, but the willful Grannies made their way in.
“After spending a few minutes reading a statement and singing a few more songs, the Sergeant told them that they must leave, and that charges were going to be pressed. Both recruiters seemed uncomfortable and were unwilling to confront the elderly choir, keeping their backs turned and pretending to do office work.”
According to an Army Battalion Commander from Phoenix, the charges were pressed by the landlord of the building, not the Army itself. He declined to give any other information about the incident.
“My sense is that it’s such an absurd charge that the judge will excuse it,”
Ms. Birney said.
Thursday, July 28, 2005
SAUDI AND NIGERIA IN THE CROSSHAIRS
By William Fisher
Human Rights Watch is calling on Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah to pardon three jailed advocates of peaceful reform and urging President Olusegun Obasanjo of Nigeria to “show the world that he is serious about pursuing justice,” and “ensure that police torturers are held accountable for their crimes.”
In Saudi Arabia, an appellate court in Riyadh upheld harsh prison terms of between six and nine years for the three after they attempted to circulate a petition calling for a constitutional monarchy in Saudi Arabia.
HRW said, “The three men were among 12 petitioners arrested in March 2004. Over the following weeks, Saudi security forces pressured the detainees to sign a pledge to stop all future political petition activity in return for their release. The government released the nine detainees who signed the pledge, but continued with its prosecution of `Ali al-Dumaini, Dr. Matruk al-Falih and Dr. Abdullah al-Hamid because they refused.”
The advocacy group said the government prosecuted the men on charges “that had no legal basis”, and “denied the men basic due process rights.“ The court refused to grant the men their request for a public trial, insisting on holding all sessions behind closed doors.
It added that the general court judge denied the men access to counsel of their choice, and imprisoned the lead lawyer, Abd al-Rahman al-Lahim, in November 2004 after he spoke on television about the case. He remains in jail without charge.
A pardon from the Crown Prince is the only legal remedy open to the imprisoned activists.
Sarah Leah Whitson, HRW’s Middle East and North Africa director, said “Saudi judges seem unable or unwilling to protect Saudi citizens from arbitrary detention when they try to exercise basic rights like free speech. Instead, they have backed the government’s relentless repression of all peaceful political criticism.”
She charged that the verdict “did not specify which laws the defendants had violated, but found that they had “address[ed] the public and appeal[ed] to it in respect of critical issues concerning the system of rule” and engaged in “criticism of the people charged with authority in the Islamic regime” in a manner “contrary to the principle of mutual advice with the ruler.” None of these charges is codified as a punishable offense under Saudi law, which follows Islamic law, or shari`a.
“The government is relying on vaguely defined offenses that it can apply arbitrarily to silence citizens critical of the government,” Whitson said.
“The Saudi Foreign Minister publicly stated his view that Saudi Arabia would become a constitutional monarchy, but three months later the government jailed these ordinary citizens for advocating exactly this.”
On the Nigeria issue, Peter Takirambudde, executive director of HRW’s Africa Division, said that “Despite Nigeria’s progress on democratic reforms, Nigerian police routinely commit brutal acts of torture that have endured since the country’s era of military rule.
In a new report, HRW said, “For too long, the police in Nigeria have gotten away with murder and brutality."
It noted that “The United States and Britain have invested millions in police reform initiatives in Nigeria, but police practices have changed little since the end of military rule,” said Takirambudde. “Diplomatic relations have taken precedence over concern for human rights for too long. It’s time the British and the U.S. governments conditioned further aid to the police to measurable improvements in police conduct.”
The 76-page report, “‘Rest in Pieces’: Police Torture and Deaths in Custody in Nigeria,” said that “Across Nigeria, both senior and lower-level police officers routinely commit or order the torture and mistreatment of criminal suspects. Human Rights Watch urged foreign governments funding police reform in Nigeria to be more critical about police abuses, such as torture.
The report is based on over 50 interviews with victims and witnesses of torture and is the first comprehensive study on the subject. It documents brutal acts of torture and ill treatment in police custody, dozens of which resulted in death.
“If President Olusegun Obasanjo wants to show the world that he is serious about pursuing justice, he should ensure that police torturers are held accountable for their crimes,” HRW said.
It reported that most victims were arrested within the context of an aggressive government campaign against common crime and were tortured to obtain confessions. They were tortured in local and state police stations across Nigeria, often in interrogation rooms especially equipped for the purpose.
Forms of torture documented by Human Rights Watch include the tying of arms and legs behind the body, suspension by hands and legs from the ceiling, severe beatings with metal or wooden objects, spraying of tear gas in the eyes, shooting in the foot or leg, raping female detainees, and using pliers or electric shocks on the penis, the Report said.
In addition, HRW said that witnesses reported that dozens of deaths as a result of injuries and others were summarily executed in police custody.
The Report noted that the majority of the torture victims interviewed were ordinary criminal suspects whose cases were characterized by an absence of due process of law. Typically, suspects were not informed by the police of the reasons for arrest, received no legal representation, and were subjected to excessive periods of pretrial detention. Once the suspects were brought before a court, judges and magistrates often accepted confessions extracted under torture.
It noted that “Police torture in Nigeria is often socially accepted because it has been common for so long. A culture of impunity has protected the perpetrators. When victims and others have tried to attain accountability they have faced harassment, intimidation and obstruction by the police.”
It declared that the “absence of independent mechanisms to investigate police abuses and make referrals to the prosecutor has created a serious accountability vacuum. This has allowed the perpetrators to evade justice. In recent years, not a single police officer has been successfully prosecuted for committing torture in Nigeria.”
Human Rights Watch is calling on Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah to pardon three jailed advocates of peaceful reform and urging President Olusegun Obasanjo of Nigeria to “show the world that he is serious about pursuing justice,” and “ensure that police torturers are held accountable for their crimes.”
In Saudi Arabia, an appellate court in Riyadh upheld harsh prison terms of between six and nine years for the three after they attempted to circulate a petition calling for a constitutional monarchy in Saudi Arabia.
HRW said, “The three men were among 12 petitioners arrested in March 2004. Over the following weeks, Saudi security forces pressured the detainees to sign a pledge to stop all future political petition activity in return for their release. The government released the nine detainees who signed the pledge, but continued with its prosecution of `Ali al-Dumaini, Dr. Matruk al-Falih and Dr. Abdullah al-Hamid because they refused.”
The advocacy group said the government prosecuted the men on charges “that had no legal basis”, and “denied the men basic due process rights.“ The court refused to grant the men their request for a public trial, insisting on holding all sessions behind closed doors.
It added that the general court judge denied the men access to counsel of their choice, and imprisoned the lead lawyer, Abd al-Rahman al-Lahim, in November 2004 after he spoke on television about the case. He remains in jail without charge.
A pardon from the Crown Prince is the only legal remedy open to the imprisoned activists.
Sarah Leah Whitson, HRW’s Middle East and North Africa director, said “Saudi judges seem unable or unwilling to protect Saudi citizens from arbitrary detention when they try to exercise basic rights like free speech. Instead, they have backed the government’s relentless repression of all peaceful political criticism.”
She charged that the verdict “did not specify which laws the defendants had violated, but found that they had “address[ed] the public and appeal[ed] to it in respect of critical issues concerning the system of rule” and engaged in “criticism of the people charged with authority in the Islamic regime” in a manner “contrary to the principle of mutual advice with the ruler.” None of these charges is codified as a punishable offense under Saudi law, which follows Islamic law, or shari`a.
“The government is relying on vaguely defined offenses that it can apply arbitrarily to silence citizens critical of the government,” Whitson said.
“The Saudi Foreign Minister publicly stated his view that Saudi Arabia would become a constitutional monarchy, but three months later the government jailed these ordinary citizens for advocating exactly this.”
On the Nigeria issue, Peter Takirambudde, executive director of HRW’s Africa Division, said that “Despite Nigeria’s progress on democratic reforms, Nigerian police routinely commit brutal acts of torture that have endured since the country’s era of military rule.
In a new report, HRW said, “For too long, the police in Nigeria have gotten away with murder and brutality."
It noted that “The United States and Britain have invested millions in police reform initiatives in Nigeria, but police practices have changed little since the end of military rule,” said Takirambudde. “Diplomatic relations have taken precedence over concern for human rights for too long. It’s time the British and the U.S. governments conditioned further aid to the police to measurable improvements in police conduct.”
The 76-page report, “‘Rest in Pieces’: Police Torture and Deaths in Custody in Nigeria,” said that “Across Nigeria, both senior and lower-level police officers routinely commit or order the torture and mistreatment of criminal suspects. Human Rights Watch urged foreign governments funding police reform in Nigeria to be more critical about police abuses, such as torture.
The report is based on over 50 interviews with victims and witnesses of torture and is the first comprehensive study on the subject. It documents brutal acts of torture and ill treatment in police custody, dozens of which resulted in death.
“If President Olusegun Obasanjo wants to show the world that he is serious about pursuing justice, he should ensure that police torturers are held accountable for their crimes,” HRW said.
It reported that most victims were arrested within the context of an aggressive government campaign against common crime and were tortured to obtain confessions. They were tortured in local and state police stations across Nigeria, often in interrogation rooms especially equipped for the purpose.
Forms of torture documented by Human Rights Watch include the tying of arms and legs behind the body, suspension by hands and legs from the ceiling, severe beatings with metal or wooden objects, spraying of tear gas in the eyes, shooting in the foot or leg, raping female detainees, and using pliers or electric shocks on the penis, the Report said.
In addition, HRW said that witnesses reported that dozens of deaths as a result of injuries and others were summarily executed in police custody.
The Report noted that the majority of the torture victims interviewed were ordinary criminal suspects whose cases were characterized by an absence of due process of law. Typically, suspects were not informed by the police of the reasons for arrest, received no legal representation, and were subjected to excessive periods of pretrial detention. Once the suspects were brought before a court, judges and magistrates often accepted confessions extracted under torture.
It noted that “Police torture in Nigeria is often socially accepted because it has been common for so long. A culture of impunity has protected the perpetrators. When victims and others have tried to attain accountability they have faced harassment, intimidation and obstruction by the police.”
It declared that the “absence of independent mechanisms to investigate police abuses and make referrals to the prosecutor has created a serious accountability vacuum. This has allowed the perpetrators to evade justice. In recent years, not a single police officer has been successfully prosecuted for committing torture in Nigeria.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
