The Liberal Patriot

The St. Patrick's Four Return to Trial- Will the First Amendment Survive?

Leigh Saavedra - September 20, 2005

     "If you fall on the side that is pro-George,

     and pro-war, you get your ass over to Iraq,

     and take the place of somebody who wants to

     come home. And if you fall on the side that

     is against this war and against George Bush,

     stand up and speak out." -- Cindy Sheehan,

     mother of Casey Sheehan, who was killed in Iraq.

On Monday, September 19, the rights of all peace

activists went on trial.  Representing us are four

Catholic anti-war activists who have already stood

trial for their stand against the invasion of Iraq.

Now, more than two years later, cleared of the

original charge of criminal mischief, they are being

charged with conspiracy and will be tried again.

THE ACCUSED:  Four Catholic Workers from Ithaca, NY.

Daniel Burns works in the film industry and traveled

to Iraq in 2003 to promote peace and reconciliation.

Clare Grady has worked for seventeen years as a

kitchen coordinator at Loaves and Fishes Community

Kitchen, a ministry that feeds the hungry.  Peter De

Mott is a former marine who served in Vietnam, then

joined the army and took a NATO post as a linguist.

Peter too has traveled to Iraq as part of a Christian

Peacemaker Team.  Teresa Grady is a dance instructor

and founder of the Ithaca Catholic Worker community

with a long history of working with the homeless.

THE CRIME:  On March 17, 2003, Dan, Clare, Peter, and

Teresa entered a military recruiting center in

Lansing, New York, and poured a half cup of their own

blood around the vestibule.  No one was prevented from

entering or leaving the recruiting center as they then

knelt and read the following statement:

"Our apologies, dear friends, for the fracture of good

order.  As our nation prepares to escalate the war on

the people of Iraq by sending hundreds of thousands of

U.S. soldiers to invade, we pour our blood on the

walls of this military recruiting center.  We mark

this recruiting office with our own blood to remind

ourselves and others of the cost in human life of our

government's war making.

"Killing is wrong.  Preparations for killing are

wrong.  The work done by the Pentagon with the

connivance of this military recruiting station ends

with the shedding of blood, and God tells us to turn

away from it.  Blood is the symbol of life. All life

is holy.  All people are created in the image and

likeness of God.  All people are family, and everyone

is loved by God.

"Dr. Martin Luther King reminds us that'...we are

called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for

the victims of our nation, for those it calls "enemy,"

 for no document from human hands can make these

humans any less our brothers [and sisters].'

"We come here today with pictures of Iraqi people --

mothers, children, those who have been the victims of

U.S. bombardment and sanctions for the past twelve

years.  We also come here with love in our hearts for

the U.S. service people,  also victims of war making.

"We find hope in these dark times when sisters and

brothers around the world resist the spirit of hatred

and violence, lift up prayers for peace -- together

with works for peace.

"The St. Patrick's Four"

The following month the four were tried for criminal

mischief.  Nine of the twelve jurors voted to acquit

them, and after twenty hours of deliberation, the

judge declared a mistrial.  At such declaration the

crowded courtroom gave the Four a standing ovation.

The District Attorney said that he would not

re-prosecute them, expecting that another jury would

yield the same verdict.

A year later, however, the U.S. government decided to

retry the four peace activists, this time on the more

serious charges of conspiracy.  Technically, they are

charged with conspiracy to impede "by force,

intimidation and threat" an officer of the United

States and three lesser charges.  The trial begins

Monday, September 19, and if the four are convicted,

the penalty could be up to six years in prison and

$250,000 in fines.

This will be the first federal conspiracy trial

arising out of civil resistance to the invasion of

Iraq.  It will also be the first federal conspiracy

trial of anti-war protesters since Viet Nam.

When Dan, Clare, Peter, and Teresa cut themselves and

drew their own blood to make a powerful statment about

the feared invasion they were not alone.  A month

earlier, throughout the world, primarily in Europe but

including such remote places as Antartica, people

appeared by the millions to demand that no such war be

started.  The U.N. Security Council had not sanctioned

it, so that aside from the immorality of attacking a

sovereign country without the means to defend itself,

the invasion was illegal both through lack of U.N.

approval and through the breaking of the Nuremberg

Principles, ratified by the U.S. in 1950.

Since that day, much has happened.  The people of the

world, even in those countries where a leader sides

with George Bush, such as Britain and Italy, remain

staunchly against the invasion and occupation.

From recent personal experience I saw the popular

response of people that Bush considers "allies."  In

May, in Italy, I noticed anti-Bush graffiti on the

walls of the narrow streets of Rome and Florence, some

of it strongly-worded.  While we were there, there was

one demonstration against the so-called war.  An

artist near the Uffizi got into a heated conversation

with me, though we were both on the same side.

"At first," he said, "we just thought the people of

your country didn't know better.  Bush wasn't that

well-known.  But then, he broke all the rules.  He

ignored the world and started a criminal war.  We

thought he was through, but then he was re-elected.

WHY?"

I couldn't answer, still can't.  I also couldn't find

an Italian who supported the so-called war against

Iraq.

The great blind nationalism that props up support for

what Bush did and does is eroding now, according to

all the polls.  The initial reason for attacking Iraq,

to rid the country of its weapons of mass destruction,

was rendered null when it was discovered that Iraq had

no wmd.  Further, there have been strong indications

that the planning of the war began long before the

attack on the New York Trade Center on 9-11, so that

many now think that weapons of mass destruction was

never an issue, only a call to raise fears and

consequent war support.  The "evidence," it began to

appear, was created to support the neocon desire to

conquer Iraq, whether for its oil or for a better

foothold in the mideast or for the economic boon to a

few who profit at exponential rates from war.

The erosion of support for the so-called "war" (I do

not refer to the invasion/occupation as a war, as Iraq

had no real means of defending itself) seems to be

based primarily on costs - monetary and human lives.

Over a hundred and ninety-four BILLION dollars have

been spent, and we do not yet have the man who was

allegedly behind 9-ll, Osama bin Laden.  Many would

question whether the handful of true terrorists the

U.S. has killed are worth that much, an amount that

could have fully funded global anti-hunger efforts for

eight years, or could have provided four-year

scholarships at public universities for almost TEN

MILLION STUDENTS.

Worse for many is the cost in human lives.

Approximately 1900 U.S. soldiers have been lost in

Iraq.  Another 94 British and a total of 94 more from

other countries who have sent token support.  The

numbers of Iraqi deaths, mostly civilians, soars,

estimated to be as high as 35,000 by some counts

(www.iraqbodycount.com) and closer to 100,000 by other

independent studies.

This was the "war" that the St. Patrick's Four spilled

their own blood to try to stop.  And now, with the war

machine down in the polls and the civil war in Iraq

growing more violent and claiming more lives each day,

it appears that breaking the Nuremberg Principles is

something that will haunt the United States for years,

as we fight to regain a measure of world respect.

Many people from many countries have voted George Bush

the greatest terrorist threat on earth.

None of these points, none of the evidence that the

war was based on mistakes and lies, is allowed as part

of the defense of the St. Patrick's Four.  Not in the

coming trial.  Further, the Four are under a gag

order, unable to discuss their reasons for

demonstrating their objections as they did.

To counter the gag order, a large support group for

the Four has been set up in Binghamton, New York,

where the trial will be held.  I spoke with William

Meyer of the group today, and he hesitantly mentioned

the number 200 for the number of people expected.  A

moment later, he added, "A thousand is possible."

For such numbers, Citizens Tribunals are set up as

seminars on what is happening in Iraq, the facts that

the Four are not allowed to mention.  These meetings

and speeches will continue throughout at least the

early days of the trial, certainly throughout jury

selection.  Among the moderators are James Petras,

author and editor of over 60 books, including the

acclaimed Globalization Unmasked: Imperialism in the

21st Century.  Ray McGovern, former CIA analyst, and

Ann Wright, who resigned from the U.S. Foreign Service

on March 19, 2003 to protest the invasion of Iraq,

will be involved in the tribunals.

It is in this way, this control over us when we don't

conform to the neocon notion of "patriotism," that all

of us who fight media manipulation of news and the

ongoing fighting itself are in danger.  If four

ordinary parents are not allowed to make a somewhat

graphic display of their objections to the war, then

how can we assume that to write of the blundering

mistakes and deceit of George Bush, Dick Cheney, and

Donald Rumsfeld is not an invitation for a knock on

the door, an arrest, a trial?

My empirical bent does not allow me to be lax with

conspiracy theories.  I'm not cut that way, nor are

most of the writers I know.  But if Clare Grady, who

has spent most of her adulthood working to feed the

hungry is not allowed to cut herself and mark a spot

with her own blood, how can a writer who regularly

accuses George Bush of being a liar feel secure about

his or her ongoing freedom.  What about the very act

of attending a march, such as the one approaching on

September 24, the walking and chanting and carrying a

sign that says, "Bush lies" or "No more blood for

oil"?

How safe is dissent?  As much as we care about four

brave individuals who did what they could to stop the

invasion in 2003, we must go beyond them and consider

the thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands, who wear

anti-war or anti-Bush tee-shirts, who attend rallies,

who write letters to the editor.  Dare they keep their

bumper stickers?

The fact that these four pacifists are being tried

again, even after the war has been shown to most

people's satisfaction to have been a mistake, and

worse, that they are not allowed to express their

feelings or use the illegality of the war in their

defense throws open doors and windows that even the

most cynical weren't truly expecting two years ago.

Whether our constitutional right to freedom of speech

will live or not is the point.  What happens in

Binghamton, New York in the coming week or weeks will

probably be a barometer.  If Daniel, Clare, Peter and

Teresa are found to be guilty of conspiracy, then all

those who vocally support them are guilty.

And if we are, then our darkest fears grown out of the

so-called Patriot Act have grown as real as a match

being held out, then tearing our constitution into

flames and ashes.

__________

Further details about the accused and about the case

are in a detailed and abundant website at:

http://www.stpatricksfour.org/index.php

Along with other information available through the

website is a letter that people may sign, showing

support for the Four.  There is also contact

information for those who want to actively expose this

event and show their objections not only to the

invasion and occupation of Iraq but to the re-trying

of four people who attempted with their own blood to

do their part in stopping the invasion of a sovereign

country.

Please go to the website.  Please sign the letter.

And if you're near Binghamton in New York, consider

attending the trial and lending your support.

For all of us who speak out, this is about US.

__________

Leigh Saavedra has written poetry, fiction, and

political essays for several years under the name Lisa

Walsh Thomas.  Her second book, "The Girl with Yellow

Flowers in her Hair," is a collection of dissident

articles, available through

http://www.whatIdidinthewar.com

Back to The Liberal Patriot Main Page