Blackwater protesters sentenced after judge clears courtroom

Subject: Blackwater protesters sentenced after judge clears courtroom

This requires “letters to the editor” of the Virginian-Pilot from all over the country; these people who have stood up in an area where the military (Hampton Naval Yards) has a huge presence need our support. I would encourage everyone to distribute this article widely, post it on blogs and bulletin boards, make sure every peace organization is aware of this and takes appropriate solidarity actions.

Please forward this to everyone on your e-mail lists.

Please submit for publication in all newspapers and newsletters.

On-line comments can be posted here:
http://content.hamptonroads.com/story.cfm?story=138265&ran=1278#comments

Letters to the Editor can be submitted via this link:
http://home.hamptonroads.com/feedback/submit.cfm?id=1&url=http://content.hamptonroads.com/story.cfm?story=138265&ran=1278

I sent the following Letter to the Editor to the Virginian-Pilot the main daily for the area:

I am outraged that a Judge in North Carolina would close a court-room to the public and the media concerning the Blackwater protest arrests. This continuing war in Iraq is not only squandering away the resources we require for things like a national single-payer universal health care system; it is destroying our democracy. Thomas Jefferson must be rolling in his grave.

A former Virginia Beach resident.

Alan L. Maki
Warroad, Minnesota



Note: original material obtained via a link from an excellent blog in the Hampton Roads area:

http://jadedprol.blogspot.com/




Blackwater protesters sentenced after judge clears courtroom

http://content.hamptonroads.com/story.cfm?story=138265&ran=1278

By BILL SIZEMORE, The Virginian-Pilot

© December 6, 2007 | Last updated 11:07 PM Dec. 5

CURRITUCK, N.C.

In a courtroom closed to the press and public, protesters were sentenced to jail Wednesday for re-enacting a Baghdad shooting incident at the front entrance of Blackwater .

They said they will appeal the verdicts, partly on the grounds that they were denied their constitutional right to a public trial.

Currituck County District Judge Edgar Barnes took the rare step of clearing the courtroom after trying one of the protesters, Steve Baggarly of Norfolk, in public.

The remaining six were then tried, convicted and sentenced behind closed doors.
The judge gave no reason for his action.

The seven received jail terms ranging from 10 to 45 days and were fined $100 each. They said they will not pay the fines. One was ordered to pay $450 restitution to Blackwater for damage to its property.

All were released pending their appeals.

After the trials, Baggarly speculated that the judge closed the courtroom to silence the group’s anti-war rhetoric.

“He didn’t want people influenced by our message,” Baggarly said. “There have been hundreds of thousands of civilian casualties in Iraq. If we’re going to speak about that, nobody is allowed to hear it. Obviously the system feels threatened by that. It loves darkness.”

Katy Parker, legal director of the North Carolina chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, said she had never before heard of a similar action being taken by a North Carolina judge.

“It’s a clear violation of constitutional rights, not only of the defendants but the press and public,” she said. “They have a right to a public trial, so any trial that goes on behind closed doors is a farce.”

In the Oct. 20 demonstration at Blackwater’s Moyock headquarters, the protesters drove a small station wagon, covered with simulated bullet holes and smeared with red paint, onto Blackwater’s property.

They also smeared red handprints on two Blackwater signs.

The scene was intended to mimic that in Baghdad’s Nisoor Square on Sept. 16, when an Iraqi doctor and her son died in a fusillade of gunfire as their car approached a Blackwater diplomatic convoy.

They were among 17 Iraqis killed in the incident, which prompted a federal grand jury investigation and a demand from the Iraqi government that Blackwater’s security contractors be banned from the country.

The seven protesters were convicted of second-degree trespassing. Six were also convicted of resisting arrest, and one of injury to real property. Several went limp when they were arrested and had to be dragged from the scene.

During Baggarly’s trial, he was repeatedly cut short by the judge when he tried to discuss the morality of the Iraq war and Blackwater’s role in it. The only issue up for discussion was trespassing and the related charges, the judge said.

“We feel like Blackwater is trespassing in Iraq,” Baggarly told the judge. “And as for injuring property, they injure men, women and children every day.”

The others convicted were Beth Brockman of Durham, N.C.; Mark Colville of New Haven, Conn.; Peter DeMott of Ithaca, N.Y.; Mary Grace of Madison County, Va.; Laura Marks of Ayden, N.C.; and Bill Streit of Louisa County, Va.

Bill Sizemore, (757) 446-2276,

bill.sizemore@pilotonline.com

The Judge can be contacted here:

http://www.nccourts.org/County/Currituck/Staff/District.asp

The Honorable Edgar L. Barnes

159 Fearing Place North
Manteo, N. C. 27954

Phone and Fax:

(252)-331-4750
(252)-331-4814 (FAX)

An additional news report from:

The DailyAdvance


Judge finds all 7 Blackwater protesters guilty

By From Staff Reports

http://www.dailyadvance.com/news/content/news/stories/2007/12/05/1205Blackwater.html?cxtype=rss&cxsvc=7&cxcat=7

Wednesday, December 05, 2007

CURRITUCK - A District Court judge on Wednesday found seven protesters guilty of trespassing on Blackwater USA's property in Moyock in October.

Judge Edgar Barnes, who held part of the proceedings behind closed doors, handed down jail sentences ranging from between 10 and 45 days to the seven defendants. None of the sentences were active, however. All were suspended on the condition the protesters not violate any laws for one year and pay fines ranging from $100 to $450.

None of the defendants said they planned to pay their fines. However, none were expected to go to jail - at least not immediately - because all said they planned to appeal Barnes' rulings.

Only one of the cases was heard in open court.

Barnes found Steven John Baggarly, of 1321 West 38th St., Norfolk, Va. guilty of trespassing and resisting arrest in connection with the Oct. 20 protest on Blackwater's property in Currituck County. The judge dismissed a charge of damaging property.

Barnes sentenced Baggarly to 20 days in jail, suspended on the conditions he not violate any laws for a year and pay a $100 fine. He also sentenced Baggarly to one year of supervised probation.

Following the verdict, one of Baggarly's fellow defendants, Elizabeth Velkey Brockman, 45, of 1407 Pennsylvania Ave., Durham, urged Barnes to allow the remaining defendants to be tried as a group.

The judge agreed, but after Brockman stood up and declared her opposition to the Iraq war, Barnes suddenly ordered sheriff's deputies to clear the courtroom. Everyone except the defendants, prosecutors, sheriff's witnesses and a Blackwater official were immediately barred from the courtroom.

Barnes did not give a reason for clearing the courtroom.

According to the defendants, Barnes then proceeded to try their cases. The other defendants included:

• William Mathias Streight, 53, of 16560 Louisa Road, Trevilians, Va.

• Laura Lee Marks, 40, of 4261 Norris Store Road, Ayden;

• Mark Peter Colville, 46, of 203 Rosette St., New Haven, Conn.;

• Peter Johns DeMott, 60, of 133 Sheffield Road, Ithaca, N.Y.; and

• Mary Terese Grace, 51, of P.O. Drawer 189 Wolftown, Va.

With the exception of Grace, who was charged with second-degree trespassing, all four of the other defendants were charged with second-degree trespassing, resisting arrest and destruction of property.

Prior to Wednesday's court proceedings, a group of approximately 40-50 protesters, including the defendants, stood outside the Currituck Courthouse. Many held signs protesting Blackwater USA, the Moyock-based security company.

The original demonstration outside the entrance to Blackwater's Moyock compound on Oct. 20 involved approximately 40 protesters. The demonstration, organized by the Norfolk, Va.-based Catholic Worker group and Blackwater Watch, was held to protest the shooting of 17 Iraqi civilians by Blackwater guards in Baghdad on Sept. 16.

Six of the seven demonstrators arrested were in fact re-enacting the events of the deadly shooting as a protest against Blackwater.

According to a press release from Currituck Sheriff Susan Johnson, the protesters drove a station wagon covered with simulated bullet holes and smeared with red paint onto Blackwater?s property. They then laid on the ground, as if they had been shot.

The scene was intended to mimic that in Baghdad's Nisour Square, where an Iraqi doctor and her son died in gunfire as their car approached a Blackwater diplomatic convoy.

The protesters also smeared red handprints on two Blackwater signs, illustrating blood.

"Upon arrival (of sheriff's deputies) about 40 protesters, some splashed in red paint, began painting the signs belonging to Blackwater and blocking the roadway," Johnson said.

Deputies ordered the protestors to disperse and get out of the roadway in front of Blackwater, Johnson said. When six refused, they were arrested, she said.

Defendants said following Barnes' verdicts that the judge used a YouTube video of the demonstration as evidence against the protesters.




Alan L. Maki
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell phone: 651-587-5541
E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net

Check out my blog:

Thoughts From Podunk

http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/

"Incendiary" Capitalism... some thoughts on war and peace

Recent reports from Greece suggest the huge forest fires there were ignited by real
estate speculators and venture capitalists looking to make a fast buck.

Now is the time for the left to come together and undertake a massive campaign to educate people about capitalism.

I have always understood that capitalism is bad; but, until this discussion about "fires" I never really gave much thought to just how cruel this rotten system can be.

You hear about a forest fire here and there on the news.

Other reports tell of house fires.

But, really, how often does a person ever stop to consider that anyone would use something like fire as a corporate investment in order to turn a profit?

Think about it; reading a newspaper, listening to the news on the radio, watching the news on television--- is there anything in any of these "news" stories which would lead one to believe this rotten capitalist system is responsible for any of these fires?


But wait... the U.S. military-financial-industrial complex created the "Mother Of All Bombs," and now...


The mafia-controlled capitalist government of Russia has created the "Dad of All Bombs;" both bombs are huge incendiary(fire) bombs.

Capitalism truly is a bestial system--- beginning with the exploitation of working people... but, to burn people from their homes, intentionally start forest fires, while these capitalist governments boast of having created bigger and better incendiary bombs... if there is any such thing as "insanity," this is it.

The mafia backed government of Vladimir Putin boasts that they can now do the equivalent damage with the "Dad Of All Bombs" as what previously could only be destroyed with a nuclear bomb... what kind of sick boast is this? Boasting as if a cure had been found for every dreaded sickness and disease plaguing human kind. Boasting as if they expect all humanity to stop what ever it is they are doing, stand and applaud this insanity.

The really sad part of all of this is the American left seems to have unlimited patience with it all... content to keep any discussion of the need to get rid of capitalism on the pages of periodicals and newspapers read within small circles in someones living room and within the confines of academia rather than putting the discussion out where it should be... in the public square, so to speak. It is almost as if the American left has become fearful of alienating those politicians and people in power making these insane decisions.

Something is wrong with the tactics and strategy of the American left... I don't understand it, perhaps someone can explain what is going on... in my opinion we shouldn't be worrying about offending any of the Democrats... what we should be concerned with is getting the American people out into the streets and making it impossible for the military-financial-industrial complex--- these merchants of death and destruction--- to continue dominating our lives and running the world.

The capitalists will not be satisfied with burning a forest here and there and burning people out of their homes... they have much larger fires in mind with more sinister designs as they are set on dominating the world; if this was not the case we would not be seeing an entirely new "family" of incendiary bombs having been created and hailed as if they have replaced Adam and Eve... the "Mom," and the "Dad" of all destruction--- as if we are supposed to expect a glorious new world order to be created through incendiary fires ignited by capitalists and imperialists out to generate greater corporate profits... they almost make it seem like we should welcome the outcome like new growth sprouts from the forest floor after a natural fire.

It is time to replace this barbaric and bestial "incendiary" capitalism with a cooperative socialist society before we are introduced to our new "Mom" and "Dad," which will make "original sin" seem kind of fun.

A Look at the Mounting Cost of the Iraq War

I received this from a fellow blogger in Manitoba, Canada... Along with the article, he asks a very pertinent question many other people from around the world are asking:

Where are all those fiscal conservatives in the US who
scream about excessive government spending?

Cheers, Ken Hanly

Links to Ken's blogs:

Blog: http://kenthink7.blogspot.com/index.html
Blog: http://kencan7.blogspot.com/index.html



A Look at the Mounting Cost of the Iraq War

By BOB DEANS
Cox News Service
Wednesday, July 18, 2007

WASHINGTON — By Friday, the Senate is expected to
authorize a record-breaking $648 billion in defense
spending for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1.

Even adjusted for inflation, the Pentagon budget for
the coming year would be the largest tab for national
defense since the end of World War II.

Driving the increase is the continuing war in Iraq,
where more than 3,610 U.S. troops have been killed and
26,700 wounded, according to Pentagon figures.

Adding the cost of continuing the fight and long-term
costs, such as taking care of wounded and disabled
veterans and the toll exacted on the U.S. economy, the
total cost of the war could reach well beyond $2
trillion, according to a study last year by two
scholars at Harvard and Columbia universities.

By the numbers:

$567 billion – Cost of the war through 2008, according
to a June analysis by the Congressional Research
Service, which exists to provide nonpartisan advice to lawmakers and congressional committees.

$350 billion-$700 billion — Estimated lifetime care
for wounded and disabled veterans of Iraq and
Afghanistan, according to a study by Linda Blimes of
Harvard University. The numbers vary depending on the
duration of the war and the troop levels.

$100 billion — The potential additional costs through
2014 even if most combat troops come home next year.
Retaining 30,000 troops per year — about a fifth of
the current force level in Iraq — would cost about $21
billion a year, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget
Office estimates. So, if troop levels were reduced to
30,000 by 2010 — the first full year after the next
president takes office — it would cost about $100
billion to keep them there until 2014.

$22 billion — Economic value of lost lives.

Economists and government agencies value the earning
and production potential of the average American male
in his prime at roughly $6 million. Using that figure,
the economic value of the 3,613 lives lost as of July
16 is $21.7 billion.

$390,000 — Estimated cost to deploy an American
soldier to Iraq for a year, according to the
Congressional Research Service.

I also received this from Michael Munk in Portland, Oregon; Michael operates an excellent e-mail list on a variety of topics... If you would like to get on his e-mail list, he can be reached at: Michael Munk [lastmarx@comcast.net]


Analysis: Iraq (near) united in opposition

July 9, 2007

By BEN LANDO
UPI Energy Correspondent

WASHINGTON, July 9 (UPI) -- U.S. President Bush may be right: Iraq's oil law, although highly controversial, could be a "benchmark for reconciliation."

When Iraq's council of ministers last week suddenly approved the law, critics of various stripes united in opposition. Shiite and Sunni political parties alike denounced it, vowed to defeat it, even threatened to ensure Parliament can't take it up. It is seen by some as weakening the central government and giving too much to foreign companies.

Iraq depends on the sale of oil for the vast majority of its federal budget. It's infrastructure badly needs investment to boost production. A law governing the world's third largest reserves -- and a sizable amount of natural gas -- has been as elusive as security there.

In one attack alone Saturday in the northern city of Tuz Khurmato, nearly five times as many were killed than at the Virginia Tech massacre in the United States.

In the midst of a war zone of more than four years old, the Bush administration itself could be the most divisive agent. And, it's the White House's support for Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's administration, as well as the heavy pressure on it to pass the oil law, that could draw together the fractured country.

The fate of and fight for control over Iraq's oil is the same for the country itself. At issue is to what extent the federal government, as stewards of Iraq as a whole, will decide oil policy. Local governments, especially the Kurdistan Regional Government, disapprove of strong central control; their suspicions rest on memories of Saddam's Iraq, where the central government's uneven investment hand benefited only some, and its heavy hand brutalized the rest.

Much more oil is in the ground than being pumped now, that's likely why a law governing the oil has been held up in the United States as the tool for grand compromise, leading toward the path of more hand-shaking.

President Bush himself, as well as U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker, Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, in separate meetings in Washington and Baghdad are all regularly urging the passage of the law.

KRG and federal government negotiations on the oil law began last summer. Deals were reached and stalled since late February. Then Tuesday the ministers approved it.

"It has to be a package of laws in which all the Iraqis can agree, which is why it is a benchmark of national reconciliation," a State Department official told UPI in May, adding that's why revenue sharing is the main emphasis of the U.S. government. Revenue sharing would be decided in a revenue sharing law, not the oil law, two of four laws that comprise the package. The revenue sharing law is to be taken up this week by the ministerial council.

The oil law already faced opposition from Iraq oil experts -- including two of the law's three original authors -- as well as the powerful oil unions. The unions say they're willing to stop production and exports if the law gives foreign oil companies too much access to or ownership of the oil.

"The last four years have witnessed repeated attempts at dismantling the basis for any well planned resources management for the whole nation, only to replace it with market oriented destabilization and fragmentation policies that are at variance and in competition with each other and the national interest," said Tariq Shafiq, an Iraqi now living in Amman and London, tasked last spring by the Iraq oil minister to co-write the law. It was subsequently altered in negotiations and he now opposes it.

"Would this law really optimize the management of the oil and gas? Would it really unite the country?," Shafiq said. "I believe sincerely it is naive to think it would."

"It's really important to challenge the notion that the law is going to unite 'warring factions,'" said Ewa Jasiewicz of the London-based campaigner Platform. "The language in which the law is being couched and reported is incredibly sectarian and is creating de facto Sunni, Kurdish and Shiite regional power blocks in the imagination and political landscape and, in the process, the conditions for the creating of these kinds of facts on the ground."

Many political parties opposed Maliki's government before the oil law. As security in Iraq diminishes, so does the political strength of Maliki's coalition of Shiites -- many backed by Iran -- and Kurds.

The ministerial council just barely had quorum last week because of boycotts of key Shiite allies and Sunni parties. Parliament was supposed to take up the oil law Wednesday but boycotts and chronic absenteeism scrapped that.

The Sadr Movement and the Iraqi Accord Front now say they may end the boycott specifically to challenge the law. The former held mass rallies over the weekend in opposition to Maliki. IAF says it will call for a vote of no confidence in him.

The Association of Muslim Scholars issued an edict against any Parliamentarian approving the law. Off the record talk by campaigners, unionists and oil experts express the need to turn up the heat of opposition.

Last week the Iraq Freedom Congress -- whose motto is "Working for a Democratic, Secular and Progressive Alternative to both the U.S. Occupation and Political Islam in Iraq" -- teamed up with the new Anti Oil Law Frontier to rally masses against the law.

All the while a coalition in Iraq grows. It encompasses Shiites, Sunnis, Kurds and secularists. Its goal is to keep Iraq together. But it also wants an end to the U.S. occupation.

"They are also strongly opposed both to the terrorist forces of Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) and to the growing influence of Iran in Iraq," Robert Dreyfuss wrote of the opposition in The Nation.

Despite sharing two key tenets of the war on terrorism, the United States isn't supporting the coalition.

State Department Iraq Coordinator David Satterfield, answering questions in March about what has been self-termed the "National Salvation Government," vowed support for Maliki's government. "It is not helpful to talk about alternatives," he said.

But alternatives may force themselves into the conversation, especially on the heels of the oil law.

--

(e-mail: energy@upi.com)