[Peace-discuss] Fwd: [SRRTAC-L:13247] New Draft

[Alfred Kagan]

>Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2004 15:23:48 -0400 (EDT)
>From: Frederick W Stoss <fstoss at buffalo.edu>
>X-Sender: fstoss at callisto.acsu.buffalo.edu
>To: SRRT Action Council <srrtac-l at ala.org>
>Subject: [SRRTAC-L:13247] New Draft
>X-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
>Reply-To: srrtac-l at ala.org
>Sender: owner-srrtac-l at ala.org
>X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
>
>Peace,
>
>Fred Stoss
>
>PLEASE REPOST THIS IN YOUR BULLETIN BOARD SO THAT EVERYONE READS THIS!
>
>This is an important message. It is about the efforts being undertaken in
>Washington to reinstate The Draft-conscription of US men and women for
>compulsory service. Read this and share this with those you think need to
>be informed.
>-----
>
>House sponsors are: Mr. RANGEL (for himself, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. CONYERS,
>Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mr. STARK, and Mr. ABERCROMBIE) introduced the
>following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
>Senate Sponsors are: Mr. HOLLINGS introduced the following bill; which was
>read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services
>
>ALL DEMOCRATS!!!
>
>Why would they fall into Bush's trap like that! He can now say it was
>introduced by the democrats and he had nothing to do with it. I can see it
>now: VOTE FOR KERRY AND REINSTITUTE THE DRAFT.
>
>If it doesn't' come out, Bush WILL jump on it if he is reelected. This is
>TERRIBLE.
>-----
>
>See Pete Stark's letter of support below:
>
>Supporting H.R.163 the Universal National Service Act of 2003
>
>January 8, 2003
>
>Mr. Speaker:
>
>I am an original cosponsor of the Rangel/Conyers bill, the Universal
>National Service Act of 2003 (HR 163), which would reinstate a national
>draft. I would like to explain my support for this legislation. I ardently
>oppose war with Iraq. The evidence simply does not exist to warrant
>sending our nation's young people to sacrifice their lives in Iraq. I
>believe America ought to be an advocate for peace, not imperialism.
>
>Yet, war is on the horizon. The President is intent on invading Iraq
>whatever the cost. Thanks to the President's brand of hotheaded bully
>diplomacy, war with North Korea may also be imminent. The only real
>question that remains is whether or not Americans are ready and willing to
>bear the cost?
>
>I commend my colleagues Mr. Rangel and Mr. Conyers for their wisdom in
>authoring this bill. I'm honored to be an original cosponsor.
>
>This bill requires all young Americans  men and women between 18 and 26
>to perform a two year period of national service in a military or civilian
>capacity as determined by the President. For those who conscientiously
>object to war, the bill assures that any military service would not
>include combat. Otherwise, there would be no preferences, no deferments,
>no chance for the well-off or the well- connected to dodge military
>service for their country, as did our President.
>
>Reinstituting the draft may seem unnecessary to some. But, it will ensure
>all Americans share in the cost and sacrifice of war. Without a universal
>draft, this burden weighs disproportionately on the shoulders of the poor
>the disadvantaged and minority populations.
>
>It is my understanding that out of the 435 Members of this House and the
>100 members of the Senate, only one-only  one-has a child in active
>military service. Who are we to know the pain of war when we ourselves
>will not directly bear the brunt of that action? It won't be us mourning
>the loss of a child or loved one. Maybe some of you in this Congress would
>think twice about voting for war in Iraq if you knew your child may be
>sent to fight in the streets of Baghdad?
>
>If our nation is to go to war, it is only right that all Americans share
>in the sacrifice of war. It is time we truly comprehended the
>consequences. I urge my colleagues to support a universal draft which I
>believe will make votes for war much more real for many of my colleagues.
>-----
>
>US Preparing for Military Draft in Spring 2005
>by Adam Stutz  Wednesday January 28, 2004 at 09:50 AM
>
>    The current agenda of the US federal government is to reinstate the
>draft in order to staff up for a protracted war on "terrorism." Pending
>legislation in the House and Senate (twin bills S 89 and HR 163) would
>time the program so the draft could begin at early as Spring 2005 --
>conveniently just after the 2004 presidential election!
>
>Reinstatement of the draft
>
>Dear Friends and Family,
>
>I urge you to read the article below on the current agenda of the federal
>government to reinstate the draft in order to staff up for a protracted
>war on "terrorism."
>
>Pending legislation in the House and Senate (twin bills S 89 and HR 163)
>would time the program so the draft could begin at early as Spring 2005 --
>conveniently just after the 2004 presidential election! But the
>administration is quietly trying to get these bills passed NOW, so our
>action is needed immediately. Details and links follow.
>
>If voters who currently support U.S. aggression abroad were confronted
>with the possibility that their own children or grandchildren might not
>have a say about whether to fight, many of these same voters might have a
>change of mind. (Not that it should make a difference, but this plan would
>among other things eliminate higher education as a shelter and would not
>exclude women -- and Canada is no longer an option.)
>
>Please send this on to all the parents and teachers you know, and all the
>aunts and uncles, grandparents, godparents.... And let your children know
>-- it's their future, and they can be a powerful voice for change! Please
>also write to your representatives to ask them why they aren't telling
>their constituents about these bills -- and write to newspapers and other
>media outlets to ask them why they're not covering this important story.
>
>The Draft*
>
>$28 million has been added to the 2004 Selective Service System (SSS)
>budget to prepare for a military draft that could start as early as June
>15, 2005. SSS must report to Bush on March 31, 2005 that the system, which
>has lain dormant for decades, is ready for activation. Please see website:
>
>http://www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html
>
>to view the SSS Annual Performance Plan-Fiscal Year 2004.
>
>The Pentagon has quietly begun a public campaign to fill all 10,350 draft
>board positions and 11,070 appeals board slots nationwide.. Though this is
>an unpopular election year topic, military experts and influential members
>of Congress are suggesting that if Rumsfeld's prediction of "long, hard
>slog" in Iraq and Afghanistan [and a permanent state of war on
>"terrorism"] proves accurate, the U.S. may have no choice but to draft.
>
>Congress brought twin bills, S. 89 and H.R. 163 forward this year,
>entitled the Universal National Service Act of 2003, "To provide for the
>common defense by requiring that all young persons [age 18--26] in the
>United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a
>period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and
>homeland security, and for other purposes."
>
>These active bills currently sit in the Committee on Armed Services.
>Dodging the draft will be more difficult than those from the Vietnam era
>remember. College and Canada will not be options. In December 2001, Canada
>and the US signed a "Smart Border Declaration," which could be used to
>keep would-be draft dodgers in. Signed by Canada's Minister of Foreign
>Affairs, John Manley, and US Homeland Security Director, Gov. Tom Ridge,
>the declaration involves a 30-point plan which implements, among other
>things, a "pre-clearance agreement" of people entering and departing each
>country.
>
>Reforms aimed at making the draft more equitable along gender and class
>lines also eliminate higher education as a shelter. Underclassmen would
>only be able to postpone service until the end of their cur-rent semester.
>Seniors would have until the end of the academic year.
>
>*This article by Adam Stutz is from the "What's Hot Off the Press" column
>of the newsletter of Project Censored, a media research group at Sonoma
>State University that tracks the news published in independent journals
>and newsletters. From these, Project Censored compiles an annual list
>(more than 20 years running) of 25 news stories of social significance
>that have been overlooked, under-reported, or self-censored by the
>country's major national news media. The mission of Project Censored is
>"to educate people about the role of independent journalism in a
>democratic society and to tell The News That Didn't Make the News and
>why."
>
>"What's Hot Off the Press" includes student synopses of articles currently
>being investigated for inclusion in the next Project Censored report. For
>more info and/or to receive Project Censored's newsletter, go to
>
>http://www.projectcensored.org, 
>
>or email [censored]@sonoma.edu
>
>Don't believe it yet? Go to
>
>www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/g_three_sections_with_teasers/legislative_home.htm
>
>and search for "S 89", then later search for "HR 163" where it says "By
>Number" and you'll find the articles. I would link you to the articles
>directly but that doesn't work for some reason.
>
>---end of message---


-- 


Al Kagan
African Studies Bibliographer and Professor of Library Administration
Africana Unit, Room 328
University of Illinois Library
1408 W. Gregory Drive
Urbana, IL 61801, USA

tel. 217-333-6519
fax. 217-333-2214
e-mail. akagan at uiuc.edu