Light at the End of the Tunnel - public domain & DU-exclusive material

Lowell Sun - http://www.lowellsun.com/ci_2782217 (note: the Sun is a Kerry/Meehan-bashing pulp winger rag)

Father of slain soldier pushes for exit strategy
By MEAGHAN WIMS, Sun Staff

BEDFORD -- It's time to put free speech to work.

That's the call from Brian Hart, whose son, Army Pfc. John Hart, died at age 20 in Iraq in October 2003 when his unarmored Humvee was ambushed. Since then, Hart, united with First Parish Rev. John Gibbons, has urged better protection for troops. Now they're pushing for a clear exit strategy to bring troops home. It starts with open dialogue, they said, however unpopular the discussions may be.

“There is a silence today in the national discourse, a silence that breeds fear,” Hart said to a group gathered at First Parish, a Unitarian Universalist congregation near Bedford Town Common. “In America, we seem afraid to ask the president where Osama bin Laden is, or why we were sent to Iraq on half-truths when the whole truth would have sufficed, or how will we ever get out. ... It has become too easy to send another man's son to Iraq,” he added. “We must fight a government that implies that it is un-American to express dissent. Silence is not an answer.”

Hart's collaboration with Gibbons may seem unlikely when you realize how they were first acquainted. John Hart, before he shipped to Iraq, was angered by a “Speak Out for Peace” banner First Parish had hung from its church front. John asked his father to help get it removed. Gibbons agreed to the family's request. Now, Gibbons and Brian Hart are allies in their desire for a national dialogue on bringing soldiers home. Gibbons praised the Hart family for their “relentless pursuit of the truth” about their son's death. “It is a campaign to speak out for the truth. We want a credible plan to bring it to an honorable conclusion,” Gibbons said.

U.S Rep. Marty Meehan, a Lowell Democrat and one of the first lawmakers to propose a detailed exit strategy, yesterday joined them by renewing his call for a phased-out removal of American forces. Meehan bemoaned how “the rush to war” left America's troops unprepared and inadequately protected. He credits Hart for helping him secure funds to armor 80 percent of American Humvees. U.S. troops are seen as occupiers, not liberators, Meehan said, and the perception has bred the Iraqi insurgency. “Because of our occupancy, we're growing the insurgency quicker than we can capture or eliminate them,” Meehan said. “By any measure, the policy in Iraq is a failure,” he added. “Our troops are not failing, our policy is failing. Some people think that talking about our policy is not good. I think the worst thing we can do for our brave men and women is to leave them in Iraq with a policy that's not working. “We owe it to our soldiers to look and move forward with an exit strategy” that would phase out the troop withdrawal by the end of 2006 and, in the meantime, boost training of Iraqi troops and push American forces to the background. Meehan said he will introduce a joint resolution this week in Congress to plan an exit strategy. Hart's hope is that in the future, some may say: “A revolution started here.”

Boston Globe - Former supporter joins foes over war -
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2005/06/05/former_supporter_joins_foes_over_war/

Former supporter joins foes over war
Speaks for peace after son's death
By Michael Levenson, Globe Correspondent | June 5, 2005

Two years ago, Brian T. Hart, an avid supporter of the American military mission in Iraq, wrote to the Board of Selectmen in Bedford to complain about a 20-foot banner strung from the front of the First Parish church that read, ''Speak Out For Peace." Today, Hart, now a blistering critic of the campaign in Iraq, plans to return to the church on the town green to speak out for peace at the pulpit. The reason for his transformation: His son, Private First Class John D. Hart was killed outside Kirkuk, Iraq, in October 2003 when insurgents firing small arms and rocket-propelled grenades attacked his unarmored Humvee.

''I don't care if they call me un-American," Brian Hart said Friday as he ignored a tall glass of iced tea sitting before him on the back porch of his home in Bedford. ''I've come full circle in saying the best way to support the troops today is to give them a plan to exit Iraq." Hart, 46, grew up in a conservative Texas family, served as president of the Republican club at the University of Texas, and voted for President Bush in 2000. His daughters, Rebecca, 18, and Elizabeth, 14, are members of the Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps at Bedford High School. The peace banner went up in early 2003. That July, John Hart saw the sign as he prepared to leave for Iraq on his first tour of duty with his unit, the 173d Infantry Brigade. John asked his father to help get the sign removed.

Brian Hart wrote to the Board of Selectmen, contending that the peace banner violated the town's historic zoning codes. At a board meeting, he threatened to file a lawsuit. John Eric Gibbons, the Unitarian minister whose congregation had hung the blue-and-white banner, agreed to take it down. Hart was pleased. Three months later, John was dead, one month past his 20th birthday. First Lieutenant David R. Bernstein of Phoenixville, Pa., was also killed in the attack. Bernstein was 24. Days later, at Bernstein's graveside, Hart said an Army sergeant told him that US troops were lacking supplies. At his son's funeral, Hart said a soldier who had been in the Humvee during the fatal attack also told him that their Army unit lacked armor and ammunition. Hart began studying the way the Army supplies its soldiers. He met with US Senator Edward M. Kennedy, spoke with other members of Congress, and developed contacts with military suppliers and service members. What he learned about Humvee armor disturbed him, he said. ''Congress was being told that the plants were at full capacity," Hart said. ''They were just lied to. Hundreds of kids died from over this issue alone."

Quite a good article, there is much more........”

INTRODUCTION OF BRIAN HART BY PASTOR JOHN OF THE BEDFORD FIRST PARISH UNITARIAN CHURCH, Sunday, June 5, 2005 (posted with permission of the author).

It was the philosopher George Santayana who said that “the pursuit of truth is a form of courage.”

I did not know Brian Hart until, in the winter of 2003 during the run-up to war, I learned that he and a few other Bedford citizens had publicly objected to a large banner which this congregation had placed across the front of our meetinghouse. The banner read, “Speak Out for Peace.” It was Brian and Alma’s son John who, while on leave from the Army’s 173rd Airborne Brigade, questioned why people in his hometown were unsupportive of our troops.

In part in deference to the feelings of families like the Hart’s, the banner came down soon thereafter; and, indeed, foreign policy cannot be waged by slogan. Nonetheless, a relationship grew between the Hart’s and this congregation and, thus, we coordinated a community vigil and memorial service when, in October of 2003, John was killed in action near Kirkuk, fighting in an unarmored Humvee. I joined the family for John’s burial at Arlington National Cemetery.

Last autumn a second soldier from Bedford, Travis Desiato, was also killed in action; and again we coordinated a community response. These experiences have changed many lives and outlooks, including my own.

Thereafter, Brian and Alma have relentlessly pursued the truth of their son’s death. Building a network of active duty troops, politicians, businesspeople and anyone who could shed light, they uncovered the unwelcome truth that our troops were and remain inadequately armored and that our government has consistently dissembled as to the conditions under which our troops must fight, the purposes of this war, and the strategy that will bring this war to a conclusion.

On the issue of armoring, no one in this country is more informed than the Hart’s; they have pursued nothing but the truth.

Foreign policy cannot be waged by slogan and thus “a war against terrorism” cannot succeed if it creates more terrorists and “Iraqi freedom” cannot be accomplished by occupation. There is a need to go deeper and to understand our circumstances more broadly; and yet, a climate of fear has fostered silence. We must be able to support our troops and to speak freely about their conditions and their mission.

Today Brian and I begin a campaign to support our troops who cannot speak freely for themselves. We begin a campaign to “speak out.” It is not a simplistic campaign to speak out for peace; it is not an anti-war or a pro-war campaign; it is not a campaign of simple slogans. It is a campaign to speak out for truth. We want the truth about this war and we want a credible plan to bring it to an honorable conclusion. We are honored by Congressman Meehan’s presence and we look forward to others who also will speak out for truth.

As New England meetinghouses such as this one were the crucible of American democracy and as the Minutemen once mustered on this Bedford Common, so too we will promote a national discourse about this war and we will muster for democracy and the truth.

The worst thing that could happen to Brian has already happened; he can’t be bought off or intimidated. He’s not here to shill for any orthodoxy, party or ideology. He rarely raises his voice. He’s here to support our troops with truth.

I would describe Brian as a courageous man in pursuit of truth but, in deference to John and to Travis, Brian would reject that description. No one, he says, is shooting at him. Nonetheless, please welcome Brian Hart.

INTRODUCTION OF REP. MARTY MEEHAN (D-MA-5) BY PASTOR JOHN GIBBONS OF THE BEDFORD FIRST PARISH UNITARIAN CHURCH, Sunday, June 5, 2005 (posted with permission of the author).

FIRST PARISH UNITARIAN SPEECH WITH CONGRESSMAN MARTY MEEHAN
JUNE 5, 2005
BY BRIAN T. HART

“Where do we go from here?”
“What is the right thing to do?”

These are questions asked on this Town Common 230 years ago.
Today they are being asked again.

The decision then was to go to Concord and fight the most powerful army on earth. It was an unmistakable act of treason for which there was no return. It took courage. Some would die. That day, the world changed forever.

It is altogether fitting, that today, in this town, in this building, on this common we should begin a discussion on Iraq that might be viewed in some circles as treasonous and in others as common sense.

Should we stay there or should we go? That is the question in Iraq today.

Is it better to blindly follow our national leaders: right or wrong?
Is it better to support the troops by speaking out on their behalf?
Is it treason to state the obvious; that occupiers stay and liberators leave?

Democracy requires discourse. Occasionally it needs dissent.
We should not fear free speech, nor be afraid to use it.

There is a silence today in the national discourse; a silence that fears brings. Indeed, the world seems manipulated by fear. Terrorists rely on it. Hundreds of people from Boston and thousands from New York were killed to instill fear in us. Governments also use it for control; even our government.

In Iraq today, religious extremists attempt to rule by random acts of terror replacing the organized terror from Ba’athists.

In America we seem afraid to ask the President where Osama Bin Laden is; why intelligence analysts can lie with impunity; why we were sent to Iraq on half-truths when the whole truth would have sufficed, and how will we ever get out?

We are afraid to ask the questions in part because we are afraid of the answers.

More reporters cover Michael Jackson than Iraq. Yet every day flag draped caskets land at Dover AFB where photography is banned. And a steady stream of wounded arrives at Walter Reed, anonymous to the world. These are our children, our spouses, and our patriots. It has become too easy to send another man’s son to war.

We must be unwilling to concede our world to the powers of fear and fanaticism; be it Muslim homicide bombers or Christian hate groups which come tomorrow to terrorize school children. We must also fight a government that implies it is un-American to express dissent.

So what is the right thing to do?
We must hold our leaders and ourselves accountable. Silence is not an answer.

Today in this hall we choose not to live in fear.

We owe Nick Pulliam, a son of parishioners here who is in Iraq today, to have this discussion. We owe it to John, we owe it to Travis. We owe it to veterans here today. They earned it.

Rev. Gibbons and I hope to start a sustained discussion on this topic; to explore options with civil discourse, to use free speech as it was intended; to bring about a more perfect world.

Someday people may say a revolution began here. Why here? Why now? -- Why not?

In New England Town Hall tradition, we are privileged to host Congressman Marty Meehan, the only Massachusetts congressman on the House Armed Services Committee.

I first met Congressman Meehan a year ago March. We did a joint press conference where Marty proposed and I endorsed a resolution prodding a reluctant Army to release all funds set aside for vehicular armor immediately instead of over 12 months. Such a common sense proposal was met with derision at the time in official circles. We were told it would never be heard before the House Armed Services Committee, but through a network of concerned citizens, we found Republican co-sponsors and soon Mr. Meehan’s position became the common sense of the day.

Later he would act vigorously to obtain supplemental funds which passed into law in August 2004. Those funds brought production of armored vehicles to near capacity and as a result somewhere around 40,000 soldiers a day, everyday, drive on patrol in vehicles with adequate armor. Though the problem continues, without doubt, hundreds have been saved from needless injury or death by Rep. Meehan’s actions.

So it was with great interest earlier this year that I read a draft paper by Congressman Meehan discussing policy in Iraq. It was well researched and thoughtful. It was ignored. It is a policy of phased exit I endorse as the best option among imperfect options for supporting our troops. It is in the best interest of Americans and Iraqis.

It is with great pleasure that I introduce Rep. Marty Meehan.

http://www.house.gov/meehan/iraq.html



Meehan Position Statement on Iraq

As a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee, Congressman Marty Meehan has been a vocal critic of the Bush Administration's handling of the war in Iraq. Since the onset of the conflict, Marty has advocated bringing on additional allies for the security and reconstruction efforts in Iraq. He has also been a leading critic of the Defense Department's failure to provide our troops with the technology, equipment, and logistical support they need to protect themselves.

Marty believes that the Administration's unwillingness to conduct diplomacy and its poor planning of the post-war transition have been damaging to U.S. foreign policy. The conduct of the war has not only damaged our credibility around the world, but damaged our ability to wage an effective war on terrorism.

Fighting terror ought to be the top national security priority of the United States of America. Unfortunately, the war in Iraq has siphoned precious resources out of the war on terror and into Iraq. Moreover, the harm the Bush Administration's handling of the war has caused with our allies and with potential allies in the war on terror has increased, not decreased, threats to U.S. domestic security.

Marty has proposed an effective exit strategy from the quagmire in Iraq that will allow U.S. troops to come home, lead Iraq down the path to stability and democracy, and focus on the war on terror. The centerpiece of this plan is to bring additional allies into the reconstruction efforts and improve the training of Iraqi security forces to facilitate a withdrawal of U.S. troops as quickly as possible.

Marty has also been deeply troubled by the damage done to our credibility at the Abu Ghraib prison. He has taken a lead role in making sure that those private contractors implicated in the atrocities at Abu Ghraib prison are held accountable for their actions by writing the Contractor Accountability Act and the Torture Accountability Act. The Contractor Accountability Act closes loopholes in current law and ensure that outside contractors are held accountable for any illegal actions they may commit while working for the United States government. The Torture Accountability Act to expand the application of anti-torture statutes abroad.

What happened at Abu Ghraib is the ugliest - but my no means the only - symptom of an overall failure to manage the post-war reconstruction of Iraq. Halliburton, for example, has received billions of dollars in pork in no bid contracts while our troops have been left, in many cases, to buy their own body armor and reinforce their vehicles with scrap metal. This despite the fact that Halliburton has ties with state sponsors of terrorism and has allegedly overcharged the American taxpayer by tens of millions of dollars. Marty has supported open, competitive, and transparent procedures for awarding contracts and voted to restrict the administration's ability to award no-bid contracts. He has also written Attorney General John Ashcroft urging him to appoint a special counsel to investigate whether certain corporations are violating U.S. law by conducting business with state sponsors of terrorism.

International Effort

From the outset of the conflict, Marty called on the Bush Administration to reject the unilateral use of force in Iraq. In the days leading up to the war, he wrote a letter to the President arguing that "it would be disastrous to our long-term national security interests if we take unilateral military action against Iraq" and that "a broad-based international coalition is essential to the long-term success of our vital interests in the region."

Marty continues to be a leading proponent of internationalizing the reconstruction and stability operations in Iraq. Within a week of the commencement of hostilities, he wrote to the President urging him to use the new opportunity to engage the United Nations for post-Iraq reconstruction both to "effectively work toward consensus in the region" and to "bridge rifts in our international relationships." This requires the Bush Administration to empower the United Nations to oversee the reconstruction of infrastructure and Iraqi elections. He is hopeful that the long overdue Security Council Resolution passed this June will give the United Nations and its Special Envoy to Iraq the authority they need to take over the reconstruction of Iraq.

Marty strongly supports handing over military and security operations to the Iraqis as soon as they are adequately trained. This includes advocating ramped up efforts to train the Iraqi Civil Defense Corps, police, and other security forces. It also includes turning over control of military operations to a true coalition, such as NATO.

Giving Our Troops What They Need

Marty has been outraged by the failure of the Defense Department to provide for the personal safety of our men and women in the Armed Forces. Marty worked in the House of Representatives to urge the Administration to provide sufficient body armor for every soldier, many of whom spent up to $2,000 out of their own paychecks to provide necessary armor that the Pentagon failed to provide. In May he secured $1.6 billion to provide necessary armor for Humvees and purchase interceptor body armor for unprotected soldiers.

There are also concerns about the length of time our troops have been deployed to Iraq and the burdensome strains placed on our reserve forces. For example, the 94th Military Police Company based out of Londonderry, New Hampshire has been activated for 2 ½ of the past four years and had their deployment extended twice. The shortage of troops is a result of this administration's inability to convince our allies to contribute to the effort in Iraq and their refusal to deploy additional forces to the region. Marty has called for a more reasonable rotation schedule for Reservists to give troops more advanced notification and a concrete deployment length so they can spend less time away from their families.

The Road From Here

Marty's top priority is to implement an effective exit strategy by treating our allies as equals and negotiating their full participation in the operation in Iraq. If the United States worked more cooperatively with our allies could obtain commitments for 50,000 troops from outside the United States - twice the current number. This would increase the number of allied troops in Iraq to 200,000, the amount that General Eric Shinseki, the former Army Chief of Staff, predicted would be necessary to stabilize Iraq.

Looking to the future, the reconstruction of Iraq is extremely important. Our exit can only occur when Iraq is ready to exist as an autonomous entity. To this end, we need an extensive training campaign to prepare an independent Iraqi military and security force. The United Nations and NATO must play a leading role in Iraq's future after the conflict ends and should immediately be given more involvement in the troubled state.