Choosing Jail: Experimenting With Redemptive Suffering

Experimenting With Redemptive Suffering by Steve Clemens. June 11, 2012

It was in reading Mohandas Gandhi that I first learned about his “experiments with truth” – a term he used in perfecting the tactics of nonviolent resistance to the apartheid regime in South Africa and the British colonial occupation of his homeland of India. Martin Luther King Jr. took lessons from Gandhi’s campaigns in designing his own strategies to throw off the shackles of racial prejudice and legal discrimination. King used the term “redemptive suffering” drawing from his training as a Baptist minister and his understanding of the nonviolent response of Jesus to persecuting authorities.

Even though I’m now on the far side of 60, I feel I’m just a novice when it comes to creative nonviolence when I read the accounts of Gandhi, King, Dorothy Day, Daniel Berrigan, and many others. I’ve been arrested now more than 30 times; jailed more than 10 (for periods of a few hours up to six months). Some trials were before just a Judge, other times with a jury; some acquittals but more convictions. All of them learning experiences but I find each time I enter the courtroom, I find I have fewer expectations of “justice” from an entrenched system to is clearly in service to empire.

While the option of doing community service is definitely preferable to incarceration for most crimes that don’t involve violence, (especially having seen first-hand the dehumanization of most jails and prisons, even the “minimum security” Federal prison “camps”), it struck me that, for me – this time, I could experiment again by choosing the more difficult option.

To choose suffering over against retaliation or violence is what Martin King, Ralph Abernathy, and thousands of others (including my friend Marv Davidov) did during the Civil Rights struggle. While suffering in itself might be efficacious, publicly choosing to do so can hopefully encourage others to join the struggle. Thus, from King’s choice to remain in jail rather than seek to be released on bail, we were blessed with arguably one of the best treatises on nonviolent action in the form of King’s powerful “Letter From the Birmingham Jail.” King’s choice to suffer in jail lent moral credibility to his letter to his critics – especially those who also wore clerical garb but chose a “go slow” strategy when it came to human rights for people of color. King not only chose suffering over retaliation but also over comfort and convenience. His friends argued that “you could do a lot more for the cause on the ‘outside’ rather than rotting in jail” but King understood the power of redemptive suffering as a way to move others.

So, it got me thinking as I prepared once again for trial on the charge of criminal trespass at Alliant Techsystems (ATK) – purveyor of death and destruction for corporate profit by making and selling landmines, cluster bombs, and depleted uranium munitions among other products designed to kill, maim, and dominate. Although I would defend our nonviolent actions on the basis of International Laws and Treaties, I knew there was a good chance our legal arguments would fall on deaf ears. If found guilty, should I request the likely consequence, community service, a “penalty” already offered us by the Prosecutor in exchange for giving up our rights to a jury trial and pleading “guilty” – or should I choose a path which might embrace some discomfort and suffering?  

My friends on the receiving end of ATK’s lethal products take daily risks. My friend and fellow peacemaker, Sami Rasouli, now back in his homeland of Iraq, has to ask whether or not to risk having another child with his wife Suaad, knowing that the contamination of Iraq by depleted uranium has caused birth defects and cancers to rise precipitously since 1991. How can I stand in solidarity with him?

My friend and member of the Afghan Youth Peace Volunteers, Ali, must take risks every time he leads his donkeys into the mountainsides of the Bamiyan Province of Afghanistan to earn his living carrying water and firewood back to the village. He risks death or dismemberment from landmines, cluster bombs, or attacks from Apache helicopters or unmanned drones. How can I stand in solidarity with him?

I can choose to take a very modest amount of suffering and discomfort by going to jail in solidarity with them. Ten days of sleeping on a steel bunk with a pathetic 2” plastic-covered mattress and a clump of material called a pillow will be hard enough if I’m allowed a daily dose of ibuprofen to ease the aches but most jails deny the painkillers as a matter of course. Physical separation from friends and family, missing the physical comforts of home, forgoing the autonomy of being able to choose what and when you eat, the lack of quiet – all of these may cause some “suffering” but pale in the face of what my friends must encounter without a 10-day release promise. There is some risk of assault by guards or other inmates, the physical humiliation of the strip-search, the gratuitous orders from guards just to remind you that you are not in control anymore.

But Jesus tells us in the Gospels, “Be not afraid, I go before you”, and, he does. Besides, I have a community on the outside to support and advocate on my behalf – something very few other prisoners have. I only have 10 days; my friend Mark just was sentenced to 4 months and another friend Brian will likely get 6 months for a recent nonviolent protest against drones at Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri this spring. But we can offer up whatever we are able to risk and endure when we think of those on the receiving end of these illegal and indiscriminate weapons.

My suffering won’t in any way match theirs – but, when offered in solidarity, compassion, and hope, I pray it will help to begin the healing process that war is so bent on destroying. It’s been 10 years since my last incarceration at Hennepin County’s Adult Correction Facility, aka “the Workhouse”. It’s time to “experiment” again in the struggle for nonviolent change. I report to my jailers on June 26.

Punished for Exercising Our Constitutional Rights? by Steve Clemens May 16, 2012

The contrast between the two Judges couldn’t have been starker. Judge Peter Cahill and Judge Ronald Abrams both serve on the Hennepin County’s Fourth District Bench. Both Judges were assigned criminal trespass cases for nonviolent protest at the entrance to the corporate headquarters of Minnesota’s largest war profiteer, Alliant Techsystems (ATK). The same defense arguments were made in both courtrooms, the former in 2010, the latter this week. The same Eden Prairie Prosecutor, different Judges. The results were significantly different: Judge Cahill thanked the defendants for interesting and enlightening testimony and fined us $1 or one hour of community service – hopefully at a local children’s hospital, he added, noting in our testimony about our concern over civilian causalities of war.

While Judge Abrams treated us courteously and thanked both the defense and prosecution for our behavior in court, the sentencing differed widely. 10 days in jail; two days in jail; 68 hours of community service; 32 hours of community service. When is the last time you hear a Judge order 90 days in jail for an 89 year-old nonviolent defendant who is a nun in declining health? Yes, he stayed 87 of those days for a year in mandating the 32 hours of community service but his sentence was the maximum allowed under the trespass law of Minnesota.

To further add to the disparity, the 12 nonviolent defendants were repeatedly offered a plea bargain deal if we chose to forgo our right to a jury trial and enter a no contest plea to the charges: any amount of self-reporting community service to any local non-profit organization would be the prosecutor’s recommendation to the court. All we had to do is take the guilty plea.

“Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time” is an adage I’ve heard (and repeated) many times. In fact, if we choose to engage in civil resistance for the sake of peace and justice, we would do well to always be prepared to face the legal consequences of our actions.

The Constitution gives us the right to a jury trial of our “peers” but the way the system operates when one looks closely from behind the defendants table in the courtroom is a process which often removes citizens with well-formed, educated opinions when the jury pool is whittled down to who will actually hear the case. Strict rules of evidence and what testimony will be allowed in front of a jury controls the process – treating as “hearsay” and “irrelevant” the years of study and investigation done by principled protestors. The jury is instructed to follow the precise letter of the law, the spirit of which be damned.

One can go “pro se”, act as one’s own attorney but you aren’t invited back to the inner sanctum of the courtroom where the prosecutor can huddle with the judge, planning out sentencing strategy. When one co-defendant tried to go through the back door to request that the microphones be turned off during a break in the proceedings so the defendants could discuss issues without them being recorded or overheard, he was briskly told he could not be “back there” because of the security risk – even though he had gone through the same security checkpoint on the second floor as any prosecutor would.

We are told by the Prosecutor that “more than 95%” of all his cases are “settled out of court” with a type of plea bargain. The number of cases overwhelms the Court as the budgets for the judicial branch continue to face cuts to both staff and finances. The entire system would collapse if only a few more defendants would request their right to a jury trial. Judge Cahill asked his defendants if they were will to accept an official “hearing” rather than a jury trial and I suspect his sentence reflected his appreciation for our willingness to avoid the more confrontational style of a jury trial.

But defendants shouldn’t have to make such choices when a trial by jury is a constitutional right. I went in to the Courtroom this week a skeptic about the type of “justice” I’d receive. I remain skeptical. The Judge was given input from the Prosecutor about my past convictions (although Patrick Leach, the Prosecutor, probably didn’t do a thorough search of all the defendants) but I’m certain he did not mention that 3 times Hennepin County juries have acquitted me of the same charge for the same type of protest. In jury trials for this offense, I’m still 3 wins (not guilty) with now two losses; a batting average of .600, not bad for a non-lawyer.

I’m glad to do the 10 days in jail if it exposes our “judicial system” for what it is: straining at gnats while swallowing a camel (Matthew 23:24) when it continues to fail to challenge illegal wars, indiscriminate weapons, and predatory bankers but instead fills our jails and prisons with those who are predominately on the margins of our society. Our jails are filled with people who are mentally ill and/or physically addicted but instead of treatment, we specialize in punishment. A friend of mine in Georgia who recently was jailed because of his nonviolent support of immigrants told me he experienced his jail time as a sacrament. His friend told him, “Being imprisoned for the Gospel is sacramental.” Lets hope I can keep that in mind when it is time to “do my time”!

Going To Jail for Peacemaking

Going To Jail For Peacemaking by Steve Clemens. May 15, 2012

I could tell by the way the jurors entering the courtroom today refused to meet our eyes or even look at us that the verdict would go against the 11 peacemakers on trial in Hennepin County’s 4^th District Court. The jury trial was the result of a nonviolent witness at the entrance of Alliant Techsystems’ corporate headquarters in Eden Praire, MN just two days before ATK would move its main office to Arlington, VA on October 1, 2011 to be close to the Pentagon, its largest customer. 

There were 12 defendants the day we were arrested on trespass charges when we refused to leave unless we could meet with the CEO or other corporate officers to deliver a Civil Arrest Warrant as well as a notebook entitled “Employee Liabilities of Weapons Manufacturers Under International Law”. Even though the Eden Prairie Police Officers agreed to place the documents we carried into our case files, Judge Ronald Abrams agreed with Prosecutor Patrick Leach’s objection to the documents being allowed to be entered as evidence in our trial. So the jurors never had the excerpts of the international laws and treaties in front of them when they deliberated and instead seemed to agree with the prosecutor’s closing statement claiming we cited no actual laws in our defense after he and the Judge had prevented including them as evidence.

Despite the disappointing verdict, it was a great pleasure to hear the moving, clear testimony of my fellow defendants. I was proud to sit beside Sister Marguerite Corcoran at the defense table and watch her slowly walk up to the witness chair aided by her cane due to her Parkinson’s. She knew, given some of her health challenges, that at age 82 this might be one of her last times she might be able to participate in civil disobedience for a cause she cares deeply about. She wasn’t alone in that sentiment: her housemates, Sister Rita McDonald, age 89, and Sister Kate McDonald, age 83, didn’t choose to sit on the sidelines that September morning and so were great compatriots while testifying on their own behalf.

A third of the four “notorious” McDonald Sisters, Brigid, was feisty with her comments in the courtroom, expressing her outrage that ATK can profit by killing people yet we were the ones hauled into court rather than “the real criminals”. Jeanne Hynes carried a bandaged doll to the ATK protest and brought it again to hold while testifying about how indiscriminate weapons like the ones ATK sells continue to victimize real children – and keep killing and deforming long after a war has ended. Dr. David Harris, a retired surgeon and military veteran told his reasons for joining the arrest witness. Retired postal worker and fellow veteran, John Schmid tried to talk about some of the medical affects he has learned about from depleted uranium but Prosecutor Leach interrupted his testimony as irrelevant. Roger Cuthbertson attempted to explain the need for a citizen’s arrest procedure but was also stifled by objections which were sustained by the Judge.

Tom Bottolene, the creator of Alliant Action’s webpage and fount of information about Minnesota’s largest war profiteer testified about ATK’s history of making indiscriminate weapons, describing three of them in greater detail: cluster bombs, the XM-25 combat weapons designed to fire around corners or over walls, and depleted uranium. He told of our October 2010 “secret meeting” with ATK’s CEO, Mark DeYoung, and how he told us his company was no longer making depleted uranium munitions, indicating that he did not feel compelled to continue some of the “bad” decisions of his predecessors. Bottolene went on to describe his attendance at the AKT Shareholders meeting in August 2011 where CEO DeYoung admitted that the new contract for tank shells included depleted uranium. Therefore, Bottolene continued, it was incumbent that we remind the CEO of the illegality of this indiscriminate weapon by trying to once again deliver to him copies of relevant treaties and international law contained in the notebook.

Bill Barnett, also a stockholder, told how he had been arrested while trying to attend a shareholders meeting in past years and once again asked the Judge to reconsider entering our notebook into evidence since we carried it with us at the time of arrest and certainly documented our intent that day – to no avail. My own testimony may have been the longest because I attempted to read into the court record excerpts of Treaties the U.S. has signed, including the Hague and Geneva Conventions which clearly outlaw indiscriminate weapons. I tried to describe provisions from the Nuremberg Tribunals which compel all people to resist complicity with War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity. Although I managed to read a few of these excerpts despite the prosecutor’s objections, copies of these were prohibited from being included as evidence even though the US Constitution declares such treaties as “the supreme law of the land and judges in every state shall be bound thereby”. It appears that in Hennepin County, “supreme” somehow needs to take a backseat to private property trespass laws!

The jury took barely one hour to convict all of us when they returned to deliberate the next morning after receiving the jury instructions from the judge. After dismissing them, the Judge asked if we were ready to proceed to sentencing. The defendants were. Having already appeared four times in the courtroom at Ridgedale for arraignment and pre-trial appearances, we had little desire to make another separate trip to the façade of “justice”. However, the Prosecutor asked if he could have some time to consult with the defendants before making his recommendations to the Court.

“What do you want to do, Mr. Clemens?” Leach asked me. I responded that I felt my actions were a “community service” already and if the court felt it needed to punish me, I’d prefer to go to jail. “For how long?” was his response. I refused to set the parameters of my own punishment declaring that he should “let the punishment fit the crime.”

Why would I “choose” jail over a sentence of community service and a fine?

Doing the time for the “crime” certainly is closer to Gandhi’s own practice of asking his judges for the maximum penalty. He understood the value of taking on suffering as a moral force for change and how it exposed the violence and cruelty of the state. For me, having the Judge order me to jail helps expose the preposterous idea that peaceful, nonviolent protest should be punished when it challenges the “rights” of corporate war profiteers. [The Prosecutor went out of his way to say that he might not like what ATK produces and did not represent the company in his role as prosecutor. Other prosecutors I’ve had in the past went further –admitting they despised what ATK did – but all followed their prescribed role in protecting a trespass law over human life in “enemy” lands.]

Choosing jail is my offering to my new (and future) friends in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is a statement to them that I take seriously my desire to stand in solidarity with them in denouncing the scourge of depleted uranium and depleted consciences. Their knowledge that there are Americans willing to sit in jail (even if only for 10 days) out of concern for their well-being can hopefully help the healing needed between citizens of the US empire and citizens of its new vassal states in the Middle East and southwest Asia. I go to jail in good conscience to stand in solidarity with my friends Sami, Hakim, Abdulai, Sammera, Faiz, Zuhair, President Akeel, Zahra and Sharbanoo, Dr. Ali, Hiba, Dr. Askouri, and many others. I’ll have time in jail to think about and pray for them. I’ll have time to think about and pray for my own nation’s leaders and corporate chieftains.

Dr. David Harris, a stalwart friend (although all the other defendants have become good friends over our years of vigil and protest together), said he wanted to join me in going to jail when Mr. Leach asked him what he felt was an appropriate sentence for his conviction. Although he was sentenced to only two days in jail, the Prosecutor deciding (without a lot of first-hand evidence) that he had fewer criminal convictions, I am grateful for his act of conscience and solidarity.

While other defendants have been sentenced to between 32 and 68 hours of community service, our 12^th defendant, Charlie Bloss, had his sentence suspended because he remains in the hospital battling the effects of cancer. He had been excused from attending the trial but the court honored his desire to be included with us, accepting whatever verdict came down on the others.

So, after our conversation with the Prosecutor, one by one we were called before the bench for our sentencing. It was a little startling to hear “I sentence you to 90 days in the Hennepin County Adult Corrections Facility (Workhouse). Execution of 81 days is stayed for one year. You are fined $50. You will serve 10 days with the 10^th day served in lieu of paying your fine and surcharge and assessments. You will report to the Workhouse on June 26^th by 11AM. You are not to go on the property of 7480 Flying Cloud Drive in Eden Prairie for a year. No trespass (within the State of Minnesota) during that year. I wish you well in the future.”

David was sentenced before me and the Judge prefaced his sentence saying, “I work very hard to keep people out of jail. I am sending you to jail (at your request) with a heavy heart.” I believe he meant it. Our Judge is trapped in the same system which seems bent on victimizing everyone in the process. Such is life in the declining empire.

The Things I Carried To My Arrest

The Accoutrements of Arrest by Steve Clemens. September 28, 2011

Usually when I risk arrest in an action of nonviolent civil disobedience I try to only carry the bare essentials: my drivers license/ID and possibly some cash if I will try to make bail. I even remove my wedding ring if I’m expecting to end up in jail. Today, however, for our last arrest witness at Alliant Techsystems, Minnesota’s largest war profiteer, I carried a Civil Arrest Warrant for ATK’s CEO, Mark DeYoung. I also wore my blue scarf brought home from Afghanistan this Spring as a symbol of solidarity with nonviolent peacemakers in Kabul and Bamiyan Province.

I wore my Blue T-shirt with the bold lettering of “No War” coupled with “Love your enemies” and “our God is Love, our Gospel is Peace” statements.

I also carried excerpts of International Law provisions from the Hague and Geneva Treaties, resolutions from the United Nations, statements from the International Committee of the Red Cross, and statements from experts about the illegality of depleted uranium weapons. I carried a copy of my personal letter to CEO DeYoung as well.

Alliant Techsystems, also well known by their stock-ticker abbreviation as ATK, just recently announced that they are moving their corporate headquarters from Eden Prairie, MN to Arlington, VA so they can be close to their preferred customer, the five-sided Department of War headquarters also known as the Pentagon. Here in Minnesota they are a big fish in a small pond when it comes to corporate sales; in the Washington, DC area, close to the center of pork barrel politics and military contracts, they will just be one of many trying to sidle up to the hog trough.

Our AlliantACTION vigil group, usually about 20-30 stalwart peacemakers, have come every Wednesday morning for more than 15 years running from 7-8 AM to hold signs, sing songs, and gather together to call for ATK to cease production of illegal and indiscriminate weapons and instead use their inventive engineering genius to create products that are life-giving and useful. “Peace conversion with no loss of jobs” is one of our on-going mantras. It is coupled with another, a query: “Who profits? Who dies?”

We carry few illusions that our act of nonviolent civil disobedience today will result in a radical change in policy for a corporation which has profited from weapons of death and threats of annihilation. This spin-off of Honeywell’s weapons division (after years of nonviolent protest at their south Minneapolis corporate headquarters organized by The Honeywell Project), ATK has the notorious distinction of being one of our nation’s largest manufacturer of landmines, cluster bombs, and depleted uranium weapons.

To further add to this pantheon of what the United Nations lists as “weapons of mass or indiscriminate destruction” (and, as such are illegal to manufacture, sell, or use), ATK also makes components for nuclear weapons, including the nuclear missile for the Trident Submarine. As if that were not enough, they have developed a gun that purports to “shoot around corners”, the XM-25 which is now being field-tested in Afghanistan. There are also reports that Alliant is also providing components for the Pentagon’s latest obsession, the un-manned aerial vehicle, aka the drone. While ostensibly targeted at Taliban leaders, scores of reports of innocent civilians being killed in Afghanistan and Pakistan has led hundreds if not thousands to join the insurgency to seek revenge for the attacks on family members.

Our act of civil disobedience comes just four days before the birthday of the premier disciple of nonviolence, Mahatma Gandhi. On October 2, the AlliantACTION vigil group will return to the front doors of the newly vacated corporate headquarters. The move of the corporate officers is to take place on October 1 but Gandhi’s birthday comes only once a year so we will gather to celebrate his life and witness as well as the power and the blessing our vigil circle has provided to us over the past 15 years. It was not our goal to “chase” ATK out of Minnesota; our state can use good paying jobs. We just want those jobs to affirm life rather than find ever more creative ways to destroy it.
__________________________
My letter to Mark DeYoung:

September 28, 2011

 Mr. Mark DeYoung, CEO

Alliant Techsystems

7480 Flying Cloud Drive

Eden Prairie, MN 55344-3720

Dear Mr. DeYoung,

I come to ATK Headquarters today with a heavy heart. The last time I approached this front door, just a few weeks shy of one year ago, it was in response to your gracious agreement to meet with a small group of us from the weekly Alliant ACTION vigil. As you may recall, during that meeting you told us “We are not in that business” in reference to depleted uranium weapons and went on to say that ATK always “pick and choose what contracts we will go after” – or words to that effect since you requested that I hand over all my written notes as we left the meeting so these quotes are my best recollection of what was said last October 11^th.

Although I am not a shareholder of ATK stock, several members of our vigil group are and they reported back to those of us vigiling outside or the morning of your annual shareholders meeting in August that you admitted in that meeting that ATK is assembling munitions containing depleted uranium provided for you by the U.S. Government.

You might recall during our meeting with you we gave you (and your legal counsel who was also present) a lengthy document identified as “Employee Liabilities of Weapons Manufacturers Under International Law”. Included in that document was a resolution passed by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in 1996 which stated categorically that weapons containing depleted uranium are “weapons of mass or indiscriminate destruction” and “the production, sale and use of such weapons are incompatible with international human rights and humanitarian law”.

Therefore, we come with the intent of serving you with a Citizens Arrest Warrant, charging you with both the production and sale of illegal weapons according to Treaties signed by the U.S. Government. It has always been the intent of our vigil group to advocate “peace conversion with no loss of jobs” for the company you lead but since you have decided to move the corporate headquarters to the Washington, DC area at the end of this week, we felt we needed to take this nonviolent action.

 Sincerely, in Peace,

 Stephen D. Clemens

Member, Alliant ACTION Vigil

"Depleted” Sounds Like It is Benign

I plan to join Women Against Military Madness (WAMM) in a fund-raising Walk Against Weapons on Saturday June 5th. We will walk to the entrance to Alliant Techsystems, Minnesota's largest war profiteer. WAMM's Director asked me to write briefly about the scourge of DU, one of ATK's profitable illegal weapons.

“Depleted” Sounds Like It is Benign by Steve Clemens

It is pyrophoric, probably carcinogenic and mutagenic, and when aerosolized, the ceramicized, minute particles can be readily inhaled or ingested. Why so many highfalutin words for something that is already “depleted”?

Uranium-238, aka depleted Uranium or DU, is a waste product remaining from the enrichment process used to process Uranium for use in nuclear weapons and as the fuel for nuclear power plants. While remaining radioactive, it is a less intensive (but longer-lasting) – thus earning the moniker of “depleted”.

As a metal, DU is heavier and denser than lead and has a similar toxicity in humans and animals if ingested. Heavy metal poisoning particularly affects organs like the kidney and liver. But DU’s radioactivity, mostly benign when used as ballast in airplanes and boats or as shielding in tanks and troop carriers, becomes a more potent factor when it is ingested or inhaled.

Military planners are always looking for a super weapon or silver bullet. They discovered that depleted uranium was much more effective in destroying hardened targets than traditional lead or titanium based munitions. As the DU projectile flies through the air, it burns (pyrophoric) and sloughs off tiny, minute particles which take on a hardened, non-soluble character due to the heat (ceramicized). According to military officials, the weapon “self-sharpens” and burns its way into the target. The heat created often ignites or explodes items within the target, further scattering the radioactive dust particles. These particles can enter the body when breathed in (inhaled), swallowed when the dust lands on food or water sources (ingested), or through cuts in the skin.

Doctors in Iraq in the area where DU weapons were used in the 1991 War have been alarmed by the huge increases of cancers and birth defects they have witnessed. While scientific proof of causation demands years of careful study (it took more than 35 years for the Army to admit Agent Orange caused cancer in Vietnam), the circumstantial evidence mounting in Iraq and Afghanistan and other battle areas where it has been used is substantial.

What is really depleted is the morality of designing, manufacturing, and profiting from a weapon which keeps on killing beyond the battlefield (when the sandstorms in Iraq and Afghanistan blow the radioactive dust particles up into the atmosphere where they land who-knows-where); it keeps killing long after a war has ended (with the half-life of 4 ½ billion years –so it will keep killing until it is cleaned up); it is inhumane in how it kills with the likely cancer-causing diseases, birth defects, and heavy-metal poisoning; and it harms the natural environment with its radioactive pollution. Any failure of these four tests make a weapon illegal according to international law experts. The fact that DU fails all four make it an especially heinous “weapon of mass indiscriminate destruction” (according to the UN).

Alliant Techsystems (ATK) profits from the manufacture and sale of these illegal and immoral weapons. This depleted morality must be converted to research for life-giving alternatives. Peace conversion with no loss of jobs.

A Difference Between Night and Day: A Tale of Two Judges

A Difference Between Night and Day: A Tale of Two Judges by Steve Clemens. April 25, 2010

My trials were 7 months apart, almost to the day. One was in neighboring Ramsey County, the other in my home county of Hennepin. Both were for the same charge: criminal trespass and both ended with a somewhat similar sentence: continuance towards dismissal with conditions. In Ramsey County it was “no same or similar for 1 year”; in Hennepin it was “no arrest for trespass at ATK for 6 months.” However, the Ramsey sentence, besides being longer in duration also harbored a more threatening restriction – no arrest [for protest] anywhere in the world, whereas the Hennepin County Court Judge, instead of threatening told us we were welcome to “return to the scene of the crime” (so to speak) by attending the weekly Wednesday morning vigil; we were just to avoid going on Alliant Techsystems property for the next six months. But, if we did, we’d still qualify to get the jury trial we originally planned for –albeit not a speedy one.

I think the differences we experienced in court demonstrate how subjective justice can be with our present system. Much of the experience depends on the judge assigned to one’s case. On the surface, I’d suppose that an African American judge might be somewhat more sympathetic to civil disobedience and principled public protest because without precisely that happening 50-60 years ago during the Civil Rights struggle, we would likely not have many jurists of color on the Bench. That said, one only has to look at the record of Clarence Thomas on the US Supreme Court to disabuse one of stereotyping Black judges as progressive.

But it was an African American District Court Judge I faced in September 2009 for the prior year’s arrest at the Republican National Convention. Judge Edward Wilson, however, had no patience whatsoever with our desire to discuss the US Constitution, International Treaties and Laws, UN Resolutions, or even the MN State Constitution in our “Claim of Right” defense for the trespass charge. Never before had I faced a judge so controlling in this my 5th jury trial on identical charges. In fact, 3 of the prior 4 juries found me “not guilty” after hearing our testimony; the only guilty verdict coming in the wake of 9/11 and the initial popularity of the Afghan War.

So, given Judge Wilson’s hostility, especially evident when I attempted to testify in my own behalf and was interrupted about 30 times by either the Judge or the Prosecutor, it was no surprise that the Ramsey County Judge slapped a $100 fine (or 20 hours of community service), insisting that it also be done in his county, not “anywhere in the world” like his “no arrest” restriction plus $81 in “court costs” which could not be substituted with community service.

The contrast in the Hennepin County Courthouse this week couldn’t have been more pronounced. At first, our trial date was set for April 15th, Income Tax Day. The assigning judge instructed us to go to Courtroom 753 and present our case to Judge Peter Cahill. I’ve written elsewhere about that experience (A Hearing in Lieu of a Trial) which concluded in an official Court Hearing on Friday, April 23rd. Over the weekend I wrote letters to ATK’s new CEO, Mark DeYoung as well as to Eden Prairie Police Lieutenant Tracy Luke inviting them and other arresting officers to attend the Hearing to see what we had to say. Email requests for media coverage were sent to local reporters as well in the days prior to the Hearing.

Promptly at 9 AM, Judge Cahill took the bench and welcomed us. I made a few prefatory remarks about how we wished to proceed and thanking Lt. Luke for her presence in the Courtroom. I made an Opening Statement on behalf of all the four defendants and then Sr. Kate McDonald took the stand. The 80-year old nun began by reading the “Commitment to Practice Nonviolence” statement that is read every Wednesday morning at the beginning of the circle of sharing time during the vigil by the driveway entrance to Alliant Techsystems. She described how she and 20-30 others come every week to call for the end of the production of indiscriminate weapons, calling instead for “peace conversion with no loss of jobs”. She talked about her present literacy teaching work with immigrants and why she felt the need to walk up the driveway on that October morning in an attempt to talk with the CEO of Minnesota’s largest weapons manufacturer.

Geri Eikaas, a 71-year old grandmother who joined the weekly vigil two years ago as the company was moving to Eden Prairie from Edina, took the stand next. She talked about her long involvement with Amnesty International in working to free political prisoners and prisoners of conscience. Recounting how that world-wide movement was sparked by the efforts of one man, Englishman Peter Banenson, who wanted to protest an unjust imprisonment of two students he had never met before who were given a 7-year prison sentence for “toasting freedom” in Portugal, Ms. Eikaas stated that individuals can do great, wonderful things. While she continues to write letters on behalf of political prisoners half a world away, she also wanted to personally address what was happening in her own backyard. On the witness stand she looked at a newspaper photo from 2004 of two Afghanis sitting on a wooden bench at a Red Cross center in Kabul. Both had lost a leg to Soviet landmines that had probably been planted in 1979. Those victims, she said, were part of the Soviet legacy. Noting Alliant’s manufacture of landmines, cluster bombs, and depleted uranium munitions, she said she didn’t want more victims as America’s legacy in that same nation. That is why she felt compelled to act.

Noting ATK’s claim that “If our American men & women are sent in harms way, we want to see them protected and we take that very seriously.” quoting Rod Bitz, one of their public relations staff, Geri went on to describe another spokesman for ATK’s ammunition division announcing their plan to “go after international business to offset any slump in our business with the U.S. Army.” Showing that ATK is now selling AK-47 bullets to Afghanistan, while also noting the estimate that about 1/3 of all material given to the Afghani Government ends up on the black market, she wryly asked, “How long do you think it will be before these same munitions are used on our American soldiers?” She ended with a sad question: “Who profits? Who Dies?”

The Judge was seen taking notes and was obviously engaged with the testimony. He paged through the 32-page document, Employee Liabilities of Weapons Manufacturers Under International Law, which the group had carried with them to give to the CEO; now the Judge had a copy, marked Exhibit 1 after it was put into evidence for the case. As Ms. Eikaas finished, he started to ask a question about some of these weapons but then said he’d wait to hear the rest of the testimony because he felt it might answer some of the questions he had. With that, he called another 71-year old defendant to the witness stand.

Roger Cuthbertson often flies one of his colorful kites on days when the wind is right during the vigil. One of the kites he likes to fly over the parking ramp in front of ATK’s entrance reads “PU DU” referencing his personal disgust and outrage over the manufacture, sale, and use of depleted uranium weapons. Roger described in greater detail how depleted uranium weapons and cluster bombs work in battle and continue to kill, maim, and cause serious health issues, primarily to civilians, long after a war has ended. His description of these weapons confirmed how indiscriminate they are in affecting not just other enemy combatants but also our own soldiers and civilians.

Mr. Cuthbertson told the court he had been a public school teacher for 32 years after serving two years in the Philippines as a Peace Corps Volunteer at its very beginning during President Kennedy’s Administration. He said, “I guess you could say that I have been a person interested in peace and justice and active citizenship, for about 50 years. I have been protesting against weapons production even before Alliant Tech was formed out of its parent company, Honeywell.”

After speaking at length about some of ATK’s indiscriminate weapons, Cuthbertson concluded, referencing the arrest took place during a special vigil honoring Mahatma Gandhi’s 140th birthday, “What was resonating in my mind on Oct 2, 2009 when I tried to visit ATK was Gandhi’s statement, “Whatever you do may seem insignificant to you, but it is most important that you do it.” I read this statement out loud to my friends gathered at ATK before our action. I did do something that day. What I did was not violent or threatening in any way. I did not hurt any one. I am not trying to evade the consequences of my action. I do not feel guilty of any committing any offense. I did not destroy property. I thought long and hard about my action before taking it. I made sure I was reasonably well informed. I thought of my children and my grand children and the kind of world I want for them and for the millions of children like them around the world. Some people were a little bit inconvenienced by my action, but that is all the harm that was done. What I did is to demand a chance to talk to the decision makers at Alliant Tech about their immoral, illegal activities. What ATK is doing is more than inconvenience. It is producing large scale violence and death for profit.”

It was shortly after 10 o’clock when I took the witness chair. I’m always a little nervous or anxious every time I’m called to testify although it seemed easier this time without the awkward position of having the Judge seated on one side of you and the jury on the other side. This time it was only the Judge, Court Reporter, the Court Clerk, and many friends in the audience section of the courtroom. Fortunately my wife had the day off from work and was able to be there in support. Besides a copy of what I had to say, I also carried photos, a letter, and a collection of other documents I carried on the day of my arrest which I hoped could be placed into evidence. Juggling all those things and trying to remember to pour a glass of water for my parched throat added to my own personal drama.

I described a little about myself and how a semester abroad in college sparked my interest in international law. My commitment to peacemaking saw its genesis when I had to register for the Draft during the height of the Vietnam War. Quoting what is known as “the supremacy clause” of the US Constitution, I then read brief excerpts from Treaties signed by our federal government that now are considered (according to the Constitution –if not most US Judges) “the supreme law of the land.” I read from The Hague and Geneva Conventions, the CCW Treaty of 1980, the Treaty establishing the Nuremberg Tribunals and the Nuremberg Principles. All of this to the effect of highlighting the prohibition in international law of “indiscriminate weapons.”

I recounted my journey to Iraq just prior to the start of this present war as part of the Iraq Peace Team. Showing photos of a Pediatric Cancer doctor and two of his patients, I shared what he told me about the dramatic rise of cancers in the area where depleted uranium was used in the 1991 War. I showed photos of myself and Iraqis in the area called “the Highway of Death” to see some of the destruction wrought by depleted uranium weapons in that first war. Showing an additional photo taken the day of the arrest of a new Iraqi friend, I described the Sister City visit of Dr. Najim Askouri, an Iraqi nuclear physicist, to Minneapolis in the two weeks prior to October 2 and how the letter I carried with me that day told ATK’s CEO about the Iraqi delegate’s deep concern and anger at the contamination of their country by dU weapons make by his company.

I concluded my testimony by describing how the International Committee of the Red Cross, charged by the United Nations with promulgation and promotion of the Laws of War, calls us to “sensitize public opinion” and use the national courts and the media to help implement it. That is one reason we think raising these concerns within the Judicial Branch of the government is necessary to help stop the scourge of these already illegal weapons. I ended by reciting the words to the song we sing each week as we gather for the vigil:

Who will speak if we don’t?
Who will speak if we don’t?
Who will speak so their voice will be heard?
Who will speak if we don’t?

We were in court to try to give voice to those thousands victims of war – especially the children who are disproportionately crippled, maimed, sickened, and killed by these indiscriminate weapons.

Our testimony had taken about 90 minutes. The Judge announced a recess so the Court Reporter could have a break and he said it would be a longer recess so he had time to consider written memoranda we gave him which better described the case law basis for our “claim of right” defense. When the Court resumed, Geri Eikaas gave a Closing Argument and then we awaited a response from Judge Peter Cahill.

Judge Cahill told us he was a Public Defender, a private criminal defense lawyer, a city prosecutor, and a county prosecutor before becoming a judge. He said he was curious about what we would have to say in our defense and then remarked, “I found a group of people who were very sincere, very compassionate, and I have to give you credit for one thing I don’t always see among protesters: and that is humility. There is not an arrogance about your message, there is more a plea for, almost a desperation, to hear of the injuries of others as you try to stop the violence you see around the world. That’s refreshing. I think your actions are consistent with the highest standards of the traditions of civil disobedience.”

He went on to say, “With all of you out-ranking me in age, you are the kind of people I want to be like when I grow older. Your message is serious and your message is compelling, as I said. The information you provided was very educational to me and worth my time.” …

“You may be right that depleted uranium munitions may violate international law. Cluster bombs might violate international law. But that’s not why we are here today. And to be honest, I think it is way above my pay grade as a State Trial Court Judge to decide those weighty issues of international law. I’m here because we have a trespass case. And this case demonstrates the tension that exists between property rights and what we hold to be the most sacred rights, the Bill of Rights, the First Amendment rights to freedom of expression.”

The Judge said he couldn’t speculate how a jury might have decided the case. He did admit, “If your claim of right, based on international law, is sincere and in good faith, it would amount to a defense.” Because of the disposition we had already agreed upon in choosing to accept a Hearing in lieu of a jury trial, the Judge did not have to determine our guilt or innocence. It seemed, at least to this defendant, that he was relieved that we had already decided that matter.

Then he told us, “I am imposing $1 in court costs – or, by your conscience, one hour of community service – which can’t include protest activity at Alliant Techsystems. I would encourage you to consider devoting time, maybe your hour, to Gillette Children’s Hospital.” He went on to tell us that his now deceased older sister had suffered from polio all her life and what wonderful care she had received at the local Children’s hospital. He sensed our own compassion and hoped we could channel some of it toward local children like he had received on behalf of his sister. I could tell we had connected on a human level. It was no longer an authority figure looking down at some criminals from the bench but rather fellow citizens wanting to make our community a better place for everyone.

It wasn’t just the sensitivity of the sentence imposed. It was the tone and demeanor of the Judge in the Courtroom that gave me the impression that I really had been heard. What a complete difference between those two Courtroom experiences, one on the east side of the Mississippi, the other on the west. I want a justice tempered by mercy, informed by compassion – calling us to a community that embraces those marginalized and too often victimized in the process. My morning in Courtroom 753 on Friday April 23 was a sign of hope that at least one Judge is ready to listen.

A New Strategy to Be Heard?

A Hearing in Lieu of a Trial by Steve Clemens. April 15, 2010

Four members of the weekly AlliantACTION circle that vigils every week by the entrance to Alliant Techsystems (ATK), Minnesota’s largest weapons manufacturer and war profiteer, were scheduled to have a jury trial today in Hennepin County Court. The four of us, Sister Kate McDonald, Roger Cuthbertson, Geri Eikaas, and myself were charged with trespass on October 2, 2009. It was the 140th anniversary of Gandhi’s birthday and in the spirit of this icon of nonviolence, the four of us attempted to carry documents into ATK’s corporate headquarters in Eden Prairie and ask to meet with their CEO or other corporate official.

The documents we carried were entitled “Employee Liabilities of Weapons Manufacturers Under International Law” and included a letter signed by the four of us, excerpts from International Treaties about indiscriminate weapons, and articles from the media about the use and effects of cluster bombs and depleted uranium munitions. We chose to accept arrest rather than leave without at least an appointment with an ATK official.

We intended to plead our case to a jury this morning, basing our defense on International Treaties signed by our government under the “Claim of Right” provision in Minnesota’s trespass statute. However, when we were assigned Judge Peter Cahill as our trial judge, he asked us if there was any way we could “settle the case” short of a jury trial. The prosecutor from Eden Prairie had already offered a deal of community service with little to no fine and the possibility of waiving court costs but each of us wanted our day in court.

When Judge Cahill asked me why I desired a jury trial instead of settling the case with little or no consequences, I told him that we wanted a public forum to educated the public on the illegal weapons made and sold by Alliant Techsystems. I informed the judge that the International Committee of the Red Cross, the organization charged by the United Nations with promulgating International Humanitarian Law (also referred to as the Laws of War), has said that “using the national courts”, and “pressure from the media and public opinion help insure implementation of IHL”.

The judge listened carefully and paused to consider what I had said. He noted that the four of us planned to go to trial without lawyers representing us and said he would abide by strict court procedures in what testimony or evidence he would allow before the jury. However, he asked if we would be willing to consider an alternative: he would make his courtroom available for half a day for a “hearing –on the record, with a court reporter” for us to present our case to him in a freer format than before a jury. We could call witnesses if we wished. He would allow freer reign in what evidence, including photos that we might wish to present. In exchange, he would issue a “continuance toward dismissal” of our case providing none of the four of us were arrested for trespass at ATK in the next six months. He would assess court costs to us between zero and $100 after he heard our testimony and evidence. We were free to invite the public and especially the media if we wanted to follow the Red Cross mandate to “sensitize public option”.

We requested to possibility of videotaping the testimony but were denied that request because Hennepin County is in the midst of internal discussions about considering adjustments to its present policy prohibiting it, noting that some might feel that this case would appear “too political” to some who already opposed any changes. The judge suggested we could invite local media to video any testimony we wished to give outside of the courtroom if we wished. The real question for us is this: does the local media even care? In the past, even with two consecutive “not guilty” verdicts from Hennepin County juries in December 2004, local media showed no interest in the story. “We’ve already covered those protests in the past” was a typical reply from the local major newspapers and the local TV stations weren’t interested without compelling video footage.

The four of us chose to accept the judge’s proposal as an experiment, a new option we haven’t had before. The judge reminded us that in accepting it, we were only waiving our right to a speedy trial. If, after the hearing, we felt dissatisfied, we could return to ATK and “cross the line” and be arrested again for trespass within the six month window, causing us to return to his courtroom for a jury trial. (Not that our right to a speedy trial had done us much good – it has been more than six months since the arrest for this day in court.)

Will the media be interested? Or will the defendants be merely “preaching to the choir” plus Judge Cahill? How do we best capture the attention of our fellow Minnesotans about the indiscriminate weapons marketed around the world by ATK? How do we give voice to the voiceless victims of what the United Nations has labeled “the weapons of mass indiscriminate destruction”? The Hearing is scheduled for Friday, April 23, 9-noon, in Courtroom 753 of the Hennepin County Government Center in downtown Minneapolis. Come hear a grandmother who just became active in the anti-indiscriminate weapon movement in the past two years tell why she was arrested for the first time. Hear one of the MacDonald sisters, radical nuns who have sung and protested for decades. Listen to a Peace Corp alumnus who taught geography for over 30 years and now flies colorful kites with messages about war, healthcare, and weapons. Come and lend your voice to public opinion calling for “peace conversion with no loss of jobs.”

The Things I Carried

On Friday, October 2nd, the AlliantACTION vigil group celebrated Gandhi's birthday again by a nonviolent presence at the entrance to Alliant Techsystems, Minnesota's largest "defense"[sic] contractor and Merchant of Death. Bret Hesla led us in song,we read excerpts of passages from Gandhi's writings, and talked about the choice which confronts our nation: will we choose health-care or warfare?

As the gong was struck 141 times for the years since the Mahatma's birth, four of us chose to carry the message to the building's entrance, asking to meet with the CEO, retired Admiral Dan Murphy. We carried with us a notebook entitled, Employee Liabilities of Weapons Manufacturers Under International Law which included a letter signed by the four of us to the CEO. With me were Roger Cuthbertson, Geri Eikaas, and Sister Kate McDonald - making me the youngest of the quartet!

Because I had spent the previous two weeks with visiting delegates from Minneapolis' new Sister City, Najaf, Iraq, I also carried a more personal letter to explain why I was risking arrest (again). Here is what I carried:

October 2, 2009
Admiral Daniel Murphy, CEO
Alliant Techsystems
Eden Prairie, MN

Dear Admiral Murphy,

I come today to Alliant Techsystems at the behest of my new Iraqi friends, members of the Sister City delegation from Najaf. They have told me of the plague of disease and death wrought on their nation from the US military use of depleted uranium weapons, both in the 1991 war as well as the present war. Because ATK manufacturers, sells, and profits from making these toxic and illegal weapons, it is incumbent upon me to remind you of the illegality of indiscriminate weapons under treaties signed by our government as well as reminding you of the human cost of the use of these weapons.

Dr Najim Askouri, one of the members of the Sister City delegation, is a nuclear physicist and he has helped further educate me in the effects of this weapon on both humans and the environment. Doctors Al Janabi and Al Radhi, also distinguished members of the delegation have told me of the increase of cancers and birth defects in their country which they believe is related to exposure to your radioactive and toxic depleted uranium munitions. Other members of the delegation share the sense of urgency in the need to stop producing these weapons and the need for your company and the US government to pay for the clean-up of the contaminated areas and to set up medical treatment facilities to deal with the civilian casualties caused by DU. Members are especially concerned about contamination of the water systems in Iraq, including contamination from the particles of uranium tri-oxide from DU munitions used in the wars.

I bring with me today a notebook, Employee Liabilities of Weapons Manufacturers Under International Law in hopes that you will understand the legal obligations your company faces in manufacturing and selling these illegal and immoral weapons. I ask you to sit down with members of the AlliantACTION group which vigils every Wednesday in front of your headquarters to discuss our concerns. We remain nonviolent in our words and actions on this, the anniversary of Gandhi’s birthday.

In hope for peace conversion with no loss of jobs,

Steve Clemens
2912 E. 24th St.
Minneapolis, MN 55406-1322
steveclemens@gmail.com

With the above letter, I also carried highlighted excerpts of Treaties and laws documenting the illegality of depleted uranium and other "weapons of indiscriminate mass destruction" made by ATK. Included were:
1) Constitution of the United States, Article VI (Supremacy Clause).
2) Excerpts from Hague Convention (1907), Section II
3) Excerpts from Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 …, Parts III and IV
4) Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW)
5) Agreement For the Establishment of an International Military Tribunal For War Criminals in Europe. (Nuremberg Tribunal) and Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of Nuremberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal. (Nuremberg Principles)
6) Excerpts from International Committee of the Red Cross publication International Humanitarian Law: Answers to Your Questions 31-10-2002.
7) UN Commission on Human Rights Resolution 1996/16: International Peace and Security …

We were met at the front entrance to the building by ATK security and we asked permission to enter to deliver our documents to the CEO or other corporate officers. The security officer refused, stating he would not accept any documents from us and were told we were trespassing and should leave.

After being notified a second time that we were trespassing, the police asked us if we would voluntarily leave to which we politely refused. We were told we were under arrest and treated respectfully by the Eden Prairie Police who were present. As we walked back to the squad car to be processed for our arrest, Lt. Tracy Luke, asked me if I wished to have the documents we carried placed into the case file for this arrest. It showed a profound respect for the relationship we have developed since ATK moved from Edina to Eden Prairie a couple of years ago. While she is willing to enforce property laws, she also has listened carefully to our vigil group and clearly understands our commitment to nonviolence even if it leads to what is considered civil disobedience.

We, in turn, believe we have a "claim of right" under International Law and Treaties, and thus are innocent of the charge of trespass. It will be up to a jury to decide in the coming months. For me, this act of resistance was a parting gift to my new Iraqi friends. Over the past two weeks they've asked those they met for tangible, specific commitments of what we will do to help rebuild Iraq. I told them I will continue to nonviolently struggle to stop the use of DU and work to insist that those who have profited from this illegal and immoral weapon pay for the clean-up of the radioactive debris and fund a cancer research and treatment center to help heal the victims.

Please friends, add your voice and body to ending this scourge of war and inhumanity.

[photos courtesy of Tom Bottolene]. For link to photos from the event go to: http://alliantaction.org/archives/a1go/2009/action/100209gandhi/100209.html

Claiming Their Rights

Claiming Their Rights: When Nuns, Social Workers, and Librarians Confront The Military Industrial Complex by Steve Clemens. September 11, 2009


It wasn’t the usual group of criminal defendants in Hennepin County’s Courtroom 14D this week where Judge Lloyd Zimmerman presided. Minnesota judges are used to facing defendants who have been charged with drunk driving, burglary, assault, and even murder. And it is a rare occurrence when defendants who face up to three months in jail agree to “stipulate to the facts” of the charges against them before any evidence is presented by the prosecutor. In fact, after the stipulation was entered into the court record, the prosecutor for the City of Eden Prairie rested her case.

After all, the stipulation said both the defense and the prosecution agreed to the “facts”: The nine defendants went on the property at 7480 Flying Cloud Drive on March 4, 2009; they had not been invited and, in fact, were asked to leave; they refused; and the police were summoned and arrested them on the charge of criminal trespass. Only one element of the case was disputed: did the defendants have a reasonable belief that they had a “claim of right” to be on that property despite the wishes of the owner?

The youngest defendant is 52. Three were nuns in their seventies. An elementary school librarian. A retired social worker. An environmental engineer. At least four defendants are grandparents. And not a lawyer among them – they chose to go “Pro-Se”, to defend themselves. An old saying is often heard in the halls of most law schools: “He who defends himself has a fool as a client”. But these defendants thought this was no laughing matter. They sat before their jurors facing fines and jail because of conscience and conviction.

It was where the alleged trespass occurred that holds the key to understanding their determined and principled resistance – the headquarters of the largest Minnesota-based military contractor, Alliant Techsystems. Some of the defendants in the courtroom had begun their protest of the manufacture of illegal, indiscriminate weapons (especially cluster bombs) in the 1960s when Honeywell made them. After nearly twenty years of protest, vigils, and arrests, Honeywell chose to spin off their weapons products into another company, Alliant Techsystems – which is often referred to as ATK, their abbreviation on the stock exchange. That is significant. There is a lot of money to be made in selling both bullets and high tech weapons to a nation whose military budget grossly outpaces the rest of the world. But ATK doesn’t stop there. It markets its deadly products to more than 40 other nations.

Besides the deadly cluster bombs that one defendant told the jury “kills more children” when the “duds” are picked up by them thinking they might be toys, this war profiteer also makes depleted uranium munitions and land mines. Defendants testified about the effects of some of these weapons and cited International Treaties that ban their manufacture, sale, and use.

This is the lynchpin of the defendant’s case: did they have a “claim of right” to be on the property? The testimony from the stand connected the dots. The US Constitution states that treaties signed by our government become the “supreme” law of the land. The Hague and Geneva Conventions and the Nuremberg Tribunals signed by the U.S. declare weapons which are indiscriminate and kill civilians, damage the environment, and keep killing years after a conflict has ended are illegal. The Nuremberg Principles declare that “complicity” with war crimes and crimes against the peace or crimes against humanity is itself a crime. The defendants spoke about therefore having a solemn responsibility to take nonviolent action to try to prevent the manufacture, sale, and use of these illegal weapons.

What the defendants readily admit is on March 4th, they marched forth – right into the lobby of ATK carrying with them a notebook with the title: Employee Liability of Weapons Manufacturers Under International Law. They intended to hand this loose-leaf notebook to CEO Daniel Murphy or one of several other corporate officers and it contained a letter to him, sections of relevant International Treaties, and some case studies of weapons manufacturers who were prosecuted as war criminals under the Nuremberg Tribunals at the end of World War II. They requested to schedule a meeting with one of the corporate officials but were denied that as well. It was at that point they refused to leave.

Rita Foster, one of three nuns from the Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondolet, gave the opening statement for all the defendants. She described the actions and intent of the defendants on that morning in March.

Marie Braun was the first defendant to take the stand in her own defense. An indefatigable leader and organizer of the local anti-war movement and member of Women Against Military Madness, she told about meeting a German woman about her own age in the 1970s at a conference. When they were talking about their experiences growing up, the German woman told Marie that she had asked her parents why they hadn’t done anything to stop the Holocaust. Her parents told their daughter they “didn’t know” what was going on. Marie’s new friend told her, “I think they did know something.” They were afraid to act and now their daughter experienced the shame and guilt many Germans still feel today. Marie told the jurors she is now a grandmother and doesn’t want them to feel ashamed because of her failure to act – she knows what ATK makes.

Char Madigan, a nun who has worked with thousands of mothers and children who have suffered domestic violence, took the stand next. She talked about commonwealth versus corporate wealth and greed. She talked about taking responsibility rather than “hiding behind private property or trespass laws”. She said, “Just as property rights don’t protect from domestic abusers, nor should property rights protect weapons makers who violate international law. [Speaking] as a nun, property rights should not protect church officials from covering up pedophilia.” Char was clear that there should be some property rights but they have to be balanced and weighed with other important values, in her case with the value of international law to protect people during war.

John Hynes used to work at Honeywell until quitting in 1971. He was on the inside when Sister Char was vigilling outside! He told the jurors, “I wish someone had given me a copy of ‘Employee Liabilities’ when I worked at Honeywell.”

Kathleen Ruona only testified briefly and reminded the jurors that these weapons endanger all species, not just humans. John Braun, described the design and effects of cluster bombs. When he declared that civilians, especially children, were often victims of “dud” cluster bombs, the prosecutor objected, saying his statement was inflammatory.

Betty McKenzie, the third nun to address the Court testified about the effects of depleted uranium. She told the jury she was not a doctor or scientist but she had read plenty and heard experts talk about the horrendous effects the heavy metal poisoning and toxic radiation released from this newer super-weapon favored by the military. The judge instructed the jury, as he did for most of the witnesses, that her testimony was allowed not as “fact” but rather as to her “state of mind” when the defendant was arrested. It was up to the jury to determine if her beliefs and intent were “reasonable”.

The school librarian told a story about a children's picture book where the main character observes various children in her school being picked on or bullied. When none of her friends come to her aid after being poked fun of, her older brother reminded her that she also didn't " say something." Pepperwolf told the jurors, “I couldn't go back to school and face my students if I had this knowledge, this common knowledge of what these weapons do, and not ‘say something’. That is the title of the book: Say Something. “

Tom Bottolene gave the closing statement for all the defendants. He stated that the US Constitution was written for all the people not “we the corporations” or “we the government”. Since the case hung on whether the defendants had a reasonable belief they had a claim of right, Bottolene asked, “Is it reasonable to believe that this document has any meaning?” He went on to discuss the basis of international law and the rules of war. These were ratified by our government. And again he asked, “Do these documents have any meaning?”

He reminded the jurors that the Nuremberg Tribunals ruled that corporations were liable for their acts; that being told to or asked by the government doesn't excuse those actions. He explained how the Nuremberg rulings became part of the United Nations Charter, another Treaty signed by the United States government. “Is it reasonable to believe that document has any meaning?” he asked again. Then he told the jurors about his friend, the late Sister Rita Steinhagen. When she was on her way to prison for a nonviolent protest, she said, “I have the burden of knowing.”

For Tom, for the other eight defendants, and now the Judge and the Jury –all have the burden of knowing. We can’t tell our children like some German parents did after the Holocaust, “We didn’t know.”

[Just after I finished this article, the jury found all 9 guilty of trespass. The Judge sentenced them to a $300. fine or 24 hours of community service. In my opinion, they have already performed a service to the community with their acts of conscience.]

Mercenaries In Our Midst?

Mercenaries in Our Midst? By Steve Clemens. July 29, 2009

It looked like they were expecting trouble. The two Eden Prairie police officers each wore the following: a handgun, two additional clips of ammunition, a taser, a collapsible baton, a canister of chemical agent (likely pepper spray), two sets of handcuffs, plus a couple items around their waists I couldn’t readily identify.

Who were they protecting, and why?

Every Wednesday morning from 7-8 AM, a group of 20-40 people, most of them years, if not decades, beyond 50, gather to vigil by the entrance to Alliant Techsystems (ATK), Minnesota’s largest weapons manufacturer. Ever since this war profiteer moved from Edina to Eden Prairie a little more than two years ago, this maker of cluster bombs and depleted uranium munitions has hired cops from the local city government to be stationed at the driveway entrance to their corporate headquarters off Flying Cloud Drive, just to the north of Valley View.

Typically, the contingent of two uniformed cops seem armed primarily with just their service weapon holstered at their side so I was quite taken aback by the plethora of weapons displayed around their waists today. Over the past two years there have been several arrests for trespass, most notably the past two Augusts when the company hosts its Annual Shareholders Meeting. All of those arrested at those events were shareholders who had received invitations to attend the meeting only to be told when they arrived that they could not attend and would be arrested if they didn’t leave. Those who were arrested have consistently remained nonviolent.

It is the contention of many of the regular weekly vigilers that some of the weapons made by ATK are illegal under International Humanitarian Law (aka “the rules of war”) because of their indiscriminate nature – weapons which kill or injure civilians, poison or pollute the environment, continue killing long after a war has ended, and/or cause inhumane suffering. The language of international treaties, many of which our nation has not only signed and ratified but in many cases had a major hand in drafting, identify the manufacture, sale, stockpiling, and use of such weapons as “war crimes” and “crimes against humanity”- thus making Dan Murphy, the retired Admiral and CEO of ATK a “war criminal”.

So, if the company is hiring “armed enforcers” (off-duty police) to help protect a criminal enterprise and its leader, is it morally different than a drug or mafia kingpin using his thugs to “protect his turf”? When police are hired in this case, is it significantly different than a mercenary, a “hired gun” in the service of a corrupt dictator?

But it still begs the question: why the “overkill” of weapons when “protecting” this company from a group with a long record of nonviolent protest? Does carrying all those weapons encourage their use at some point?

(Thanks to Tom Bottolene of AlliantACTION for the photos)

Is This Thing Working? Is This Thing On?

Is This Thing Working? Is This Thing On? By Steve Clemens. March 11, 2009

In a recent album, Peace Queer, by singer/songwriter Todd Snider, there is a haunting parable delivered first as a spoken word piece and then sung. It is about a schoolyard bully who repeatedly beats up on younger or smaller kids. One kid decides he’s had enough and tells the bully that if he’s going to beat up someone else, he has to beat him up first! Day after day this boy gets beaten and after a while, the bully tires – it has become a burden to him. There is no more joy in his triumph; it has become a job, a duty. The bully’s admirers, followers slowly desert him. The “victim” has exposed the true nature of the bully.

The spoken word begins with tapping the microphone: “Is this thing working? … Is this thing on?” It is the perennial question of public speakers, entertainers. Is my message getting out? Can you hear me? Is anybody listening? We need feedback from our audience to acknowledge we’ve been heard.

“Is this thing working?” can also be asked of whatever efforts we embark upon. Are we being effective? Is change occurring because of what we’re doing? Does anyone care; does anyone notice? In the story above, the bully’s tactics were no longer working: instead of generating fear, he began to generate disgust. Certainly the parable has application to the on-going occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan and increasingly the answer to the question comes back in the negative – it’s not working. Or at least the desired result, “Shock and Awe” has come back on the imperial bully with a worldwide sense of shame and disgust.

But, let’s ask the question of our own “work”. This morning 13 of us stood for an hour on the sidewalk in minus 12 degree weather. That’s before you add in the wind chill factor. It was so cold the cops (who are paid by the weapons manufacturer to “monitor” our presence by their driveway entrance) quickly went back to their heated vehicles as soon as our vigil group “circled up”. [Each week, as we have done for the past 13 years, we stand with signs, flags, and banners in front of the corporate headquarters of Alliant Techsystems, Minnesota’s largest war profiteer. We sometimes march on the sidewalk, parade across the driveway entrance, or merely chat amongst ourselves hoping to be “present” to the ATK employees arriving to their workplace. At 7:30 AM, we “circle-up” and, after repeating our “Commitment to Practice Nonviolence”, we go around the circle to share concerns, announcements, or whatever is on the hearts and minds of the viligers.]

As I’ve said, we’ve been doing this for 13 years! Is this thing working? Is this thing on? Are we being heard? Is our “message” being heard? Has anyone quit their job making cluster bombs, landmines, depleted uranium weapons because of our presence? Have large stockholders divested themselves of the spoils of war and conflict? Has ATK become a pariah within the community to the extent that individuals are ashamed to let it be known that they work there? Is this thing [our vigiling] working?

Let’s frame the question another way. What if there was a company in your neighborhood that consistently produced a product that poisoned others, or caused serious injury or death when their product was used or consumed. Would you want people to ignore it and let it continue to operate unmolested? Or would you want at least a few people to occasionally (or regularly) to hold up signs in protest, occasionally sit in the driveway or in front of the company entrances to obstruct “business as usual”? If your kids, or family members, or friends, or neighbors were the victims of this corporate abuse, would you feel comforted knowing that no one cares enough to protest, however meekly?

Some members of our AlliantACTION vigil group want to explore finding ways to sue the company for violating International Law in their profiting from the sale of indiscriminate weapons which have been regularly outlawed by the international community. Others have bought a symbolic share of stock (1 each) in order to attend the annual stockholders meeting – but they’ve been stymied each of the past three years when they have been arrested when they try to attend the shareholders meeting with their written invitations in hand! [When they go to court to face the trespass charge, it is finally dismissed and they don’t even get a chance to be heard in court.]

What would happen if, instead of 13, we had 130? 1,300? (Normally we average between 20-50 so this weeks numbers were unusually low.) Maybe we all can’t travel to Eden Prairie, MN each week to add our “No!” to Alliant Tech. What if all those with a conscience took it upon themselves to find one corporation or institution in your own community, a place where wars are planned, the poor and vulnerable are crushed, people are routinely marginalized. Places where, for Christians, Jesus is re-crucified on a daily basis. Maybe you can make this your Lenten discipline – it might become a weekly habit.

One certainly does not have to be a Christian to have a conscience! In fact it is refreshing that there are still some who are willing to identify at all with an institution (the Christian Church) which itself has often sponsored or encouraged such marginalization. Our AlliantACTION group includes atheists, pagans, agnostics, Muslims, Christians, Jews. We may differ on theologies but we agree that what goes on behind the closed doors of ATK must be resisted. We take our pledge of nonviolence as a self and group discipline to not let our anger at injustice cloud our judgment and get in the way of calling those workers to live up to acting as humans rather than making inhumane weapons.

Is this thing working? Can you hear us? Do you care? Will you join us – or find your own time and place to reassert your own humanity by saying “no” in a public way?

Hire Your Own Cop!

Hire Your Own Cop!
By Steve Clemens. June 2008

For the past twelve years, AlliantACTION has vigiled in front of Alliant Techsystems, Minnesota’s largest arms merchant. After being spun off from Honeywell who grew tired of the protests from the Honeywell Project, Alliant Techsystems, or ATK as it is known by their company logo and in the stock market, first located in an old Honeywell facility in Hopkins, MN.

The weekly vigil by local activists started in 1996, focusing on ATK’s manufacture and sale of anti-personnel landmines. After a significant victory in court in 1997 when 79 people were acquitted of trespassing charges under a defense claiming International Law, the Wednesday morning vigil continued to grow in size.

When the weapons manufacturer moved its headquarters a mile or two down the road to Edina, the weekly vigil followed. After a few years there, we noticed a difference in the police presence. At first, the city of Edina assigned a police Sergeant as the primary liaison between the vigilers and the arms corporation. AlliantACTION didn’t request any law enforcement presence even though it felt that some international laws should be enforced against this company. Apparently local police don’t specialize in enforcing International Law.

Because members of the group occasionally attempted to carry their concerns directly to the front doors of the corporation – attempting to deliver documents highlighting the illegality of the weapons they made to corporate officers – they recognized that the local police might haul some of them off under charges of trespassing. The Edina Police Sergeant courteously explained to the group that his presence during our vigil was to be sure our First Amendment rights were honored as much as to “protect” the property of this manufacturer of cluster bombs and depleted uranium weapons. He even insisted on sitting through an entire trial after he was called to testify about the arrest of some of the group for trespass. He told some of the defendants, “Since I arrested you, the least I can do is remain in the courtroom to hear your testimony about why you did it.” After hearing testimony from one defendant about ATK’s research and development of a gun that could “shoot around corners”, then hearing the defendant add that “we know that any such weapon made for our own soldiers will likely be found a few years later on our own streets and used against our own cops by criminals”, the Edina policeman wanted to know more about the research on this weapon uncovered by the defendants.

The vigil group noticed a change after that Sergeant was replaced after a few years. Now, younger, more verbally abrasive officers were present on the Wednesday mornings. Members of the group suspected (and were later told) that these police were “hired” by ATK. It wasn’t until ATK recently moved again, this time to Eden Prairie, that the AlliantACTION group began to question this practice. The group’s new police liaison with Eden Prairie, Lt. Tracy Luke, informed the group that the two officers now present at each weekly vigil were off-duty Eden Prairie Police who were “hired” by Alliant Techsystems. The crucial difference was that AlliantACTION decided to change part of their vigil in to a walking picket that now crossed the driveway into ATK’s parking lot and office complex. So now, police hired by the company being picketed decide when to stop the flow of pickets in order to allow ATK workers up their driveway.

When questioned about the obvious conflict of interest present, Lt. Luke responded, “Well, you know, you can hire your own cops as well. It is $60. per hour”. The private-duty cops are dressed in their Eden Prairie Police uniforms and arrive for this “private-duty” work in an Eden Prairie squad car. While they are charged by their own department to fairly uphold the law, wouldn’t their judgment be skewed in favor of who is paying for this job? What if AlliantACTION hired its “own cops”? Would it depend on the rank or seniority of the “dueling police officers” in judgment calls about when to give priority to the pedestrian “rights” of picketers over the “rights” of motorists?

Have you noticed the uniformed police officers at your local Target store or grocery store? How does one tell if a police officer is a “hired gun” for a corporation rather than a public safety officer for the community? If citizens are free to “hire our own cop” to ensure our First Amendment rights, should Black citizens hire their own officer of color if you are afraid of being stopped for “driving while Black”? If you are Latino, you might want to hire your own Hispanic-heritage-looking cop so you aren’t stopped and asked to see if you are in this country “illegally”. Maybe Native Americans can hire their own cops and ask them to help enforce some of the many Treaties that have been unenforced by the “majority” political powers. However, at $60. an hour, not too many of us can afford our own “law enforcement”.

Maybe, we could decide as a society to pay our public safety officers enough so they wouldn’t have to “moonlight” as shills for the corporate powers. It makes one wonder when, this September, we meet cops “protecting” who(?) during the Republican convention – who are they working for when “private-duty” cops wear the same uniform as public safety officers. Maybe they could wear armbands that disclose their “sponsor” for the day.

14 Arrested at Headquarters of Local Arms Merchant

14 Arrested at Headquarters of Local Arms Merchant
By Steve Clemens. October 3, 2007 (published in www.tcdailyplanet.net)


October 2nd has been declared by the United Nations as “International Day of Nonviolence” in honor of the life and witness of Mohandas Gandhi, the leader of the nonviolent movement that ended British colonial rule in India. For a second consecutive year, AlliantACTION has sponsored a march and presence at Alliant Techsystems headquarters in Edina, MN on that date to honor Gandhi’s birthday. The theme chosen this year to celebrate one of history’s greatest nonviolent activists was “Peace Conversion With No Loss of Jobs”.

AlliantACTION has held a weekly vigil in front of Alliant Techsystems (ATK) headquarters for more than ten years on every Wednesday morning. However, to honor Gandhi and to broaden the circle of protestors beyond the normal group of 20-50 activists, the group added to the weekly presence by gathering on Tuesday where close to 100 people marched to the entrance of ATK. In a nearby park the group began with a song and reciting a “Commitment to Nonviolence” pledge. A poem was read to the circle and a brief talk informed those gathered about “Why We Focus on Alliant Techsystems”. Besides objecting to “profiting from war and death” and that “ATK sells its weapons all over the world –in more than 60 countries”, specific mention was made to the “illegal and indiscriminate weapons” designed, manufactured, and sold by ATK. Cluster bombs, anti-personnel landmines, and depleted uranium weapons were included in the list.

After the group had marched down Lincoln Drive to arrive at Alliant’s headquarters driveway, the group again circled to sing, hear quotes from Gandhi, and hear about the history and struggles about “peace conversion” – the “beating of swords into plowshares” where the crowd was encouraged to think of what peaceful and helpful products and services could be performed and sold by companies rather than seeking profits through making weapons. As the group said, “Happy Birthday, Gandhi”, members of the action brought forth dolls, books, a blanket, stuffed animals, toys, and even a huge stuffed “Elmo” Sesame Street character – placing them in a large over-flowing basket. Each person made a statement about their desire for this company to convert from making bombs and bullets and instead make toys, books, wind turbines, or other life-affirming products. As one member placed a stuffed dog in the basket, he said, “Dogs give love unconditionally – that’s what children need –unconditional love, not cluster bombs.” The event organizers announced that all the toys and books collected were to be delivered to the Incarnation House shelter in south Minneapolis later that morning.

After the basket of toys was filled, several members of the group announced their intention to give the balloons they were carrying to ATK security personnel and Edina Police Officers who had placed themselves across the driveway to prevent the activists from attempting to enter the building. The balloons were offered to them “to give to your kids or grandkids in celebration of Gandhi’s birthday”. They read a brief letter addressed to Alliant personnel stating that they were carrying a notebook entitled “Employee Liabilities of Weapon Manufacturers Under International Law” to give to them as well as asking the company to agree to “peace conversion with no loss of jobs”. Both the ATK security and the Edina police refused to accept either the offered balloons or the International Law documents before placing the 14 members of the group that ventured up the driveway under arrest for criminal trespass, a petty misdemeanor in Edina.

A bright, rainbow-colored kite flew over the gathering with the inscription “PU / DU” in reference to the disgust over the sale of depleted uranium (DU) weapons made by the corporation. Members of the circle clapped and thanked those who had been arrested for their nonviolent convictions and then posed for a photo in front of the corporate logo sign by the driveway entrance. One of the closing songs sung by the group before disbanding was set to the tune of “Home on the Range” and written by one of the weekly vigil circle members. It began,

“Oh, Alliant Tech please,
We ask you to cease,
Making products that cause
Death and pain.
May you ever increase
In products of peace
For folks that will
Keep this world sane…”