Members of the Teaneck Peace Coalition have been making the case against war on Iraq through action and argument, using every democratic medium and forum to reach our neighbors and government officials. Here is a collection of statements from our membership. We hope they will be useful to anyone who wants to make a case against war. Please add your declaration of peace to this page by sending it to us.
Remarks by Daniel M. Rosenblum to the Teaneck Township Council, March 18, 2003, in Support of a Resolution Opposing War in Iraq
Members of the Council,
At this late stage in what appears to be an inexorable path towards war, it may seem futile to pass resolutions on the subject. I nevertheless believe that as long as a glimmer of hope remains that war can be avoided, it is important for all concerned to state their views. As a citizen of Teaneck who is deeply concerned about the safety and security of our people and the people of Iraq, and as a member of the Teaneck Peace Coalition, I am here to ask that the Township Council take a stand in opposition to this impending illegal war.
A few weeks ago, several of us asked you to take a stand opposing this war. Mayor Kates stated, in reply, that it was the responsibility of the Council to focus on the numerous local governance issues that come before it. I respect your recognition of the need to focus on matters that affect Teaneck. Your legitimate understanding of the boundary of your jurisdiction, however, has, quite properly, not limited your speaking out in an advisory capacity to other government bodies about policies that affect the Township. In particular, you have recently passed excellent resolutions calling on New York State to close the Indian Point nuclear power plant and calling on the New Jersey legislature to prohibit drivers from using cell phones. I submit that a war on Iraq affects Teaneck just as much as these matters.
On September 11, 2001, we learned all too well that international terrorism can directly affect our lives here just as much as the lives of people in Africa, Asia and Europe. It has been repeatedly pointed out that a unilateral preemptive war on Iraq is a fabulous recruiting tool for al Qaeda, which easily portrays an America motivated by a general war on Islam to people who are both desperate and not well educated. (As an aside, I do not believe that these are the Bush administration’s motives, whatever they may be.) If the Iraqi regime posed a serious and imminent threat, or if Saddam Hussein were in collaboration with al Qaeda, the risk of new recruits to al Qaeda might be worth the benefit of being rid of Mr. Hussein. But the evidence for those claims ranges from very weak to downright nonexistent. The Bush administration is therefore increasing the risk to the safety of the American people, as well as numerous others around the world, by pursuing this war against Mr. Hussein. That Mr. Hussein is a despot and criminal of the worst sort cannot be gainsaid, but there are any number of others like him, including some among our allies, and Mr. Hussein has been kept at bay for the past twelve years and could be kept at bay indefinitely by internationally approved means. The war that President Bush envisions, therefore, merely increases the risk of terrorist attacks on the American people without any commensurate benefit.
Because Teaneck is a suburb of one of the two major metropolitan areas that have known al Qaeda’s terrorism, we should be particularly alert to actions that can increase that threat. Indeed, one of the main concerns about the Indian Point nuclear plant, about which you have spoken, is that it may not be adequately protected against a terrorist attack. Government actions that increase the probability of such an attack are just as relevant to us as those that fail to defend its likely targets. Furthermore, as the Federal government dedicates increasing amounts of its revenues to war, there is less to spend on all of the human needs of the American people, forcing state and local governments to increase taxes if and when it is possible to maintain these services. If the Council is to be consistent in speaking in an advisory capacity to other government bodies on matters that affect our safety and welfare, it surely behooves you to speak out against a unilateral preemptive war on Iraq.
Let me conclude with a thought on patriotism. As war becomes more likely, some political leaders argue that it is unseemly, if not downright treasonous, to criticize or oppose the government’s policies. Such thinking smacks more of obsequiousness to tyrants than of the critical thoughtfulness necessary to democracy. There is nothing noble or glorious in supporting an ill-advised war, not to mention one that is unjust and illegal, just because it is being contemplated or waged by one’s own country’s government. If our opposition to the Bush administration’s course is unpatriotic, then so too was Congressman Abraham Lincoln’s opposition to President Polk’s war of conquest against Mexico, and so was Mark Twain’s condemnation of our government’s massacres of Filipino patriots under the guise of rescuing the Philippines from Spain. Our armed forces deserve to be called upon only for just causes. In a democracy, as the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. recognized in his critique of the Vietnam war, it is the height of patriotism to defend our soldiers and sailors from being used as cannon fodder for ill-conceived schemes. I urge you to rise to that level of democratic patriotism and go on record opposing the Bush administration’s mad march to war.
| Top of page |
Letter from Brenda Allen to the Teaneck Township Council, March 19, 2003
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers:
Cities for Peace reports that Lambertville and Plainfield have now joined the ten other New Jersey municipalities on record as opposing preemptive/unilateral war in Iraq. The national total now stands at 159. [see http://www.ips-dc.org/citiesforpeace/resolutions.htm]
The Teaneck Peace Coalition is an inclusive organization. TPC consists of people who are for getting Saddam out of office, against war at all costs, pro-war but not a unilateral war, pro-war only if the US gets UN approval, and also against getting Saddam out of office.
The common ground being that TPC is against a US-led preemptive unilateral war without UN approval. If you did not get that perception from the TPC Resolution, I am sorry, but do not let the TPC language stand in the way of the Teaneck Town Council taking prudent action. Write your own resolution, it can be but a sentence: Be it resolved that the Teaneck Town Council opposes a premptive military attack against Iraq.
Most of the world, and many of the congressmen, senators, NJ legislature and the majority of the US people are against a non-UN sanctioned preemptive war. Where polls ask specifically about a preemptive or unilateral war, 70% of US citizens are against such a war!
For this reason, I urge the Teaneck Town Council to pass a resolution condemning the US threat of a preemptive/unilateral war against Iraq without the blessing of the UN.
The NJ Legislature is considering similar resolutions:
AR252 Calls upon the U.S. Congress to immediately debate and vote on the question of declaring war against Iraq.
AR251 Opposes preemptive military attack against Iraq; memorializes Congress and the President to work through diplomatic channels to solve crisis.
Identical Bill Number: SR135
Please consider passing such a resolution.
It is good business for Teaneck.
Just this morning a list of American business that will not survive a war was listed on the radio: airlines, restaurants, Broadway theatres, movie theatres, various businesses, etc. Remember what happened after 9-11? Remember the confusion during Desert Storm? Consider Cedar Lane: Which business will be closed? Mediterranean Deli was forced to change its name -- will it now be forced to close?
Please reconsider and do the right thing.
| Top of page |
Letter from Joe Harris to The Suburbanite, March 19, 2003
Dear Editor,
On Tuesday, March 18, the Teaneck Town Council refused even to consider a petition signed by 1,200 town residents, including seven clergy, asking the Council to pass an Anti-War Resolution. The Teaneck Peace Coalition (TPC) brought 100 members to the meeting, and the Council, in its Good and Welfare section, listened to a long list of informative TPC speeches. Opposing the resolution was a group of perhaps twenty people who claimed to represent the sentiments of war veterans. After the speeches ended, and without missing a breath, Mayor Kates told the audience that the Anti-War Resolution was not Town Council business! She apparently spoke for all the Council members – since not a single one raised a hand to oppose her.
The audience erupted in anger and frustration, realizing that the Council had pulled off a charade. At the beginning of the Good and Welfare section of the meeting, Mayor Kates told the audience that the Council was ready to listen to speeches about the Anti-War Resolution. What she did not say, however, was that the Council had already made up its mind – before hearing any testimony – that it was going to duck the issue. The sad reality is that the Council members did not want to stand up and be counted.
In contrast, the city/town councils of Lambertsville and Plainfield just passed anti-war resolutions. They joined ten other New Jersey localities: East Orange, Englewood, Irvington, Jersey City, Maplewood, Montclair, Newark, Paterson, Princeton, and Prospect Park.
Some people think members of the TPC should have maintained so-called “civil decorum.” They say that the Council “listened respectfully” to us. I disagree. The Council ignored everything we said. Without even a single rebuttal, they rejected the request of 1,200 Teaneck residents that the Council consider a peace resolution. There is no compelling reason on earth why members of the TPC should have left the mockery of a meeting quietly and “reasonably.”
Frederick Douglass, the great abolitionist, wrote the truth: “The whole history of the progress of human liberty shows that all concessions, yet made to her august claims, have been born of earnest struggle....Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters.”
The slogans of the Teaneck Peace Coalition include: “Let Teaneck Stand for Peace” and “Take YOUR Stand for Peace.” We ask you join our struggle for peace.
| Top of page |
Letter from Ed Gross to The Suburbanite, March 19, 2003
I arrived at the Teaneck Town Council meeting with speech in hand, intending to add my voice to those of other Teaneck Peace Coalition members who were speaking on behalf of our anti-war resolution. Before I could be called on, I listened to a number of stirring speeches. Many made the point that was on my mind - an outrageously expensive war that starves the federal and state budgets of funds is a fit topic for the Council to address. So I felt no need to speak. The Council listened attentively and graciously extended the public's opportunity to address them for a second hour. We were all grateful.
Imagine, then, the shock we all felt when Mayor Kates read a message, obviously crafted beforehand, to claim that the Council had no standing to deal with the question of war. Even had this not flown in the face of the Council's past history, ironically including a resolution in favor of the first Persian Gulf War, it would have been surprisingly and disturbingly undemocratic. While I regret that our frustration and disappointment exploded in angry voices at that point, I am far more saddened by the fact that Teaneck has fallen so far short of the standard set by more than 150 towns and cities in NJ and across the U.S. They didn't quibble about jurisdiction. They took a stand for peace.
| Top of page |