Editor’s Note: Thanks to Tom Rogers and Mary Gleysteen for reporting on yesterday’s court hearings. Their commentaries are woven together for this report. Thanks, also, to the resisters who engaged in the Mothers Day weekend nonviolent direct action last May, as well as those who were able to show up to support them at yesterday’s hearings. Click here to read the news release from the Mothers Day action.
Ten nuclear resisters, who blocked the entrance to the largest concentration of deployed nuclear weapons in the United States, appeared in court to plead their cases for peace and nuclear abolition.
The resisters were in court on July 26, 2018 as a result of their nonviolent direct action last Mothers Day weekend when they symbolically closed Naval Base Kitsap-Bangor, the West coast home port for the U.S. Navy’s Trident ballistic missile submarines, by blocking the entrance gate to the base.
The ten activists and about the same number of supporters met at Givens Park, a few blocks from the Kitsap County District Courthouse in Port Orchard, for a picnic lunch and pretrial socializing and song. Then they marched and sang their way to the courthouse where they sang on the courthouse steps, and handed out leaflets. The music definitely lightened the mood at the courthouse.
(l to r) mitigators Michael Siptroth, Doug Millholland, Mack Johnson (supporter) and Tom Rogers. photos by Mary Gleysteen
The resisters chose to appear in court to mitigate their charges; in other words, to speak to their actions and put them on the public record, and to have their fines reduced or eliminated.
The mitigation hearings were in Judge Jeffrey Jahns’ courtroom at Kitsap District Court. Judge Jahns started off by explaining that he had been a prosecuting attorney in the Kitsap County Prosecutor’s Office for 14 years prior to being appointed to the bench in 2009. He was involved in trials of Ground Zero members during that time and offered any of the mitigants a continuance with a different judge if this was an issue. No one took him up on the offer.
Each of the mitigants was given ample time to deliver testimony about why they had blocked the road at the Bangor Submarine Base last Mothers Day. All were beautiful heartfelt and compelling statements. Larry Kerschner’s testimony summarized International law regarding nuclear weapons in a very well researched statement. Margarita Munoz sang her testimony. The judge was very attentive and respectful of each mitigant, commenting on many of the statements. Fines ranged from zero to ten dollars depending on the number of previous offenses. Even Larry Kerschner, who might still face Federal charges stemming from his arrest at Bangor last August, had his fine cancelled.
The Judge closed the hearings by thanking all of the mitigants for their commitment. He said that ethically he couldn’t tell us to “keep up the good work, but well, you know”.
Some of the mitigant’s written statements follow, and are unedited. Should we receive any other written statements, we will add them to this post.
Statement of Larry Kerschner
Larry Kerschner (8Z0555181): Statement to the Court concerning the Mother’s Day action of blocking the roadway into the Bangor Submarine Base on on May 12, 2018:
Mother’s Day in the United States was first suggested in 1872 by Julia Ward Howe as a day dedicated to peace. Howe saw the effects on both sides of the Civil War and realized destruction from warfare goes beyond the killing of soldiers in battle. Nuclear weapons also go far beyond the threat of war to the threat of the destruction of all of humanity.
I, as an individual, can really do little to make the changes that are needed in our country. However, as the survival of my children and my grandchildren and the rest of the human race is at stake, I have no other option except to raise my voice in any way I can. If that requires me to commit acts of civil resistance so be it. I accept that there will be consequences of my actions. I, however, believe that these actions are also required of me by international and domestic law.
US citizens, under decisions of the Nuremberg Tribunal, which Article VI of the US Constitution, makes the Supreme Law of the United States, have a legal duty and obligation to prevent the commission of and to remove themselves from any participation in or collusion with the illegal nuclear policies of the United States, to avoid criminal responsibility under international law. General common law defense allows individuals, who are aware of the fact that crimes are ongoing, to undertake reasonable actions to stop that crime and to bring it to the criminal activity to the attention of the proper authorities.
Every American citizen has the right and the duty to insist upon a lawful foreign policy. A resolution concerning the relationship between citizens and the State was introduced by the United States in the UN General Assembly and unanimously approved. In post-Nuremberg settings, a government that flagrantly violates international law is engaged in criminal activity, and as far as related law is concerned, its policies are not entitled to respect or compliance by the citizens.
In People v. Jarka, No.002170 in the Circuit Court of Lake County, Waukegan, Illinois, Judge Alphonse F. Witt instructed the jury that the threat of use of or the use of nuclear weapons violates international law. He said “The use of or threat of use of nuclear weapons is a war crime or an attempted war crime because such use would violate international law by causing unnecessary suffering, failing to distinguish between combatants and noncombatants and poisoning its targets by radiation”.
US domestic law has expressly incorporated international law by means of article VI of the US Constitution with respect to treaties, as well as by the decision of the US Supreme Court in Paquete v. Habana, 175 US 677 (1900) with respect to customary international law. Since customary international law is a part of both federal and state common law, federal or state criminal statutes must be construed in a manner that would be consistent with the requirements of international law.
Article 6(a) of the 1945 Charter of the International Military Tribunal established to prosecute and punish Nazi war criminals defined the term “crime against peace” to mean “planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing”.
Every President of the United States has taken an oath required by article 2, section 1, clause 7 of the US Constitution to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States” which expressly includes international treaties and agreements by virtue of article 6. Similarly article 2, section 3 of the US Constitution requires the President to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed”.
The US Government has a 30-year program to “modernize” the US nuclear arsenal and production facilities. The plan is to build a new generation of US nuclear weapons and nuclear production facilities to last the nation well into the second half of the 21st century. This plan, which has received almost no attention by the mass media, includes redesigned nuclear warheads, as well as new nuclear bombers, submarines, land-based missiles, weapons labs and production plants at a cost of over $1 trillion. This plan also includes developing “tactical” nuclear weapons which will be much more likely to be used because they are “small”. This plan is clear evidence of a continuing criminal conspiracy at the highest levels of the US Government.
Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter prohibits both the threat of and the use of force except in cases of legitimate self-defense under article 51. It is clear that the actual use of nuclear weapons would grossly violate the international laws of humanitarian armed conflict under any conceivable circumstances. How can the US threaten the use of nuclear weapons without violating international law? The Nuremberg Principles absolutely proscribe crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. How can the US Government lawfully establish a threat to commit such heinous offenses?
A citizen has the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances being committed by the President and the Executive branch of the federal government. In this case, these grievances consist of the latter’s ongoing violation of the basic rules of international law, US domestic law (both civil and criminal) and the President’s recognized obligations under the terms of the US Constitution. These crimes against international law would include but not be limited to crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions. Under the Separation of Power Doctrine, this Court must compel the President and other members of the Executive Branch to cease and desist from the continuing criminal activity related to US nuclear weapons policies.
This not a civil disobedience case but a case of civil resistance. In civil resistance cases, individuals are attempting to prevent the ongoing commission of crimes under well-recognized principles of international and domestic law. To resist reasonably a violation of international law is a matter of legal right, possibly even legal duty if knowledge and capacity for action exists.
I respectfully ask the Court to dismiss the charges against us on the grounds that they are preempted by the international laws and treaties cited herein which are the Supreme Law of the United States under the Supremacy Clause and to publicly define the current nuclear weapons policies of the US Government as an ongoing conspiracy to violate international law and the United States Constitution.
Statement (in the form of a song) by Margarita Muñoz
It’s Dependent on You and Me
Submitted by Margarita Muñoz
Margaret Mead: “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.”
1st Amendment: “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech…or right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
For the sake of our destiny
For the health of our Earth and sea
Never doubt that a few
Can foresee what to do
It’s dependent on you and me.For the sake of humanity
Since we know freedom isn’t free
Let us uphold what is just
Rise and do what we must
It’s dependent on you and me.I practice my right…my right to assemble
When I witness the threat of our nuclear deal
My duty, my focus, my charge for concern
To upend the lethal grip that we wield.Let’s promote a new legacy
Where the Earth’s treated ethically
We must limit the bombs
Learn to settle our qualms
It’s dependent on you and me.For the sake of our progeny
And our claim to democracy
Be aware of the ploy
These bombs are meant to destroy
They represent a hypocrisy.I practice my right…my right to assemble
When I witness the threat of our nuclear plan
My duty, my focus, my charge for concern
To upend the legal gap of this land.Never doubt that a few
Can foresee what to do
It’s dependent on you and me
Statement of Ramon Nacanaynay
July 26, 2018
To the Court, the Law Officers and other civil servants involved in our nonviolent action, Thank You for your service;
It all began after I spent four years in the Air Force from 1986-90, used my G.I. Bill to become a nursing assistant then an Early Learning Teacher. In 2007 a visiting priest at the All Saints Catholic Church in Puyallup announced an anti-war march and rally in Tacoma. The following week he had to apologize for making that announcement because someone in the congregation felt “unwelcome”. “What?”, I thought to myself. Upon hearing that I was determined to attend the event. The squandering of our resources is illogical, illegal and immoral.
Now I am a member of Ground Zero Center for Nonviolence which sponsors nonviolent action protests on nuclear weapons at the Kitsap-Bangor Submarine Base yearly. One on the Hiroshima-Nagasaki (Bombing) Anniversary Day in August, one on Martin Luther King Jr. Day week and one on Mothers’ Day week.
I am a member of Pax Christi USA, a 501 c-3, nonprofit, Catholic organization. It is the Catholic Peace movement which teaches that nonviolent action has a price, one that I am willing to pay.
I am a member of Veterans For Peace, a 501 c-3, nonprofit veterans organization. It educates the public on the costs of war. It is international and has representation in the U.N. Veterans, including my brother, who is also a veteran, claims the name of the organization implies veterans and veteran organizations are “for” war. The truth is far from that, ALL veterans are for peace. I have a brother who is retired Air Force, a brother Naval Reserve, my father is retired Navy and I served four years in the 1722 CCS in Mc Chord AFB. Since then, I’ve been a Nursing Assistant, Early Head Start teacher and a Pre-K teacher. So I have seen the squandering of our resources. It is illogical, illegal and immoral. When I see a young person being recruited into the military I feel sorry for their immaturity. When I see an active duty military service person I get “flashbacks”. When I see a veteran who is disabled or a veteran working towards an end to violent and oppressive solutions I think, “There but for the Grace of God, goes I.”
If what we are doing now is a waste of our precious resources, then what is an appropriate form of protest? I’ve written to legislators, collected signatures for petitions, rallied, marched, spoke to a high school, . . . What is the next step? I have yet to try a hunger strike if for some reason I cannot maintain the “cushy” lifestyle I am accustomed to. If I get sick, or hurt in an accident, I may have no choice but to seek lodgings and health care in our “lavish” prison or “detainment” systems. If I become declared “illegal” or falsely accused of something I may have to “occupy” a tiny house or a public office. Again, the squandering of our precious resources is illogical, illegal and immoral. Nevertheless, I still have Faith in our system, in you, your Honor. And in my Faith I will preach where ever I am led even if it is behind bars.
Peace and Nonviolence,
Ramon Nacanaynay
Statement of Tom Rogers
Kitsap District Court
Port Orchard, WA
July 26, 2018
Good afternoon your honor. I’m here today because I blocked access to the Bangor Submarine Base in an effort to raise public awareness to the issue of nuclear weapons.
I spent 32 years of my life serving our country as a naval officer. I commanded an attack submarine for 3 years during the Cold War. I’ve been directly responsible for nuclear weapons. I understand the destructive power released in a nuclear detonation. I have some understanding of the unimaginable humanitarian consequences of a nuclear attack. To have this understanding and fail to do anything about it is to be complicit. So this is the work that I do now. For the past 15 years I’ve worked with the Ground Zero Center for Nonviolent Action to abolish nuclear weapons.
My biggest fear today is that our children will die in a nuclear exchange between the US and Russia. There is an argument that the deterrent effect of nuclear weapons has protected us from nuclear attack for nearly 70 years. That may be true. I suppose deterrence got us through the Cold War. But deterrence assumes that nuclear attack is rational and deliberate.
Imagine a cyber attack initiated by a third party that creates the illusion of an incoming nuclear attack against the United States. Our nuclear weapons command and control is based on “launch under attack”. If a ballistic missile attack is detected and confirmed, there is incredible pressure to counterattack before our ICBM’s are destroyed in their launch tubes. The Russians have the same dilemma. I believe our president, who has the sole authority to order the launch of nuclear weapons, would do so. And if we actually launch, then the Russians must launch. It’s that simple.
The source of the cyber attack is irrelevant. If the nuclear weapons states can be induced to attack one another then our civilization is done for. The danger of having these horrible weapons of mass destruction is that they will inevitably be used.
But there is a solution. If there aren’t any nuclear weapons in the world, then an accidental nuclear war can’t happen.
My work your honor, is to help raise awareness of what could happen if we continue to base our national security strategy on nuclear annihilation. It’s up to ordinary citizens to find the moral courage to elect leaders who are willing to rid the world of these weapons.
Thank you for your attention.
Very respectfully,
Thomas F. Rogers
