WolfEagle1499's blog: "Good Reading for the Military"

Semper Fi Act of 2008 https://www.aclj.org/Petition/Default.aspx?sc=3320&ac=1 In a disturbing display of disrespect — and a slap in the face to our military men and women — the City Council of Berkeley, California, voted to oust Marine Corps recruiters from their city. They continued their anti-military conduct by giving a radical protest group access to the recruitment office and permission to “impede” the work of the Marines. This is an outrageous insult to the brave men and women who serve our country and secure our freedoms. They put their lives on the line for you and your future. Please put your name on the line for their sake today. Read the form below carefully and declare your membership with the ACLJ by signing our Petition in Support of Our U.S. Marines. Petition in Support of Our U.S. Marines To All Members of the United States Senate To All Members of the United States House of Representatives The brave men and women who faithfully serve our country and secure our freedoms deserve the unmitigated support and respect of a grateful nation. As concerned members of the American Center for Law and Justice, we stand with Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow in calling for accountability. We will not stand for insults and careless disregard of the sacrifice of our military heroes. We support Senator Jim DeMint’s legislation, the Semper Fi Act of 2008, and ask you to do likewise. The city of Berkeley, California, does not deserve a dime of federal funding following their reckless insult of the United States military. This legislation sends a powerful message: Contempt has consequences. Click Here to go Sign the Petition: https://www.aclj.org/Petition/Default.aspx?sc=3320&ac=1

(repost of original by '"PURPLE HEARTED HEROES"' on '2008-02-13 13:37:54') HERE IS THE LINK TO THE BULLETIN: http://fubar.com/bulletins.php?b=1101876824

Real Trees for Troops http://www.christmasspiritfoundation.org/programs/trees4troops/home.htm 2007 Trees for Troops by the Numbers Number of trees * Estimated to be 17,000 ... with more than 10,000 donated by tree farmers * Final number will be available Tuesday, December 4 Number of farms donating trees * More than 750 farmers Number of states from which the trees are coming * 29 states Number of Trees for Troops Weekend (December 1-2) Locations where consumers can purchase trees and donate to Trees for Troops program * 40 retail locations and farms Number of trees consumers purchased * We will release this number on Tuesday, December 4 Number of bases to which the trees are being delivered * 37 bases plus National Guard families in four states (CA, IL, NY, TN) Air Force, Army, Coast Guard, Marines, Navy Number of countries to which trees are going * estimated at 15 ... final number will be known about December 4 Number of miles the FedEx trailers will travel in delivering the trees * Estimated at 51,000 over the road miles ... does not include miles to pickup and delivery points Christmas Tree farmers and FedEx are donating trees and transportation to say Thank You to our troops and to make their holidays a little brighter Help Share the Spirit! People have asked how they can help. Consumers can help by purchasing additional trees or by making a donation to help cover other costs of the program. * Donate now * Buy an extra tree for the troops at a Trees for Troops Weekend event * Participate in our online charity auction * Participate in Brown-Forman's rebate program * Contribute through the Combined Federal Campaign: CFC#12283

I was told about this by a Friend. Fox News will collect & forward Christmas Cards and Messages of Good Will to Our Service Members. Here is the URL & the Information: http://colbyfiles.blogs.foxnews.com/2007/11/30/operation-holiday-thanks/ ------------------------------------------------ Operation Happy Thanks by Jamie Colby Show your appreciation and share your season’s greetings with a recovering service member. Simply send your holiday cards to: Operation Holiday Thanks c/o E.D. Hill FOX News Channel 1211 6th Ave. 17th floor New York, NY 10036 We’ll make sure your cards are distributed to a number of military hospitals!

When troops die serving, U.S. lets down survivors

By Deanna Salie

For the Journal-Constitution

Published on: 04/26/07

My husband was certain that he was going to die in Iraq.

Sgt. 1st Class David J. Salie had been an American soldier for almost 17 years. He'd deployed many times, and he'd been to war before. He'd parachuted into Panama with the 82nd Airborne Division, served in the Gulf War and gone to Haiti with the 25th Infantry Division. But he'd never been so certain that he was going to die that he prepared for death.

David told me that he wouldn't be coming back. I didn't believe him. I felt that he was just under so much stress thinking of our children and me, and about the 40 soldiers in his platoon who were his responsibility.

In the month before he left for Iraq with B Company, 2nd of the 69th Armor, 3rd Infantry Division, David went over his will with a fine-toothed comb, and he checked out his Survivor's Group Life Insurance, which provides protection for military people.

David even gave away some of his personal belongings. He also checked on the death benefits that a soldier's family receives.

My husband came home and proudly announced that if he died in Iraq, his family would be taken care of. I tried to tell him that he shouldn't worry about things like that. He said that every soldier going to war worries about his family and wants to make sure that if he's killed, his family will be taken care of just as they would be if he were still alive.

We were "all squared away," David told me.

I wish I could say that he was wrong about dying and right about the rest of it. Instead, he was correct in his premonition about his own death, but wrong that we were "squared away."

On the evening of Feb. 14, 2005, a little after 9 p.m., I heard a knock on the front door of our house at Fort Benning, Ga. I got up from the couch in the living room, where I'd been resting with a sick child, and I saw two soldiers in dress green uniforms standing on the front porch.

As my 11-year-old daughter watched, they informed me that David had been killed that day by a roadside bomb in Baqubah, Iraq. I can't tell you what they said after I heard the words, ". . . regrets to inform you" because I was crying and screaming too loudly to hear much.

The next week was filled with contacting family members, trying to hold myself together for my three children, making funeral arrangements and dealing with all the red tape that a military death forces upon you.

Had it not been for my Casualty Assistance Officer and the Rear Detachment Command of my husband's brigade, I'm not sure I would have made it through those first weeks. I was one of a lucky few who had wonderful help after my husband's death. Many other Army wives are less fortunate.

After making it through my husband's funeral, I was greeted with mountains of paperwork. I was escorted from office to office by my casualty officer as my military identification card was changed and reissued; as I signed up for the Veterans Administration's Dependency and Indemnity Compensation and the military's Survivor's Benefit Plan.

I reviewed the paperwork after all of these appointments, and I was shocked to discover that David had been wrong: We weren't going to be cared for as if he were still alive.

My husband didn't know that dependents' compensation offsets the Survivor's Benefit Plan. If he'd known that, it would have made him very angry.

DIC is a payment made to widows, their children and some parents who've lost a husband, father or son. Widows are entitled to the benefit for the remainder of their lives, unless they remarry. DIC comes from the Department of Veterans Affairs. SBP pays a deceased soldier's income, and it comes from the Department of Defense.

The offset, a dollar-for-dollar deduction, is supposedly intended to prevent double dipping from two similar benefit plans.

But the Survivors Benefit Plan and Dependents Indemnity Compensation are provided for different reasons, and the offset leaves many military families with no survivors' benefits at all. Others receive only the pittance that's left over after the offset is deducted.

One widow in West Virginia receives a service member's annuity of $4 a month. A disabled widow in Tennessee receives no Survivors' Benefits and still has to pay for Medicare and other medical expenses. A widow in California had to assign her lifetime SBP benefit to her three children because they can receive that money without the offset and she can clothe and feed them. After they're grown, she'll receive nothing from SBP.

Surviving spouses with children have the greatest needs. Many were unable to build careers and earn retirement credits of their own because of the constant moves and the other demands of their spouses' military jobs. Child-care costs are high. Their families were totally dependent on their service members' income.

A surviving spouse who's disabled has even greater needs. A service member's life insurance may be used up buying a home or financing college for his or her children.

As we try to rebuild our shattered lives, the offset deals us a second blow. Grief and loss are hard enough to handle, but now we have more important worries, such as providing homes, food, clothing and schooling for our families.

This is not a partisan political issue. This is not a matter of whether you're for or against the war in Iraq. This is about those who died serving our country, standing between our enemies and us and believing that their families would be cared for if they gave their lives.

It's a shame that that isn't true. Two bills are pending in Congress —- S 935 in the Senate, sponsored by U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) and HR 1927 in the House of Representatives, sponsored by U.S. Rep. Solomon Ortiz (D-Texas) —- that would eliminate the offset and help the families of our fallen. Please contact your senators and representatives and urge them to vote for these bills.



Deanna Salie is the widow of Sgt. 1st Class David J. Salie, who was killed in Iraq on Feb. 14, 2005.

Some of our injured troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan are facing a ridiculous and unnecessary obstacle. Because they have been discharged early, they are not receiving their full enlistment bonuses. Some are even be asked to return payments they have already received. A new bill that would ensure this does not continue is gaining momentum in Congress, and lawmakers need to hear from civilians who support it. We can help our nations' veterans on this critical issue. Please take a minute to send a message to your representatives, and tell them you support this bill. Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America has made it easy - just visit www.iava.org Thank you! Paul Rieckhoff Iraq Veteran Executive Director Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America

Military Spouse Day, 2007 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070510.html# A Proclamation by the President of the United States of America America's military spouses inspire our Nation with their sense of duty and deep devotion to our country. On Military Spouse Day, we honor the husbands and wives of those who wear the uniform of the Armed Forces of the United States. The husbands and wives of our service members have made significant sacrifices for freedom's cause, and they are an integral part of the success of our Armed Forces. Spouses may endure long periods of separation and frequent relocations, and they often set aside their own personal and professional ambitions for the benefit of their family and the Nation. Despite tremendous personal challenges, military spouses maintain everyday life for their families here at home, while sending love, prayers, encouraging words, and care packages to their loved ones stationed around the globe. On behalf of a grateful Nation, we salute our Nation's military spouses. For ways to support our troops, their spouses, and their families, visit http://www.americasupportsyou.mil/americasupportsyou/index.aspx NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim May 11, 2007, as Military Spouse Day. I call upon the people of the United States to observe this day with appropriate ceremonies and activities and by expressing their gratitude to the husbands and wives of those serving in the United States Armed Forces. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ninth day of May, in the year of our Lord two thousand seven, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-first. GEORGE W. BUSH

Canada court: AWOL U.S. soldiers not refugees Rejection of appeal by Supreme Court clears way for deserters' deportation http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21794024/ By Kari Huus Reporter MSNBC updated 5:21 p.m. ET, Thurs., Nov. 15, 2007 The Supreme Court of Canada on Thursday refused to hear an appeal by two U.S. military deserters who sought refuge in the country to avoid deployment to Iraq, a conflict they argued is “immoral and illegal.” The announcement ends a bid by American soldiers Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey, the plaintiffs in the case, to win refugee status and opens the way for them to be deported to the United States, where they could face court martial for going AWOL and missing troop movements. It also could lead to deportation of dozens of other American soldiers who have filed formal applications for refugee status. “Theoretically they (are) facing immediate removal,” said Jeffry House, a Toronto lawyer who represents most of the U.S. refugee applicants, including Hinzman and Hughey. The Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the case, “vastly advances the government’s agenda to remove them,” he said. The rejection also closes off that legal avenue for other U.S. military personnel who have gone to Canada and remained illegally. House estimates there are at least 300 AWOL U.S. soldiers living in Canada. Board deems legality of conflict irrelevant Hinzman and Hughey both deserted from the U.S. Army and came to Canada to avoid imminent deployments to Iraq. Their case for refugee status rested on the argument that the military action in Iraq is illegal and, based on the United Nations convention on refugees, they cannot be prosecuted for failure to serve in an illegal conflict. The men’s argument failed to sway Canada’s Immigration Review Board and two Canadian courts before their appeal was rejected by the Supreme Court. “The immigration board said, with input from the government, that the illegality of the war is irrelevant to these immigration claims, “ said Michelle Robidoux, a Toronto-based activist with the War Resisters Support Campaign. “We believe it is very much connected.” Canada, under then-Prime Minister Jean Chretién did not commit troops to the 2003 invasion of Iraq and most Canadians do not support the war, polls show. The country does have troops serving in Afghanistan. Canadian immigration officials said that no more than 40 refugee claims have been filed by American soldiers. House, however, said the number is significantly higher, noting that he has handled 45 to 50 claims himself. Based on the number of inquiries he has received from AWOL U.S. soldiers, he estimates there are about 300 American military deserters living in Canada, adding that many of them entered the country after serving combat tours in Iraq. Support from Vietnam era runaways The new arrivals have been coached, housed and supported by some of the Vietnam era anti-war activists and draft dodgers who took advantage of Liberal Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau’s famous declaration of his country as a “refuge from militarism.” House himself left the United States and came to Canada in 1970 after he was drafted. There are significant differences between Canada’s position on the Vietnam War and the war in Iraq, however. The most obvious is that the current deserters were not conscripted, but signed up to serve in a volunteer military. And the current exodus to Canada is small in comparison to the Vietnam era, when an estimated 20,000 to 50,000 Americans moved to Canada to avoid military duty, many of them settling there permanently. With Thursday's setback, activists with the War Resisters Support Campaign in Canada are focusing on securing a political solution. They organized "emergency rallies" to take place in six Canadian cities Thursday night in an effort to pressure members of Parliament to forge a provision to allow resisters and their families to stay in Canada. Move to mobilize popular support "We're disappointed about the decision (the Supreme Court) made, but I don’t think it’s the whole of Canada speaking," said Lee Zaslofsky of the Campaign. The activists are banking on popular support for the soldiers and among opposition party parliamentarians, in the face of a harder line taken by Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who is seen as a close ally of the Bush administration. Zaslofsky said two opposition parties have expressed clear support for the war resisters and they are hopeful the Liberal party — the party of Trudeau — will take a similar position. "What we need is for the (Liberal) party as a whole to take a stance on this," said Zaslofsky. "Together (the three parties) have a majority, and if they act together they can put something through the House of Commons." In June, a poll in Ontario found that 64.6 percent of 605 respondents said U.S. soldiers should be allowed to settle in Canada, while 27.2 percent favored sending them home. The remainder of those surveyed said they were unsure or declined to answer the question. More than 3,300 deserted last year Today, the majority of U.S. military deserters are from the Army, according to statistics obtained by the Associated Press through a Freedom of Information Act request. In 2006, 3,301 soldiers deserted from the Army, compared to 2,659 in 2005, and 2,450 in 2004, it reported. Under military law, desertion during war time is a crime punishable by death. In practice, though, a small percentage of deserters are court-martialed and sentenced to serve time in prison. Most are dishonorably discharged and leave the military without benefits and with a black mark on their record. "If a service member were returned and apprehended by federal authorities, the person would then be turned over to the respective service for further action," said Defense Department public affairs officer Jonathan Withington. He referred other questions about the Canada-based U.S. deserters to the Department of Justice. For Brad McCall, a 20-year-old American soldier who applied for refugee status after arriving in Canada in September, Thursday's rejection was a surprise and a blow. Though his own case and others technically remain in play, he sees grim writing on the wall. He's already looking into other options and possible destinations. "If I was talking to a soldier considering Canada right now, I would tell him to research every other available place to go … that would accept him as a war resister, because it’s still not safe enough here," McCall told msnbc.com, speaking from Vancouver where he is staying with sympathizers. "The Canadian government is obviously not on our side." Related content Vote: What should Canada do with U.S. military deserters? Gut Check America: War's impact falls hard on relative few

I know this is old, but I just found it: Navy ship with WTC steel survived Katrina's assault http://www.sptimes.com/2006/04/04/Worldandnation/Navy_ship_with_WTC_st.shtml By ASSOCIATED PRESS Published April 4, 2006 NEW YORK - With a year to go before it even touches the water, the Navy's amphibious assault ship USS New York has already made history - twice. It was built with 24 tons of scrap steel from the World Trade Center, and it survived Hurricane Katrina. That combination of disasters gives the ship a unique standing among the 500 or so Avondale, La., shipyard workers building it, said Tony Quaglino, a crane superintendent who postponed retirement to have a hand in the New York's construction. "I think Katrina made us more aware of the tragedy in New York," said the 66-year-old Quaglino. "One was manmade, one was natural, but they're both a common bond." The New York is about 45 percent complete and should be ready for launch in mid 2007. Katrina disrupted construction when it pounded the Gulf Coast, but the 684-foot vessel escaped serious damage and workers were back at the yard near New Orleans two weeks after the storm. The ship led many of the yard's thousands of workers to return to the job even though hundreds lost their homes, Quaglino and others said. Northrop Grumman employed 6,500 at Avondale before Katrina. Today, roughly 5,500 are back, working on the New York and three other vessels. More than 200 employees who lost their homes to Katrina are living at the shipyard, some on a Navy barge and others in bunk-style housing. "Their dedication and devotion to duty has been, to say the least, epic," Philip Teel, a vice president for Northrop Grumman Corp. and head of its ship systems division, told a Navy League dinner audience in New York on March 22. "It sounds trite, but I saw it in their eyes," Teel said in a separate interview. "These are very patriotic people, and the fact that the ship has steel from the trade center is a source of great pride. They view it as something incredibly special. They're building it for the nation." The USS New York is the fifth in a new class of warship - designed for missions that include special operations against terrorists. It will carry a crew of 360 sailors and 700 combat-ready Marines. Steel from the World Trade Center was melted down in a foundry in Amite, La., to cast the ship's bow section. When it was poured into the molds on Sept. 9, 2003, "those big rough steelworkers treated it with total reverence," recalled Navy Capt. Kevin Wensing, who was there. "It was a spiritual moment for everybody there." [Last modified April 4, 2006, 03:15:07]