Skip to main content

Posts

Showing posts with the label Midge Potts

Speaking Truth to Power; Cutting Off Warmonger Kissinger

My friend Midge Potts is back in town and doing some fantastic activist work: I am riding a wave like I can barely describe right now... I went to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing this morning knowing it was about "Iraq options," but had no idea Henry Kissinger would be there... My heart was beating SO hard, but could not sit by and listen to Kissinger and a fat cat Republican Senator talk about how we needed to be in Iraq "until the job was done"... SO, I stood up, cutting them off in mid sentence, and yelled, "The American people voted to end the war in Iraq!" and held up a small banner I had made that read "Bring Service People Home Now." I was escorted out of the room by Capitol Police and went with them peacfully... They detained me for about 10 minutes, then let me go without arrest or citation. In fact, they said I could stay in the building if I would not go back in the hearing. So I hung around outside the hearing room so p...

Three Anti-Torture Activists Argue Case Before DC Court of Appeals

Tuesday January 23rd at 11:00am oral arguments were heard in District of Columbia Court of Appeals regarding the conviction of David Barrows, Peter Perry, and Midgelle Potts. The three were arrested while kneeling on the plaza of the US Supreme Court on February 9th, 2005 protesting the confirmation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and his part in permitting torture of prisoners in Abu Ghraib and Guatanamo Bay. They were convicted in DC Superior Court June 30th 2005 for violating Title 40 sec. 6135 of US Code. Mark Goldstone delivered oral arguments for Dave Barrows, while Pete Perry was represented by William.Becker, and Midge Potts was represented by William Dansie. In addition an amicus brief was submitted to the court by Czech Ambassador to the United Nations Martin Palous, who contrasted the observance of free speech by the European Union to the lower court’s decision in this case. The appellants’ arguments were focused on the lack of notice and the ambiguity of the statute. ...