TRUE HERO: JOE GLENTON THE SOLDIER WHO SAID NO
from the Morning Star
Anti-war Lance Corporal Joe Glenton has been arrested and faces 10 years in jail for bravely honouring his moral responsibility to speak out against the illegal occupation of Afghanistan.
The serving soldier faces up to seven charges after he defied orders to address 10,000 demonstrators last month in Trafalgar Square and told the media that he did not believe the war was legitimate or in the nation’s interest.
He became the first serving soldier since the start of the Afghan occupation to join an anti-war march.
Despite receiving direct orders from his commanding officer not to speak to the media, L/Cpl Glenton defied them - instead observing army rules which morally oblige soldiers to “to speak out against injustice and illegality,” his caseworker John Tipple told the Morning Star.
L/Cpl Glenton also faces criminal charges for desertion - for which he could serve up to four years - because he refused to return to Afghanistan.
During last month’s rally he told the crowd he could not justify “in good conscience” being part of the “great wrongs” perpetrated in the country which he witnessed during his service.
Stop the War Coalition has pledged to fight tooth and nail for his immediate release and have called a protest on Thursday at 5pm outside the Ministry of Defence, Whitehall. A petition has also been launched calling for his freedom.
StWC convenor Lindsey German accused the Establishment of “persecuting” L/Cpl Glenton because of his determined stance against the war.
His mother Sue Glenton has spoken out in defence of her son.
She said: “You’ve got government ministers, army commanders and MPs speaking every day in support of the war. What’s so scary about a lance corporal having his say for what he thinks is right?”
L/Cpl Glenton is currently being held in remand in the Glasshouse military training corrective centre in Colchester.
A Stop the War Coalition spokesman said: “L/Cpl Glenton has been overwhelmed by expressions of support from fellow soldiers for his stance against the war. They tell him that he’s saying what many of them think; that the Afghan war is futile and unwinnable.”
But Mr Tipple said the authorities were pressurising those defending his actions not to speak to the media and were keeping a close watch on what they said.
At the rally, L/Cpl Glenton set out the reasons behind his decision to join the campaign to bring the troops home.
“The occupation in Afghanistan is at best dubious in terms of legality and morality,” he declared.
“The occupation of a country like that, regime change, these things are all illegal.
“I can’t be involved in it on that basis and, not only that, I am also bound to try and stop it, try and change things.”
Despite the threat of prison, he added that he would not be silenced.
“People keep telling me I’m brave but I don’t feel brave at all - I feel fairly terrified. It’s not going to stop me, I’m going to keep going,” he said.
“I’ll keep talking and doing what I think is right. I have to or I’ll have to live with this forever if I don’t.”
Malalai Joya, the Afghan MP who has been called “the bravest woman in Afghanistan” and who has received numerous international awards for her defence of human rights, sent a message of support to Mr Glenton on Wednesday.
She wrote: “Dear Joe, Stay strong! The majority of the Afghan people are with you and we respect and admire the stand you have taken.
“When there is no justice, it is better for honest people to go even to jail rather than go to war. Down with the occupation. I send you my warmest greetings and solidarity.”
“She wrote: “Dear Joe, Stay strong! The majority of the Afghan people are with you and we respect and admire the stand you have taken.”
We have been arguing this on a thread below but I think it is worth noting once more that Joya is just wrong about this. The majority of Afghan people do not want troops out of Afghanistan.
Also, I think a majority of the world’s legal authorities disagree that the war is illegal. In fact, is there Any reason to think it is illegal? If it is, the soldier is required, by law, to disobey orders, of course.
Comment by John Meredith — 12 November, 2009 @ 10:48 am
He knew the rules, he takes his chances, but he’s no hero, that’s reserved for those who go to Afghanistan and face fire, risk death or disablement despite having misgivings about government policy. L/Cpl Glenton may well be right about his protest, but he’ll still get a dishonourable discharge and deservedly so, he joined the army to serve his country, not protest foreign policy.
Comment by QM — 12 November, 2009 @ 11:07 am
this war is not for ‘our country’ its for the people whorun it, wn and control it.
Comment by non-partisan — 12 November, 2009 @ 11:25 am
What nonsense in message 2.
By that logic, soldiers at My Lai, Oradour sur Glane and Auschwitz should have “just got on with it…despite any misgivings”. Rot!
Comment by Andy BH — 12 November, 2009 @ 11:25 am
“By that logic, soldiers at My Lai, Oradour sur Glane and Auschwitz should have “just got on with it…despite any misgivings”. Rot!”
It isn’t a precise analogy. Shooting civilians is a crime in every circumstance, so those soldiers knew that their orders were illegal and had a duty to disobey. But deciding the legality of an invasion is another matter. In this case Glenton has not (as far as I know) explained how he knows his orders were illegal. I don’t think any acknowledged international legal authority has found them to be. Generally speaking, I prefer elected politicians to decide the policy and the military just to do what it is told. You (and General Pinochet) may disagree.
Comment by John Meredith — 12 November, 2009 @ 11:30 am
I think this solider should be congratulated for standing up and doing the right thing in incredibly difficult circumatances. I can only hope that more of his colleagues do the same.
Meanwhile John Meredith wrote:
‘The majority of Afghan people do not want troops out of Afghanistan’.
This is a highly problematic claim to make. I was tempted to ignore it because John has not cited a source. Can I ask John for the source of his claim? I think if you are going to make claims like this at the very least you should reference them.
Comment by Owen — 12 November, 2009 @ 12:17 pm
“This is a highly problematic claim to make. I was tempted to ignore it because John has not cited a source. Can I ask John for the source of his claim? I think if you are going to make claims like this at the very least you should reference them.”
The source is in the BBC poll:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/05_02_09afghan_poll_2009.pdf
We have been debating this further down but, for the record, see Q27 where 75% say they would like NATO troops to stay for at least the next 6 months.
Comment by John Meredith — 12 November, 2009 @ 1:22 pm
Joe Glenton has served in Afghanistan. He refuses to return and has had considerable support from soldiers in his own barracks.
Comment by john morton — 12 November, 2009 @ 2:07 pm
Personally I think Joe is a hero. What he did must have been very hard, I know that it is different in that we don’t have the draft, but soliders who instrumental in the legitimacy of the anti-Vietnam war movement.
I Know many people hold the view that if you join up for the army, then you should expect to go to war, and should not complain. But no one joins the army expects the government to conduct a war in the way that the war in afganistan is being waged.
The main argument was to stop terrorists from attacked us, well that is rubbish, we had not been attacked before, now we have been. Our government has ripped up constitutional rights and alienated whole generations of muslims who are sick at being treated like suspects all the time. This war hasn’t made our country safer, it has made our country more paranoid and continues to make our country a target for terrorism.
Another argument for the war was to make Afganistan a better place, now Afganistan has one of the most corrupt governments on the planet thats very legitimacy is questioned by allegations of fixed elections…etc Hundreds of thousands have been killed, the country now is producing more opium than ever before, with a huge epidemic in drug addiction. In other words the country is worse off because of the invasion.
In this context I think it is perfectly reasonable for people like Joe to stand up, because the soldiers have been lied to just as much as the general public.
And at the end of the day, they actually know the situation in Afganistan, because they have been there and have seen how we are not helping the situation at all.
Comment by George W — 12 November, 2009 @ 3:02 pm
#7 That ‘poll’ is over 9 months old!
Comment by anticapitalista — 12 November, 2009 @ 3:14 pm
I bet the a few like Joe Glenton ,out there in fact when we was camping a few week ago a solder come to us and said how sick and tried he amd many of is comrades of this war ,and he when on to said the afganistan people are in the middle of all the shit what is going on out there .
Comment by steelcityred — 12 November, 2009 @ 3:28 pm
“#7 That ‘poll’ is over 9 months old!”
Well yes, they only poll once a year, but it is the best data we have, unfortunately. But even if support for troops has declined significantly, it is still likely to be a large majority.
Comment by John Meredith — 12 November, 2009 @ 3:42 pm
First the incursion by NATO forces led by US imperialists was illegal on two counts. The US nor Britain were engaged in a defensive war (as required by the UN) as neither have been attacked by Afghanistan. Secondly the invasion was never approved by the UN security council it was a unilateral decision by warmonger in Chief, George Bush and his toady Tony Blair.
Joe Glenton speaks for the majority of British people who demand a withdrawal. His example of refusing to engage in this disgusting adventure is one of courage.
The false reasons given for the invasion have been well aired but the media especially the BBC continue to promote government propaganda. It had nothing to do with “stopping terrorism reaching our shores” but all to do with establishing NATO bases in a strategic region with which to threaten Iran,Russia and China as well as protect the US owned oil pipeline from the Caucusus region to the ocean. Support Joe Glenton!
Comment by Alfie — 12 November, 2009 @ 3:55 pm
That poll isn’t just old, it’s also to be taken with a large grain of salt since the areas where insurgent activity is strongest may have been excluded for reasons of security. Unfortunately we can’t tell because the poll doesn’t come with methodology explained. We can, however, make some inferences: 63% of respondents reply (Q28) that the Taliban have “no significant presence at all” in their local area. (To be sure this question is a bit hard to interpret, since it doesn’t ask about “insurgents” or “resistance”, but rather “Taliban” - the respondents might well have a much more particular interpretation of that term than the survey designers.) We also cannot have any good idea of the effect on data by a wish to answer what the respondent believes the questioner wants to hear, or the local warlord wants the answer to be.
Moreover, Meredith is giving one interpretation of the data (”more than 75% want US troops to stay for at least 12 months”). It’s not the only possible one, though. Note that less than half the respondent want troops to stay “until security is restored” or “permanently”, while more than 50% of respondents support withdrawal within a limited time frame.
Comment by christian h. — 12 November, 2009 @ 5:46 pm
well I did try to find out more about the polling organization, but its hard to find details
this seems to be the lead organization
http://www.d3systems.com/public/home.asp
but they tell us nothing about themselves, I did find this
http://directory.esomar.org/USA/r693_D3-Systems-Inc.php
but it goes little further in helping us find out where they learned their trade, studied, what they have written etc so help appreciated to fill in the blanks
as they are based in Virginia, did any of them sing in that old country band the Foggy Bottom Boys?
Comment by harry monro — 12 November, 2009 @ 6:29 pm
‘injustice and illegality’
Except the war isn’t unjust, and it isn’t illegal. He’d better find a new defence?
I feel for him, but he seems generally to be a bit thick. Commented on briefly here.
http://byrnetofferings.co.uk/?p=11
Comment by Thomas Byrne — 12 November, 2009 @ 8:43 pm
Presumably those commenters who think Lnc Cpl Glenton should not have spoken out also wish the soldier who said “I am making this statement as an act of wilful defiance of military authority, because I believe that the war is being deliberately prolonged by those who have the power to end it” during wartime should also have kept hiis trap shut.
Comment by Solomon Hughes — 13 November, 2009 @ 12:38 am
“Moreover, Meredith is giving one interpretation of the data (”more than 75% want US troops to stay for at least 12 months”). ”
It is the only possible interpretation of that particular point. Obviously most people want the troops out at some time (although a tiny group want them there permanently), just not yet. Things may changewhen the next poll is conducted, of course. The very large minority (41%) who want troops to stay there indefinitely (until peace is restored) is a surprise to me. It suggests support for NATO troops goes quite deep as well as being extremely widespread.
Comment by John Meredith — 13 November, 2009 @ 9:25 am
I didn’t notice these points:
“That poll isn’t just old, it’s also to be taken with a large grain of salt since the areas where insurgent activity is strongest may have been excluded”
The poll is less that a year old, we cannot expect poll data much more reguilalry. The Ais Foundation poll which corroborates the results where the questions align is less that six months old. And no province was excluded, although the high margin of error (=/-2.5%) reflects the difficulty of polling in sopme areas.
“We can, however, make some inferences: 63% of respondents reply (Q28) that the Taliban have “no significant presence at all” in their local area.2
This contradicts your first point, as you must see.
Comment by John Meredith — 13 November, 2009 @ 9:28 am
Let’s be quite clear, Meredith, you are full of it. You know as well as I do that “immediate withdrawal” doesn’t mean “tomorrow” if onyl because it takes time to move all the weapons the invaders brought. So do the Afghan people. That is, the answer “withdrawal within 1-2 years” is, in practical terms, identical to “immediate withdrawal”.
Moreover, I am getting very suspicious of that poll. A margin of error of only 2.5% seems awfully low - it’s lower than the m.o.e. of most political polls in the US. This strongly suggests that the polling firm doesn’t take the peculiarities of polling in a war zone seriously at all.
My point about 63% not reporting any Taliban activity at all is that this seems to contradict the fact that insurgent activity is widespread throughout the country, thereby supporting my suspicion that there is strong regional bias in the poll. It is also strange that more respondents report “foreign Jihadi” activity than “Taliban activity”, for example.
Comment by christian h. — 13 November, 2009 @ 4:19 pm
On the question of the legality of the war. There have been at least 5 international laws or treaties since WW1, which Britain has signed, and which make it illegal to wage a war against another country (unless is is clearly in self-defence, hence the lies). The invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and the bombing of Yugoslavia were all illegal acts of aggression. The only problem is that it has not been made clear how to enforce these laws. The International Treaty for the Renunciation of War signed by Britain and other countries in 1929 was used to convict the Nazi war criminals at the Nuremburg Trials. It also applies to Blair’s wars and that is why he is widely referred to as “The war criminal Blair”. They know where he lives but it is just not in their interests to arrest him.
Comment by Patricia S — 13 November, 2009 @ 5:14 pm
I think we need to be wary of straying into legal debates about the Afghan war, afterall none of us are experts and there is too much selective quoting. For me the moral aspect of the war comes before whether it is legal or not.
John, let’s say the poll is right-does that mean you support the continued involvement of British troops in Afghanistan?
Comment by Owen — 13 November, 2009 @ 5:37 pm
Meridith (or perhaps Meriadoc)
Still no reply about the identity the BBC pollsters you quote, perhaps because you are as clueless as the rest of us about who these people are. It’s better not to be a mushroom you know.
I guess the fact they are backed by the Asia Foundation (I’m sure that’s who you mean) also impresses you, so for the rest of us here is part of the CV of one the Asia Foundations pointmen in Afghanistan “From October 2006 to April 2007, Mr. Haines served as the Civil Society Program Director for the International Republican Institute (IRI) in Baghdad, Iraq, and implemented a project called “Post Election Democratic Transition.” From June 2003 to June 2005, he served in the Ukraine as a U.S. Peace Corps volunteer working on business and economic development, and as a fundraising consultant and a trainer with organizations such as Freedom House, Institute of Competitiveness, and the Youth Communication Action Network. From 1990 to 2003, Mr. Haines worked as a business development manager in the private sector for companies including Mohawk Industries in Seattle, Washington, and International Service Systems in Copenhagen, Denmark.
Mr. Haines served in the United States Army Reserve (1987-1995) and saw active duty during Desert Shield/Storm in 1991. He is a recipient of several individual and unit commendations. He is fluent in Danish; speaks intermediate Russian; and has basic skills in Arabic and Spanish.”
For those unfamiliar with IRI here are some of their Board of Directors
U.S. Senator John McCain, Chairman Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Armed Services
Ambassador L. Paul Bremer, III Former Presidential Envoy to Iraq
Lawrence S. Eagleburger Former U.S. Secretary of State
Frank J. Fahrenkopf, Jr. Former Chairman of the Republican Party
Alison B. Fortier Vice President, Lockheed Martin Missile Defense Programs , Former Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs
Michael Kostiw Republican Staff Director, U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee
Brent Scowcroft Former Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs
Margaret Tutwiler Former U.S. Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, U.S. State Department
Oh and this from their webpage “IRI honored former National Security Advisor and Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger with its 2009 Freedom Award for his contribution to the security and progress of the United States.”
As to Freedom House (irony upon irony) “Freedom House receives the majority (66%) of its funding from the U.S. government through the National Endowment for Democracy, USAID, and the State Department.”
All of these folk may impress the Harrys Place crowd but you really are wasting your time here Merry ta ta
Comment by Harry Monro — 13 November, 2009 @ 5:56 pm
You don’t have to be an expert to read the Laws of War and understand them so I don’t agree that my comments should be dismissed as “straying into legal debates…” I was picking up on an earlier post about the legality of the war and it is relevant to Joe Glenton’s case. The Nuremburg Trials stated that “I was only obeying orders” was no defence when charged with war crimes and every soldier has to decide whether their actions are illegal under international law. Joe Glenton does not want to commit war crimes and I support him 100%.
Comment by Patricia S — 13 November, 2009 @ 7:31 pm
24 wrote: The Nuremburg Trials stated that “I was only obeying orders” was no defence when charged with war crimes and every soldier has to decide whether their actions are illegal under international law. Joe Glenton does not want to commit war crimes and I support him 100%.
Would you argue then that the vast majority of British soliders, who are in your view obeying illegal orders, should be tried in an international court?
Comment by Owen — 13 November, 2009 @ 8:24 pm
Hero he is not
Busy them With Freedom
So They Do Not Busy Us With Bombs
When human beings are being enslaved to grow poppy fields, men, women and children are being trafficked to rich men and women for the sex trade. A people with a low level of education are being brain washed to believe in a spiritual being that wants them to kill all non believers. Drug dealers are making more and more money on the tombstones in people’s eyes. So called Religious Clerics tell their people to strap bombs to them and kill innocent humans. Dictators and fascist religious groups try and dominate the area. Should we stay home and sit on our hands?
Hero, psss buddy, you can sit in your jail cell and call your self a hero all you want. FOR ANY OF YOU OTHER WEIRDOS WHO JOIN A FREE REPUBLIC ARMY PROTECTING AGAINST TERROIST, DRUG DEALING BRAIN WASHERS AND ALL OF A SUDDEN CONSCIOUSLY OBJECT AFTER BEING IN THE MILITARY TO GOING TO FIGHT FOR AN OPPRESSED PEOPLE, you are not hero’s. You are weak.
A true anti-war hero would have went to war and made documentation of why we should not be there and, truly, that we are not helping them at all. Unles this man did that I see no hero.
Besides do you think that the radical Muslim clerics or drug dealing brain washers will just up and all of sudden stop plotting or erecting brain washed soldiers to bomb innocent civilians? I don’t.
We try and busy them with Freedom, like Iraqi Security. Give them museums, give their children video games, books, electricity, family events, free trade to help the humans feel valued and able to produce and feed their families, amusement parks like they have, malls for their teenagers, dating places for them to make out, beat up cars for their teens, football, or cricket games for their teen boys & the crazy girls, debate teams for their nerds, philosophy classes for the enlightened souls above religions, and utmost help that poor man who saw his brother or father taking away because of gangster (radical group) or drug ties, feel that their was A FAIR TRIAL AND DUE PROCESS OF RIGHTS. Let the tribes respect the vote, let the truly enlightened hearts be able to talk out against religion, let the lawyers sue for injustice, ALL IN ALL, BUSY THEM WITH FREEDOM SO THEY DO NOT BUSY US WITH BOMBS.
I am proud that we are in Afghanistan. However, we do need to get paid for our muscle and sweat as we are a capitalist society.
I do not like communist as a matter of fact I hate the idea that some non real life folks (leaders with their play money) could have more power over my possessions and what I do with my time, money or personal life because of the sake of the commune. I would never brain wash someone to suicidaly bomb their innocent civilians.
It is obvious to me, that this man who would join a known force against oppression and tyrannical movements would all of a sudden make some kind of excuse that we should not be Afghanistan. Maybe he would think that we should not go to Africa either, or Central America. I guess we should just bring everybody home and let the world be taken over by bullies. That is real heroic. Real heroic.
I do apologize if things I said in this blog are upsetting to the Afghanistan people. If they wish us not their then they should vote us out. If they wish us their then they should pay for our research, muscle and enforcement of the philosophical idea “to busy their people with Freedom so they do not busy the free with bombs”
Rider I
enlightened, through reading and writing.
“Busy them with Freedom so they do not Busy us with Bombs” Rider I 2009
Comment by Rider I — 14 November, 2009 @ 9:01 am
No. 25: No, I suggest they start from the top down but no-one will take on the establishment and Blair etc. have been allowed, by the dopey public, to become too powerful.
My point is that Joe Glenton is fully justified under international law in taking the action he took.
No. 26: American right-wing nonsense.
Comment by Patricia S — 14 November, 2009 @ 10:40 am
Good luck to Joe Glenton. I remember a British Army soldier who defected to Sweden rather than go to Ulster.
On issues of war and peace:
http://frontpagemag.com/2009/11/13/the-worst-decision-by-a-us-president-in-history-by-david-horowitz/
Quite thought-provoking!
Comment by Willy — 14 November, 2009 @ 10:56 am