Another SoldierTravis Bishop, refuses Afghanistan deployment

Dahr Jamail, Truthout

Sgt. Travis Bishop, who served 14 months in Baghdad with the 3rd Signal Brigade, faces a court-martial this Friday for refusing to deploy to Afghanistan.

Bishop is the second soldier from Fort Hood in as may weeks to be tried by the military for his stand against an occupation he believes is "illegal." He insists that it would be unethical for him to deploy to support an occupation he opposes on both moral and legal grounds and he has filed for conscientious objector (CO) status.

Spc. Victor Agosto was court-martialed last week for his refusal to deploy to Afghanistan. Agosto's lawyer, James Branum, who is also Bishop's lawyer, is the legal adviser to the GI Rights Hotline of Oklahoma and co-chair of the Military Law Task Force. Branum told Truthout during a phone interview on July 10 that, contrary to mainstream opinion that believes Afghanistan to be a "justified" war, the invasion and ongoing occupation are actually in violation of the US Constitution and international law.

"Victor is approaching this from the standpoint of law and ethics," Branum explained, "It's his own personal ethics and principles of the Nuremberg Principles, that the war in Afghanistan does not meet the criteria for lawful war under the UN Charter, which says that member nations who joined the UN, as did the US, should give up war forever, aside from two exceptions: that the war is in self-defense and that the use of force was authorized by the UN Security Council. The nation of Afghanistan did not attack the United States. The Taliban may have, but the nation and people of Afghanistan did not. And under US law, the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution, any treaty enacted by the US is now the 'supreme law of the land.' So when the United States signed the UN Charter, we made that our law as well."

Bishop told Truthout he was inspired by Agosto's stand and had chosen to follow Specialist Agosto's example of refusal. Both his time in Iraq, the illegality of the occupation and a moral awakening led to his decision to refuse to deploy.

"I started to see a big difference between our reality there and what was in the news," Bishop explained to Truthout about his experience in Iraq, but went on to add that morality and religion played a role as well.

When he received orders to deploy to Afghanistan, Bishop said, "I started reading my Bible to get right with my creator before going. Through my reading I realized all this goes against what Jesus taught and what all true Christians should believe. I had a religious transformation, and realized that all war is wrong."

Bishop received his orders to deploy to Afghanistan in February, but at the time "didn't know there was a support network or a way out at all. I thought GI resistance was something archaic from Vietnam."

As his deployment date approached, he met with other soldiers at a GI resistance cafe, "Under the Hood", in Killeen, Texas.

"They told me not only do I have a choice, but I have a support network backing me up," Bishop explained, "I told them my thinking, and they said that I sounded like a CO. They put me in touch with (James) Branum and when I learned from him what a CO was, I knew I couldn't go."

Bishop went absent without leave (AWOL) for one week the day his unit deployed, "because I didn't have time to prepare to file for CO status. So while AWOL I prepared a statement and filled out my application for CO (status). Then I went back (to Fort Hood) with Branum and turned myself in. I never planned on staying AWOL. They gave me a barracks room and assigned me to a platoon and told me to show up to work the next day. That was it. They started the CO process, but they also started the Uniform Code of Military Justice process, and that's where it gets shifty."

Shortly thereafter, the military charged him with two counts of missing movement and disobeying a direct order.

Bishop, Agosto, and other resisters are not alone. In November 2007, the Pentagon revealed that between 2003 and 2007 there had been an 80 percent increase in overall desertion rates in the Army (desertion refers to soldiers who go AWOL and never intend to return to service), and Army AWOL rates from 2003 to 2006 were the highest since 1980. Between 2000 and 2006, more than 40,000 troops from all branches of the military deserted, more than half from the Army. Army desertion rates jumped by 42 percent from 2006 to 2007 alone.

Bishop informed Truthout that morale is low among his peers in the military, whether they are pro-war or opposed to the occupations.

"Hard Corps folks, as soon as they hear about my sentence being capped at a year, they are changing their minds already," he said, "There's a lot of soldiers that go just because they feel they have to go. They are driven by money and legal obligation, not patriotism. They go because they don't want to lose their job and get in trouble. A lot of the people I talk to that are in, they feel as I do, but they say things like 'I only have four more months, so I'll ride it out and hope not to get stop-lossed.'"

Spc. Michael Kern, an active duty veteran of the occupation of Iraq (where he served from March 2007 to March 2008), is also based at Fort Hood. He is currently getting treatment for traumatic brain injury (TBI) and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

Kern turned against both occupations, as he told Truthout, "Once I realized it wasn't a war and was an occupation, and once I realized I was a terrorist to people in Iraq. It wasn't a hard decision. My whole unit feels as I do, but are afraid to speak out because they don't know there is support for those of us who speak out against the war."

Kern, like Bishop, says that troop morale is very low.

"I'd say it's at an all-time low - mostly because of Afghanistan now. Nobody knows why we are at either place, and I believe the troops need to know why they are there, or we should pull out, and this is a unanimous feeling, even for folks who are pro-war."

Kern feels that the decisions of Agosto and Bishop to refuse to deploy to Afghanistan is worthy of admiration and support.

"I admire these guys," he told Truthout, "They are truly amazing. I wish I would have done that, but when I deployed I didn't know what I was getting into, or my options. I look up to these guys. They are standing up for what they believe in, and that's the greatest thing any of us can do, and they are doing it despite what the Army is doing to them."

Kern suggests that soldiers "do your research before you willingly follow orders, because this is an unjust war, and according to Army regulations, you are entitled to question an illegal order, such as deploying to an illegal war not sanctioned by the UN. And that there is a large community of support for those who are standing up. And it's all over the world, not just the US, wherever you are, there are people who feel the same way you do."

In England, Lance Cpl. Joe Glenton, from the Royal Logistics Corps, has become the first British soldier to speak out publicly against the war in Afghanistan.

Glenton delivered a letter to British Prime Minister Gordon Brown on 30 July stating why he is refusing to return to Afghanistan.

Glenton wrote: "The war in Afghanistan is not reducing the terrorist risk, far from improving Afghan lives it is bringing death and devastation to their country. Britain has no business there. I do not believe that our cause in Afghanistan is just or right. I implore you, Sir, to bring our soldiers home."

Glenton, like Agosto, and soon for Bishop, began his court-martial proceedings on 3 August.

US commanders recently announced that US and NATO troop deaths from Afghan bombings spiked six-fold in July, compared to the same month last year. In July, resistance fighters detonated the highest number of bombs against occupation forces in the eight-year occupation, according to figures released Tuesday. More US troops were killed in July in Afghanistan than any other month of the entire occupation, and violence continues.

Meanwhile, Anthony Cordesman, a senior adviser to the US military commander in charge of NATO forces in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, told The Times of London that an additional 45,000 US troops are needed in Afghanistan.

Bishop hopes his refusal to deploy will inspire soldiers to search their consciences.

"My hope is that people who feel like me, that they don't have a voice and are having doubts, I hope that this shows them that not only can you talk to someone about this, but that you actually have a choice," he said.

"Choice is the first thing they take away from you in the military," Bishop added, "You're taught that you don't have a choice. That's not true. And not wanting to kill someone or get killed does not make you a coward. I hope my actions show this to more people."

-thanks to Truthout

Laura's interview with War Resister, Dean Walcott, will refresh our memories of this man.

Wednesday, Aug 19: Vigil for War Resisters, Dean Walcott & Rodney Watson

Next Wednesday, August 19, the federal court will hear an appeal by Iraq war resister Dean Walcott. Dean, a former US Marine who served two tours of duty in Iraq, is appealing the negative decisions on his Pre-Removal Risk Assessment and his request to be allowed to stay in Canada on Humanitarian and Compassionate grounds.

I've interviewed Dean, and his story affected me deeply. When he received his first deportation order, for January 6, I wrote this.

Dean joined the United States Marine Corps in 2000, a few weeks shy of his 18th birthday, hoping to get a college education and some structure in his life. Dean knew if the US went to war, he would be expected to fight, and he fully accepted that risk. In 2003, he was involved in the United States' invasion of Iraq, and was deployed to Iraq a second time in 2005.

Between those two deployments, Dean was stationed at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, a US military hospital in Stuttgart, Germany. There, families of mortally wounded US soldiers are flown in to see their loved one for the last time.

Alarmed by the high suicide rate among Landstuhl patients, military brass assigned soldiers to act as liaisons for both patients and visiting families. Dean, who had no training in either health care or counselling, was charged with that duty.
He was totally unprepared for what he saw – US soldiers, as well as Iraqi civilians, blown to bits, but somehow still clinging to life, burn victims dying in unimaginable agony.

"That was the only time I ever saw Marines drop the tough-guy act," says Dean. "I would hold someone in my arms – a mother, father, son or daughter – who was losing a person they loved, and we would cry together."

Dean began having nightmares and became severely depressed. He eventually came to feel that "if people are going to suffer this much, there has to be a better reason than 'because the president said so'."

Back in the US, Dean found his disgust at the futility of the Iraq War didn't go away. The Marines obstructed his efforts to get help for his depression and post-traumatic stress symptoms, but there was no legal way for him to leave the military.

Frustrated, trapped and heartsick, in December 2006, he walked away from his base in North Carolina and boarded a Greyhound bus for Toronto.

Dean now trains high school students in computer repair, working for reBOOT Canada, a non-profit organisation that provides computers and technical support to charities and low-income Canadians. He still grapples with PTSD, but has built a quietly productive life in Toronto. He also does public speaking on behalf of war resisters - and on behalf of peace.

Canada should be proud to welcome this man to our country. Instead, the Harper government calls him and all the war resisters "bogus" refugee claimants and does its best to kick them out.

August 19 is also the removal date for war resister Rodney Watson, now living in Vancouver. Join us that morning to show support for Dean, Rodney, and all the war resisters.

WHEN: Wednesday, August 19, 8:00 a.m.

WHERE: Federal Court Building, 180 Queen Street West, Toronto (west of University Ave, Osgoode subway)

WHY: Let Them Stay!
Posted by L-girl at We Move to Canada

This is straight from Laura's blog. She covers it all and does it so well, I just can't help myself.

Nine Arrested at End of 3 Day Peace Walk to Fort McCoy

Protestors End Walk for Peace at Ft. McCoy

Voices for Creative Nonviolence

Camp Williams is headquarters to the 32nd Brigade Combat Team of the Wisconsin National Guard. The 32nd BCT is currently deployed to Iraq, the largest combat deployment of the Wisconsin Guard since World War II. The 32nd BCT originated as the Red Arrow Division that served the most days in combat of any Army or Army Guard unit during World War II. Camp Williams is located next to the community of Camp Douglas, Wisconsin.

Fort McCoy plays a key role in the mobilization of Army Guard and Army Reserve units deploying to Iraq and Afghanistan. In the spring and summer of 2009 several units are scheduled for mobilization training prior to deployment.

August 9, 2009

TOMAH, Wisconsin – Nine anti-war activists were detained at Mt. McCoy after walking onto the central-Wisconsin base to protest the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the continued U.S. possession of nuclear weapons.

Five of the nine were ticketed and released from the site after being permanently banned from entering the base again.

Four of the group were taken by U.S. marshals to Madison where they face federal trespass charges in U.S. District Court. The four had previously been banned from the base for earlier protests.

All nine were part of a three-day walk for peace that began Aug. 7, near Camp Williams, Wisc..

The walk was also a commemoration of the U.S. atomic attacks bombings of the cities of Hiroshima, August 6, and Nagasaki August 9, 1945, and an appeal for a moratorium on the use of armor-piercing shells made from waste uranium-238 known as “depleted uranium” munitions.

Walkers carried dozens of placards along highways 12 and 21, principle among them were pleas:

to bring all the troops home; to compensate the victims of the U.S. military occupations; to abolish nuclear weapons; and to inform the National Guard troops of all their legal rights.

The four activists being held in federal custody in Madison pending arraignment are Brian Terrell, 53, of Maloy, Iowa; Bonnie Urfer, 57, of Luck, Wis.; Alice Gerard, 52, of Grand Island, New York; and Joy first, 55, of Madison, Wisc.

The five ticketed and released pending arraignment are Gerald Paoli, 49, of Chicago, IL; Janet Parker 41, of Madison; Dylan Parker, 20, of Davenport, IA; Vicki Andrews, 64, of Grand Rapids, MN; and Tom Haebig, 72, of West Bend, Wisc.

-thanks to Voices for Creative Nonviolence

Dean Walcott Vigil & Hearing, August 19

I was checking my calendar and noticed that War Resister, Dean Walcott, has a hearing scheduled for next Wednesday and there will be a vigil outside the Federal Court at 8am.

Dean Walcott Vigil

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

8:00am

Federal Court Building

180 Queen St. West

(west of University Ave, Osgoode subway)

Toronto

The Federal Court will hear an appeal by Iraq war resister Dean Walcott. Dean, a former U.S. Marine who served two tours of duty in Iraq, is appealing the negative decisions on his Pre-Removal Risk Assessment and his request to be allowed to stay in Canada on Humanitarian and Compassionate grounds.

Join a vigil to support Dean Walcott and to demand that the Harper government respect Canadian democracy and the will of the Canadian people. It is time to let the war resisters stay!

-Organized by the War Resisters Support Campaign

Free Army Sgt. Travis Bishop!

Iraq war vet Sgt. Travis Bishop will be court martialed this Friday, August 14 at Fort Hood, Texas for refusing to deploy to Afghanistan.

Please donate to Travis' defense!

($800 of $2,000 has been raised so far.)

-thanks to Courage To Resist

Iraq War resister Kimberly Rivera wins in Federal Court

L-Girl of We Move To Canada:

I've just learned that war resister Kimberly Rivera has won her most recent appearance in federal court.

From lawyer Alyssa Manning:

Justice Russell found that the Pre-Removal Risk Assessment Officer did not address properly the risk of differential punishment on the basis of political opinion and the evidence put forward in support of that risk.

This means that Kim is entitled to a new PRRA with a different PRRA officer.

We have a long way to go, but for today: WE WON!

WAR RESISTERS SUPPORT CAMPAIGN
MEDIA RELEASE
For Immediate Release
Tuesday, August 11, 2009


First female Iraq War resister to seek refuge in Canada gets another temporary stay

TORONTO — On Tuesday, the Federal Court of Canada granted Kimberly Rivera a new Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA). The judicial review hearing took place on July 8 before Federal Court Judge The Honourable James Russell.

Justice Russell found that the PRRA Officer did not deal properly with the risk that Kim Rivera would face differential prosecution on the basis of her opposition to the Iraq War.

There was evidence before the Officer indicating that individuals who are on record as critics of the Iraq War are targeted for prosecution and more severe punishment as opposed to being granted an administrative discharge from the military.

As a result of the ruling Rivera is entitled to a new decision in her PRRA, a process that may take up to four months.

Rivera, her lawyer Alyssa Manning, and a representative of the War Resisters Support Campaign will be available tomorrow morning to discuss the implications of this ruling.

EVENT: Media availability re: the decision in Kimberly Rivera’s judicial review

DATE: Wednesday, August 12, 2009

TIME: 10:00 a.m. EDT

LOCATION: Steelworkers' Hall, 25 Cecil Street, Main Floor, Members' Lounge, Toronto (south of College Street, west of Beverley Street)

Rivera was granted an eleventh-hour stay of removal in March following public outcry over the threat of her deportation. In January, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Jason Kenney used the occasion of her original PRRA decision to claim that Iraq War resisters are "bogus refugee claimants". His comments brought rebuke from Amnesty International Canada and the Canadian Council for Refugees for prejudicing the chance of a fair hearing for Rivera and other war resisters.

The War Resisters Support Campaign is renewing its call on the minority Harper government to implement a motion that was passed twice by the House of Commons (on June 3, 2008 and again on March 30, 2009) and stop the impending deportation of Iraq War resisters, including Rodney Watson from Vancouver. Two Iraq War resisters have already been deported by the Harper government and sentenced to jail terms in the U.S. for opposing the war.

Rodney Watson, a war resister in Vancouver, is currently threatened with deportation.

"Today's court decision reflects the strong consensus in this country supporting people of conscience like Kim Rivera," said Michelle Robidoux, spokesperson for the War Resisters Support Campaign. "MPs have voted twice, directing this minority government to stop the deportations. No matter the personal opinions of Stephen Harper and Jason Kenney, Canadians expect them to respect the will of Parliament and implement the motion."

Kimberly Rivera, who served in Iraq in 2006, is the first female Iraq War resister to seek refuge in Canada. Rivera, along with her partner Mario, son Christian (7 years old) and daughter Rebecca (4 years old), fled to Canada in January 2007 when she refused redeployment. In late November 2008 Rivera gave birth to her Canadian daughter Katie (9 months old).

"I'm so happy. Like the other war resisters, I just want to stay in Canada," said Kimberly Rivera. "Our families shouldn't be broken up, with a mother or father thrown in jail because they stood up for what's right."

A public opinion poll conducted by Angus Reid Strategies in June 2008 found widespread approval (64%) for the House of Commons’ vote in support of war resisters.

Excerpts from Justice James Russell's reasons

[98] In the present application, the Minister says that the act of persecution itself was never clearly identified by the Applicants as a new risk and, if it was, the Decision addresses the whole court martial system and not just due process punishment. I agree with the Respondent that the distinction between prosecution per se and punishment for desertion is not as clearly delineated in the submissions as it might be. This gave me some initial concern that the Officer had not addressed the targeting issue because the written submissions appear to emphasize process and punishment. However it would appear that the Officer’s own identification of the stated risks shows that he was fully aware that the Principal Applicant feared not only the trial process and punishment but also the act of being charged with desertion and subjection to court martial proceedings.

[99] In the end, there is no meaningful examination in the Decision of selected and targeted prosecution based upon political opinion of those deserters who have spoken out against the war in Iraq. The Principal Applicant provided ample evidence of the targeting of similarly situated individuals, but this evidence is never addressed from this perspective. In addition there was also evidence before the Officer of prosecutors seeking harsher treatment, and judges imposing harsher sentences, for deserters who have spoken out against the war. This again raises the issue of the exercise of prosecutorial and judicial discretion in a way that discriminates against those soldiers who have expressed public opposition to the war in Iraq. In turn, this calls into question the procedural and state protection safeguards available to targeted individuals who are prosecuted (instead of receiving an administrative discharge) and who are punished harshly for their political opinions, and whether this amounts to section 96 persecution or section 97 harm. In her written submission, the Principal Applicant raised the issue not only of disproportionate punishment, but of the improper exercise of prosecutorial discretion based upon and individual deserter’s profile as an opponent of the U.S. war effort. In my view, the availability of the conscientious objector process, even if it were available to the Principal Applicant, which does not appear likely or the evidence, is irrelevant to the issue.

[102] In my view, the Officer's failure to fully address the targeting issue, and the evidence that supports the Applicant's position, renders the Decision unreasonable and it must be returned for reconsideration.

-thanks to War Resister Support Campaign and We Move To Canada

Canadian MPs back war resisters at vigil for Rodney Watson

Canadian MPs back war resisters at vigil for Rodney Watson
As Iraq war resister Rodney Watson faces imminent deportation by the Harper government from Vancouver to court-martial in the U.S. for opposing the war, Toronto supporters handed out 800 leaflets at a local vigil and two Members of Parliament spoke in support of letting war resisters stay.

Please watch these videos and scroll down to see how you can take action in support of Rodney and other US Iraq war resisters.

-thanks to War Resisters Support Campaign

Deportation of War Resister, Rodney Watson, deferred but still imminent

War resister Rodney Watson has won a deferral of his deportation, while some matters pending in court can be resolved. The new date, however, is August 19, only 12 days away.

We must continue to stand up for Rodney and to speak out in his behalf. Call and email Stephen Harper, Jason Kenney and Alice Wong. Tell them to respect the will of Parliament and stop the deportations!

-thanks again to L-girl at We Move To Canada

See updates HERE and HERE

Thousands Mourn Britain’s Oldest Warrior

I came across this moving article from the New York Times.

Harry Patch, the last living British soldier from World War 1 has a story similar to many returning Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan soldiers. I think his saga deserves a few moments of our time.

I can't understand how we still allow our governments to take our young and send them off to war after all the testimonies of soldiers who have been there . . . and came back to share their horrors.

photo: Carl De Souza/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

By JOHN F. BURNS, Published: August 6, 2009

WELLS, England — Harry Patch was past his 100th birthday before he began speaking out about the horrors he endured as a machine gunner in Flanders in World War I, when he survived the fighting at Ypres that was among the bloodiest in a war that took the lives of nearly 900,000 men from Britain and its colonies.

When Mr. Patch finally broke 80 years of silence, in the final decade of a life that was honored by thousands of mourners who gathered at his funeral on Thursday in this quiet cathedral town set in rolling green hills 140 miles west of London, his message was not the traditional story of valor and patriotism under fire. Rather, he took as his central themes the futility of war and the common humanity of soldiers who meet as enemies on the battlefield.

It was a gospel expressed in the simple language of a man who was a 19-year-old private when he was struck by the burst of a German shell over the British trenches in September 1917 and sent home to recover from his wounds. Working as a plumber in Wells until his retirement, he lived to the age of 111 before he died on July 25, when he was listed by Britain’s Defense Ministry as the last survivor among the millions of British soldiers who fought in the trenches on the Western Front.

In his last years, he became a national celebrity, memorialized in a poem written by Andrew Motion, then the poet laureate, and in a song fashioned from Mr. Patch’s own words about the fighting in the trenches that was recorded by the pop group Radiohead (“I’ve seen devils coming up from the ground/I’ve seen hell upon this earth.”) He met it all with the same modesty, saying that it was not he who should be honored but the men who fell at the battlefront, “the ones who didn’t come home.”

At a time when a new generation of British soldiers has been sent into combat in Iraq and Afghanistan, suffering casualties that have stirred growing public disquiet, Mr. Patch’s voice struck a deep chord. War, he said once, was “the calculated and condoned slaughter of human beings,” too often sent into combat as “cannon fodder” by politicians who should have settled their conflicts by dueling among themselves. “War isn’t worth one life,” he said. “Too many died.”

As for the carnage on the Western Front, on both sides, he said all who fought, whether British or German, should be mourned. “Irrespective of the uniforms we wore,” he told the BBC, “we were all victims.” When he attended remembrance services for the war dead, as he did in London last November on the 90th anniversary of the armistice that ended the war, he pressed the message home. “Remember the Germans,” he said.

At his funeral, televised live in Britain, it was these themes that shaped the service. Mr. Patch told officials that he did not want a state funeral, and not a military one, either, at least not one with rifle or artillery salutes. His coffin was draped with the Union Jack, and carried into the 13th-century Gothic cathedral by soldiers from The Rifles, the British Army unit whose regimental antecedent was the Duke of Cornwall’s Light Infantry, the unit that Mr. Patch fought for in Flanders. But no weapons, not even ceremonial ones, were allowed into the cathedral.

But the feature that would have been likely to please Mr. Patch more than any other was the presence, as honorary pallbearers, of two German soldiers in full dress uniform, part of a six-man contingent that also included soldiers from Belgium and France. A German diplomat, Eckhard Lubkemeier, offered a New Testament reading from Corinthians that spoke of Christ’s “message of reconciliation.”

Along with traditional Anglican hymns, the service included a singing of Pete Seeger’s Vietnam-era antiwar ballad, “Where Have All the Flowers Gone?,” sung by a young woman from the cathedral choir. A Belgian diplomat read an excerpt from Mr. Patch’s 2007 autobiography, “The Last Fighting Tommy,” in which he described an offensive during the battle at Paschendaele, the bloodiest chapter in the Ypres fighting, when he came across a fellow soldier “ripped from his shoulder to his waist by shrapnel” during a British assault on German lines.

The episode reinforced in Mr. Patch, a devout Christian, the belief that there is a life after death. “When we got to him, he looked at us and said, ‘Shoot me,’ ” he recalled. “He was beyond all human help, and before we could draw a revolver he was dead. And the final word he uttered was ‘Mother!’ It wasn’t a cry of despair, it was a cry of surprise and joy.”

He added, “I’m positive that when he left this world, wherever he went, his mother was there, and from that day, I’ve always remembered that cry, and that death is not the end.”

For many in Britain, Mr. Patch’s death signaled another kind of end, the departure of the last man living who could tell what it was to be a soldier in “the Great War,” as many here still call it, leaving only military archives and history books and documentaries to tell the story. “We mark the end of an era,” said the Very Rev. John Clarke, the dean of the cathedral. “The last voice with direct experience of combat in the trenches of the First World War has fallen silent.”

Official mourners at the funeral included the Duchess of Cornwall, the former Camilla Parker-Bowles, who is married to Prince Charles, and Gen. Sir Richard Dannatt, chief of the general staff, Britain’s top army commander. Queen Elizabeth, on vacation in Scotland, as always at this time of year, is expected to lead a national memorial service for all of Britain’s World War I dead at Westminster Abbey this fall.

But the strongest testament to Mr. Patch’s iconic status came from the crowds who gathered outside the cathedral, undeterred by a persistent drizzle. The town’s sidewalks were packed three and four deep with people who applauded as the cortege drove past, among them Americans, Australians and visitors from across Europe, including Germans.

A crowd of about 2,500 watching the funeral on a giant video screen erected on the cathedral green, including families with small children and dogs, pensioners in wheelchairs, a vacationing fisherman with his tackle slung over his shoulder and a leather-jacketed motorcyclist with a ponytail. Among them, ramrod still, was a platoon of somber-faced men wearing replica World War I army uniforms.

Many said they had come to honor Mr. Patch, and with him the generation of their grandfathers and great-grandfathers who fought and died in the war. “Even if they were treated as cannon fodder, as lions led by donkeys, they died for their country and made the world a better place,” said Richard Bowery, a 54-year-old jobless man who came with his wife, Amanda. “It’s just a pity that not many of the younger generation these days understand what sacrifices they made.”

Alan Cowell contributed reporting from London.

Top ten reasons to resist the war in Afghanistan

By Courage to Resist. August 5, 2009

-Like Iraq, it is also illegal
-No military solution to terrorism
-Funds used for war are needed at home
-Civilian casualties are not acceptable
-War is not good for women in Afghanistan
-Support the troops: Bring them home now
-Torture and human rights abuses in Afghanistan
-Climate change and resource wars
-War destabilizes Afghanistan and the region
-Respect Afghani self-determination; No to global military intervention