Pax Americana

Justice Dumpty

The keenest legal mind of our time:

"I don't like torture," Scalia says. "Although defining it is going to be a nice trick. But who's in favor of it? Nobody. And we have a law against torture. But if the - everything that is hateful and odious is not covered by some provision of the Constitution," he says.

"If someone's in custody, as in Abu Ghraib, and they are brutalized by a law enforcement person, if you listen to the expression 'cruel and unusual punishment,' doesn't that apply?" Stahl asks.

"No, No," Scalia replies.

"Cruel and unusual punishment?" Stahl asks.

"To the contrary," Scalia says. "Has anybody ever referred to torture as punishment? I don't think so."

"Well, I think if you are in custody, and you have a policeman who's taken you into custody…," Stahl says.

"And you say he's punishing you?" Scalia asks.

"Sure," Stahl replies.

"What's he punishing you for? You punish somebody…," Scalia says.

"Well because he assumes you, one, either committed a crime…or that you know something that he wants to know," Stahl says.

"It's the latter. And when he's hurting you in order to get information from you…you don’t say he's punishing you. What’s he punishing you for? He's trying to extract…," Scalia says.

"Because he thinks you are a terrorist and he's going to beat the you-know-what out of you…," Stahl replies.

"Anyway, that’s my view," Scalia says. "And it happens to be correct."

He went on to add:

"There's glory for you!"
"I don't know what you mean by 'glory,' " Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you don't—till I tell you. I meant 'there's a nice knock-down argument for you!' "
"But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument,' " Alice objected.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."
"The question is, " said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty. "which is to be master—that's all."

To which I add: vafanculo.

ntodd

History's Greatest Monster

Code Pink sends gifts:

Dear Former President Jimmy Carter,

Thank you for your inexhaustible work toward creating peace in the Middle East. We are deeply grateful for your trip to Syria; we hope the U.S. government will follow your lead and come to understand that we have to talk to Hamas if we want peace to flourish in the region. For your bravery and wisdom, we present you with this Pink Badge of Courage.
...
You serve as a beautiful role model for us, President Carter. Thank you for your example and your continuing commitment to peace.

With gratitude and admiration,

p.s. We also wish to give you this Jerusalem Hope Candle. Crafted by Israeli and Palestinian women, this candle embodies the peace and reconciliation you are working so hard to achieve. May its glow inspire you as you continue your important work for peace.

Sign here.

ntodd

Hark upon the gale: William and Mary's war on free thought

AUTHOR'S NOTE: After some thought, I have decided to cross-post this essay here at PaxAm, because I believe it addresses some fundamental aspects of the warring society in which we find ourselves as Americans today, and because I wish it to have a wider audience than it might have on my own sucky blog.  Indeed, I think it speaks to the extent to which the Right will go in order to squelch dissent and opposing viewpoints.

If you don't feel this post is appropriate here, kindly scroll on by.  Thank you for your indulgence.

-- Sinfonian

Unless, like me, you are a graduate (or student) of the College of William and Mary ("W&M"), you probably wouldn't recognize the importance of that post title.  But I've struggled all afternoon and evening with what to write after today's resignation of the College's 26th president, Gene Nichol.  Perhaps you might think it's not even worthy of a blog post, especially from a sucky blog in Florida that focuses on politics.  But if you think that, I think you would be wrong ... because Nichol's ouster has everything to do with politics and, specifically, the divergent ideologies of the W&M leadership.

First, let me say this: W&M means a great deal to me.  I don't know the extent to which graduates from other colleges and universities feel a sense of loyalty and devotion to their alma maters, and indeed, as a student there, I can remember thinking, "Ah, it's just a college.  It's a place to spend four years.  Big deal -- I'll never be sentimental about it."  Well, I don't know whether fellow alumni Jon Stewart ('84) or Robert Gates ('65) would agree, but the longer I'm away from Williamsburg, the more drawn to it I feel. In short, there really is something about (William and) Mary.

So, it was a shock to the system to receive an e-mail from President Nichol (right) this morning, through my alumni e-mail subscription.  It reads in part:

I was informed by the Rector on Sunday, after our Charter Day celebrations, that my contract will not be renewed in July. Appropriately, serving the College in the wake of such a decision is beyond my imagining. Accordingly, I have advised the Rector, and announce today, effective immediately, my resignation as president of the College of William & Mary. I return to the faculty of the school of law to resume teaching and writing. [...] I have also hoped that this noble College might one day claim not only Thomas Jefferson’s pedigree, but his political philosophy as well. It was Jefferson [a 1762 graduate of W&M -- ed.] who argued for a "wall of separation between church and state" -- putting all religious sects "on an equal footing." He expressly rejected the claim that speech should be suppressed because "it might influence others to do evil," insisting instead that "we have nothing to fear from the demoralizing reasonings of some if others are left free to demonstrate their errors." And he averred powerfully that "worth and genius" should "be sought from every condition" of society.

Sadly, President Nichol departs his office today as the victim of an ideological war that has pitted the "liberal" freedoms that our Constitution provides -- freedoms of speech and of expression, and of "the right of the people peaceably to assemble" -- against the prevailing right-wing demagoguery of those who would seek to stifle, indeed to destroy, those freedoms.

The "other side" of the ideological war has been led by the College's Rector (chair of the Board of Visitors, equivalent to "Trustees"), Michael Powell ('85).  A contemporary of mine at the College, Powell, the son of former Secretary of State and noted sycophant Colin Powell, is perhaps best known for his radically patriarchal chairmanship of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which featured the previously unheard-of introduction of usurious punitive fines for radio stations that intentionally or inadvertently permitted obscenities to be aired.  Powell has gathered around him a cadre of like-minded pearl-clutchers and censors who have made it their crusade -- their jihad, if you will (for it truly is a holy war from their perspective) -- to artificially shelter the entire William and Mary community from anything that might inconveniently broaden the College's horizons.  I would call it "opening students' minds," they might say "poisoning students' minds," but in any event the effect was the same: to restrict awareness and understanding and to impose a single-minded, Christianist viewpoint on the College -- one that had been absent, for the most part, since its earliest days as a seminary around the turn of the 18th Century.

Powell and his cronies vilified Nichol, whose academic expertise as a law professor is in First Amendment jurisprudence, for four key decisions, which the now-former president described in his e-mail as "hav[ing] stirred ample controversy:"

First, as is widely known, I altered the way a Christian cross was displayed in a public facility, on a public university campus, in a chapel used regularly for secular College events -- both voluntary and mandatory -- in order to help Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, and other religious minorities feel more meaningfully included as members of our broad community. The decision was likely required by any effective notion of separation of church and state. And it was certainly motivated by the desire to extend the College’s welcome more generously to all. We are charged, as state actors, to respect and accommodate all religions, and to endorse none. The decision did no more.

Second, I have refused, now on two occasions, to ban from the campus a program funded by our student-fee-based, and student-governed, speaker series. To stop the production because I found it offensive, or unappealing, would have violated both the First Amendment and the traditions of openness and inquiry that sustain great universities. It would have been a knowing, intentional denial of the constitutional rights of our students. It is perhaps worth recalling that my very first act as president of the College was to swear on oath not to do so.

Third, in my early months here, recognizing that we likely had fewer poor, or Pell eligible, students than any public university in America, and that our record was getting worse, I introduced an aggressive Gateway scholarship program for Virginians demonstrating the strongest financial need. Under its terms, resident students from families earning $40,000 a year or less have 100% of their need met, without loans. Gateway has increased our Pell eligible students by 20% in the past two years.

Fourth, from the outset of my presidency, I have made it clear that if the College is to reach its aspirations of leadership, it is essential that it become a more diverse, less homogeneous institution. In the past two and half years we have proceeded, with surprising success, to assure that is so. Our last two entering classes have been, by good measure, the most diverse in the College’s history. We have, in the past two and a half years, more than doubled our number of faculty members of color. And we have more effectively integrated the administrative leadership of William & Mary. It is no longer the case, as it was when I arrived, that we could host a leadership retreat inviting the 35 senior administrators of the College and see, around the table, no persons of color.

While the cross controversy generated a great deal of emotion on both sides (and had, for me, the most personal impact, as I well remember participating in many events in the Wren Chapel, where the cross had been displayed for years), it was the second of the aforementioned decisions, the hosting of a sex workers' art show at the College, which drew the most ire and ultimately, according to at least one W&M official with whom I spoke today, was the final straw.

I'm not going to throw a whole bunch of links at you.  If you're interested, just Google Nichol's name along with "Wren Cross" or "sex show" and you'll get more information than you might ever want.  The point is that, while our soldiers fight a so-called "War on Terror" overseas, we who remain here are fighting another intangible, equally dangerous concept: censorship.  Mind control.  I don't mean "censorship" in its most superficial sense, as in taking Don Imus off the air for being a racist tool.  I mean the kind of pervasive censorship that limits our intellectual growth as human beings, the kind that would insist that there is only one true religion, only one true ideology, only one proper and correct perspective on all things.  Thanks to the Bush crime syndicate (of which both Powell père and Powell fils have been card-carrying members) and to the Newt Gingrich-led Project for a New American Century before it, with the willing participation of the mainstream corporate-run media, Americans have become indoctrinated over the last fifteen or so years to the neoconservative view.  Gene Nichol's resignation is merely another symptom in a disease that is nearing epidemic proportions: the idea that we, as Americans, are unable to think for ourselves or to permit others the opportunity to think freely and openly, and therefore we become less intellectually curious and let others tell us how to think, how to feel, how to react.

With regard to the resignation itself, what I find most appalling of all is that Powell apparently tried to buy Nichol's silence.  Let Nichol explain it, again from his e-mail:

I add only that, on Sunday, the Board of Visitors offered both my wife and me substantial economic incentives if we would agree "not to characterize [the non-renewal decision] as based on ideological grounds" or make any other statement about my departure without their approval. Some members may have intended this as a gesture of generosity to ease my transition. But the stipulation of censorship made it seem like something else entirely. We, of course, rejected the offer. It would have required that I make statements I believe to be untrue and that I believe most would find non-credible. I’ve said before that the values of the College are not for sale. Neither are ours.

Bravo!  I applaud Gene Nichol for his steadfast refusal to kowtow to such demands.  It is quite literally painful to consider the unconscionable behavior of the Board of Visitors, through Rector Powell, in offering "hush money" so that Nichol might hide the true nature of the Board's decision.

Naturally, Powell denies any ideological motivation, and he sent out his own e-mail, on behalf of the Board of Visitors, less than four hours after Nichol.  It reads in pertinent part:

It is critical to explain that this decision was not in any way based on ideology or any single public controversy.  To suggest such a motivation for the Board is flatly wrong.  Indeed, the Board has been repulsed by the personal attacks on the President and his family.  The uncharitable personal assaults are unworthy of anyone who professes to care about the College and there should be no joy when things do not work out between good people.

Many policies championed by President Nichol are fully embraced by the Board.  We agree unflinchingly with the President’s efforts to make William and Mary a more diverse educational environment.  His achievements in this area will be the most enduring part of his legacy.  We will continue the pursuit with vigor and will insist that all future presidents of the College do as well.  We strongly support the Gateway program and will work to put it on sound financial footing by building an endowment that will allow it to blossom.  Equally, we continue to see the enormous value that attends to the efforts of internationalization and civic engagement.  And, so there is no doubt, the Board will not allow any change in the compromise reached on the placement of the Wren Cross.

Powell chose his words very, very carefully, in the finest tradition of the Bush crime syndicate; he has learned well.  I'm sure the Board embraced "many policies" ... but not the ones that led to his ouster.  Indeed, the decision may not have been "based on ... any single public controversy;" but multiple, or private, controversies might explain it quite clearly.  And it's mighty charitable of the Board to agree to adhere to the compromise they themselves ratified regarding the Wren Cross: that it be removed from permanent display in the Chapel but be available freely to any and all groups that request it.  However, it's instructive, and indeed enlightening, that Powell said nothing about the sex workers' art show, unless you count his supercilious platitudes about "a more diverse educational environment."

William and Mary is a school with a proud tradition.  In its 315 years of existence, the College has had only 26 presidents.  Nichol's three predecessors, who comprise my personal connection to the College dating back to my matriculation in 1983, served for an average of over eleven years each. It is highly unusual that a president of W&M would serve only two-and-a-half years -- in fact, it is the shortest presidential tenure since 1848, and only two presidents have served less time than Nichol.

Such is the legacy of Rector Michael Powell and "his" Board of Visitors -- a legacy that looks alarmingly like the scorched-earth policy of the Bush crime syndicate.  Just as Drunky McStagger spit on hundreds of years of military non-aggression by starting a "war" for the first time in American history, so too has Powell besmirched three centuries of openness, loyalty, and inquisitive scholarship by deposing Gene Nichol.

Until now, the ideological impact of the Board of Visitors traditionally has been limited to the chancellorship, a purely ceremonial position that since its resurrection in 1986 has been held by Warren Burger, Margaret Thatcher, Henry Kissinger, and Sandra Day O'Connor (the current chancellor), right-wing icons all.  It saddens me to predict that the next president of the College of William and Mary is likely to fall in the same category of wingnut warrior, someone who, like so many in the federal government today, lacks even the most basic credentials for the job, but who is a fervent, enthusiastic supporter of the neoconservative agenda.

Today is a sad day for me and for my gracious alma mater.  And while I know most who read this (if anyone does) have no horse in this race, I hope you at least can see that it is a sad day for free thought in America.

Star Chamber

Nay, that I mean to do. Is not this a lamentable thing, that of the skin of an innocent lamb should be made parchment? that parchment, being scribbled o'er, should undo a man? Some say the bee stings: but I say, 'tis the bee's wax; for I did but seal once to a thing, and I was never mine own man since. 

- CADE, King Henry VI Part 2, Act 4, Scene II

Guardian:

Military prosecutors today issued the first charges relating to the September 11 attacks, saying they would seek the death penalty against six detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, including the alleged mastermind of the plot, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

The Department of Defence, which is leading the prosecution through a controversial and much-criticised process of military commissions, issued 169 charges against the men that include conspiracy, murder in violation of the law or war, attacking civilians, destruction of property and terrorism.

Appended to the full list of the charges published on the Pentagon's website today were the names of all 2,973 victims of the outrage.

Prosecutors accused the men of collectively organising a "long-term, highly sophisticated plan to attack the United States".

The highest profile of the six, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, is alleged to have been the mastermind of 9/11 who, by his own words, was responsible "from A to Z".

The announcement of 9/11 charges brings to a head the simmering conflict over the legal treatment of the 275 detainees remaining in Guantanamo, and particularly the 15 so-called "high-value" suspected terrorists held there since September 2006.

Lawyers working on behalf of detainees have long criticised the commissions process — in which even the judges are military personnel — as unfair, unduly secret and against the US constitutional right to habeus corpus.

How sad that silly scribblings on paper are used to prevent justice...

ntodd

Dr King

AP:

Nearly 40 years after the assassination of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., some say his legacy is being frozen in a moment in time that ignores the full complexity of the man and his message.

"Everyone knows — even the smallest kid knows about Martin Luther King — can say his most famous moment was that 'I have a dream' speech," said Henry Louis Taylor Jr., professor of urban and regional planning at the University of Buffalo. "No one can go further than one sentence. All we know is that this guy had a dream. We don't know what that dream was."

King was working on anti-poverty and anti-war issues at the time of his death. He had spoken out against the Vietnam War and was in Memphis when he was killed in April 1968 in support of striking sanitation workers.

King had come a long way from the crowds who cheered him at the 1963 March on Washington, when he was introduced as "the moral leader of our nation" — and when he pronounced "I have a dream" on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.

By taking on issues outside segregation, he had lost the support of many newspapers and magazines, and his relationship with the White House had suffered, said Harvard Sitkoff, a professor of history at the University of New Hampshire who has written a recently published book on King.

"He was considered by many to be a pariah," Sitkoff said.

But he took on issues of poverty and militarism because he considered them vital "to make equality something real and not just racial brotherhood but equality in fact," Sitkoff said.

Just a few excerpts for now:

• Beyond Vietnam, April 1967 - "A time comes when silence is betrayal." That time has come for us in relation to Vietnam.
     
  The truth of these words is beyond doubt but the mission to which they call us is a most difficult one. Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government's policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one's own bosom and in the surrounding world. Moreover when the issues at hand seem as perplexed as they often do in the case of this dreadful conflict we are always on the verge of being mesmerized by uncertainty; but we must move on.
     
  Some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak. And we must rejoice as well, for surely this is the first time in our nation's history that a significant number of its religious leaders have chosen to move beyond the prophesying of smooth patriotism to the high grounds of a firm dissent based upon the mandates of conscience and the reading of history. Perhaps a new spirit is rising among us. If it is, let us trace its movement well and pray that our own inner being may be sensitive to its guidance, for we are deeply in need of a new way beyond the darkness that seems so close around us.
   

• Domestic Impact of the War, November 1967 - Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. And then there are those who said 'You're hurting the civil right movement.' One spoke to me one day and said, 'Now Dr. King, don't you think you're going to have to agree more with the Administration's policy. I understand that your position on Vietnam has hurt the budget of your organization. And many people who respected you in civil rights have lost that respect and don't you think that you're going to have to agree more with the Administration's policy to regain this.' And I had to answer by looking that person into the eye, and say 'I'm sorry sir but you don't know me. I'm not a consensus leader.' I do not determine what is right and wrong by looking at the budget of my organization or by taking a Gallup poll of the majority opinion. Ultimately a genuine leader is not a searcher for consensus but a molder of consensus.
     
  On some positions a coward has asked the question is it safe? Expediency asks the question, is it politic? Vanity asks the question, is it popular? But conscience asks the question is it right? And there come a time when one must take a position that is neither safe nor politic nor popular but he must take it because conscience tells him it is right.
   

• I've Been to the Mountaintop, April 1968 - Well, I don't know what will happen now. We've got some difficult days ahead. But it doesn't matter with me now. Because I've been to the mountaintop. And I don't mind. Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God's will. And He's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over. And I've seen the promised land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land. And I'm happy, tonight. I'm not worried about anything. I'm not fearing any man. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord.

More later...

ntodd

(x-posted at Dohiyi Mir)

Happy Birthday

1958: Arrested for "loitering" in Montgomery, Alabama

I couldn't let today pass without doing a post in honor of Martin Luther King, so here are a few excerpts from one of his lesser known speeches.

                                                                                                                                                                                                   

Freedom is never given to anybody, for the oppressor has you in domination because he plans to keep you there, and he never voluntarily gives it up. And that is where the strong resistance comes—privileged classes never give up their privileges without strong resistance.

If there had not been a Gandhi in India with all of his noble followers, India would have never been free. If there had not been an Nkrumah and his followers in Ghana, Ghana would still be a British colony. If there had not been abolitionists in America, both Negro and white, we might still stand today in the dungeons of slavery. And then because there have been, in every period, there are always those people in every period of human history who don’t mind getting their necks cut off, who don’t mind being persecuted and discriminated and kicked about, because they know that freedom is never given out, but it comes through the persistent and the continual agitation and revolt on the part of those who are caught in the system. Ghana teaches us that.

It says to us another thing. It reminds us of the fact that a nation or a people can break aloose from oppression without violence. Nkrumah says in the first two pages of his autobiography, which was published on the sixth of March—a great book which you ought to read—he said that he had studied the social systems of social philosophers and he started studying the life of Gandhi and his techniques. And he said that in the beginning he could not see how they could ever get aloose from colonialism without armed revolt, without armies and ammunition, rising up. Then he says after he continued to study Gandhi and continued to study this technique, he came to see that the only way was through nonviolent positive action. And he called his program "positive action." And it’s a beautiful thing, isn’t it? That here is a nation that is now free and it is free without rising up with arms and with ammunition; it is free through nonviolent means. 

The aftermath of nonviolence is the creation of the beloved community. The aftermath of nonviolence is redemption. The aftermath of nonviolence is reconciliation. The aftermaths of violence are emptiness and bitterness. This is the thing I’m concerned about. Let us fight passionately and unrelentingly for the goals of justice and peace, but let’s be sure that our hands are clean in this struggle. Let us never fight with falsehood and violence and hate and malice, but always fight with love, so that when the day comes that the walls of segregation have completely crumbled in Montgomery that we will be able to live with people as their brothers and sisters.

Then I can hear Isaiah again, because it has profound meaning to me, that somehow "every valley shall be exalted, and every hill shall be made low; the crooked places shall be made straight, and the rough places plain; and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together."

That’s the beauty of this thing: all flesh shall see it together. Not some from the heights of Park Street and others from the dungeons of slum areas. Not some from the pinnacles of the British Empire and some from the dark deserts of Africa. Not some from inordinate, superfluous wealth and others from abject, deadening poverty. Not some white and not some black, not some yellow and not some brown, but all flesh shall see it together. They shall see it from Montgomery. They shall see it from New York. They shall see it from Ghana. They shall see it from China.

For I can look out and see a great number, as John saw, marching into the great eternity, because God is working in this world, and at this hour, and at this moment. And God grant that we will get on board and start marching with God because we got orders now to break down the bondage and the walls of colonialism, exploitation, and imperialism, to break them down to the point that no man will trample over another man, but that all men will respect the dignity and worth of all human personality. And then we will be in Canaan’s freedom land.

Tertium Non Datur

You're either with us or against us.  You either are for the war or hate the troops.  You either support the President or are anti-American.

The media and many (generally GOP) politicians love the Law of The Excluded Middle.  It's a smidge better than the "have you stopped beating your wife" questions and allows them to frame issues to the advantage of whatever narrative they're peddling.  Witness this exchange during last night's Democratic "debate" on CNN (applause deleted for space):

BLITZER: Well, let me bring in Governor Richardson.  Governor Richardson...you've suggested cutting off military aid to Pakistan so long as the Pakistani leader doesn't take these steps to restore the constitution, take off his military uniform, end the national state of emergency and have free and fair elections.

But some are worried, including the opposition leader, Benazir Bhutto -- I spoke with her earlier this week -- that cutting off military aid to the Pakistan military could undermine U.S. national security.  This is a country that has nuclear weapons. It has a strong Taliban presence, an Al Qaida presence. Are you worried at all that as bad as President Musharraf might be, it could get a whole lot worse over there.

RICHARDSON: Well, of course I'm worried, but what happened with our Pakistan policy, we got our principles wrong. We forgot our principles, our principles that we said to Musharraf: You know, Musharraf, security is more important than human rights.

If I'm president, it's the other way around -- democracy and human rights. What I would do is, yes, I would condition the assistance to Musharraf. We give him $10 billion. Sixty percent of that is to his military.

I would say, President Musharraf, unless you restore the constitution; unless you have elections in January; unless you end the state of emergency; unless you allow Benazir Bhutto to run as a candidate; unless you put the supreme court back -- and something else we forgot.

RICHARDSON: He is supposed to go after terrorists on his border. And he has done a very weak job of doing that.  And you know, I would condition the assistance...

BLITZER: All right.

RICHARDSON: ... but here's another point -- no, but here's another point. Pakistan and the politics of Pakistan, Islamic parties get maybe 15 percent of the vote. I mean, so this threat that, oh, revolutionary elements are going to overtake him, if he has a fair election, and you take his party and Benazir Bhutto's party, and you get the military...

BLITZER: But...

RICHARDSON: ... I believe that moderate forces can win. So, if we're on the side of democracy and human rights, and we're on the side of Musharraf having elections, then U.S. interests are preserved, and the Pakistani people have a democracy.

BLITZER: Let me just be precise because I want to make sure we all -- I heard you correctly.  What you're saying, Governor, is that human rights, at times, are more important than American national security?

RICHARDSON: Yes...because I believe we need to find ways to say to the world that, you know, it's not just about what Halliburton wants in Iraq. It's also about...our values of freedom, equality. Our strength is not just military and economic.

BLITZER: All right.

RICHARDSON: Our strength as a nation is our values: equality...

BLITZER: All right.

RICHARDSON: ... freedom, democracy...

BLITZER: All right.

RICHARDSON: ... human rights.

BLITZER: Senator Edwards, I want you to weigh in.

RICHARDSON: That's why we are strong.

It's a fundamental mistake to think respecting human rights and protecting American security interests are mutually exclusive.  They are really two sides of the same coin, for what has ostensibly given the United States a great deal of power in the world has been its moral authority, now pretty much pissed away in long, bloody wars in which we explicitly state our objective is to have other nations and people bear the brunt of "collateral damage" so we don't have to suffer any more trauma at home.

As William Fullbright observed:

The attitude above all others which I feel sure is no longer valid is the arrogance of power, the tendency of great nations to equate power with virtue and major responsibilities with a universal mission. The dilemmas involved are preeminently American dilemmas, not because America has weaknesses that others do not have but because America is powerful as no nation has ever been before and the discrepancy between its power and the power of others appears to be increasing.
...
I do not question the power of our weapons and the efficiency of our logistics...Our handicap is well expressed in the pungent Chinese proverb: "In shallow waters dragons become the sport of shrimps."
...
If America has a service to perform in the world - and I believe it has - it is in large part the service of its own example. In our excessive involvement in the affairs of other countries, we are not only living off our assets and denying our own people the proper enjoyment of their resources; we are also denying the world the example of a free society enjoying its freedom to the fullest. This is regrettable indeed for a nation that aspires to teach democracy to other nations, because, as Burke said: "Example is the school of mankind, and they will learn at no other."
...
[W]e have the opportunity to serve as an example of democracy to the world by the way in which we run our own society; America, in the words of John Quincy Adams, should be "the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all" but "the champion and vindicator only of her own."

If we can bring ourselves so to act, we will have overcome the dangers of the arrogance of power. It will involve, no doubt, the loss of certain glories, but that seems a price worth paying for the probable rewards, which are the happiness of America and the peace of the world.

AS many people know, Kucinich is my man, er...hobbit during the primaries, but Richardson did a decent job with this question.  He at least recognized that human rights don't take a back seat to national security, though he still fell for the "one must be more important" false dichotomy.  It seem he implicitly understands the dangers posed by American arrogance of power.

ntodd

We Hold These Truths To Be Self-Evident

Following up on Tutu's statement the other day, the Guardian reports:

A UN general assembly committee has passed a draft resolution calling for an end to the death penalty in a debate that put the US in the same camp as Iran and Syria.

The resolution, passed 99-52 by the human rights committee yesterday, must still be submitted to the 192-member general assembly for a vote. If approved, it would be non-binding, but would carry moral weight.

Co-sponsored by EU states and 60 other countries, the resolution calls on those countries that have capital punishment to introduce a moratorium on executions and eventually abolish capital punishment.

Opponents of the resolution, including Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados and Syria, argued that it smacked of moral righteousness and touched on issues of national sovereignty.

The US, where a challenge to lethal injection has reached the supreme court, said capital punishment was not barred by international law.

Oh yes, we're all of a sudden concerned about what is allowed by international law.  How...quaint.

ntodd

The Doctrine Of Revenge

Desmond Tutu in The Guardian:

For most of the 20th century the majority of the world's nations used the death penalty. But, as the millennium approached, many societies questioned whether killing their citizens through the judicial system served a positive purpose. I am delighted that the death penalty is being removed from the globe. To a Christian whose belief system is rooted in forgiveness, the death penalty is unacceptable.

Either in law or in practice, 130 countries have now abolished the death penalty. And since 1990, 50 countries have abolished the death penalty for all crimes. Last year only 25 countries carried out executions.

So strong is the global sentiment against the death penalty - with some notable exceptions, such as the United States, China and Singapore - that a resolution calling for a moratorium on executions and the abolition of capital punishment is scheduled to go before the United Nations general assembly...

I have experienced the horror of being close to an execution. Not only during the apartheid era of South Africa, when the country had one of the highest execution rates in the world, but in other countries as well.
...
Retribution, resentment and revenge have left us with a world soaked in the blood of far too many of our sisters and brothers. The death penalty is part of that process. It says that to kill in certain circumstances is acceptable, and encourages the doctrine of revenge. If we are to break these cycles, we must remove government-sanctioned violence.

The time has come to abolish the death penalty worldwide. The case for abolition becomes more compelling with each passing year. Everywhere experience shows us that executions brutalise both those involved in the process and the society that carries them out. Nowhere has it been shown that the death penalty reduces crime or political violence. In country after country, it is used disproportionately against the poor or against racial or ethnic minorities. It is often used as a tool of political repression. It is imposed and inflicted arbitrarily. It is an irrevocable punishment, resulting inevitably in the execution of people innocent of any crime. It is a violation of fundamental human rights.

Amen.

Facts and figures on capital punishment from Amnesty International:

• 90 countries and territories have abolished the death penalty for all crimes;
• 11 countries have abolished the death penalty for all but exceptional crimes such as wartime crimes;
• 32 countries can be considered abolitionist in practice: they retain the death penalty in law but have not carried out any executions for the past 10 years or more and are believed to have a policy or established practice of not carrying out executions,
• making a total of 133 countries which have abolished the death penalty in law or practice.
• 64 other countries and territories retain and use the death penalty, but the number of countries which actually execute prisoners in any one year is much smaller.
• In 2006, 91 per cent of all known executions took place in China, Iran, Pakistan, Iraq, Sudan and the USA.
• Iran executed 177 people, Pakistan 82 and Iraq and Sudan each at least 65. There were 53 executions in 12 states in the USA.

It's a hell of a thing, giving the state a monopoly on violence and murder.

ntodd

Bearing The Burden

National Coalition for Homeless Veterans:

Who are homeless veterans?

The U. S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) says the nation's homeless veterans are mostly males (4 % are females). The vast majority are single, most come from poor, disadvantaged communities, 45% suffer from mental illness, and half have substance abuse problems. America’s homeless veterans have served in World War II, Korean War, Cold War, Vietnam War, Grenada, Panama, Lebanon, Operation Enduring Freedom (Afghanistan), Operation Iraqi Freedom, or the military’s anti-drug cultivation efforts in South America. Forty-seven percent of homeless veterans served during the Vietnam Era. More than 67% served our country for at least three years and 33% were stationed in a war zone.

How many homeless veterans are there?

Although accurate numbers are impossible to come by -- no one keeps national records on homeless veterans -- the VA estimates that nearly 200,000 veterans are homeless on any given night. And nearly 400,000 experience homelessness over the course of a year. Conservatively, one out of every three homeless men who is sleeping in a doorway, alley or box in our cities and rural communities has put on a uniform and served this country. According to the National Survey of Homeless Assistance Providers and Clients (U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness and the Urban Institute, 1999), veterans account for 23% of all homeless people in America.

Why are veterans homeless?

In addition to the complex set of factors affecting all homelessness -- extreme shortage of affordable housing, livable income, and access to health care -- a large number of displaced and at-risk veterans live with lingering effects of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and substance abuse, compounded by a lack of family and social support networks.

A top priority is secure, safe, clean housing that offers a supportive environment which is free of drugs and alcohol.

Veterans aren't the only ones who defend our nation and civil liberties, nor are they the only people going through crisis and living on the streets.  But with tomorrow being Veteran's Day, you might want to donate to NCHV--more local readers could consider supporting United Veterans of America, who provide housing and other services in MA for struggling vets, or Friends of Veterans, who offer assistance to vets in VT and NH.

ntodd

Hullaballoo from the Land of Mangos

I attended the antiwar march in New York yesterday, and made it almost ¾ of the way before succumbing to the rain, and popping into the Acme Bar for a bite to eat.

   Then I saw this story about landless peasants in India, marching for weeks on end, just for their rights to land and water, enough to survive.  And I feel so unworthy, but also so inspired by their example. This is a lesson in humility from some people who may not even know how to read and write, but we are in political organizing kindergarden compared to them. 

They have come from all across this vast country, marching in long lines every day for nearly four weeks - some 25,000 tribal people and landless labourers, bringing their battle to the heart of India's capital.

Flags wave and drums are beaten. Everyone has a story to tell. Either they have lost land to corrupt politicians and new industrial zones, or they have never had any land in the first place, and they struggle to survive.

"The government is giving land to big companies for factories," says Juma Rao, from Gwalior "So why can't they give a little bit to us? We're here to claim our rights."

The march is remarkably disciplined - people are divided into groups of 100 for eating, for walking, and for chanting.

Some carry banners, others hold bows and arrows. More than a few look exhausted. All in all, it is an extraordinary sight.

"I'm hopeful that we will achieve something," says Ramesh Sharma, who has been coordinating the political campaign.

"The political reaction has been pretty positive. And now we have a new slogan - if you're not ready to give us land, then give us jail."

I love their slogan! 

It also got me thinking about the various ways that protest marches/walks can make an impression.

1) by the large number of participants.

2) by frequency. You have a small group, like the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo, who turned out year after year.

3) by the distance/duration of the march.

The Indian marchers are impressive by their numbers, and also the distance they were willing to travel.  The marchers have now arrived in Delhi and tomorrow the main protest event will be taking place.  I am saying a prayer for their success.

I don’t have a prescription about how we can apply their tactics to our peace movement, but it certainly is food for thought. 

Pretty Soon You're Talking About Real Money

I've been following the Bush adminstration's fuzzy math and true costs of the war since the beginning, so of course this caught my eye:

The cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could total $2.4 trillion through the next decade, or nearly $8,000 per man, woman and child in the country, according to a Congressional Budget Office estimate scheduled for release Wednesday.

A previous CBO estimate put the wars' costs at more than $1.6 trillion. This one adds $705 billion in interest, taking into account that the conflicts are being funded with borrowed money.

Pete Stark did an admirable job linking these astronomical costs of death and destruction to our alleged inability to preserve life and care for children with SCHIP.  When you consider the Right's canard that people making $83K should be able to make choices and afford healthcare for their kids, they are correct.  "Should" being the operative word.

When you're stealing $8000 from each person in this country, those families lose a significant chunk of all that "discretionary" income they're supposed to be investing in their kids' insurance.

ntodd

Sometimes You Need A Miracle

Scout tells us about this story:

On a fresh late-summer's afternoon of the 22nd of September, 2007, Miracle Lewis came down to New Orleans to see her newly restored room. Miracle's family was rebuilding the home after the house had been filled with ten feet of water and damaged by a massive tree. After being forced out by the storm to Port Allen, LA, and on to Houston, TX, her family had made it a little closer to their goal of returning to their roots by finding temporary-stay housing in Baton Rouge. The gleeful approval in Miracle's eyes after seeing her room on this day, however, was truly a milestone on the soon-to-be-realized path of bringing the family back home.

Early the next morning, however, a cruel turn of events quickly devastated their dreams. Some time during those early morning hours someone had parked a stolen vehicle their backyard, removed the tires, and set the car on fire to presumably destroy any evidence linking the perpetrator to the vehicle. The resulting inferno engulfed the the home, and burned it entirely to the ground. A firefighter was quoted as saying that "the flames were seen from a mile away, that's how intense it was." Hours before, the house was 80 percent complete, and the electricity was scheduled to be turned on the coming Monday. All that remained now was ash.

Miracle, her mother Kellie, and six brothers and sisters have all called the historic Holy Cross neighborhood in New Orleans home for nearly ten years. Her mother had worked their way out of the St. Bernard Housing Project that the family had moved into following the loss of her husband in a motor cycle accident, to become a homeowner in this neighborhood. Determined to give her children the best possible options, she kept them out of trouble, in school and church-related activities, and close to home. After the storm, her children were having a hard time integrating into their new schools, and Kellie quickly realized the need to return her family to the place that defined their being, to New Orleans. This unsettling tragedy severely jeopardized this noble hope.

All is not lost, however. A concerned group of family, friends, and public officials are determined not to let this family's self-evident courage and determination to return to their home base to be irreparably devastated, and plea for you to help them realize their dream of bringing Miracle home.

After losing their home originally in Hurricane Katrina the Joseph family put $138,000 which they received from a Road Home grant towards rebuilding their home and life. This investment was tragically lost in the fire, and unfortunately the maximum they can receive from their insurance to rebuild their home a second time is $12,000. As a consequence, the Joseph family will not have the means to rebuild their house.

A rebuilding fund has been established by State Representative Charmaine Marchand at Capital One that is specifically restricted for use only in reconstruction.

Donations can be made HERE

ntodd

A Life Well Lived

It's difficult to capture in a few hundred words the nature and goodness of a life like the one Ernie Marx lived. But the knowledge he dispensed and the friends he left behind will testify to the value of his 81 years.

John Donne noted centuries ago that "any man's death diminishes" the rest of us. If that is a verity — and it surely is — then Ernie Marx's death in early July marked a great loss not just for those in Louisville who came to know him, but for those who would have profited by knowing him in the future.

A lot has been said and written in local and national media about the drama and tragedy this Holocaust survivor encountered when that horror erupted years ago. Marx was arrested and detained on "Kristallnacht" — the "night of broken glass" — that marked the beginning of the Nazi attempt to exterminate the Jews. That was Nov. 9, 1938 and Marx, then just 13 years old, and his family were among the nearly 20,000 Jews imprisoned by Nazi storm troopers that night.

His father was the rabbi at a synagogue near Frankfurt, Germany, when the violence erupted. The synagogue was burned, one of 200 destroyed on that one night, and the rabbi later died along with other members of the Marx family in the ovens at Auschwitz.

Ernie Marx spent two years in Nazi prisons, at first in the infamous Dachau and later at a less-well-known camp in France. He escaped from the French camp and as a 15-year-old boy joined the French Resistance.

It all sounds like a movie, but the sadness in Marx's eyes as he recounted those events in later years revealed the reality of it all. It was a reality that Marx wanted to ensure was never forgotten. And therein lies the real gift Ernie Marx gave to the rest of us — especially to his "buddies," the students in Catholic schools in his adopted home of Louisville, Ky.

For decades after he came to the U.S., Marx didn't talk about the Holocaust or the personal tragedy that hatred and bigotry visited on his family and his life. But about a quarter-century ago, he decided that his story needed telling, that the Holocaust was such an evil, such a testimony to darkness that those who'd experienced it should educate those who hadn't.

Ernie Marx dedicated his life to making sure young people would know the truth about the Shoah. He wanted to shine the light of knowledge on that nightmare so young people — and adults — would make certain it would never happen again.

Over the years, this slight wisp of a man accompanied nearly 80 groups of school children to Washington, D.C., to visit the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. There he would translate German inscriptions, read Scripture and poetry, lead prayers — and cry.

"I can't keep from it, every time," he told me back in 2005. "No one who knows what happened can keep from crying. But the tears will also bring knowledge of the truth so we can keep hatred from getting into our hearts ever again.

Back in 1998, the Vatican's Pontifical Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews released a document called "We Remember: A Reflection on the Shoah." At the time of the document's release, Pope John Paul II said it was intended to "help heal the wounds of past misunderstandings and injustices" present in the relationship between Jews and Catholics.

"May the Lord of history guide the efforts of Catholics and Jews and all men and women of good will," the pope said, "as they work together for a world of true respect for the life and dignity of every human being."

That's what Ernie Marx worked for, too. That's why he reached out to Catholic school children, especially those at Louisville's St. Francis of Assisi School. The students there made Marx an honorary graduate in 2005; he wore a gown and marched down the aisle with the rest of the graduating class of 8th graders that spring night, his face beaming right along with the rest of his fellow "graduates."

It made him pround, he said. And now that he has left us, those fortunate enough to have met and known Ernie Marx can also say they are proud — proud to have known this bearer of the truth.

Glenn

Maladjustment

Dr King:

I must honestly say to you tonight my friends that there are some things in our world, there are some things in our nation to which I’m proud to be maladjusted, to which I call upon all men of goodwill to be maladjusted until the good society is realized.

I must honestly say to you that I never intend to adjust myself to segregation and discrimination. I never intend to become adjusted to religious bigotry. I never intend to adjust myself to economic conditions that will take necessities from the many to give luxuries to the few. I never intend to adjust myself to the madness of militarism and the self defeating effects of physical violence.

And I say to you that I am absolutely convinced that maybe the world is in need for the formation of a new organization: "The International Association for the Advancement of Creative Maladjustment" -- men and women who will be as maladjusted as the prophet Amos who in the midst of the injustices of his day would cry out in words that echo across the centuries: “Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream;” as maladjusted as Abraham Lincoln who had the vision to see that this nation could not survive half slave and half free; as maladjusted as Thomas Jefferson who in the midst of an age amazingly adjusted to slavery would etch across the pages of history words lifted to cosmic proportions: “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights and that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness;” as maladjusted as Jesus of Nazareth that said to the men and women of his day: “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, pray for them that despitefully use you.”

And through such maladjustment we will be able to emerge from the bleak and desolate midnight of man’s inhumanity to man into the bright and glittering daybreak of freedom and justice.

ntodd

Lunch With Tutu

This post is much later than I thought my first post would be & it is not the topic that I thought I would use, but so life goes.

Friday Bishop & Mrs. Tutu joined us for lunch --- it was pretty awesome!

He was speaking in Kalamazoo, via the Fetzer Institute -- the president told him about us & he wanted to visit, but it all had to be secret -- after guests had left & before others arrived (he normally needs a bodyguard when he travels) -- at my suggestion we combined the prayer services of Sext & None & then we seated the president of Fetzer & his wife & Bishop & Mrs Tutu at the monks' table & had a talking lunch (normally we eat in silence while someone reads aloud -- currently Matthew Stewart's "The Courtier and the Heretic: Spinoza, Leibnitz and the Fate of God in the Modern World"). Bishop Tutu was seated between me & the abbot. He said that the monastery was very beautiful. We talked about what has happened in South Africa & what is happening in the World Wide Anglican Communion (basically the threat of schism over gay rights). He likes peanut butter. He blessed our refectory cross (which we also use in church for the liturgy on Good Friday) in Xhosa (a "click" language -- some of us remember Miriam Makeba singing "The Click Song" on The Ed Sullivan Show?) -- we were all exhausted & slept much of the afternoon.

I hope they come again (& they just might -- this is not the first time he has spoken in the area -- was in Sturgis, Michigan a few years ago -- obviously he was well received).

Kalamazoo Gazette online:
http://www.mlive.com/news/kzgazette/index.ssf?/base/news-24/118658496825120.xml&coll=7
or
http://tinyurl.com/2eu4wk

For those of you who don't know who Bishop Tutu is (shame on you):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desmond_Tutu

Some memorable quotations:
http://www.southafrica.to/people/Quotes/DesmondTutu/DesmondTutu.htm
(Two examples)

"People who call pacifists weak, that's not the case. Actually you go into confrontation. You confront violent people without weapons and your confrontation draws out their violence as it did in Birmingham with the dogs as it did in South Africa with the dogs. And that worked beautifully in Capetown in in those few months. It was called the Defiance Campaign. The police violence, which was normally confined to black townships, was exported into the city. There was a particular evening, in which the Anglican Cathedral went to a judge to seek an order to stop the police from beating people up indiscriminately on the streets. Well, the police lawyer had considerable difficulty persuading the judge not to grant the order when the judges own clerk had been beaten up on the way to court to hear the case that evening."

"It was fairly straightforward that one of the things we had to do was to seek to establish a moral position. The second was maintaining the morale of our people. Telling our people 'your cause is a just cause.' This is, in fact, a moral universe. We're going to win."

Miriam Makeba:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miriam_Makeba

I think Tutu is one of our living saints & highly recommend that if any of you has a chance to see him speak that you take it. I don't think you will regret it!

Stand For Peace And Justice

Stand for Peace and Justice

"I stand for peace and justice.

I stand for democracy and autonomy. I don't think the U.S. or any other country should ignore the popular will and violate and weaken international law, seeking to bully and bribe votes in the Security Council.

I stand for internationalism. I oppose any nation spreading an ever expanding network of military bases around the world and producing an arsenal unparalleled in the world.

I stand for equity. I don't think the U.S. or any other country should seek empire. I don't think the U.S. ought to control Middle Eastern oil on behalf of U.S. corporations and as a wedge to gain political control over other countries.

I stand for freedom. I oppose brutal regimes in Iraq and elsewhere but I also oppose the new doctrine of "preventive war," which guarantees permanent and very dangerous conflict, and is the reason why the U.S. is now regarded as the major threat to peace in much of the world. I stand for a democratic foreign policy that supports popular opposition to imperialism, dictatorship, and political fundamentalism in all its forms.

I stand for solidarity. I stand for and with all the poor and the excluded. Despite massive disinformation millions oppose unjust, illegal, immoral war, and I want to add my voice to theirs. I stand with moral leaders all over the world, with world labor, and with the huge majority of the populations of countries throughout the world.

I stand for diversity. I stand for an end to racism directed against immigrants and people of color. I stand for an end to repression at home and abroad.

I stand for peace. I stand against this war and against the conditions, mentalities, and institutions that breed and nurture war and injustice.

I stand for sustainability. I stand against the destruction of forests, soil, water, environmental resources, and biodiversity on which all life depends.

I stand for justice. I stand against economic, political, and cultural institutions that promote a rat race mentality, huge economic and power inequalities, corporate domination even unto sweatshop and slave labor, racism, and gender and sexual hierarchies.

I stand for a policy that redirects the money used for war and military spending to provide healthcare, education, housing, and jobs.

I stand for a world whose political, economic, and social institutions foster solidarity, promote equity, maximize participation, celebrate diversity, and encourage full democracy.

I stand for peace and justice and, more, I pledge to work for peace and justice."

~Originally circulated by Z magazine~

Afghan women journalists targeted; Women for Afghan Women speak out

This is cross-posted from WIMN's Voices: The Group Blog on Women, Media, AND... (I'd love it if you click on over there, nose around a bit...)

On the heels of Afghan feminist parliamentarian Malalia Joya’s being suspended from the Afghan parliament and targeted with death threats, as WIMN’s Voices blogger Sonali Kolhatkar wrote last month, the Associated Press reported yesterday that Afghan women journalists are also facing threats of violence and murder.AP’s Alisa Tang writes:

In an article headlined, “Afghan women journalists targeted,” the

Farida Nekzad began receiving menacing calls on her cell phone a half hour after arriving at the funeral of a fellow female journalist assassinated by gunmen.

“‘Daughter of America! We will kill you, just like we killed her,’” she quoted the man on the phone as saying as she stood near the maimed body of Zakia Zaki, the owner of a radio station north of Kabul.

Part of Zaki’s face was blown away by three attackers who entered her home and shot her seven times with pistol and automatic rifle fire in front of her 8-year-old son this month.

“‘At least people can recognize her from one side of her face. We will shoot your face, and nobody will recognize you,’” Nekzad quoted the caller as saying before she hung up on him.

Noting that “this month has seen a rising number of attempts to quash these advances with threats and violence,” the AP seeks explanation from Manizha Naderi, director of the international women’s human rights group Women for Afghan Women, and long time ally with Women In Media & News (WIMN has previously partnered with WAW to create the Afghan Women’s Media Organizing Project, and WAW’s co-founder, Sunita Mehta, is a member of WIMN’s board of directors). Within the past year, Naderi relocated from WAW’s home base of Queens, NY, where she worked with Afghan American and Afghan immigrant women, to return to her native country in order to help women organize for their own rights in Afghanistan.

She told the A.P.:

Manizha Naderi, director of the rights group Women for Afghan Women, believes the recent attacks reflect a Taliban resurgence and spike in militant violence across the country. Afghan women in general, and journalists in particular, are being targeted because of their high profiles.

“They want to make news, and targeting the journalists is a way to make news,” Naderi said. “They’re showing the world, ‘We’re here and we’re still in charge of this country.’”

The rest of the A.P.’s story illuminates a disturbing picture of the daily risks facing Afghan women working to report the brutal realities of life that persist for women whom the U.S. media claims the U.S. military has “liberated”:

Women have played a large role in the country’s media advances the past six years, and several women work on TV news programs as reporters and newscasters. They are typically modestly dressed, with their hair and necklines carefully hidden under scarves.

Still, some Afghans think it is inappropriate for women to appear before the public.

When Afghans talk about Shaima Rezayee, a popular music video show host shot to death in 2005, they speak in hushed tones — about the racy, un-Islamic way she dressed and behaved on TV, as if this justified her death.

And it appears Zaki may have been targeted because of her radio programming.

The radio host had been critical of warlords who warned her to change the programming on her station. Two suspects being held for her slaying are connected with the militant group Hezb-e-Islami, officials said.

In a second killing of a female journalist this month, Shokiba Sanga Amaaj, a newscaster for private Shamshad TV, was shot in her home in Kabul on June 1. Two family friends have been detained in the case.

Authorities say they do not know the motive for the killings of Zaki or Amaaj.

Threats in this war-torn and corrupt country are not uncommon.

Nekzad, 29, who works for the news agency Pajhwok Afghan News, forwarded an e-mail to an Associated Press journalist that warned her, “We will kill you as soon as possible, INSHA ALLAH” — if God wills it.

The message, dated June 8, accused her of sexual impropriety and of working for NATO. It was signed “Habib from Hezb-e-Islami,” the same militant group authorities suspect in Zaki’s death. The authenticity of the e-mail could not be verified.

Nekzad said Afghans began paying attention to her fears only after she told foreign journalists, who took the dangers she faced seriously. She said she wondered if her own role as a journalist could somehow have saved Zaki.

A year ago, Nekzad assigned a reporter to interview Zaki about death threats she had received. Zaki later decided against airing the story, so the reporter scrapped it and erased the videotape.

“If it were published, maybe the international community would have taken it more seriously, but after her death, it has no meaning,” Nekzad said. “Nobody paid attention, not even the international community or the government.”

Meanwhile, Nekzad has begun changing her work schedule each day so potential attackers cannot track her routine. She sleeps in a different room of her house every night. She goes without sleep for days, and her speech is punctuated by a cough that she says is caused by stress.

“Maybe they will kill me after six months, after six days, after six minutes,” she said. “We know that one day we will leave this world, but if you are informed that you will be killed, it is very, very bad. Every second kills you.”

Diary of "Polish Anne Frank" found - will journalists draw connections to contemporary girls' experiences of war?

On WIMN's Voices today, I posted about the recent discovery of a Holocaust diary of a Polish Jewish girl, Rutka Laskier, who reporters are calling "The Polish Anne Frank." According to the A.P., the diary  "chronicl[es] the horrors she witnessed in a Jewish ghetto — at one point watching a Nazi soldier tear a Jewish baby away from his mother and kill him with his bare hands.”

In my WIMN's Voices post, I explain why, as a Jewish woman of a Polish immigrant father and grandparents, this diary strikes a deep chord with me. I also ask some key questions about whether media will draw any connections between Rutka's experience and the experiences of girls in Darfur, Iraq, Afghanistan... or whether we'll have to wait another 60 years for media to report the voices and concerns of girls like Rutka suffering through contemporary atrocities which, in some cases (such as the Iraq war) we have the power to prevent.

I hope you'll read the post and share your comments with me at WIMN's Voices.

--Jennifer L. Pozner

Memorial Day musings on women, media and peace activism

I've posted a rather in-depth entry on women, media and peace activism to the women's media analysis group blog I manage (WIMN's Voices). I woke up today, the day after Memorial Day, to an Associated Press article about Cindy Sheehan leaving the anti-war movement. “‘It’s up to you now’: Sheehan quits,” the headline blared, noting that "she’s done being the public face of the movement.”

The AP piece quotes from Sheehan’s statement (as I do below) about the smears and attacks she’s been forced to endure, yet instead of seeking commentary from any peace movement activist or spokesperson who could contextualize the meaning or impact of Sheehan’s decision, the newswire gives two good-riddance paragraphs to pro-war opponents so they could get in one last dig.

To me, Sheehan’s decision to back away from the media spotlight should direct our attention to the impact of media coverage on issues of war and peace, activism and apathy, and, of course, on women in the public eye. WIMN’s Voices is a media criticism blog, so my post there today focuses on what Sheehan’s reluctant resignation means about the media landscape. The first issue is that Sheehan didn’t choose to be “the face” of the anti-war movement. There are some who have, and who are damn good at it, but who haven’t been able to generate the firestorm of coverage Sheehan has. Sheehan’s protest came from a place of deep grief and anger about the death of her soldier son — her motivation was to get justice for her son by ending the war she felt took his life for false reasons, not to become America’s leading voice for peace. But media like a sexy story, and diverse, lifelong activists from MADRE, the international women’s human rights group that has been advocating an end to war in Iraq while also providing desperately needed humanitarian aid there as well as important research and commentary about the devastation that U.S. invasion has wrecked on Iraqi women — their work is complicated, their political engagement long-term and intellectually developed — but those attributes that make them successful as advocates? Decidedly unsexy to the media gatekeepers, who much preferred to elevate Sheehan as a sort of EveryMom whose political anger was rooted in love for her fallen hero son, a woman whose anti-war voice they thought was finally worth listening to.

Problem is, they hadn’t been listening to women’s anti-war voices before Casey Sheehan was killed...

To read more about media, women and peace activism, related to Cindy Sheehan -- and also to Stacy Bannerman, a military wife, vocal advocate with Military Families for Peace, and author of When The War Came Home: The Inside Story of Reservists and the Families They Leave Behind, then...

...read my full post at WIMN's Voices, the group blog of Women In Media & News, the women's media analysis, education and advocacy group.

--Jennifer L. Pozner

Where's Your Hat?

My friend Morgan Brown notes:

Heard a report today from someone in Burlington whom I have nothing but the deepest of respect for that the police are once again hassling people who are living homeless in encampments in the area, forcing them to move on (to where they are supposed to live, I have not a clue), something I find very disheartening.

Nothing like harassment to respect human dignity.  Morgan continues:

When a person hangs their hat someplace temporarily, are they no longer considered truly homeless even if, in fact, it is not really their home?

Being homeless myself, I know well how the smallest items of hope are always held onto very tightly.

Just like one's own sense of dignity, self-respect, pride -- which are equally cherished and held close, such hope can often prove extremely useful and even vital in the long journey being undertaken just in managing to survive as well as living independently.

These core parts of one's self can also be key to what is needed to help find, obtain and then move into some form of safe, decent and affordable housing of one's own; which is an essential part of what is needed to end homelessness.

As near as it may be to my becoming housed once again, after being homeless in its various forms for nearly five years [ed note: this section was originally written in 2002] this time around, one would think nothing could easily stand in my way.

Yet, there are many moments when it seems too daunting and so very far away to ever be accomplished on one's own.

There are those days, and even weeks, which do not seem to pass by without a severe and persistent need to find and renew hope, inner strength as well as faith in everything.

Almost constantly, in many different ways, I remind myself that whatever the circumstances or, how they are experienced and felt, there are always other ways of thinking about them and other methods of accomplishing something when it is waited for a little while longer and, what is sought is looked for even deeper than we may believe is possible and, the support needed to do so is received.

Just as crucial though, the value of the smallest or seemingly least important thing to provide inspiration should never be underestimated; often found in what we may perceive to be the most unlikely of places or persons, especially when it is needed the most.

These are among the things which often help me to never, ever, give up on anything or anybody -- and, most importantly, never on myself.

How much support could we on an individual and societal level could we offer Morgan and his friends if we weren't spending trillions of dollars creating millions of homeless Iraqis?  Have we given up on ourselves as a once great and moral nation--or was that always just a myth?

ntodd