From the Editor
This newsletter is published by the AIUSA Middle East Coordination Group (the country specialists) for all the members of the AI local, student and MERAN groups that work on Action files , MERAN actions, or any other Amnesty work in the Middle East. We will feature regional background, news, and action. We hope this will help create a sense of community, the “big picture”, and that we are all in this together, as many of the issues and themes overlap the entire Middle East. We would also like the members to be able to share their successes, events, ideas with everyone. So, please email me and they will be in the next newsletter!
Pat Gerencser, Editor- pgerencser@igc
Israel/OPT: Forty years of occupation -- no security without basic rights
On the eve of the 40th anniversary of Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, Amnesty International today called on the Israeli authorities to end the land-grabbing, blockades and other violations of international law carried out under the occupation. These have resulted in widespread human rights abuses and have also failed to bring security to the Israeli and Palestinian civilian populations.A 45-page report published today, Enduring Occupation: Palestinian under siege in the West Bank, illustrates the devastating impact of four decades of Israeli military occupation. The report documents the relentless expansion of unlawful settlements on occupied land that deprives the Palestinian population of crucial resources and documents a plethora of measures that confine Palestinians to fragmented enclaves and hinder their access to work, health and education facilities. These measures include a 700km fence/wall, more than 500 checkpoints and blockades, and a complicated system of permits."Palestinians living in the West Bank are blocked at every turn. This is not simply an inconvenience -- it can be a matter of life or death. It is unacceptable that women in labour, sick children, or victims of accidents on their way to hospital should be forced to take long detours and face delays which can cost them their lives," said Malcolm Smart, Director for Amnesty International's Middle East and North Africa Programme."International action is urgently needed to address the widespread human rights abuses being committed under the occupation, and which are fuelling resentment and despair among a predominantly young and increasingly radicalized Palestinian population," said Malcolm Smart. "For forty years, the international community has failed adequately to address the Israeli-Palestinian problem; it cannot, must not, wait another forty years to do so."Amnesty International is calling for the urgent deployment of an effective international human rights monitoring mechanism to monitor compliance by both parties, Israeli and Palestinian, with their obligations under international law. This must be backed up with a commitment to investigate and prosecute, through the exercise of universal jurisdiction, those who commit war crimes or other crimes under international law."We do not underestimate the difficulties of establishing such an independent monitoring system, whether by the UN or another appropriate body, but it is vital that the international community should become more engaged in finding a solution, and in holding the parties to their obligations under international law," said Malcolm Smart.In its report, Amnesty International acknowledges Israel’s legitimate security concerns and the government’s obligation to protect the population within its borders, but says this does not justify blatant violations of international law, such as construction of much of the fence/wall inside the West Bank on Palestinian land."If the intention was simply to prevent Palestinian suicide bombers from entering Israel, the barrier would be located on the Green Line, the border between Israel and the West Bank," said Malcolm Smart. "Yet, the reality is that most of it is being built on Palestinian land, in defiance of the International Court of Justice, and is separating Palestinian towns and villages in the West Bank."In addition to the fence/wall, the movement of Palestinians is several constrained by a host of other restrictions, including over 500 checkpoints and blockades, and a network of roads for Israeli settlers to use and off-limits to Palestinians. The barrier, together with these roads and roadblocks, benefit continuously expanding but unlawful Israeli settlements and make them territorially contiguous with Israel."Harsh Israeli restrictions have caused the virtual collapse of the Palestinian economy and are exacerbating the increasingly fragile conditions in which Palestinians live and work -- resulting in levels of despair, poverty and food insecurity never before seen in the Occupied Palestinian Territories," said Malcolm Smart."Most Palestinians are now relying on aid for subsistence, with families reducing the quality and quantity of the food they consume and selling assets essential for their livelihoods."Amnesty International is calling on the Israeli authorities to:* lift the regime of blockades and restrictions on Palestinians in the OPT, which constitute collective punishment, and ensure that restrictions imposed in response to specific security threats only target the individuals concerned -- not entire communities.* halt the construction of the fence/wall inside the West Bank, and remove the sections already built there;* cease the construction or expansion of Israeli settlements and related infrastructure in the OPT as a first step towards removing Israeli settlements and "outposts";* cancel all demolition orders on homes in the OPT, and provide reparation to Palestinians whose homes and properties have already been destroyed.The organization is also reiterating its call on Palestinian armed groups to end immediately attacks on civilians and on the Palestinian Authority (PA) to take effective action to stop and prevent such attacks and bring to justice those responsible. To see a full copy of the report, please go to http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engmde150332007
Egypt Closes Door on AI Trial Observers
The Egyptian government June 3 refused to allow human rights groups to observe the military trial of 33 leading members of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, undercutting the government's claims that civilians will have a fair trial before military courts, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch said today. Along with mass arrests of political opponents and democratic activists in the days preceding the June shura legislative council elections, the closing of the military court trials is indication that human rights are moving in the wrong direction in Egypt.Amnesty International, the Arab Commission for Human Rights, the Egyptian Organization for Human Rights, and Human Rights Watch had sent observers to monitor the trial of 33 leading members of the Brotherhood. None of the groups was allowed to attend. Among the accused is Khairat al-Shatir, the organization's deputy supreme guide, who was arrested on December 14, 2006, along with 16 other prominent Muslim Brotherhood members in predawn raids. They were subsequently charged with membership in a banned organization, providing students with weapons and military training. On January 29, 2007, a Cairo criminal court dismissed all charges against al-Shatir and his co-defendants and ordered their immediate release. Security forces re-arrested the men moments after the ruling, and on February 4, President Hosni Mubarak, ignoring the court's verdict, ordered the cases, and those of 23 other alleged members of the Brotherhood, transferred to a military court. On May 8, a Cairo administrative court ruled that President Mubarak's order was invalid, but on May 14, the Supreme Administrative court reversed that decision after the government appealed. After the June 3 session, the court adjourned until July 15. "Twelve years ago the court granted me unfettered access when I observed the military trial of senior members of the Muslim Brotherhood," said Palestinian lawyer Anis Kassim, Amnesty International's senior trial observer. "I am extremely disappointed in the government's attitude this time." Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch said that trying civilians before Egyptian military courts flouts international standards for fair trials.
TAKE ACTION: Amnesty International Member Fighting Forcible Return and Likely Torture in Egypt
Time is running out for Amnesty International member Sameh Khouzam. Khouzam, an Egyptian native who faces forcible return to Egypt, has received a 12-day stay of deportation. This is due to expire on 18 June, leaving him at risk of torture or ill-treatment if he is then returned to Egypt.
Sameh Khouzam, who is currently a member of the AIUSA chapter in York, Pa., fled Egypt in 1998 after reportedly being tortured and ill-treated by the Egyptian police because of his Coptic Christian religious beliefs. He alleges that he and his family had been subjected to a sustained campaign of intimidation and abuse on account of his refusal to convert to Islam. On one occasion in 1997 he alleges that he was beaten and sexually abused in a police station. The Egyptian authorities have reportedly told the US State Department that he is wanted in Egypt on a murder charge.
Sameh Khouzam was held in US immigration detention until February 2006, when he was released on condition that he report regularly to the immigration authorities. However on 29 May 2007, he was taken into custody again and told that he could be returned to Egypt within days. He is believed to have received a letter from the US Department of Homeland Security stating that it had received diplomatic assurances from the Egyptian authorities that he would not be tortured on his return.
Amnesty International does not take a position on the murder charges. What does concern us is that a U.S. court ruling staying his deportation because of the torture concerns has been quietly overruled by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security without any public process. What does concern us is that the decision was based on diplomatic assurances from the Egyptian government that he wouldn't be tortured, assurances that Amnesty's documentation and the Department of State's own reports indicate can't be trusted. What concerns us is international and U.S. law says a prisoner cannot be returned to a country where it is likely he will be tortured.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Please send appeals to arrive as quickly as possible:
- welcoming the stay of deportation granted to Egyptian national Sameh Khouzam, but expressing continued concern that he may face torture or ill-treatment if returned to Egypt when the current order expires on 18 June;
- calling on the US authorities to halt his deportation;
- urging them not to rely on diplomatic assurances when deciding whether a person is at risk of torture or ill treatment if transferred to another country;
- calling on them to reaffirm the absolute nature of the obligation under international law not to transfer any person to a country where there are substantial grounds for believing that he or she would be in danger of being subjected to torture or other ill-treatment.
APPEALS TO:
The Honorable Condoleezza Rice
Secretary of State
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street, N.W.
Washington DC 20520, USA
Fax: 1 202 261 8577
E-mail: secretary@state.gov
Salutation: Dear Secretary of State
The Honorable Michael Chertoff
Secretary of Homeland Security
US Department of Homeland Security
Washington DC 20528, USA
Fax: 1 202 456 2461
Salutation: Dear Secretary Chertoff
Women in Iran have been at the forefront of the human rights movement in that country, advocating on a broad spectrum of issues, such as for reforms in the legal system that would revise provisions that hamper women’s rights, for an end to execution by stoning, and for better pay and working conditions for teachers and others. Although their advocacy has consisted of peaceful activities such as participating in non-violent demonstrations and circulating petitions, they have been met with harsh repression from the Iranian government, as part of a recent pervasive crackdown on a wide range of activists, who have suffered arrest, detention, torture and ill-treatment, imposition of prison sentences and fines. As one activist Jila Baniyaghoub told the Associated Press, over the past year, the Iranian security forces have "become more and more aggressive even as women's actions have become more peaceful and more tame.”
Amnesty International is concerned that Minister of Intelligence Gholam Hossein Mohseni Ejeie has publicly accused the Iranian women’s movement and student activists of being part of an enemy conspiracy for a “soft subversion” of the Iranian government on 10 April 2007. Despite the repressive conditions and real threats to their safety, fearless women activists persevere in their human rights work. Amnesty International has been working to support the many initiatives taken by these brave Iranian women.
One campaign spearheaded by Iranian women is the “Campaign for Equality,” also known as the “Million Signatures Campaign,” which seeks to reform the Iranian legal system. Although women in Iran have achieved success in education and in many professions—the majority of university students in Iran, for instance, are women—they are subject to discriminatory family laws involving divorce, inheritance and custody rights. Women activists launched the campaign in August 2006 and have been circulating petitions with the goal of collecting at least a million signatures calling for an end to these inequitable laws. Their campaign involves going door to door and talking to other women in their homes, in schools and universities and in factories. They have also held peaceful demonstrations and have been active on the Internet, setting up a number of Web sites dedicated to women's issues. Amnesty International is supporting this campaign and issued a joint statement calling for equal rights for women in Iran on International Women's Day on 7 March 2007 with Iranian lawyer and prominent human rights activist Shirin Ebadi, the 2003 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate.
One of the leading activists in this campaign has been Zeinab Peyqambarzadeh. She was arrested on 8 May 2007 for her participation in a peaceful protest on 4 March 2007. She had reported to the Revolutionary Court after receiving a summons and was then arrested and sent to the notorious Evin Prison in Tehran. Her family and lawyer attempted to post bail but the court would not authorize her release. Five other women active in the “Million Signatures Campaign” had been arrested on 2 April 2007 while collecting signatures. Three were released after one day in detention, but Mahboubeh Hossein Zadeh and Nahid Keshavarz were taken to Evin Prison and were released on bail on 15 April 2007. They were reportedly accused of “acting against state security through propaganda against the system.” And on 10 June 2007 Ehteram Shadfar, a 62-year-old member of the Women’s Cultural Center, who has been active collecting signatures for the campaign, was arrested and taken to Niloufar police station and then transferred to the Vozara Detention Center, where they are believed to be still held. No charges are known to have been brought against them, but activists believe they have been detained in connection with their collection of signatures for the campaign.
Two women who had been prosecuted for their participation in a peaceful demonstration on 12 June 2006 calling for equal rights for women were sentenced to prison terms on 18 April 2007. That June 2006 demonstration had been violently dispersed by security forces who arrested at least 70 people. Fariba Davoudi Mohajer was sentenced to four years, three of which were suspended, and Sussan Tahmasebi was sentenced to two years, eighteen months of which were suspended. The two are currently free pending an appeal of their sentences. Also on 18 April, Behareh Hedayat, a university student, was tried, without the presence of her lawyer, on charges of “acting against state security”, “participating in an illegal demonstration on 12 June 2006” and “disturbing public order”. Earlier, on 11 April, Azadeh Forghani, a university student, was given a two-year suspended sentence in connection with the same demonstration. Several days later, she was summoned to court where she was questioned and informed that she was facing new charges in connection with a peaceful gathering on 4 March 2007 held to protest against the prosecution of five other activists in connection with the demonstration in June 2006.
Over 30 women activists were arrested on Sunday, 4 March 2007 while staging a peaceful demonstration in Tehran. The arrests were apparently intended to deter activists from organizing events to mark International Women's Day on 8 March. The women were arrested outside Tehran's Revolutionary Court, where they had gathered to protest at the trial of five women charged in connection with a demonstration held on 12 June 2006 to demand that women be given equal rights with men under the law in Iran."Rather than arresting peaceful demonstrators, the Iranian authorities should be taking seriously women's demands for equality before the law and addressing discrimination against women wherever it exists in the Iranian legal system," said Irene Khan, Amnesty International's Secretary General.” In their joint statement of 7 March 2007, Shirin Ebadi and Irene Khan stated, “as long as women are denied human rights, anywhere in the world, there can be no justice and no peace. Recognizing women's equal rights, therefore, is an essential requirement for the creation of strong, sustainable and stable societies and ensuring that women enjoy equality with men in all areas of life is a key step to making human rights a universal reality.” Unfortunately, due to the failure of the Iranian government to recognize the basic human rights of its citizens, as noted by Shirin Ebadi in an interview with SPIEGEL ONLINE, "harassment is a fact of life for someone pursuing human rights in Iran."
Appeals to be sent to:
Leader of the Islamic Republic
His Excellency Ayatollah Sayed ‘Ali Khamenei, The Office of the Supreme Leader
Shoahada Street, Qom, Islamic Republic of Iran
Email: info@leader.ir
istiftaa@wilayah.org
Salutation: Your Excellency
Head of the Judiciary
His Excellency Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi
Ministry of Justice, Park-e Shahr, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran
Email: Please send emails via the feedback form on the Persian site of the website: http://www.iranjudiciary.org/contactus-feedback-fa.html
Salutation: Your Excellency
President
His Excellency Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
The Presidency, Palestine Avenue, Azerbaijan Intersection, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran
Fax: + 98 21 6 649 5880
Email: dr-ahmadinejad@president.ir
(Or via website) http://www.president.ir/email
SAMPLE LETTER
Dear:I am writing to you to express my deep concern about the prison sentences recent imposed on a number of women activists as well as the arrests and harassment of a number of other women in the last few months, including students, teachers, and academics—some of whom had been involved in peaceful demonstrations calling for reform. I am particularly worried that those arrested could face torture or ill-treatment while in detention.
Zeinab Peyqambarzadeh, an activist involved in the “One Million Signatures” campaign calling for reform of discriminatory legislation regarding women, was arrested on 8 May for her participation in a peaceful protest on 4 March 2007. Five other women active in the “Million Signatures Campaign” had been arrested on 2 April 2007 and Ehteram Shadfar was arrested on 10 June 2007 while collecting signatures. Three were released after one day in detention, but Mahboubeh Hossein Zadeh and Nahid Keshavarz were taken to Evin Prison and were released on bail on 15 April 2007. They were reportedly accused of “acting against state security through propaganda against the system”.
Two women who had been prosecuted for their participation in a peaceful demonstration on 12 June 2006 calling for equal rights for women were sentenced to prison terms on 18 April 2007. Fariba Davoudi Mohajer was sentenced to four years, three of which were suspended, and Sussan Tahmasebi was sentenced to two years, eighteen months of which were suspended. The two are currently free pending an appeal of their sentences. Also on 18 April, Behareh Hedayat, a university student, was tried, without the presence of her lawyer, on charges of “acting against state security”, “participating in an illegal demonstration on 12 June 2006” and “disturbing public order”. Earlier, on 11 April, Azadeh Forghani, a university student, was given a two-year suspended sentence in connection with the same demonstration. Several days later, she was summoned to court where she was questioned and informed that she was facing new charges in connection with a peaceful gathering on 4 March 2007 held to protest against the prosecution of five other activists in connection with the demonstration in June 2006.
The right to engage in peaceful activism is enshrined in a number of international treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. I urge your government to cease arresting and detaining those who participate in non-violent protests and human rights activism. I also call on you to release those currently held in detention for their peaceful activism and to reverse the sentences of Fariba Davoudi Mohajer, Sussan Tahmasebi and Azadeh Forgani.
Thank you very much for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
26 March 2007
For every soldier or Marine who dies in Iraq, at least 20 Iraqis are killed. Some of their stories.
By Rod Nordland and Babak Dehghanpisheh
Newsweek
April 2, 2007 issue - Describing Jalal Mustafa to a reporter, the first thing his family mentions is "that long love story of his." The young mechanic's dream was to wed his fiancée, Laila, and "have as many kids as they could." But running a small auto-repair shop, it took Mustafa a long time to save up enough for the wedding, let alone a house. On Feb. 4, he finally went to the courthouse to apply for a marriage license. As he was walking through the gates, a car pulled up next to the building. Before the vehicle came to a full stop, the driver detonated a suicide bomb. Four bystanders died, including Mustafa: burned over much of his body, a piece of shrapnel lodged in his head. The bombing didn't even make the news; it was an ordinary day in Baghdad.
For each U.S. service member killed in Iraq, at least 20 Iraqis die violently. Feb. 4 was no exception. That day in Baghdad, roadside bombs killed four Iraqi policemen in one incident and two soldiers in another, and an Army colonel lost his life to assassins in the southern suburbs. But most of the day's 81 victims of violent deaths—about the usual daily toll this past winter—were civilians like Mustafa, the softest of soft targets. Forty-two of them were gunned down execution style, many of their corpses bearing signs of torture: hallmarks of Shia death squads. Most of the other deaths appeared to be the work of Sunni and Al Qaeda extremists. NEWSWEEK talked to the families of four of the Feb. 4 victims. Among them were a street vendor, a former TV journalist and a truck-parts dealer. Two were Shia, and two were Sunni. And in each case their families lost not only loved ones but breadwinners. None of their killers has been identified:
Jawad Jasem, 44, was serving a customer at his pushcart outside the courthouse when the bomb exploded. The son of a poor Shia farmer, Jasem had wanted to be an engineer. When he was 18, family friends got him into the Air Force, where he earned good money working on jets—until the Army, desperate for infantrymen in the war with Iran, sent him to the front. He was wounded four times. He was not allowed to return to civilian life after the war, even though he had a wife and five children. "He used to tell everyone that the last day of his military service would be the happiest day of his life," says his younger brother, Kareem, a shopkeeper. "He said he'd celebrate with a great party in which he would make a feast for the entire city."
It didn't turn out that way. His last day of duty was April 8, 2003, when U.S. troops entered Baghdad. Jawad was among thousands of Iraqi soldiers who stripped off their uniforms and fled.
He started over, buying his pushcart and setting up in front of the courthouse. He built a good business. It was a predominantly Shia neighborhood, but the bomber killed members of both sects indiscriminately. "Evil has no eyes," says Kareem Jasem. "Jawad's shop had turned into just a big hole ... and his body was smashed into a wall."
Abdul Salam, 47, was a pious Sunni who believed in sectarian harmony. The father of six, he had refused to join Saddam's Army, and worked instead in defense factories. After the invasion, he started a truck-parts business; he hired two Shia apprentices and set up shop in Al Yousifiyah, a mostly Sunni suburb. Driving home from work one night with his two assistants, Salam stopped at a police checkpoint. A van full of gunmen pulled up and abducted all three. Shia friends tried to intercede for Salam at the local Mahdi Army office, but on Feb. 4, Salam's corpse was found dumped in a field a few miles from his home, shot repeatedly in the head and chest. His Shia apprentices were freed. "He was beloved by his friends, colleagues and all of his neighbors, most of them Shiites," says Salam's brother, Naser Zaidan. "He used to say Islam is the unifier of Iraqis."
For Suhad Shakir, 36, her new job was a dream come true. She had always wanted to work with Americans, and she loved helping people. Last September she quit her post as a journalist at state-owned TV and jumped at an opening with the Iraqi Assistance Center, a Coalition-run office in the Green Zone that works with U.S. and Iraqi agencies to provide social services. It seemed safer than reporting, and it paid better.
On Feb. 4 she was on her way to work, waiting in the queue at a checkpoint near an entrance to the Green Zone which is often targeted by suicide bombers. Shakir was in the slow lane, for Iraqi cars that are subject to careful searches. A convoy of armored vehicles came roaring up and got stuck at the checkpoint. One of the bodyguards in the first vehicle threw a bottle of water at the driver in front of Shakir to signal him to move. The driver panicked and backed into Shakir's car. She tried to get out of the way but backed into the car behind her. Someone aboard the fourth vehicle in the convoy, seeing Shakir's sudden move, opened fire, hitting her once. The vehicle slowed and a goateed Westerner in khaki leaned out his window and shot her again in the face at close range. Then the convoy raced off into the Green Zone.
Iraqi cops think Shakir's killer mistook her for a suicide bomber, but they say they're continuing to investigate. "It is very important I know why she is killed and who killed her," said Shakir's mother, Salima Kadhim, dressed in black a month after her daughter's death. Like many Iraqis, she still waits.
With Salih Mehdi and Ahmed Obeidi in Baghdad
Newsweek
April 2, 2007 issue - Describing Jalal Mustafa to a reporter, the first thing his family mentions is "that long love story of his." The young mechanic's dream was to wed his fiancée, Laila, and "have as many kids as they could." But running a small auto-repair shop, it took Mustafa a long time to save up enough for the wedding, let alone a house. On Feb. 4, he finally went to the courthouse to apply for a marriage license. As he was walking through the gates, a car pulled up next to the building. Before the vehicle came to a full stop, the driver detonated a suicide bomb. Four bystanders died, including Mustafa: burned over much of his body, a piece of shrapnel lodged in his head. The bombing didn't even make the news; it was an ordinary day in Baghdad.
For each U.S. service member killed in Iraq, at least 20 Iraqis die violently. Feb. 4 was no exception. That day in Baghdad, roadside bombs killed four Iraqi policemen in one incident and two soldiers in another, and an Army colonel lost his life to assassins in the southern suburbs. But most of the day's 81 victims of violent deaths—about the usual daily toll this past winter—were civilians like Mustafa, the softest of soft targets. Forty-two of them were gunned down execution style, many of their corpses bearing signs of torture: hallmarks of Shia death squads. Most of the other deaths appeared to be the work of Sunni and Al Qaeda extremists. NEWSWEEK talked to the families of four of the Feb. 4 victims. Among them were a street vendor, a former TV journalist and a truck-parts dealer. Two were Shia, and two were Sunni. And in each case their families lost not only loved ones but breadwinners. None of their killers has been identified:
Jawad Jasem, 44, was serving a customer at his pushcart outside the courthouse when the bomb exploded. The son of a poor Shia farmer, Jasem had wanted to be an engineer. When he was 18, family friends got him into the Air Force, where he earned good money working on jets—until the Army, desperate for infantrymen in the war with Iran, sent him to the front. He was wounded four times. He was not allowed to return to civilian life after the war, even though he had a wife and five children. "He used to tell everyone that the last day of his military service would be the happiest day of his life," says his younger brother, Kareem, a shopkeeper. "He said he'd celebrate with a great party in which he would make a feast for the entire city."
It didn't turn out that way. His last day of duty was April 8, 2003, when U.S. troops entered Baghdad. Jawad was among thousands of Iraqi soldiers who stripped off their uniforms and fled.
He started over, buying his pushcart and setting up in front of the courthouse. He built a good business. It was a predominantly Shia neighborhood, but the bomber killed members of both sects indiscriminately. "Evil has no eyes," says Kareem Jasem. "Jawad's shop had turned into just a big hole ... and his body was smashed into a wall."
Abdul Salam, 47, was a pious Sunni who believed in sectarian harmony. The father of six, he had refused to join Saddam's Army, and worked instead in defense factories. After the invasion, he started a truck-parts business; he hired two Shia apprentices and set up shop in Al Yousifiyah, a mostly Sunni suburb. Driving home from work one night with his two assistants, Salam stopped at a police checkpoint. A van full of gunmen pulled up and abducted all three. Shia friends tried to intercede for Salam at the local Mahdi Army office, but on Feb. 4, Salam's corpse was found dumped in a field a few miles from his home, shot repeatedly in the head and chest. His Shia apprentices were freed. "He was beloved by his friends, colleagues and all of his neighbors, most of them Shiites," says Salam's brother, Naser Zaidan. "He used to say Islam is the unifier of Iraqis."
For Suhad Shakir, 36, her new job was a dream come true. She had always wanted to work with Americans, and she loved helping people. Last September she quit her post as a journalist at state-owned TV and jumped at an opening with the Iraqi Assistance Center, a Coalition-run office in the Green Zone that works with U.S. and Iraqi agencies to provide social services. It seemed safer than reporting, and it paid better.
On Feb. 4 she was on her way to work, waiting in the queue at a checkpoint near an entrance to the Green Zone which is often targeted by suicide bombers. Shakir was in the slow lane, for Iraqi cars that are subject to careful searches. A convoy of armored vehicles came roaring up and got stuck at the checkpoint. One of the bodyguards in the first vehicle threw a bottle of water at the driver in front of Shakir to signal him to move. The driver panicked and backed into Shakir's car. She tried to get out of the way but backed into the car behind her. Someone aboard the fourth vehicle in the convoy, seeing Shakir's sudden move, opened fire, hitting her once. The vehicle slowed and a goateed Westerner in khaki leaned out his window and shot her again in the face at close range. Then the convoy raced off into the Green Zone.
Iraqi cops think Shakir's killer mistook her for a suicide bomber, but they say they're continuing to investigate. "It is very important I know why she is killed and who killed her," said Shakir's mother, Salima Kadhim, dressed in black a month after her daughter's death. Like many Iraqis, she still waits.
With Salih Mehdi and Ahmed Obeidi in Baghdad
05 March 2007
Statement at CSW by the Middle East Caucus
Speaker: Amal Mahmoud FayedWhen: Friday, March 2, 2007What time: 3:00 – 6:00 pm, General DebateOrganization: Middle East Caucus (Amal Fayed herself is from the Forum for Women in Development and Karama Arab Group for Ending Violence Against Women)
Topic: Arab Women's Suffering Under Armed Conflict, Economic and Political Situation Threatening Women's Dignity
We are the women in the Middle East Caucus participating in the CSW sessions from Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Morocco, Palestine, Sudan, Tunisia, Yemen.
We consider women's dignity to be the essence of a woman's right and a woman's life. In Arabic, this word for dignity is 'Karama.' We believe the elimination of discrimination and violence against women is a reclamation of dignity and a defense of human rights.
We urge the formal government delegations at CSW to place a greater focus on prevention of violence against women and protection for children from violence, and conflict resolution in the Middle East region. War brings the maximum escalation of violence into human lives and the greatest violations of human rights and women's rights. War brings obstacles that affront the development process, which enacts a double form of violence against women: 1) traditional practices based on cultural heritage, 2) practices of the occupation force against local women, including rape, prostitution, economic exploitation, and violence.
Women from Palestine, Iraq, Sudan, Lebanon, and Somalia are experiencing the height of victimization by armed forces at war in their countries. Yet there exists no international convention that explicitly protects the rights and safety of women within armed conflict zones, and their survival. Neither is there questioning of those responsible for this military and gender violence in our region.
The cost of war to women and its exponential harm is our concern. To eradicate the roots of war in our region, we must also transform the abuse of global media which stereotypes Arab women as passive, oppressed, and incapable of self-determined rights and liberties. These stereotypes in the global media are used to market so-called democratic reforms as a justification for military action. The democratic reforms do not arrive, instead women and their families suffer increasing injustice and loss of human rights living under armed conflict.
We ask the CSW and UN to focus their efforts to solve the special problems for women and girl refugees, to protect them from the violence and discrimination they face in escaping war and in the countries to which they flee. The resources for UN ANWRA should be increased to offer necessary services and additional program to serve and protect women and girl refugees. They live as some of the most vulnerable and unprotected people in the world.
The World Bank policies such as structural adjustment and privatization in the Middle East are dramatically increasing poverty and economic deprivation and violence, with an exaggerated burden falling on women and their children. Economic crisis makes women more vulnerable and exposes them to many forms of abuse, especially sexual abuse. We demand review of all of these economic policies and insist on a special convention on the economic empowerment of women and girls.
We also take into consideration on our region the position of immigrant women, who suffer double dimensions of violence and violations of their rights: economic violence, sexual violence, psychological violence, and abuse of their civil status and rights in the host country where they have immigrated, as well as male domination and forms of discrimination suffered in their country of origin. We urge a Special Protocol to protect immigrant women in whatever nations they live, and to ensure their rights despite any disparity between the laws of their country of residence and the laws of their country of citizenship/origin.
Violence against women is a crime against all humans. UN member nations and governments must protect all women, and punish those responsible for committing the violence. We want to see the Declaration to End All Forms of Violence Against Women transformed into a UN Convention banning gender violence, to which governments sign their commitment and monitor compliance in their countries.
Because of the expansion of all forms of violence against women and girls in the Middle East in the private sphere, public sphere, or by states, we request a policymaking process with outcomes that are more concrete, more committed, and more enforced with laws, programs, and resources to integrate gender perspective in all institutions, agencies, and governments.
We urge the private sector to implement international criteria and standards for ethics to protect women and girls from exploitation and abuse in workplaces, employment, services, and industry.
We urge the partners in the 1999 UN Global Compact on Corporate Leadership in the World Economy, which upholds social responsibility and human rights principles across the private sector, to implement and enforce these international ethics and criteria that protect women and girls from economic abuses. We encourage national authorities and local governments to impose penalties on any private sector entity that commits violence or discrimination against women and girls.
In the Middle East and around the world, we regard the civil society organizations as essential partners with national and local government bodies in their strategic decisionmaking and policymaking to eliminate violence and discrimination against women and girls. This partnership will ensure that the national and local governments will have strategies that are more diverse, representative, and stronger in their protection of women and girls.
We support the effort for UN reform of the gender architecture to achieve equality and to end all forms of discrimination against women in the UN structure. We call on all UN agencies to support, implement, and integrate the work of UNIFEM, OSAGI, and the Division for the Advancement of Women, and to significantly increase their budgets.
We recommend that UN agencies and member nations invest a greater commitment and more resources to offer shelters and welfare for women victims of violence, to establish legal procedures that protect these shelters and those who work at them, defending women from violence.
We urge UN member nations to enact equality for women and men in both word and deed, enforcing it in the written laws and in the application of the laws, especially in criminal law which has biases that favor men and allow the trafficking and abuses of women.
We need to raise the legal age for marriage to 18 years in all countries, for women and for men, in order to stop violence and forced marriage of girls underage.
It is a necessity to ensure girls' rights to have their mother's citizenship, especially to ensure the mother's right to pass her nationality to her children. We highlight especially the Palestinian women's suffering from Israel Family Unification Law, which denies citizenship and permanent residency to any Palestinian from the Occupied Palestinian Territories who marries an Israeli citizen, a right available to spouses from every other country in the world.
The Secretary General's report on Violence Against Women should follow up with more attention to specific populations of women and girls who suffer double dimensions of discrimination and violence: on one level as women and then again as women with disabilities, girls in armed conflict, women detained or in prison, women suffering mental health disabilities.
http://www.vday.org/contents/vday/press/release/0703011
Topic: Arab Women's Suffering Under Armed Conflict, Economic and Political Situation Threatening Women's Dignity
We are the women in the Middle East Caucus participating in the CSW sessions from Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Morocco, Palestine, Sudan, Tunisia, Yemen.
We consider women's dignity to be the essence of a woman's right and a woman's life. In Arabic, this word for dignity is 'Karama.' We believe the elimination of discrimination and violence against women is a reclamation of dignity and a defense of human rights.
We urge the formal government delegations at CSW to place a greater focus on prevention of violence against women and protection for children from violence, and conflict resolution in the Middle East region. War brings the maximum escalation of violence into human lives and the greatest violations of human rights and women's rights. War brings obstacles that affront the development process, which enacts a double form of violence against women: 1) traditional practices based on cultural heritage, 2) practices of the occupation force against local women, including rape, prostitution, economic exploitation, and violence.
Women from Palestine, Iraq, Sudan, Lebanon, and Somalia are experiencing the height of victimization by armed forces at war in their countries. Yet there exists no international convention that explicitly protects the rights and safety of women within armed conflict zones, and their survival. Neither is there questioning of those responsible for this military and gender violence in our region.
The cost of war to women and its exponential harm is our concern. To eradicate the roots of war in our region, we must also transform the abuse of global media which stereotypes Arab women as passive, oppressed, and incapable of self-determined rights and liberties. These stereotypes in the global media are used to market so-called democratic reforms as a justification for military action. The democratic reforms do not arrive, instead women and their families suffer increasing injustice and loss of human rights living under armed conflict.
We ask the CSW and UN to focus their efforts to solve the special problems for women and girl refugees, to protect them from the violence and discrimination they face in escaping war and in the countries to which they flee. The resources for UN ANWRA should be increased to offer necessary services and additional program to serve and protect women and girl refugees. They live as some of the most vulnerable and unprotected people in the world.
The World Bank policies such as structural adjustment and privatization in the Middle East are dramatically increasing poverty and economic deprivation and violence, with an exaggerated burden falling on women and their children. Economic crisis makes women more vulnerable and exposes them to many forms of abuse, especially sexual abuse. We demand review of all of these economic policies and insist on a special convention on the economic empowerment of women and girls.
We also take into consideration on our region the position of immigrant women, who suffer double dimensions of violence and violations of their rights: economic violence, sexual violence, psychological violence, and abuse of their civil status and rights in the host country where they have immigrated, as well as male domination and forms of discrimination suffered in their country of origin. We urge a Special Protocol to protect immigrant women in whatever nations they live, and to ensure their rights despite any disparity between the laws of their country of residence and the laws of their country of citizenship/origin.
Violence against women is a crime against all humans. UN member nations and governments must protect all women, and punish those responsible for committing the violence. We want to see the Declaration to End All Forms of Violence Against Women transformed into a UN Convention banning gender violence, to which governments sign their commitment and monitor compliance in their countries.
Because of the expansion of all forms of violence against women and girls in the Middle East in the private sphere, public sphere, or by states, we request a policymaking process with outcomes that are more concrete, more committed, and more enforced with laws, programs, and resources to integrate gender perspective in all institutions, agencies, and governments.
We urge the private sector to implement international criteria and standards for ethics to protect women and girls from exploitation and abuse in workplaces, employment, services, and industry.
We urge the partners in the 1999 UN Global Compact on Corporate Leadership in the World Economy, which upholds social responsibility and human rights principles across the private sector, to implement and enforce these international ethics and criteria that protect women and girls from economic abuses. We encourage national authorities and local governments to impose penalties on any private sector entity that commits violence or discrimination against women and girls.
In the Middle East and around the world, we regard the civil society organizations as essential partners with national and local government bodies in their strategic decisionmaking and policymaking to eliminate violence and discrimination against women and girls. This partnership will ensure that the national and local governments will have strategies that are more diverse, representative, and stronger in their protection of women and girls.
We support the effort for UN reform of the gender architecture to achieve equality and to end all forms of discrimination against women in the UN structure. We call on all UN agencies to support, implement, and integrate the work of UNIFEM, OSAGI, and the Division for the Advancement of Women, and to significantly increase their budgets.
We recommend that UN agencies and member nations invest a greater commitment and more resources to offer shelters and welfare for women victims of violence, to establish legal procedures that protect these shelters and those who work at them, defending women from violence.
We urge UN member nations to enact equality for women and men in both word and deed, enforcing it in the written laws and in the application of the laws, especially in criminal law which has biases that favor men and allow the trafficking and abuses of women.
We need to raise the legal age for marriage to 18 years in all countries, for women and for men, in order to stop violence and forced marriage of girls underage.
It is a necessity to ensure girls' rights to have their mother's citizenship, especially to ensure the mother's right to pass her nationality to her children. We highlight especially the Palestinian women's suffering from Israel Family Unification Law, which denies citizenship and permanent residency to any Palestinian from the Occupied Palestinian Territories who marries an Israeli citizen, a right available to spouses from every other country in the world.
The Secretary General's report on Violence Against Women should follow up with more attention to specific populations of women and girls who suffer double dimensions of discrimination and violence: on one level as women and then again as women with disabilities, girls in armed conflict, women detained or in prison, women suffering mental health disabilities.
http://www.vday.org/contents/vday/press/release/0703011
26 November 2006
The Faces of Muhammed
This is a blog dedicated to the Danish cartoons that began the riots over the Prophet Muhammed. You can see the cartoons here -
http://face-of-muhammed.blogspot.com/2006/03/12-muhammed-cartoons.html
http://face-of-muhammed.blogspot.com/2006/03/12-muhammed-cartoons.html
24 November 2006
Oldie, but a goodie
Editorial Observer: Accounting for the Invisible Casualties of War
>Shouldn’t Be a Matter of Politics
>
>November 14, 2003
> By ANDREW ROSENTHAL
>
>
>
>One of the most enduring memories from the funeral of my
>friend Michael Kelly, who was killed covering the war in
>Iraq for Atlantic Monthly, was standing by his open grave
>in a cemetery in Cambridge, Mass., watching an Army officer
>in dress uniform make his way through the cold, persistent
>drizzle and up the small hill to Michael's wife and boys.
>He spoke to the family quietly and then got down on one
>knee on the wet artificial turf that had been placed there
>in a vain attempt to shield the mourners from the earth. He
>gave the boys a flag and a medal.
>
>Michael Kelly was not one of their own. He was brash and
>brave, but distinctly unmilitary. Yet the Army took pains
>to make this simple gesture that drove home the way the
>military honors death: it endows that inescapable but
>inescapably tragic part of their lives with a sense of
>moment, of ceremony and dignity, and most of all it faces
>death squarely and honestly.
>
>This is a central part of the warrior's culture, but it is
>all too often missing from the way President Bush is
>running the Iraq war. As the toll nears 400, the casualties
>remain largely invisible. Apart from a flurry of ceremonies
>on Veterans Day, this White House has done everything it
>
>can to keep Mr. Bush away from the families of the dead, at
>least when there might be a camera around.
>
>The wounded, thousands of them, are even more carefully
>screened from the public. And the Pentagon has continued
>its ban on media coverage of the return of flag-draped
>coffins to Dover Air Force Base in Delaware, denying the
>dead soldiers and their loved ones even that simple public
>recognition of sacrifice. Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of
>the Joint Chiefs of Staff, explained rather lamely that the
>ban had been in place since 1991 - when another President
>Bush wanted to avoid the juxtaposition of his face and
>words with pictures of soldiers' coffins.
>
>Some Republicans say it would take up too much of the
>president's time to attend military funerals or meet the
>coffins returning from Iraq. "They're coming back
>continually," the conservative commentator Bay Buchanan
>said on CNN on Tuesday. "The president cannot be flying up
>there every single week."
>
>
>But someone of rank from the White House could and should
>be at each and every military funeral. Ideally, Mr. Bush
>would shake the hand of someone who loved every person who
>dies in uniform - a small demand on his time in a war in
>which the casualties are still relatively small. And he has
>more than enough advisers, cabinet secretaries and other
>officials so attending funerals should not be such an
>inconvenience.
>
>The White House talks about preserving the privacy and
>dignity of the families of the war dead. But if this was
>really about the families, the president or Vice President
>Dick Cheney or Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld would be
>handing flags to widows and mothers in the time-honored
>way. And if protecting the privacy of Americans who are
>suffering was such a priority, the White House wouldn't
>call in the cameras to watch Mr. Bush embracing victims of
>every hurricane, earthquake or suburban California
>wildfire.
>
>Along with the coverage of these casualties, the coverage
>
>of combat in Iraq has virtually ceased. The "embedded"
>correspondents who reported on the stunningly swift march
>to Baghdad during the invasion are gone. The Pentagon has
>ended the program. The ever-upbeat Mr. Rumsfeld likes to
>say that the attacks on American soldiers are brief and
>relatively few in number, compared with the number of men
>in arms in the field in Iraq. But without real news
>coverage, it's hard to know the truth.
>
>Letters from American soldiers who have died in Iraq,
>published on the Op-Ed page on Tuesday, suggest that Mr.
>Rumsfeld's accounting may be highly selective. Shortly
>before he died on June 17, Pvt. Robert Frantz wrote this to
>his mother: "We've had random gunfire within a 100-meter
>radius all night, every night, since I have been here. It
>kinda scares you the first couple nights, but you tend to
>get used to it."
>
>The idea of a slow, painful and bloody holding action in
>which gunfire is a nightly occurrence contrasts sharply,
>
>perhaps too sharply for comfort, with the display of
>overwhelming force, low casualties and lightning-swift
>conclusions that Mr. Bush and Mr. Rumsfeld put on in the
>spring. The administration undoubtedly feels that showing
>coffins on television or having the president attend
>funerals would undermine public support for the war. (The
>ban on covering the arrival of coffins at Dover was in
>effect during the popular Afghanistan war, but was not
>enforced.) That seems like more of an acknowledgment of how
>fragile that support is than any poll yet taken.
>
>The Bush administration hates comparisons between Iraq and
>Vietnam, and many are a stretch. But there is a lesson that
>this president seems not to have learned from Vietnam. You
>cannot hide casualties. Indeed, trying to do so probably
>does more to undermine public confidence than any display
>of a flag-draped coffin. And there is at least one direct
>parallel. Thirty-five years ago, at the height of the
>
>Vietnam War, the Pentagon took to shipping bodies into the
>United States in the dead of night to avoid news coverage.
>
>http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/14/opinion/14FRI4.html?ex=1069834045&ei=1&en=660f
>5cd6223c62e2
>Shouldn’t Be a Matter of Politics
>
>November 14, 2003
> By ANDREW ROSENTHAL
>
>
>
>One of the most enduring memories from the funeral of my
>friend Michael Kelly, who was killed covering the war in
>Iraq for Atlantic Monthly, was standing by his open grave
>in a cemetery in Cambridge, Mass., watching an Army officer
>in dress uniform make his way through the cold, persistent
>drizzle and up the small hill to Michael's wife and boys.
>He spoke to the family quietly and then got down on one
>knee on the wet artificial turf that had been placed there
>in a vain attempt to shield the mourners from the earth. He
>gave the boys a flag and a medal.
>
>Michael Kelly was not one of their own. He was brash and
>brave, but distinctly unmilitary. Yet the Army took pains
>to make this simple gesture that drove home the way the
>military honors death: it endows that inescapable but
>inescapably tragic part of their lives with a sense of
>moment, of ceremony and dignity, and most of all it faces
>death squarely and honestly.
>
>This is a central part of the warrior's culture, but it is
>all too often missing from the way President Bush is
>running the Iraq war. As the toll nears 400, the casualties
>remain largely invisible. Apart from a flurry of ceremonies
>on Veterans Day, this White House has done everything it
>
>can to keep Mr. Bush away from the families of the dead, at
>least when there might be a camera around.
>
>The wounded, thousands of them, are even more carefully
>screened from the public. And the Pentagon has continued
>its ban on media coverage of the return of flag-draped
>coffins to Dover Air Force Base in Delaware, denying the
>dead soldiers and their loved ones even that simple public
>recognition of sacrifice. Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of
>the Joint Chiefs of Staff, explained rather lamely that the
>ban had been in place since 1991 - when another President
>Bush wanted to avoid the juxtaposition of his face and
>words with pictures of soldiers' coffins.
>
>Some Republicans say it would take up too much of the
>president's time to attend military funerals or meet the
>coffins returning from Iraq. "They're coming back
>continually," the conservative commentator Bay Buchanan
>said on CNN on Tuesday. "The president cannot be flying up
>there every single week."
>
>
>But someone of rank from the White House could and should
>be at each and every military funeral. Ideally, Mr. Bush
>would shake the hand of someone who loved every person who
>dies in uniform - a small demand on his time in a war in
>which the casualties are still relatively small. And he has
>more than enough advisers, cabinet secretaries and other
>officials so attending funerals should not be such an
>inconvenience.
>
>The White House talks about preserving the privacy and
>dignity of the families of the war dead. But if this was
>really about the families, the president or Vice President
>Dick Cheney or Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld would be
>handing flags to widows and mothers in the time-honored
>way. And if protecting the privacy of Americans who are
>suffering was such a priority, the White House wouldn't
>call in the cameras to watch Mr. Bush embracing victims of
>every hurricane, earthquake or suburban California
>wildfire.
>
>Along with the coverage of these casualties, the coverage
>
>of combat in Iraq has virtually ceased. The "embedded"
>correspondents who reported on the stunningly swift march
>to Baghdad during the invasion are gone. The Pentagon has
>ended the program. The ever-upbeat Mr. Rumsfeld likes to
>say that the attacks on American soldiers are brief and
>relatively few in number, compared with the number of men
>in arms in the field in Iraq. But without real news
>coverage, it's hard to know the truth.
>
>Letters from American soldiers who have died in Iraq,
>published on the Op-Ed page on Tuesday, suggest that Mr.
>Rumsfeld's accounting may be highly selective. Shortly
>before he died on June 17, Pvt. Robert Frantz wrote this to
>his mother: "We've had random gunfire within a 100-meter
>radius all night, every night, since I have been here. It
>kinda scares you the first couple nights, but you tend to
>get used to it."
>
>The idea of a slow, painful and bloody holding action in
>which gunfire is a nightly occurrence contrasts sharply,
>
>perhaps too sharply for comfort, with the display of
>overwhelming force, low casualties and lightning-swift
>conclusions that Mr. Bush and Mr. Rumsfeld put on in the
>spring. The administration undoubtedly feels that showing
>coffins on television or having the president attend
>funerals would undermine public support for the war. (The
>ban on covering the arrival of coffins at Dover was in
>effect during the popular Afghanistan war, but was not
>enforced.) That seems like more of an acknowledgment of how
>fragile that support is than any poll yet taken.
>
>The Bush administration hates comparisons between Iraq and
>Vietnam, and many are a stretch. But there is a lesson that
>this president seems not to have learned from Vietnam. You
>cannot hide casualties. Indeed, trying to do so probably
>does more to undermine public confidence than any display
>of a flag-draped coffin. And there is at least one direct
>parallel. Thirty-five years ago, at the height of the
>
>Vietnam War, the Pentagon took to shipping bodies into the
>United States in the dead of night to avoid news coverage.
>
>http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/14/opinion/14FRI4.html?ex=1069834045&ei=1&en=660f
>5cd6223c62e2
A Rebirth of "We the People"
By Jim Rough
Draft written for "The Good Society,"
a journal of PEGS, Committee on the Political Economy of the Good
Society
http://www.bsos.umd.edu/pegs/
A good system of governance needs to work for
both individuals and society as a whole. In the
eighteenth century the old forms of governance
headed by a king and hereditary aristocracy were
not working to the benefit of most people, and a
new system was needed. Through what we now call
the "U.S. Constitutional Convention," "We the
People" of the former colonies transformed
themselves from the rule of inherited privilege
to the rule of law. This transformation affected
governance, economics, and all aspects of life,
creating a new version of the "Good Society."
Today, that newer system is having problems, both
for us collectively and for us as individuals.
Another fundamental change is needed.
This article suggests how "We the People" might
transform ourselves once again, using a seemingly
innocuous U.S. Constitutional amendment. This
amendment borrows from the strategy of the
founders to facilitate all of us to become "We
the People" and to manage our system.
The Problem
Currently, our constitutional, rule of law,
majority-voting, free market system is on
automatic pilot managing both itself and us.
Because the system is based on competition, it
encourages each of us to maximize our own
"special interest," while the "general interest"
takes care of itself. When people were
independent farmers, fishers, and craftspeople on
a seemingly infinite planet, this self-oriented
approach automatically served the general
interest. It was a win/win game, where healthy
competition made things better for everyone.
But as we confront the limits of planetary
resources, as technology and trade link us
together, and as transnational corporations hold
sway, we are becoming more interdependent than
independent. Competition within an interdependent
whole does not serve the general interest. It's
more like the heart and lungs competing for blood
within one body. The body can't survive that way.
Consider one element within our system, a
hypothetical defense contractor. It competes for
money against other possible uses of tax dollars,
like education, protecting the environment, or
public health. With deeper pockets than its
competition, it can hire many lobbyists and make
large political donations to spread a message of
fear, emphasizing real and imaginary dangers. It
garners a big part of the budget in this country
and then sells its products to whichever client
can pay, whether or not they are a risk to our
country. The primary aim of this industry isn't
to maximize national security, but to grow the
market for its products.
By design, all companies aim more primarily for
profits than for citizen well being or a healthy
environment, or other human values. But this
design was made for a time when none of us was
powerful enough to manipulate the demand or
supply of labor or resources, ruin the commons,
or manipulate government to serve our ends. With
the shift from being independent to being
interdependent, the competitive stance of our
system now undermines local communities,
increases long-term health problems, exacerbates
global warming, promotes inequities of wealth,
risks war, crime and terrorism, and limits
individual freedoms.
To earn a living today, even if you work for
yourself, you must direct your attention, energy
and talents to serving a special interest. Those
who ignore this imperative and seek to serve
humanity directly, like to help preserve the
commons, will struggle financially.
Even our thinking process is affected by this
competition. Our political system doesn't
recognize the possibility of a "general-interest"
viewpoint, but enforces special interest
battling. Those who try to enact legislation in
the public interest, like most environmentalists,
must pretend they are a special-interest group,
and compete against well-organized, well-funded
groups who really do serve special interests.
Also, because of our competitive mind-frame, we
don't look too deeply at problems. Like someone
in an argument, rather than searching out the
underlying causes, we blame individuals like
"greedy" CEO's, "lazy" welfare recipients,
"bureaucratic" civil servants, "corrupt"
politicians, or "apathetic" citizens. We look to
non-systemic answers like better education,
active citizen involvement, better leaders, more
volunteerism, small group dialogues, fairer laws,
etc. These are vital, but for real change to
happen, we must take charge of our system.
Many people think human nature is a problem. They
imagine people to be naturally competitive and
unable to reach consensus in large groups. The
structure of our system makes it seem this way.
I've asked many people, for example, "Which set
of values should have priority in society:
Corporate values or human values?" I think
everyone has already reached consensus on
this-human values should predominate. But since
our system is in control of society, it directs
us to enact the opposite. Our job is to keep our
heads down, to serve corporate interests, and to
be in denial about what is happening in the big
picture.
"We the People" Are the Solution
How do we take charge of our system so that it
works for individuals, for all of us, for other
species, and for future generations? Key is that
we need to become "We the People." We need to
call "time out" from the system, convene everyone
together, face the big issues, dialogue
creatively, develop new options, and reach
consensus on a shared vision. If we can do this,
many of society's problems would just go away.
Accomplishing this is not as difficult as it
might seem. Once we escape from the
all-encompassing competitive stance imposed by
our system, and we are facilitated to hold a
general-interest conversation, we will find that
people are naturally attuned to this. Adding the
following "Citizens Amendment" to the U.S.
Constitution, would make the necessary change:
Each year, a lottery selects twenty-four
registered voters to form a "Wisdom
Council." This Wisdom Council is a symbol
and proxy for all the people of the United
States. It meets for up to one week to
choose issues, talk about them, and create
unanimous statements. A meeting facilitator
assures a creative, collaborative process.
At the end of the week, the Wisdom Council
presents its "Statements of the People"
to the nation in a new ceremony, like a State
of the Union message. The Wisdom Council
will then disband permanently and the next
year a new Wisdom Council will be randomly
selected.
Before considering how this Amendment would
establish an inclusive and wise "We the People,"
and how it would benefit society, notice that it
poses little risk. Congress, the Supreme Court,
laws, the media, government programs, elections,
lobbyists, and all the other elements of our
system remain unchanged. It makes no change to
our economic system either. Corporations, the
markets and the distribution of wealth are
untouched. The Citizens Amendment simply adds a
succession of different small groups that meet,
make statements, and disband. These groups have
no power of coercion, and there is little cost.
Policy continues to be set in the normal way,
through experts and elected representatives.
Transformational Conversation
Key to understanding how the Wisdom Council would
transform society is to recognize the
transformational quality of talking and thinking
it engenders, both within the Wisdom Council and
among the larger population.
I call it "choice-creating" rather than
"decision-making" because people seek progress
through breakthroughs more than through logic.
With choice-creating, diverse passionate voices
are assets rather than liabilities because they
make breakthroughs more likely. Just from talking
in this way, people change their minds and how
they feel, and they build a sense of community.
The best way for any group to reach consensus on
a difficult issue is for them to have a
breakthrough. Then consensus happens quickly,
individual views are respected, and all are
motivated to help implement the result. Debate
and deliberation, the ideals of our founders,
mute this possibility. These modes are oriented
toward critical thinking and winning the
competition, instead of creative thinking and
seeking what is best for all. Even
"consensus-building," where people are expected
to suppress their own individuality for the
benefit of the group, mutes the possibility for
breakthroughs.
The Wisdom Council is structured for choice-creating in a number of
ways.
* It is a "time out" from the usual political conversation.
* It is a diverse group of ordinary people who speak only for
themselves.
* The group must reach unanimity.
* The group has been symbolically anointed to speak as "We the People.
* And the group is aided by a facilitator-
hopefully, one who uses "Dynamic Facilitation."
Dynamic Facilitation (DF) is a new social
invention oriented to helping groups achieve
choice-creating. [1]
Tom Atlee, the author of "The Tao of Democracy:
Using Co-Intelligence to Create a World That
Works for All" (www.taoofdemocracy.com) says,
"Part of why I love Dynamic Facilitation so much
is that it works with people AS THEY ARE. It
doesn't require that they buy into a set of rules
about how they're going to talk together. They
can be [jerks[ and the facilitator makes sure (a)
that they don't get shut down because of that,
(b) that the people they target -- and the group
as a whole -- continue to feel safe and (c) that
whatever gift they bring gets heard and made
available to the group mind. This alone makes DF
incredibly useful in a pluralistic democracy. Add
to that its power to metabolize conflict into
useful insights and to engender co-creativity
among diverse people, and it's a real
treasure."[2]
The Wisdom Council Can Transform Society
At first glance, a Wisdom Council doesn't seem
like it would do very much. "OK, so the group
determines a unanimous conclusion and presents
it, then what?" The Wisdom Council would identify
a general-interest viewpoint, express it in a
powerful new way and enable all-of-us-together to
have more influence over legislation.
But this is only a minor influence. It would also
educate people about the important issues,
involve more citizens in current affairs, include
minority voices and those who are currently
underrepresented, help overcome the dominance of
corporate controlled media, raise the important
issues and put them on the national agenda, and
raise the quality of the political conversation.
One big impact of the Amendment would be in how
it opens the door to a transformation of how we
make collective decisions. Consider, for example,
what it would mean to have a legitimate,
thoughtful voice of an inclusive "We the People."
This would approximate a true democracy. For
example, as the Wisdom Council process continues,
the Supreme Court [might] build trust in the
dynamic views of "We the People" today. At some
point they [might well] hold those views to be a
more relevant standard for their judgements than
the static positions taken by "We the People" of
the eighteenth century.
Currently, we do not make collective decisions in
a thoughtful way. Special interests buy the
media, politicians, and expert voices to defeat
legislation that is in the public interest.
"Sound bites" generated by highly paid public
relations firms make bad proposals sound good,
and good ones sound costly, bureaucratic, or
stupid. But a Wisdom Council can help all of us
to examine, understand, and appreciate the
underlying issues more deeply, and build the
political will for thoughtful actions.
With the Amendment in place, you and I will
participate in creating a shared vision of what
all people want. To have such a vision is a shift
in leadership style from our current reactive
mode, stopping bad things from happening, to a
pro-active mode, helping good things to happen. A
visionary leadership style requires fewer laws.
It would transform government efficiency, how the
media reports the news, and how individuals
contribute to society.
The Wisdom Council promises to shift the basis of
society from competition for scarce resources,
like a scarcity of jobs, toward cooperation to
enhance our shared abundance. In my community,
for instance, there are limited jobs for teachers
in the local school and the schools are cutting
back because of lack of funds. Yet at the same
time, there are many people who may or may not
have teaching credentials, who would dearly love
to teach kids. Our present system impoverishes
individuals and society alike by keeping this
pressing need and these vital human resources
apart. With a Wisdom Council in place, common
sense can reassert itself over the dictates of
the system.
To enact the Citizens Amendment is to open the
door to a transformation of our selves, as well.
For instance, it would help us break out of our
collective denial about the big problems we face
and our feelings of powerlessness over them. It
provides a way for all of us to become creative
and empowered in serving others and life on this
planet.
An Example from History
The best example of how the Wisdom Council can
transform our society today is how something like
it initiated a world-transformation during the
years 1787-1791. The delegates to the U.S.
Constitutional Convention didn't think of
themselves as "We the People." Most believed in
the benefits of having an aristocracy and were
fearful of democracy. They didn't include slaves,
women, Native Americans, or those who had no
property in their design for governance. But
despite these non-democratic tendencies, the
founders described the U.S. Constitution as
having been written by "We the People."
This phrasing was not what they wanted to say. To
them, it was really the states that were
ordaining and establishing this Constitution. But
since the Convention had already decided that the
Constitution would go into effect after
ratification by nine of the thirteen states, and
no one knew which states would adopt it, the
document couldn't start with a list of states.
"We the People" was a grammatically convenient
phrase.
Besides representing itself as speaking for We
the People, the U.S. Constitutional Convention
was like a constitutionally anointed Wisdom
Council in many ways. It was a small group of
people who took "time out" from the normal course
of events for a high-visibility meeting. It
addressed the big issues of the day, established
a higher than normal quality of conversation,
sought consensus rather than a majority, issued a
near-unanimous proposal and then disbanded. The
final document was signed by 39 out of 42 present.
One might ask about the Constitutional
Convention, as people often do about the Wisdom
Council, "How could there be any real change
without follow-up?" It just presented its
conclusion and disbanded. Action happened because
its conclusions sparked a widespread conversation
throughout the land and initiated a
self-organizing dynamic of change. It was from
this larger conversation that the Constitution
was implemented and the Bill of Rights was added.
The whole process took only one Wisdom
Council-like meeting, plus four and a half years
of talking and thinking. In the end, "We the
People" really did "ordain and establish" the new
system.
The Citizens Amendment would establish annual
symbolic meetings of "We the People." Those
selected for Wisdom Councils would be given more
power to affect change than were the original
founders. These citizens are anointed by the U.S.
Constitution to speak for "We the People." They
are not beholden to various states or
constituencies, but can speak their minds and
hearts freely. They are not limited in what they
can talk about or recommend, but can pick any
issue, and frame it in their own way. In fact,
they need not even propose an answer. They can
just describe a problem and ask their fellow
citizens to solve it. They have the advantage of
a facilitator, the mass media and the Internet to
generate citizen resonance.
Plus, these "constitutional conventions" are not
just one-time phenomena. They are ongoing.
You and I were born into a system that we didn't
design. Nor did we have the chance to critically
examine and approve it before we came under its
control. We say that we live in a democracy
because we live in a rule-of-law system, we have
a large measure of freedom, and we vote for
elected representatives to make the laws.
Although this may be the best system on earth,
without us choosing it, it is not a democracy.
Thomas Jefferson pointed this out in a letter he
wrote to his friend, James Madison. From the
actuarial tables of his time, he had calculated
that a majority of any given generation would be
dead after about nineteen years. With this
statistic in mind, he wrote: "It may be proved
that no society can make a perpetual
constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth
belongs always to the living generation. . . .
Every constitution, then, and every law naturally
expires at the end of 19 years. If it be enforced
longer, it is an act of force and not of
right."[3]
Going Forward
The Wisdom Council is a new concept that needs
testing. Schools, unions, towns, cities,
counties, states, nations and all large systems
that seek democratic governance can use it.
Consultant, Nancy Rosanoff, established one
Wisdom Council experiment in Pleasantville, NY.
Nine citizens were randomly selected with the
blessing of the Town Trustees. They met for eight
hours-four hours on each of a Saturday and
Sunday. They were dynamically facilitated to
achieve unanimity. In the last half-hour, they
made a presentation to the Town Trustees. A quick
summary of their unanimous conclusions
illustrates how creative and thoughtful such a
group can be:
Theme: We need to have more pride in
Pleasantville. We can't just be a bedroom
community but need to be a real community.
There were three subheadings:
1) We need to set up a community infrastructure
to separate New York City commuter parking from
downtown parking and to redirect traffic. (They
had a design for how to do it and how to pay for
it.)
2) We need to create community spirit by
establishing a real center to the town. (The
group suggested using awnings, landscaping and
lighting, and an ongoing committee to encourage
more diverse kinds of downtown businesses.)
3) Youth should be a priority. (The group
identified an abandoned building that should be
an activity center and described ideas for its
funding. They proposed a weekend bus for youth
activities.)
So far this experiment is missing crucial pieces
that create a "We the People." The people of
Pleasantville should enact the Wisdom Council
through a citizens' initiative. The random
selection should be done in a public ceremony,
everyone in town should be invited to a
large-scale presentation of the results, and
there should be organized opportunities for
people to dialogue about the ideas and add their
views. A more complete experiment is planned for
Ashland, OR in the fall of 2003. [4] [This has
now been successfully held. - Tom Atlee] A
non-profit organization, the Center for Wise
Democratic Processes has been formed to help
communities organize Wisdom Councils.[5]
There is interest from a TV producer in a Wisdom
Council experiment for national television. One
way this might happen is to randomly select
sixteen people each quarter to meet for three
days and to have them present their unanimous
findings to a live local and national audience.
Viewers would be encouraged to watch the show
with friends or in churches and community
centers, and to comment on the results through
the Web. This allows people to experience the
Wisdom Council process and to start building a
general-interest perspective. If the timing is
right, this TV show can help establish a
"people's agenda" for the Presidential debates
and the next election.
A common response of many people when they first
hear about the Citizens Amendment is to dismiss
the concept as unworkable. But it is our current
system that will soon prove itself to be
unworkable without this change. It is on
automatic pilot, programmed with
eighteenth-century assumptions about the nature
of human beings and what is needed in the world.
It directs us to keep our heads down, to stay in
denial about our collective situation, while it
drives us toward a world we didn't choose and
that is unsustainable. The Wisdom Council offers
a way for us to call "time out," to come together
as We the People, and to take charge of our
destiny. The potential benefits are immense and
the risk is low. I hope you will investigate
further and experiment with this proposal.
Draft written for "The Good Society,"
a journal of PEGS, Committee on the Political Economy of the Good
Society
http://www.bsos.umd.edu/pegs/
A good system of governance needs to work for
both individuals and society as a whole. In the
eighteenth century the old forms of governance
headed by a king and hereditary aristocracy were
not working to the benefit of most people, and a
new system was needed. Through what we now call
the "U.S. Constitutional Convention," "We the
People" of the former colonies transformed
themselves from the rule of inherited privilege
to the rule of law. This transformation affected
governance, economics, and all aspects of life,
creating a new version of the "Good Society."
Today, that newer system is having problems, both
for us collectively and for us as individuals.
Another fundamental change is needed.
This article suggests how "We the People" might
transform ourselves once again, using a seemingly
innocuous U.S. Constitutional amendment. This
amendment borrows from the strategy of the
founders to facilitate all of us to become "We
the People" and to manage our system.
The Problem
Currently, our constitutional, rule of law,
majority-voting, free market system is on
automatic pilot managing both itself and us.
Because the system is based on competition, it
encourages each of us to maximize our own
"special interest," while the "general interest"
takes care of itself. When people were
independent farmers, fishers, and craftspeople on
a seemingly infinite planet, this self-oriented
approach automatically served the general
interest. It was a win/win game, where healthy
competition made things better for everyone.
But as we confront the limits of planetary
resources, as technology and trade link us
together, and as transnational corporations hold
sway, we are becoming more interdependent than
independent. Competition within an interdependent
whole does not serve the general interest. It's
more like the heart and lungs competing for blood
within one body. The body can't survive that way.
Consider one element within our system, a
hypothetical defense contractor. It competes for
money against other possible uses of tax dollars,
like education, protecting the environment, or
public health. With deeper pockets than its
competition, it can hire many lobbyists and make
large political donations to spread a message of
fear, emphasizing real and imaginary dangers. It
garners a big part of the budget in this country
and then sells its products to whichever client
can pay, whether or not they are a risk to our
country. The primary aim of this industry isn't
to maximize national security, but to grow the
market for its products.
By design, all companies aim more primarily for
profits than for citizen well being or a healthy
environment, or other human values. But this
design was made for a time when none of us was
powerful enough to manipulate the demand or
supply of labor or resources, ruin the commons,
or manipulate government to serve our ends. With
the shift from being independent to being
interdependent, the competitive stance of our
system now undermines local communities,
increases long-term health problems, exacerbates
global warming, promotes inequities of wealth,
risks war, crime and terrorism, and limits
individual freedoms.
To earn a living today, even if you work for
yourself, you must direct your attention, energy
and talents to serving a special interest. Those
who ignore this imperative and seek to serve
humanity directly, like to help preserve the
commons, will struggle financially.
Even our thinking process is affected by this
competition. Our political system doesn't
recognize the possibility of a "general-interest"
viewpoint, but enforces special interest
battling. Those who try to enact legislation in
the public interest, like most environmentalists,
must pretend they are a special-interest group,
and compete against well-organized, well-funded
groups who really do serve special interests.
Also, because of our competitive mind-frame, we
don't look too deeply at problems. Like someone
in an argument, rather than searching out the
underlying causes, we blame individuals like
"greedy" CEO's, "lazy" welfare recipients,
"bureaucratic" civil servants, "corrupt"
politicians, or "apathetic" citizens. We look to
non-systemic answers like better education,
active citizen involvement, better leaders, more
volunteerism, small group dialogues, fairer laws,
etc. These are vital, but for real change to
happen, we must take charge of our system.
Many people think human nature is a problem. They
imagine people to be naturally competitive and
unable to reach consensus in large groups. The
structure of our system makes it seem this way.
I've asked many people, for example, "Which set
of values should have priority in society:
Corporate values or human values?" I think
everyone has already reached consensus on
this-human values should predominate. But since
our system is in control of society, it directs
us to enact the opposite. Our job is to keep our
heads down, to serve corporate interests, and to
be in denial about what is happening in the big
picture.
"We the People" Are the Solution
How do we take charge of our system so that it
works for individuals, for all of us, for other
species, and for future generations? Key is that
we need to become "We the People." We need to
call "time out" from the system, convene everyone
together, face the big issues, dialogue
creatively, develop new options, and reach
consensus on a shared vision. If we can do this,
many of society's problems would just go away.
Accomplishing this is not as difficult as it
might seem. Once we escape from the
all-encompassing competitive stance imposed by
our system, and we are facilitated to hold a
general-interest conversation, we will find that
people are naturally attuned to this. Adding the
following "Citizens Amendment" to the U.S.
Constitution, would make the necessary change:
Each year, a lottery selects twenty-four
registered voters to form a "Wisdom
Council." This Wisdom Council is a symbol
and proxy for all the people of the United
States. It meets for up to one week to
choose issues, talk about them, and create
unanimous statements. A meeting facilitator
assures a creative, collaborative process.
At the end of the week, the Wisdom Council
presents its "Statements of the People"
to the nation in a new ceremony, like a State
of the Union message. The Wisdom Council
will then disband permanently and the next
year a new Wisdom Council will be randomly
selected.
Before considering how this Amendment would
establish an inclusive and wise "We the People,"
and how it would benefit society, notice that it
poses little risk. Congress, the Supreme Court,
laws, the media, government programs, elections,
lobbyists, and all the other elements of our
system remain unchanged. It makes no change to
our economic system either. Corporations, the
markets and the distribution of wealth are
untouched. The Citizens Amendment simply adds a
succession of different small groups that meet,
make statements, and disband. These groups have
no power of coercion, and there is little cost.
Policy continues to be set in the normal way,
through experts and elected representatives.
Transformational Conversation
Key to understanding how the Wisdom Council would
transform society is to recognize the
transformational quality of talking and thinking
it engenders, both within the Wisdom Council and
among the larger population.
I call it "choice-creating" rather than
"decision-making" because people seek progress
through breakthroughs more than through logic.
With choice-creating, diverse passionate voices
are assets rather than liabilities because they
make breakthroughs more likely. Just from talking
in this way, people change their minds and how
they feel, and they build a sense of community.
The best way for any group to reach consensus on
a difficult issue is for them to have a
breakthrough. Then consensus happens quickly,
individual views are respected, and all are
motivated to help implement the result. Debate
and deliberation, the ideals of our founders,
mute this possibility. These modes are oriented
toward critical thinking and winning the
competition, instead of creative thinking and
seeking what is best for all. Even
"consensus-building," where people are expected
to suppress their own individuality for the
benefit of the group, mutes the possibility for
breakthroughs.
The Wisdom Council is structured for choice-creating in a number of
ways.
* It is a "time out" from the usual political conversation.
* It is a diverse group of ordinary people who speak only for
themselves.
* The group must reach unanimity.
* The group has been symbolically anointed to speak as "We the People.
* And the group is aided by a facilitator-
hopefully, one who uses "Dynamic Facilitation."
Dynamic Facilitation (DF) is a new social
invention oriented to helping groups achieve
choice-creating. [1]
Tom Atlee, the author of "The Tao of Democracy:
Using Co-Intelligence to Create a World That
Works for All" (www.taoofdemocracy.com) says,
"Part of why I love Dynamic Facilitation so much
is that it works with people AS THEY ARE. It
doesn't require that they buy into a set of rules
about how they're going to talk together. They
can be [jerks[ and the facilitator makes sure (a)
that they don't get shut down because of that,
(b) that the people they target -- and the group
as a whole -- continue to feel safe and (c) that
whatever gift they bring gets heard and made
available to the group mind. This alone makes DF
incredibly useful in a pluralistic democracy. Add
to that its power to metabolize conflict into
useful insights and to engender co-creativity
among diverse people, and it's a real
treasure."[2]
The Wisdom Council Can Transform Society
At first glance, a Wisdom Council doesn't seem
like it would do very much. "OK, so the group
determines a unanimous conclusion and presents
it, then what?" The Wisdom Council would identify
a general-interest viewpoint, express it in a
powerful new way and enable all-of-us-together to
have more influence over legislation.
But this is only a minor influence. It would also
educate people about the important issues,
involve more citizens in current affairs, include
minority voices and those who are currently
underrepresented, help overcome the dominance of
corporate controlled media, raise the important
issues and put them on the national agenda, and
raise the quality of the political conversation.
One big impact of the Amendment would be in how
it opens the door to a transformation of how we
make collective decisions. Consider, for example,
what it would mean to have a legitimate,
thoughtful voice of an inclusive "We the People."
This would approximate a true democracy. For
example, as the Wisdom Council process continues,
the Supreme Court [might] build trust in the
dynamic views of "We the People" today. At some
point they [might well] hold those views to be a
more relevant standard for their judgements than
the static positions taken by "We the People" of
the eighteenth century.
Currently, we do not make collective decisions in
a thoughtful way. Special interests buy the
media, politicians, and expert voices to defeat
legislation that is in the public interest.
"Sound bites" generated by highly paid public
relations firms make bad proposals sound good,
and good ones sound costly, bureaucratic, or
stupid. But a Wisdom Council can help all of us
to examine, understand, and appreciate the
underlying issues more deeply, and build the
political will for thoughtful actions.
With the Amendment in place, you and I will
participate in creating a shared vision of what
all people want. To have such a vision is a shift
in leadership style from our current reactive
mode, stopping bad things from happening, to a
pro-active mode, helping good things to happen. A
visionary leadership style requires fewer laws.
It would transform government efficiency, how the
media reports the news, and how individuals
contribute to society.
The Wisdom Council promises to shift the basis of
society from competition for scarce resources,
like a scarcity of jobs, toward cooperation to
enhance our shared abundance. In my community,
for instance, there are limited jobs for teachers
in the local school and the schools are cutting
back because of lack of funds. Yet at the same
time, there are many people who may or may not
have teaching credentials, who would dearly love
to teach kids. Our present system impoverishes
individuals and society alike by keeping this
pressing need and these vital human resources
apart. With a Wisdom Council in place, common
sense can reassert itself over the dictates of
the system.
To enact the Citizens Amendment is to open the
door to a transformation of our selves, as well.
For instance, it would help us break out of our
collective denial about the big problems we face
and our feelings of powerlessness over them. It
provides a way for all of us to become creative
and empowered in serving others and life on this
planet.
An Example from History
The best example of how the Wisdom Council can
transform our society today is how something like
it initiated a world-transformation during the
years 1787-1791. The delegates to the U.S.
Constitutional Convention didn't think of
themselves as "We the People." Most believed in
the benefits of having an aristocracy and were
fearful of democracy. They didn't include slaves,
women, Native Americans, or those who had no
property in their design for governance. But
despite these non-democratic tendencies, the
founders described the U.S. Constitution as
having been written by "We the People."
This phrasing was not what they wanted to say. To
them, it was really the states that were
ordaining and establishing this Constitution. But
since the Convention had already decided that the
Constitution would go into effect after
ratification by nine of the thirteen states, and
no one knew which states would adopt it, the
document couldn't start with a list of states.
"We the People" was a grammatically convenient
phrase.
Besides representing itself as speaking for We
the People, the U.S. Constitutional Convention
was like a constitutionally anointed Wisdom
Council in many ways. It was a small group of
people who took "time out" from the normal course
of events for a high-visibility meeting. It
addressed the big issues of the day, established
a higher than normal quality of conversation,
sought consensus rather than a majority, issued a
near-unanimous proposal and then disbanded. The
final document was signed by 39 out of 42 present.
One might ask about the Constitutional
Convention, as people often do about the Wisdom
Council, "How could there be any real change
without follow-up?" It just presented its
conclusion and disbanded. Action happened because
its conclusions sparked a widespread conversation
throughout the land and initiated a
self-organizing dynamic of change. It was from
this larger conversation that the Constitution
was implemented and the Bill of Rights was added.
The whole process took only one Wisdom
Council-like meeting, plus four and a half years
of talking and thinking. In the end, "We the
People" really did "ordain and establish" the new
system.
The Citizens Amendment would establish annual
symbolic meetings of "We the People." Those
selected for Wisdom Councils would be given more
power to affect change than were the original
founders. These citizens are anointed by the U.S.
Constitution to speak for "We the People." They
are not beholden to various states or
constituencies, but can speak their minds and
hearts freely. They are not limited in what they
can talk about or recommend, but can pick any
issue, and frame it in their own way. In fact,
they need not even propose an answer. They can
just describe a problem and ask their fellow
citizens to solve it. They have the advantage of
a facilitator, the mass media and the Internet to
generate citizen resonance.
Plus, these "constitutional conventions" are not
just one-time phenomena. They are ongoing.
You and I were born into a system that we didn't
design. Nor did we have the chance to critically
examine and approve it before we came under its
control. We say that we live in a democracy
because we live in a rule-of-law system, we have
a large measure of freedom, and we vote for
elected representatives to make the laws.
Although this may be the best system on earth,
without us choosing it, it is not a democracy.
Thomas Jefferson pointed this out in a letter he
wrote to his friend, James Madison. From the
actuarial tables of his time, he had calculated
that a majority of any given generation would be
dead after about nineteen years. With this
statistic in mind, he wrote: "It may be proved
that no society can make a perpetual
constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth
belongs always to the living generation. . . .
Every constitution, then, and every law naturally
expires at the end of 19 years. If it be enforced
longer, it is an act of force and not of
right."[3]
Going Forward
The Wisdom Council is a new concept that needs
testing. Schools, unions, towns, cities,
counties, states, nations and all large systems
that seek democratic governance can use it.
Consultant, Nancy Rosanoff, established one
Wisdom Council experiment in Pleasantville, NY.
Nine citizens were randomly selected with the
blessing of the Town Trustees. They met for eight
hours-four hours on each of a Saturday and
Sunday. They were dynamically facilitated to
achieve unanimity. In the last half-hour, they
made a presentation to the Town Trustees. A quick
summary of their unanimous conclusions
illustrates how creative and thoughtful such a
group can be:
Theme: We need to have more pride in
Pleasantville. We can't just be a bedroom
community but need to be a real community.
There were three subheadings:
1) We need to set up a community infrastructure
to separate New York City commuter parking from
downtown parking and to redirect traffic. (They
had a design for how to do it and how to pay for
it.)
2) We need to create community spirit by
establishing a real center to the town. (The
group suggested using awnings, landscaping and
lighting, and an ongoing committee to encourage
more diverse kinds of downtown businesses.)
3) Youth should be a priority. (The group
identified an abandoned building that should be
an activity center and described ideas for its
funding. They proposed a weekend bus for youth
activities.)
So far this experiment is missing crucial pieces
that create a "We the People." The people of
Pleasantville should enact the Wisdom Council
through a citizens' initiative. The random
selection should be done in a public ceremony,
everyone in town should be invited to a
large-scale presentation of the results, and
there should be organized opportunities for
people to dialogue about the ideas and add their
views. A more complete experiment is planned for
Ashland, OR in the fall of 2003. [4] [This has
now been successfully held. - Tom Atlee] A
non-profit organization, the Center for Wise
Democratic Processes has been formed to help
communities organize Wisdom Councils.[5]
There is interest from a TV producer in a Wisdom
Council experiment for national television. One
way this might happen is to randomly select
sixteen people each quarter to meet for three
days and to have them present their unanimous
findings to a live local and national audience.
Viewers would be encouraged to watch the show
with friends or in churches and community
centers, and to comment on the results through
the Web. This allows people to experience the
Wisdom Council process and to start building a
general-interest perspective. If the timing is
right, this TV show can help establish a
"people's agenda" for the Presidential debates
and the next election.
A common response of many people when they first
hear about the Citizens Amendment is to dismiss
the concept as unworkable. But it is our current
system that will soon prove itself to be
unworkable without this change. It is on
automatic pilot, programmed with
eighteenth-century assumptions about the nature
of human beings and what is needed in the world.
It directs us to keep our heads down, to stay in
denial about our collective situation, while it
drives us toward a world we didn't choose and
that is unsustainable. The Wisdom Council offers
a way for us to call "time out," to come together
as We the People, and to take charge of our
destiny. The potential benefits are immense and
the risk is low. I hope you will investigate
further and experiment with this proposal.
America's Abu Ghraibs
May 31, 2004
By BOB HERBERT
Most Americans were shocked by the sadistic treatment of
Iraqi detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison. But we shouldn't
have been. Not only are inmates at prisons in the U.S. frequently
subjected
to similarly grotesque treatment, but Congress passed a law in 1996 to
ensure that in most cases they were barred from receiving any financial
compensation for the abuse.
We routinely treat prisoners in the United States like
animals. We brutalize and degrade them, both men and women.
And we have a lousy record when it comes to protecting well-behaved,
weak
and mentally ill prisoners from the predators surrounding them.
Very few Americans have raised their voices in opposition
to our shameful prison policies. And I'm convinced that's primarily
because
the inmates are viewed as less than human.
Stephen Bright, director of the Southern Center for Human Rights,
represented several prisoners in Georgia who sought compensation in the
late-1990's for treatment that was remarkably similar to the abuses at
Abu
Ghraib. An undertaker named Wayne Garner was in charge of the prison
system
at the time, having been appointed in 1995 by the governor, Zell
Miller, who
is now a U.S. senator.
Mr. Garner considered himself a tough guy. In a federal
lawsuit brought on behalf of the prisoners by the center,
he was quoted as saying that while there were some inmates
who "truly want to do better . . . there's another 30 to 35
per cent that ain't fit to kill. And I'm going to be there
to accommodate them."
On Oct. 23, 1996, officers from the Tactical Squad of the Georgia
Department
of Corrections raided the inmates' living quarters at Dooly State
Prison, a
medium-security facility in Unadilla, Ga. This was part of a series of
brutal shakedowns at prisons around the state that were designed to
show the
prisoners that a new and tougher regime was in charge.
What followed, according to the lawsuit, was simply sick. Officers
opened
cell doors and ordered the inmates, all males, to run outside and
strip.
With female prison staff members looking on, and at times laughing,
several
inmates were subjected to extensive and wholly unnecessary body cavity
searches. The inmates were ordered to lift their genitals, to squat, to
bend
over and display themselves, etc.
One inmate who was suspected of being gay was told that if
he ever said anything about the way he was being treated,
he would be locked up and beaten until he wouldn't "want to
be gay anymore." An officer who was staring at another
naked inmate said, "I bet you can tap dance." The inmate
was forced to dance, and then had his body cavities
searched.
An inmate in a dormitory identified as J-2 was slapped in
the face and ordered to bend over and show himself to his cellmate. The
raiding party apparently found that to be hilarious.
According to the lawsuit, Mr. Garner himself, the commissioner of the
Department of Corrections, was present at the Dooly Prison raid.
None of the prisoners named in the lawsuit were accused of
any improper behavior during the course of the raid. The suit
charged that the inmates' constitutional rights had been violated
and sought compensation for the pain, suffering, humiliation and
degradation they had been subjected to.
Fat chance.
The Prison Litigation Reform Act, designed in part to limit "frivolous"
lawsuits by inmates, was passed by Congress and signed into law by Bill
Clinton in 1996. It specifically prohibits the awarding of financial
compensation to prisoners "for mental or emotional injury while in
custody
without a prior showing of physical injury."
Without any evidence that they had been seriously physically
harmed, the inmates in the Georgia case were out of luck.
The courts ruled against them.
This is the policy of the United States of America.
Said Mr. Bright: "Today we are talking about compensating prisoners in
Iraq
for degrading treatment, as of course we should. But we do not allow
compensation for prisoners in the United States who suffer the same
kind of
degradation and humiliation."
The message with regard to the treatment of prisoners in the U.S.
has been clear for years: Treat them any way you'd like. They're
just animals.
The treatment of the detainees in Iraq was far from an aberration.
They, too, were treated like animals, which was simply a logical
extension of the way we treat prisoners here at home.
---
Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company
By BOB HERBERT
Most Americans were shocked by the sadistic treatment of
Iraqi detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison. But we shouldn't
have been. Not only are inmates at prisons in the U.S. frequently
subjected
to similarly grotesque treatment, but Congress passed a law in 1996 to
ensure that in most cases they were barred from receiving any financial
compensation for the abuse.
We routinely treat prisoners in the United States like
animals. We brutalize and degrade them, both men and women.
And we have a lousy record when it comes to protecting well-behaved,
weak
and mentally ill prisoners from the predators surrounding them.
Very few Americans have raised their voices in opposition
to our shameful prison policies. And I'm convinced that's primarily
because
the inmates are viewed as less than human.
Stephen Bright, director of the Southern Center for Human Rights,
represented several prisoners in Georgia who sought compensation in the
late-1990's for treatment that was remarkably similar to the abuses at
Abu
Ghraib. An undertaker named Wayne Garner was in charge of the prison
system
at the time, having been appointed in 1995 by the governor, Zell
Miller, who
is now a U.S. senator.
Mr. Garner considered himself a tough guy. In a federal
lawsuit brought on behalf of the prisoners by the center,
he was quoted as saying that while there were some inmates
who "truly want to do better . . . there's another 30 to 35
per cent that ain't fit to kill. And I'm going to be there
to accommodate them."
On Oct. 23, 1996, officers from the Tactical Squad of the Georgia
Department
of Corrections raided the inmates' living quarters at Dooly State
Prison, a
medium-security facility in Unadilla, Ga. This was part of a series of
brutal shakedowns at prisons around the state that were designed to
show the
prisoners that a new and tougher regime was in charge.
What followed, according to the lawsuit, was simply sick. Officers
opened
cell doors and ordered the inmates, all males, to run outside and
strip.
With female prison staff members looking on, and at times laughing,
several
inmates were subjected to extensive and wholly unnecessary body cavity
searches. The inmates were ordered to lift their genitals, to squat, to
bend
over and display themselves, etc.
One inmate who was suspected of being gay was told that if
he ever said anything about the way he was being treated,
he would be locked up and beaten until he wouldn't "want to
be gay anymore." An officer who was staring at another
naked inmate said, "I bet you can tap dance." The inmate
was forced to dance, and then had his body cavities
searched.
An inmate in a dormitory identified as J-2 was slapped in
the face and ordered to bend over and show himself to his cellmate. The
raiding party apparently found that to be hilarious.
According to the lawsuit, Mr. Garner himself, the commissioner of the
Department of Corrections, was present at the Dooly Prison raid.
None of the prisoners named in the lawsuit were accused of
any improper behavior during the course of the raid. The suit
charged that the inmates' constitutional rights had been violated
and sought compensation for the pain, suffering, humiliation and
degradation they had been subjected to.
Fat chance.
The Prison Litigation Reform Act, designed in part to limit "frivolous"
lawsuits by inmates, was passed by Congress and signed into law by Bill
Clinton in 1996. It specifically prohibits the awarding of financial
compensation to prisoners "for mental or emotional injury while in
custody
without a prior showing of physical injury."
Without any evidence that they had been seriously physically
harmed, the inmates in the Georgia case were out of luck.
The courts ruled against them.
This is the policy of the United States of America.
Said Mr. Bright: "Today we are talking about compensating prisoners in
Iraq
for degrading treatment, as of course we should. But we do not allow
compensation for prisoners in the United States who suffer the same
kind of
degradation and humiliation."
The message with regard to the treatment of prisoners in the U.S.
has been clear for years: Treat them any way you'd like. They're
just animals.
The treatment of the detainees in Iraq was far from an aberration.
They, too, were treated like animals, which was simply a logical
extension of the way we treat prisoners here at home.
---
Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company
23 September 2006
V-Day Karama Partners Issue Statement on Violence in Middle East
August 7, 2006
V-Day's mission is to end violence against women and girls worldwide. As such, we stand in opposition to war. We ask all political leaders to break the old paradigm of responding to violence with more violence. Instead we urge them to seek more sophisticated solutions that work to reveal the root causes of violence and transformation of violence rather than the escalation of it.
Following is a statement from our V-Day Karama partners on the ongoing violence in Lebanon and Gaza. “Karama,” the Arabic word for dignity, is a unique partnership with nine countries of the Middle East and North Africa: Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Sudan.
-V-Day
STATEMENT FROM V-DAY KARAMA PARTNERS
As Arab organizations and representatives of human rights efforts, as citizens in countries living under political violence and different types of occupations, and as women working together to gain peace with dignity, we oppose all forms of violence.
Therefore, we condemn the horrific attacks and extreme military force being used against civilians, including women and children, in Lebanon and Gaza. We condemn the rush to inflict weapons and killing instead of attempting non-violent negotiations and prisoner exchange.
We condemn the United States government's material and political support of the attacks by Israel, the G8's one-sided response, and the deafening silence from some Arab Governments which ignores and condones the heinous scale of civilian casualties and infrastructural damage suffered by the families and communities of Lebanon and Gaza—more than 650 death in Lebanon and 106 in Gaza since 25 June 2006.
As the Israeli air strikes continue well-past 1,500 bombings, as the death and destruction mounts, we condemn the disproportionate harm being done to Lebanese and Palestinian civilians—taking lives, health, homes, livelihoods, economic development, the rule of law, infrastructure, and governance for years to come. In just the past few days, Beirut has seen the appearance of 500,000 displaced families and refugees.
We are women leaders from nine countries across the Arab Region, linked through V-Day Karama, addressing violence against women from every angle of society and politics. When political and military violence erupts, our work begins there.
This includes the conflicts elsewhere in Iraq and Sudan that have leveraged exponential political, military, and humanitarian crises that undermine community and human security for a generation. As the Karama partners we are coordinating common actions to cease these crises. "Karama" means dignity, a prerequisite for establishing peace and keeping an end to violence.
We are women in the region asking the international community and international human rights organizations to take a decisive stand against the attack without any neutrality. We believe that this is the time for these organizations to show their support of our issues and to act immediately to cease fire, take urgent action for solidarity with Lebanese and Palestinian people, and to provide humanitarian assistance for the displaced.
Starting immediately, Karama partners in and around Lebanon and Gaza have set forth the following actions:
- Hold a prominent event on the 2nd of September in Jordan by V-Day Karama, Al Gad News Paper and TV Satellite Channel, and Arab Women Organization of Jordan to support women's NGOs in Lebanon in their struggle for providing humanitarian assistance.
- Activities to support Lebanese women's organizations in the nine countries that Karama work in, as Lebanese people start facing shortages in food, medicine, and fuel.
- Distribute the statements and calls from Lebanese Civil Society Organizations to the international organizations and UN agencies.
- In Addition to activities will be held by Karama partners in each of the Arab Countries.
Organization/Country
1. V-Day Karama
Based in nine Arab countries (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine, Algeria, Morocco, Syria, Sudan, and Tunisia) with headquarters in Egypt and a regional office in Jordan
2. Arab Women of Organization
Jordan
3. Women in Communication Society
Algeria
4. The Human Forum for Women
Jordan
5. Women Will of Iraq
Iraq
6. ACT
Egypt
7. Egyptian Family Foundation
Egypt
8. The Egyptian Centre for Women's Rights
Egypt
9. Syrian Committee for Women Causes
Syria
10. Research Centre for Refugees Studies
Jordan
11. Kafa (Enough) Violence and Exploitation
Lebanon
12. Hey Institute
Egypt
13. The Lebanese Democratic Forum for Women
Lebanon
14. Najdeh, Palestinian Women Forum
Lebanon
15. Al Nadeem Centre
Egypt
16. Jordanian Society for Professional Ethics
Jordan
17. Women Organization to Combat Illiteracy
Jordan
18. The Jordanian Society for Development
Jordan
19. Izdihar Project for Family Development
Jordan
20. Al Asera Al Bedaa' Society
Jordan
21. Al Nakheel Society
Morocco
22. The Alliance for Syrian Women
Syria
23. UMI Society
Egypt
24. Women and Society Organization
Egypt
25. Union de l'Action Féminine ,
Morocco
26. The Society for Women In Crises
Algeria
27. The Egyptian Centre for Housing Rights
Egypt
28. The Center for Studies & Programs of Alternative Development
Egypt
29. Al Hassna Magazine
Lebanon
30. Jordan Society for Profession and Work Ethics
Jordan
31. Women Movement for Peace Society
Algeria
32. EACPE
Egypt
33. Mosawa Network,
Jordan
34. The Egyptian Forum for Women and Development,
Egypt
35. Salmmah Centre for Gender and Development
Sudan
36. Siha Horn of Africa Network,
Sudan
37. Women's Centre for Legal Aid and Counseling,
Palestine
38. Women against Violence,
Palestine
39. Eve Centre for Counseling,
Morocco
40. Tunisian Women Society for Research and Development
Tunisia
41. The Arab Society for Sociologists
Tunisia
42. The Arab Alliance for women
Egypt
43. Center for Egyptian Women Issues
Egypt
44. Gender Centre for Research And Training
Sudan
45. Women Society for Solidarity with Urban Families
Algeria
46. The National Union for Algerian Women
Algeria
47. The National Committee for Women and Sport
Algeria
48. National Society for Women's Development
Algeria
49. The National Organizations for Families Victims of Terrorism
Algeria
50. The National Society for Urban Women and development
Algeria
51. Parliamentarian Women's Forum
Algeria
52. Society for Enhancement of Women's Activities
Algeria
53. Iqra' (read) Society)
Algeria
54. National Society for Family Development
Algeria
55. The Moroccan Society for Advocating Women's Rights/ Fama Centre
Morocco
56. The Moroccan Society for Combating Violence against Women
Morocco
About V-Day Karama
In 2005, V-Day continued its initiatives in Africa, Asia and the Middle East by launching the Karama Program, envisioned by V-Day Special Representative and Karama Chair, Hibaaq Osman, in Cairo, Egypt. “Karama,” the Arabic word for dignity, is a unique partnership with nine countries of the Middle East and North Africa: Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Sudan. Through women's organizations and inter-regional agencies such as the Arab League and the African Union, Karama brings together women, men, governments, activists and artists to examine the impact of violence on women's health, education, and economics, and to create and encourage campaigns at the national, regional, and international levels to end violence against women, tailored to the cultural realities of the target country. Headquartered in Cairo, Karama works closely with organizations working in different sectors, and on different issues in each society, such as education, health, religion, art, economics, and policy.
V-Day's mission is to end violence against women and girls worldwide. As such, we stand in opposition to war. We ask all political leaders to break the old paradigm of responding to violence with more violence. Instead we urge them to seek more sophisticated solutions that work to reveal the root causes of violence and transformation of violence rather than the escalation of it.
Following is a statement from our V-Day Karama partners on the ongoing violence in Lebanon and Gaza. “Karama,” the Arabic word for dignity, is a unique partnership with nine countries of the Middle East and North Africa: Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Sudan.
-V-Day
STATEMENT FROM V-DAY KARAMA PARTNERS
As Arab organizations and representatives of human rights efforts, as citizens in countries living under political violence and different types of occupations, and as women working together to gain peace with dignity, we oppose all forms of violence.
Therefore, we condemn the horrific attacks and extreme military force being used against civilians, including women and children, in Lebanon and Gaza. We condemn the rush to inflict weapons and killing instead of attempting non-violent negotiations and prisoner exchange.
We condemn the United States government's material and political support of the attacks by Israel, the G8's one-sided response, and the deafening silence from some Arab Governments which ignores and condones the heinous scale of civilian casualties and infrastructural damage suffered by the families and communities of Lebanon and Gaza—more than 650 death in Lebanon and 106 in Gaza since 25 June 2006.
As the Israeli air strikes continue well-past 1,500 bombings, as the death and destruction mounts, we condemn the disproportionate harm being done to Lebanese and Palestinian civilians—taking lives, health, homes, livelihoods, economic development, the rule of law, infrastructure, and governance for years to come. In just the past few days, Beirut has seen the appearance of 500,000 displaced families and refugees.
We are women leaders from nine countries across the Arab Region, linked through V-Day Karama, addressing violence against women from every angle of society and politics. When political and military violence erupts, our work begins there.
This includes the conflicts elsewhere in Iraq and Sudan that have leveraged exponential political, military, and humanitarian crises that undermine community and human security for a generation. As the Karama partners we are coordinating common actions to cease these crises. "Karama" means dignity, a prerequisite for establishing peace and keeping an end to violence.
We are women in the region asking the international community and international human rights organizations to take a decisive stand against the attack without any neutrality. We believe that this is the time for these organizations to show their support of our issues and to act immediately to cease fire, take urgent action for solidarity with Lebanese and Palestinian people, and to provide humanitarian assistance for the displaced.
Starting immediately, Karama partners in and around Lebanon and Gaza have set forth the following actions:
- Hold a prominent event on the 2nd of September in Jordan by V-Day Karama, Al Gad News Paper and TV Satellite Channel, and Arab Women Organization of Jordan to support women's NGOs in Lebanon in their struggle for providing humanitarian assistance.
- Activities to support Lebanese women's organizations in the nine countries that Karama work in, as Lebanese people start facing shortages in food, medicine, and fuel.
- Distribute the statements and calls from Lebanese Civil Society Organizations to the international organizations and UN agencies.
- In Addition to activities will be held by Karama partners in each of the Arab Countries.
Organization/Country
1. V-Day Karama
Based in nine Arab countries (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine, Algeria, Morocco, Syria, Sudan, and Tunisia) with headquarters in Egypt and a regional office in Jordan
2. Arab Women of Organization
Jordan
3. Women in Communication Society
Algeria
4. The Human Forum for Women
Jordan
5. Women Will of Iraq
Iraq
6. ACT
Egypt
7. Egyptian Family Foundation
Egypt
8. The Egyptian Centre for Women's Rights
Egypt
9. Syrian Committee for Women Causes
Syria
10. Research Centre for Refugees Studies
Jordan
11. Kafa (Enough) Violence and Exploitation
Lebanon
12. Hey Institute
Egypt
13. The Lebanese Democratic Forum for Women
Lebanon
14. Najdeh, Palestinian Women Forum
Lebanon
15. Al Nadeem Centre
Egypt
16. Jordanian Society for Professional Ethics
Jordan
17. Women Organization to Combat Illiteracy
Jordan
18. The Jordanian Society for Development
Jordan
19. Izdihar Project for Family Development
Jordan
20. Al Asera Al Bedaa' Society
Jordan
21. Al Nakheel Society
Morocco
22. The Alliance for Syrian Women
Syria
23. UMI Society
Egypt
24. Women and Society Organization
Egypt
25. Union de l'Action Féminine ,
Morocco
26. The Society for Women In Crises
Algeria
27. The Egyptian Centre for Housing Rights
Egypt
28. The Center for Studies & Programs of Alternative Development
Egypt
29. Al Hassna Magazine
Lebanon
30. Jordan Society for Profession and Work Ethics
Jordan
31. Women Movement for Peace Society
Algeria
32. EACPE
Egypt
33. Mosawa Network,
Jordan
34. The Egyptian Forum for Women and Development,
Egypt
35. Salmmah Centre for Gender and Development
Sudan
36. Siha Horn of Africa Network,
Sudan
37. Women's Centre for Legal Aid and Counseling,
Palestine
38. Women against Violence,
Palestine
39. Eve Centre for Counseling,
Morocco
40. Tunisian Women Society for Research and Development
Tunisia
41. The Arab Society for Sociologists
Tunisia
42. The Arab Alliance for women
Egypt
43. Center for Egyptian Women Issues
Egypt
44. Gender Centre for Research And Training
Sudan
45. Women Society for Solidarity with Urban Families
Algeria
46. The National Union for Algerian Women
Algeria
47. The National Committee for Women and Sport
Algeria
48. National Society for Women's Development
Algeria
49. The National Organizations for Families Victims of Terrorism
Algeria
50. The National Society for Urban Women and development
Algeria
51. Parliamentarian Women's Forum
Algeria
52. Society for Enhancement of Women's Activities
Algeria
53. Iqra' (read) Society)
Algeria
54. National Society for Family Development
Algeria
55. The Moroccan Society for Advocating Women's Rights/ Fama Centre
Morocco
56. The Moroccan Society for Combating Violence against Women
Morocco
About V-Day Karama
In 2005, V-Day continued its initiatives in Africa, Asia and the Middle East by launching the Karama Program, envisioned by V-Day Special Representative and Karama Chair, Hibaaq Osman, in Cairo, Egypt. “Karama,” the Arabic word for dignity, is a unique partnership with nine countries of the Middle East and North Africa: Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Sudan. Through women's organizations and inter-regional agencies such as the Arab League and the African Union, Karama brings together women, men, governments, activists and artists to examine the impact of violence on women's health, education, and economics, and to create and encourage campaigns at the national, regional, and international levels to end violence against women, tailored to the cultural realities of the target country. Headquartered in Cairo, Karama works closely with organizations working in different sectors, and on different issues in each society, such as education, health, religion, art, economics, and policy.
An Open Letter to President Bush, Read by Eve Ensler at V-Day Paris
March 31, 2003
Paris, France
Dear Mr. President,
I am writing as a woman, as a citizen of the world, as an American who has just visited 16 countries, including Afghanistan, Jordan and Pakistan, working with V-Day, a global movement to stop violence against women and girls.
I am writing because I believe your war on Iraq reveals your profound lack of understanding of the world.I am writing because I believe your war on Iraq reveals your profound lack of understanding of the world.
I believe your war indicates a desire to dominate, rather transform, heal, improve, or build relationships.
I do not think you understand that the United States is one country and one culture and not the only country and culture. That the spirit of domination threatens the world’s diversity and difference—the very forces that are most magical and essential to the human experience.
I do not think that you have sat with the panicked Afghan women in Kabul who believe the war will shift attention away from their country and thus bring an end to their short-lived security. I do not think you have seen the desperate face of the woman in a Ramallah refugee camp, a widow who just lost her two sons. I do not think you have been privy to the generosity of the Muslim women in the ghettos of Cairo, in the kitchens of Bosnia, in the high offices of Jordan. I do not think you have allowed these people to enter you.
I think you are in the process of polluting all that is great about America, destroying the dream, erasing the years of struggle for democracy, human rights, self-determination, tolerance and peace.
Here is a response to some of your terribly dangerous misconceptions, based on what I have seen in my travels:
1. The Muslim world is not populated by terrorists. Most people long for peace, long for justice, long for cooperation.
2. Muslims do not hate Americans. They despise the current American government as they feel it has no respect for their values, culture, religion, or ways of being. They are suspicious of a government that bombs places like Afghanistan with the promise of reconstruction and then abandons the job before the majority of people have heat, water or electricity. Terrorists are born in the cracks of broken promises.
3. The people of the Muslim world want to love Americans, as the experiment of democracy in the United States has been a great inspiration to them.
4. The loss of American lives is not worse then the loss of Iraqi lives or Israeli lives or Palestinian lives or Bosnian lives or Afghani lives. Three thousand deaths--whether it be in the World Trade Center or the streets of Baghdad or in Mazur Sharif—will always be equal to the destruction of three thousand dreams, stories, and families.
5. You cannot help people through force or violence. You help people by serving them, by asking questions, through humility, by being engaged in a process of discovery, admitting that you do not have answers and seeking answers together. You help people by providing safety and resources so they can do their best thinking. You help people by trusting they have the capacity to help themselves.
Mr. President, there is a new paradigm. I have seen it manifest itself everywhere, from Manhattan to Manila, Sarajevo to Johannesburg. Women and men who have suffered enormous violence are not buying AK-47s or machetes or weapons of mass destruction. They are not plotting retaliation or revenge. I have seen how in the Rift Valley of Africa the women who were mutilated are now opening safe houses to protect young girls from Female Genital Mutilation. In Houston, Denver, New York, Los Angeles, and Kauai, women are telling their stories of rape and domestic battery, risking shame and embarrassment so other women will be free. In Juarez, Mexico, women activists are risking assassination as they speak out against the murder and disappearances of hundreds of poor women. In the refugee camps of Peshawar, Afghan women who lost every right under the Taliban are bringing up girls and boys to be equal. In the community centers of Mostar, women who were raped during the Bosnian war are working with soldiers to heal their trauma. In Islamabad, women are risking Fatwa to save other women from acid burnings and honor killings. In the streets of Paris, women are risking everything to hide women from their pimps and save their daughters from sex slavery. These are the new warriors--those who transform the violence into healing. Those who are creative and imaginative and careful in their response.
Women and men all over the world know that the time of violence is over. Your war will not divide or distract us or undo this new paradigm. Yes, the story of violence is in our bodies. But so is the new determination and strength. We grieve the centuries of rape, bombings, brutality, and cruelty. We refuse to act in kind. Instead we hold and transform this violence, and we do everything in our power to prevent this from happening again to anyone, anywhere.
We urge you to stop the bombing, to stop the dominating.
End the old paradigm. Join us here on the other side.
Sincerely,
Eve Ensler
Activist/Playwright/Founder, V-Day
Paris, France
Dear Mr. President,
I am writing as a woman, as a citizen of the world, as an American who has just visited 16 countries, including Afghanistan, Jordan and Pakistan, working with V-Day, a global movement to stop violence against women and girls.
I am writing because I believe your war on Iraq reveals your profound lack of understanding of the world.I am writing because I believe your war on Iraq reveals your profound lack of understanding of the world.
I believe your war indicates a desire to dominate, rather transform, heal, improve, or build relationships.
I do not think you understand that the United States is one country and one culture and not the only country and culture. That the spirit of domination threatens the world’s diversity and difference—the very forces that are most magical and essential to the human experience.
I do not think that you have sat with the panicked Afghan women in Kabul who believe the war will shift attention away from their country and thus bring an end to their short-lived security. I do not think you have seen the desperate face of the woman in a Ramallah refugee camp, a widow who just lost her two sons. I do not think you have been privy to the generosity of the Muslim women in the ghettos of Cairo, in the kitchens of Bosnia, in the high offices of Jordan. I do not think you have allowed these people to enter you.
I think you are in the process of polluting all that is great about America, destroying the dream, erasing the years of struggle for democracy, human rights, self-determination, tolerance and peace.
Here is a response to some of your terribly dangerous misconceptions, based on what I have seen in my travels:
1. The Muslim world is not populated by terrorists. Most people long for peace, long for justice, long for cooperation.
2. Muslims do not hate Americans. They despise the current American government as they feel it has no respect for their values, culture, religion, or ways of being. They are suspicious of a government that bombs places like Afghanistan with the promise of reconstruction and then abandons the job before the majority of people have heat, water or electricity. Terrorists are born in the cracks of broken promises.
3. The people of the Muslim world want to love Americans, as the experiment of democracy in the United States has been a great inspiration to them.
4. The loss of American lives is not worse then the loss of Iraqi lives or Israeli lives or Palestinian lives or Bosnian lives or Afghani lives. Three thousand deaths--whether it be in the World Trade Center or the streets of Baghdad or in Mazur Sharif—will always be equal to the destruction of three thousand dreams, stories, and families.
5. You cannot help people through force or violence. You help people by serving them, by asking questions, through humility, by being engaged in a process of discovery, admitting that you do not have answers and seeking answers together. You help people by providing safety and resources so they can do their best thinking. You help people by trusting they have the capacity to help themselves.
Mr. President, there is a new paradigm. I have seen it manifest itself everywhere, from Manhattan to Manila, Sarajevo to Johannesburg. Women and men who have suffered enormous violence are not buying AK-47s or machetes or weapons of mass destruction. They are not plotting retaliation or revenge. I have seen how in the Rift Valley of Africa the women who were mutilated are now opening safe houses to protect young girls from Female Genital Mutilation. In Houston, Denver, New York, Los Angeles, and Kauai, women are telling their stories of rape and domestic battery, risking shame and embarrassment so other women will be free. In Juarez, Mexico, women activists are risking assassination as they speak out against the murder and disappearances of hundreds of poor women. In the refugee camps of Peshawar, Afghan women who lost every right under the Taliban are bringing up girls and boys to be equal. In the community centers of Mostar, women who were raped during the Bosnian war are working with soldiers to heal their trauma. In Islamabad, women are risking Fatwa to save other women from acid burnings and honor killings. In the streets of Paris, women are risking everything to hide women from their pimps and save their daughters from sex slavery. These are the new warriors--those who transform the violence into healing. Those who are creative and imaginative and careful in their response.
Women and men all over the world know that the time of violence is over. Your war will not divide or distract us or undo this new paradigm. Yes, the story of violence is in our bodies. But so is the new determination and strength. We grieve the centuries of rape, bombings, brutality, and cruelty. We refuse to act in kind. Instead we hold and transform this violence, and we do everything in our power to prevent this from happening again to anyone, anywhere.
We urge you to stop the bombing, to stop the dominating.
End the old paradigm. Join us here on the other side.
Sincerely,
Eve Ensler
Activist/Playwright/Founder, V-Day
This Is Most Fragile Time for Afghanistan
After her most recent trip to Afghanistan, playwright and women's activist Eve Ensler pleads for the U.S. to keep its promises to stabilize the country, which she likens to a patient at a dangerous point of recovery.
I have just returned from Afghanistan. This was my third trip. I write now because the situation is urgent. Afghanistan today reminds me of a person who has been seriously ill. She is just beginning to recover, the fever has broken and there are those early moments where she suddenly feels alive. We know this is the most dangerous time. The energy is part of the fever itself, a kind of delirium, but the patient thrilled with the possibility of living, if not protected can go wild with activity. This exertion can have deadly consequences. In the case of Afghanistan this somewhat frenzied, disorganized activity comes not just from a momentary recovery-a ceasing of bombs falling but from a deep panic that the recovery is short lived and not guaranteed and so everything must be done now or it will disappear forever.
I would say this is the most fragile time I have experienced in Afghanistan.
Under the Taliban it was a tortured, ruinously oppressed country, but women in particular knew what to prepare for, they knew how to defend themselves against the madness, they could identify their enemies, they were braced for violence. They had learned how to maneuver in clandestine ways. Now for example, the situation is less clear, there is the pretense of liberation, although the ongoing threat of violence can be felt.
For example, at our recent women's leadership training conference women, who were visionary about the future, felt compelled to still wear burqas. On March 8, there were huge events celebrating International Women's day. One event at the Afghan Women's Union unveiled a statue symbolizing women's freedom and power. Hundreds attended. A day later the statue was stolen. The Women's Minister who in theory is the symbolic representative of Afghan women cannot move anywhere in the country without bodyguards. Although women are now working to create new businesses, build schools, open hospitals, the majority of the people in Afghanistan still live without heat, electricity or running water.
Having spent time in recent months with Afghan women in Kabul, as well as women and men in Amman, Cairo, Ramallah, Islamabad, and Peshawar, I can say that the Muslim world is highly suspect of the intentions of the U.S. government. They are watching Afghanistan. It is the test case. If the U.S. does not deliver security, substantial aid and reconstruction, we may never recover the trust of the Muslim world. If we turn our backs on Afghanistan, if we do not fulfill our promises, there is a good chance that the patient will never recover nor will she fulfill her dream of a free, safe and prospering Afghanistan. Terrorists are born in the cracks of broken promises.
- Eve Ensler
Eve Ensler, playwright of "The Vagina Monologues," is the Founder and Artistic Director of V-Day, a global movement to end violence against women and girls.
This commentary appeared on Women¹s eNews (http://womensenews.org) on April 30, 2003
http://www.vday.org/contents/vday/press/media/0305021
I have just returned from Afghanistan. This was my third trip. I write now because the situation is urgent. Afghanistan today reminds me of a person who has been seriously ill. She is just beginning to recover, the fever has broken and there are those early moments where she suddenly feels alive. We know this is the most dangerous time. The energy is part of the fever itself, a kind of delirium, but the patient thrilled with the possibility of living, if not protected can go wild with activity. This exertion can have deadly consequences. In the case of Afghanistan this somewhat frenzied, disorganized activity comes not just from a momentary recovery-a ceasing of bombs falling but from a deep panic that the recovery is short lived and not guaranteed and so everything must be done now or it will disappear forever.
I would say this is the most fragile time I have experienced in Afghanistan.
Under the Taliban it was a tortured, ruinously oppressed country, but women in particular knew what to prepare for, they knew how to defend themselves against the madness, they could identify their enemies, they were braced for violence. They had learned how to maneuver in clandestine ways. Now for example, the situation is less clear, there is the pretense of liberation, although the ongoing threat of violence can be felt.
For example, at our recent women's leadership training conference women, who were visionary about the future, felt compelled to still wear burqas. On March 8, there were huge events celebrating International Women's day. One event at the Afghan Women's Union unveiled a statue symbolizing women's freedom and power. Hundreds attended. A day later the statue was stolen. The Women's Minister who in theory is the symbolic representative of Afghan women cannot move anywhere in the country without bodyguards. Although women are now working to create new businesses, build schools, open hospitals, the majority of the people in Afghanistan still live without heat, electricity or running water.
Having spent time in recent months with Afghan women in Kabul, as well as women and men in Amman, Cairo, Ramallah, Islamabad, and Peshawar, I can say that the Muslim world is highly suspect of the intentions of the U.S. government. They are watching Afghanistan. It is the test case. If the U.S. does not deliver security, substantial aid and reconstruction, we may never recover the trust of the Muslim world. If we turn our backs on Afghanistan, if we do not fulfill our promises, there is a good chance that the patient will never recover nor will she fulfill her dream of a free, safe and prospering Afghanistan. Terrorists are born in the cracks of broken promises.
- Eve Ensler
Eve Ensler, playwright of "The Vagina Monologues," is the Founder and Artistic Director of V-Day, a global movement to end violence against women and girls.
This commentary appeared on Women¹s eNews (http://womensenews.org) on April 30, 2003
http://www.vday.org/contents/vday/press/media/0305021
VM in the ME
I am writing from Cairo. Today we were part a truly momentous event, the opening of Bayat Hawa, the first shelter in Egypt for battered women. This event not only opened the first safe place for women here, but it broke open the silence and invisibility of women’s pain. It signaled that change is possible. I spent the afternoon in the new house, listening to a group of women who have suffered and continue to suffer enormous violence. Most of them had been beaten by their husbands, their brothers, their fathers. Traditionally, women do not report this to anyone as “privacy” of the family is valued above all else, and there are no laws that would protect them from such assault. If women complain, they risk their husbands, marrying another wife and taking their children away from them. Saffa, a fifteen-year old girl who was beaten by her father for years, was married at 14 and then seriously beaten by her husband. She has now moved back to her father’s house where the abuse continues. As Saffa told her story the sadness in her eyes was matched by the depth of her desire for a new life, for education, for a way out.
[...]
The policies of the United States are in many cases, escalating this war. If we look at Iraq as one example, we see that under the terrible tyranny of Saddam Hussein, women lived difficult lives, but they were actually one of the most liberated and free in the Middle East. Since the U.S. invasion and occupation, the situation has becoming increasingly desperate. Women now face ongoing abductions, honor killings, and fundamentalist oppression. They are being raped and acid burned. They do not feel safe leaving their homes or keeping jobs. Shariah law – which could seriously limit their rights - is likely to become part of the new constitution.
Where people feel threatened and undermined by outside invasion, fundamentalism grows. Fundamentalism survives on the suppression and silencing of women. As the United States sustains policies of empire building and hegemony, in the supposed name of “security”, women throughout the world, become increasingly imperiled and insecure.
As I have traveled these last eight years, I have had the honor to meet women and men across this planet who have witnessed or suffered enormous violence, and rather than getting an AK47 or a machete, they feel this violence, grieve this violence and allow it to transform within their beings. Then they devote their lives to making sure it never happens to another woman or girl. We have come to call these people ‘Vagina Warriors.’ There are thousands, perhaps millions of these warriors in the world. They are fierce, obsessed, can’t be stopped, driven. They are citizens of the world. They cherish humanity over nationhood. They are done being victims. They know no one is coming to rescue them. They are community makers. They bring everyone in.
They are women and men who constantly sacrifice their own personal security and by doing so create real safety and freedom for the rest. They realize that the end goal is becoming vulnerable, realizing the place of our connection to one another rather than becoming secure, in control and alone.
- Eve Ensler
http://www.vday.org/contents/vday/vmoment/wfntest
[...]
The policies of the United States are in many cases, escalating this war. If we look at Iraq as one example, we see that under the terrible tyranny of Saddam Hussein, women lived difficult lives, but they were actually one of the most liberated and free in the Middle East. Since the U.S. invasion and occupation, the situation has becoming increasingly desperate. Women now face ongoing abductions, honor killings, and fundamentalist oppression. They are being raped and acid burned. They do not feel safe leaving their homes or keeping jobs. Shariah law – which could seriously limit their rights - is likely to become part of the new constitution.
Where people feel threatened and undermined by outside invasion, fundamentalism grows. Fundamentalism survives on the suppression and silencing of women. As the United States sustains policies of empire building and hegemony, in the supposed name of “security”, women throughout the world, become increasingly imperiled and insecure.
As I have traveled these last eight years, I have had the honor to meet women and men across this planet who have witnessed or suffered enormous violence, and rather than getting an AK47 or a machete, they feel this violence, grieve this violence and allow it to transform within their beings. Then they devote their lives to making sure it never happens to another woman or girl. We have come to call these people ‘Vagina Warriors.’ There are thousands, perhaps millions of these warriors in the world. They are fierce, obsessed, can’t be stopped, driven. They are citizens of the world. They cherish humanity over nationhood. They are done being victims. They know no one is coming to rescue them. They are community makers. They bring everyone in.
They are women and men who constantly sacrifice their own personal security and by doing so create real safety and freedom for the rest. They realize that the end goal is becoming vulnerable, realizing the place of our connection to one another rather than becoming secure, in control and alone.
- Eve Ensler
http://www.vday.org/contents/vday/vmoment/wfntest
23 August 2006
Window on Iran
From: Fatemeh Keshavarz
To: undisclosed-recipients:
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2006 6:42 PM
Subject: Window on Iran
Dear Friends,
In the past few months, the U.S. media coverage of Iran has gone from bad to unbelievable. It used to emphasize the negative and leave out the positive. It now appears to be inventing information that those of us in close contact with Iran are unable to trace. For example, in May 2006 there was a report in the papers here that the Iranian Jews will be forced to wear a uniform. Last weekend, another breaking news was: Ahmadinejad is imposing a ban on the use of foreign words. There is no truth to either of these (I won't list more).
Some of us in the Iranian American community feel that, due to the explosive conditions in the Middle East, we must provide our American friends and family members with possibility of access to reliable information, small as its impact might be. This is why I have put this e-mail update together to keep you informed of events in contemporary Iran. Its frequency would be once a week -- unless there is significant breaking news. I have made contact with friends who will monitor the news in Iran, and I will try to follow reliable publications here. Needless to say, I will not be able to be comprehensive.
If you feel you don't need these updates, please let me know to take you off the list. If you wish to check how informed you might be about Iran, take a look at the following questions:
On the issue of the Iranian nuclear program, did you know that:
* The Iranian supreme religious leader issued a legal decree (fatwa) on November 6, 2004 in which all development, production, and use of nuclear weapons is considered against the Islamic principles and should not be undertaken under any circumstances.
* Iranian nuclear facilities have been inspected over 2000 time during the past three years (some surprise inspections) by the IAEA and nothing illegal has been found. The IAEA's report has specified "to date, there is no evidence that undeclared material are related to any weapon's programs."
* Iran is home to tens of thousands of people affected by Saddam Husain's chemical weapons, and people have a strong feeling against the use of such weapons (I know some of these people personally).
* Iran has described the package of incentives from the west as potentially acceptable and announced a while ago that there will be an official and detailed reply by August 22nd, 2006.
On the issues related to the local politics, did you know that:
* the Taliban are an enemy of Iran and have engaged in regular assassinations of Iranian diplomats.
* The Iranian regime considers al-Qa'ideh a terrorist organization.
* Iranians held night long vigils to commemorate the victims of 9/11.
* Iran does not support the Shiite extremist Moqtada al-Sadr, and prefers peace, stability, and democratic elections in Iraq because it does not wish its own Kurdish population to aspire to separatist ideas and because a democratic election in Iraq will give a prominent role to the Iraqi Shiites.
* According to all major historians of the region, in reality, Iran exercises little influence on the Hezbollah.
On the social and cultural front, did you know:
* the latest best-selling titles in Iran are the DaVinci Code and Hillary Clinton's My life in (Persian translation)
* according to the latest statistics, close to 70% of the Iranian university students are women
* IVF, and gamete donation, as well as transsexual operations are legal in Iran.
* Iranian cinema produces critically acclaimed films (often openly critical of the regime).
* Iranian women golfers, race car drivers, and polo players compete internationally.
I hope my next messages will be much shorter. Please let me know if you wish your name to be taken off this list, or if you wish to add someone's name to it. I will send out my first update message soon.
Best,
Fatemeh Keshavarz
========================
Fatemeh Keshavarz, Professor and Chair
Dept. of Asian and Near Eastern Languages and Literatuares
Washington University in St. Louis
Tel: (314) 935-5156
Fax: (314) 935-4399
To: undisclosed-recipients:
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2006 6:42 PM
Subject: Window on Iran
Dear Friends,
In the past few months, the U.S. media coverage of Iran has gone from bad to unbelievable. It used to emphasize the negative and leave out the positive. It now appears to be inventing information that those of us in close contact with Iran are unable to trace. For example, in May 2006 there was a report in the papers here that the Iranian Jews will be forced to wear a uniform. Last weekend, another breaking news was: Ahmadinejad is imposing a ban on the use of foreign words. There is no truth to either of these (I won't list more).
Some of us in the Iranian American community feel that, due to the explosive conditions in the Middle East, we must provide our American friends and family members with possibility of access to reliable information, small as its impact might be. This is why I have put this e-mail update together to keep you informed of events in contemporary Iran. Its frequency would be once a week -- unless there is significant breaking news. I have made contact with friends who will monitor the news in Iran, and I will try to follow reliable publications here. Needless to say, I will not be able to be comprehensive.
If you feel you don't need these updates, please let me know to take you off the list. If you wish to check how informed you might be about Iran, take a look at the following questions:
On the issue of the Iranian nuclear program, did you know that:
* The Iranian supreme religious leader issued a legal decree (fatwa) on November 6, 2004 in which all development, production, and use of nuclear weapons is considered against the Islamic principles and should not be undertaken under any circumstances.
* Iranian nuclear facilities have been inspected over 2000 time during the past three years (some surprise inspections) by the IAEA and nothing illegal has been found. The IAEA's report has specified "to date, there is no evidence that undeclared material are related to any weapon's programs."
* Iran is home to tens of thousands of people affected by Saddam Husain's chemical weapons, and people have a strong feeling against the use of such weapons (I know some of these people personally).
* Iran has described the package of incentives from the west as potentially acceptable and announced a while ago that there will be an official and detailed reply by August 22nd, 2006.
On the issues related to the local politics, did you know that:
* the Taliban are an enemy of Iran and have engaged in regular assassinations of Iranian diplomats.
* The Iranian regime considers al-Qa'ideh a terrorist organization.
* Iranians held night long vigils to commemorate the victims of 9/11.
* Iran does not support the Shiite extremist Moqtada al-Sadr, and prefers peace, stability, and democratic elections in Iraq because it does not wish its own Kurdish population to aspire to separatist ideas and because a democratic election in Iraq will give a prominent role to the Iraqi Shiites.
* According to all major historians of the region, in reality, Iran exercises little influence on the Hezbollah.
On the social and cultural front, did you know:
* the latest best-selling titles in Iran are the DaVinci Code and Hillary Clinton's My life in (Persian translation)
* according to the latest statistics, close to 70% of the Iranian university students are women
* IVF, and gamete donation, as well as transsexual operations are legal in Iran.
* Iranian cinema produces critically acclaimed films (often openly critical of the regime).
* Iranian women golfers, race car drivers, and polo players compete internationally.
I hope my next messages will be much shorter. Please let me know if you wish your name to be taken off this list, or if you wish to add someone's name to it. I will send out my first update message soon.
Best,
Fatemeh Keshavarz
========================
Fatemeh Keshavarz, Professor and Chair
Dept. of Asian and Near Eastern Languages and Literatuares
Washington University in St. Louis
Tel: (314) 935-5156
Fax: (314) 935-4399
Facts from Palast
The Fear Factory
I'm going to tell you something which is straight-up heresy: America is not under attack by terrorists. There is no WAR on terror because, except for one day five years ago, al Qaeda has pretty much left us alone.
That's because Osama got what he wanted. There's no mystery about what Al Qaeda was after. Like everyone from the Girl Scouts to Bono, Osama put his wish on his web site. He had a single demand: "Crusaders out of the land of the two Holy Places." To translate: get US troops out of Saudi Arabia.
And George Bush gave it to him. On April 29, 2003, two days before landing on the aircraft carrier Lincoln, our self-described "War President" quietly put out a notice that he was withdrawing our troops from Saudi soil. In other words, our cowering cowboy gave in whimpering to Osama's demand.
The press took no note. They were all wiggie over Bush's waddling around the carrier deck in a disco-aged jump suit announcing, "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED." But it wasn't America's mission that was accomplished, it was Osama's.
Am I saying there's no danger, no threat? Sure there is: 46 million Americans don't have health insurance. IBM is legally stealing from its employees' pension plan and United Airlines has dumped its pensions altogether. Four-million three-hundred thousand Americans were injured, made sick or killed by their jobs last year. TXU Corporation is right now building four monster-sized power plants in Texas that will burn skuzzy gunk called "lignite." The filth it will pour into the sky will snuff a heck of a lot more Americans than some goofy group of fanatics with bottles of hydrogen peroxide.
But Americans don't ask for real protection from what's killing us. The War on Terror is the Weapon of Mass Distraction. Instead of demanding health insurance, we have 59 million of our fellow citizens pooping in their pants with fear of Al Qaeda, waddling to the polls, crying, "Georgie save us!"
And what does he give us? In my own small town, the federal government has paid for loading an SUV with .50 caliber machine guns to watch for an Al Qaeda attack at the dock of the ferry that takes tourists to the Indian casino in Connecticut. The casino dock is my town's officially designated "Critical Asset and Vulnerability Infrastructure Point (CAVIP)." (To find the most vulnerable points to attack in the USA, Al Qaeda can download a list from the Department of Homeland Security -- no kidding.)
But that's not all. Bush is protecting us from English hijackers with a fearsome anti-terrorist tool: the Virginia-class submarine. The V-boat was originally meant to hunt Soviet subs. But there are no more Soviet subs. So, General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin have "refitted" these Cold War dinosaurs with new torpedoes redesigned to carry counter-terror commandoes. That's right: when we find Osama's beach house, we can shoot our boys right up under his picnic table and take him out. These Marines-in-a-tube injector boats cost $2.5 billion each -- and our President's ordered half a dozen new ones.
Lynn Cheney, the Veep's wife, still takes in compensation from Lockheed as a former board member. I'm sure that has nothing to do with this multi-billion dollar "anti-terror" contract.
Fear sells better than sex. Fear is the sales pitch for many lucrative products: from billion-dollar sailor injectors to one very lucrative war in Mesopotamia (a third of a trillion dollars doled out, no audits, no questions asked).
Better than toothpaste that makes our teeth whiter than white, this stuff will make us safer than safe. It's political junk food, the cheap filling in the flashy tube. What we don't get is safety from the real dangers: a life-threatening health-care system, lung-murdering pollution production and a trade deficit with China that's reducing mid-America to coolie status. Protecting us from these true threats would take a slice of the profits of the Lockheeds, the Exxons and the rest of the owning class.
War on Terror is class war by other means -- to keep you from asking for real protection from true menace, the landlords of our nation give you fake protection from manufactured dangers. And they remind you to be afraid every time you fly to see Aunt Millie and have to give up your hemorrhoid ointment to the underpaid guy in the bell-hop suit with a security badge.
Oh, hey, you never got the punch line.
So, Osama Walks into This Bar, See? and Bush says, "Whad'l'ya have, pardner?" and Osama says, "Well, George, what are you serving today?" and Bush says, "Fear," and Osama shouts, "Fear for everybody!" and George pours it on for the crowd. Then the presidential bartender says, "Hey, who's buying?" and Osama points a thumb at the crowd sucking down their brew. "They are," he says. And the two of them share a quiet laugh.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2984547.stm
tuesday april 29, 2003
excerpt:
The United States has said that virtually all its troops, except some training personnel, are to be pulled out of Saudi Arabia.
The decision was confirmed by US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld during a joint news conference with Saudi Defence Minister Prince Sultan.
Saudi Arabia is home to some of Islam's holiest sites and the deployment of US forces there was seen as a historic betrayal by many Islamists, notably Osama Bin Laden.
It is one of the main reasons given by the Saudi-born dissident - blamed by Washington for the 11 September attacks - to justify violence against the United States and its allies.
But news of the US pull-out does not mean the campaign is over for Bin Laden and his followers, according to the BBC's Arab affairs analyst Magdi Abdelhadi.
Their agenda now goes beyond the boundaries of one country, he says. Their goal is to liberate all Muslim societies from foreign troops and what they see as ungodly secular rulers.
I'm going to tell you something which is straight-up heresy: America is not under attack by terrorists. There is no WAR on terror because, except for one day five years ago, al Qaeda has pretty much left us alone.
That's because Osama got what he wanted. There's no mystery about what Al Qaeda was after. Like everyone from the Girl Scouts to Bono, Osama put his wish on his web site. He had a single demand: "Crusaders out of the land of the two Holy Places." To translate: get US troops out of Saudi Arabia.
And George Bush gave it to him. On April 29, 2003, two days before landing on the aircraft carrier Lincoln, our self-described "War President" quietly put out a notice that he was withdrawing our troops from Saudi soil. In other words, our cowering cowboy gave in whimpering to Osama's demand.
The press took no note. They were all wiggie over Bush's waddling around the carrier deck in a disco-aged jump suit announcing, "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED." But it wasn't America's mission that was accomplished, it was Osama's.
Am I saying there's no danger, no threat? Sure there is: 46 million Americans don't have health insurance. IBM is legally stealing from its employees' pension plan and United Airlines has dumped its pensions altogether. Four-million three-hundred thousand Americans were injured, made sick or killed by their jobs last year. TXU Corporation is right now building four monster-sized power plants in Texas that will burn skuzzy gunk called "lignite." The filth it will pour into the sky will snuff a heck of a lot more Americans than some goofy group of fanatics with bottles of hydrogen peroxide.
But Americans don't ask for real protection from what's killing us. The War on Terror is the Weapon of Mass Distraction. Instead of demanding health insurance, we have 59 million of our fellow citizens pooping in their pants with fear of Al Qaeda, waddling to the polls, crying, "Georgie save us!"
And what does he give us? In my own small town, the federal government has paid for loading an SUV with .50 caliber machine guns to watch for an Al Qaeda attack at the dock of the ferry that takes tourists to the Indian casino in Connecticut. The casino dock is my town's officially designated "Critical Asset and Vulnerability Infrastructure Point (CAVIP)." (To find the most vulnerable points to attack in the USA, Al Qaeda can download a list from the Department of Homeland Security -- no kidding.)
But that's not all. Bush is protecting us from English hijackers with a fearsome anti-terrorist tool: the Virginia-class submarine. The V-boat was originally meant to hunt Soviet subs. But there are no more Soviet subs. So, General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin have "refitted" these Cold War dinosaurs with new torpedoes redesigned to carry counter-terror commandoes. That's right: when we find Osama's beach house, we can shoot our boys right up under his picnic table and take him out. These Marines-in-a-tube injector boats cost $2.5 billion each -- and our President's ordered half a dozen new ones.
Lynn Cheney, the Veep's wife, still takes in compensation from Lockheed as a former board member. I'm sure that has nothing to do with this multi-billion dollar "anti-terror" contract.
Fear sells better than sex. Fear is the sales pitch for many lucrative products: from billion-dollar sailor injectors to one very lucrative war in Mesopotamia (a third of a trillion dollars doled out, no audits, no questions asked).
Better than toothpaste that makes our teeth whiter than white, this stuff will make us safer than safe. It's political junk food, the cheap filling in the flashy tube. What we don't get is safety from the real dangers: a life-threatening health-care system, lung-murdering pollution production and a trade deficit with China that's reducing mid-America to coolie status. Protecting us from these true threats would take a slice of the profits of the Lockheeds, the Exxons and the rest of the owning class.
War on Terror is class war by other means -- to keep you from asking for real protection from true menace, the landlords of our nation give you fake protection from manufactured dangers. And they remind you to be afraid every time you fly to see Aunt Millie and have to give up your hemorrhoid ointment to the underpaid guy in the bell-hop suit with a security badge.
Oh, hey, you never got the punch line.
So, Osama Walks into This Bar, See? and Bush says, "Whad'l'ya have, pardner?" and Osama says, "Well, George, what are you serving today?" and Bush says, "Fear," and Osama shouts, "Fear for everybody!" and George pours it on for the crowd. Then the presidential bartender says, "Hey, who's buying?" and Osama points a thumb at the crowd sucking down their brew. "They are," he says. And the two of them share a quiet laugh.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2984547.stm
tuesday april 29, 2003
excerpt:
The United States has said that virtually all its troops, except some training personnel, are to be pulled out of Saudi Arabia.
The decision was confirmed by US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld during a joint news conference with Saudi Defence Minister Prince Sultan.
Saudi Arabia is home to some of Islam's holiest sites and the deployment of US forces there was seen as a historic betrayal by many Islamists, notably Osama Bin Laden.
It is one of the main reasons given by the Saudi-born dissident - blamed by Washington for the 11 September attacks - to justify violence against the United States and its allies.
But news of the US pull-out does not mean the campaign is over for Bin Laden and his followers, according to the BBC's Arab affairs analyst Magdi Abdelhadi.
Their agenda now goes beyond the boundaries of one country, he says. Their goal is to liberate all Muslim societies from foreign troops and what they see as ungodly secular rulers.
12 July 2006
Jordan Times
Project seeks to get more women into the workforce
By Grace Peacock
AMMAN — Civil society organisations joined forces with the business community, government representatives and the European Union yesterday to tackle the high rates of unemployment among women in both Jordan and Gaza.
“We want to find a way to help men and women work together. We want to target women of all parts of society and help them use the skills they have to match them with a job,” said Elena Abu Adas, managing director of Tatawor Association, a nonprofit organisation that hosted the workshop.
Over 70 people took part in Tatawor’s project ‘Free to Work’ — a 24-month initiative financed by the European Commission to determine employment opportunities in Jordan and Gaza and help women assess their skills, undergo further training and ultimately find a job.
“Unemployment here is really high and we want to know why most of the unemployed people are women?” said Mariam Abu Adas, Tatawor’s project manager.
She pointed out that women account for 82 per cent of Jordan’s unemployment rate.
A recent report by the Ministry of Labour put the country’s unemployment rate at 15 per cent, while the poverty rate is estimated at 14.8 per cent.
“There are so many women here who are disempowered because they don’t have jobs. But if they use their skills to find work then they could really be empowered,” she added, explaining that the policy framework in both Jordan and Gaza needs to change to make the workforce more accessible for women.
Abu Adas also hopes to challenge what is commonly referred to as the “culture of shame” that exists in these regions whereby women are prevented from working due to objections from family members.
The project Free to Work is in its first stage and is designed to study the economy for actual and potential markets and identify the resources needed to develop further job opportunities.
Women who take part in the programme will have their skills analysed and will receive personalised training to help them meet their career aims and ambitions.
“We hope to assist a wide range of women from 16 to 60, educated or uneducated from all walks of life,” said Abu Adas, who encourages unemployed women to contact Tatawor.
Hanan Quirdy is a mother of three and says she was the first female industrial machinery driver in Amman. She believes the Free to Work initiative will help other women break through the same barriers she experienced to take on what has traditionally been a man’s job.
“This project helps me and other women be more sure that we can do what we want. It’s become my own personal challenge to do this job and be a driver and it should be every woman’s challenge to find herself the job they like,” she said.
For more information on the Free to Work project, call: 554 6556 or email info@tatawor.org.
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
By Grace Peacock
AMMAN — Civil society organisations joined forces with the business community, government representatives and the European Union yesterday to tackle the high rates of unemployment among women in both Jordan and Gaza.
“We want to find a way to help men and women work together. We want to target women of all parts of society and help them use the skills they have to match them with a job,” said Elena Abu Adas, managing director of Tatawor Association, a nonprofit organisation that hosted the workshop.
Over 70 people took part in Tatawor’s project ‘Free to Work’ — a 24-month initiative financed by the European Commission to determine employment opportunities in Jordan and Gaza and help women assess their skills, undergo further training and ultimately find a job.
“Unemployment here is really high and we want to know why most of the unemployed people are women?” said Mariam Abu Adas, Tatawor’s project manager.
She pointed out that women account for 82 per cent of Jordan’s unemployment rate.
A recent report by the Ministry of Labour put the country’s unemployment rate at 15 per cent, while the poverty rate is estimated at 14.8 per cent.
“There are so many women here who are disempowered because they don’t have jobs. But if they use their skills to find work then they could really be empowered,” she added, explaining that the policy framework in both Jordan and Gaza needs to change to make the workforce more accessible for women.
Abu Adas also hopes to challenge what is commonly referred to as the “culture of shame” that exists in these regions whereby women are prevented from working due to objections from family members.
The project Free to Work is in its first stage and is designed to study the economy for actual and potential markets and identify the resources needed to develop further job opportunities.
Women who take part in the programme will have their skills analysed and will receive personalised training to help them meet their career aims and ambitions.
“We hope to assist a wide range of women from 16 to 60, educated or uneducated from all walks of life,” said Abu Adas, who encourages unemployed women to contact Tatawor.
Hanan Quirdy is a mother of three and says she was the first female industrial machinery driver in Amman. She believes the Free to Work initiative will help other women break through the same barriers she experienced to take on what has traditionally been a man’s job.
“This project helps me and other women be more sure that we can do what we want. It’s become my own personal challenge to do this job and be a driver and it should be every woman’s challenge to find herself the job they like,” she said.
For more information on the Free to Work project, call: 554 6556 or email info@tatawor.org.
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
Poems
I wrote these when I was still in Jordan, and just now found them on a disk...
Found
You are reminiscent of the
Desert of my dreams.
An unattainable desire,
A need that will not be filled,
The only place resembling home,
An emotion I have yet to claim...
Or lay a finger on.
If love exists it is in your gaze.
As elusive as that which
Stirs my heart to passion.
Wadi Rum
The Canadian Geese have arrived, with them memories of the desert have also taken flight.
I had awoken at 5.30 in the morning to catch the miracle of the desert sunrise. It was surprisingly cold, my breathe visible upon my pale hands - I suppose I'd never believed a place so hot and dry could get so ghastly cold.
Peering out of the beitshar across the flat plane of sand to the crest of the wadi we were encamped within, I began to trek to where the land seemingly disappeared from the eye, but not the mind. I wondered at the piles of sand at the base of this rocky outcropping where I found myself in the early morning twilight. Gently stepping onto the top of one my leg was immediately engulfed to the knee, surprisingly reminiscent of the snow drifts of my winter home.
Finally finding a place where I felt comfortable I settled in for the sunrise that had always inhabited my dreams.
In front of me tiny feet marched across the ripples and waves of sand. I could only guess at who they might belong - Rodent? Scorpion? Better not to think of what might reappear to take the journey back to whence it had come.
Gradually, nudging its way above the distant peaks, the sun began its daily pilgrimage above one jabal and then another.
Startled; looking up for a plane, tank, or unknown monster. A sound like a million running, pounding feet, yet closer to the sound of a jet taking off. Sounds like this make the simple word sound seem too small and unable, or maybe unwilling, to capture the full measure of what was heard.
Across the horizon a flock of birds whose size was incomprehensible appeared and disappeared as quickly.
Desert silence returns; was that the true sound of a bird? Where had it previously hid before that instant? Could it be that they only shared their true essence in the absence of all others...
Missing
Unrecognizable to those that
Surround me.
Living in distant lands
And memories.
The sandy wind blowing through
My hair,
Tangled and uncontrollable-
Resembling the web of
My life.
Blown back into
My present reality,
Walking sidewalks that fade to
Desert horizons inside
My mind.
Neither belonging
Here
Nor there;
The world I was born into
And that of
My own choosing.
Found
You are reminiscent of the
Desert of my dreams.
An unattainable desire,
A need that will not be filled,
The only place resembling home,
An emotion I have yet to claim...
Or lay a finger on.
If love exists it is in your gaze.
As elusive as that which
Stirs my heart to passion.
Wadi Rum
The Canadian Geese have arrived, with them memories of the desert have also taken flight.
I had awoken at 5.30 in the morning to catch the miracle of the desert sunrise. It was surprisingly cold, my breathe visible upon my pale hands - I suppose I'd never believed a place so hot and dry could get so ghastly cold.
Peering out of the beitshar across the flat plane of sand to the crest of the wadi we were encamped within, I began to trek to where the land seemingly disappeared from the eye, but not the mind. I wondered at the piles of sand at the base of this rocky outcropping where I found myself in the early morning twilight. Gently stepping onto the top of one my leg was immediately engulfed to the knee, surprisingly reminiscent of the snow drifts of my winter home.
Finally finding a place where I felt comfortable I settled in for the sunrise that had always inhabited my dreams.
In front of me tiny feet marched across the ripples and waves of sand. I could only guess at who they might belong - Rodent? Scorpion? Better not to think of what might reappear to take the journey back to whence it had come.
Gradually, nudging its way above the distant peaks, the sun began its daily pilgrimage above one jabal and then another.
Startled; looking up for a plane, tank, or unknown monster. A sound like a million running, pounding feet, yet closer to the sound of a jet taking off. Sounds like this make the simple word sound seem too small and unable, or maybe unwilling, to capture the full measure of what was heard.
Across the horizon a flock of birds whose size was incomprehensible appeared and disappeared as quickly.
Desert silence returns; was that the true sound of a bird? Where had it previously hid before that instant? Could it be that they only shared their true essence in the absence of all others...
Missing
Unrecognizable to those that
Surround me.
Living in distant lands
And memories.
The sandy wind blowing through
My hair,
Tangled and uncontrollable-
Resembling the web of
My life.
Blown back into
My present reality,
Walking sidewalks that fade to
Desert horizons inside
My mind.
Neither belonging
Here
Nor there;
The world I was born into
And that of
My own choosing.
10 July 2006
Courtesy
I read this article in the Saint Louis Post Dispatch on July 3rd, and wanted to laugh my ass off. Who'd have thought!?!?!?! Courtesy? I mean that must have taken some real geniuses in D.C. to come up with that one. What saddens me is that they are trying to put it off as a cultural phenonemon. I'm sorry, but if you break into my house, kill or beat up the men in my family, and then yell at me to answer questions possibly using force, shit I'm NOT answering you. I'll spit in your face, and give you a reason to be doing what you're doing. This is NOT cultural!!!!!! Arabs are not inately violent people who are out there trying to kill Americans, its human nature to be pissed and in shock when something like this happens to the people you love. What is cultural is that these women probably only know these men, and very few if any others. Family is everything, and you don't talk to strange men, so maybe if these soldiers wer taught something about Middle Eastern culture they would learn that men and women do not socialize outside of the family sphere and sometimes work.
SECTION: INTERNATIONAL NEWS
LENGTH: 885 words
HEADLINE: U.S. Troops Try Courtesy in Iraqi City
BYLINE: By ANTONIO CASTANEDA, Associated Press Writer
DATELINE: RAMADI Iraq
BODY:
U.S. troops are switching tactics in the fight against insurgents in parts of this rebellious city, replacing confrontation with courtesy in hopes of winning public trust and undercutting support for the militants.
It's too early to assess the change, which is largely confined to the more affluent western areas of Ramadi, a city of 400,000 people that is considered the most violent in Iraq's restive Anbar province.
Still, U.S. officers believe the new approach is paying off. Attacks are down enough in western Ramadi to allow Iraqi soldiers to patrol larger areas without Americans at their side.
"We've had some success in making inroads to the population there," said Army Col. Sean MacFarland, commander of the 1st Brigade Combat Team, 1st Armored Division, which oversees all U.S. military forces in the city. "We're beginning to see a turn there for the better."
Marines based in western Ramadi now regularly knock on people's front doors instead of storming through. Instead of roaming the streets in armored Humvees, Marines took a census of the area sitting down and listening to people's concerns and complaints.
"You'd be surprised at how many people in Ramadi are shocked when we knock and ask to come in. And in Arab culture, it makes all the difference," said 2nd Lt. Ryan Hub of Sumter, S.C., who as a teenager lived in Kuwait for two years while his Air Force officer father was stationed there.
To reinforce their goodwill gestures, Marines are trying to repair Ramadi's water works to demonstrate that Americans can improve conditions. Reconstruction projects in the city have long been stalled because of persistent sabotage by insurgents.
The changed approach also applies to the Iraqi army. Marines recently held public meetings where residents could scold Iraqi soldiers for allegedly mistreating residents and stealing from their homes.
"It was time for a different fight in Ramadi," said Capt. Max Barela, 36, commander of Lima Company, 3rd Battalion, 8th Marine Regiment. "I've been told that we're conducting ourselves more as police than Marines."
Less U.S. firepower is being used. Commanders say they are content to let gunmen escape if retaliatory fire could injure civilians or cause serious property damage.
No airstrikes have been called in by Barela's unit, which arrived here in March. During the winter, Marines ordered more than a dozen aerial bombings in western Ramadi.
In more dangerous areas of the city, Marines still use aggressive tactics such as blowing in doors with shotguns when residents don't immediately answer the door to evade possible gunmen. But they want to get away from that.
"You've got an enemy that understands the effects of our mistakes," Hub said, referring to damage caused by U.S. forces that insurgents trumpet in propaganda. "I think part of the battle of Ramadi is the (information campaign) that insurgents are winning."
Earlier this year, Marines believed the city was not ready for softer methods. Tactics such as random vehicle searches took a sharp edge: Marines would toss stun grenades at randomly selected vehicles, then rush the drivers with guns pointed.
"If you're treating everyone like terrorists, kicking down doors and tearing through their homes, that's what you'll get terrorists," said Cpl. Daniel Tarantino, 21, of Gainesville, Ga.
There is little sign of change in central Ramadi, where street battles are common, or in southern neighborhoods where few American patrols have ventured in months. And violence still flares in western Ramadi, although at lower levels.
But Marines believe the new approach is working in the west, where wealthier and better educated Iraqis live. The provincial governor, along with hundreds of fellow tribesmen from the Alwani clan, live in the area. Two sprawling U.S. bases are nearby.
Basic military tactics have also helped reduce violence in that area. Marines installed concrete roadblocks on getaway routes once used by insurgents. Marines also walk some 15-20 miles a week through the area's streets, citing the refrain, "Patrol it or you don't control it."
Even here, though, the tension of war still grates on Marines. One Marine, sweating during an overnight patrol that snaked deep into the city, cursed at a boy in a driveway to keep his lights off. Another Marine struggled to contain his temper with an Iraqi man who didn't understand English.
"It's difficult for a lot of Marines to accept. It's not the Marine ethos," Hub said of the new tactics. "The history of the Marine Corps is that they're known for overwhelming firepower."
Commanders point to the long stretch of devastated buildings that make up downtown Ramadi to skeptics who argue that the city's people first need to fear the U.S. military before order can be restored.
"It requires 10 times more discipline to win a counterinsurgency than to win a total war. Any Marine can go out in the city and kill people, but this requires discipline, and to think more," said 2nd Lt. John Warren, 27, of Greenville, S.C.
Barela, the company commander, concedes the approach carries added risks, but says his Marines try to vigorously follow tactics that make them "hard to kill." Several Marines in the company have been wounded but none have been killed.
"We've risked a lot to put ourselves in contact with the Iraqi people," Barela said.
LOAD-DATE: July 3, 2006
SECTION: INTERNATIONAL NEWS
LENGTH: 885 words
HEADLINE: U.S. Troops Try Courtesy in Iraqi City
BYLINE: By ANTONIO CASTANEDA, Associated Press Writer
DATELINE: RAMADI Iraq
BODY:
U.S. troops are switching tactics in the fight against insurgents in parts of this rebellious city, replacing confrontation with courtesy in hopes of winning public trust and undercutting support for the militants.
It's too early to assess the change, which is largely confined to the more affluent western areas of Ramadi, a city of 400,000 people that is considered the most violent in Iraq's restive Anbar province.
Still, U.S. officers believe the new approach is paying off. Attacks are down enough in western Ramadi to allow Iraqi soldiers to patrol larger areas without Americans at their side.
"We've had some success in making inroads to the population there," said Army Col. Sean MacFarland, commander of the 1st Brigade Combat Team, 1st Armored Division, which oversees all U.S. military forces in the city. "We're beginning to see a turn there for the better."
Marines based in western Ramadi now regularly knock on people's front doors instead of storming through. Instead of roaming the streets in armored Humvees, Marines took a census of the area sitting down and listening to people's concerns and complaints.
"You'd be surprised at how many people in Ramadi are shocked when we knock and ask to come in. And in Arab culture, it makes all the difference," said 2nd Lt. Ryan Hub of Sumter, S.C., who as a teenager lived in Kuwait for two years while his Air Force officer father was stationed there.
To reinforce their goodwill gestures, Marines are trying to repair Ramadi's water works to demonstrate that Americans can improve conditions. Reconstruction projects in the city have long been stalled because of persistent sabotage by insurgents.
The changed approach also applies to the Iraqi army. Marines recently held public meetings where residents could scold Iraqi soldiers for allegedly mistreating residents and stealing from their homes.
"It was time for a different fight in Ramadi," said Capt. Max Barela, 36, commander of Lima Company, 3rd Battalion, 8th Marine Regiment. "I've been told that we're conducting ourselves more as police than Marines."
Less U.S. firepower is being used. Commanders say they are content to let gunmen escape if retaliatory fire could injure civilians or cause serious property damage.
No airstrikes have been called in by Barela's unit, which arrived here in March. During the winter, Marines ordered more than a dozen aerial bombings in western Ramadi.
In more dangerous areas of the city, Marines still use aggressive tactics such as blowing in doors with shotguns when residents don't immediately answer the door to evade possible gunmen. But they want to get away from that.
"You've got an enemy that understands the effects of our mistakes," Hub said, referring to damage caused by U.S. forces that insurgents trumpet in propaganda. "I think part of the battle of Ramadi is the (information campaign) that insurgents are winning."
Earlier this year, Marines believed the city was not ready for softer methods. Tactics such as random vehicle searches took a sharp edge: Marines would toss stun grenades at randomly selected vehicles, then rush the drivers with guns pointed.
"If you're treating everyone like terrorists, kicking down doors and tearing through their homes, that's what you'll get terrorists," said Cpl. Daniel Tarantino, 21, of Gainesville, Ga.
There is little sign of change in central Ramadi, where street battles are common, or in southern neighborhoods where few American patrols have ventured in months. And violence still flares in western Ramadi, although at lower levels.
But Marines believe the new approach is working in the west, where wealthier and better educated Iraqis live. The provincial governor, along with hundreds of fellow tribesmen from the Alwani clan, live in the area. Two sprawling U.S. bases are nearby.
Basic military tactics have also helped reduce violence in that area. Marines installed concrete roadblocks on getaway routes once used by insurgents. Marines also walk some 15-20 miles a week through the area's streets, citing the refrain, "Patrol it or you don't control it."
Even here, though, the tension of war still grates on Marines. One Marine, sweating during an overnight patrol that snaked deep into the city, cursed at a boy in a driveway to keep his lights off. Another Marine struggled to contain his temper with an Iraqi man who didn't understand English.
"It's difficult for a lot of Marines to accept. It's not the Marine ethos," Hub said of the new tactics. "The history of the Marine Corps is that they're known for overwhelming firepower."
Commanders point to the long stretch of devastated buildings that make up downtown Ramadi to skeptics who argue that the city's people first need to fear the U.S. military before order can be restored.
"It requires 10 times more discipline to win a counterinsurgency than to win a total war. Any Marine can go out in the city and kill people, but this requires discipline, and to think more," said 2nd Lt. John Warren, 27, of Greenville, S.C.
Barela, the company commander, concedes the approach carries added risks, but says his Marines try to vigorously follow tactics that make them "hard to kill." Several Marines in the company have been wounded but none have been killed.
"We've risked a lot to put ourselves in contact with the Iraqi people," Barela said.
LOAD-DATE: July 3, 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
