Tortured
Today, it happened. I felt an a twinge that startled me. I stood still as he entered the room. I expected nothing out of the ordinary, or at least nothing other than what has become his recently adopted, more avoidant, routine. Although long ago, I had become accustomed to his face, his voice, and his demeanor, for I have known the man for more than a few years. In the last few weeks, while essentially he is who he always was, some of his stances have changed. Possibly, Barry has felt a need to compromise his positions, but I wonder, what of his principles.
Early on, I knew that he and I differed in some respects. While we each loathe drama, I was never certain if he felt as I do; love need not be a tortuous trauma. Barry spoke of the need to work together. Yet, not necessarily in aspect of life. At times, he advocated aggressive actions I could not consider. This, for me, caused much confusion. Nonetheless, I liked the man I saw before me.
I recall the day we first met, face-to-face. We shook hands. He smiled. Barry was polite, not pushy. Amiable is the way I would describe him. Then, the second time we saw each other, we had a more extensive conversation. He took my hand in his. We each spoke with greater sincerity. As Barry and I chatted , he looked me straight in the eye. He listened to my personal tale. Visibly, he pondered the story I shared. Barry responded so genuinely to my inquiry, albeit an unconventional concern, I was surprised. Indeed, I was impressed, although less than I was when I read what he had written.
His books moved me. The more autobiographical tome endeared him to me. His notes on hope did not lack the spirit to inspire me. As one who "loves" to learn, which differs from the impulsive idea that I might be "in love," a person that can kindle my earnest thirst for knowledge truly electrifies me. I recall the moment I read the text that, all these years later, still resonates within me. Barry humbly offered, in a discussion of empathy . . .
Barry told tales of his mother, his grandfather, and how through his interactions with each he realized there is reason to think "about the struggles and disappointments" others have seen in their lives. Reflection helped the younger Barry understand, every individual is not solely right or wrong. If he were to insist that, his way was the only approach that worked, "without regard to his [or her] feelings or needs, I was in some way diminishing myself." Such awareness, such a superior soul; Barry showed what I believe to be a human's greatest strength, vulnerability. Were I to have a heart to win, the words of this gentle-man could have surely swept me off my feet.It is at the heart of my moral code, and it is how I understand the Golden Rule – not simply as a call to sympathy or charity, but as something more demanding, a call to stand in somebody else's shoes and see through their eyes.
Even his calm demeanor is as I desire and live. Those close to me wonder of my own emotional tranquility. From his manner and manuscript, it would seem Barry believes as I do. Empathy elicits equilibrium. Today, he seemed to embrace this notion once again. We can choose to love our neighbors. We need not torture "those who are different from us."
Near noon, on April 23, 2009, at the Holocaust days of Remembrance Ceremony, Barry, the now President of the United States, Barack Obama spoke of this belief again. Once more, I felt a pang for the person who oft-expressed a profound connection to the feelings of another. The sweet soul who can bring me to tears, did so once again. On this historic occasion, Barry shared a profound realization through a personal story. The subject; the Holocaust and the torture our forebears felt or beheld.
Stunned, by the saga, and the words that preceded the legend, I began to believe again. Perhaps the Barry I admire had a change of heart. Policies he never fully embraced, might not seem reasonable to him now.In the face of horrors that defy comprehension, the impulse to silence is understandable. My own great uncle returned from his service in World War II in a state of shock, saying little, alone with painful memories that would not leave his head. He went up into the attic, according to the stories that I've heard, and wouldn't come down for six months. He was one of the liberators -- someone who at a very tender age had seen the unimaginable. And so some of the liberators who are here today honor us with their presence -- all of whom we honor for their extraordinary service. My great uncle was part of the 89th Infantry Division -- the first Americans to reach a Nazi concentration camp. And they liberated Ohrdruf, part of Buchenwald, where tens of thousands had perished.
During the campaign, Barry, Senator Barack Obama only promised to investigate, not to prosecute. Many months ago, before the August 2008 declaration, and thereafter, I had thought his stance reflected his vast ability to empathize. Yet, in the light of the ample evidence, most if not all of which affirms the Bush Administration engaged in extreme methods of interrogation, President Obama still supports or chooses to sustain a position that negates empathy for the victims. I shudder to think of how the Seventh Generation might be affected.
Hence, I am left to question what I thought was truth. Was the empathy I envisioned not as sincere as I hoped it to be? Perchance that is why, for me, love is as torture. I have faith no one has the power to disappoint me. Only my choices can be a source of much concern. For as long as I can recall, I have observed, once infatuation fades, we learn as I had before Barry entered the Oval Office. He is but another human. He embraces and then forgets, the power of empathy and the force of our past?
When, in homage to Holocaust victims, and survivors of a heinous hostility that forever stains world history, I sensed he knew. As I looked on, I forgot the setting. Intent on the torrent of news on torture techniques I read and heard throughout the day, I made an erroneous connection. As Barry, President Obama spoke of the deeds done in decades past, and those crimes committed by the previous Administration, I imagined the man I thought I knew meant to express empathy for those who suffered at the hands of Americans. The Chief Executive, on behalf of the United States avowed.
I cried. Tremendously thankful for the oratory, indeed, I must say, for a second, I was elated.. I wondered. Had the person many think beloved, the individual I at least treasure, decided to rescind his prior position?Their legacy is our inheritance. And the question is, how do we honor and preserve it? How do we ensure that "never again" isn't an empty slogan, or merely an aspiration, but also a call to action?
I believe we start by doing what we are doing today -- by bearing witness, by fighting the silence that is evil's greatest co-conspirator.
In the face of horrors that defy comprehension, the impulse to silence is understandable.
Might he have rejected the thought offered recently; "nothing will be gained by our time and energy laying blame for the past."
Could it be the Holocaust Remembrance Ceremony helped the President to renew his faith in his earlier expression; "(H)istory returns "with a vengeance . . . "(A)s Faulkner reminds us, the past is never dead and buried -- it isn't even past." I hoped.
Perchance, he had worked through a struggle I too experience. As one who has no desire to hurt others, even those who have physically and psychologically harmed individuals, and our country's image, how might I think prosecution is just?
I truly embrace such an honorable ability to seek no retribution. Indeed, I may not fall "in love"; nonetheless, I would hope to live love.
I feel harsh reprisals are never wise. I also accept the enduring wisdom of a finer balance. I have experienced the need to empathize and the conflict of what I might do if one I treasure intentionally injures another. I have come to discover, if deleterious deeds are allowed to stand, sooner or later the other, I, and perchance, society will be subjected to adulterations that individuals or a culture cannot endure.
Awful actions we accept, avoid, or merely do not acknowledge become a foundation for the future. Humans inure. Lest we forget the Milgram shock experiment of decades ago, or the knowledge that when repeated in the present, proves again, as a Psychologist, Thomas Blass, espoused in “The Man Who Shocked the World.” Milgram extrapolated, to larger events like the Holocaust, or Abu Ghraib. “people can act destructively without coercion." “In things like interrogations, we don’t know the complexities involved. People are under enormous pressure to produce results.”
I wonder how many Americans came to accept violence as a necessity on September 11, 2001. On that dreadful day, a date that now lives in infamy, all Americans were placed in a precarious position. With the threat of terror etched into our every cell, each of us had to ask, what were we to do. In the 2004 edition of Dreams From My Father, the Barry, who I trusted to be so thoughtful whispered his woe for what might occur once the "world fractured." He penned . . .
Those are the words of the Barry I was inspired to meet, the person I was reminded of when he stood with an audience of individuals who never forget the agony of torture. Today, as that empathetic soul, the President referred to the future, the generations to come, he stated, "We find cause for hope" when "people of every age and faith and background and race (are) united in common cause with suffering brothers and sisters halfway around the world." I thought of the detainees at Guantánamo Bay prison, and the prisoners at Abu Ghraib and the need to empathize with victims of "extreme duress."This collective history, this past, directly touches my own . . .
I know, I have seen, the desperation and disorder of the powerless: how it twists the lives of children on the streets of Jakarta or Nairobi in much the same way as it does the lives of children on Chicago's South Side, how narrow the path is for them between humiliation and untrammeled fury, how easily they slip into violence and despair. I know that the response of the powerful to this disorder -- alternating as it does between a dull complacency and, when the disorder spills out of its proscribed confines, a steady, unthinking application of force, of longer prison sentences and more sophisticated military hardware -- is inadequate to the task. I know that the hardening of lines, the embrace of fundamentalism and tribe, dooms us all.
Oblivious to the purpose of this particular speech, in my moment of stupor, I surmised Mister Obama had not only accepted the association, but perhaps had realized what could occur if the transgressions of the previous Administration were allowed to stand as if all was in the past.
"Barry," Barack, the Commander-In-Chief, further elucidated; "Those [persons] can be our future . . . (D)uring this season when we celebrate liberation, resurrection, and the possibility of redemption, may each of us renew our resolve to do what must be done. And may we strive each day, both individually and as a nation, to be among the righteous.
I imagined the reference was to empathy, to the paradigms I too embrace. Punishment offers no benefits for people. Yet, there is a need to prosecute the culpable, to ensure that people are answerable for the most atrocious aggressions. It is vital, if we wish to prevent the numbness that humans so easily adopt, we must bring torture to the full light of day. Torment executed in our names, I think Barry would agree, hurts us. Surely, General and President Eisenhower did. Mister Obama acknowledged this only hours ago.
Barry knows what President Obama. spoke of in his address at the Holocaust Day of Remembrance Ceremony Love needed not be tortured. Expressions of fondness are found in empathy, not extreme duress.Eisenhower understood the danger of silence. He understood that if no one knew what had happened, that would be yet another atrocity -- and it would be the perpetrators' ultimate triumph.
What Eisenhower did to record these crimes for history is what we are doing here today. That's what Elie Wiesel and the survivors we honor here do by fighting to make their memories part of our collective memory. That's what the Holocaust Museum does every day on our National Mall, the place where we display for the world our triumphs and failures and the lessons we've learned from our history. It's the very opposite of silence.
But we must also remember that bearing witness is not the end of our obligation -- it's just the beginning. We know that evil has yet to run its course on Earth. We've seen it in this century in the mass graves and the ashes of villages burned to the ground, and children used as soldiers and rape used as a weapon of war.
President Eisenhower understood as I had hoped, on this day, Barry Obama had. What occurs far from view is never truly unseen. Nor can avoidance erase the scars left on a heart. While as a country, or as individuals we may prefer to retreat to the attic as President Obama's great uncle did, in truth, it is impossible to forget.
People who participated know this to be so. A belatedly brave Federal Bureau of Investigation agent, Ali Soufan, tell his tales of sorrowful love in My Tortured Decision. The mediator recalls how for seven years he has remained silent about the false claims magnifying the effectiveness of the so-called enhanced interrogation techniques like waterboarding. Mister Soufan, as General Eisenhower did before him saw the need to "shed light on the story, and on some of the lessons to be learned."
I inquire; what will Barry do, and what of President Obama. Will the man who once held my hand and professed a need to be empathetic do as he declares his commitment? "(W)e have an opportunity, as well as an obligation, to confront these scourges." Might he instead do as he hopes we will not, "wrap ourselves in the false comfort that others' sufferings are not our own."
I can only hope Barry will encourage the President to heed his own call. "(W)e have the opportunity to make a habit of empathy; to recognize ourselves in each other; to commit ourselves to resisting injustice and intolerance and indifference in whatever forms they may take -- whether confronting those who tell lies about history, or doing everything we can to prevent and end atrocities like those that took place . . ."
Let us never forget Guantanamo Bay prison, Abu Ghraib, or any America penitentiary camp, need not be our holocaust. Tales of tortured love need not be an American truth.
References for tortured love . . .
- Remarks by the President at the Holocaust Remembrance Ceremony. United States Capitol. April 23, 2009
- Our New Sort of War, It might be the most dangerous of all. By Victor Davis Hanson. National Review. April 16, 2009
- Obama calls situation in Afghanistan 'urgent'. Cable News Network. July 21, 2008
- Obama Challenges Grads to Cultivate Empathy, by Barack Obama. Northwestern University. June 19, 2006
- How Obama Did It, By Karen Tumulty. Time. June 5, 2008
- Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance, By Barack Obama. 2004
- Statement of President Barack Obama on Release of OLC Memos. Office of the Press Secretary. White House. April 16, 2009
- On Interrogation Policies, Another Delicate Compromise From Obama, By Ben Pershing. Washington Post. April 17, 2009
- he Audacity of Hope, By Barack Obama
- Would Obama prosecute the Bush administration for torture? By Mark Benjamin. Salon. August 4, 2008
- Science Chief Discusses Climate Strategy, Obama Adviser Hints at Compromise on Cap-and-Trade Emission Allowances. By Juliet Eilperin. Washington Post. Thursday, April 9, 2009; A02
- A Guide to the Memos on Torture. The New York Times.
- Decades Later, Still Asking: Would I Pull That Switch?, By Benedict Carey. The New York Times. July 1, 2008
- William Faulkner.
- My Tortured Decision. By Ali Soufan. The New York Times. April 23, 2009
- In 2002, Military Agency Warned Against 'Torture, Extreme Duress Could Yield Unreliable Information, It Said. By Peter Finn and Joby Warrick. Washington Post. Saturday, April 25, 2009
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on April 24, 2009 at 01:00 PM in Abuse, Aggression, Bush 43 Administration, Central Intelligence Agency, CIA Prisons, Emotional Intelligence, Ethics, Iraq War, Lawbreakers, Military Missions, Morality in an Immoral War, War Crimes, War Kills [Mind, Body, Spirit] | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
The Lesson; All Beings Are a Beautiful Bundle of Love
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
The day was delightful. The water was superb. The sun was full and bright. A few billowy, puffy clouds floated through the sky. They were white, cumulus, fluffy fellows, the type that excite many a child as they gaze into the heavens. In parks, on lawns, little ones were likely looking up and pointing. "Look," they might say, "It is a horse, a donkey, or perchance a unicorn." It was a day for whimsy. The children, playful in the pool, barely noticed the graceful shapes as they danced above their heads. Instead, they were focused on what they decided were June bugs.
Three young sweet girls stood in the warm water near their Daddy. All were calm, content, and serene. The sisters chatted easily. Father smiled. The youngest lass expressed her curiosity. As her sibling searched for bugs on the plastic rope line, the "baby" in the family asked of the insects. "Are they icky to touch," the cautious curly haired youngster inquired. The more confident elder sister said, "No! They are cute," she said. See." The "older" child showed the girl of fewer years.
A stranger, in the adjacent lane was preparing to swim. Becky was her name. She was much older than the children, and perhaps no wiser; nonetheless, she share her assessment of the beetle. Becky said of the six-legged lovelies, "They are life; all creatures are beautiful." With that thought, the father beamed, and the older lady plunged head first into the water filled cement reservoir.
Lap after lap and look after look the woman and children enjoyed the quiet of the day. The words the swimmer shared seemed to hang in the air. People came and went, throughout the afternoon, and splendor was all anyone saw.
Then, everything changed. The evolution from tranquil to trauma was slow; nonetheless, unexpected. Those in the recreation park were struck, as if by a bolt of lightening. However, unlike when a storm threatens, swimmers were not forced to leave the pool. The jolt evoked more silence. No one screamed, but the sole boy, victim to the method his Mom's adopted for instruction.
The young mother, a woman, perhaps, in her early thirties, was extremely pleasant in appearance, and it seemed her personality was equally delightful. She, Madison, entered the deck area with her small son in her arms. Skin, beautifully tanned, this well-dress lady strode to the lifeguard tower. The little guy, let us call him, Michael, was not as bronze in color, and was visibly agitated. Michael whimpered, even as his Mom held him close.
Becky, the swimmer who enjoyed the company of the little lasses and their Dad before she began her exercise had just finished the more strenuous part of her routine when the mother and child came into view. Becky, a teacher, enjoyed children, in or outside the classroom. She marveled at the openness of a mind not yet crushed by the weight of worry. The sincerity of a small one was a source of fascination for Becky. Children, early in life, were candid and joyous, at least most were, or appeared to be.
Little Michael, a lad, maybe three, or four, was not a cheerful child. He wore no glee on his face, although his features were cute as could be from what Becky was able to see. When the swimmer first noticed Madison and Michael, they were yards away. They approached the guard tower at the opposite end of the pool and spoke with Brianna, the young adult hired to protect the public in an emergency. Becky thought nothing of the interaction. She was relieved to have only her stretches left to complete. Becky moved the shallow end and commenced with another ritual.
Behind her, a metal chair scraped along the concrete. The sound startled her and she looked up at the area where people sat enjoying the sun. Had Becky waited just a moment she would have known Michael and Madison had moved closer to her. The cries filled the air. The sweet little boy shrieked, "I wanna go see Daddy." Michael howled; "No Mom!!!! No!" His face scrunched tightly, this little lovable fellow yelled, "Daddy! Daddy! Daddy! Please Mom! No!" Michael repeated the words, "I wanna go see Daddy!"
His mother chided him, gently. "We have to do this." Madison did not seem to believe she could quiet her son's fears. An expectation that the little guy might enjoy was void from her voice. The Mom simply worked feverishly, to accomplish the dreaded task. She prepared Michael for his dip in the water, and said, "Let's just get this over with."
Becky continued with her work out and wondered of the circumstances. Perchance, the mother and father were divorced or newly separated. Michael may have expressed the deep distress he felt for a family no longer united. Becky, the daughter of parents who parted understood how stressful such a situation might be. She was eight when . . . her reverie was interrupted.
Madison had abruptly carried Michael to the step at the shallow end of the pool. The Mom now wore a white shirt over her own bathing suit. Sweetly, she smiled and leaned forward. Madison said to Becky, "I do not wish to disturb you. I want to warn you; I am teaching my son to swim and he screams, loudly." As an experienced educator, Becky imagined it would be a mild and momentary shout. As one who swims daily and had for well over a decade, the teacher witnessed many a young child learn to paddle and breathe in water.
Indeed, at this very facility she has observed perhaps hundreds of child learn to master their strokes. The excellent swim teachers, parents and paid professionals, helped calm many a neophyte nerve. Often Becky watched with admiration as patient Moms, Dads, and lifeguards helped little ones wade through the water. It was as she shared with the girls earlier in the day, "They, people and insects, are life. All creatures are beautiful."
What Becky witnessed next was not beautiful; it was brutal! Madison held Michaels arms tightly. She forced him into the water. The Mom insisted the boy's head remain face down immersed until she pulled him up. Apparently, they had practiced this cycle before. Becky now understood why Michael cringed and cried out long before he was ever near the expansive liquid sea.
Initially, the trained instructor was paralyzed. Becky could not imagine that a mother might torment her child. The volume of Michaels screams increased. His little arms flailed. "Mom, No! Pleassssssssse!" The emotional agony he felt was palpable. Mom did not stop as he pleaded. The pain on his face did not move Madison to succumb. His words, his anguish, nothing stopped this mother on her quest. For Becky, what must have been a minute or less seemed like hours, years, decades. She thought of sweet obedient Michael. While he shed many a tear and shrieked when he could gasp for air, the little love did as he was told or required to do. He dropped his head into the pool on demand.
Off into the distance, in the parking lot, just outside the fence, Becky noticed a late model shiny black vehicle. The man at the wheel peered in. His car was not situated in a space meant for stopping. This fellow seemed interested in the antics of Madison and Michael. Becky mused; possibly the sound of suffering haunted him as it did her. She could not stand by a moment longer.
With an earnest concern, Becky expressed her empathy for the child. She inquired; "Is he frightened.." The mother responded, "He can swim." Becky queried aloud, had the mother sought other means for instruction. Perchance, if Michael were given the opportunity to slowly adjust to the water. If he were allowed to breathe easily as he slowly learned to stoke . . . Becky's words were cut off. Still somewhat genteel and reserved, Madison explained, "This is what his teacher taught me to do." "She is excellent. Everyone goes to her. They call her the swim Nazi."
The practiced swimmer, and professional educator, shared her own expertise. Becky told of a time when she worked with another teacher who was extremely punitive. This castigatory colleague was an award winner. Some children loved her, parents too. Students taught Becky what she had not known; if you are raised in a family where cruelty is common, you learn to believe that rough treatment is love. Violence is fondness when a family is familiar with vicious behavior.
Becky spoke of a man she loves. He was introduced to swimming in much the way Michael was guided. This man loathes his parents. As an adult, he says of himself, he is really messed up. For the man Becky cares for, trust is not an option. The lesson he learned at the hands of his mother, who taught him how to swim, just as Madison now advised Michael, is that people will hurt you.
In this very short and quick conversation Becky, recalled her own memories, and how she has vivid recollections of events in that occurred in her life when she was younger than Michael. Becky looked over at Michael's face. The torment was already etched into his skin. The screeches scarred him.
Madison listened, maybe. She was polite. The Mom never let go of her cherished son, Michael. The activity did not stop. Nor did the blood curdling screams. The echoes of pain continued to pierce the air, and break delicate decorum.
People within the recreation center while startled, they stood still or pretended to ignore what escaped no one. Only Becky articulated her concern. Madison expressed her interest; more so once she realized Becky is an educator. However, without a moment of hesitation, or a break from or for Michael, she offered a retort. "I will speak with the teacher." Becky again offered, the teacher does what she thinks is best. Perhaps, she, just as the pupils Becky spoke of, had parents who were as aggressive as she was.
Those who admire the techniques the Nazi swim teacher endorses may also be intimately acquainted with instruction through intimidation. "In my family no one yells," Becky said. Madison responded; the same was true in her life. She and her husband do not scream.
Michael continues to squeal. "Mom, Please, No!" He thrashes. He grabs for her mother. Michael reaches for Madison's shirt and slaps her body and face. The Mom had mentioned she wore the blouse just for this purpose. Michael grabbed at the swim instructor, just as prescribed, and when with her, Michael clawed for Madison's clothing.
His moves do not seem to suggest an intention to hurt the mother Michael loves. From appearances, the boy only hopes to find a source of solace. He wants to hold on to someone, anyone. His words seem to express a desire that his Mom will save him from her. The child cries out again and again. He flaps; he flounders. Little lovable Michael thrashes and struggles. Madison was not discouraged.
Still alert and attentive to her purpose, Madison proclaims, "The swim teacher has them trained within a week." Once more, she says, "Everyone goes to her." She may have sensed or seen Becky's alarm. Apprehensive, the mother said, "I will speak to my husband. He is in the car."
Becky realized the man who she had observed earlier might have studied the pair with an interest that could not be described. Possibly, what the father felt was beyond words. Becky knew that emotionally, this event tugged at her heartstrings. She wondered; did the Dad wait for he too could not endure the misery inflicted on his son. How could a mother be so cruel? How could anyone treat a child with such contempt? Why were words of compassion and caution not enough to stop the abuse? Was Becky alone in her anguish?
She exited the pool area, entered the locker room. Then she scrubbed herself in the shower. All the while Becky heard the howls and the hollers. This small sorrowful soul did not rant or rage against his Mom. He only called out for help. Each shout sliced the air and sent chills up Becky's spine. She could hardly contain her own tears.
Becky left the building and again approached Madison, whose energy and purpose had not waned. The worried woman spoke, "If I could I would like to inquire; would it not be better if Michael loved his lessons (and the person who teaches him)?" Did she share the latter thought? She was so troubled, she did not know what she said. Had she asked if it was necessary to master the skill in a week? Madison ignored Becky. She was done with this exchange. She said to Michael, "Just a few more minutes."
Defeated, Becky left the deck. She walked to the office where the guards stood in alert. The group discussed what left each of them distraught. A resigned Brianna verbalized her belief, "There is nothing we can do or say." Shocked to discover Becky spoke to the woman, Brianna began to ask of what was said. Then she realized Madison, with a drained and strained Michael in her arms, was near. She let out a sound that signaled the need for silence.
The mother and her madness quickly fled the premises. After a short discussion with the guards, Becky thanked them for listening to her fears and followed the path from the pool to the parking lot. Apparently, the couple and their child were settling into the coupe. The father glanced over as he saw Becky near the vehicle. Nothing was said. For Becky, there were no words.
She pondered. Was Becky the person now considered a predator? Had Madison grumbled to her husband as she shared details of the encounter? Exhausted and uncertain of the empathy she had supposed all beings had for others, Becky went to her car. She could not drive away, although she saw the family did. The lover of living beings, of children, could not fully understand what existed only for moments in her own life. She was haunted by the hurt she saw in Michael's face and heard in his calls.
Stunned and shaken Becky sat trembling for a very long time. She wailed; she wept. Had she just let a sweet child fend for himself in a world too awful to survive?
Hours passed and Becky imagines, in her life, Michael, and the impression he made on her would never move on. Sadly, she fears, what for her was but minutes, for Michael, will be life.
Becky had mentioned to Madison, or hoped she had, the effect of trauma. To this day, the older educator recounts the stresses that transformed her being. The lessons, what her Mom, Dad, and mentors did supposedly for her benefit, if not facilitated fondly, harmed her deeply. Cognizant that children absorb all they encounter and are affected by every exchange, Becky contemplates the drama Michael endured.
In a desire to calm her self, Becky, an educator who loves to learn, sought answers. She had so many questions, so many concerns. As a teacher, never labeled a dictatorial tyrant, she had much trepidation. What had Madison taught Michael? Was he expected to sink or swim? As she read, her angst increased. What would become of Michael?
How Do You Recognize a Patient (or Person) with Trauma if it is Not Always Obvious?
Different people respond differently to traumatic events. Some people will carry it around in ways that everybody can see that they've been impacted. But most people actually will go through a traumatic experience and won't have any easily visible or obvious manifestation of that. The problems may emerge many months or sometimes even years after the original event. So it's very important for people who are trying to understand trauma to become aware of the various ways in which traumatic symptoms can manifest, the various ways in which trauma can be carried forward by children and adults, and the pervasive impact that trauma has independent of the way someone is observed to perform.How Do Relationships Affect the Way the Brain Develops?
Human beings are at our core, relational creatures. We are designed to live, work, play, and grow in groups. The very nature of humanity arises from relationships. You learn language, you learn social language, you learn appropriate emotional regulation, and essentially everything that's important about life as a human being you learn in context of relationships. And the very substance of a successful individual is bathed in a whole host of relationships with people in that person's life . . .
Can You Continue with the Relationships and How it Affects the Brain
When you look at someone, when you hear someone, when you have a conversation, when you make a joke with somebody, when you touch someone, every single one of those physical interactions are translated into patterned neuronal activity that go into the brain of both people in that interaction and result in positive changes. These physical changes influence our immune system and they influence the autonomic nervous system that controls your heart and your lungs and your gut. Literally, when people have a wealth of relationships, where relationships are present in high quantities and they're of good quality, these individuals are actually physically healthier, they're emotionally healthier, they're more cognitively enriched, and they actually reach their potential to be humane in ways that are impossible without relationships.It's a very interesting thing that people don't really appreciate this very much, but that there's no better biological interaction that you can have than a relationship.
Yes, all beings are but a beautiful bundle of love. Yet, rarely do humans honor that veracity. So few people understand the depth of each interaction. Too frequently, individuals do what was done to them, or what they think they can. Societal standards, customs, traditions, the lessons taught by authoritarian teachers shape them. People learn. Yet, they may not have studied the ultimate lesson. We are each a lovely and fragile beings. We grow well when hearts, minds, bodies, and souls are tenderly touched.
"Michael, I am soooooooo sorry," Becky mused. What of the relationship she had with Michael, or for that matter, with all beings. What affect did her actions or inactions have. Becky though of how all that occurred developed, and how Michael might grow. "If only I had done more, been more, were a better teacher to your Mom, or had offered to help you learn to swim." Becky, heart heavy with regret promised herself, if she were to meet this family again, she would . . . in truth, she did not know what she could or would do. She only hoped that someone would tell her. How does one swim in a world where too many forget, all beings are but a bundle of love.
Sources and Suffering . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on July 6, 2008 at 09:00 AM in "Take me as I am!", Abuse, Adult Influence on Children, Aggression, Approval or Love, Art of Loving, Have or Be, Change the World [Within], Children, Desire to Learn, Dreams Live and Die , Education, Emotional Decisions, Emotional Intelligence, Empathy and Evolution, Family, Functioning, Fables, Life, A Forward Motion, Looking at Life, Nature or Nurture, Quality of Life, Teach The Children | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Calm Communicators Unite Us. Cruel Commanders Divide Us
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
Americans are at odds. As a nation, we are splintered. The parts do not function as a whole. Some wish to control and command. Others prefer to work for the common good. As we stand, we are a country divided.
The most recent Internal Revenue Service data, shows one percent of Americans received twenty-one and two-tenths [21.2] percent of all personal income. In 2005, fifty [50] percent of the people in this nation, those who have long struggled to survive, earned twelve and eight-tenths [12.8] percent of all wages and salaries. In the United States, dollars earned split the population. Wealth is not all that separates us.
Color causes schisms. Citizens live in regions of the country labeled Red, or Blue. Brownish immigrants, with or without papers, are relegated to reside in neighborhoods far from the affluent or influential, even when authentic assimilation is meant to be an option. Frequently Black Americans are housed in communities where opportunities are few. When persons of various hues intermingle with the massive pinkish population, in the United States, the people of color are alienated.
Were Americans do physically unite, they would likely remain segregated. Americans subtly separate themselves from those they loathe, and form the people they love. Few ever consider what they do to create a rift. In America, demeanors, the way in which we communicate, divides us.
In this nation, a large portion of the population is frequently aggressive, abusive, and antagonistic. Those they encounter, the not obnoxious or toxic ones, accommodate, appease, appear unaffected, or remain anxious when in the company of the people who believe the best way to appear authoritative is to dictate what needs to be done, by whom, when, where, and why.
At times, the public is able to openly observe and discuss abuse, but usually, only when it is evident in the extreme. Banner headlines may scream a need to attend to what, for the most part remains hidden. Neglect, Abuse Seen in 90, 000 Infants. However, mostly Americans demonstrate their angst in manners identified as normal. No one speaks of what is standard. Perchance, the reason is, in the States reactive behaviors, which reveal annoyance, are so common as to be customary.
Daily, in periodicals we read of what we would wish to think is not traditional, but may be. The accounts scream to us. Citizens in this country think it outrageous when they realize. In Chicago, youth violence is increasingly prevalent. Twenty-two [22] students were slain in this heartland city so far this year. Our fellow country men remark, 'This sort of thing occurs only among 'those people.' Surely, the rest of us are sane and serene. 'The average American would not strike out in such a manner.' People say, 'Weaponry is for outlaws,' or at least, mechanical arsenals are meant only to combat a political enemy. Those who reside in the United States never imagine that "they" would use a gun in anger, or lash out when with a friend. Few consider how frequently they attack those they say they are fond of.
When words are the weapon of choice, and blood is not spilled, most in this country think no harm is done. War and wounds are what we see on the battlefields, and mostly abroad. In this country, life is calm.
We read of skirmishes elsewhere daily. Americans witness what occurs in the Persian Gulf. Iraqi deaths are on the rise regardless of the Americans attempt to Surge and subvert the violence. Now, that is awful. Thankfully, this nation is not torn apart by war.
Few ponder the fact that these excessive examples illustrate and amplify what is apparent in American homes. People pounce easily and often. We cruelly criticize and intentionally drive a wedge between unions. We conquer; and in America, we destroy.
In this country, enemies are thought to be around every corner. We publicly rant and rage when we refer to people of another race or religion. Privately, many are punitive towards those who reside in our homes. When we look upon those the "commanders" consider beloved, we see differences, and ignore similarities. He is wrong; I am right. She is flawed. "I am perfect." Spite is right. Malice is might. Vindictiveness is used to undermine viciousness. In many American homes, tit for tat is the acceptable.
Those in authority, "Tsk, tsk," the ones who they would wish to weaken. Children are infrequently given information about the consequences of their choices. Calm and complete communication is too often a rarity in our abodes. Rather than work to create cohesive communities within a household, parents and their progeny dictate, and divide.
Adults learn their aggressive manners in childhood. A slight from a toddler's first teachers cuts to the core. Terse comments, a tease, or a taunt directed at a teen does not simply slide off the back of one scarred by a lifetime of verbal slashes. Adults do not deflect digs; some have merely learned how to present the appearance of being unaffected by an oral assault. In truth, "Sticks and stone may break my bones, and names hurt me more than a physical attack might." Many may relate to a common event and decide this is not my business.
As I was leaving gym one morning, I overheard a mother berating her daughter for refusing to put her face in the water during a toddlers' swim class. "You're such a little coward," she told the sobbing child -- who could not have been more than three years old. "It's the same every week. You always make your daddy and me ashamed. Sometimes I can't believe you're really my daughter."Although my stomach churned with rage on the child's behalf, I said nothing. After all, I rationalized, the mother would just tell me to mind my own business. But I had no doubt that what I had witnessed was in many ways as bad as a brutal beating. It was emotional child abuse.
"The bruises don't show on the outside, so there are no statistics on how many children are victims," says Dr. Elizabeth Watkins, chief of pediatric primary care at St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center in New York City. "But anyone who works with children knows that the problem is widespread."
University of Minnesota psychologist Byron Egeland, who has conducted extensive studies on parenting and early-childhood development, says the effects of emotional child abuse may be at least as devastating as those of physical abuse. Research conducted by Egeland and his colleagues suggests that emotionally abused children suffer an even greater decline in mental and psychological development as they grow older than do physically abused children.
This abated state does not necessarily translate to an academic deficit. Often times, persons who were beaten down emotionally excel in their physical and intellectual endeavors. Countless adults, who were verbally assaulted as children, believe that the cruelty and callousness they endured, has made them stronger. People in older bodies show no physical blemishes. A mature member of society is not noticeably bruised or disfigured. Most middle-aged grown-ups, those once exposed to such exploitation have learned to hide the scars. Hurt hearts do not inhibit intellectual growth; nor do the effects of verbal and emotional injuries restrict achievements. As a tot, a teen, or an individual in his or her golden years, a person harmed by words can thrive and triumph. The attitude is, "I will show them!" The thought that provokes our success is, "I will do well. Then, they will [finally] love me."
The truth is mean Mom's and dismissive Dad's do love their offspring. They simply do not know how to show it. Too often, we do as was done to us. As adults, we become the people our parents were. While we may have abhorred mother or father's behavior, it is what we know. We grow to be as those who taught us were.
At birth, we learn of what we despise most. In our parents dwelling, as tots, we become acquainted with insults, invectives, and insolence. The invisible barbs are experienced as a barrage of bullets; each pierces the flesh. Mothers mock us. Fathers jeer. Brothers and sisters, bully. In our earliest years, we begin to think of when and how we can leave the company of those who say they treasure us. In time, as children we decide the best defense is a good offense. Hence, we become equally odious, angry, and ambitious. Often adults, who were verbally abused as children, when they speak of their parents, state, "They did the best they could." Indeed, perfectionist parents do what they believe is best, and they expect their progeny to do better.
In ambitious middle-class families, one of the most common forms of emotional abuse is the denigration of any achievement that falls short of perfection, such as when a child is punished for bringing home a B instead of an A. Jeree Pawl, director of the Infant-Parent Program at San Francisco General Hospital, observes that "perfectionist" parents may display irrational expectations.
After a time, Mom and Dad no longer need to express what they expect; children know what is necessary. In fact, a young person will demand more of him or herself than either parent ever did. In our youth, we become self-critical. Our parents likely did not disparage us as well as we demean ourselves. Each day, we improve. We can deliver venom more vigorously than Mom or Dad ever did. Persons, who were the victims of verbal mistreatment in their youth, inflict the same sarcastic and sardonic on them selves as they age.
The use of hurtful declarations becomes a habit. Spoken stabs pull a person down. Those not stated aloud do us in with greater force. The voice within is perhaps more furious than the one separate from self. Our self-assessments are as a cancerous virus. Merciless messages kill. Yet, no one notices the cause or effects of the illness. Too many Americans share the symptoms; hence, the pain is standard.
Parental verbal abuse may wound children's psyches so deeply that the effects remain apparent in young adulthood. Such abuse may wreak psychological havoc greater than that caused by physical abuse.With an M.B.A. degree under her belt, 24-year-old "Jaime" (not her real name) should have glowing job prospects in Chicago. But she harbors memories that erode her self-confidence and make her bristle with anger—memories of her father shouting at her, during drunken rages, that she was ugly and of little value.
Indeed, verbal abuse during childhood can scar people deeply, a new study suggests. It was headed by Martin Teicher, M.D., Ph.D., director of the Developmental Biopsychiatry Research Program at McLean Hospital, which is affiliated with Harvard Medical School. Results were published in the June American Journal of Psychiatry.Although the injurious effects of child physical and sexual abuse have been the subject of considerable inquiry, not much attention has been paid to the possibly noxious effects of verbal abuse on children.
People attend to what they see. The battered hearts, the wounded souls are not visible to the eye; although the effects of these are apparent if we wish to see them. Researchers studied and discovered what lies just beneath the surface.
People who were verbally abused had 1.6 times as many symptoms of depression and anxiety as those who had not been verbally abused and were twice as likely to have suffered a mood or anxiety disorder over their lifetime, according to psychology Professor Natalie Sachs-Ericsson, the study's lead author."We must try to educate parents about the long-term effects of verbal abuse on their children," Sachs-Ericsson said. "The old saying about sticks and stones was wrong. Names will forever hurt you."
Moms and Dads wield words as weapons daily. An innocent and sweet child may be saddened by what is said to them. Frequently, a lad or a lass, who has come to expect the worse is fretful, frightened, or apprehensive when near those who vocally attack. After a time, a child turned teen, may appear angry, as an adult resigned, acquiescent when with Mom or Dad. Still, the pain seeps out. It spills onto all the injured individual encounters.
The cycle starts subtly. It is all so subterranean. How often is a child told, "You need to take responsibility"? Yet, how frequently does neither guardian seems to accept that they play a part in what occurred in their own lives. After a night on the town, too much food, and an abundance of alcoholic beverages, Dad may bellow, "Stay out of my way today if you know what's good for you." Then, as if to inform his brood, father would offer, "I'm in a bad mood." Daddy does not wish to be liable for his own limitations. Thus, if he was under duress, or hassled, surely, someone else must be to blame.
It is a "me against the world" mentality. Those who command and seek control, the power they did not feel they had in their youth, see themselves as separate from the others. Hence, the great divide.
Mom may be no different from Dad. This sweet, soft-spoken woman, a mother committed to her children often commented, "My life would have been perfect if it were not for you." She would then say, "Get out of my sight; you are a bad boy, a hateful, ungrateful girl." Then, moments later, Mommy would say how much she loved you, or I. Life and love, as a child, and later as an adult can be caustic, chaotic, and troublesome, even if we emerge confidently. Either parent can do the damage. Both can build the barriers that teach one of the brood to be boldly brazen.
Weeks ago, Americans watched an esteemed achiever, a Presidential aspirant, vent wrathful words. The statements made echoed in every American household. On television and radio airwaves we heard, "Shame on you. “It is time you (act in a manner) consistent with your messages in public. That is what I expect from you. (L)et's have a debate about your tactics and your behavior . . ." Only days prior, we, as a nation, were moved by the magnanimous words, "(Y)ou know, no matter what happens in this contest -- and I am honored, I am honored to be here with [the same person who was slammed two days later.] I am absolutely honored." Hours before the homage was delivered in a face-to-face encounter, the self-proclaimed "fighter" raged, she was ready. The person she humiliated after offering a sincere homage was not. Then, in a fit of anger, this eloquent and accomplished adult exclaimed to her audience, "Let's get real."
On an occasion or two, the New York Senator states if she and her adversary worked as one, all dreams would come true. Quickly, Hillary Rodham Clinton reminds us that the same individual who she thinks praiseworthy is incompetent. He cannot command; nor is he qualified. The waling wounded Clinton claims the man who might steal her win is but a "child." She demeans his experience while she exaggerates her own. In a breath, the scared child, now a grown Senator, cries out. The former First Lady, who continues to carry the weight of a world built on pain within her, tells us the man who angers her is eloquent, admirable, and yet, inadequate.
One day this wise woman is passive or polite; then in the next moment she is aggressive and antagonistic. As Hillary Clinton speaks of Uniting the States, creating a cohesive Democratic Party, she works to divide these entities. She loves her country, her challenger, and her community; yet . . .
The push-pull of these love-hate relationships may remind us of what too many of us as children and adults experience in our family homes. In the "United" States, division, derision, declarations that divide a union are natural. Most accept the conventions that have been familiar throughout their lives. Few are disturbed by the divisiveness a Presidential candidate puts forth. Perchance, the American people relate. Might we consider the climate that was the candidate's childhood, her history, and the truth that fashioned her family?
The couple fought. In 1926, Dorothy's father filed for divorce, claiming that his wife had hit him in the face and scratched him on three separate occasions, according to Cook County records. In a March 1927 court hearing, Della Howell's own sister accused her of abusing her husband and abandoning her two daughters."She had a violent temper and flew at him in a rage, and would fight him," testified the sister, Frances Czeslawski.
Della Howell did not show up to contest the divorce -- she could not be found by subpoena servers. Dorothy's father was given custody. But, either unwilling or unable to take care of his daughters, he put them on the train to California, where his parents, Edwin Howell Sr. and Emma Howell, had moved a few years previously. . . .
The grandparents were ill-prepared to raise Dorothy and her sister, Isabelle.
Edwin Howell Sr. had emigrated from Wales. He worked as a machinist in an auto plant and as a laborer for the Alhambra street department, according to Alhambra city directories from the time. He mostly left the girls' care to his wife.
Emma Howell was a strict woman who wore black Victorian dresses and discouraged visitors and parties. Once, discovering that Dorothy had gone trick-or-treating on Halloween, she ordered her confined to her room for a year except for school.
"Her grandmother was a severe and arbitrary disciplinarian who berated her constantly, and her grandfather all but ignored her," Clinton wrote. . .
"Once I asked my mother why she went back to Chicago," Clinton wrote in "Living History." The answer? "'I'd hoped so hard that my mother would love me that I had to take the chance and find out,' she told me. 'When she didn't, I had nowhere else to go.'
Too many of us can recall a time when we wanted to be appreciated, admired, accepted by those who brought us into the world, or taught us to be the best we could be. Even when those we care for harm us, we still crave their adoration. A child who feels less than cherished will try harder. Humans will do whatever they believe they must do in hopes that someday, they will be treasured by their first teachers, the people they call family.
Hillary was the best student among her siblings, the one who took her parents' lessons most seriously. . .Hugh Rodham, unlike many other fathers of his era, raised his daughter to be ambitious. When she brought home straight A's, Rodham would say, "Well, Hillary, that must be an easy school you go to," she [Presidential hopeful, Hillary Clinton] wrote. . .
Hugh Rodham took thrift to even greater heights than many survivors of the Depression. If Hillary, Hugh Jr., or Tony left the cap off the toothpaste, he would toss it out the window and send the child to search for it. An allowance was out of the question. "I feed you, don't I?" she remembers him saying.
Clinton speaks of her father admiringly, but . . . no one disputes his gruffness. "He was character building, like our winters in Chicago," Ebeling, Clinton's best friend, said. . . .
He was "highly opinionated, to put it mildly," [Hillary] Clinton wrote. "We all accommodated his pronouncements . . .
Hilary is as many warriors in society are. She expects the electorate to tolerate her brusque, sometimes demeaning, statements, just as she accepted much of what her father said. If the people wish to argue with the aspirant, as occasionally she did with her dear Dad, Clinton thinks that is fine. After all, she is a fighter. She knows how to win. Just as Hugh Rodham did when he felt his children were uncontrollable, the dictatorial, decidedly aggressive decider known as Dad escalated the argument. "You are with me or against me" is a common refrain among those who command cruelly.
Many progeny adapt to parents who can be punitive. After a time, offspring learn, the boundaries that divide them are best when they remain as invisible, just as the wounds on the heart are. Children convince themselves, they are strong. They are in control. As long as they go along to get along all will be well, and it will be, until the next emotional upheaval. Even then, those who scream and demean will be fine, for what they experience is familiar.
I offer a personal anecdote, one that helped me to understand the divide that exists among us in America. There are the "fighters" well-trained to battle, and the peacemakers, those who talk in tones that are more tranquil.
I realized this only in recent years. A time ago, after I had lived on this glorious green Earth for more than three decades I thought I understood people. I experienced much in my lifetime. As a child, I settled in the suburbs, the city, and the country. In my earliest years may family had all the fineries. We were exceptionally wealthy. Then, there was the divorce. My Mommy, new Daddy a sister, and I were extremely poor when I was in Elementary School. Eventually we evolved into Middle Class. I felt as though we were average.
At seventeen years of age, I declared my independence. I left home, lived on my own, and struggled to earn enough money to survive. I inhabited neighborhoods not thought to be safe. My knowledge of life and it's various styles, I believed was expansive.
Then, it occurred. I met a man. Immediately, I knew I loved him. I had never been easily impressed. Romantic relationships were not part of my repertoire. This person, I perceived as beyond special. I admired him, and I intensely appreciated him. This gentleman was brilliant. He was very successful. He smiled ever so warmly. Until . . . suddenly, he yelled. The wrath was intended for me. As Gary excitedly expressed his disgust, his face was flush. His eyes and veins were bulging. This cherished chap was agitated, accusatory, and exceptionally anxious. To this day, I know not why. I have asked. Yet, an explanation was not forthcoming.
As Gary ranted and raged, I stood frozen, as a deer in headlights. I was stunned. In my whole life, no one had ever yelled at me, or so I thought, previous to that day. There was one other occasion.
That narrative aside, as Gary and I stood face to face, as he screamed and shrieked, he articulated the assertion, "You are having a tantrum." I marveled. I am a calm person. As a child, I was just as serene. In my entire life, I did not recall being explosive. As I observed Gary and listened to his words, I was uncertain which aspect of this encounter was more amazing to me, his conduct, or his contention. After, the damn or dam broke, he seemed free of his agitation. I was anxious, although still silent. I knew not what to say or do. What had I witnessed? What did it mean? How did I feel about it?
In time, I did learn as Hillary Clinton, and others whose hearts are hurt by words, do. I could choose to tolerate the brusque and debasing language. I could choose to appease, to please, or to patronize. However, I also understood no matter what I decided to do, there would be consequences. There would always be a chasm between Gary and I. I would never fully feel comfortable, for I did not know what might bring on another brutal belch of bitterness.
I walked on eggshells, and he, with all his hollering, hoped to secure the impression that he walked on water. I came to discover that Gary had been challenged all his life. His parents were the purveyors of agenda after agenda. As a child he had felt as he now teaches others to feel, as though he was and is less than. Gary was told too often, he was not good enough, smart enough; he was wrong. If Gary received an excellent evaluation in class, he too was meet with the remark similar to the ones the New York Senator heard in her youth. "Well, that subject is just too simple." "An "A" grade is not good enough."
Dissect a heart. Dismember a sweet spirit. It is the American way, divide and conquer. In a competitive society, where cruelty is common, most everyone will suffer, so that the few spoiled souls can feel, even if only for a moment, that they have succeeded. Sadly, their triumph is our demise.
Gary, Hillary, and too many we encounter have become so familiar with belligerent behaviors they no longer think there are other ways to work with people.
I was raised in a family where no one yells. To say I am jarred by loud aggressive rants is to understate what I feel. For a time, I team-taught with an instructor deemed superior. This person won District-wide awards. I understood why when I assessed the curriculum this teacher originated. Yet, this individual chastised students vociferously and with ample abandon. When in a rage, this educator's voice traveled throughout the building. I literally jumped in fright on more than one occasion.
Even without the volume, this teacher's words could cut like a knife. When the venom was directed at me, I froze. I am extremely sensitive to the lexis. The phrases this instructor used were not part of my reality. Our philosophies on life were disparate. Yet, I truly enjoyed this individual when the conversation was amiable. When jovial, the professor was a delight. Indeed, this person often was happy and genuinely fun.
When a scream was heard through the walls, students and I would react. Some smiled. A few laughed nervously. Others and I were startled. We cringed. When the world was again calm, quietly, throughout the room, discussions emerged. The demeanor of this academic was the topic. Talk of the teacher was approached tenderly. As I listened, I learned. If a person grows up in a home where one particular approach to life is normal, they learn to accept and appreciate that manner of expression. People who were taught to expect verbal lashings, as Hillary Clinton noted, learn to accommodate or accept.
If cruel criticisms were common in a home; howls were considered to be a sign, someone cares, painful as that might be. Those never exposed to love that did not hurt could not imagine the possibility. Tis a sad state in this union, when those we treasure most are the ones we whip to a pulp with words. A country divided cannot stand.
Perchance it is time to truly discuss what divides America. Dollars and legal documents are not divisive. Paper does not have the power to pull us apart. Race cannot physically separate us. In nature, every hue is a significant part of the whole. Religion does not cause a rift between neighbors. A philosophy can only teach us. Principles do not reach into our souls and cause us to slice and dice. It is we who control the chaos that drives a wedge between our brethren and we.
Might Americans come together at home and on every avenue? From Wall Street to Main Street let us speak kindly to each other. Let us teach the children well.
Perhaps, it is time to tell those you share a life with that you revere them without reservations. If we choose to use words that consistently show we care for those we love, perhaps, peace will have a chance. If our words were to mirror our stated beliefs, possibly, money would have no power, color could do no harm, and religious principles would be evident in our every expression. Please, imagine and work to give birth to what for too long was thought impossible. Let us live in an America, united in more than name only.
Sources, Scars, Screams in a divided society . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on April 4, 2008 at 08:00 AM in Abuse, Aggression, Americana, Approval or Love, Art of Loving, Have or Be, Children, Compassion, Conflict, Complex, Dreams Live and Die , Emotional Decisions, Emotional Intelligence, Empathy and Evolution, Family, Functioning, Fables | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Homage to Lawrence King. Teach Tolerance To Adults and Children
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
It was February 14, 2008, Valentine's Day. Love was in the air. However, the expressions of appreciation offered were mournful. Doctors informed the family and his friends, Lawrence King, 15, was removed from life support. Two days earlier, young Larry was in the computer lab at E. O. Green Junior High in Oxnard, California. He sat with 24 other students when Brandon McInerney walked into the room with a gun. The armed classmate, fourteen-years of age, approached Lawrence with intent. Brandon aimed his weapon, pulled the trigger, and shot Lawrence in the head. Without hesitation, the shooter ran from the building. Circumstances led observers and police officers to conclude the act was intentional, calculated, and a conscious choice. Brandon committed what is commonly defined as a "hate crime."
Students were locked in classrooms. Grief and disbelief filled the air. Adults tried to calm the children. Teens tried to cope. Peers were befuddled. Pupils sought information and shared what they knew. After the event, fingers flew across cellular telephone keypads. Text messages were sent and received from schoolroom to schoolroom. The words were, "Brandon McInerney did the deed." 'Not Brandon McInerney, No way.'
"Brandon wouldn't do this," eighth-grader Jessica Lee remembers thinking. "He's a good kid. It can't be Brandon."But some at the Oxnard junior high school had seen Larry, 15, teased by students in the weeks before the shooting for being gay and wearing high-heeled boots and makeup. Some witnessed confrontations between Larry and Brandon, with Larry teasing Brandon and saying he liked him.
Family members and friends described Larry as a sweet, artistic boy who loved to sing and didn't understand why people reacted negatively to him.
Brandon, 14, a tall, athletic eighth-grader, was described by friends and acquaintances as a mellow, focused kid, but one who wouldn't back down in a confrontation.
Brandon had learned his lessons well. He learned to feel deeply. Indifference was not part of his repertoire, intolerance was. Perhaps from within the womb, he began his education. Those who in an act of love came together to give birth to Brandon, apparently knew nothing more than volatile loathing. Perchance, Brandon's mother, Kendra and his father, William were raised to love or hate, but not tolerate.
We can be certain that baby Brandon did as all infants do after birth, he absorbed all the messages that surrounded him. . Education is not an isolated entity. Knowledge is not gained only in a classroom. Our first school is called home. Structured lessons may inform us; however, these are never internalized as deeply as the wisdom we acquire at the knees of our Mom and Dad. Parents have a profound influence on a child. Those we love most have the power to teach us more. Definitely, the occurrence taught Brandon what to do when he felt troubled.
Kendra McInerney, Brandon's mother, claimed a night of partying in 1993 ended in a fight and William shooting her in the elbow, breaking it in several places, according to court records. Still, they married later that year, and Brandon was born in January 1994.The fighting didn't stop, and sometimes it was witnessed by Brandon and his two older half-brothers, according to court records. In 2000, William pleaded no contest to a domestic battery charge against Kendra. He was sentenced to 10 days in jail and ordered to attend domestic violence classes. The couple separated in August 2000.
Love, or familiarity can breed contempt. Even when someone no longer shares a physical space with the person that causes him or her distress that individual remains intimately connected in the heart. Parting is not a sweet sorrow. Indeed, it is often the source of more pain. Indifference is rarely evident once an emotional bond is formed.
For Kendra and William McInerney, separation did nothing to alleviate the angst they felt or expressed. , Nor, did living apart make life more livable for the children. Drinking, drugs, and violence were daily transgressions in Brandon's life. The stories are stark. Yet, fortunately, it appeared Brandon survived. Indeed, some would say he thrived.
Through all the family turmoil, Brandon got involved in activities outside the home, including martial arts and lifeguard training. He seemed to want something more than just the status quo of Silver Strand, Crave said."He didn't want to be involved in that whole thing," Crave said, gesturing at friends drinking a few beers nearby after getting off work.
Brandon joined the Young Marines — the Marine Corps' equivalent of a JROTC program — several years ago and became a leader in the group, which disbanded last summer.
"Brandon was a young man that I would never have figured something like this would happen to," said Mel Otte, his commanding officer.
Otte said he never witnessed Brandon showing a short temper and that he would have been kicked out of the group if he had bullied other kids.
"He was an outstanding young man," Otte said. "What happened since I left, I have no idea."
What occurred did not take place in a instant. The image of restraint did not transcend an earlier reality. Change did not come on in a flash. Often calm is a facade for the chaos that lay beneath the surface of a boy [girl, woman, or man] who battles emotional upheavals. What was real for Brandon is true for each of us. We learn and live what we believe is customary.
Even those of us who "know better," or are exposed to impressive amounts of information, organized to challenge unhealthy conventions, do as we have seen done, or was done to us. Some escape the affects of sensory overload for a time. Few abandon family traditions until long they have repeatedly fallen from grace. Only an individual forced to face his or her "demons" day in and day out thinks to learn new habits.
We all love easily. We loathe with less effort. What we do not do well is authentically accept others. Few beings bother to have compassion, to learn from those who look, think, feel, or act differently. Without empathy, everyone is a possible enemy.
Hate, or fear, of what we do not understand, motivates many a mind to react aggressively. Apprehension and anxiety are not logical. None of our emotions are. Nevertheless, all too often humans, prideful of an intellectual capacity, are galvanized by feelings. We are threatened by what we feel terrorizes us.
For Brandon it was a boy who thought him fine. For adults it may be a secret admirer, or an individual who has authority over us. The neighbor who was unkind could seem a danger. Mature men or women may believe the man in the automobile in front of them is a menace. Even a small girl, on the corner, with her fingers out-stretched in a sign of peace could seem a hazard if our habit is to adopt an angry stance when we feel annoyed.
People are familiar with what deeply disturbs them. They know all too well how to demonstrate love and hate. Indifference is doable, as long as an n individual does not see or hear those outside their sphere. Benevolence, perhaps that is the reaction, the action we do not learn from birth.
We all crave a connection. Humans have needs. Individuals long to be included, intimately involved; we wish to feel as though we have the right and power to make decisions for ourselves. Men, women, and children are not indifferent. Hence the dilemma.
When it seems we are unable to manage our world, humans freak. Each of us responds differently, understandably. Intellectually, people may recognize they cannot control the universe. However, when stressed, we discover the habits we hold dear remain intact. Our reactions are not innate, just well studied. Brandon McInerney was not a bad boy. He is a human being. He reacted as he had learned to do. Barely fourteen years of age, Brandon expressed his deep disdain for a situation and someone he could not control.
Chaos abounds. Nonetheless, we try. Too often, we fail. A senseless murder, and what assassination is not absurd, illustrates what occurs when someone does not feel fulfilled and knows not what to do. People in physical or psychological pain lash out in the ways they know how.
Brandon McInerney was baffled, no terrified, by the actions of another boy. Lawrence did not cause bodily harm to his peer. He did no verbal damage, at least not intentionally. Paradoxically, when Larry spoke of Brandon, he articulated his sincere admiration. That is what bothered the young boy Brandon. Love, especially when expressed unconventionally, caused Brandon's heart and mind to break. The young lad, now passed, Larry, did not bully Brandon or his buddies. Indeed, the other boys hassled Lawrence prior to his final day.
In recent weeks, the victim, Lawrence King, 15, had said publicly that he was gay, classmates said, enduring harassment from a group of schoolmates, including the 14-year-old boy charged in his death.
McInerney, now in custody, refuses to speak of what motivated him. His lawyer offers the fourteen year old is too young to fully understand his actions. Perhaps all people are too immature to rationalize the unreasonable, revulsion, repulsion, and feelings of repugnance.
What is hate? Certainly, it is an emotion, as inexplicable as fondness. Each can be voiced to the extreme. Neither is inconsequential. Perhaps, when humans feel adoration or antipathy they lose all perspective. The chemistry we feel when we connect intensely is uncontrollable. If only people could capture the energy and place it in a bottle before they pop.
Assemblyman Mike Eng (Democrat, Monterey Park), chairman of the Assembly Select Committee on Hate Crimes, said we would, with a bit of money directed towards teaching diversity, be able to stop crimes against people based on race, religion, ethnicity, or sexual orientation.
"My bill is focusing on [hate crime] prevention," Eng said after a news conference at his El Monte district office. "We already have bills on the books about proper punishment; mine will focus on dealing with hatred in a school setting."Eng hopes to create a pilot program by allocating up to $150,000 to establish a diversity and sensitivity curriculum at a few school districts. The pilot program would serve as a model to be used to develop lesson plans statewide.
Others in the community believe the proposed program only serves to comfort parents and Principals, adults, and not adolescents. Countless argue that similar programs such as D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education), D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education), are ineffective. These simplistic strategies always were nothing more than slogans used to appease anxious adults. Although these agendas survive, they do not strengthen the will or the character of the young persons they serve. At times, instruction is as indifference. If you do not know what to do, or say about an open wound, look for an easy answer. Apply salve, and walk away. Most of us truly believe the sore will eventually heal by itself.
Here's a news flash: "Just Say No" is not an effective anti-drug message. And neither are Barney-style self-esteem mantras . . .DARE, which is taught by friendly policemen in 75 percent of the nation's school districts, has been plagued by image problems from the beginning, when it first latched on to Nancy Reagan's relentlessly sunny and perversely simplistic "Just say No" campaign. The program's goals include teaching kids creative ways to say "no" to drugs, while simultaneously bolstering their self-esteem (which DARE founders insist is related to lower rates of drug use). . . .
According to an article published in the August 1999 issue of the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, DARE not only did not affect teenagers' rate of experimentation with drugs, but may also have actually lowered their self-esteem. . . .
The findings were grim: 20-year-olds who'd had DARE classes were no less likely to have smoked marijuana or cigarettes, drunk alcohol, used "illicit" drugs like cocaine or heroin, or caved in to peer pressure than kids who'd never been exposed to DARE. But that wasn't all. "Surprisingly," the article states, "DARE status in the sixth grade was negatively related to self-esteem at age 20, indicating that individuals who were exposed to DARE in the sixth grade had lower levels of self-esteem 10 years later." Another study, performed at the University of Illinois, suggests some high school seniors who'd been in DARE classes were more likely to use drugs than their non-DARE peers.
Still, Americans, intent on straightforward solutions, quick fixes, and immediate gratification, forget that life is not so simple. The family teaches children from birth. The lessons we learn in our youngest years are internalized deeply. In infancy, each day we encounter our mother, father, or guardian, the people we need most, and most want to love us. As toddlers, we are intimately involved with our caregivers, even if they do not seem to care for us. When we are children, the only choice that we have, the only option that gives us a sense of control, is to cling to those who help us survive. Moms and Dads are our first and best, teachers, if only because they are there in whatever capacity.
However, sadly, for some of us, such as Brandon McInerney our mentors did not teach us well. Schools try to suffice. Teachers with ten, twenty forty to a class try to create a relationship with each student. As educators teach Math, Science, Reading, and English, they work to provide a sense of self-worth to each and every young scholar. For a few hours, five days a week, a troubled youngster can call his or her classroom home.
For young people such as Larry, school may have been a place to blossom, somewhere where he felt safe, or for both the boys an educational institution may have been the place where lessons begun at birth were reinforced. Each was teased, bullied, and verbally battered. Each had friends. However, they may not have felt they achieved an authentic intimate connection with anyone. Even acquaintances can say . . .
“He had a character that was bubbly,” Marissa said. “We would just laugh together. He would smile, then I would smile, and then we couldn’t stop.”
An ally in life does more than smile or laugh. Larry King may have felt he had few real supporters, in a school he attended for only months. How close can two people be when they see each other only for hours and then each returns to their own abode. One may return to the place they consider "Home Sweet Home," the other may reside in an institution, far from those who are "supposed" to love him.
For several months before to the shooting, Larry had been living at Casa Pacifica, a residential center for troubled youths in Camarillo.
Lawrence's parents are alive and well, as are his four siblings, a younger brother, two older brothers, and an older sister. While the family spoke lovingly of the dearly departed, they dared not speak of why the lad no longer lived with them. Many children today are placed in treatment agencies. The numbers are staggering. The reasons are astounding. Yet, when people know not how to love well, and are not indifferent, they do what they may hate to do.
The number of children placed in residential treatment centers (or RTCs) (1) is growing exponentially.(2) These modern-day orphanages now house more than 50,000 children nationwide.(3) Children are packed off to RTCs, often sent by officials they have never met, who have probably never spoken to their parents, teachers or social workers.(4) Once placed, these kids may have no meaningful contact with their families or friends for up to two years.(5) And, despite many documented cases of neglect and physical and sexual abuse, monitoring is inadequate to ensure that children are safe, healthy and receiving proper services in RTCs.(6) By funneling children with mental illnesses into the RTC system, states fail—at enormous cost—to provide more effective community-based mental health services.(7)RTC placements are often inappropriate.
RTCs are among the most restrictive mental health services and, as such, should be reserved for children whose dangerous behavior cannot be controlled except in a secure setting.(8) Too often, however, child-serving bureaucracies hastily place children in RTCs because they have not made more appropriate community-based services available.(9) Parents who are desperate to meet their kids’ needs often turn to RTCs because they lack viable alternatives.(10)To make placement decisions, families in crisis and overburdened social workers rely on the institutions’ glossy flyers and professional websites with testimonials of saved children.(11) But all RTCs are not alike.(12) Local, state and national exposés and litigation “regarding the quality of care in residential treatment centers have shown that some programs promise high-quality treatment but deliver low-quality custodial care.”(13) As a result, parents and state officials play a dangerous game of Russian roulette as they decide where to place children, because little public information is available about the RTCs, which are under-regulated and under-supervised.
Yet, parents and community services agencies take those who are perhaps most vulnerable, our young and troubled teens, and place them in Residential Treatment Centers not able to provide minimal care. When we, as a culture consider other options, and other means for childcare, we cannot but think of poor Brandon and how he suffered at the hands of his mother and father. We are reminded that Brandon, the tormented shooter, lived in a location he called home. We might wonder; which situation was better, worse, or can we even compare the traumas each child in this story suffered.
Brandon and Larry are not anomalies. They are not alone. Children throughout our country are taught to express love in a violent manner. The little ones watch adults they admire model cruelty. The young are trained to demonstrate their contempt similarly. Sadistic reactive behaviors rule in our society. Listen to people ruthlessly scream in the marketplace. Consider the abundance of "hate crimes" in America. Turn on the television. Tune into the radio. Read the "literature." Hostile conduct is commended and condoned.
For too many of our offspring, aggression in their daily existence is the norm. They hear it in their homes; see their parent bludgeon each other. As toddlers, tots, children, or teens our youth feel the bruises on their back, and remember the bones broken by those they love most. Ponder the statistics.
During FFY 2005, an estimated 899,000 children in the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico were determined to be victims of abuse or neglect.
- Children in the age group of birth to 3 years had the highest rate of victimization at 16.5 per 1,000 children of the same age group in the national population;
- More than one-half of the victims were 7 years old or younger (54.5%)
- More than one-half of the child victims were girls (50.7%) and 47.3 percent were boys; and
- Approximately one-half of all victims were White (49.7%); one-quarter (23.1%) were African-American; and 17.4 percent were Hispanic.
Gender preference did not determine maltreatment when infants and the very young among were involved. Specific biases are learned as we "mature." While many wish to focus on Larry's identification with the gay community as reason for such a horrific reaction, the cause for Brandon's response goes far deeper. Scorn is rarely selective. Disparagement is an equal opportunity employer.
Abusive behaviors are rooted in our personal history. We cannot dismiss the fact that as a society, our past performances towards those we disdain are deplorable. As a culture, emotional beings that we are, we embrace love and hate, and ignore indifference.
We must ask ourselves, what are we doing to our offspring from the day they enter this world, and why. Answers offered after the fact, solutions that do not address the broader question will not stop the violence we see in schools. Nor will it quash the mayhem or reduce the murders we see on our streets. Hate crimes are born at home. Mothers and fathers motivate much that occurs. Moms and Dads often do what was done to them.
Children 'learn violence from parents'Children who witness domestic violence are at an increased risk of having abusive relationships as adults, researchers have found.
Being abused as a child and having behavioural problems also increases the risk of being violent as adults. Receiving excessive punishment is another risk factor. US researchers from Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons and the New York State Psychiatric Institute followed 540 children for 20 years from 1975 . . .
If a pattern of violent behaviour towards a partner has been established, it is difficult to change say the researchers. . . .
If a child was hit by their parents, they were much more likely to see violence as a way of resolving problems as adults, the researchers found.
But seeing violence perpetuated between parents was found the be the greatest risk factor for being the victim of a violent partner as an adult.
Both men and women who witnessed domestic violence were likely to grow up to abuse their partners . . .
"This acceptance of coercive, power-based norms as ways of regulating conflict may have direct implications for young adults' means of conflict resolution with partners, independent of a disruptive behaviour disorder."
For too many of our young persons a forceful hand, a furious face, and a vicious voice are identified with those they are most fond of. Children are confused. In too many lives, love does not come easily. Little ones do not know what authentic affection looks like. As "mature" beings, some people seek the wisdom they did not acquire in their family homes. They wish to learn of what could not have been fully integrated in a school curriculum. Grown-up persons harmed by habits that debilitate a mind, body, heart, and soul know to their core, habits die hard. Adult classes meant to teach as Assemblyman Eng proposed exist at West Virginia University an older person can study How To Communicate Love. Learners are instructed, "Love comes from within." Students are advised to appreciate themselves.
Learning to love yourself will help create your personal appearance of love. If you do not know how to love yourself, you will not be able to love others. Loving yourself also means that you have a loving attitude in your actions and responses toward others; that you look for opportunities to help rather than be helped; that you communicate a loving appreciation of others with “thank you” and “please” as part of your vocabulary; that you forgive others and do not hold a grudge; and that you help people in need without thought of reward or recognition.
However, ultimately pupils are reminded of what Lawrence and Brandon have helped us realize.
How we communicate love to others is learned; we are not born with the ability to communicate love.
Nor are we born with the ability to hate. Each of us, every man, woman, and child is well-trained. If we are to truly end the violence that exists in schools, we must eliminate the hostility in our homes. Assemblyman Eng, perhaps a program in parenting, one instituted in every community throughout the globe might be more effective than any instruction in a school. If we are to truly teach forbearance to our progeny we must acknowledge parents, adults in every avenue are our life teachers. Let us not speak of how best to teach the children tolerance. We, their elders must learn how to love first. Perhaps, if the elders begin to appreciate each other without brutality, next Valentine's Day Cupid will not shoot arrow. He will bestow gentle kisses on each of us.
Sources, Societal Scars, Scabs . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on February 28, 2008 at 11:00 AM in "Take me as I am!", Abuse, Adult Influence on Children, Aggression, Approval or Love, Communities and Communication , Compassion, Conflict, Complex, Emotional Intelligence, Family, Functioning, Fables, Fear, Human Nature, Humans, Self-Destructive, Life, A Forward Motion, Light. Darkness., Looking at Life, Nature or Nurture, Quality of Life, School Days, School Shootings, School Violence, Society, Teach The Children, Tributes, Verbal Combat, Violence, When Will I Be Right? | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Where Is the Beef? Where Are the Bees? Planet in Peril
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
Late in January 2008, Americans read the startling news, Video Reveals Violations of Laws, Abuse of Cows at Slaughterhouse. Tears were shed by some; most turned away. The footage was too graphic. Countless wished to remain removed from a reality they do not wish to witness. Reports, of brutal treatment towards beefy cattle, were received by many as is steak on a plate. Those who eat the meat think it sad that a cow must be sacrificed in order to fill a human stomach. Nonetheless, numerous persons believe man kills "lower" forms of life; that is the natural order.
After the revelation, not much changed. Throughout the nation people continued as they had. Weeks passed. Those categorized as the highly intelligent, and humane, had greater concerns than cattle or the cruelty inflicted upon these beast. Matters of consequence were and are far more critical than fallen cows. Decision-makers at the morally condemned abattoir understood the more crucial issue would be public relations. If earnings are to be maintained and profits sustained some action must be taken. The reputation of the business was at stake [steak]. Embarrassed by the audio-visual documentation of doings within the plant, Chief Executives at the Westland - Hallmark Meat Company, ordered the Largest Recall of Ground Beef ever.
The meat packaging plant issued a warning. Consumers were asked to return a full 143 million pounds plus, of beef. Meat produced over the last two years was included in the cautionary measures.
More than a third of the 143 million pounds of California beef recalled this week went to school lunch programs, with at least 20 million pounds consumed, Agriculture Department officials said Thursday.About 50 million pounds of the meat went to schools, said Eric Steiner, deputy administrator of special nutrition programs for the department's Food and Nutrition Service.
Of that amount, about 20 million pounds has been eaten, 15 million pounds is on hold at storage facilities and 15 million pounds is still being traced, he said.
Conceivably, the scope was too broad. Consumers became frightened. The public panicked Parents feared for the children. Schools worried; as recipients and distributors of large quantities of the beef would they be liable.
As awareness increased for the possibly tainted beef, an anxious public cried, "How many people need to get sick, or die, before Congress starts to repair and modernize the nation’s food safety system?" Americans remembered other recent recalls and clamored, someone must be held accountable. People blamed the Bush Administration for this "turn" of events. Periodicals offer resounding criticisms. No one spoke of the duplicity. Why is it considered cruel to abuse the animal you are prepared to kill?
Instead of strengthening the government’s regulatory systems, the Bush administration has spent years cutting budgets and filling top jobs with industry favorites. The evidence of their failures keep mounting: contaminated spinach, poisoned pet food, tainted fish.
There was and is much to speak of, more to scrutinize. Infected food can cause death. Yet, no one places the onus on those who passively accept food industry standards, the American people. The official word of the Federal Food and Drug Administration, which relaxed regulations decades ago, escapes censure as well. Citizens no longer recall that this branch of government loosened standards, and allowed the industry to define what might be acceptable fodder.
[In] 1958, the definition of pantry goods had changed substantially. New food products and a newly competitive refrigerated and frozen goods industry that developed in the domestic marketplace after World War II had literally redefined the household pantry. As the number of new processed and fabricated foods grew, the government spent less time issuing refined standards for products such as raisin bread and egg bread, and more time establishing new standards for products such as frozen orange juice, frozen "TV" dinners, frozen breaded shrimp, freeze dried coffee, and "instant chocolate drinks." As soon as the Food Additives Amendment was in place, FDA began to experiment with less restrictive food standards than the strict "recipe standards" that had predominated in the standards program.In 1961, FDA first deviated from the recipe approach when it issued standards for "frozen raw breaded shrimp" which simply provided for the use of "safe and suitable" batter and breading ingredients, rather than listing all optional ingredients individually. A legal definition of "safe and suitable" was later codified and used to allow "safe and suitable preservatives" or "safe and suitable emulsifiers."
This action was taken at the bequest of businesses. Food producers found the shift necessary. Congress never challenged the move or the measure. Communities nationwide did not question the wisdom of this action. Just as Americans accept that we must kill animals and eat them in order to survive, we also understand that when definitions or circumstances make our daily life more convenient, that cannot be all bad. Even the skeptical among us have faith no business or government agency would intentionally harm patrons, the people, or the planet.
Hence, as long as industry is regulated, and the government classifies food, or chemical substitutes as safe, there is no reason to question what appears on American plates. Events such as the one at this particular slaughterhouse are an anomaly.
Americans trust they system and did as they characteristically do. They heard the warnings and worried not. Authorities would take care of the situation. We will survive. The world is a wondrous place.
Humans rather not reflect on the possibility the treatment of cows relates to a broader reality. The planet is in peril. Downer cows lifted so that they might be butchered for food, speaks of more than a single slaughterhouse or situation. Yet, Americans and other world inhabitants do not wish to discuss what is.
This story is not merely about how humans murder another mammal with malice, or how the master of the universe, man, with his magnificent mind rationalizes what he knows to be morally wrong. This tale offers a reflection too long ignored. Humans hungry, and habitual in nature, do not chew on the thought . . .
The food chain is a complex balance of life. If one animals source of food disappears, such as from over fishing or hunting, many other animals in the food chain are impacted and may die.
Man in his infinite wisdom has altered the balance of nature. People do not consider, what they have done to the animals, insects, all the inhabitants they classify as lesser beings. Humans do not wish to acknowledge they have killed off many species. One extinction leads to another, then another, and finally, if we follow the chain, to total inhalation. A productive planet can die just and its inhabitants without insight might perish sooner than later.
Perchance, nature will remind those hard of heart. Kill fellow organisms, murder the mortal, and Mother Nature will politely, slowly, and subtly punish you for your selfish aggressions.
The lovely lady who breathes life into man and beast tries to tell man-kind [sic], be cautious. Earth, in all her elegance gives humans brains enough to realize life on this planet is pained. The treatment of cattle helps to explain how man threatens Earth.
Humans brutally slaughter the cattle and the cows return the favor. Life is cyclical. Relationships are symbiotic. Try as man might to control Mother Nature, he cannot combat the fluid energy that created him.
The livestock sector emerges as one of the top two or three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global.
Livestock’s long shadow, a report released by the Livestock, Environmental, and Development [LEAD] initiative tells a tale of woe that is worrisome. Worldwide, man, in his zeal to eat the flesh of cattle, degrades the land, changes the climate, pollutes the air and water, causes water shortage, and engenders loss of biodiversity. The adage, 'kill or be killed' might be better stated, 'slay and be slain.'
The livestock sector is by far the single largest anthropogenic user of land. The total area occupied by grazing is equivalent to 26 percent of the ice-free terrestrial surface of the planet. In addition, the total area dedicated to feedcrop production amounts to 33 percent of total arable land.In all, livestock production accounts for 70 percent of all agricultural land and 30 percent of the land surface of the planet. Expansion of livestock production is a key factor in deforestation, especially in Latin America where the greatest amount of deforestation is occurring – 70 percent of previous forested land in the Amazon is occupied by pastures, and feedcrops cover a large part of the remainder.
About 20 percent of the world’s pastures and rangelands, with 73 percent of rangelands in dry areas, have been degraded to some extent, mostly through overgrazing, compaction, and erosion created by livestock action. The dry lands in particular are affected by these trends, as livestock are often the only source of livelihoods for the people living in these areas.
A society dependent on meat production destroys the delicate balance that sustains life on this globe. Yet, to look at cows in the field, one would never know. Most who see cattle graze feel a sense of serenity. Few of us consider cows in the countryside a problem. After all, we were raised to appreciate these animals for what they provide.
Americans, carnivores and omnivores that we are, can claim, 'Look at all that life.' Few satiated humans whose stomach bulge, state, 'Look at all that death and destruction.' Climate change, as it slowly creeps into consciousness, does not startle us as it might. Humans barely notice the nuances.
With rising temperatures, rising sea levels, melting icecaps and glaciers, shifting ocean currents and weather patterns, climate change is the most serious challenge facing the human race. The livestock sector is a major player, responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions measured in CO2 equivalent. This is a higher share than transport.The livestock sector accounts for 9 percent of anthropogenic CO2 emissions. The largest share of this derives from land-use changes – especially deforestation – caused by expansion of pastures and arable land for feedcrops. . . .
It is probably the largest sectoral source of water pollution, contributing to eutrophication, “dead” zones in coastal areas, degradation of coral reefs, human health problems, emergence of antibiotic resistance, and many others. The major sources of pollution are from animal wastes, antibiotics and hormones, chemicals from tanneries, fertilizers and pesticides used for feedcrops, and sediments from eroded pastures.
Global figures are not available but in the United States, with the world’s fourth largest land area, livestock are responsible for an estimated 55 percent of erosion and sediment, 37 percent of pesticide use, 50 percent of antibiotic use, and a third of the loads of nitrogen and phosphorus into freshwater resources.
The brown-eyed beauties are not the problem. It is man who has chosen to cultivate a crop of beef that destroys the planet. Humans, intent on self-service kill the cattle brutally, and will ultimately kill themselves if they continue to ignore the signs. Currently, the extinction of bee colonies throughout the planet is not considered a priority; yet, it is more evidence that something has gone wrong. As absurd as it may seem some researchers claim cell telephones emit radiation and this effects the honeybees ability to navigate. Others argue, that theory is preposterous. Numerous refute claims they deem science fiction.
Nevertheless, honeybees are the most important insects in the human food chain. Little buzzers are the principal pollinators of hundreds of fruits, vegetables, flowers, and nuts. In the last three scores years, or more, the number of bee colonies has declined. In October 2007, as honey bee colonies collapsed, a study by the National Academy of Sciences, Colony Collapse Disorder and Pollinator Decline, suggests American agriculture may place too great a reliance on one type of pollinator, the honeybee. Other investigations focus on the reason for the threat of an apparent bee colony collapse.
Genetic testing at Columbia University has revealed the presence of multiple micro-organisms in bees from hives or colonies that are in decline, suggesting that something is weakening their immune system. The researchers have found some fungi in the affected bees that are found in humans whose immune systems have been suppressed by the Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome or cancer.“That is extremely unusual,” Dr. Cox-Foster said.
Meanwhile, samples were sent to an Agriculture Department laboratory in North Carolina this month to screen for 117 chemicals. Particular suspicion falls on a pesticide that France banned out of concern that it may have been decimating bee colonies. Concern has also mounted among public officials.
“There are so many of our crops that require pollinators,” said Representative Dennis Cardoza, a California Democrat whose district includes that state’s central agricultural valley, and who presided last month at a Congressional hearing on the bee issue. “We need an urgent call to arms to try to ascertain what is really going on here with the bees, and bring as much science as we possibly can to bear on the problem.”
Science is endorsed as the solution. However, the discipline remains part of the problem. Man cannot study as quickly as Mother Nature moves. Anthropoids do not understand that nature is fluid, chaotic, and not easily categorized. It cannot be controlled, but it can be corrupted. What humans have yet to comprehend is the effect they have on what they have and have not discovered.
Life on Earth is in the early stages of the worst mass extinction since the end of the Cretaceous. Many species are likely go extinct before they are even discovered and named by biologists. Of the estimated 10 to 20 million species living on Earth, only 10 percent have been described in the past 250 years. Dr. Edward O. Wilson, Professor Emeritus at the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, proposes that the remaining 90 percent must be described in one-tenth that time to save millions of species from extinction.
According to Doctor Wilson, a renowned expert on biodiversity, megafauna are dying out. The tuatara, the lizard-like reptile on New Zealand, the kagu, a crane-like bird with a big plume of feathers in New Caledonia an island in the south Pacific, the Sumatran rhino and the hairy rhinoceros of Europe "were wiped out before humans even had a conscience." If we continue to consume or 'control' as we do, complete extinction may be inevitable, with thanks or no thanks to the knowledge gained by the study of the physical world.
The statistics are staggering. Annihilation in the animal kingdom is ample. If we were only assess to what is observable among the insect community, we might realize there is reason to be startled. A known fact is, in America alone, 27 states have experienced bee colony collapse. Countries abroad document the same disorder.
Bee Alert Technology Inc., a company monitoring the problem. A recent survey of 13 states by the Apiary Inspectors of America showed that 26 percent of beekeepers had lost half of their bee colonies between September and March. . . .These bees may suffer from a diet that includes artificial supplements, concoctions akin to energy drinks and power bars. In several states, suburban sprawl has limited the bees’ natural forage areas.
So far, the researchers have discounted the possibility that poor diet alone could be responsible for the widespread losses. They have also set aside for now the possibility that the cause could be bees feeding from a commonly used genetically modified crop, Bt corn, because the symptoms typically associated with toxins, such as blood poisoning, are not showing up in the affected bees. But researchers emphasized today that feeding supplements produced from genetically modified crops, such as high-fructose corn syrup, need to be studied.
The food now available to the honey bees harms them. The fodder that humans ingest is arguably not healthy. The analysis absent in each of these scenarios, stories of beef and bees, is how humans destroy the gift of life. In our fervor to fulfill self, we sacrifice our souls. Man, in his infinite desire to control and consume, alters crops, raises cattle only to satisfy a stomach too large, and gratify a spirit too small. Humans hurt honeybees, the helpers of every man, woman, and child. All suffer at the hands of those beings who pride themselves on having a brain; yet have forgotten what it might mean to have a heart.
The Beef, The Bees, The Brutality . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on February 23, 2008 at 01:00 PM in Abuse, Environment, Ethics, Ethics and Profits, Farming Business, Food Folly, Global Village, Global Warming, Humans, Self-Destructive, Nature, Nature or Nurture | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
California Slaughterhouse; Human Cruelty Exposed
copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
What if you were born to the world, hopeful, and full of life, only to be immediately separated from your mother and father. What if you never felt the warmth of a parent's love or the sun on your skin? Imagine, instantaneously, after birth you were placed in a restrictive room with no space in which to spread out. Your arms and legs frozen from confinement. You are squeezed into a sealed cage, placed in a pen with other little beings. In this crate, you are forced to eat food not to your liking.
From what you observe, there are hundreds of other orphaned newborns in this dark and dank dwelling. The stench in the warehouse that you call home causes you to gag. Some of the other occupants are diseased. A few have already passed. Dead bodies, trampled by the live who are trapped with them, smell of decay. Bugs eat at the flesh.
The lack of involvement or intellectual stimulation is the reason you go mad. Stressed, strained and in both physical and emotional pain, when you are provided an exit, you know not what to do. You lash out, become aggressive, only to be poked and prodded into submission. Your one day of freedom is not more than a funeral march.
A gun is placed at your head. A round is fired. You bleed, but do not die quickly or quietly enough for the killer who wants your flesh. Tired and trying to survive, someone grabs your legs, and ties them together. Your beautiful body, one never before able to stretch out fully, is now hung from a great height. A knife enters your sphere of vision, and your throat is slashed.
Soon your remains, or those of another species whose life was as awful as your own will be served up as nutritious meals on a child's school lunch program.
Warning: This video contains graphic and disturbing footage.
In it, an HSUS investigator describes his experience working undercover in a slaughterhouse.Cheap Meat Working in a Slaughterhouse
Video footage was released in the Twenty-First Century, in January of the New Year 2008. In a civilized society, carnivores and omnivores show they are more concerned with what fills their stomachs and satchels of silver and gold then how there wants are satisfied.
In a culture, gone awry, animals are treated with malice. Dairy cows, cattle bred for beef are brutally beaten and murdered. Laws against cruelty do nothing to deter malicious behavior.
[W]orkers at a California slaughterhouse delivering repeated electric shocks to cows too sick or weak to stand on their own; drivers using forklifts to roll the "downer" cows on the ground in efforts to get them to stand up for inspection; and even a veterinary version of waterboarding in which high-intensity water sprays are shot up animals' noses -- all violations of state and federal laws designed to prevent animal cruelty and to keep unhealthy animals, such as those with mad cow disease, out of the food supply.Moreover, the companies where these practices allegedly occurred are major suppliers of meat for the nation's school lunch programs, including in Maryland, according to a company official and federal documents.
An undercover investigator for an animal welfare group, wore a customized video camera under his clothes. This affords us an opportunity to see what no one should have to witness, and what need never occur. This lover of animals, mammals, man, and all beings who breathe worked at the abattoir last year.
His or her efforts provide evidence that anti-cruelty and food safety regulations do not discourage or prevent unnecessary and inhumane abuse. The current standards are derisory.
Nevertheless, this footage reveals the Agriculture Department must inspect animal environments more thoroughly and enforce the rules with greater rigor. The Humane Society of the United States, which coordinated the project, explained there is ample need to improve the laws and to better conditions for our four legged friends.
"These were not rogue employees secretly doing these things," the investigator said in a telephone interview on the condition of anonymity because he hopes to infiltrate other slaughterhouses. "This is the pen manager and his assistant doing this right in the open."The investigator and Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society, said the footage was taken at Hallmark Meat Packing in Chino, Calif. Hallmark sells meat for processing to Westland Meat Co. in Chino, according to Westland President Steve Mendell, who is also Hallmark's operations manager.
Over the past five years, Westland has sold about 100 million pounds of frozen beef, valued at $146 million, to the Agriculture Department's commodities program, which supplies food for school lunches and programs for the needy, according to federal documents.
In the 2004-05 school year, the Agriculture Department honored Westland with its Supplier of the Year award for the National School Lunch Program.
In an interview, Mendell expressed disbelief that employees used stun guns to get sick or injured animals on their feet for inspection.
"That's impossible," he said, adding that "electrical prods are not allowed on the property."
Asked whether his employees use fork lifts to get moribund animals off the ground, he said: "I can't imagine that."
Asked whether water was sprayed up animals' noses to get them to stand up, he said: "That's absolutely not true."
"We have a massive humane treatment program here that we follow to the n{+t}{+h} degree, so this doesn't even sound possible," Mendell said. "I don't stand out there all day, but to me it would be next to impossible."
However, after a moment or two, as we watch the video, we recall, when humans are involved, merciless, heartless, callous, and sadistic practices are always possible. Carnivores sharpen your teeth. Salivate and contemplate; the sweet tender baby you are about to eat, was once prey at the hands of a person who cared not. The quality of your meat is no better than the quality of how the life was sacrificed for your stomach.
References, Resources, Food For Thought . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on January 30, 2008 at 06:30 PM in Abuse, Ethics, Farming Business, Food Folly, Lawbreakers | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Rumsfeld and Mukasey, Tortured Times and Trials
Mukasey: Waterboarding is Torture if It's Torture
copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
It has been tried before. Efforts failed. Nonetheless, I remain hopeful. I have always believed, "Never, never give up!" Thankfully, several Human Rights organizations in the United States and Europe trust in the same principle. They persevere. On Thursday, October 25, 2007, the International Federation for Human Rights, the French League for Human Rights, and the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York, filed a formal grievance in a Paris court. The complaint stated former Secretary of Defense, Donald H. Rumsfeld authorized torture at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, The writ states, Rumsfeld violated the 1987 Convention Against Torture Act.
While Rumsfeld wrestled with his past, on the floor of United States Senate Judge Michael B. Mukasey pondered his future. This Bush appointee was asked if "enemy combatants" were tormented, would he, as the Attorney General deem himself accountable. Senators questioned Michael B. Mukasey extensively, albeit civilly. They inquired, if he were approved for the Attorney General position would he accept responsibility for reprehensible actions, or did he not think torture wrong. The nominee hedged and hummed just as Rumsfeld had in the past.
Mukasey blurred the lines that define the methods used to inflict physical pain on people. In a trial of sorts, Judge Mukasey told the Senate he might be the mirror image of his predecessor, Alberto Gonzales. Today, the times are tough for those that think detainees deserve to be subjected to waterboarding.
We recall, the infamous former Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales. Gonzales was the man behind the Justice Department curtain. He clarified the terms and authorized severe means for obtaining actionable intelligence from detainees. Henchman for Vice President Dick Cheney, and of course, friend of the President, Attorney General Gonzales sanctioned measures that allow soldiers to 'crush a captives will to resist.'
Gonzales, who served as Counsel to the President, was part of a powerful team of lawyers. Legal eagles for the Administration helped to redefine Executive Privilege. White House Attorneys expanded Presidential powers. Thus, cruel and unusual punishment for enemies of the State was made possible. It is for this reason, today, Senators seek to understand Mukasey. Those in Congress hope to avoid another debate over the legality, Constitutionality, of inhumane treatment inflicted on those suspected of being terrorist. A bit of ancient history might help to explain the caution we witnessed this week.
The vice president's lawyer advocated what was considered the memo's most radical claim: that the president may authorize any interrogation method, even if it crosses the line into torture. U.S. and treaty laws forbidding any person to "commit torture," that passage stated, "do not apply" to the commander in chief, because Congress "may no more regulate the President's ability to detain and interrogate enemy combatants than it may regulate his ability to direct troop movements on the battlefield."That same day, Aug. 1, 2002, Yoo [John Choon Yoo, best known for his work from 2001 to 2003 in the United States Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel] signed off on a second secret opinion, the contents of which have never been made public. According to a source with direct knowledge, that opinion approved as lawful a long list of interrogation techniques proposed by the CIA -- including waterboarding, a form of near-drowning that the U.S. government has prosecuted as a war crime since at least 1901. The opinion drew the line against one request: threatening to bury a prisoner alive.
With the policy in place, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld did as he thought best. He sanctioned cruelty against combatants. Extracting information by any means, no matter how extreme seemed reasonable to those bent on battle. Donald Rumsfeld, blessed by Bush and Cheney and their interpretation of the constitution enforced, endorsed, the use of methods such as waterboarding. Then, he, and the White House claimed, "We do not torture."
Concurrently, the man that now seeks to head the Justice Department, Michael B. Mukasey mulled over Presidential powers. Mukasey questioned the punitive measures the Bush Administration adopted. Then, Judge Mukasey, a Reagan appointee served as the Chief Judge for the Southern District of New York. He presided over the José Padilla case. Padilla was a prisoner held in Guantánamo Bay detainee camp in Cuba.
After Padilla was first detained in April 2002 and declared an "enemy combatant," he was held incommunicado, denied all access to the outside the world, including counsel, and the Bush administration refused to charge him with any crimes. A lawsuit was filed on Padilla's behalf by a New York criminal defense lawyer, Donna Newman, demanding that Padilla be accorded the right to petition for habeas corpus and that, first, he be allowed access to a lawyer. That lawsuit was assigned to Judge Mukasey, which almost certainly made the Bush DOJ happy.But any such happiness proved to be unwarranted. Judge Mukasey repeatedly defied the demands of the Bush administration, ruled against them, excoriated them on multiple occasions for failing to comply with his legally issued orders, and ruled that Padilla was entitled to contest the factual claims of the government and to have access to lawyers. He issued these rulings in 2002 and 2003, when virtually nobody was defying the Bush administration on anything, let alone on assertions of executive power to combat the Terrorists. And he made these rulings in the face of what was became the standard Bush claim that unless there was complete acquiescence to all claimed powers by the President, a Terrorist attack would occur and the blood would be on the hands of those who impeded the President.
Now, as we bathe in blood abroad, and fear the carnage will follow us home, we realize that Michael B. Mukasey was not as he initially appeared. When pressed, nominee Mukasey does not condemn the Administration. He does not argue with the White House on all counts, and perhaps, forcing those presumed to be enemies is apt. Indeed, fair hearing for foes of the State are not necessary, or so says Judge Michael B. Mukasey.
[Mukasey] He argued that the prosecution of Jose Padilla —which Mukasey handled until his retirement from the bench last year—demonstrates that federal courts should not try terrorists. Never mind that after the government jerked Padilla in and out of the federal system and reportedly subjected him to serious abuse, he was convicted by a jury on charges that bore little relation to the allegations that former Attorney General John Ashcroft originally—and so publicly—made against him.According to Mukasey, Padilla's case does not stand for the victory of security concerns over civil liberties in federal court, but rather shows why "current institutions and statutes are not well suited" to terrorism cases. The rules for ordinary criminal defendants—that is, regular old constitutional law—should not apply to bad guys "who have cosmic goals that they are intent on achieving by cataclysmic means."
Mukasey derides terrorism prosecutions in federal court for putting "our secrets at risk" and discouraging our allies from sharing information with us. He warns of dire results if the Supreme Court rules this upcoming term that Guantanamo detainees have a right to bring their claims in federal court. An alleged terrorist could insist to his interrogators that he wanted to see a lawyer, as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed supposedly did, and "this bold joke could become a reality."
Mukasey doesn't offer his own fix but floats two proposals that have been offered by others: "[t]he creation of a separate national security court" with life-tenured judges and the use of civil commitment standards for the mentally ill for other "dangerous people." Most surprisingly, Mukasey suggests that Congress might need "to modify the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction."
What is justice for those assumed innocent would not be applied to persons deemed guilty by the world's superpower, the leaders of the United States. In times of war, terrorists must be dealt with severely. Yet, I wonder, how do we determine who the insurgents might be. Who will define the line drawn between a person fighting for the sovereignty of their homeland, and one that transgresses against another nation.
For me, war is an offense against mankind. Those that command others to kill are criminals. I understand that the vast majority of people think my belief is naïve. I am dismissed as a peacenik. Nonetheless, thankfully, worldwide, after centuries of strife, humans have come to question the sanity or humanity of torture.
In the last few years, fear has flourished. Talk of terrorism fueled much fire. Guns blazed. Bombs dropped. Enemy combatants were gathered together. Prisons were filled and the rights of people were ignored. Geneva Conventional wisdom was weakened. The Bush Administration concluded the rules were quaint. Torture passed for justice and habeas corpus was no more.
Perhaps, one day, justice for more than "just us, Americans" will again prevail. That is the hope of Michael Ratner, the President of the Center for Constitutional Rights. It is my wish as well. I have faith that the families and friends of those that suffered, no matter their country of origin, also dream of better days. For now, we only have the news and our dreams.
Groups Tie Rumsfeld to Torture in Complaint
By Doreen Carvajal
The New York TimesParis, Oct. 26 — Several human rights organizations based in the United States and Europe have filed a complaint in a Paris court accusing former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld of responsibility for torture.
The group, which includes the International Federation for Human Rights, the French League for Human Rights, and the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York, made the complaint late Thursday and unsuccessfully sought to confront Mr. Rumsfeld as he left a breakfast meeting in central Paris on Friday.
Jeanne Sulzer, one of the lawyers working on the issue for the human rights groups, said the complaint had been filed with a state prosecutor, Jean-Claude Marin, saying he would have the power to pursue the case because of Mr. Rumsfeld’s presence in France.
Similar legal complaints against Mr. Rumsfeld have been filed in other countries, including Sweden and Argentina. German prosecutors dismissed a case in April, saying it was up to the United States to investigate the accusations.
The French complaint accuses Mr. Rumsfeld of authorizing torture at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, and says it violated the Convention Against Torture, which came into force in 1987. . .
Michael Ratner, the president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, said in a statement that the aim of this latest legal complaint was to demonstrate “that we will not rest until those U.S. officials involved in the torture program are brought to justice. Rumsfeld must understand that he has no place to hide.”
Rumsfeld may have thought he worked his way through the havoc he created. The former Secretary of Defense may have believed retirement would free him from responsibility for woes and wars he helped to create. However, perhaps, the adage is true. We cannot hide from our history.
Tides do turn. This week the seas are turbulent. Perchance, Rumsfeld can never fully resign. Nor can he negate responsibility. Torture, may ultimately be seen as what it is, a serious transgression. Those that support the premise, we must suppress the spirit of those that may possibly oppose us may realize their just reward.
Michael B. Mukasey may not sail through his Senate hearings. Waterboarding may be the wave that does this Jurist in. Democrats may develop the gumption to ride the rippling effect of outrage. They too may denounce the deplorable practices that mark Americans as arrogant. As I read the reports, hope is high among peaceniks [humanists] such as I.
Denounce Waterboarding, Democrats Tell Nominee
By Philip Shenon
The New York Times
October 27, 2007Washington, Oct. 26 — The nomination of Michael B. Mukasey as attorney general encountered resistance on Friday, with Democratic senators suggesting for the first time that they might oppose Mr. Mukasey if he did not make clear that he opposed waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques that have been used against terrorism suspects.
The ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, joined in the expressions of concern about Mr. Mukasey. Mr. Specter said in an interview Friday that the nomination could hinge on Mr. Mukasey’s written responses to questions posed to him this week about the Bush administration’s antiterrorism policies, including its use of interrogation techniques like waterboarding, which simulates drowning, and about his larger views on executive power.
At his Senate confirmation hearings last week, Mr. Mukasey, a retired federal judge from New York, declined to say whether he agreed with many lawmakers and human rights groups that waterboarding is a form of torture and is unconstitutional. He said he did not know the details of how waterboarding, which has been used by the C.I.A. against senior leaders of Al Qaeda, was conducted. In waterboarding, interrogators pour water onto cloth or cellophane that has been placed over the face of a suspect, creating the sensation of drowning.
In an initial letter to the Judiciary Committee that was dated Wednesday and made public Friday, Mr. Mukasey repeated the assertion he had made at his confirmation hearings that torture was unconstitutional and a violation of American obligations under international treaties. But once again, he did not address the question of whether waterboarding was torture. In the letter, he also repeated his suggestion that the administration’s program of eavesdropping without warrants was legal despite criticism by lawmakers that it violated terms of federal surveillance laws.
Until this week, the nomination of Mr. Mukasey to replace Alberto R. Gonzales as attorney general appeared to be a sure thing. Many Democratic lawmakers say privately that he is still likely to be confirmed, given the need for leadership in the Justice Department after months of turmoil. Apart from Mr. Specter, no Republicans on the Judiciary Committee have raised public doubts about the nomination.
It is good to know that reservations are realized. There is reason to dream. Imagine, the impossible is achievable. Naïve as I might be, the news of the day brings me joy. It furthers my belief. One day there will be peace planet wide. Perhaps, world harmony will occur in my lifetime.
Never, Never, Never Give Up. Will Justice Prevail . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on October 27, 2007 at 11:28 PM in Abuse, Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General , Bush 43 Administration, CIA Prisons, Ethics, Politics, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Terrorism | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Grim, Tortuous Fairy Tales, By Bush Administration; Ghost Writer, Justice Department
copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
Sit down my child and you shall hear the tale I tell of what was once revered. I know you are sleepy and need your rest. Perhaps, this parable will be the best anecdote for a body too busy to slumber. Close your eyes and count the sheep, as I whisper words that might make you weep. The fable is horrific, as most fantasies are. Nonetheless, my hope is the narrative will bestow great wisdom. When we contemplate the harsh realities of life we learn lessons. There are principles to digest, my darling. Too few discover; too many forget.
Two years earlier Americans were told the Justice Department forbade such measures. Yet, in truth they never had. This, dear one, is characteristic in a White house gone wild with power. In this our surreal Orwellian world, to torment is to be compassionate. To crush the body and spirit of a living soul is apparently considered conservative, neoconservative.
Americans in the year 2007 are as Alice in Wonderland. We observe ourselves in the looking glass, and we wonder. Is up, down; is the mission accomplished, or is this a protracted exercise extended indefinitely into the future. My child I sense you are confused and disheartened. So too am I. Take heed. In time, sleep will come. Dreams will fill your head. My hope is you will forget all the misery I speak of, just as others have done so many times before you.
I remind you of what we each experience daily. In recent years, the public has become dubious. Most suspect the current Bush Administration, our nation's leaders, falsify, tells half-truths, conceal, claim confidentiality, fabricate, or flounder. Nonetheless, citizens remain complacent. This recent October surprise is not treated as a revelation. It does nothing to excite or incite us into authentic action. As citizens, we do as we have done before, as you too shall do soon. We sleep. We utter barely a peep.
Granted, residents of the United States rant from the comfort of their over-stuffed chairs. Countrymen complain as they, we choke on the fumes from our grand gas-guzzlers. Yet, we drive. Millions of people fly inter and intrastate. Many travel abroad, just for fun, business too. Americans continue to pollute the skies. We resent the war for oil, the profits made on such a repugnant endeavor.
Citizens carp as we contemplate the cost of combat. The people are aware, that money could have been spent at home. The nation mourns the loss of life, American deaths and at times, the passing of an Iraqi. In cyberspace, communities clamor through their keyboards. Then we rest on our laurels.
Progressives say they elected a Democratic Congress. Certainly, that would make a difference. The 110th Congress, with Democrats in control, claim the first one hundred days a success. Yet, the war marches on.
For soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, time stands still. Families and friends hold their breath, fearful fathers, mothers, sons, and daughter will never return home. Those that have returned to native shores are not the same. Although, 'enemy forces' have not captured the American soldiers that found their way back to the States, the troops have been tortured.
Soldiers dressed in camouflage have stayed away too long. Each day American men and women awake in a land far from their native shore. Enlistees that once believed they had purpose; they could bring freedom to Iraqi have seen the cost of liberty is not cheap. The price is far greater than these young persons ever expected to pay. Children, barely out of high school have seen blood and the guts of their friends splattered on their shoes.
War on the streets of Baghdad is nothing like the battles on a video screen. Death, in the name of democracy, or G-d is not as holy as our leaders would want us to believe. American troops have witnessed an effective insurgency, one beyond imagination. Rebels that feel they have a cause are never as groomed in warfare as a trained soldier may be. Speaking on the resourcefulness of Iraqi revolutionaries Sergeant Benjamin Flanders, Army National Guard states . . .
It was very effective, and the thing they have us beat at is the human intelligence side. Maybe you can speak more to this, but they can use cruel and unusual methods in order to extract information from people that we couldn't use. There is sort of this, like, torture -- that word is getting thrown around -- well, the true torture is when you behead innocent civilians and throw them on the side of the road, which we came upon more than once. That's how they get their message across.
Torture is the topic of the day. It was in 2005. It has been the source of much discussion for years, ever since this strange, fantastic, dreamlike drama began. You my dear sweetness might recall, we read fables together so long ago. By candlelight, on another quiet evening, we gazed upon the pages and pondered.
I tucked those texts away. There they sit safe on the bookshelf. I sensed when we read these memorandums together they were too severe, too shocking; they upset you so. My darling the words on those pages, the images they evoked were too much for me. In truth, I was emotionally paralyzed by the verbiage. What I envisioned weighed on my heart. What have we wrought. The havoc, the harm, one human might do to another. It is unthinkable. Perhaps, one day we will wish to review the references again. For now, may they just remain close at hand.
Ah, but that was so long ago my adorable beloved. We studied that ghastly folio when you were but a baby in my arms. We cooed. We cuddled. In those, medieval days, the Dark ages, you and I were certain man would never be so cruel. Thus, we drifted off to dreamland and trusted. We had faith in our fair leader as we must today for the President, and his Cabinet, remain steadfast. "We do not torture." The words ring out and have for what must be eons, no matter the evidence to the contrary. Indeed, since the latest exposure the frequency of this rhetoric has increased. The volume is vociferous.
Only days ago, George W. Bush proclaimed, America does not persecute, cause undue harm, harass, or forcefully torment those in custody. The President postured, the United States does not torture. Our government captures, confines, holds enemy combatants in custody, and castigates forcibly in order to safeguard Americans from harm.
Bush Says US 'Does Not Torture'
By Jennifer LovenWashington (AP) — President Bush defended his administration's methods of detaining and questioning terrorism suspects on Friday, saying both are successful and lawful.
"When we find somebody who may have information regarding a potential attack on America, you bet we're going to detain them, and you bet we're going to question them," he said during a hastily called Oval Office appearance. "The American people expect us to find out information, actionable intelligence so we can help protect them. That's our job."
Bush volunteered his thoughts on a report on two secret 2005 memos that authorized extreme interrogation tactics against terror suspects. "This government does not torture people," the president said.
The adorable Press Secretary, Dana Perino substantiates the declaration. Defiantly, this wily and wondrous woman mesmerized the media as she denounced the conclusion, Americans torture. Secret decrees aside, we would never do anything that was not in the best interest of the people. United States Intelligence does as is necessary. Their mission is as the President's and the Justice Department's, to protect and defend the nation.
In this new war, which is an unprecedented war, facing an enemy unlike we've ever faced before, sometimes -- oftentimes the best information that you get is from the terrorists themselves. They know where the other terrorists are hiding and what the other terrorists are planning. And to win the war on terror we must be able to detain them, interrogate them, question them, and when appropriate, prosecute them -- in America -- when we capture them here in America and on battlefields around the world. The policy of the United States is not to torture. The President has not authorized it, he will not authorize it.But he had done everything within the corners of the law to make sure that we prevent another attack on this country, which is what we have done in this administration. I am not going to comment on any specific alleged techniques. It is not appropriate for me to do so. And to do so would provide the enemy with more information for how to train against these techniques. And so I am going to decline to comment on those, but I will reiterate to you once again that we do not torture. We want to make sure that we keep this country safe.
"Safety" is the sanctuary that gives credence to what occurs in those corners of the law. It is for security sake that we retain the President, our protector. This magnificent man has decided to spread democracy aggressively, and we the people follow his lead, no matter where it takes us. George W. Bush is the law. He is the Commander-In-Chief. If this compassionate conservative thinks the mission is worthwhile, apt, or accomplished, who are we to argue.
Soldiers may see the war effort differently. However, if they do not understand the purpose and the profound contribution they make to the greater good of our society then they must be "phony soldiers." In a News Hour interview that aired just two years ago, we can sense the inner struggle a service man or woman might feel. Patrick Resta, a former combat medic was among those that spoke. Specialist Resta shared his thoughts.
Margaret Warner:: All right, let me get Patrick Resta in here. And Patrick Resta, you were a combat medic with the Army National Guard. How did all of this look from your end in terms of the U.S. troops' tactics and, for that matter, equipment? Did it appear to you that the U.S. approach was making progress?Specialist Patrick Resta: No, it didn't. I was told I was going there to help the Iraqi people. And then once I got there, I found out that I could not treat them unless they were about to die and the injury had been caused either directly or indirectly by U.S. forces, such as an IED going off or a car bomb going off or somebody being shot at a checkpoint, or something like that. So I don't think that's really conducive to getting people on your side.
There was one night in particular where a local Iraqi walked to the gate of our camp after he had been beaten up pretty severely and pistol-whipped, and basically the people in town told him that if he came back to town they would kill him if they saw him in town again. And he came up to our gate begging for help. I went out there, you know, to dress his wounds and take care of him.
And he was begging me to save his life and he was just, you know, turned away and told, you know, "Go to the Iraqi police and they'll help you," which, you know, it's after nightfall and the police aren't functioning, especially not in my area. So it was that kind of callous disregard that really set in what's really going on over there for me.
Oh sweetness, I know this tale is hard to take. I see you are troubled. Breathe deeply my love. Take heart. Americans raged. They released the anger they felt. However, ultimately, they accepted. There was not time then; nor are there sufficient days now to impeach this President or his Cabinet. Congress cannot act. Such measures might detract from the broader coalitions purpose, to get elected in 2008.
I understand dear heart. There is much frustration. Sleep tight. This too shall pass. Signing statements, secret judgments that allow for torture, substantiation, Bush Began to Plan War Three Months After 9/11, nothing seems to prompt the people to act. Perchance they too are tired. Rest your head on my shoulder love. Soon, it will all be over.
Yes, yes, the Administration misled the public; citizens recognize this. However, no matter the depth of deception, most Americans choose to relent. Our countrymen believe they can do nothing to stop what this White House does. If a former Prisoner of War, one that avidly supports the war effort, cannot help this Administration see the light, what can a lowly citizen Progressive do. Possibly, those on the Right that now reject the need for this battle are too embarrassed to express what they also observe. The Emperor has no clothes. Nor do we, the jesters.
My child, the words of Senator John McCain were strong. He spoke from experience. McCain challenged conventional wisdom and the Commander-In-Chief. Yet, his profound assessment fell on deaf ears. You recollect.
Obviously, to defeat our enemies we need intelligence, but intelligence that is reliable. We should not torture or treat inhumanely terrorists we have captured. The abuse of prisoners harms, not helps, our war effort. In my experience, abuse of prisoners often produces bad intelligence because under torture a person will say anything he thinks his captors want to hear—whether it is true or false—if he believes it will relieve his suffering.
There was a glimmer of anticipation, as improbable as it was. Publicly Progressive rejoiced. Even the hardened delighted. A legal decision was handed down in December 2004. The Justice Department publicly proclaimed the deliberate infliction of severe physical pain is "abhorrent." Politically astute, no matter the Party, citizens truly welcomed this judgment. Yet, we knew. The most informed among our countrymen were well aware that as day turned to night, we could not deny, nothing was different. Nor would it be in this nightmare of a novel.
Friend and foe alike were subject to torture. George W. Bush and the neoconservatives were and are on a mission. While they say it was accomplished, they also acknowledge without a win, we, the Americans will not leave the land we have destroyed. A legacy is at stake.
Americans hold onto hope. The President is expected to leave office in January 2009, G-d willing. Thus, the people of this country are encouraged.
My sweet child, the electorate must purposely delude themselves. Whimsy is the only action that might allow them to remain sane. People do not wish to think of the pain they, the American people inflict on soldiers, innocent Iraqi civilians, women, and children at home and abroad. Civilians prefer to ponder change will come when Bush exits the White House. Thus, the people wait patiently. They can, for Americans sleep well in their cozy beds.
Fluff the pillows. Snuggle up in the comforter. Bring another blanket into the room. It is chilly out there. Perhaps it is colder in our hearts.
When the Iraqi government felt a need to recess, for the temperature was one hundred and twenty degrees plus, Americans were angry. Plump people seated in air-conditioned rooms expressed their disdain for those that struggle to work in a war torn country with little to no electricity.
Understandably, Americans are distracted. They are excited. An election is on the horizon. A large percentage of the population longs for the 2008 appointment of a President. Each state can hardly wait to participate. The Primaries cannot come soon enough. From Florida to California, every region wishes to be the first to pick the "winner." With a sigh I state, I believe we are all losers. I wonder how we sleep. I can only muse.
The peaceful among us, those that honor humanity, and the rules of Geneva Convention chose to forget what they, we, wish were not true. Oh, they protested with vigor; however, ultimately, they had jobs to consider, bills to pay, a family to support. Their strength was quelled by the demands of life. Assertive pacifists understood as they have throughout the President's term, this White House deliberately and delicately defines the term "torture." In America, the Bush Bunch is the medium and the message.
The White House and the Justice department were kind enough to hide the truth for a time. Cognitive dissonance can be so wonderful; it allows for necessary rest. Peaceniks needed time to feel settled, to sense that they made a difference. The stress was too much for the non-combative. They, my dear were losing sleep. That would not do. In a Capitalist society, the everyday chump must be fit, fresh, and ready to take on the most routine of days.
In times of war, production is important. There are profits to consider. Ah, my child. Do not fret. Perhaps, this tale too is but a dream. Official opinions come and go. I know you heard as I did, the good President Bush Defend[ed] CIA's Clandestine Prisons. He said, 'We Do Not Torture.' Well, perhaps we do, just a pinch. Nonetheless, it was good to stay in the dark. The light hurts my eyes. Does it not bother you my little love? What is it they say, "ignorance is bliss?" Ah, to be joyous again. However, the real news invades our space once more.
The Justice Department issued another opinion, this one in secret. It was a very different document, according to officials briefed on it, an expansive endorsement of the harshest interrogation techniques ever used by the Central Intelligence Agency.The new opinion, the officials said, for the first time provided explicit authorization to barrage terror suspects with a combination of painful physical and psychological tactics, including head-slapping, simulated drowning and frigid temperatures.
Mr. Gonzales approved the legal memorandum on “combined effects” over the objections of James B. Comey, the deputy attorney general, who was leaving his job after bruising clashes with the White House. Disagreeing with what he viewed as the opinion’s overreaching legal reasoning, Mr. Comey told colleagues at the department that they would all be “ashamed” when the world eventually learned of it.
Later that year, as Congress moved toward outlawing “cruel, inhuman and degrading” treatment, the Justice Department issued another secret opinion, one most lawmakers did not know existed, current and former officials said. The Justice Department document declared that none of the C.I.A. interrogation methods violated that standard.
The classified opinions, never previously disclosed, are a hidden legacy of President Bush’s second term and Mr. Gonzales’s tenure at the Justice Department, where he moved quickly to align it with the White House after a 2004 rebellion by staff lawyers that had thrown policies on surveillance and detention into turmoil.
Congress and the Supreme Court have intervened repeatedly in the last two years to impose limits on interrogations, and the administration has responded as a policy matter by dropping the most extreme techniques. But the 2005 Justice Department opinions remain in effect, and their legal conclusions have been confirmed by several more recent memorandums, officials said. They show how the White House has succeeded in preserving the broadest possible legal latitude for harsh tactics.
Progressives did not doubt that this truth would be exposed, eventually. Still, they do not act as they might. Perchance, they are too war weary to do what they no longer think possible. Too much time has passed. In late 2007, the public says there is no time to impeach this President or his Vice. Liberals listen to interviews. We mumble and crumble. We hear the words and yet, we sit still.
In defense of such an odious offense, Homeland Security Advisor, Fran Townsend speaks to the media. Journalist, Wolf Blitzer of The Situation Room inquires of the torment inflicted on a previous guest.
Blitzer: We're joined by the White House homeland security adviser, Fran Townsend. She's joining us from the White House. You just heard this former inmate -- this former detainee at Guantanamo Bay say I was beaten, shackled, spat at, kicked, punched, stripped naked, left in isolation sometimes naked, hog tied. What do you say to that charge that he's making? In effect, experts say, that amounts torture.Fran Townsend, White House Homeland Security Advisor: OK. Well, let's back up and be very clear. You've heard Dana Perino say it today. You heard the president say it numerous times -- the United States does not torture. Do we have a program?
Yes, we do. It is -- it is very limited. There have been fewer than 100 people in it. But it has pro -- and the people who participate in that program are carefully trained, with more than 250 hours of training. The average age of an interrogator is 43. They're not just interrogators who are part of the team. There are also subject matter experts and individuals who are there to monitor the health and psychological well-being of the detainee himself.
We start with the har -- the least harsh measures first. It stops after it -- if someone becomes cooperative. And let's be clear, Wolf, this -- this is a -- this is a program that was used when Abu Zubaydah was in custody and not being cooperative. He had clearly been trained in resistance techniques to interrogation. This -- this -- and these techniques...
Blitzer: All right, well, let's go through...
Townsend: Well, wait a minute, Wolf.
Blitzer: Yes.
Townsend: These techniques were used on Abu Zubaydah. It produced actionable intelligence that resulted in the capture of Ramzi Binalshibh. This is -- this -- these programs stop attacks.
Blitzer: All right, well, let's go through some of the specifics and you tell us if you're doing that. For example, the "New York Times" says these memos authorized not only slaps to the head, but hours held naked in a frigid cell, days and nights without sleep while battered by thundering rock music, long periods manacled in stress positions or the ultimate -- water boarding. "Never in history," the "Times" says, "has the United States authorized such tactics." Is that true?
Townsend: Now, Wolf, obviously I'm not going to talk about each individual and specific technique that we used. The director of Central Intelligence has talked to members of both Intelligence Committees in the House and the Senate. He -- what he did was he understood this was not just a legal question, but there was a policy issue and there's a political willingness question.
Frankly, Wolf, if Americans are killed because we fail to do the hard things, the American people would have the absolute right to ask us why.
We inquire, then, we wait. Americas do not move en masse to the streets of Washington, New York, Los Angeles, or Des Moines. Small town USA remains quiet. While boulevards are bustling, the sounds are not of crowds up in arms. What we hear is commerce in action.
Congress may be in session; however, they continue to be disconnected. Americans, distrustful and with reason, do not telephone House Leader Nancy Pelosi and state, "Impeachment must be on the table." Those proud to be labeled rebels excitedly await the 2008 election. Most are so overjoyed by the prospect that they might throw the Bushies out.
I know my love, 'tis true, as the Democrats dance and dicker, people in foreign lands fight for their lives. Again, the ability to hold two distinct beliefs simultaneously is quite the art. It calms the soul and lives large amongst all of us. Many think one of the three lovelies is their only hope.
If George W. Bush is the sinister character in this drama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards are the dynamic duo or trio. Surely, one of these three will save the day. Hillary is high in the polls. She is strong, savvy, and brings Bill with her. Obama supporters purport he is the one. This man has style. Barack is smooth, article. People gravitate to him as they would a rock-star. Edwards is as a prince to those enamored with his casual charismatic manner, his broad grin, and his profound gaze. He has charm, chutzpah; and a wife that won the hearts of a nation.
People throughout the nation presume to believe they can pick a winner and will before the November 2008 general election. Thus, impatient Americans gather together to support the sole candidate that they trust to prevail, regardless of the fact that the war will not end under her, or his leadership.
Dems can't make guarantee on Iraq troops
By Beth Fouhy
Associated Press
Wed Sep 26, 9:26 PM ETThe three leading Democratic presidential hopefuls conceded Wednesday night they could not guarantee that all U.S. combat troops would be gone from Iraq by 2013.
"I think it's hard to project four years from now," said Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois in the opening moments of a campaign debate in the nation's first primary state.
"It is very difficult to know what we're going to be inheriting," added Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.
"I cannot make that commitment," said former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina.
Nonetheless, the public does not pause or blink. Presidential hopefuls pander in their attempts to explain what they truly meant, or at least some do. It matters not. When charmed, captivated, and determined to believe the Democrats must and will conquer the eyes glaze over. Ear cavities close. Brain cells become numb. People refuse to give up that dream; the troops will come home if a Democrat is in the Oval Office.
I suspect my love, those that truly yearn for peace long to sleep through the night. That is the only thought that might explain why people that profess peace happily embrace the notion of five more years of battle.
I have to trust numerous Americans tossed and turned too frequently in the dark of night since America attacked Afghanistan and then Iraq. I did. Perchance, some are so desperate for relief they say, anyone but Bush. I do believe war can wound the psyche, planet wide. When soldiers and civilians die, I have to believe sensitive souls feel the pain, consciously or not.
Perhaps, my beloved I am in error. I observe brutal battles among those that claim to be Progressive. In cyberspace, communities crumble under the weight of differences. Defiance in the name of self-defense thrives. On the street corners, I hear peace protesters scream with delight as they dodge and weave the barbs thrown at them. Often, those that march in the name of harmony aggress against those that support the wars.
Maybe sweet one, some genuinely catch a snooze. For a few, peace protests may be a crusade. Professed pacifists, some, also wish for victory. Possibly, they sleep when they sense blood in the water. Could it be, for such Democrats, Progressives, and Liberals a win at any costs is the mantra they embrace just as those on the Right do? I know not young one. I only wonder how those that think, triumph is strength, sleep. Perhaps the answer is obvious. Americans when distressed; find respite in drugs. A Pharmaceutical stupor might explain why we the people are willing to accept what we do.
War through 2013 is now wonderful, practical, and Presidential. Torture is not a high crime nor is it a misdemeanor. When without slumber, a prolonged war is peace. Poverty is prosperity. What was grim is welcome. Yes, my dearest, Americans have been down so long it is beginning to look like up and we have been up too long.
Oh precious one, I know this tale is distressing. The trauma, the drama, the dreadful torture, and the time, it all slips away as we watch and wait for more what, Godot. We heard the President, his Press Secretary, and the homeland Security Adviser, Fran Townsend say "America does not torture." We are not reassured. Americans may ask, "How do they sleep at night?" The answer must be as the question, "How do we!"
I wish you pleasant dreams little one. Say your prayers. "Now I lie me down to sleep. Pray the Lord my soul to keep, for if one more person dies before I wake, if another individual is tortured as I slumber . . . Oh G-d, Allah, the Almighty, the greatest powers within the universe let the planet sleep. Please bring serenity and peace to us all.
Little love, I promise, tomorrow will be a better day. I will share the story of a Don Quixote Dennis Kucinich. The miracle man tilts at windmills. He imagines what others think the impossible dream. The Kucinich tale is inspirational. The narrative uplifts the soul. As the big business bullies battled with Dennis, decades ago, when they demanded he give up his principles and bow to them at the expense of the common people, dreamer Kucinich remained strong and resolute. This magnificent man did not allow the brutes to intimidate him. Muny Light remained the people's utility.
Years later as a nation declared war. Dennis Kucinich spoke only of "Strength through peace." This Presidential aspirant helps us believe in man's humanity to his fellow man. My child, you will wake and all will be well. With Dennis Kucinich in your mind, heart, and in the Oval Office we can bring the troops home, cut the funds, and truly cast the President and Vice President aside. If only I had read the Kucinich legend to you long ago, perhaps we could have removed the scourge before they had done so much damage.
Perchance, with the wisdom I share when you awake, my dear heart, you too will feel empowered. Honey Bun, might the legend of Don Dennis Kucinich help encourage us all to impeach our present rulers, to be the change we imagine. The time left in their term is already too long. I cannot endure more tales of torture; can you?
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on October 8, 2007 at 04:23 PM in Abuse, Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General , Bush 43 Administration, Central Intelligence Agency, Domestic Security, Ethics, Humans, Self-Destructive, Impeach GW Bush, Iraq War, Lies, Military Missions | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
War of Words. Bloggers, Broadcasters, Rappers Code of Ethics
Oprah on Imus (Public forum with Russell and others) 2
© copyright 2007 Betsy L. Angert
In this tome, I am not advocating autocratic censorship. I ask each of us to look within and consciously choose an empathetic ethical code.
"There is a problem." However, Americans do not agree what the problem is. Sexism, racism, homophobia, violence, or the words we use to promote such social ills. For weeks, language has been in the news, on the blogs, in the airwaves, and in music-industry executives meeting rooms. Free speech is the topic in question, as is the power of words. As children, we learned that "Sticks and stones may break our bones; but names will never hurt me." In fact, the opposite is true. Words and the inferences can cause greater, and more last injuries than twigs or rocks might. The body heals far better than the heart does.
After receiving numerous death threats, blogger Kathy Sierra called on the blogosphere to confront the culture of cruelty in cyberspace. This active author and public speaker, fears for her life. Missus Sierra recently canceled public speaking engagements and suspended her site. On her weblog, Kathy Sierra writes . . .
If you want to do something about it, do not tolerate the kind of abuse that includes threats or even suggestions of violence (especially sexual violence). Do not put these people on a pedestal. Do not let them get away with calling this "social commentary," "protected speech," or simply "criticism."For weeks, Missus Sierra has been immobilized. After becoming the focus of ample threats, inclusive of a post that featured a picture of her next to a noose, she stated . . .
"I have cancelled all speaking engagements. I am afraid to leave my yard, I will never feel the same. I will never be the same."The police are investigating the harassment and the blogosphere is blazing. Discussions of how women are treated online are fueling a fire. While, on her own site, Creating Passionate Users, Kathy Sierra receives much support, there are those that think her call for civility and courtesy is ridiculous.
In Death threats and blogging, by the famous Kos condemnation of a proposed code was evident.
[T]he rantings of a lunatic. For my part, I've gotten my fair share of such vile emails. Some of them have threatened my children. One or two actually crossed the line into "death threat" territory. But so what? It's not as if those cowards will actually act on their threats. For better or for worse, this isn't a country in which media figures -- even hugely controversial ones -- are routinely attacked by anything more dangerous than a cream pie.This dictum on Daily Kos was posted on April 12, days before an angry aggressor, Cho Seung-Hui avenged those he loathed at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. The shooter's rants were his truth. His threats proved to be powerful. Cho Seung-Hui may not have sent his last package in a timely manner. Nevertheless, he did warn and alarm many years before he carried out this horrific and planned deed.Email makes it easy for stupid people to send stupid emails to public figures. If they can't handle a little heat in their email inbox, then really, they should try another line of work. Because no "blogger code of conduct" will scare away psycho losers with access to email.
Words can be wicked. They are often used as weapons. Expressions wound a heart and soul; they hurt. Yet, we excuse these repeatedly. Mel Gibson declared, "I am not anti Semitic" after a tirade that was terribly intolerant. This was not the Directors first show of fury against Jews. Nevertheless, it was excused. It did promote momentary concerns.
Abraham H. Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, called Gibson's apology "unremorseful and insufficient." Prominent Hollywood talent agent Ari Emanuel called for an industry boycott of Gibson in a blog posted Monday.Nonetheless, money ruled. His next movie "Apocalypto," distributed by The Walt Disney Company received rave reviews, even from periodicals that some consider Progressive. The almighty buck may not reduce bigotry. Actually, it may help to create it."At a time of escalating tensions in the world, the entertainment industry cannot idly stand by and allow Mel Gibson to get away with such tragically inflammatory statements," he wrote. "People in the entertainment community, whether Jew or gentile, need to demonstrate that they understand how much is at stake in this by professionally shunning Mel Gibson and refusing to work with him, even if it means a sacrifice to their bottom line.
"There are times in history when standing up against bigotry and racism is more important than money."
In recent years, [Mel Gibson] has turned his attention to producing films and TV shows through his Icon Productions. The hundreds of millions of dollars he made producing the 2004 film "The Passion of the Christ" has given the star the ability to finance his own films, giving him a measure of independence from the major studios.Some "artists" using racial slurs make millions. They defend their right to do so. Many or most apologize. However, there is skepticism. Why are they contrite. Can a heart change in a moment or is cash their concern.
When Michael Richards railed against Blacks in his audience, he was quite impassioned. His "hate speak" seemed infinitely sincere. Smears spewed; slights slammed, all said with sincerity. These affronts fell trippingly off his tongue. The comedian apologized while explaining, "I am not a racist." The response was "Really?" It is difficult to know whether Michael Richards has or will recover from such a blunder or the unbelievable statement, "I'm not a racist, that's what's so insane about this."
Will Don Imus be deeply effected by his debacle? The debate continues. Again, cash was cut off, at least temporarily. Imus was apologetic and ashamed, perchance more so after advertisers raised the volume on this discussion. Ultimately Don Imus lost his battle. The major television and radio networks that carried the Don Imus Show felt they could no longer support him. The load was too great; the rewards realized too little. Don Imus had become a distraction.
Executives at CBS and MSNBC saw where the numbers were heading. They may well have been genuinely disgusted by Imus' reference to the Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos," but their decision to dump him had little to do with moral outrage. They simply did the math. They'll miss the millions they would have earned from Imus' show, but they stood to lose even more if they let him stay on the air, and so he was toast.However, unlike Don Imus who justifies his antics as comedy, and whose money is or was tied to corporate sponsors, there are the rappers. They too are coming under attack.Free speech, meet free enterprise.
For political prominents, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and Bruce Gordon enough is enough. These gentlemen want the smears to end. These Black leaders think even Black on Black rubs need to be eliminated from our common language. Two wrongs do not make a right. Racism, bigotry, and misogyny cannot be defined differently depending on who exhibits such behavior. Reverend Al Sharpton is calling on the Federal Communications Commission to punish artists and announcers alike for advocating violence in word and deed.
In 2005, this issue was fresh and addressed. Then, a member of rap group, The Game was wounded during a shooting outside a New York hip-hop radio station. The cause was clear; another hip-hopper, 50 Cent was on the air criticizing The Game. Tempers flared. The effect of word weaponry was realized. The rest is rap or American history. After this volatile event, civil rights leader Al Sharpton . . .
The founder of the National Action Network emphasized in the letter: "We cannot sit silently by while young Americans feel that shootings and bloodshed is now synonymous with success and celebrity. We understand you're in the business of making money, but it cannot be at the expense of polluting the cultural outlook of young Americans."However, two years later, rappers again speak to their creativity, just cause, and the need to communicate their concerns.
Rappers reason they are poets; they please the people. Although admittedly, not all the people. The recent allegations of racial and misogynistic rhetoric against Don Imus amplified a too often delayed or dissuaded discussion. Is it proper to demean women or people of other ethnicities. Might a poet use his or her artistic licenses? Is it just when an performer uses racial slurs, or vile vernacular against one of their own? Today, USA Today reported . . .
Imus fallout: Music execs discuss rap lyricsAgain, we stand still. Money moves mountains; yet, capital does not necessarily change minds. We think, and act on our beliefs. When people profess their deepest, darkest chauvinistic values, spirits are often broken. Lives can be lost.NEW YORK (AP) — In the wake of Don Imus' firing for his on-air slur about the Rutgers women's basketball team, a high-powered group of music-industry executives met privately Wednesday to discuss sexist and misogynistic rap lyrics.
During the furor that led to Imus' fall last week from his talk-radio perch, many of his critics carped as well about offensive language in rap music.
The meeting, called by hip-hop mogul Russell Simmons' Hip-Hop Summit Action Network, was held at the New York home of Lyor Cohen, chairman, and chief executive of U.S. music at Warner Music Group. The summit, which lasted several hours, did not result in any specific initiative.
Organizers billed the gathering as a forum to "discuss issues challenging the industry in the wake of controversy surrounding hip-hop and the First Amendment." Afterward, they planned to hold a news conference at a Manhattan hotel to discuss "initiatives agreed upon at the meeting." But by early afternoon, the news conference was postponed, because the meeting was still going on.
After the meeting ended, it was unclear whether there would be another one. Simmons' publicist released a short statement that described the topic as a "complex issue that involves gender, race, culture and artistic expression. Everyone assembled today takes this issue very seriously."
Although no recommendations emerged, the gathering was significant for its who's-who list of powerful music executives.
Rappers know this as do bloggers. Suffering students are realizing that words, written or spoken cannot be ignored. The common folk and tycoons agree; yet, they disagree. This is evident when we listen to recent Oprah Winfrey town-hall meeting. Hip-hop mogul Russell Simmons of Hip-Hop Summit Action Network stated his beliefs . . .
"We're talking about a lot of these artists who come from the most extreme cases of poverty and ignorance ... And when they write a song, and they write it from their heart, and they're not educated, and they don't believe there's opportunity, they have a right, they have a right to say what's on their mind," he said.I wonder; might our number one concern be the hearts and minds of all humans, men, women, Black, White, Yellow, Brown, Red, and Jew, Muslims, Buddhists, and Christians too. Whether we are born in poverty or into wealth, we are human. We hurt; we bleed. We can love; however, as long as our language degrades another, love will not survive. Perhaps, neither will we. I am reminded of the phrase, "race riots," or "the war against women." I fear the folly of expressing emotions in a manner that kills heart, mind, body, or soul. I prefer the words, "May peace be with you my brother and my sister.""Whether it's our sexism, our racism, our homophobia or our violence, the hip-hop community sometimes can be a good mirror of our dirt and sometimes the dirt that we try to cover up," Simmons said. "Pointing at the conditions that create these words from the rappers ... should be our No. 1 concern."
For me, a code of ethics need not be written or etched in stone; it must be lived because we believe in love, peace, and tranquility.
The Rap and Resources . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on April 19, 2007 at 12:00 AM in "Take me as I am!", Abuse, Advertising, Aggression, Americana, Black Men, Bloggers Unite, Business, Civil Disobedience, Civil Rights, Communities, Communities and Communication , Consumption and Content, Corporate Profits, Current Affairs, Daily Kos, Discussion, Economics, Emotional Intelligence, Ethics, Ethics and Profits, Manipulated Media, Markos Moulitsas Zúniga , Philosophy, Racial Discrimination, Social Order Teaches , Standards in Society, Violence, “When is Enough, Enough?” | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Americans Violate the Law and Call “Them” Illegal? ©
We talk of “illegal aliens”; however, I wonder. Might we instead discuss “illegal Americans?”
In October 2005, after the Katrina storm, thousands of immigrant workers were hired. They were asked to help with the emergency clean up. For the most part, they were immigrants. These people, new to this country, sweated while they worked. They removed debris; they worked long hours, and they were told that they would be rewarded/paid.
The job was a challenge, the conditions unclean and often unhealthy. Nevertheless, these migrants who were willing to actually do these tasks worked hard. They were helping to heal the New Orleans region. Two formidable American companies had hired them, Belfor USA Group Incorporated and LVI Environmental Services of New Orleans, Incorporated. Yet, they did not pay these immigrants fully for all of the work they had done.
Immigrant Justice Project (IJP) discovered this and on February 2, 2006, filed two class action lawsuits. However, J.J. Rosenbaum, Attorney, working with the Southern Poverty Law Canter’s Immigrant Justice Project cautioned, "Lawsuits alone won't stop the widespread exploitation of workers that's going on in New Orleans.” People must.
It seemed people were. The Department of Labor, on December 1, 2005, declared in a press release “five Spanish-speaking investigators had been dispatched to the Gulf region.” They were dispatched to interview the workers and establish that they were being treated fairly. By law, this agency is required to “protect workers involved in the reconstruction process;” however, they did not.
IJP lawyers interviewed many a migrant, and all repeated the same mantra; no one had spoken to them of their working conditions. No surprise. This saga is only one of many.
While there are numerous groups flocking to the states in mass, America is focusing on Mexican migration. The native born are most disturbed by those that arrive from just south of the border. The attention is wanted and not. It is desirable when one is known as a “hard worker.” Employers want an industrious soul. However, if you are acknowledged only for your work and not as a person, even that compliment feels as a slight. When laborers go without pay, after toiling all day, they realize that the flattering remark is not. When supposed kindness is ultimately cruel, it is not welcome.
Nevertheless, this is the experience of many Mexicans. They are all too familiar with what is, though they rarely discuss it. The same is true for other settlers. Rumanians, Russians, Poles, Czechs, and Irish arriving here without papers, also have tales to tell. Sikhs, Phillipinos, Koreans, and Indians come to this country as well. America, while thought to be the land of opportunity, is all too often, the nation of abuse. Exploitation is abundant. In virtually every region of this country, new immigrants, want to work. However, they are mistreated; few escape harm.
In this exposé, I will work to provide perspective. I will offer only a few snippets of information; the exposure I present will be minimal. I write to invite exploration. My wish is to advance awareness. I am asking readers to be conscientious. I appeal to your sense of humanity. Please look more closely, what happens in our neighborhoods, yours, mine, and ours? I encourage individuals to speak with strangers, to discover what is, and to ponder. Only then do I advocate you act.
In February 2006 another spoke. Gary Younge, writing for the Guardian, offered, “Where someone's pocket change can feed another's family for a week.” Mr. Younge states, “Migrant workers do the jobs that Americans will not do, but they are vulnerable to bigots and big business.”
Writer Younge, so eloquently described what is not an elegant experience. This author described in detail the daily ritual of many migrant workers. Throughout the nation, early each morning, thousands of men and woman gather, and wait. They hope to be chosen. In New York, they stand in the cold. In California, Louisiana, Florida, and other large metropolises, they congregate on city corners.
Day laborers with numerous skills, and some still learning, wait for work. This practice poses a threat to these immigrants. While their work is vital to the American economy, being out in the open leaves them vulnerable. For those who have entered the country illegally, there are greater burdens. The xenophobic have easy access to these individuals. The opportunists do as well. Since these new settlers feel that they have no rights, they often do not speak of the unspeakable. Thus, the wrath of those that do not wish these migrants well is always just around the bend.
Life in America is a challenge for these newcomers. Through quotes, the journalist Gary Younge shares the their experience.
"On a bad week you can get nothing," explains Victor Singh, who left his village near Amritsar, in India, five years ago and has not had a full-time job since. "Winter time is always slow. In the summer you can sometimes work four days a week."Standing outside her tarpaulin home in a makeshift town of tents in New Orleans's City Park, Mercedes Sanchez cries as she recalls leaving her four daughters in Mexico. "You can have a lot of love for your children but it cannot fill their stomachs," she says. "In Mexico, I made 200 pesos (£11) a week. I can make that in two hours here;" But only on those days when she can find work, which have been few recently.
Simon, who was not paid for several weeks' work, is now reconsidering his decision to leave his three children behind in Mexico. "You make more money but you pay more for rent and everything else," he says. "Sometimes I think it's not worth the sacrifice of leaving your family. It's not what you think it's going to be."
Gary Younge addresses more; he reflects upon the results of a recent report from the University of California. According to this source, every morning, 117,600 laborers find employment while congregating on the street corners of America. They huddle in mass and hope that a business owner or individual will drive by, see them, and connect. They long to be hired.
Homeowners employ forty-nine percent of these men and women. That is to say, nearly half of those that support the current system are not businesspersons; they are individuals. Law-abiding American citizens are seeking cheap labor to do what they themselves consider menials tasks. “Illegals” are employed to do domestic work or gardening.
Day laborers regularly, and religiously search for full-time employment opportunities. However, the “vast majority, 83 percent, relies on day-labor work as their sole source of income. Seventy percent search for work five or more days a week.” They are a hardy bunch and can we truly deny this. These émigrés risked life and limb just to come to America. Many that do find jobs find more than one. Why?
Daily workers are paid poorly. The median hourly wage is $10, and as we have learned, what is promised, is all to frequently, not given. These positions are not certain, stable, or secure. Therefore, income is inconsistent. In July and August 2004, the average monthly take-home pay was $700.
When we consider the higher costs for rent and food in neighborhoods where day laborers can be accommodated, we know that this amount is paltrier than it may seem initially.
Contractors hire just over 40% to do construction work or landscaping. Nationwide, almost two-thirds are Hispanic and approximately twenty-five percent are from Central America.
The University of California, Los Angeles report goes on to address employer abuse.
• Day laborers regularly suffer employer abuse. Almost half of all day laborers experienced at least one instance of wage theft in the two months prior to being surveyed. In addition, 44 percent were denied food/water or breaks while on the job.
• Workplace injuries are common. One-in-five day laborers has suffered a work-related injury. More than half of those who were injured in the past year did not receive medical care. More than two-thirds of injured day laborers have lost time from work.
• Merchants and police often unfairly target day laborers while they seek work. Almost one-fifth (19 percent) of all day laborers have been subjected to insults by merchants, and 15 percent have been refused services by local businesses. Day laborers also report being insulted (16 percent), arrested (9 percent) and cited (11 percent) by police while they search for employment.
Those that come to the States frequently find themselves in lines, looking for work. Life is not as they expected. Émigrés do not find the streets of America paved in gold, nor do they experience opportunity is plentiful. Immigrants quickly discover they are at risk.
The offenders are not only those the liberals love to slam, corporate employers. They are all of US, the native-born and naturalized citizens. Individuals living in the good old USA are frequently those that abuse. The government is not squeaky clean; they are expected to serve and protect; yet, they too are willing to exploit this labor force.
In the news and on blogs we are flooded with stories that blame businesses for illegal immigration; corporations do not copiously scrutinize employee records. Most, place the onus on the migrants. If only they did not come to this country, life would be good. People forget that their own parents, grand, or great traveled from afar. The one group that “we” never find fault with is, us, we, the people of the United States. We engage in actions that have created an imperfect union.
Yes, it is true bigger businesses are on the battering bandwagon. They too, do as was done by government officials, large federally funded companies, and individual homeowners. . [Reminder almost fifty percent of those living in the States illegally are hired by homeowners!] Please review this New York Times article, Wal-Mart to Pay U.S. $11 Million In Lawsuit on Immigrant Workers, By Steven Greenhouse, March 19, 2005.
Wal-mart was required to pay $11 million fine after a federal Grand Jury investigation found them guilty of hiring those witout papers. Of course, they did nothing wrong. Yes, it is true, this mega-monopoly was illegally employing more than 100 undocumented employees to clean more than 700 of its national stores. However, corporate executives knew nothing of the practice. The bigwigs blame sub-contractors, just as the average citizen and small business owners place the onus on conglomerates. Actually, each of these considers the immigrants themselves culpable.
Thus, I ask again, who is “illegal”, “aliens” or Americans.
• EDITORIAL: Illegal immigration a complex matter, Knight Ridder Tribune Business News. April 2, 2006
• The invisible illegal immigrants, By Xiao-huang Yin. Los Angeles Times. April 2, 2006.
• A Hard Life, One Day At A Time: Immigrant workers: Employers cheat and abuse them; jobs scarce, By Claudia Mel. Knight Ridder Tribune Business News. January 30, 2006.
• Shady job agencies exploit immigrants, By Teresa. The Atlanta Journal - Constitution. November 3, 2005.
• When a law isn't a law; Los Angeles Times. October 22, 2005.
• America's muddled border war Series: The first in a series of editorials about immigration reform in the United States. Chicago Tribune. August 5, 2001.
• Mexican victims of crime get help Police ask cooperation: Criminals exploit immigrants who tend to carry cash and are afraid to talk to police, By Lyda Longa. The Atlanta Journal the Atlanta Constitution, May 6, 1999..
• Woman in Thai Servant Case Jailed by Judge, By David Rosenzweig. Los Angeles Times. May 2, 1998.
• Georgia migrant workers face harsh reality Voiceless victims: Illegal immigrants, unaware of their rights and afraid to complain even when not paid, are easy targets for the unscrupulous, the INS and advocates say, By Elizabeth Kuyrlo. The Atlanta Constitution. July 22, 1997.
• COLUMN ONE Domestics: Hiring the Illegal Hits Home The thriving market for low-cost child care and menial help shows how ignoring immigration law has entrenched itself in California life. By Stuart Silverstein, Los Angeles Times. October 28, 1994.
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on April 5, 2006 at 04:07 PM in Abuse, American Jobs, Cause and Effects, Immigration, Civil Rights, Current Affairs, Homeowners Employ Illegals, Immigration, Immigration Politics, Lawbreakers, Racial Discrimination, Southern Poverty Law Center, Undocumented Immigration, Wal-Mart, Xenophobia | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack
