For
reasons too complicated to explain here, I transferred some wooded acreage with
a log cabin, pond, and river frontage in rural Virginia to my daughter
Stephanie living in Hawaii, who is now selling it. When my 4 kids were young, I
used to take them and our black lab Claire up there on weekends, once even with
Claire’s 8 purebred puppies (her first and last litter), who, at a few weeks of
age, followed her in a straight line as she swam out in the pond, like so many
ducklings swimming behind their mother. The pups were born knowing how to swim!
But now, with no car and little time, I rarely go there anymore. A complication
of the sale has been that my son Andrew,
who died in 1994, is buried there—or rather, his urn of ashes brought back
from his Fort Lauderdale home, was buried there, resting under a granite headstone
bearing a quote from Walt Whitman about someone's ashes under foot: “I stop
some where waiting for you.” I do feel he is waiting somewhere for me. (His birthday
is coming up next month.)
So, with
the sale pending, I went up there with my daughter Melanie and granddaughter
Natasha to unearth the urn and take the gravestone. They also wanted a set of
bunk beds for my 7-year-old great-grandson De’Andre. Although the stone was very
heavy, we brought it back, but after digging a 4-foot square, 2-foot deep hole
around the stone’s location, we couldn’t find the metal urn. Apparently,
underground items can migrate over the years—or maybe we didn’t go deep enough.
We decided to leave the urn there, in a place that Andrew loved. So, we came
back with only the gravestone. I’ve contacted the historic Congressional
Cemetery near my home and plots are still available there, so I could buy one
for my son and myself. Also, it’s not required to have any actual remains buried beneath
a headstone.
I must apologize
to readers for the length of this and some previous postings, promising more
brevity in the future. Sometimes just thinking through these matters and putting
all that down on paper helps me clarify my own position, so hope it helps readers
as well. Or maybe I have my fingers in too many pies and should prioritize my
thoughts and actions.
Recently,
walking in my Capitol Hill neighborhood, overheard a conversation between a
frantic mom catching up with her pre-teen daughter who had crossed a street on
a skateboard without permission, not exactly scolding her but saying, “Please don’t do that; it’s definitely not
cool.”
My
former visitor from Kenya, from the same ancestral
village as President Obama’s Kenyan family, has reported that, “We had a good
time with Obama,” without giving details. He had been anxious to get home in
time to meet the president.
I went
out to the end of the metro system’s new silver line, Wiehle–Reston, for
the first time to meet my granddaughter Natasha. Everything at that station
looks fresh and new, no gum stains on the platform yet. Going straight out to
the left through a very long tunnel, I found a staircase down to the street,
but no Natasha. Going out on the long right-hand tunnel yielded office
buildings, but nothing else. I finally located her down an out-of-the-way escalator
back on the left side with tiny lettering above a glass enclosure, saying “Kiss
& Ride, Buses.” A sign pointing to the escalator would have been helpful.
On my way back to DC, I saw a group of guys selling barbeque and sides from an
ambulatory grill outside the top of the escalator and bought a dinner in a Styrofoam
container to take home. When I got home, I was surprised and somewhat annoyed
to get an e-mail message, presumably because my credit card is linked to my e-mail
address, asking what I thought of the food and service. I did not answer, not
wanting to encourage such connections. We already know there is no privacy in
the digital age! My sister and several friends my own age refuse to have internet
in part because of that.
Some 9,000 Central American kids from last
summer’s surge are reported living in the DC area, most still in legal limbo,
but at least with their parents for the time being. I met some parents when
working as an interpreter at DC schools
last fall. My work in schools over the last 10 years became temporarily
suspended in January when the new mayor, Muriel
Bowser (for whom I voted), took office and put in place a number of requirements
for anyone working in DC schools in any capacity, including a clear TB test.
That involves an easy skin test for most people, but, for me, requires a chest
x-ray, since my test is always positive, something I was resisting getting. Well,
I finally had it and, of course, don’t have TB, so I’m hoping to return to DC schools
in the fall.
When the
Smithsonian made arrangements with Bill
Cosby and his wife to display their private art collection, Cosby’s sex
scandal had not broken, but when it did, a sign went up at the exhibit saying
this was an art display and not a commentary on his guilt or innocence. The exhibit has remained, but has become
controversial.
Is President Donald Trump even a
possibility? The idea sounds absurd, but really scary. The American electorate
is fickle and ignorant, but not quite to that extent in the aggregate. Surely
most people would come to their senses? In fact, maybe they are already tiring
of Trump’s antics.
In the wake of
the Republican presidential candidates’ debates, I would wager that if the
Republicans would agree to stop deportations of undocumented persons without
offering them a path to citizenship (thereby preventing them from becoming
future voters), most would be OK with that. Citizenship is obtainable only through
a long, expensive, and arduous process, and many legal residents never attempt it.
It would probably be enough for the undocumented that their US-born children
could carry on and for members of their family not to fear being abruptly and arbitrarily
deported.
On this 70th anniversary of the bombing
of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I remember being horrified even as child that
such bombs had been dropped on a civilian population, not once, but twice, which
forever tarnished my opinion of President Truman’s legacy. According to General Eisenhower: “The Japanese were ready to
surrender and it wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing.” Then why
were the bombs dropped? Apparently, according to the consensus of historians,
to impress the Soviets with the power of nuclear weapons.
In South Sudan, Amnesty International
requests the support in highlighting the urgency of international action in
bringing an end to the protracted conflict in South Kordofan and Blue Nile that
has led to a human rights and humanitarian crisis (in the very area I visited
in 2006).
Sukarno’s
daughter, heading up a foundation bearing her father’s name, with a straight
face, has awarded the foundation’s peace and justice prize to North Korean leader Kim Il Sung. Mahatma
Gandhi and Aung San Suu Kyi are previous recipients. Maybe Kim will try to live
up to their example?
I’m
curious as to how and why Hasidic Jews
have settled in NYC rather than Israel, an environment not always hospitable to
them, as some are finding out when their apartment buildings have moved to
electronic keys for front-door entry, something forbidden for them to use on
the Sabbath.
Israel’s worst fears are published in the ayatollah’s
new book: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/irans-ayatollah-ali-khamenei-publishes-book-to-destroy-israel-and-deceive-us/ar-BBlllUD?ocid=iehp
I don’t have enough inside information and understanding about the
Iran deal to comment in detail,
though I tend to think, on balance, that it’s better than the status quo. Is it
the best possible deal imaginable? Probably that’s not obtainable. No doubt,
there are elements of the Iranian leadership that would annihilate Israel if
they could, but would squelching this deal make that less likely? I don’t
really know. It’s a truism—and also true—that every agreement or decision has
pros and cons, risks and benefits, and, of course, different stakeholders. No decision
outcome carries a 100% guarantee—whether on a personal level, such as in
marrying a given partner, having children, or buying a home—or on a larger community,
statewide, national, or international level.
In a Peace Corps magazine, an article
recently appeared about a same-sex
female couple who served together in Ecuador,
though without revealing their relationship to local people, although the Peace
Corps brass did know. That must have been a Peace Corps first.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/10/politics/state-department-dominican-republic-haiti-crisis/index.html
While
the Dominican government seems to
have backtracked somewhat on its threat to expel all those of Haitian descent
by a certain deadline, many people remain without the papers needed for school
or work.
Haiti’s
President Michel Martelly was speaking at a rally July 29
when a woman accused his government of incompetence and complained that it
failed to bring electricity to her community. Video broadcast by Haitian media
show the president telling her in Haitian Creole to "go get a man and go
in the bushes" to have sex. Many in the crowd at the nighttime rally
erupted in cheers and laughs at his remarks. A presidential spokesman did not
respond to a request for comment Wednesday. Loss of the three officials as the
result of Martelly’s remarks is unlikely to affect the outgoing president's
ability to govern or the remainder of his term.
Has the international community failed Haiti?
By
Owen Bennett-Jones BBC News
7
August 2015
Carlos, a member of our local Amnesty
International Group 211 from Mexico,
gave us a somewhat gloomy assessment of the rule of law, corruption, and the
hold of the drug trade there, a trade fed mostly by demand from our side of the
border, no surprise. About half of the country is controlled by cartels, he
said, raising the murder rate and inculcating a sense of insecurity and fear
among the populace. Journalists and human rights advocates are particularly
targeted and at-risk.
The
retrial of former Guatemalan strongman General
Rios Montt was delayed again. At July’s hearing, the Tribunal decided that
a new diagnosis of his health was needed (the prosecutors alleged that the diagnosis
presented by the defense was not accurate).
Therefore, the Tribunal stated that Rios Montt should be send to a state
mental institution and get a new diagnosis. An appeal was filed by the defense
and, up to now, he remains at his house.
Almost 700 political arrests were made in Cuba in
July. Since the accords were signed, such arrests have increased, but are
no longer considered news.
U.S., Cuba Hold First Formal Talks
on Human Rights
by
Wochit
The United States and Cuba met on Tuesday [August 4,
2015] to discuss how they intend to treat future dialogue on the thorny issue
of human rights as the countries move toward restoring diplomatic ties. The
U.S. delegation was led by Tom Malinowski, the State Department's assistant
secretary for human rights and democracy. Pedro Luis Pedroso, deputy director
of multilateral affairs and law at the ministry of foreign affairs, led the
Cuban side. A State Department official, speaking on condition of anonymity,
said, "This preliminary meeting reflects our continued focus on human
rights and democratic principles in Cuba."
It would
be great but unlikely if some peaceful dissidents were invited to the formal
opening of the US embassy in Havana by
Sec. Kerry on August 14, rumored to
be Fidel’s birthday. Already, independent journalists who have applied to cover
the event have not been approved. If an opposition figure should actually be
present, it would be a big surprise, sure to infuriate the Cuban leadership,
though it would be awkward for them to pull out of the deal now. Probably the
US won’t attempt that at this delicate juncture. The prospects for free
association and expression do not look good in Cuba, but they didn’t look good
either before the US-Cuba accords. Now, at least, “the Empire” (the regime’s label
for the US) should no longer be blamed for Cuban dissidence. I think the main
reason the US sought diplomatic relations with Cuba, apart from freeing hostage
Alan Gross, was because our policy was condemned around the world, especially in
Latin America, and Obama wanted to attend the Summit of the Americas last
April, which he did. The accords took much of the wind out of the sails of
Maduro and others who ranted continually against the US. With Cuba and the US having
diplomatic relations, one of their main talking points was lost. I’ll bet some
invitees at the recent opening of the Cuban Embassy were not in particular favor
with Washington. If most Cuban citizens actually
support “the Revolution,” what is there to fear from a few dissidents?
One way for the new embassy to partially redeem itself would be to
invite independent journalists to
some sort of alternative event or forum, perhaps featuring a frank discussion
on the embassy's relationship with them now after the accords and getting their
suggestions on how to navigate the relationship going forward. I'm wondering
how such matters are handled in China and Viet Nam--are opposition figures ever
invited to the embassy or are human rights concerns just mentioned in private diplomatic
conversations (which may have little or no effect)? The Pope's visit will
probably result in some political prisoners being released, but not much else.
It's hard to see how Cuban dissidents will be supported now--European sources may
be the best hope.
As the Cuban ration book shrinks, some areas
are only dispensing oil, rice, and sugar. A person might not starve with that,
but it’s hardly a nutritious and balanced diet. The idea is to get US-based relatives to send
more money to spend for food from government dollar stores. Those without relatives abroad are out of
luck.
Perhaps
if USAID and the US government pull back assistance and moral support to Cuban
civil society, Cuban activists will redouble their independent efforts? Cubans
are inventive and spend their lives skirting strictures. For example, because of
punishing tariffs for internet usage, Cubans have found ways to share a single
connection wirelessly with cell phones. Of course, stealing from state
industries is still universal, but since such industries are shrinking, opportunities
now are fewer.
The Cuban regime has begun courting gay tourists
from the US and elsewhere, funneling them into government-approved facilities and tours, all no doubt, bearing the
imprimatur of First Daughter Mariela
Castro.
As a lifelong
Democrat, I am concerned that presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton has declared herself in favor of lifting the
remaining embargo against Cuba, apparently
unconditionally, a position popular with most voters who don’t realize or do
not believe that the Castro government is a repressive regime. Lifting it under
certain conditions would be OK, but already enough of Cuban citizens’ freedoms
have been sacrificed on the altar of rapprochement, so it should be fully lifted
only in exchange for additional freedoms for ordinary Cubans, not just benefits
for the political elite or members of the Communist Party or even of American
tourists. Other nations’ leaders have been castigated for far less than what
the Cuban leadership is doing, including some in Africa by President Obama
during his recent visit there, calling out African presidents who have served
multiple terms. What about 56 years in
Cuba? I understand that Obama wanted
diplomatic relations with Cuba because US policy, rightly or wrongly, was
universally condemned, especially by Latin American leaders. Secondarily, an apparently
suicidal Alan Gross was freed in the deal, but many other American hostages around
the world have not been so lucky.
Most
people everywhere not close to the situation have bought into the very
successful narrative disseminated by the Cuban leadership (and the NYTimes) that US policy is to blame for brave
little Cuba’s economic woes, notwithstanding that Cuba trades with nations
around the world and hosts tourists from everywhere, with the US sending the
most visitors there from any country if family visits are also counted. And
families bring goods and cash to their relatives in Cuba, often paying exorbitant
duties on the gift items. Remittances from the US are a major source of hard
currency, most of it going to the Cuban military and political elite through
sales at marked-up prices at government dollar stores. To have the embargo
lifted unconditionally without requiring any concessions from Cuba in terms of its
own people’s human rights and economic freedoms is to give up what little
leverage the US still has and merely entrenches the current leadership and may
visit harm on ordinary Cubans, especially Afro-Cubans, who are the bottom of
the heap. Cuba is an oppressive police
state that not only impedes its citizens’ economic wellbeing, funneling all
income from abroad through its military and the Castro family, with very little
trickle-down, but that prevents free association and communication among the
majority of its citizens—never mind actual voting. Free internet was even turned
down by the leadership.
I know Amnesty
International’s policy is to oppose all embargoes, but what other leverage
exists? Or does the US just give up on
human rights in Cuba, as Americans seem to have done regarding some other
regimes, and simply aim for economic development, which would still be an improvement
for many Cubans who have never known political freedoms anyway? However, as China’s
rulers are finding out, it’s hard to mix a more capitalist and competitive
economy with a closed, controlled political system. And China’s citizens are
becoming more restless now, generations on under their political strictures, especially
those who have traveled or studied abroad and have seen how other governments
function.
The Cuban Catholic Church
is the only institution in Cuba that operates semi-autonomously from the
government. What about a meeting of US officials with the papal nuncio? It does
seem that Pope Francis will have a chance to speak on behalf of greater freedom
of association and expression--also to have some political prisoners released. His Cuba schedule:
Sunday, Sept.
20
— Celebrates
Mass in Revolution Square in Havana.
— Visits with
state leaders, religious men and women, youth.
Monday, Sept.
21
— Celebrates
Mass in Holguin.
Tuesday, Sept.
22
— Celebrates
Mass in the minor Basilica of the Shrine of Our Lady of Charity of Cobre,
Santiago.
— Meets
families in the Cathedral of Our Lady of Asuncion, Santiago.
I don’t really
understand the need for personal
firearms (here in DC, a little boy just killed a little girl with a gun he found),
but do recognize that some feel the need to carry guns to protect themselves
from other people or possibly from animals that may attack them in the wild. However,
the appeal of trophy hunting and fishing
is a complete mystery to me. Why kill magnificent creatures—some
endangered--that have survived every natural challenge just to be able to stuff
them, insert glass eyes, and put them on display? What are the bragging rights
there? It’s an unfair fight. Is shooting animals or, in the case of giant fish, hooking
and hauling them in, thus ending their natural life, something to celebrate? If
a rare multicolored lobster or giant octopus is caught by accident, it’s enough
just to take some photos, throw it back, and put the episode on You-Tube. That’s fame enough. If people kill
animals or fish to eat, that’s one thing, but killing a lion king is not for
eating. Luring a protected lion out of his habitat and killing him is considered
sport? Even worse is killing a half-tame lion in a private reserve, like
shooting fish in a barrel. I’m glad that Minnesota dentist lion hunter had to
shut down his business because of protests and if he makes the lion’s skin into
a rug or hangs its head up on a wall, he’d better display it in a secret
locale.
Perhaps
the death of Cecil the Lion will
lead to a prohibition on big game hunting, especially of rare or endangered
species. I’m well aware that such
hunting expeditions do afford an income to some local people, but perhaps more
might be employed in non-lethal safaris (in which I have participated) and in wildlife
protection. Now, we hear that the
killing of Cecil has been compounded by the reported killing of his brother or
best pal, thought to be guarding the lioness and cubs he left behind, although
there has been dispute about the veracity of details about that second killing.
Apparently, another male lion in the vicinity was killed by another American after Cecil, but may not have been
associated with him. Added to lion killing is the senseless the slaughter of elephants
and rhinos for their tusks and horns, butchered in the mistaken belief of mostly
Asian males that ingestion of powdered tinctures enhance virility—they should try
Viagra instead, much more effective!
Amnesty
International, where I have been a volunteer activist since 1981, has really
opened up a hornets’ nest by tackling the issue of prostitution
and deciding it should be decriminalized
as a transaction between consenting adults. Maybe
if you are with Eliot Spitzer, that’s the case, but surely that’s the
exception. There may be a few others. A professional single woman at an
association where I once worked enjoyed making extra money and sharing fun
evenings and sexual adventures with well-heeled men by moonlighting as a
high-end escort after hours. That was before the internet was in widespread use,
so I don’t know how she met her “johns.” What percentage of prostitutes fall
into that elite category and is it worth promoting the idea of consensual
prostitution to protect them from arrest or reprobation? Do such women even
need protection? The line between consensual and coerced sex—even implied
coercion because of unequal economic circumstances— is really not so clear.
Amnesty’s pending consideration of
the issue was discussed in TIME (Aug.
17, 2015) and the policy was approved at an international meeting https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2015/08/global-movement-votes-to-adopt-policy-to-protect-human-rights-of-sex-workers/
While there may be exceptions, I
do think the sex trade worldwide is very exploitative of women and rarely a
free and equal contract among consenting adults. However, the new Amnesty policy does not
identify prostitution as a human right, but affirms that sex workers have
rights. (Yes, that should include the right not be engaged in such work.)
Making Life Harder for Pimps, Nicolas Kristof
[Excerpts] The Nordic
model to combat trafficking and exploitation, pioneered
in Sweden, has been gaining ground, too. It provides for the arrest of
johns while offering help rebuilding the lives of women who were selling sex.
Nothing works all that well in curbing sex trafficking, but this model has
succeeded better than other approaches.
Yet in some quarters, there’s still a myopia about the
degree to which this is a human rights issue. Amnesty International will
consider a proposal in the coming days that would call for full
decriminalization of the sex trade, including for johns, on the theory that
this would benefit sex workers. Nice theory, but a failed one. It has been
tried repeatedly and it invariably benefited johns while exacerbating abuse of
women and girls: A parallel underground market emerges for underage girls. Let’s
hope Amnesty comes to its senses and, as
Swanee Hunt of Harvard put it, avoids “endorsing one of the most
exploitative human rights abuses of our time.”
Here’s Swanee Hunt’s article
referenced above: http://www.globalpost.com/article/6625747/2015/08/03/commentary-amnesty-international-legalize-sex-trade
No comments:
Post a Comment