SpeakOut is Truthout's treasure chest for bloggy, quirky, personally reflective, or especially activism-focused pieces. SpeakOut articles represent the perspectives of their authors, and not those of Truthout.
Dear Senator Feinstein:
On Thursday, when you responded to news about massive ongoing surveillance of phone records of people in the United States, you slipped past the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. As the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, you seem to be in the habit of treating the Bill of Rights as merely advisory.
The Constitution doesn’t get any better than this:
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
Today's NYT editorial, "President Obama's Dragnet,' which condemns Obama's routine collection of data on all phone calls that Americans make, is followed on the NYT web site with an insightful comment, by a "Scott W" in Chapel Hill, NC:
"Scott W Chapel Hill, NC In the end, this has nothing to do with preventing terrorism, but is a paranoid government's attempt to control a society destined to revolt against increasing inequality. The "bad guys" are ALL of us and that is why we all are being spied on. Every last legislator, and executive branch member who supports this terrorism on our right to privacy should be thrown out of office, if not ultimately prosecuted. June 7, 2013 at 6:50 a.m"
There is almost too much to write about from Berlin! To start off, the uncanny disappearance of 1.5 million residents of Germany, missing since the last census over 20 years ago. Instead of 81.7 million people there are only 80.2 million (of whom 6.2 million, or 7.7 percent, were not German citizens). You may ask "Who cares?" One answer: hard-hit Berlin, where 400,000 are unaccounted for, and which will now lose millions of euros in subsidies from the European Union and richer German states.
Then there are those deadly killing machines, the drones, which Obama is trying so hard to justify. Germany's Thomas de Maiziere is in a worse bind: his Defense Department wasted $ 650,000,000 dollars on Northrop Grumman's Global Hawk drone, renaming it the Euro Hawk. It may soon be called the Euro Vulture, since his project is a cadaver: his drones, lacking an anti-collision system, are officially banned in Europe, and unless Herr Minister can do some skillful maneuvering, Merkel may have to drop him from her cabinet – just a few months before the big election. Of course, Northrup Grumman will hardly drop from its double digit billion domain, nor will Germany's arms ranking greatly suffer; it remains the world's third biggest weapons exporter.
David "Deacon" Jones died today. Unless you followed football in the 1970s, you probably never heard of him. I vaguely remember him and his Los Angeles Rams teammates Rosey Grier, Lamar Lundy and Merlin Olsen. As I listened to the news about his death today, the reporter highlighted a statement Jones made during his acceptance speech during his 1980 Hall of Fame induction. Now here was a man who devoted his career to an arguably violent sport, to inflicting pain and suffering on his opponents, in other words, his life was about violence. So when I heard what he said, it really caught me off guard, yet in an instant I knew what he spoke was truth, from his inner knowing. He said in that 1980 speech "Violence in its many forms is an involuntary quest for identity. When our identity is in danger, we feel certain that we have a mandate for war."
How profound is that? Violence is a quest for identity. And I will add for respect, meaning, and recognition. How many times has my own identity felt threatened to where I have lashed out, maybe not in physical violence but at least with violent words, spewing venom and anger?
Throughout US history, we have wronged people, identified the problem and in time corrected it. Slavery and prison camps are joined by a modern epidemic: Wrongfully stripping children from parents. I am not speaking of grey areas where someone with heavy criminal activity and drug use gets limited visitation. In many instances, the parent being stripped is very much the polar opposite – the parent better suited to love and nurture the children.
Parents who optimistically get dragged into the court system by ex-spouses find themselves squashed by aggressive counterparts who often win in the name of the kids.
In simplest terms, a divorcing parent who can find any means of stripping a child from the other parent through the legal system including bribing or intimidating the child, gets financially rewarded.
When I attended the US Naval Academy in Annapolis as an undergraduate from 2000-2004, male midshipmen used the acronym "WUBA" to refer to their female counterparts. According to historian Robert Schneller, the moniker originated as a reference to "Working Uniform Blue Alpha," a uniform issued to female midshipmen. Despite hearing "WUBA" thousands of times, I never heard the origin story described by Schneller while I was at the academy. Instead, male upper-class midshipmen offered me a very different interpretation during my freshman year. According to them, WUBA stood for "Women Used By All," or, sometimes, "Women With Unusually Big Asses."
Use of "WUBA" was far from taboo during my time at Annapolis. Males who viewed their female peers as sexual commodities or threats to male dominance readily used the term. Others used it to avoid being labeled "pussies" for refusing to participate in the school's culture of misogyny.
Two years ago a sociologist at Stanfordpublished a studywhich found that, concurrent with the widening division of wealth in the US, the standardized testing gap between high-income and low-income students had grown 40% to 50% since the 1960s. Since the education gap between blacks and whites is a common theme in left literature, it is worth noting then that the achievement gap by income is now nearly twice as large. Setting aside the moral questions raised by such a discrepancy, it merits serious consideration from a policy standpoint given the negative impact it has on the national economy. A McKinseyreport published in 2009showed that closing the income achievement gap from 1983 to 1998 would have increased GDP in 2008 from $400 billion to $670 billion. Furthermore, it concluded that "by underutilizing such a large proportion of the country's human potential, the US economy is less rich in skills than it could be" which is the "economic equivalent of a permanent national recession."
We stood in a meadow somewhere in Northern Israel, a middle-aged American man and two young women. We smiled at each other and exchanged pleasantries in Hebrew and English, in Hebrish. The sun burned overhead, aggressively oblivious. All morning I'd been going hard on Shviel Yisrael, the challenging and beautiful Israel National Trail, and my feet were sore from scrambling on ragged, volcanic rocks. Trailside kotzim had slashed my shins with their scimitars and razor rhizomes. The sweat-streaked Israelis, seven weeks out of Eilat through the Negev Desert and Judean Hills, hefted huge backpacks – bigger than mine.
How's the trail ahead? I asked. The women paused – minds executing a host of judgments based on culture, history and personal values. And one said, Ein ba'aya, no problem. It is good, sure, the other one elaborated.
Most conspicuous by its absence from the new Obama Doctrine was any mention of climate change.
We should not be surprised by its exclusion. At the Copenhagen Climate Conference, Obama waited till the end to avoid any effort to significantly address the issue. At Durban, the only change was that Obama had his representatives undermine the conference from the beginning. Despite what he may say in a State of the Union Address, Obama by his actions supports Wall Street and the energy conglomerates in continuing to pursue profits at the price of despoiling and destroying the planet. That climate change is already a factor in world conflicts and promises to be a key driver of future wars, fundamentally threatening both US and world security, merited nary a word in his May 23rd presentation.
The Cluster Project presents the controversial work THE CHILDREN EXPERIMENT, a short documentary investigation in which replicas of cluster bomblets are placed in Virginia playgrounds as surveillance cameras secretly record the reaction of local children. Around the world, children are tragically attracted to these kinds of small, unexploded bombs — do American children possess the same impulse?
Employing a mix of interventionist art, ethnography, and reportage, The Children Experiment explores the relationship between cluster bombs, children, and western complicity with immoral weaponry. While the U.S. traditionally produces and sells the bulk of the world's cluster munitions—weapons that result in alarmingly high casualty rates for children and other civilians — few Americans know or care. Would this be the case if it were American children at risk?