Tuesday, November 28, 2006

After Prison

[One should also see Tony Papa's parallel experience and campaign to reform the Rockefeller Drug laws: http://www.15yearstolife.com/ Needless to say the draconian Rockefeller drug laws intended to curb drug sales, did not. They effectively destroyed thousands of lives of many no more guilty than having letting themselves be conned into a stupid move in a tight situation of financial need -- what would have qualified as a far lesser charge and punishment with other comparable crimes such as a minor theft or burglary. Ed Kent]


http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/fea/20061127/202/2042


After Prison


November 27, 2006

GOTHAM GAZETTE: We're here with Jennifer Gonnerman, formerly of the Village Voice, who will talk to us about Life on the Outside: the Prison Odyssey of Elaine Bartlett. The book uses the story of one woman to talk about some issues facing the city, and the nation as well – but our focus is the city. These issues are the Rockefeller Drug Laws, and ex-prisoners' reintegration into society.

Ms.. Gonnerman, when you met Elaine Bartlett, you were working as a reporter for the Village Voice, meeting with various inmates. What struck you about her, that you would spend the next several years writing a book that rests on her story?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: I met Elaine Bartlett in 1998 when she was in Bedford Hills prison doing 20 to life, and she was in year 14. At that time I was at the Voice, and it was the 25th anniversary of the Rockefeller Drug Laws, which no one was even writing about because by news standards there was no real news reason to write about it – they had been on the books for so long and nothing had changed. I used the anniversary as an excuse to interview five people [in New York prisons] who were doing at least 15 to life for a first drug offense under the Rockefeller Drug Laws.

That day at Bedford I interviewed three women; she was the last. The first two women who came in got all dolled up for the interview. Elaine came in last, and she looked like she hadn't gotten out of bed in a month. She purposely wore her whole uniform; she certainly hadn't brushed her hair or anything. I didn't want to ask any questions because she looked so deeply depressed. I was afraid that if I asked her about her life, or her sentence, or her prison circumstances, that she might just break down and cry. But of course I was there, and that was my job. So I started asking questions, and she started answering them. She was so both blunt and honest about her life, and perceptive, that I was just very struck by her.

I found her to be such a good interview – and of course her story is so unbelievably compelling: she was doing 20 to life, went in when she was 26, when she was locked up she had four kids under the age of 10, it was a first offense –

GOTHAM GAZETTE: -- And she was set up.

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: Yes, and she was set up. I didn't even know half the stuff that's in the book at that time. In fact, I didn't know there was going to be a book. But I did quote her in the piece extensively, and ended up writing another piece about her a year later before she got clemency. When she got out of prison, I was there. The book grew out of those articles from the Voice, but the relationship really started with that very first meeting.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: Do you remember anything specific that she said in that first meeting that stuck with you?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: The meeting was April 1998, and her mother passed away in either February or March. She described going to say goodbye to her mother. This meant leaving Bedford Prison in a van, shackled, going to a hospital in East Harlem, and walking through the hospital in shackles to say goodbye to her mother, who she hadn't seen outside a prison setting in 14 years. Her mother is in bed, a day or two before her death, and she basically just climbed into the bed next to her wearing the shackles. It had happened just a few weeks before, and she was crying when she told the story. It's just the kind of thing you never forget.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: You write that in many ways she is not typical of the people who are in prison, and the people who are in prison for the Rockefeller Drug Laws. So two questions: how so? And then, the obvious question: Why write a book about her in particular?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: It's probably impossible to pick any prisoner and say, "this prisoner is completely typical." Because prison is just like society – who is the typical American? She's unusual because she's female – that puts her very much in the minority.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: About 15 percent of prisoners are female?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: I think it's less than that.

Elaine was also unusual because she was at Bedford Hills, which is the only maximum security prison for women in New York State, and it also had a college program. Many prisons used to have college programs, but they eliminated virtually all of them in the mid-1990s when Congress voted to take Pell Grants away from prisoners. But Bedford raised money privately, so Elaine was able to continue an education, get an associates degree, and move towards a bachelors. So by the time she came out she was much better educated than most other people coming out of prison.

She also did a tremendous amount of time – 16 years. That's an extraordinary amount of time, especially for a non-violent offense. You see a lot of people going in and out, but for someone to do such a long stretch at one time is pretty unusual.
ROCKEFELLER DRUG LAWS

GOTHAM GAZETTE: How do the Rockefeller Drug Laws work? And you can say they don't really, but what is the mechanism of it?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: The Rockefeller Drug Laws were created in 1973 under Governor Nelson Rockefeller. They were the first mandatory minimum drug laws in the country, so in a lot of ways they kicked off the nation's War on Drugs.

Mandatory minimum sentences mean that your prison term is mandatory. The power has shifted from the judges to the prosecutors in a sense in determining what the severity of your punishment will be. The judge's hands were essentially tied; once you were convicted of a certain crime he or she had to give a certain punishment, a mandatory punishment. And the way that the punishment was determined was by the weight of the drugs involved, not, for example, by whether you were a drug kingpin or a drug mule.

In Elaine's case she was arrested for a drug sale to an undercover cop for more than two ounces, the highest level, an A1 felony, in New York State. So the judge was required to give her at least 15 to life. She had the bad luck of having a judge up in Albany county, "Maximum" John Clyne, who gave her twenty to life.

This way of fighting the War on Drugs was copied across the country, and also by the federal government. These laws are still on the books, even though many states have softened them.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: They also don't place all drugs on an equal footing.

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: Well, the Rockefeller Drug Laws apply to cocaine and heroin. Meanwhile, New York State has a very lenient policy on marijuana. Possession of small amounts of marijuana is technically a violation, not a crime. Way back when, in the 1970s, a lot of middle college kids started getting a lot of state prison time for marijuana, and parents went ballistic. You had a lot of parents up in Albany lobbying, and that's when they started to really decriminalize marijuana in New York State. I always felt if you had the same kids getting locked up under the Rockefeller Drug Laws, maybe we wouldn't have the situation we have now, which is that roughly 94 percent of inmates in the state prison system who are there under the drug laws are African American or Latino.

BOB ZANE: It seems like before Governor Rockefeller signed these laws he had a liberal reputation. Then he made these drug laws. Do you think one of the reasons he did this is because he wanted to run for president or vice president of the United States?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: A lot of people who were around him at the time basically said as much. There was such a marked difference from the past; they felt he had gone from playing for a New York audience to a national audience. He had to shore up his conservative credentials, and what way to do that faster and easier than appearing tough on crime?

REJOINING SOCIETY

GOTHAM GAZETTE: You write that when you interviewed Elaine after she got of prison, you imagined this as the happy ending to her prison story. But your book continues for years, following her difficult effort to rejoin society. What trials that she faced surprised you the most?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: Well, everything surprised me. The day she walks out of prison, she describes it as the happiest day of her life, of course. I had been going up to visit her in the weeks before, as the excitement was building. After fighting for a couple of years, she had received clemency from Governor Pataki. He had only given it to three or four people out of 70,000; it's like winning the lottery. So she got four years shaved off her sentence.

Elaine imagined that this was a happy ending to a very traumatic and tragic story. I thought it was the beginning of better days. It turned out we were both very, very naïve and overly optimistic.

I thought that when you get out of prison, you'd find a place to live, you'd get a job, and in six months you'd be up and running. After she got out of prison, I wrote a piece for the Voice about the release. I continued to stay in touch with her. Sometimes she would call me at the Voice and explain the scene in her apartment, and her relationships with the kids, which were increasingly frayed. She used to say things on the phone to me like, "I left one prison to come home to another." That phrase is almost like a mantra that runs through the book. I realized in a lot of ways that the story was just starting, the struggle was just beginning. It was another whole journey she was about to undertake.

I ended up following her for the first year for a piece that ran in the Village Voice in 2000. It was 18 pages in the Voice, very long. After the piece came out, she had a job. She didn't really have a place to live yet – she was still living with her children at the Lilian Wald houses on Avenue D. And we stayed in touch and would hang out sometimes. She would say, "Hey, how about you write a book." And I would say, "A book? 18 pages in the Village Voice isn't enough? How much more is there to say? Is there really anything else going to happen here?" I didn't know. She promised me that the story hadn't ended, and of course it had not.

It got to this question of how long it takes someone to re-enter society, and to get back up on their feet. The book ends up following her over four years, and I would say the process continues even to this day. Especially someone who did as much time as she did. She went in at 26, and when she got out in some ways she was still 26 and in other ways she was 42. So there was this incredible learning curve. That's a lot of what the book deals with. People use the term reentry. For a lot of people coming out of prison it's much more complex than that. In a lot of ways I think it's a lifelong process.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: In general, is the difficulty in getting out of prison because of actual legal barriers, or because prisoners have been damaged socially by being in prison?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: Well, both.

The list is so long about what the problems people face coming home from prison. It's become an increasingly popular subject in the last three or four years. There's a long list of things prisoners can't do: in New York State you can't get a barber's license. If you're on parole you can't stay out after nine, can't vote, can't legally live in a housing project, even though the housing projects are full of people that have been through the prison system.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: No matter what the crime was that you were convicted of?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: The laws vary state to state. In New York you can't vote if you are on parole -- it doesn't matter what the crime is. Most people coming out are on parole. There are basic parole rules and then sometimes they add on special ones.

The barber's license you can't get if you're a convicted felon unless they make a special exception for you.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: In the Drum Major Institute blog there was the story of a guy who was in prison –

JENNIFER GONNERMAN; -- Marc LaCloche. He was a barber on the inside, he was trained by the prison system and became very good. He came out and wanted to be a barber and why not? He couldn't get a license, and he fought and it was a court battle, and he won, and then it was appealed. It was endless. One day I was sitting at the Village Voice and someone called me and told me Marc LaCloche had passed away. And in a very small world, he was a little bit of a celebrity, because he was the one person who actually tried to fight for his rights. He was en route to Potters Field, and we ended up writing a piece on him in the Voice. All these people came forward and donated money and he ended up being buried in New Jersey in a cemetery.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: How had he died?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: He ended up dying of AIDS.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: What I don’t understand is why they trained him as a barber in prison in the first place if he wasn't allowed to practice when he was released.

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: It makes no sense, but it's not really unusual. What people spend their time doing in prison often times has virtually no relationship to what work they may be able to do on the outside.

This speaks to a larger ambivalence on the part of society about what are we putting people in prison to do. Are we trying to punish them or are we trying to rehabilitate them? There was a time when prisons were thought to be correctional facilities and rehabilitation was the goal. But over the last thirty years or so there has been a shift to pure punishment. This is why you have virtually no college programs anymore, why you have people not trained for jobs that they could actually do, or trained for jobs that don't exist.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: These are things that are obviously barriers. What about the psychological issues? Would these exist no matter what?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: When I was thinking about Elaine getting out of prison, what her year would be like, and what I would be reporting on, I had been thinking that as long as she gets an apartment and a job that she'd be okay. But she had four kids, and for her the biggest struggle coming out was not finding an apartment or a job -– although those struggles were enormous –- it was trying to be a mother to her children and repair these deeply damaged relationships, and make up for all of this lost time.

She has four kids. When she got out of prison, one was at Rikers Island on a drug case of his own, which was something she had to deal with. And though obviously her kids were thrilled to have her home, her two youngest daughters were very upset because their mother had been gone virtually their entire lives. Trying to help these kids who had basically grown up without parents was her full time job in a sense. That speaks a little bit to the psychological ramifications that someone faces when they come home. I think that in some ways they are a little more pronounced for women if they are the primary caretaker.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: Is there a most common way that former felons end up in jail?

Bedford Hills, the prison for women.

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: Well, there are many ways, but one of the main ways is through parole violations. This can mean any of a host of things – that you give your parole officer dirty urine, failing your drug test; maybe you've stopped going to your parole officer altogether because you don’t want to give him dirty urine, or you're tired of parole. Drugs, in many ways, are the things that take a lot of people back. Either possession or sale, or some crime related to it, or using drugs and disappearing and not reporting to your parole officer anymore.

But also, and this isn't dealt with so much in the book, there are a tremendous amount of people in prison who have some sort of mental illness. And you think the problems were hard for Elaine. When mentally ill people come out of prison, they have very few resources, and often there are periods of time when they can't get their medication. They may behave in ways that are not criminal but just so bizarre that their parole officer thinks that it's better to lock them up before they do something. Mental illness is often what brings people back into the system.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: Is there a happy ending to the Elaine Bartlett story? The book ends in 2003. We don't even know if Nathan, her boyfriend who was arrested with her when she was 26, gets out of jail.

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: He did get out of prison, shortly after the book was published in 2004. This was not specifically related to the book's publication, but the legislature had changed the way that merit time was calculated in part because of the activism of people like Elaine Bartlett.

All of the problems that are detailed in the book don't stop existing after it comes out. Life goes on. The damage done to her entire family by her absence over such a long period of time runs so deep that [it can't be erased] no matter what she does over the next twenty years. She says this herself in a very memorable way: "After being away for 16 years you come home and you're a complete stranger to your family. They love you but they're angry with you at the same time because of everything they went through in those 16 years and you weren't there. You can't get the birthdays back, you can't get the graduations back, you can't get the nights they laid up crying wanting mommy and she was nowhere to be found. You can't get those years back. No matter what you do in life you can never go back." I can't say it any better.

MARTHA SOFFER: What's she doing now?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: She is living in the same place she is at the end of the book, in Washington Heights. She is still trying to rebuild her life. She puts tremendous amount of energy into her granddaughter Tanae. From the passage I just read you can see that the pain of not raising her children is never going to go away. So it's almost like she's trying to be a mother to the grandchild. She had her kids quite young, so if you saw her on the street with her grandchild you might think that was her kid.

MARTHA SOFFER: Is she working?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: She was working, but she just lost her job and I don't think she has a new one yet. The struggles go up and down. There have been good streaks and bad.

MARTHA SOFFER: What kind of work was she doing?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: Her last job, I believe, was answering telephones at a community center on the Lower East Side.
EASING THE TRANSITION FROM PRISON

GOTHAM GAZETTE: Do city, state, and federal government have responsibilities or incentives to create programs for ex-prisoners? Are such programs politically feasible in New York?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: In the last three or four years there's been a tremendous focus on prisoner reentry, which means there's also been a lot of federal money going into a lot of programs across the country. There's been a tremendous sea change. It used to be that people just talked about, "lock 'em up, lock 'em up", and there was very little thought about what happened on the back end. Now there's been a real focus on that though it's hard to generalize nationally.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: What about in New York?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: There are a number of different places people can go for services. The biggest thing is housing. It's a problem for everybody, but the shelters are full of ex-prisoners with nowhere to go.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: Are there specific programs for ex-prisoners in terms of housing?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: Not so much. There is a little bit of housing specifically for ex-prisoners, but a lot of people in New York City need housing who never committed a crime. That's just a huge problem citywide.

MARTHA SOFFER: What about organizations that can help you get a job?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: Yeah, there are a lot of organizations. New York City actually has a much higher number than most places, so in some ways Elaine was fortunate that she came home here. There are places like the Osborne Association, the Fortune Society. There's a lot of different places that if you go in there after you've gotten out of prison they will help you get a job. What do you do in an interview? How do you make a resume? What do you say? What do you not say? How do you deal with the inevitable question, "Do you have a felony on your record?" It is possible to get a job for a lot of people when they come out of prison.

This is dealt with a lot in the book. This guy named George Lino helps Elaine to get a job. He plays a very important role by giving her very straight-up advice on how to get a job. He told me once that getting people into jobs is not the hard part; it's making sure they keep their job. This might seem counterintuitive, but these people are coming from a highly structured environment where every decision is made for them. Suddenly they're on the outside and responsible for themselves. They may not have used an alarm clock in ten years. They never wear a watch. There are a lot of things that people may have never dealt with that they must learn before they can be a reliable employee.
FORMER PRISONERS AND ACTIVISM

GOTHAM GAZETTE: Are there specific programs that are known to be most effective, and are they focused here in New York? You said New York is known for its programs. Is it because they're more effective, or just because there are more of them?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: There are a lot of programs here in New York. I mentioned a couple of them; there are many more I can mention. There's a program called Exodus that started in the last five years in East Harlem. It was started by Julio Medina, who was a drug gang leader from, I believe, the Bronx. He did a lot of time, he came out, and said he wanted to start his own organization for people coming out of prison. I met a lot of people who after coming out of prison said they wanted to start their own organization where they gave back and did something positive. He's one of the only people I saw who pulled it off. All the skills he had used in the past to commit crimes he put to good use. He was actually with George Bush at the State of the Union a couple of years ago as a model program. It was very much about people who have come out of prison helping other people who are coming out of prison – a peer model. I think it is a very powerful model, people saying, “I know what you're going though because I've been down that path before.”

One of the things about coming out of prison for Elaine and a lot of people that's so difficult is that you don't have role models. You may know people who have been locked up again, but it's hard to find people who have broken out in the ways you were suggesting. Elaine was very hungry to find those people, to try to follow their lead. Programs that hire a lot of ex-offenders, like Fortune Society, play a crucial role in helping people figure out how to overcome all the legal and psychological hurdles.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: Is there a group of people who have devoted themselves to fighting the Rockefeller Drug Laws? Has that given them a purpose in life?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: One of the themes that runs throughout the book is the role that Elaine's activism plays, politically and statewide, but also in her own personal life. After she gets out of prison she does become an activist, hanging out with Tony Papa and other prisoners-turned-activists who did time under the drug laws. For her becoming an activist, speaking at rallies, telling her story again and again, it was therapy, and it was also a way to rewrite her history. I don't mean rewrite by changing the facts of what happened, but by recasting prison as less about a tragedy that decimated her family, but more about, "I went through this and now I'm going to help people avoid the same fate, and change the laws so they don't have to do as much time as I did."

But one of the things about coming out of prison, as I mentioned, is that most people are on parole. And when you're on parole you can't associate with other people who are on parole – other felons. Now that makes sense on the one hand, because you don't want someone who you're trying to steer in the right direction to be hanging out on the corner with people who are selling drugs. But it does make this question of peer counseling or looking for new role models a little more complicated.

CALVIN JOHNSON: I have a question carrying on the theme of activism. To what extent were you motivated by activism as well? Certainly the Village Voice has a reputation of that journalistic style. Can you comment on where you saw an activism agenda or political implications of the book? Beyond telling a story, what are the effects that reach out into the larger situation?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: I felt like my personal goal, mission, or purpose was to tell the story as clearly and frankly as possible. What happened after that, politically or otherwise, was out of my hands. I also thought that it wasn't my concern in a sense. One thing that happens with journalists who are well meaning or trying to make a difference, is that there's an impulse to sugarcoat the story. And I think that doesn't make for good journalism.

As an example, when Elaine gets out of prison she is very frustrated and angry, like most people. Her youngest daughters are home, and she starts bossing them around, acting like she thinks a mom should. There's obvious tension, and a couple of times she becomes physical with them. I felt that was a very important thing to put in the book. This speaks to how deep the problems run, how deep the frustrations and anger truly are. Controlling her temper is going to be one of the challenges through the rest of her journey. Of course, this might not be something that an activist would want to read.

TARA McISAAC: I wanted you to comment more if you could about low-income housing. The state funds for low-income housing were re-routed into building prisons. I was appalled at that, and I was wondering if you could educate me any further?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: I don't know much more than what's in the book, but it talks about state money being earmarked for low-income housing and then being diverted, and I talk about how it was used to build prison cells in upstate New York. One of the saddest parts of Mario Cuomo's legacy is that he built more prisons than any governor before him.

In a lot of ways his hands were tied. You can say, "Well, that's a horrible thing. He shouldn't have done that." But the state legislature had passed these incredibly punitive Rockefeller Drug laws, so he's required, once they are given these very hefty sentences, to put them someplace. For the laws to be changed, the legislature had to change them. And no one was willing to go out on a limb – or what was perceived to be a limb – and change them. That only happened within the last year or two.

It is one of the little known tragedies. We have now 66,000 people locked up, most of whom are in upstate New York. You go to these little towns near the Canadian border and it seems like every other person is a prison guard, because that's the number one employer. All that money that's going up there is money that's not being spent for low-income housing here, or other things. It's extraordinarily expensive – about $32,000 a year – to keep somebody locked up. I think I estimated it cost about half a million dollars to keep Elaine locked up for all that time.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: There are two other aspects of what you were talking about. One were the electoral politics of that – how prisoners are counted as residents upstate.

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: This is something that has been getting a lot of attention thanks to the work of one or two people. I'm guessing on the numbers here, but between two-thirds and three-quarters of prisoners in New York State prisons are from New York City. Once they leave the five boroughs their numbers are counted in the Census wherever they are placed. Since virtually all the prisons are upstate, those districts look larger. Obviously they are allocated funds accordingly. There has been a push to count prisoners in their home zip codes, which would benefit New York City.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: The idea is not just that the money is allocated upstate, but that there are more representatives upstate than would be otherwise because there are more districts there because of the populations who are imprisoned, even though they are not allowed to vote for candidates. Some people have compared this to the 18th century where slaves were counted for purposes of apportionment but could not vote.

TERRI GOLDBERG: One thing that was very striking to me in the book was parole violations. I was amazed that they were as strict as they were: the voting, what kind of dog you could own. Do you have any idea of how and why they come up with these? It almost seems like they're still in prison.

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: Well, you know you can't have a rottweiler or pit bull if you are on parole. Officers don't want to get bitten when they do a house visit. They don't make these rules up for no reason. You have to be home by 9 pm and can't leave before 6 am. That's because officers do house visits to check that you're actually living there. They want to be able to show up at 9:15 and know you'll be there.

But there is a sense that you're still in prison after you leave. Just as I was saying with the prison system that there has been a shift from rehabilitation being the focus to straight-up punishment, the same thing is true with parole. So while there are a lot of parole officers trying to help people when they get out of prison, the pressure is on them to just play the role of law enforcement, just be a cop in a sense. There is very little incentive to not lock someone up, and the fear is that if you don't lock someone up they're going to commit another crime and you're going to be called into your boss's office.
CHANGES IN THE DRUG LAWS

GOTHAM GAZETTE: Let's go back a little to the drug policy, which was changed in 2004. What did these changes mean to people who had been convicted of drug offenses, or for those who are being convicted now?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: I don't recall all the numbers off the top of my head, but people that were convicted under the A1 statute, the most extreme statute, received less time than they would have previously, a few years less. It was retroactive. But most people who are in the system under the drug laws are so-called B-level felonies, a lower level. They were not affected by these laws.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: Do you think the change in administration in Albany will bring more substantial change to the Rockefeller Drug Laws?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: It might. But nobody wants to appear to be not tough on crime. It's political suicide. So it's very hard for even the most well-meaning lawmakers to make changes like this. There were some small reforms a few years back, but the laws had basically been unchanged for 31 years. So I don't think you're going to see overnight some dramatic difference. It's a very complicated issue, and very difficult for lawmakers to sort out.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: You mentioned that 48 other states have similar rules based on the Rockefeller Drug Laws. Have any of them rolled back since then?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: Most of them have softened or changed their drug laws over the years. New York was one of the last. A few years back State Senator David Paterson put a report out saying that our drug laws were still the harshest in the nation, and that's because so many other states that had followed our lead had either seen the light in a sense or could not afford to have so many people locked up for so long, and had consequently reduced the length of some of those sentences.

GOTHAM GAZETTE: The ones who have softened up, their reforms were more thorough than New York's in 2004?

JENNIFER GONNERMAN: It's hard to generalize, but yes. The perception was that New York State laws were changed, but it wasn't a huge reform. One of the sticking points in these debates about New York drug laws is the idea of mandatory minimums: who should have the power to decide how much time somebody is doing? Should it be in the hands of the judges or should it be in the hands of the district attorneys? A lot of activists want to undo that so that judges have more discretion. Of course the district attorneys association doesn't want to give up power and has been fighting that. So the structure has remained in place. There has been some tinkering around the edges, but it's a battle that is going to continue to be fought.

Other Related Articles:
Rockefeller Drug Laws: An Ex-Prisoners View (2006-03-31)

The Rockefeller Drug Laws: A Prosecutor’s Perspective (2006-03-27)

Rockefeller Drug Law Reform? (2005-09-22)

My Journey With the Rockefeller Drug Laws (2005-02-07)

Rockefeller Drug Law Reform and Drug Courts (2005-01-06)
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Monday, November 27, 2006

Making Out Big Time

[Needless to say, compared with the 1% or fewer Americans making out big time, the 33 million going hungry (many if not most children) provide a living commentary on greed American style. Where have all the good people gone? Ed Kent]

GILDED PAYCHECKS
Very Rich Are Leaving the Merely Rich Behind
By LOUIS UCHITELLE
The opportunity to become abundantly rich is a recent
phenomenon in a growing number of professions and
occupations.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/27/business/27richer.html?th&emc=th
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Saturday, November 25, 2006

Palestinians and Israel Say They Are Open to Truce

[Let us hope for the best. The U.S. has been no help and perhaps it will take the battle fatigue of on-going tit-for-tat to bring sanity into this situation. The Hobbesian response to on-going civil wars in Britain was the imposition of Sovereign peace-keeping upon all factions. That does not work well and is precisely what was done by Hussein in Iraq. Can the Israelis and Palestinians bring forth their best people and impulses to end their never ending strife? Allbest, Ed Kent]

Palestinians and Israel Say They Are Open to Truce
By STEVEN ERLANGER
Israel and the Palestinians moved gingerly on Friday toward
reinstating an often-broken cease-fire.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/25/world/middleeast/25mideast.html?th&emc=th
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

16,000 Single Mothers Serving in Iraq

The report (below) hits very close to home, as one of my daughters spent some time in the National Guard getting medical training there. She had been proud to be part of a peace-keeping military (in the time of Bosnia). Then, thank G-d, she resigned rather than continue in the reserves with the arrival of her first child. Had she not, she, as a number of my women students, would be facing call up despite her family of 3 children -- eight and younger -- she is happily married, but such burdens are hitting many a family with or without a parent on the home front. One is subject to recall for ten years if on the reserve list. Read this report and weep for those not only killed and maimed, but also exploited, disrupted, and then abandoned by our current political regime. Needless to say the great bulk of those who had joined the Guard had expected to serve their nation at home in times of natural emergencies such as Katrina. Ed Kent

............................................

FOCUS | 16,000 Single Mothers Serving in Iraq
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/112406X.shtml
When war started in Iraq, a generation of US women became involved as never before - in a wider-than-ever array of jobs, for long deployments, in a conflict with daily bloodshed. More than 155,000 women have served in Iraq and Afghanistan. Among their ranks are more than 16,000 single mothers, according to the Pentagon, a number that military experts say is unprecedented.
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Thursday, November 23, 2006

Where Has American Equal Opportunity Gone?

[One of the sad ironies implicit in this editorial in the NY Times today is that it is the U.S. that is falling behind its global competitors in educating its citizens, particularly in math and and the sciences essential our for economic viability. And where has our much vaunted social mobility gone in this era of cruel down sizing?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_mobility

To put in a good word for CUNY, we have had 2 Rhodes Scholarships awarded compared with none for Columbia this past 4 years. Still, we, too, are watching our students being frozen out by cost of living/tuition inflation here in NYC. Ed Kent]

....................................

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/23/opinion/23thu3.html?th&emc=th

Public Colleges as ‘Engines of Inequality’

Published: November 23, 2006

Democrats who ran for Congress this fall made the cost of college a big campaign issue. Now that they’ve won control of the House and Senate, they can prepare to act swiftly on at least some of the factors that have priced millions of poor and working-class Americans right out of higher education. The obvious first step would be to boost the value of the federal Pell Grant program — a critical tool in keeping college affordable that the federal government has shamefully ceased to fund at a level that meets the national need.

But larger Pell Grants can’t solve this crisis alone. Policy changes will also be required in the states, where public universities have been choking off college access and upward mobility for the poor by shifting away from the traditional need-based aid formula to a so-called merit formula that heavily favors affluent students. The resulting drop in the fortunes of even high-performing low-income students — many of whom no longer attend college at all — is documented in an eye-opening report released recently by the Education Trust, a nonpartisan foundation devoted to education reform.

The public universities were founded on the premise that they would provide broad access in exchange for taxpayer subsidies. That compact has been pretty much discarded in the state flagship campuses, which have increasingly come to view themselves as semiprivate colleges that define themselves not by inclusion, but by how many applicants they turn away, and how many of their students perform at the highest levels on the SAT, an index that clearly favors affluent teenagers who attend the best schools and have access to tutors.

The flagship schools compete for high-income, high-achieving students who would otherwise attend college elsewhere, while overlooking low-income students who are perfectly able to succeed at college but whose options are far more narrow.

In recent years, aid to students whose families earn over $100,000 has more than quadrupled at the public flagship and research universities. Incredibly, the average institutional grant to students from high-income families is actually larger than the average grant to low- or middle-income families.

Partly as a result, high-performing students from low-income groups are much less likely to attend college than their high-income counterparts — and are less likely to ever get four-year degrees if they do attend.

These are ominous facts at a time when the college degree has become the basic price of admission to both the middle class and the new global economy. Unless the country reverses this trend, upward mobility through public higher education will pretty much come to a halt.
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/StudentConcerns
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Thanksgiving -- Celebrating American Genocide?

[Kenyatta Kenyatta reports the true history of Thanksgiving below. For more details see:

http://www.dickshovel.com/peq.html


If one really examines the 17th century Anglo invasion of North America, one discovers attitudes towards indigenous inhabitants that still lingered in our children's sayings in my day -- "The only good Indian is a dead Indian!" Lest I seem prejudiced here, some of my ancestors were apparently among those early Puritans and (hopefully) a few were also native Americans! Whatever -- the lesson to be voiced on Thanksgiving is NEVER AGAIN -- American depredations on fellow humans viewed somehow as less than persons and whose properties are to be brutally appropriated. Consider the perverse American religious ideology that inspired this cruel invasion called "Manifest Destiny" -- still fueling our current mad intrusion into the Middle East?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_Destiny

It is all too true to type that Cheney is this very day celebrating Thanksgiving in Baghdad! Ed Kent]

...........................

From: "Kenyatta Kenyatta"

Subject: THE REAL HISTORY OF THANKSGIVING

A GLIMSE OF THE REAL HISTORY OF THANKSGIVING
..
With Bible passages in their hands to justify their every move, those
referred to as "Puritans" began their march inland from the seaside communities. Joined by British settlers, they seized land, took the strong and young Natives as slaves to work the land, and killed the rest.

When they reached the Connecticut Valley around 1633, they met a different type of force. The Pequot Nation, very large and very powerful, had never entered into a peace treaty as had other New England Native nations. When 2 slave raiders were killed by resisting Natives, the Puritans demanded that the killers be turned over. The Pequot refused. What followed was the Pequot War, the bloodiest of the Native wars in the northeast.

Because of the lack of fighting experience, and the vast numbers of the
fierce Pequot warriors, Commander John Mason elected not to stage an open battle. Instead, the Pequot were attacked, one village at a time, in the hours before dawn. Each village was set on fire with its sleeping Natives burned alive. Women and children over 14 were captured to be sold as slaves; other survivors were massacred. Many buried in mass graves, many still alive.

The Natives were sold into slavery in The West Indies, the Azures, Spain, Algiers and England; everywhere the Puritan merchants traded. The slave trade was so lucrative that boatloads of 500 at a time left the harbors of New England.

In 1641, the Dutch governor of Manhattan offered the first scalp bounty; a common practice in many European countries. This was broadened by the
Puritans to include a bounty for Natives fit to be sold for slavery. The
Dutch and Puritans joined forces to exterminate all Natives from New
England, and village after village fell.

Following an especially successful raid against the Pequot in what is now Stamford, Connecticut, the churches of Manhattan announced a day of
"thanksgiving" to celebrate victory over the heathen savages. This was
Thanksgiving. During the feasting, the hacked off heads of Natives were
kicked through the streets of Manhattan like soccer balls.

The killing took on a frenzy, with days of thanksgiving being held after
each successful massacre. Even the friendly Wampanoag did not escape.
Their chief was beheaded, and his head placed on a pole in Plymouth,
Massachusetts -- where it remained for 24 years. Each town held thanksgiving days to celebrate their own victories over the Natives until it became clear that there needed to be an order to these special occasions. It was George Washington who finally brought a system and a schedule to thanksgiving when he declared one day to be celebrated across the nation as Thanksgiving Day.

By this time the Atlantic Slave trade was in full swing as the most
ruthless, vicious devils on the planet set out to destroy two nations
simultaneously, the Afrikan and Indigenous people of the earth.

It was Abraham Lincoln who decreed Thanksgiving Day to be a legal national holiday during the Civil War -- on the same day and at the same time he was ordering troops to march against the Sioux in Minnesota ..... and subsequently ordered 38 Santee Sioux hung on christmas Eve for leaving the reservation in search of food...the promised supplies having never materialized)

Let's put this day called thanksgiving in context. For ourselves, our
families and especially the coming generation. Teach them the truth. It
will set them free in a way that we in this present generation have not
yet been able to accomplish because of compromise.

Join me in a day of fasting meditation and prayer. Let us use this day as a time to plan our continued strategies for struggle, and to remember the ancestors, both AfriKan and Native Amerikkan who perished in the Maafa of these two proud Nations.

Let us move to the next level, seeking to find a way to pry away from
eurocentric thought and behavior and go back home to our true selves, our best selves, your AFRIKAN SELF!!

Away with european holidays, no matter how convenient they may be. No
matter how much you like turkey and stuffing. No matter how good it feels to hang out with the family. Eat turkey on another day. Come together with family on other days and lets stop letting this (eurocentric) society dictate and dupe us into the celebration of its sickness.

If you can feel me raise you fist in the air!!!

Brother Kenyatta

If you can't,,,,,,,,,,,,,,eat turkey!

=====
"Let no voice but your own speak to you from the depths; let no
influence but your own rouse you in time of peace and time of war.
Hear all but attend only to that which concerns you," Marcus Garvey
http://www.theblacklist.net
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Wednesday, November 22, 2006

When Will Lieberman Pull the Switch?

I fully expect that Senator Joseph Lieberman, re-elected as an 'Independent' Democratic Senator in Connecticut, will at some opportune moment during the next two years shift alliance to the Republicans, thus, restoring the Senate to Republican control. Lest it be forgotten, Lieberman was originally elected to the Senate in 1988 over a moderate Republican, Lowell Weicker, with a narrow 10,000 margin undoubtedly supplied by the fervent support of William F. Buckley, Connecticut resident and the grand father of the right wing movement in this country:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Lieberman

It should be no surprise to see Lieberman taking on as his spokesperson what the NY Times characterizes in the following article as an ideological chameleon:

An Ideologue for Hire Gets New Alliance
By MARK LEIBOVICH
Marshall Wittmann, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman's new
spokesman, is one of the great ideological contortionists.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/22/us/politics/22wittmann.html?th&emc=th

Frankly I don't trust anyone who can waffle on about the on-going chaos created by U.S. policy in the Middle East. Perhaps we are about to see for the first time in American history a candidate for vice president who will have run on both the Democratic and Republican tickets?
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Monday, November 20, 2006

Professor John "Tito" Gerassi Responds To Attack

John Gerassi has apparently won the ire of a good number:

http://clogic.eserver.org/4-2/monchinski.html

http://www.democracynature.org/dn/vol9/gerassi_war.htm

http://www.zmag.org/gerassicalam.htm

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=24837

http://www.qcknightnews.com/home/index.cfm?event=displayArticlePrinterFriendly&uStory_id=7e987463-ba86-435b-a7cc-e530bb8beb59

The following was sent to our CUNY Faculty Senate list. I don't agree that the Palestinians using random violence are freedom fighters. They in fact are defeating their own cause by not using more sophisticated means (e.g. non violent civil disobedience) to protest the Israeli abuses which look increasingly directed to expelling any and all Palestinians at the behest of the Eretz Israel extremists who are now dominating Israeli policy?

And I would agree that it is well past time that the U.S. update its policy from carte blanche support of whatever Israel does to its dominated peoples. Now the oppressors are sadly and increasingly those in Israel who should all too well know that such brutal policies should never again to be inflicted on anyone or any people. It is a disgrace that Olmert has included the Liberman racists in his government:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avigdor_Lieberman

Ed Kent

.................................

The following is an excerpt from the response by Queens College Professor John "Tito" Gerassi to the attack on him published in the Queens College student newspaper which was the subject of Andrea Peyser's NY Post column yesterday:

Ever since I denounced JFK's invasion (by so-called "advisers") of Vietnam, I have been smeared by bigots, American-firsters, racists and just plain idiots who believe what they read in the mainstream media. I have never bothered to answer them on the simple grounds that such yokels never listen to anyone else's point of view. I will this time to Rubin's hysterical diatribe but only because he cites for support one of the most despicable lawyers the pro-war, pro-Israel fanatics have produced: Harvard's Alan Dershowitz, who has publicly praised the use of torture by US forces, even while Bush was trying to deny that the US did so.

***[Paragraph deleted to conform to Senate-Forum line limitation]***

I research my facts carefully. Every day I read two British papers, France's Le Monde, Spain's ABC, Argentina's La Prensa, even the India Monitor, plus seven weeklies, ten monthlies (even such esoteric revues as Switzerland's Illustre) and I comb the web. I receive information via email from dozens of folks all over the world, even Indonesia. Nevertheless, I tell my students that the facts they will hear in my courses are one-sided, facts never or rarely available on mainstream media. If you want that point of view, I tell them, watch TV, read Time. If Rubin had not walked out after ten minutes, he would have heard me say: "You don't have to agree with me. I cannot penalize you if you do, as I give strictly objective exams." Ask any student. That's why I am a good teacher. That 55 of them walked out of my class as the Post's hysterical columnist reported is a lie. The only student who walked out, and who had not even registered for the course, was Rubin.

Speaking of lies, let's deal with them. I was not interviewed by that Post columnist. I hung up on her three times, once explaining that to me Murdoch, her boss, "was Bush's Goebbels. I do not talk to Bush, I do not talk to Goebbels and I won't talk to you working for Goebbels." Nor have I ever lived on the upper (or lower for that matter) eastside, as she reported. I certainly know better to believe in a Jewish control of the media; capitalists own the media, and when I say so I always give the examples (e.g GE owning NBC, Viacom owning CBS, etc).

Now let's deal with Israel and what I said and say. Zionism is an imperialism. The policy of every Israeli government has always been to regain "greater Israel" (whatever that may be) and eliminate all Palestinian characteristics. On Face the Nation (CBS, June 11, l967) Moshe Dayan (then the Israeli Defense Minister)
made that quite clear: "...We can absorb them [Palestinians] but it wouldn't be the same country...we want a Jewish state like the French want a French state." But the French state don't want a Catholic state or a Huguenot state or a Shinto state. They want a French state. Quite a difference.

>From its inception, Israeli leaders have lied, taught well by their mentors, the US. They claimed and by and large still claim that the Palestinians left Israel on their own accord, when in fact they were driven out, and all the belongings they could not carry were confiscated by the "Jewish" state. They claimed and still claim that those who remained were and are given equal rights, when in fact they suffer an apartheid regime. And Israel receives more aid, more free arms and technical support from the US than any other nation in the world, proportionally and in absolute figures. Israel is an occupying power, and I stress in my class, never judge a poor people trying to win freedom by the same criteria as you judge the powerful, the dominant power. We didn't judge the Norwegian underground or the Polish ghetto insurgents or the French Maquis by the same criterion as we judged the Nazis. So don't do it now, I tell me students, either in Afghanistan (where the US helped Taliban come to power) or Iraq (where Saddam Hussein was a paid CIA agent when he was head of Iraqi intelligence) or in Palestine. And I add: "When one country occupies another, all deaths, no matter how
committed or by whom, are the responsibility of the occupier." When freedom fighters have neither tanks nor planes, neither missiles nor canons, anything they can do against those do have them and who try to subdue them into slavery is absolutely justified. Those freedom fighters who then blow themselves up to attack their dominator are not only justified, but fantastic heroes. And the deaths, those innocent children on the bus? The murderers are the occupiers.

>From that to pretend I said such an inane remark that I thought Hezbollah would win in 40 years, is the epitome of stupidity. I did say and maintain that Hezbollah had the right to defend itself. I did say and maintain that Israel's cruel devastation of Lebanon has resulted in such hated of Israel among all Arabs and Moslems that peace now is impossible, that no Moslem will ever forget it, and that perhaps in 40 years, 400 million Arabs
may decide to get even by driving the Israelis to the sea. Nor will they ever forget that Israel used the same weapon, the anti-personnel cluster bombs that the US used in Vietnam. They know as we all do but never say in our mainstream media that Israel is just as guilty of crimes against humanity as was and is the US. They know but can never read in our mainstream media that only the weak, the losers, the helpless are tried for such crimes. That's why I say so in my classes.

-John "Tito" Gerassi
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AcademicFreedom
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Civil Disobedience -- Not Rockets and Bombs!

Let us hope that the Palestinians will expand the use of 'civil disobedience' -- defined by Martin Luther King, Jr. as a public, non-violent, illegal act targeted at protesting specific injustices. This instrumentality is an essential tool for protest -- even in well functioning democracies that have run off track and -- particularly with abuses of minorities by dominant groups such as those currently manifested by the Israelis and Palestinians.

Gandhi used this tactic to great effect in liberating India from British rule by goading British troops into over reactive firing into protesting crowds, thus bringing down on British heads the opprobrium due to oppressors. The recent group responses to threatened Israeli attacks look to be following the same line -- and they worked! Civil disobedience was also a highly effective tool used in sophisticated ways by Jews in the Soviet Union to achieve their aims, including the right to emigrate.

Let us hope the Palestinians will begin to use civil disobedience as an alternative to the non-productive rocket and bomb attacks which only invite tit-for-tat retaliation and a moral standoff. Ed Kent

..................................

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/20/world/middleeast/20mideast.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

JERUSALEM, Nov. 19 — Israel called off an airstrike against the house of a suspected Palestinian militant in Gaza late Saturday, after the inhabitants ignored a telephoned warning and neighbors flocked to the house to prevent the bombing, the military said.
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Greed at the Heart of Our Culture

New York Library Officials' Pay? Shhh
By SERGE F. KOVALESKI
Officials at the New York Public Library appear to not want
to discuss the compensation received by some of the
institution's top officers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/19/nyregion/19library.html?th&emc=th

..................

I would venture a guess that Tim Healy, S.J.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_S._Healy


previous head of the library and before that president of Georgetown, CUNY Vice Chancellor, Fordham Executive Vice Prescient, a highly respected 17th Century literary scholar -- and a dear friend -- took only the compensation necessary to cover his own living expenses.

What a disgrace these guys are. Ed Kent
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/StudentConcerns
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Tuesday, November 14, 2006

Beware the False Prophets!

It would be a vast mistake to assume that even the majority of American evangelical Christians are hungering for the restoration of Israel so that it can be destroyed, the remnant of Jews converted to Christianity, and all true believers carried back to heaven by the revisiting Savior amidst the world's destruction. In an era of WMD this is a frightening game plan. Certainly many evangelicals such as Jim Wallis and the Sojourners are deeply disturbed by this perversion of faith:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Wallis


And it is difficult to determine the real numbers who follow this line -- probably far fewer than claimed by some of their fraudulent leaders. Nevertheless these types remain dangerous with their calls for a religious war against Islam, assassination of Muslim national leaders, etc. I recall when I was a student of Reinhold Niebuhr, our leading Protestant theologian of his day, his deep concern about the sick perversions of Christianity emerging as an extension of the earlier racism bred by the Civil War and the divisions of Protestant denominations at that time into South and North, East and Middle West. Racism and bigotry are deeply embedded in our national traditions. Fortunately our founding fathers had the good sense to separate off Church and State in our First Amendment.

Beware the false prophets! Ed Kent

..................
ANATOMY OF AN ALLIANCE
For Evangelicals, Supporting Israel Is 'God's Foreign
Policy'
By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK
Many conservative Christians say they believe that support
for Israel fulfills a biblical injunction to protect the
Jewish state.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/washington/14israel.html?th&emc=th

--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Monday, November 13, 2006

They Huffed and They Puffed

The threats, direct and indirect, of the use of violence by Israel, Iran, and others, including the U.S. in the Middle East are ominous. One hopes, however, that none will go so far as to launch a deadly attack again such as ours on Iraq or Israel's on Lebanon -- yes, there were incentives in the threats, real or implied, from both targeted nations. But an object lesson is to be learned in both instances. Both the U.S. (and its coalition) have lost much for no gain in Iraq and Israel has isolated itself to such an extent that only Bolton's veto saved it from an embarrassing U.N. condemnation for its latest misbegotten mass killing in Gaza.

One hopes that some lessons have been learned. There are now rumors of peace-making efforts by the Arab League and perhaps also a new song to be sung by a refashioned Bush administration -- Bush has nothing to lose now that his approval rating is down to 31%

One is wary of being optimistic. But if any lesson has been learned, it should be that modern hi-tech military equipment is no match for determined resistance on the ground. The Taliban seem to be making a come back in Afghanistan. The civil war escalates in Iraq despite our U.S. and British troops trying to quell fighting from any and all quarters there.

The age old lesson here is that conditions of human conflict are forever changing. Clubs were replaced by swords, swords neutralized by arrows, arrows outgunned by muskets, muskets displaced by repeating weapons and all of the above by bombs and rockets from on high. Unless we now want to move on to nuclear confrontation which will do us all in and leave the planet to the insects, a halt better be called and serious peace negotiations be undertaken by all. As Hobbes observed, even the weakest can get rid of the strongest -- by poison if no other means avails itself. And the poisonous weapons of terror are all all too obvious and readily transported most anywhere in shipping crates, some billions of which crisscross the globe on an annual basis.

No one is safe unless all are. Hopefully we will get on with it!
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Saturday, November 11, 2006

"Somebody's got to do it. I guess that's me,"

I flipped on CNN yesterday, Veterans Day, to get the latest news on the election results and the 'war' on terror (four more American troops killed). A nice young man was being interviewed, Will Mock, a Kansan, I assumed on a break from current duty in Iraq. Then the report continued on that Will had ended his first tour there, February 2005, and it hit me -- he is probably dead now. He is, killed in Iraq this past August. What a loss! What a pointless loss!!

The news moved on to cover the latest Bush snippet in which he was claiming that someday Fallujah would be remembered as our present day Guadacanal or Iwo Jima:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Guadalcanal

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Iwo_Jima

He is half right. During WW2 these two battles were esteemed as heroic cleanup operations of Japanese military island outposts en route to our main target, Japan, itself. The first in 1942 was considered a necessary strike to protect our sea routes. But after the war the considered judgment became that the arrogant General Douglas MacArthur, had needlessly wasted thousands of lives -- American and Japanese -- attacking well-defended but isolated Japanese islands such as Iwo Jima in 1945 against suicidal Japanese troops when wiser judgment called simply for bypassing them and allowing them to surrender after we had accomplished our prime objective -- the defeat of our main target, Japan, itself.

Fallujah is even now viewed as a military fiasco -- one of those battles that has lost us the war in Iraq. We destroyed a city of 250,000 and the remnant of its citizens trapped there (elderly and children mainly, the 'insurgents' having mainly departed in advance of our attack) for no good reason -- military or otherwise. Fallujah merely won us the hatred of the Iraqis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallujah

What a shame that Will Mock and many of his fellow good American young soldiers have needlessly died and that our smirking President has not yet got the message that there is no course to stay in Iraq -- only the least destructive way that we can find to extract ourselves from the hell hole that we have created there -- 150,000 Iraqis dead per yesterday's report of its 'government' -- and more Americans and Iraqis dying daily!

It is manifestly clear that the present U.S. regime needs changing. It has tried to wage war according to the tactics and strategies of previously ones rather than the realities of the present. One of the first lessons that we learned in NROTC training back in the 1950s is that this all too typical mistake is made when wars are directed by arrogant, stupid people.

I grieve with the families of Will Mock and all the rest -- Iraqis and Americans -- who have been pointlessly killed and maimed over there.
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Friday, November 10, 2006

Israeli Attack on Iran?

[Note that Israel crippled that Iraqi nuclear plant 25 years ago with an attack (over the weekend) that cost no lives. Iran is a country with a population roughly 3 times that of Iraq and a critical location that could cripple the world's supply of oil, if attacked. It would be virtually impossible to destroy its dispersed nuclear equipment. Thus, it does not look from here that military solutions are the way to go. One of the gains of our American election may be that it will rescue Israel from what could manifestly become an impotent suicidal gesture. Let us hope for better. Peace in the region still is the best course for all involved there. We need an American foreign policy that strives for that end. Ed Kent]

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/786439.html

Last update - 14:03 10/11/2006
Ephraim Sneh: Israel may be forced to attack Iran
By Haaretz Service and the Associated Press

Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh suggested in comments published Friday that Israel might be forced to launch a military strike against Iran's nuclear program - the clearest statement yet of this possibility from a high-ranking Israeli official.

"I am not advocating an Israeli pre-emptive military action against Iran and I am aware of its possible repercussions," Sneh told The Jerusalem Post daily. "I consider it a last resort. But even the last resort is sometimes the only resort," hey said.

Sneh's tough talk is the boldest to date by a high-ranking Israeli official. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and other leaders frequently discuss the Iranian threat in grave terms, but stop short of discussing military action against Tehran.

The former Israel Defense Forces brigadier general said that Israel cannot afford "living under a dark cloud of fear from a leader committed to its destruction." Under such a threat, he said, "most Israelis would prefer not to live here; most Jews would prefer not to come here with their families; and Israelis who can live abroad will."

"People are not enthusiastic about being scorched," he said.

Sneh said Israel's greatest possible danger could be Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's ability "to kill the Zionist dream without pushing a button. That's why we must prevent this regime from obtaining nuclear capability at all costs."

The deputy minister said that while he hopes that efficient sanctions would be imposed by the international community against Iran, "the chances are not high... My working assumption is that they won't succeed."

Government spokeswoman Miri Eisin said Sneh's comments did not necessarily reflect the view of the government or Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.

Israel crippled Iraq's nuclear program 25 years ago with an airstrike on its unfinished nuclear reactor at Osiraq. Experts say Iran has learned from Iraq's mistakes, scattering its nuclear facilities and building some underground.
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Republican Cover Blown?

My sense of the mood of the country reflected in the election is that the Republican cover has been blown. Christians in fact (and not merely in name) DO care about the well-being of people. And most of us are not greedy grabbers of whatever we can get our hands on regardless of the effect on others.

I have been particularly impressed with the disgust manifested by some of my friends from rural areas in New England and upstate NY who have been life long Republicans now fed up with that party and voting Democratic to throw the rascals out.

I suspect that the younger generation (my college students) are waking up to the fact that they are being shafted by the Republican cuts in their tuition assistance, expectation that they will carry heavy loans into their lives managed by greedy and crooked operations set in motion by the Republicans along the lines of the credit card companies that have been pouncing on them.

And will 'spend-but-not-tax' be continued into the indefinite future until we have a society divided between multi-millionaires and the rest of us struggling to make ends meet? I doubt it. Let's up the 'death' tax and reclaim what we have earned and what is owed to the rest of us.

We have had it with Richard Mellon Scaife running our lives out of those corrupt Republican think tanks that spin us new slogans daily:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Mellon_Scaife

He did not EARN all that money -- he INHERITED it!

You can fool all of the people some of the time . . . !
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/440neighborhood
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/StudentConcerns
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AcademicFreedom
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PrivacyRights
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Tuesday, November 07, 2006

Where Have All the Real Conservatives Gone?

Those labeled liberal and conservative these days are working under miscast titles. Those of us who consider ourselves to be liberals have been smeared by neo fascists (i.e. word spinners) who deride the term with phony slanders: tax and spenders, anti-family immoralists, gay lovers, child killers, etc., etc.

Needless to say a REAL liberal is one who gives a damn about people in need and respects the rights of others so far as they are not harming anyone. We protect the rights of people to choose as companions those with whom they feel comfortable, regardless of gender. We support the right of women not to bear children -- an embryo is not a person, regardless of the bigotries of the true believers. People in need should be rescued by our modern political institutions -- private charities cannot cope with the diversities of problems facing people who are jobless, sick, discriminated against for whatever reasons, including disabilities.

We are for using good common sense and good will to cope with the various problems confronting us in the modern world, ranging from environmental hazards to the economic disasters facing both nations and individuals. This is our American pragmatic tradition of which we should be proud. If there is a problem, American ingenuity can somehow solve it has been our faith from days of yore. We don't always get it right first try, but we make the effort. Above all we care about the well-being of ALL families!

The only real differences between our conservatives and liberals in past times were the priorities in solving problems and proposals for coping with same. I dimly recall, for instance, Senator Robert A. Taft, key Republican in line for his party's nomination for president until Ike Eisenhower, former Supreme Commander of our European forces during WW2, beat him to it. Taft rallied round and continued his contribution to the welfare of Americans, working from his own perspective. I recall one dramatic shift in position when he had opposed initially the construction of public housing projects for low income families by government funding with the assumption that private construction could do it better and at a lower cost. He put the Taft fortune to work on same -- and nearly lost it -- which persuaded him that public funding was the only way to go. He shifted his support and a housing project here in NYC is named after him.

But where have the conservatives gone today. We hear that there are two types supporting Bush and Co. -- the right wing evangelicals and the fiscal conservatives. The former look to me from the perspective of one once trained in theology to be make-it-up-as-they-go-along religious deviants from the Gospels of Jesus of Nazareth, who was a liberal concerned with the well-being of the poor, although labeled a terrorist (zealot) and cruelly executed for his liberalism in his own time by a cruel governor consumed with the Roman lust for power and brutal suppression of any potential rebels against it.

The fiscal greedies -- libertarians? -- could not care less for the welfare of the nation or its future generations. They oppose any expenditures of public funds that do not personally benefit them. To hell with decent education FOR ALL, for life saving medical care FOR ALL who need it, affordable housing for those who are not making heaps of monies. They want their taxes cut and their incomes and wealth maximized even at the cost of the very basics that will allow Americans to proceed with our pursuit of the good life -- FOR ALL.

No, these are not real conservatives -- pragmatists like Bob Taft who could see a problem and then correct his own initial misconceptions in order to get it solved. A real conservative wants to CONSERVE the good things about American life -- not exploit the weaknesses of human nature for his or her self interest. Watch all the hate games these types are playing -- up to and including a war on Islam for their own personal profit -- Bechtel, Cheney's Halliburton, et al which have been feeding on tax revenues in Iraq which were allocated for the reconstruction of that war torn land. Now they are fleeing it like rats from the sinking ship which it looks to be. No, these are not conservatives. They are large scale crooks who have been scamming the American public which one hopes is just beginning to wake up even if its vote does not drive our the rascals today.

As the AARP ads suggest, check out their programs, not their pretty faces, when you cast your vote.
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/440neighborhood
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/StudentConcerns
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AcademicFreedom
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PrivacyRights
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Monday, November 06, 2006

Credit Card Crooks -- Or Neo Fascists?

"A veteran Democratic congresswoman from Indianapolis, Julia Carson, ran into trouble when she tried to vote on primary day by displaying her Congressional identification card. It had her picture on it, but she was told that was not enough. She needed something issued by the state or federal government that had an expiration date on it." Bob Herbert's Op-Ed, "Shouting Over the Din," NY Times, 11/6/06

.........................

I imagine most of us have had the all too typical experience of being ripped off by one of the major credit card companies -- sudden interest rate increases for no reason (late payment or whatever), sudden increases in fees, etc. As I recall, interest on credit cards used to be limited to 12%. Then the lobbies went to work and one is not surprised to see 31.99% interest which amounts to repaying the principal on a card without paying it off every three years.

But frankly what is most outrageous now are the games played by our Republicans with our most basic democratic institutions -- criminal cheating in gerrymandering districts (Texas), devious tactics to bar voters from casting their ballots such as the outrageous instance quoted by Bob Herbert above -- one needs a picture ID with an expiration date? Suppose my license expired last month and as a good citizen I am not driving because of vision problems and have no reason to renew my license. I am to be barred from voting when I walk into the polling station? Apparently so with the Republicans in charge here, there, and elsewhere -- including controlling the media that should be alerting people to the tricks being played on them.

I was startled the other day when I asked a class of my students how many were planning to vote -- a few hands went up. Many if not most had not registered. Most did not know who their representatives were -- Congressional, let alone state! These were not stupid or inconsiderate students. They were all too typical of their generation. They have apparently bought the Republican mantra that it doesn't make any difference for whom one votes -- the Democrats are no different than the Republicans. And besides, it is a real chore to discover how to qualify to vote, where to vote, and whom to vote for. I gather only about 20% of college and slightly older ones bother to go to the polls. But needless to say, our seniors are smart enough to get there on a stretcher, if necessary. I pointed out to my students that seniors get guaranteed medical care (Medicare) because the pols would not dare to cut them out. I also pointed out that these same pols are running up huge deficits and will not be around when the Social Security funds to which they are contributing will have been stolen away to cover the big time tax cuts for the super rich, the wars of choice here and there, the corporate benefits -- for CEOs. Bush has jumped the big hole in our budgets from $20 trillion when he came into office to $43 trillion in only five short years. Only when it is too late will they discover that they have been had -- the coming generation which will be faced with disaster most likely along the lines of that of 1929 when the market also was rewarding the well off while the working folks were slip-sliding on thin ice.

And I am running into too many middle aged ones who are being down-sized, pensions and medical insurance being snatched away -- bit by bit, if not totally Enroned.

And so it goes. These who do not inform themselves will be the ones who are blanked down the line. How sad that America is being taken over by a band of neo fascists (There is nothing conservative about the so-called neo-cons). Let's call them what they are -- killers and thieves on a par with those who eventually launched WW2.
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Now Cutting Disability Pensions?

[One cannot imagine a more cruel and unjust move by our current Republican dominated political/economic system that the cutting of pensions and support systems for those who have labored long and hard in the service of the public. Perhaps the Iraq veterans' will be the next to go? I am particularly distressed, as I have had students whose lives have been shattered by serious injuries in the line of duty and who are barely hanging on with such disability pensions. Ed Kent]

.............................

Once Safe, Public Pensions Are Now Facing Cuts
By MARY WILLIAMS WALSH
A number of state and local governments are quietly
challenging the guarantees of public sector pensions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/06/business/06pension.html?th&emc=th
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Friday, November 03, 2006

Palestinian women killed in Gaza mosque clash

Palestinian women killed in Gaza mosque clash
Fri Nov 3, 2006 6:38am ET

By Nidal al-Mughrabi

BEIT HANOUN, Gaza (Reuters) - Two Palestinian women acting as human shields between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian gunmen were killed on Friday during a stand-off at a Gaza mosque, before the 60 gunmen managed to escape.

...........................

4-year-old boy among 9 Palestinians killed in Gaza

By Avi Issacharoff and Amos Harel, Haaretz Correspondents, Haaretz Service and The Associated Press

A 4-year-old boy and 40-year-old woman were among four Palestinian civilians killed Friday during an Israel Defense Forces operation in the northern Gaza town of Beit Hanun, Palestinian sources said.

Five Hamas militants were also killed in Gaza on Friday, bringing the total number of Palestinian deaths to 24 since the Gaza offensive against Palestinian rocket-launching cells began Wednesday, the sources said.

...........................

[I have just watched the BBC TV footage on the confrontation in Gaza between the Israeli army and hundreds of Palestinian women which reported the killing by the Israelis of two of the unarmed women. A somewhat embarrassed Israeli official indicated that the event was under investigation to which a Palestinian counterpart responded with grim figures on the total numbers (80% civilians, 20% children) of the 300+ Gazans who have been killed in recent months by Israelis in retaliation for the 300 or so rockets fired blindly (and stupidly IMHO) into Israel by Palestinians from Gaza -- killing none.

What madness this all is. Needless to say there are wrongs on both sides. Those firing rockets into Israel are triggering hostile responses from the Israelis. The Israelis are imposing collective punishment upon the Palestinians which, needless to say, always afflicts mainly the innocent and not the guilty.

I am old enough to recall dimly the comparable situation in India when panicked British troops fired into civilian crowds, killing enough to count as a slaughter grimly reported in the British newspapers. Gandhi was using 'non-violent' civil disobedience to goad the British troops into over reaction. And world and British opinion soon drove the British at long last out of India. The occupation was no longer worth the opprobrium.

If the Palestinians are clever, they will expand the use of non-violent civil disobedience against their occupiers. How many Palestinians did you kill today will not wash either with world or Jewish public opinion. Sadly the Israeli government looks to be in complete disarray, having invited to join with it a manifestly racist political party imported from the former Soviet Union. This is not Zionism. It is self immolation by Israel, which, along with the U.S., may soon be able to claim itself to be one of our most oppressive, stupid, and despised, if well armed, global regimes.

Caveat both!
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Medicaid Wants Citizenship Proof for Infant Care

Medicaid Wants Citizenship Proof for Infant Care
By ROBERT PEAR
Under a new federal policy, children born in the U.S. to
illegal immigrants will no longer be entitled to Medicaid.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/washington/03medicaid.html?th&emc=th


..................

[Hurray! Perhaps we can use these dying infants for organ transplants, stem cell research, and other worthy purposes -- presumably brought to us by the same folks who oppose abortion? Needless to say the U.S. will be the only democratic nation (to my knowledge) that will be denying medical care to aliens in its territories. Ed Kent]
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net