President and Prisoner

President and Prisoner

On Friday, former President Carter returned from Pyongyang, where he had traveled to free an American man imprisoned by North Korea for alleged illegal entrance of the country. The man, Aijalon Mahli Gomes, is only the latest example in a string of high-profile detainments of Americans by the North Korean government for similar alleged crimes. Robert Park, for whom it seems that Gomes entered the country, was detained in December after visiting North Korea in order to expose poor conditions at prison camps and freed in February, and he followed the arrest and eventual release of two American journalists last year. Never before has the lack of US involvement in any way with the North Korean government been this obvious or this crippling to both the Americans who suffer in prisons for extended periods of time because of the non-presence of the US in the nation and to the nuclear goals of America.
Over the past few months, the American government (along with the UN) has begun to lay out new sanctions in response to North Korean plans and actions that violate international nuclear treaties and limits. However, US-sponsored sanctions upon North Korea are nearly useless. America engages in no tangible trade with the North Koreans; the governments' only interactions are verbal back-and-forths about the US/South Korean military drills and any incidents that happen between the North and South Koreans. The only country that could truly make a difference in North Korea economically would be China, who seems minimally interested in cutting ties economically or diplomatically with the nuclear hotspot they boarder.
Unfortunately, even if the other members of the UN, including the US, were all to agree on economic sanctions in North Korea, nothing would be implemented. China is a permanent member of the Security Counsel, and therefore has a veto vote.
The US must either begin to directly engage the North Koreans (although, due to the American involvement in the South Korean war drills, any beneficial relationship seems unlikely) or begin lobbying China heavily to partake in an economic isolation of the country. It is unlucky that, because of recent economic practices, America has minimal pull with China, but perhaps an agreement will be reached, for one must be reached if any nuclear limits are to be enforced or economic sanctions be carried out.

Read more »

Distance Makes the Heart Grow Fonder

Distance Makes the Heart Grow Fonder

It is traditional in America for a former president’s mistakes to be essentially forgiven the moment he leaves office, mostly out of respect for the position but also from a slight inclination to forget bad sections in American history. From Hoover to Clinton to Bush Sr. to even Nixon, once the president is out of office and is writing their nearly guaranteed book deal and doing PSAs for whatever the day’s crisis is, Americans tend to forgive whatever discrepancies- moral or political- happened under the prior administration. The same is true for the George W. Bush administration. As with many other previous presidents, the Bush administration has been essentially romanticized in the mind of Americans. Once considered an abject failure by most of left-wing America, the media and moderates in the country and a mild embarrassment by right-wing America, who worked throughout the 2008 campaign to keep Bush out of the public eye as much as possible, the actions of the Bush administration are becoming generally accepted, if not lauded.

But we are forgetting the reasons the Bush administration was considered a failure in the first place- and not for the reasons usually mentioned. Yes, the post-Hurricane Katrina cleanup and rescue was a complete disaster and a disgusting example of federal irresponsibility. Yes, the lies told to the American people after 9/11 about the situation in Iraq were truly heinous and led to shocking overreach by the executive branch, including the disregard for the rule of law seen throughout the presidency. Yes, the international relations that had taken years and many administrations to carefully build were essentially destroyed- but these are not the only major, crippling shortfalls of the Bush administration, nor are they the oversights that impacted the nation most in the long term.
The Bush administration set a reckless and shocking precedent for executive power in America. From the overwhelmingly political motivations of the Bush advisors to the president’s increasing trust in and funding of corporations and special interests, the entire presidency was political in a way that had never been seen in the White House before. Although plenty of past administrations have been political and made political deals- as it is nearly impossible to operate in Washington without being political to some measure- never before had a presidency dealt so much in politics instead of ideology. The administration was very conservative except when that ideology conflicted with the special interests they had financially promised to protect.
While it may seem superfluous to dwell on past mistakes of a former president, it is actually important that these trials are remembered and used as a lesson. The quicker that the bloating of executive power that occurred under George W. Bush is forgotten, the more likely any future president will be able to return to such unprecedented power. President Obama seems to have taken a very expected ‘forgive and forget’ policy when it comes to dealing with the prior president. However, Bush’s policies that last today are, therefore, being ignored rather than repudiated. President Obama needs to gain the political courage to take firm stances against Bush administration policies- both politically and legally. If he cannot or does not do this, there is nothing, no precedent to stop future administrations from acting in the dangerously unbalanced manner of the executively control-crazed former administration.
(Photo credit: newsone.com) 

Read more »

The Real Tom Robinson

The Real Tom Robinson

In Harper Lee's sole novel, To Kill a Mockingbird, a young black man- Tom Robinson- is falsely imprisoned for the rape of a privileged white girl. Robinson was killed by the prison guards after making an attempt to escape. Now, a 45 year old black man who was prosecuted for the rape of a white woman has been released from prison by a judge following prosecutors'reexamining of the case and introduction of DNA evidence which cleared his name. Michael Green, the ex-convict, has been offered 2.2 million dollars as reparations and to keep him from bringing a civil suit against the state.
Like last year's case in Texas (the same state where Green's case took place) where a man was sentenced to the death penalty and executed after new evidence had been discovered that could clear him of all charges- and which eventually did so, after his murder- Green's case was radically altered after the introduction of DNA evidence. While onus lies with the prosecutors for the (unintentional) introduction of false evidence during Green's original trial, there is no way they could have know that their eyewitness was lying or deluded. In 2009, over 3,000 men and women were on death row, and Texas alone had over 300 inmates waiting to be executed. Many of them were convicted before DNA evidence was customary to introduce by police or prosecutors.
Green, obviously, was not waiting on death row. But the way in which his case was reexamined cannot be unique to inmates who are simply imprisoned- which is not to say that that is any less horrible a fate. Green's experiences in prison were, frankly, traumatizing, as they are for many felons.
Prosecutors make mistakes. Judges are not infallible. Jurys have their own biases and baggage they bring to the case. The death or long-term imprisonment of an innocent man or woman is a horrific and life-altering mistake that can be fixed. If more DAs act like Patricia Lykos, who worked on Green's case and continues to look at all innocence claims filed, perhaps less time and lives will be lost within a broken system.
However, no true change can be made until the way in which people are executed in this country is reexamined. Unless it can be, without a doubt, guaranteed that not a single person on death row is innocent (which is practically impossible for prosecutors to do), the death penalty must be abolished. Killing innocent people just because they were once thought to be guilty is not something that can continue to be a practice in America. The US is one of the few developed nations who still executes their prisoners, and this is not something to be proud of.
There is no way to ensure that cases like Green's do not happen. Nor is there a way to ensure that only the guilty are killed. America ought not to be the only world leader who kills their inmates- much less the only who kills innocent ones.

Read more »

Civil Rights in Afghanistan: The Military is Not the Solution

Civil Rights in Afghanistan: The Military is Not the Solution

Once the 'other' war, the American conflict in Afghanistan is now the nation's focus. The New York Times released a report last week declaring counter-insurgency, the strategy launched under President Bush and carried into today's administration, a failure in the eyes of high-ranking military officials and noting the military's move away from counter-insurgency towards targeted assassinations of Taliban leaders, adding to the voices implying concern with the current actions in Afghanistan and providing tangible evidence to back up Americans who are growing increasingly disenchanted with the war.

The Obama Administration already has a 2011 deadline to leave Afghanistan, and it seems as though they will stick to it. Yet, even as Americans become very anti-war, reports like a recent Newsweek cover featuring 'the girl with no nose', a young Afghan woman who had been legally maimed for leaving an arranged marriage, have raised concerns that have been growing for the future of people's rights- especially those of women- if America leaves now. Women in Afghanistan's lives have improved lately, but they are still so far from equality that it is inhumane. Considering the way the US has been involved in Afghanistan, America has a responsibility and a moral obligation to ensure the safety of and promote the equality of Afghan women.
So although America's time as a military presence in Afghanistan may be reaching its end, a heavy diplomatic influence can both secure America's national interests and safety as well as encourage progress for Afghan women's rights, especially if Secretary of State Hillary Clinton acts as the face of America in Afghanistan. Ms. Clinton has a unique ability and opportunity to both pressure the Afghan government into providing and inspire the Afghan women to work for women's rights, along with the diplomatic tools she possesses to attempt to reduce violence against women, something the American military was never really able to do. If, as it seems with the rejection of counter-insurgency, the military is unable to to carry out the traditionally civilian roles of nation-building and education that counter-insurgency requires, then allow the State Department to take over operations in Afghanistan and act as a diplomatic force promoting equality and women's rights.

[Photo credit: The Guardian] 

Read more »

Prop 8

Prop 8

Nearly two years ago, voters in California did the unprecedented: they took away someone's rights for the first time in US history. Proposition 8, put on CA ballots after a judge ruled that the state had to allow same-sex marriages, ended gay marriages in California. Almost immediately, protests and lobbying began from both sides of the issue, including extensive focus from the entertainment world. Very quickly, the Proposition 8 law was challenged in court in Perry v. Schwarzenegger.
The trial was not able to be watched by the American people, as cameras were blocked from the proceedings, and little was known about the in-case testimony except what was leaked out through social networking sites. Judge Vaughn Walker's decision Wednesday overturned Prop 8 and the decision made by California voters, although, due to appeals, will not be enacted imminently.
Basic civil rights- including the rights to marry, to have a family, to serve in the military, or numerous others denied to LGBT citizens- are not something to be awarded to specific groups of people. They are not something that people are allowed. Civil rights are automatic and each and every person in the United States- and in the world, for that matter- deserve them. Ending Prop 8 or even allowing gay marriages nationwide would not end the sort of discrimination that LGBT people face on a daily basis, but it would be a huge step forward. For years, African-Americans, Native Americans, women, and many other minority groups fought for representation, equality, and nonviolence. While even today some of these groups still face certain discriminations, the progress made over the past fifty or so years has been incredible. In another fifty years, it is doubtless that Americans will look back upon the fight for gay rights and discrimination against LGBT people, especially LGBT youth, as a blight upon the national history in the same way segregation and the Jim Crow Laws are.
The violence and taunting that have become dangerously mainstream against LGBT people is only propped up by laws like Proposition 8 that treat gay people as different from everyone else, therefore making it 'okay' to treat them differently, even violently. Treating gay people like this is not any different from beating someone for being black or tall or red-haired or Jewish. Prop 8's arbitrary treatment of LGBT people as unequal to everyone else make it unconstitutional, and it's repeal will be the first step of many towards true equality for all people. 

Read more »

Getting Better

Getting Better

The economy, no matter what else can be said about it, is both undoubtably improving and not yet where it ought to be. While a lethargic Congress is unable to squeeze out anything remotely resembling a follow-up to the promising yet incomplete economic recovery bill, it's still difficult to tell how much more and what kind of recovery is needed, due in equal parts to the general ambiguity of the economy's signifiers for stability and the reluctance of Congress to re-approach the issue. Instead of taking real steps to continue to ensure the stability of the American economy, elected officials have taken to either singing the praises of what they consider to be an already recovered economy, or have begun to relentlessly bemoan the status of the market without offering any, much less any helpful, solutions.
Many people, including economists, look at stocks to prove the health of today's economy, rather than unemployment numbers or other signifiers, the reasoning behind this being that stocks, while not exactly a measure of the spending or financial security of the American people, act as a tangible measurement for the health of American business (or, rather, America's corporations). However, stocks are designed to both rise and fall- nearly always both in one day. If you were to take a year's measure of the stock market as comparable to the health of the economy, it is possible you could achieve an accurate- if far from full- picture. Days, months and even quarters of dips and swells in the market do not prove anything about the economy in the long run, except that it is stil working on some level.
Other analysts use the unemployment numbers, the job creation rates, the national debt or the GDP to measure the economy. Truthfully, no one number will provide a full view of the shortfalls and surges in today's market. Still, it is doubtless that, while the US economy has improved greatly, it is still not in a 'normal' or stable state.
Therefore, shouldn't Congress be doing more? Since Capitol Hill has become effectively allergic to anything that involves national spending, even that of the most rationalized kind, spending that feeds directly back into the economy, economic bills have been few and far between. The state-aid bill passed by the Senate today is certainly progress, but not quite enough. It's Congress' job to spend on the American people, so it would be beneficial for elected officials to get over their fear of using money meant to help Americans to actually help Americans.

Read more »

Fringe Movement

Fringe Movement

One of the wonderful things about the strong upholding of personal freedom in America is the complete diversity of views that is ensured and even nurtured. Never will the federal government be able to deny true freedom of speech, and never should they. While the American government is far, far from perfect, the freedoms that are protected in the US are truly one of the most perfect parts of the system.
Because of this liberty, there will always be people who are out-there and fringe movements and polarizing groups. However, there is a difference between, say, the John Burch Society, who believe that fluoride in drinking water will lead to government-sanctioned, secret doses of birth control flowing out of city wells, and a Florida church called ‘The Dove World Outreach Center’ which is planning what they call “International Burn a Quran Day” on September 11, 2010.
Sure, everyone has the right to his or her opinion. However, not only are the Dove World Outreach Center’s actions against the most important post-9/11 message our country received- effectively, that unless we can restructure our inter-faith and international relations, we can expect terrorist attacks, not only upon us but also our allies, because we cannot find a way to communicate with other nation’s governments- but they are dangerous to our national security.
The US government has worked for years to set relations on a positive tone with prominently Islamic Middle-Eastern governments. Today, with American troops stationed in Afghanistan and still in Iraq, with the unsettling nature of the US relationship with Pakistan, it is imperative that, if the American goal to end, or at least smother acts of terror in that area of the world is to be achieved, these relationships are preserved and strengthened, not torn apart by American disregard for the fact that few Muslims actually support the Taliban, that it is a fringe movement not unlike the KKK years ago in the US.
Beyond the security concerns, the Dove World Outreach Center’s plan is born from the sort of hate that breeds violence in America. While it may be legal for the group to go about burning whichever book they feel like- that is, after all, one of the importantly protected freedoms in America- this sort of religious anger is what has torn apart countries in the past. Still today in Israel, battles are fought between two of today’s leading religions, creating an unsafe and, frankly, frightening atmosphere, all because religious cannot learn to coexist.

Read more »

Quote 8/3/10

Quote 8/3/10

Anthony Weiner 

"If you believe this is a bad idea to provide healthcare, then vote no. But don't give me the cowardly view that 'oh if it was a different procedure'.."

Read more »