In the Washington Post of January 25, Blaine Harden reported:
Hardiman, a parent of seven here in the southern suburbs of Seattle, has himself roiled the global-warming waters. It happened early this month when he learned that one of his daughters would be watching "An Inconvenient Truth" in her seventh-grade science class.
"No you will not teach or show that propagandist Al Gore video to my child, blaming our nation -- the greatest nation ever to exist on this planet -- for global warming," Hardiman wrote in an e-mail to the Federal Way School Board. The 43-year-old computer consultant is an evangelical Christian who says he believes that a warming planet is "one of the signs" of Jesus Christ's imminent return for Judgment Day.
His angry e-mail (along with complaints from a few other parents) stopped the film from being shown to Hardiman's daughter.
The question now is: What about the rights of the parents who would like their kids to see the documentary? Are they going to launch their campaign or just take it?
But who is this guy anyway? Listen to him.
No you will not teach or show that propagandist Al Gore video to my child, blaming our nation -- the greatest nation ever to exist on this planet -- for global warming," Hardiman wrote in an e-mail to the Federal Way School Board.
So who exactly is this guy?
The 43-year-old computer consultant is an evangelical Christian who says he believes that a warming planet is "one of the signs" of Jesus Christ's imminent return for Judgment Day.
Thursday, January 25, 2007
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
Good analysis by a columnist
Richard Cohen, a columnist for The Washington Post, makes a very pertinent observation about the American involvement in Iraq. He goes to the bottom line, the fundamental reason for failure of Americans in Iraq. Exerpts:
Those tunnels explained to me why the United States lost the Vietnam War. We were fighting people who cared deeply enough about their cause to live underground, to live in ways that no American could even imagine. The Vietnamese communists would do for their cause what no American would do for ours. They won because they believed. We lost because we didn't. We didn't have to.
Similarly, we did not notice that in all the hoopla just before Hussein's statue in Baghdad's Firdaus Square came down in 2003, the crowd went silent after an American flag was draped over it. The crowd came to life only when the Iraqi flag replaced it. Had we noticed that, we might have learned something about Iraqi nationalism and the fleeting gratitude awarded to liberators. One minute you're a liberator, the next an occupier.
Now, of course, everyone looks like an idiot. Bremer was an idiot and Garner was an idiot and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz and Cheney and all the generals, with the exception of Gen. Eric K. Shinseki, who called for lots and lots of troops and was sidelined. But these men are not really idiots. They were merely wrong, sometimes on account of arrogance, but they were doing what they thought was the right thing. They simply didn't know what they didn't know. They didn't know a damned thing about Iraq.
Those tunnels explained to me why the United States lost the Vietnam War. We were fighting people who cared deeply enough about their cause to live underground, to live in ways that no American could even imagine. The Vietnamese communists would do for their cause what no American would do for ours. They won because they believed. We lost because we didn't. We didn't have to.
Similarly, we did not notice that in all the hoopla just before Hussein's statue in Baghdad's Firdaus Square came down in 2003, the crowd went silent after an American flag was draped over it. The crowd came to life only when the Iraqi flag replaced it. Had we noticed that, we might have learned something about Iraqi nationalism and the fleeting gratitude awarded to liberators. One minute you're a liberator, the next an occupier.
Now, of course, everyone looks like an idiot. Bremer was an idiot and Garner was an idiot and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz and Cheney and all the generals, with the exception of Gen. Eric K. Shinseki, who called for lots and lots of troops and was sidelined. But these men are not really idiots. They were merely wrong, sometimes on account of arrogance, but they were doing what they thought was the right thing. They simply didn't know what they didn't know. They didn't know a damned thing about Iraq.
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
Of bigotry, racism and ethnocentrism
We are aware of the root cause behind colonial history: to "civilize" the inferior races. The feelings of ethnocentric attitudes persist deeply in human psyche. It is evident in most of the world leaders, particularly in the Western world in their attitude towards the developing countries. It is not a surprise that the people of the West also suffer from the same syndrome. This is not to exculpate people from any part of the world in any society. Those who have a little higher station in life in the developing countries manifest similar behavior toward the less fortunate. How unfortunate!
In the Western leaders, John McCain is probably one of the biggest hype. The truth is that he has turned from a maverick to a hypocrit. He is a racist otherwise he would not use word such as "gook" to refer to Vietnamese people.
And just today Bush chided the Iraqi leaders for the way they executed two of Saddam's allies. He thought it smacked of revenge. What a remark! It is hard to figure out what planet these people livein; it is apparently not Earth. However, as they say, the bigger they are, the harder they fall.
Anyway, the point I wanted to note was the racism and bigotry present in the world. The news in Hindustan Times caught my attention. Here are some exerpts:
Shilpa faces racist abuse on UK show
Vijay Dutt
London, January 16, 2007
TV viewers in the UK are outraged at the racist treatment meted out to actress Shilpa Shetty on the reality show Celebrity Big Brother. Over the past few days, fellow participants have called Shilpa “dog”, “Paki”, and other offensive names.
“Goody’s mother Jackiey (who has now been evicted) started calling Shilpa ‘Sipla’, then, sarcastically, ‘princess’ and finally, ‘the Indian’,” hotelier Girish Sanger told HT. “When Shilpa cooked chicken, Lloyd refused it, saying it was overcooked and that was why Indians were thin and sickly. She said, ‘How do Indians eat with their fingers? One doesn’t know where their fingers have been’,” Sanger said.
The Guardian quoted Lloyd as having said of Shilpa, “She is a dog,” and Goody as, “She makes me feel sick. She makes my skin crawl.” The daily said that on Monday’s show, “Shetty (had) ended up in tears”.
In the Western leaders, John McCain is probably one of the biggest hype. The truth is that he has turned from a maverick to a hypocrit. He is a racist otherwise he would not use word such as "gook" to refer to Vietnamese people.
And just today Bush chided the Iraqi leaders for the way they executed two of Saddam's allies. He thought it smacked of revenge. What a remark! It is hard to figure out what planet these people livein; it is apparently not Earth. However, as they say, the bigger they are, the harder they fall.
Anyway, the point I wanted to note was the racism and bigotry present in the world. The news in Hindustan Times caught my attention. Here are some exerpts:
Shilpa faces racist abuse on UK show
Vijay Dutt
London, January 16, 2007
TV viewers in the UK are outraged at the racist treatment meted out to actress Shilpa Shetty on the reality show Celebrity Big Brother. Over the past few days, fellow participants have called Shilpa “dog”, “Paki”, and other offensive names.
“Goody’s mother Jackiey (who has now been evicted) started calling Shilpa ‘Sipla’, then, sarcastically, ‘princess’ and finally, ‘the Indian’,” hotelier Girish Sanger told HT. “When Shilpa cooked chicken, Lloyd refused it, saying it was overcooked and that was why Indians were thin and sickly. She said, ‘How do Indians eat with their fingers? One doesn’t know where their fingers have been’,” Sanger said.
The Guardian quoted Lloyd as having said of Shilpa, “She is a dog,” and Goody as, “She makes me feel sick. She makes my skin crawl.” The daily said that on Monday’s show, “Shetty (had) ended up in tears”.
Thursday, January 11, 2007
"Stay the course" by any other name
So Bush made his "informed" decision last night after "listening" to wide range of experts on the course of action for Iraq, which turned out to be his favorite phrase "stay the course," but not put in those terms. Things to note:
He seems to hinge on a belief that he can trust Maliki. Only one liar can be duped by another liar. In this case it is because of his wishful thinking. He seems not to have paid attention to the way Saddam was hung--pure vendetta that was a result of deeply ingrained sectorian strife, which is not going to be turned overnight by merely wishing. But cognitive dissonance is a powerful thing. It is hard to open your mind to reality when your fuzzy brain has been eaten away by "faith."
Easy to say one is a decider! A decision is only as good as one's ability to absorb and analyse the real situation. A person who has never had any exposure to the history of the world or the nature of international relations will never be able to analyze this kind of situation since he is already limited in his ability to comprehed, especially for someone who find it hard to admit that he has made any mistakes.
Bush proudly professed that he showed a "C" student can also be a president. That is true. But what is more true is that he will also make decision that are "C" or less. The policy after 9/11 clearly proves this point. In Yale he may have received a "mercy C" but in his Iraq policy, it would be hard to consider even a "F. "
Lastly, this kind of stubborness and "self righteousness" can only come from someone as self proclaimed to be "born again." Faith trumps everything else if one believes that one is ordained by God for a purpose.
He seems to hinge on a belief that he can trust Maliki. Only one liar can be duped by another liar. In this case it is because of his wishful thinking. He seems not to have paid attention to the way Saddam was hung--pure vendetta that was a result of deeply ingrained sectorian strife, which is not going to be turned overnight by merely wishing. But cognitive dissonance is a powerful thing. It is hard to open your mind to reality when your fuzzy brain has been eaten away by "faith."
Easy to say one is a decider! A decision is only as good as one's ability to absorb and analyse the real situation. A person who has never had any exposure to the history of the world or the nature of international relations will never be able to analyze this kind of situation since he is already limited in his ability to comprehed, especially for someone who find it hard to admit that he has made any mistakes.
Bush proudly professed that he showed a "C" student can also be a president. That is true. But what is more true is that he will also make decision that are "C" or less. The policy after 9/11 clearly proves this point. In Yale he may have received a "mercy C" but in his Iraq policy, it would be hard to consider even a "F. "
Lastly, this kind of stubborness and "self righteousness" can only come from someone as self proclaimed to be "born again." Faith trumps everything else if one believes that one is ordained by God for a purpose.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Kidd's bout with marital problem is a case of mental illness
The news about former Phoenix Sun's center NBA star Jason Kidd filing for divorce from his wife was interesting in a strange way to me. When I read the section, I found something very familiar to me. Exerpt:
His complaint, however, paints a detailed portrait of Joumana Kidd as a vitriolic, jealous and paranoid wife prone to public outbursts and threats, including during a recent Nets game.
According to the complaint, Joumana Kidd used the couple's 8-year-old son on Dec. 27 to sneak into the Nets locker room and rummage through Jason Kidd's locker to find his cell phone. After looking up the names and numbers on it, the complaint said she left her son behind as she went upstairs to take a front row seat, where she shouted insults at Kidd throughout the game.
The papers accuse Joumana Kidd of kicking, hitting, punching and throwing household objects at her husband as she became "increasingly controlling and manipulative" in the last few years of their union.
According to Kidd, his wife had tracking devices installed on his cars and computers and has harassed his trainer, friends and family.
I think his wife seriously needs to consult a psychiatrist. It shows an evidence of mental problems. If these were the worst he experienced, he had really too much for an NBA star to have to deal with. People experience far worse than thse. I speak from personal experience. However, what can one do when someone has mental illness, and it is impossible to interact rationally?
His complaint, however, paints a detailed portrait of Joumana Kidd as a vitriolic, jealous and paranoid wife prone to public outbursts and threats, including during a recent Nets game.
According to the complaint, Joumana Kidd used the couple's 8-year-old son on Dec. 27 to sneak into the Nets locker room and rummage through Jason Kidd's locker to find his cell phone. After looking up the names and numbers on it, the complaint said she left her son behind as she went upstairs to take a front row seat, where she shouted insults at Kidd throughout the game.
The papers accuse Joumana Kidd of kicking, hitting, punching and throwing household objects at her husband as she became "increasingly controlling and manipulative" in the last few years of their union.
According to Kidd, his wife had tracking devices installed on his cars and computers and has harassed his trainer, friends and family.
I think his wife seriously needs to consult a psychiatrist. It shows an evidence of mental problems. If these were the worst he experienced, he had really too much for an NBA star to have to deal with. People experience far worse than thse. I speak from personal experience. However, what can one do when someone has mental illness, and it is impossible to interact rationally?
UN: A Symbol of a Disfunctional World
The South Korean Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has startd his tenure at the head of the disfunctional world body. The reason for the ineptness of this instituion is, of course, its anachronistic nature. An exerpt below from UK weekly Economist makes it clear:
When the UN was created in 1945, its founder-nations—the four main victors of the second world war, America, Britain, China and Russia, plus France—allocated to themselves the only five permanent seats, with veto powers, on what was then an 11-seat Security Council. The other members, all elected by the General Assembly, held two-year non-renewable seats without a veto. Since then, the number of the UN's member states has almost quadrupled from 51 to 192, two-thirds of them in the developing world.
Yet apart from the addition of four more non-permanent seats in 1965, membership of the Security Council, the only UN body whose decisions are binding, has remained unchanged. The system is not only undemocratic, anachronistic and unfair, but also—as Paul Kennedy, professor of history at Yale, suggests in his new book, “The Parliament of Man”—outrageous. Yet it cannot be changed without inviting a veto from one of the very nations whose powers might be diminished.
The UN security counsil seats should be expanded to reflect the present world and give representation to all continents and people. There should be no provision for veto power to anyone.
Link to the article: http://www.economist.com/world/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8490176
When the UN was created in 1945, its founder-nations—the four main victors of the second world war, America, Britain, China and Russia, plus France—allocated to themselves the only five permanent seats, with veto powers, on what was then an 11-seat Security Council. The other members, all elected by the General Assembly, held two-year non-renewable seats without a veto. Since then, the number of the UN's member states has almost quadrupled from 51 to 192, two-thirds of them in the developing world.
Yet apart from the addition of four more non-permanent seats in 1965, membership of the Security Council, the only UN body whose decisions are binding, has remained unchanged. The system is not only undemocratic, anachronistic and unfair, but also—as Paul Kennedy, professor of history at Yale, suggests in his new book, “The Parliament of Man”—outrageous. Yet it cannot be changed without inviting a veto from one of the very nations whose powers might be diminished.
The UN security counsil seats should be expanded to reflect the present world and give representation to all continents and people. There should be no provision for veto power to anyone.
Link to the article: http://www.economist.com/world/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8490176
Saturday, December 30, 2006
Celebrating death!
This is what humanity has come to. It is no surprise because it has become culturally and genetically engrained to seek revenge for what you call a "closure." The United States is probably the most voilence-oriented nation. The sports and the entertainment all glorify violence, and identifies violence as "manliness." No wonder the Shiites are celebrating this man's hanging. Husseian is a person who could only be the ugliest face of huanity. But by celebrating his death, we just prove that we are no better than others who accept and rejoice in the suffering of fellow humans. Exerpt follows"
"In Baghdad's Shiite neighborhood of Sadr City, victims of his three decades of autocratic rule took to the streets to celebrate, dancing, beating drums and hanging Saddam in effigy. Celebratory gunfire erupted across other Shiite neighborhoods in Baghdad and other predominantly Shiite regions of the country."
Src: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061231/ap_on_re_mi_ea/saddam
"In Baghdad's Shiite neighborhood of Sadr City, victims of his three decades of autocratic rule took to the streets to celebrate, dancing, beating drums and hanging Saddam in effigy. Celebratory gunfire erupted across other Shiite neighborhoods in Baghdad and other predominantly Shiite regions of the country."
Src: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061231/ap_on_re_mi_ea/saddam
Sunday, December 17, 2006
Religious atrocity, again
In another example of religious foolishness, here comes a news from India. A group formed under the name of one of the Hindu "deities" feel that it is their duty to be moral police. In that quest, they deny basic human emotion to express and seek love.
Resorting to so-called moral policing, Bajrang Dal members raided Manuabhan Ki Tekri - a picnic spot in Bhopal - that also has a Jain temple within its premises and made young couples do sit-ups for indulging in actions against the "culture of our country".
[Source: Bajrang Dal targets young couples againIndo-Asian News ServiceBhopal, December 17, 2006]
Resorting to so-called moral policing, Bajrang Dal members raided Manuabhan Ki Tekri - a picnic spot in Bhopal - that also has a Jain temple within its premises and made young couples do sit-ups for indulging in actions against the "culture of our country".
[Source: Bajrang Dal targets young couples againIndo-Asian News ServiceBhopal, December 17, 2006]
Saturday, December 16, 2006
Ignorance-thy name is religion
Ignorant humans are the ones who mostly are devout in their religions. Their ignorance is that they believe in fallacies. Faith does not need proof, hence everyone can make thier own truth according to their own beliefs. Hence religion remains the most divisive force in human history. They are only now reaching the magnitude of worldwide clash as never seen before. One prime example how religion makes people blind and has actually no basis on truth comes from the story of breakaway factions of Episcopalians in Virginia. The exerpt from NY Times today:
In Virginia, the two large churches are voting on whether they want to report to the powerful archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, an outspoken opponent of homosexuality who supports legislation in his country that would make it illegal for gay men and lesbians to form organizations, read gay literature or eat together in a restaurant. Archbishop Akinola presides over the largest province in the 77-million-member Anglican Communion; it has more than 17 million members, dwarfing the Episcopal Church, with 2.3 million.
If all eight Virginia churches vote to separate, the Diocese of Virginia, the largest Episcopal diocese in the country, will lose about 10 percent of its 90,000 members. In addition, four churches in Virginia have already voted to secede, and two more are expected to vote soon, said Patrick N. Getlein, secretary of the diocese.
In Virginia, the two large churches are voting on whether they want to report to the powerful archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, an outspoken opponent of homosexuality who supports legislation in his country that would make it illegal for gay men and lesbians to form organizations, read gay literature or eat together in a restaurant. Archbishop Akinola presides over the largest province in the 77-million-member Anglican Communion; it has more than 17 million members, dwarfing the Episcopal Church, with 2.3 million.
If all eight Virginia churches vote to separate, the Diocese of Virginia, the largest Episcopal diocese in the country, will lose about 10 percent of its 90,000 members. In addition, four churches in Virginia have already voted to secede, and two more are expected to vote soon, said Patrick N. Getlein, secretary of the diocese.
Thursday, December 14, 2006
The key to poverty reduction and development
It should be a no brainer that development in any society cannot occur unless all citizens are equally empowered. When gender bias is considered, it becomes glaringly apparent that most of the poor countries have inequality forced upon women. Women are actually more crucial to development than men. Women influence the whole family as the nurturer. So any foundation of developmental aspiration of poor Third world countries has to start with empowering women. The UNICEF report as quoted from The Hindustan Times confirm this crucial assumption:
"Gender equality and the well-being of children go hand in hand. When women are empowered to live full and productive lives, children prosper. This is the main conclusion of the Unicef report released on Tuesday in the Capital.
The State of the World's Children 2007 report says that the Millennium Development Goal 3 — promoting gender equality and empowering women — will reap the dividend of bettering the lives of both women and children and will also contribute to achieving other goals, from reducing poverty and hunger to ensuring universal education."
"Gender equality and the well-being of children go hand in hand. When women are empowered to live full and productive lives, children prosper. This is the main conclusion of the Unicef report released on Tuesday in the Capital.
The State of the World's Children 2007 report says that the Millennium Development Goal 3 — promoting gender equality and empowering women — will reap the dividend of bettering the lives of both women and children and will also contribute to achieving other goals, from reducing poverty and hunger to ensuring universal education."
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Another example of American immorality
Of course, it is never one's fault. It is always someone else. That is human nature. American mask of moral high ground was torn after 911 with Abu Gharaib and then the granting of power to Bush for detention of foreign national who he deemed to be terrorists. The news below now illustrates how it shifts blames on others. It is akin to trying to plant a tropical fruit in the tundras and blaming the tundra for not supporting the growth of that fruit.
As Iraq Deteriorates, Iraqis Get More BlameU.S. Officials, Lawmakers Change Tone
By Thomas E. Ricks and Robin
WrightWashington Post Staff WritersWednesday, November 29, 2006; A01
From troops on the ground to members of Congress, Americans increasingly blame the continuing violence and destruction in Iraq on the people most affected by it: the Iraqis.
Even Democrats who have criticized the Bush administration's conduct of the occupation say the people and government of Iraq are not doing enough to rebuild their society. The White House is putting pressure on the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, and members of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group have debated how much to blame Iraqis for not performing civic duties.
This marks a shift in tone from earlier debate about the responsibility of the United States to restore order after the 2003 invasion, and it seemed to gain currency in October, when sectarian violence surged. Some see the talk of blame as the beginning of the end of U.S. involvement.
"It is the first manifestation of a 'Who lost Iraq?' argument that will likely rage for years to come," said Bruce Hoffman, a Georgetown University expert on terrorism who has worked as a U.S. government consultant in Iraq.
Americans and Iraqis are increasingly seeing the situation in different terms, said retired Army Col. Jeffrey D. McCausland , who recently returned from a visit to Iraq. "We're just talking past each other," he said, adding that Americans are psychologically edging toward the door that leads to disengagement. "We're arguing about 'cut and run' versus 'cut and jog.' "
Iraqis' role in their own suffering has been an issue since shortly after the fall of Saddam Hussein in April 2003, when looters ransacked the national museum and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld dismissed it by saying, "Stuff happens." But more than three years later, with schools and hospitals struggling, electrical service faltering, and police and government agencies infiltrated by sectarian death squads, the question of blame is more urgent.
For example, a Nov. 15 meeting of the Senate Armed Services Committee turned into a festival of bipartisan Iraqi-bashing.
"We should put the responsibility for Iraq's future squarely where it belongs -- on the Iraqis," began Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.), the committee's next chairman. "We cannot save the Iraqis from themselves." He has advocated announcing that U.S. troops are going to withdraw as a way of pressuring Iraqi politicians to find compromises.
Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) followed by noting: "People in South Carolina come up to me in increasing numbers and suggest that no matter what we do in Iraq, the Iraqis are incapable of solving their own problems through the political process and will resort to violence, and we need to get the hell out of there."
"We all want them to succeed," agreed Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.). "We all want them to be able to stabilize their country with the assistance that we've provided them." But, he added, "too often they seem unable or unwilling to do that."
Later the same day, members of the House Armed Services Committee took their turn. "If the Iraqis are determined and decide to destroy themselves and their country, I don't know how in the world we're going to stop them," said Rep. Robin Hayes (R-N.C.).
Iraqi Ambassador Samir Sumaidaie said he worries about the growing chorus of official voices blaming Iraq, and suggested that a little introspection on the U.S. side could help.
"I am indeed concerned about this trend," he said in an interview. "The U.S. through its actions and omissions has helped to create the current conditions in Iraq. Therefore the U.S. also bears responsibility in putting right the situation."
It isn't just politicians who have decided that the problem with Iraq is the Iraqis. In the military establishment, said Joseph J. Collins, a professor at the National Defense University, "there is lots of disappointment in the performance of Iraqi officials of all stripes."
Thomas Donnelly, a hawkish defense expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said he considers blame a legitimate issue. "Ultimately, just like success rests with the Iraqis, so does failure," he said. "We've made a lot of mistakes, but we've paid a huge price to give the Iraqis a chance at a decent future."
The blame game has also been playing out somewhat divisively within the secretive Iraq Study Group. The bipartisan commission, led by former secretary of state James A. Baker III and former congressman Lee H. Hamilton (D-Ind.), is deliberating policy recommendations to put forward next month.
"I'm tired of nit-picking over how we should bully the Iraqis into becoming better citizens of their own country," former CIA Middle East expert Ray Close wrote in an e-mail to the other advisers to the study group.
Several other experts of various political stripes said this tendency to dump on Baghdad feels like a preamble to withdrawal.
"It's their fault, and by implication not ours, is clearly a theme that's in the air," said retired Army Col. Andrew J. Bacevich, a Vietnam veteran and longtime skeptic of the war in Iraq. It reminds him, he said, of the sour last days of the Vietnam War, when "there was a tendency to blame everything on the 'gooks' -- meaning our South Vietnamese allies who had disappointed us."
"People never understood the culture and the challenges that we faced in trying to build a new Iraq," a senior U.S. intelligence official said. "There's incredible frustration . . . but it also shows a great deal of ignorance."
"Definitely," said Paul Rieckhoff, who served in Iraq as an Army officer in 2003-2004 and went on to found a veterans group critical of the conduct of the war. "It is growing into an angry, scolding tone." He said he finds it "sad" -- "especially after all the talk of our mission to 'save the Iraqis.' "
The long-term effect of blaming Iraqis also could be poisonous, said Juan Cole, a University of Michigan specialist in Middle Eastern issues. He predicted that it will "infuriate the Iraqis and worsen further the future relationship of the two countries."
The turning point in the blame game seems to have occurred in early October, when both Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.) went public with their frustrations, warning the Baghdad government that it must do much more much faster. Warner suggested that the United States should explore a "change of course" if security had not improved within 90 days.
During a surprise visit to Baghdad on Oct. 5, Rice said with uncharacteristic bluntness that the security situation was not helped by "political inaction."
The Bush administration hoped the long-delayed formation of a government, which took about five months after the Dec. 15 election last year, would produce more initiative by Baghdad. But the security and political situation continued to deteriorate, so the administration increased the pressure on Maliki's government. Over the past three months, U.S. officials and foreign diplomats said, senior U.S. military and administration officials visiting Baghdad have conveyed the same message: Get on with it.
"Our role is not to resolve those issues for them," Rice told reporters last month after pressing Maliki to be bolder about disbanding militias and reconciling sectarian differences. "They are going to have to resolve those issues among themselves."
Blaming Iraqis for the woeful situation disregards recent history, some experts argue. Phebe Marr, an Iraq expert and adviser to the Iraq Study Group, calculates that because of policy missteps and other errors, the United States bears about 60 percent of the blame. "You can't say, 'We did this and the Iraqis didn't rise to the occasion,' " she said. "There's enough blame to go around."
As Iraq Deteriorates, Iraqis Get More BlameU.S. Officials, Lawmakers Change Tone
By Thomas E. Ricks and Robin
WrightWashington Post Staff WritersWednesday, November 29, 2006; A01
From troops on the ground to members of Congress, Americans increasingly blame the continuing violence and destruction in Iraq on the people most affected by it: the Iraqis.
Even Democrats who have criticized the Bush administration's conduct of the occupation say the people and government of Iraq are not doing enough to rebuild their society. The White House is putting pressure on the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, and members of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group have debated how much to blame Iraqis for not performing civic duties.
This marks a shift in tone from earlier debate about the responsibility of the United States to restore order after the 2003 invasion, and it seemed to gain currency in October, when sectarian violence surged. Some see the talk of blame as the beginning of the end of U.S. involvement.
"It is the first manifestation of a 'Who lost Iraq?' argument that will likely rage for years to come," said Bruce Hoffman, a Georgetown University expert on terrorism who has worked as a U.S. government consultant in Iraq.
Americans and Iraqis are increasingly seeing the situation in different terms, said retired Army Col. Jeffrey D. McCausland , who recently returned from a visit to Iraq. "We're just talking past each other," he said, adding that Americans are psychologically edging toward the door that leads to disengagement. "We're arguing about 'cut and run' versus 'cut and jog.' "
Iraqis' role in their own suffering has been an issue since shortly after the fall of Saddam Hussein in April 2003, when looters ransacked the national museum and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld dismissed it by saying, "Stuff happens." But more than three years later, with schools and hospitals struggling, electrical service faltering, and police and government agencies infiltrated by sectarian death squads, the question of blame is more urgent.
For example, a Nov. 15 meeting of the Senate Armed Services Committee turned into a festival of bipartisan Iraqi-bashing.
"We should put the responsibility for Iraq's future squarely where it belongs -- on the Iraqis," began Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.), the committee's next chairman. "We cannot save the Iraqis from themselves." He has advocated announcing that U.S. troops are going to withdraw as a way of pressuring Iraqi politicians to find compromises.
Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) followed by noting: "People in South Carolina come up to me in increasing numbers and suggest that no matter what we do in Iraq, the Iraqis are incapable of solving their own problems through the political process and will resort to violence, and we need to get the hell out of there."
"We all want them to succeed," agreed Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.). "We all want them to be able to stabilize their country with the assistance that we've provided them." But, he added, "too often they seem unable or unwilling to do that."
Later the same day, members of the House Armed Services Committee took their turn. "If the Iraqis are determined and decide to destroy themselves and their country, I don't know how in the world we're going to stop them," said Rep. Robin Hayes (R-N.C.).
Iraqi Ambassador Samir Sumaidaie said he worries about the growing chorus of official voices blaming Iraq, and suggested that a little introspection on the U.S. side could help.
"I am indeed concerned about this trend," he said in an interview. "The U.S. through its actions and omissions has helped to create the current conditions in Iraq. Therefore the U.S. also bears responsibility in putting right the situation."
It isn't just politicians who have decided that the problem with Iraq is the Iraqis. In the military establishment, said Joseph J. Collins, a professor at the National Defense University, "there is lots of disappointment in the performance of Iraqi officials of all stripes."
Thomas Donnelly, a hawkish defense expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said he considers blame a legitimate issue. "Ultimately, just like success rests with the Iraqis, so does failure," he said. "We've made a lot of mistakes, but we've paid a huge price to give the Iraqis a chance at a decent future."
The blame game has also been playing out somewhat divisively within the secretive Iraq Study Group. The bipartisan commission, led by former secretary of state James A. Baker III and former congressman Lee H. Hamilton (D-Ind.), is deliberating policy recommendations to put forward next month.
"I'm tired of nit-picking over how we should bully the Iraqis into becoming better citizens of their own country," former CIA Middle East expert Ray Close wrote in an e-mail to the other advisers to the study group.
Several other experts of various political stripes said this tendency to dump on Baghdad feels like a preamble to withdrawal.
"It's their fault, and by implication not ours, is clearly a theme that's in the air," said retired Army Col. Andrew J. Bacevich, a Vietnam veteran and longtime skeptic of the war in Iraq. It reminds him, he said, of the sour last days of the Vietnam War, when "there was a tendency to blame everything on the 'gooks' -- meaning our South Vietnamese allies who had disappointed us."
"People never understood the culture and the challenges that we faced in trying to build a new Iraq," a senior U.S. intelligence official said. "There's incredible frustration . . . but it also shows a great deal of ignorance."
"Definitely," said Paul Rieckhoff, who served in Iraq as an Army officer in 2003-2004 and went on to found a veterans group critical of the conduct of the war. "It is growing into an angry, scolding tone." He said he finds it "sad" -- "especially after all the talk of our mission to 'save the Iraqis.' "
The long-term effect of blaming Iraqis also could be poisonous, said Juan Cole, a University of Michigan specialist in Middle Eastern issues. He predicted that it will "infuriate the Iraqis and worsen further the future relationship of the two countries."
The turning point in the blame game seems to have occurred in early October, when both Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.) went public with their frustrations, warning the Baghdad government that it must do much more much faster. Warner suggested that the United States should explore a "change of course" if security had not improved within 90 days.
During a surprise visit to Baghdad on Oct. 5, Rice said with uncharacteristic bluntness that the security situation was not helped by "political inaction."
The Bush administration hoped the long-delayed formation of a government, which took about five months after the Dec. 15 election last year, would produce more initiative by Baghdad. But the security and political situation continued to deteriorate, so the administration increased the pressure on Maliki's government. Over the past three months, U.S. officials and foreign diplomats said, senior U.S. military and administration officials visiting Baghdad have conveyed the same message: Get on with it.
"Our role is not to resolve those issues for them," Rice told reporters last month after pressing Maliki to be bolder about disbanding militias and reconciling sectarian differences. "They are going to have to resolve those issues among themselves."
Blaming Iraqis for the woeful situation disregards recent history, some experts argue. Phebe Marr, an Iraq expert and adviser to the Iraq Study Group, calculates that because of policy missteps and other errors, the United States bears about 60 percent of the blame. "You can't say, 'We did this and the Iraqis didn't rise to the occasion,' " she said. "There's enough blame to go around."
Sunday, November 26, 2006
Human suffering caused by a "divine" mission
When seasoned politicians delve in the international affairs, there are unexpected consequences to be observed. When a neophyte gets the helm of the "decider" and claim divine guidance and mission, then the result if nothing less than disastrous. The two clips below from the same newspaper issue illustrates the point with the fracturing of families and societies in two different places because of a war.
Baghdad Braces For More Reprisals
Cellphones and Web Spread Threats, Fear
By Sudarsan Raghavan and Nancy Trejos
Washington Post Foreign ServiceSunday, November 26, 2006; Page A01
BAGHDAD, Nov. 25 -- In the aftermath of one of the deadliest spasms of violence, a new level of fear and foreboding has gripped Baghdad, fueled in part by sectarian text messages and Internet sites, deepening tensions in an already divided capital.
In interviews across Baghdad on Saturday, Sunnis and Shiites said they were preparing themselves for upheaval, both violent and psychological. They viewed the bombings that killed more than 200 people Thursday in the heart of Baghdad's Shiite Muslim community of Sadr City as a trigger for more reprisal killings.
"We feel our world has become narrow, and we are being squeezed," said Karar al-Zuheari, 31, a Shiite taxi driver. "We have no place to run."
Since those attacks, quasi-armies of residents in mixed and majority-Sunni Arab neighborhoods have formed to protect their streets. Sunni Web sites are offering advice on how to kill Shiite militiamen. College students and executives pace at their homes, clutching rifles and handguns around the clock. Iraqis are posting pleas on Internet message boards to buy extra ammunition and weapons.
Despite a government-imposed curfew, Iraqis described Shiite militiamen murdering Sunnis at checkpoints, controlling neighborhoods with impunity and conspiring with Iraq's majority-Shiite police force, which the Interior Ministry controls. Other Iraqis spoke of mortar shells raining on their mosques and gun battles outside their houses, deepening their mistrust of Iraq's security forces and elected politicians....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/25/AR2006112500253.html
Long Stints in Iraq Fracture Families
3rd Infantry Division Will Be the First Deployed for a Third Year-Long Tour
By Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post Staff WriterSunday, November 26, 2006; Page A01
FORT STEWART, Ga. -- As a gray dawn broke, hundreds of 3rd Infantry Division soldiers gathered on a Georgia marching ground this month and listened to a long list of names of fallen comrades. Taps rose mournfully above rows of young redbud trees planted for each of the division's 317 soldiers who have died in Iraq...
Strained Relationships
In the living room of his Savannah home, Capt. Thom Frohnhoefer tumbled with his daughter Maggie, 2, as she jangled and waved his metal dog tags.
"She's the one I had after the first deployment," Frohnhoefer said. "It will be harder this time because she knows Daddy is leaving."
From courtship to parenting to divorce, the time away at war is having a profound impact on the families of active-duty soldiers, according to interviews with dozens of soldiers from the 3rd Infantry Division and their relatives. The division spearheaded the U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003 and returned for a second, year-long tour in January 2005.
For 1st Brigade soldiers such as Frohnhoefer, having children poses a wrenching choice: Leave your wife alone in pregnancy and birth, or miss your newborn's first year.
Frohnhoefer and several others in his brigade opted to start pregnancies soon after returning in January, creating a mini baby boom. Frohnhoefer's second daughter, Haley, was born three weeks ago. Another soldier in the unit had a baby last week.
Baghdad Braces For More Reprisals
Cellphones and Web Spread Threats, Fear
By Sudarsan Raghavan and Nancy Trejos
Washington Post Foreign ServiceSunday, November 26, 2006; Page A01
BAGHDAD, Nov. 25 -- In the aftermath of one of the deadliest spasms of violence, a new level of fear and foreboding has gripped Baghdad, fueled in part by sectarian text messages and Internet sites, deepening tensions in an already divided capital.
In interviews across Baghdad on Saturday, Sunnis and Shiites said they were preparing themselves for upheaval, both violent and psychological. They viewed the bombings that killed more than 200 people Thursday in the heart of Baghdad's Shiite Muslim community of Sadr City as a trigger for more reprisal killings.
"We feel our world has become narrow, and we are being squeezed," said Karar al-Zuheari, 31, a Shiite taxi driver. "We have no place to run."
Since those attacks, quasi-armies of residents in mixed and majority-Sunni Arab neighborhoods have formed to protect their streets. Sunni Web sites are offering advice on how to kill Shiite militiamen. College students and executives pace at their homes, clutching rifles and handguns around the clock. Iraqis are posting pleas on Internet message boards to buy extra ammunition and weapons.
Despite a government-imposed curfew, Iraqis described Shiite militiamen murdering Sunnis at checkpoints, controlling neighborhoods with impunity and conspiring with Iraq's majority-Shiite police force, which the Interior Ministry controls. Other Iraqis spoke of mortar shells raining on their mosques and gun battles outside their houses, deepening their mistrust of Iraq's security forces and elected politicians....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/25/AR2006112500253.html
Long Stints in Iraq Fracture Families
3rd Infantry Division Will Be the First Deployed for a Third Year-Long Tour
By Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post Staff WriterSunday, November 26, 2006; Page A01
FORT STEWART, Ga. -- As a gray dawn broke, hundreds of 3rd Infantry Division soldiers gathered on a Georgia marching ground this month and listened to a long list of names of fallen comrades. Taps rose mournfully above rows of young redbud trees planted for each of the division's 317 soldiers who have died in Iraq...
Strained Relationships
In the living room of his Savannah home, Capt. Thom Frohnhoefer tumbled with his daughter Maggie, 2, as she jangled and waved his metal dog tags.
"She's the one I had after the first deployment," Frohnhoefer said. "It will be harder this time because she knows Daddy is leaving."
From courtship to parenting to divorce, the time away at war is having a profound impact on the families of active-duty soldiers, according to interviews with dozens of soldiers from the 3rd Infantry Division and their relatives. The division spearheaded the U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003 and returned for a second, year-long tour in January 2005.
For 1st Brigade soldiers such as Frohnhoefer, having children poses a wrenching choice: Leave your wife alone in pregnancy and birth, or miss your newborn's first year.
Frohnhoefer and several others in his brigade opted to start pregnancies soon after returning in January, creating a mini baby boom. Frohnhoefer's second daughter, Haley, was born three weeks ago. Another soldier in the unit had a baby last week.
Changing times for young kids
This was an interesting news to soak in. Certainly it is something that will cause social issues later on in the developed societies, but this trend probably is also present to a certain extent in other societies although not to the same degree.
'Tweens' are fast becoming the new teens
By MARTHA IRVINE, AP National Writer Sat Nov 25, 6:46 PM ET
Zach Plante is close with his parents — he plays baseball with them and, on weekends, helps with work in the small vineyard they keep at their northern California home.
Lately, though, his parents have begun to notice subtle changes in their son. Among other things, he's announced that he wants to grow his hair longer — and sometimes greets his father with "Yo, Dad!"
"Little comments will come out of his mouth that have a bit of that teen swagger," says Tom Plante, Zach's dad.
Thing is, Zach isn't a teen. He's 10 years old — one part, a fun-loving fifth-grader who likes to watch the Animal Planet network and play with his dog and pet gecko, the other a soon-to-be middle schooler who wants an iPod.
In some ways, it's simply part of a kid's natural journey toward independence. But child development experts say that physical and behavioral changes that would have been typical of teenagers decades ago are now common among "tweens" — kids ages 8 to 12.
Some of them are going on "dates" and talking on their own cell phones. They listen to sexually charged pop music, play mature-rated video games and spend time gossiping on MySpace. And more girls are wearing makeup and clothing that some consider beyond their years.
Zach is starting to notice it in his friends, too, especially the way they treat their parents.
"A lot of kids can sometimes be annoyed by their parents," he says. "If I'm playing with them at one of their houses, then they kind of ignore their parents. If their parents do them a favor, they might just say, 'OK,' but not notice that much."
The shift that's turning tweens into the new teens is complex — and worrisome to parents and some professionals who deal with children. They wonder if kids are equipped to handle the thorny issues that come with the adolescent world.
"I'm sure this isn't the first time in history people have been talking about it. But I definitely feel like these kids are growing up faster — and I'm not sure it's always a good thing," says Dr. Liz Alderman, an adolescent medicine specialist at Montefiore Medical Center in New York City. She's been in practice for 16 years and has noticed a gradual but undeniable change in attitude in that time.
She and others who study and treat children say the reasons it's happening are both physical and social.
Several published studies have found, for instance, that some tweens' bodies are developing faster, with more girls starting menstruation in elementary school — a result doctors often attribute to improved nutrition and, in some cases, obesity. While boys are still being studied, the findings about girls have caused some endocrinologists to lower the limits of early breast development to first or second grade.
Along with that, even young children are having to deal with peer pressure and other societal influences.
Beyond the drugs, sex and rock'n'roll their boomer and Gen X parents navigated, technology and consumerism have accelerated the pace of life, giving kids easy access to influences that may or may not be parent-approved. Sex, violence and foul language that used to be relegated to late-night viewing and R-rated movies are expected fixtures in everyday TV.
And many tweens model what they see, including common plot lines "where the kids are really running the house, not the dysfunctional parents," says Plante, who in addition to being Zach's dad is a psychology professor at Santa Clara University in California's Silicon Valley.
He sees the results of all these factors in his private practice frequently.
Kids look and dress older. They struggle to process the images of sex, violence and adult humor, even when their parents try to shield them. And sometimes, he says, parents end up encouraging the behavior by failing to set limits — in essence, handing over power to their kids.
"You get this kind of perfect storm of variables that would suggest that, yes, kids are becoming teens at an earlier age," Plante says.
Natalie Wickstrom, a 10-year-old in suburban Atlanta, says girls her age sometimes wear clothes that are "a little inappropriate." She describes how one friend tied her shirt to show her stomach and "liked to dance, like in rap videos."
Girls in her class also talk about not only liking but "having relationships" with boys.
"There's no rules, no limitations to what they can do," says Natalie, who's also in fifth grade.
Her mom, Billie Wickstrom, says the teen-like behavior of her daughter's peers, influences her daughter — as does parents' willingness to allow it.
"Some parents make it hard on those of us who are trying to hold their kids back a bit," she says.
So far, she and her husband have resisted letting Natalie get her ears pierced, something many of her friends have already done. Now Natalie is lobbying hard for a cell phone and also wants an iPod.
"Sometimes I just think that maybe, if I got one of these things, I could talk about what they talk about," Natalie says of the kids she deems the "popular ones."
It's an age-old issue. Kids want to fit in — and younger kids want to be like older kids.
But as the limits have been pushed, experts say the stakes also have gotten higher — with parents and tweens having to deal with very grown-up issues such as pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. Earlier this year, that point hit home when federal officials recommended a vaccine for HPV — a common STD that can lead to cervical cancer — for girls as young as age 9.
"Physically, they're adults, but cognitively, they're children," says Alderman, the physician in New York. She's found that cultural influences have affected her own children, too.
Earlier this year, her 12-year-old son heard the popular pop song "Promiscuous" and asked her what the word meant.
"I mean, it's OK to have that conversation, but when it's constantly playing, it normalizes it," Alderman says.
She observes that parents sometimes gravitate to one of two ill-advised extremes — they're either horrified by such questions from their kids, or they "revel" in the teen-like behavior. As an example of the latter reaction, she notes how some parents think it's cute when their daughters wear pants or shorts with words such as "hottie" on the back.
"Believe me, I'm a very open-minded person. But it promotes a certain way of thinking about girls and their back sides," Alderman says. "A 12-year-old isn't sexy."
With grown-up influences coming from so many different angles — from peers to the Internet and TV — some parents say the trend is difficult to combat.
Claire Unterseher, a mother in Chicago, says she only allows her children — including an 8-year-old son and 7-year-old daughter — to watch public television.
And yet, already, they're coming home from school asking to download songs she considers more appropriate for teens.
"I think I bought my first Abba single when I was 13 or 14 — and here my 7-year-old wants me to download Kelly Clarkson all the time," Unterseher says. "Why are they so interested in all this adult stuff?"
Part of it, experts say, is marketing — and tweens are much-sought-after consumers.
Advertisers have found that, increasingly, children and teens are influencing the buying decisions in their households — from cars to computers and family vacations. According to 360 Youth, an umbrella organization for various youth marketing groups, tweens represent $51 billion worth of annual spending power on their own from gifts and allowance, and also have a great deal of say about the additional $170 billion spent directly on them each year.
Toymakers also have picked up on tweens' interest in older themes and developed toy lines to meet the demand — from dolls known as Bratz to video games with more violence.
Diane Levin, a professor of human development and early childhood at Wheelock College in Boston, is among those who've taken aim at toys deemed too violent or sexual.
"We've crossed a line. We can no longer avoid it — it's just so in our face," says Levin, author of the upcoming book "So Sexy So Soon: The Sexualization of Childhood."
Earlier this year, she and others from a group known as the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood successfully pressured toy maker Hasbro to drop plans for a line of children's toys modeled after the singing group Pussycat Dolls.
Other parents, including Clyde Otis III, are trying their own methods.
An attorney with a background in music publishing, Otis has compiled a line of CDs called "Music Talking" that includes classic oldies he believes are interesting to tweens, but age appropriate. Artists include Aretha Franklin, Rose Royce and Blessid Union of Souls.
"I don't want to be like a prude. But some of the stuff out there, it's just out of control sometimes," says Otis, a father of three from Maplewood, N.J.
"Beyonce singing about bouncing her butt all over the place is a little much — at least for an 8-year-old."
In the end, many parents find it tricky to strike a balance between setting limits and allowing their kids to be more independent.
Plante, in California, discovered that a few weeks ago when he and Zach rode bikes to school, as the two of them have done since the first day of kindergarten.
"You know, dad, you don't have to bike to school with me anymore," Zach said.
Plante was taken aback.
"It was a poignant moment," he says. "There was this notion of being embarrassed of having parents be too close."
Since then, Zach has been riding by himself — a big step in his dad's mind.
"Of course, it is hard to let go, but we all need to do so in various ways over time," Plante says, "as long as we do it thoughtfully and lovingly, I suppose."
'Tweens' are fast becoming the new teens
By MARTHA IRVINE, AP National Writer Sat Nov 25, 6:46 PM ET
Zach Plante is close with his parents — he plays baseball with them and, on weekends, helps with work in the small vineyard they keep at their northern California home.
Lately, though, his parents have begun to notice subtle changes in their son. Among other things, he's announced that he wants to grow his hair longer — and sometimes greets his father with "Yo, Dad!"
"Little comments will come out of his mouth that have a bit of that teen swagger," says Tom Plante, Zach's dad.
Thing is, Zach isn't a teen. He's 10 years old — one part, a fun-loving fifth-grader who likes to watch the Animal Planet network and play with his dog and pet gecko, the other a soon-to-be middle schooler who wants an iPod.
In some ways, it's simply part of a kid's natural journey toward independence. But child development experts say that physical and behavioral changes that would have been typical of teenagers decades ago are now common among "tweens" — kids ages 8 to 12.
Some of them are going on "dates" and talking on their own cell phones. They listen to sexually charged pop music, play mature-rated video games and spend time gossiping on MySpace. And more girls are wearing makeup and clothing that some consider beyond their years.
Zach is starting to notice it in his friends, too, especially the way they treat their parents.
"A lot of kids can sometimes be annoyed by their parents," he says. "If I'm playing with them at one of their houses, then they kind of ignore their parents. If their parents do them a favor, they might just say, 'OK,' but not notice that much."
The shift that's turning tweens into the new teens is complex — and worrisome to parents and some professionals who deal with children. They wonder if kids are equipped to handle the thorny issues that come with the adolescent world.
"I'm sure this isn't the first time in history people have been talking about it. But I definitely feel like these kids are growing up faster — and I'm not sure it's always a good thing," says Dr. Liz Alderman, an adolescent medicine specialist at Montefiore Medical Center in New York City. She's been in practice for 16 years and has noticed a gradual but undeniable change in attitude in that time.
She and others who study and treat children say the reasons it's happening are both physical and social.
Several published studies have found, for instance, that some tweens' bodies are developing faster, with more girls starting menstruation in elementary school — a result doctors often attribute to improved nutrition and, in some cases, obesity. While boys are still being studied, the findings about girls have caused some endocrinologists to lower the limits of early breast development to first or second grade.
Along with that, even young children are having to deal with peer pressure and other societal influences.
Beyond the drugs, sex and rock'n'roll their boomer and Gen X parents navigated, technology and consumerism have accelerated the pace of life, giving kids easy access to influences that may or may not be parent-approved. Sex, violence and foul language that used to be relegated to late-night viewing and R-rated movies are expected fixtures in everyday TV.
And many tweens model what they see, including common plot lines "where the kids are really running the house, not the dysfunctional parents," says Plante, who in addition to being Zach's dad is a psychology professor at Santa Clara University in California's Silicon Valley.
He sees the results of all these factors in his private practice frequently.
Kids look and dress older. They struggle to process the images of sex, violence and adult humor, even when their parents try to shield them. And sometimes, he says, parents end up encouraging the behavior by failing to set limits — in essence, handing over power to their kids.
"You get this kind of perfect storm of variables that would suggest that, yes, kids are becoming teens at an earlier age," Plante says.
Natalie Wickstrom, a 10-year-old in suburban Atlanta, says girls her age sometimes wear clothes that are "a little inappropriate." She describes how one friend tied her shirt to show her stomach and "liked to dance, like in rap videos."
Girls in her class also talk about not only liking but "having relationships" with boys.
"There's no rules, no limitations to what they can do," says Natalie, who's also in fifth grade.
Her mom, Billie Wickstrom, says the teen-like behavior of her daughter's peers, influences her daughter — as does parents' willingness to allow it.
"Some parents make it hard on those of us who are trying to hold their kids back a bit," she says.
So far, she and her husband have resisted letting Natalie get her ears pierced, something many of her friends have already done. Now Natalie is lobbying hard for a cell phone and also wants an iPod.
"Sometimes I just think that maybe, if I got one of these things, I could talk about what they talk about," Natalie says of the kids she deems the "popular ones."
It's an age-old issue. Kids want to fit in — and younger kids want to be like older kids.
But as the limits have been pushed, experts say the stakes also have gotten higher — with parents and tweens having to deal with very grown-up issues such as pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. Earlier this year, that point hit home when federal officials recommended a vaccine for HPV — a common STD that can lead to cervical cancer — for girls as young as age 9.
"Physically, they're adults, but cognitively, they're children," says Alderman, the physician in New York. She's found that cultural influences have affected her own children, too.
Earlier this year, her 12-year-old son heard the popular pop song "Promiscuous" and asked her what the word meant.
"I mean, it's OK to have that conversation, but when it's constantly playing, it normalizes it," Alderman says.
She observes that parents sometimes gravitate to one of two ill-advised extremes — they're either horrified by such questions from their kids, or they "revel" in the teen-like behavior. As an example of the latter reaction, she notes how some parents think it's cute when their daughters wear pants or shorts with words such as "hottie" on the back.
"Believe me, I'm a very open-minded person. But it promotes a certain way of thinking about girls and their back sides," Alderman says. "A 12-year-old isn't sexy."
With grown-up influences coming from so many different angles — from peers to the Internet and TV — some parents say the trend is difficult to combat.
Claire Unterseher, a mother in Chicago, says she only allows her children — including an 8-year-old son and 7-year-old daughter — to watch public television.
And yet, already, they're coming home from school asking to download songs she considers more appropriate for teens.
"I think I bought my first Abba single when I was 13 or 14 — and here my 7-year-old wants me to download Kelly Clarkson all the time," Unterseher says. "Why are they so interested in all this adult stuff?"
Part of it, experts say, is marketing — and tweens are much-sought-after consumers.
Advertisers have found that, increasingly, children and teens are influencing the buying decisions in their households — from cars to computers and family vacations. According to 360 Youth, an umbrella organization for various youth marketing groups, tweens represent $51 billion worth of annual spending power on their own from gifts and allowance, and also have a great deal of say about the additional $170 billion spent directly on them each year.
Toymakers also have picked up on tweens' interest in older themes and developed toy lines to meet the demand — from dolls known as Bratz to video games with more violence.
Diane Levin, a professor of human development and early childhood at Wheelock College in Boston, is among those who've taken aim at toys deemed too violent or sexual.
"We've crossed a line. We can no longer avoid it — it's just so in our face," says Levin, author of the upcoming book "So Sexy So Soon: The Sexualization of Childhood."
Earlier this year, she and others from a group known as the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood successfully pressured toy maker Hasbro to drop plans for a line of children's toys modeled after the singing group Pussycat Dolls.
Other parents, including Clyde Otis III, are trying their own methods.
An attorney with a background in music publishing, Otis has compiled a line of CDs called "Music Talking" that includes classic oldies he believes are interesting to tweens, but age appropriate. Artists include Aretha Franklin, Rose Royce and Blessid Union of Souls.
"I don't want to be like a prude. But some of the stuff out there, it's just out of control sometimes," says Otis, a father of three from Maplewood, N.J.
"Beyonce singing about bouncing her butt all over the place is a little much — at least for an 8-year-old."
In the end, many parents find it tricky to strike a balance between setting limits and allowing their kids to be more independent.
Plante, in California, discovered that a few weeks ago when he and Zach rode bikes to school, as the two of them have done since the first day of kindergarten.
"You know, dad, you don't have to bike to school with me anymore," Zach said.
Plante was taken aback.
"It was a poignant moment," he says. "There was this notion of being embarrassed of having parents be too close."
Since then, Zach has been riding by himself — a big step in his dad's mind.
"Of course, it is hard to let go, but we all need to do so in various ways over time," Plante says, "as long as we do it thoughtfully and lovingly, I suppose."
Saturday, November 18, 2006
Possible shift in Girija's stance against Monarchy
As Girija has more to look back and less to look forward to, he seems to have come to a realization that he can actually do something good for Nepal before he departs the physical realm. It still remains to see what if he has the guts, but if the news below is any indication, it bodes well for Nepal and probably for his legacy.
PM hints at action against king
Kantipur Report
KATHMANDU, Nov 18 - Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala on Saturday hinted that actions against King Gyanendra himself were foreseeable, if the High Level Probe Commission (HLPC) report deemed so.
Talking to media persons at his hometown in Biratnagar, PM Koirala informed that the government would investigate the commission's report thoroughly and then would present it before the parliament.
As to the possibility of the king facing actions for his role as the then chairman the council of ministers to suppress the April uprising, the PM declined to make any comment.
Similarly, when asked whether the HLPC report would fare better than the report presented by the Mallik Commission to investigate the atrocities during the 1990 movement, the PM said, "That is the history and it's no use raising the issue again. We will rewrite the history this time."
Stating that the late King Birendra's property would go to a trust while that of King Gyanendra would be nationalised, Koirala added, "Based on this, other things can happen."
The prime minister said that any issue of national concern would be taken very seriously by the government, adding, "The government is prepared to go to any lengths for the welfare of the nation."
Koirala mentioned that the government will definitely take actions against the culprit and added, the government will first make sure whether the offences were committed and that the punishment fits the crime.
According to sources, the PM also said that the Maoists would not be joining the interim government until the process of the cantoning the Maoist militia and arms lockup are incorporated into a definite monitoring mechanism.
"The interim government including them (Maoists) will be set up only after all their arms are locked up otherwise, there will be no interim government," the PM said.
Koirala added the peace accord will be signed on November 21 and the interim constitution will be enforced as per the time schedule after one or two days and only then the government will be formed.
Posted on: 2006-11-18 01:41:34 (Server Time)
PM hints at action against king
Kantipur Report
KATHMANDU, Nov 18 - Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala on Saturday hinted that actions against King Gyanendra himself were foreseeable, if the High Level Probe Commission (HLPC) report deemed so.
Talking to media persons at his hometown in Biratnagar, PM Koirala informed that the government would investigate the commission's report thoroughly and then would present it before the parliament.
As to the possibility of the king facing actions for his role as the then chairman the council of ministers to suppress the April uprising, the PM declined to make any comment.
Similarly, when asked whether the HLPC report would fare better than the report presented by the Mallik Commission to investigate the atrocities during the 1990 movement, the PM said, "That is the history and it's no use raising the issue again. We will rewrite the history this time."
Stating that the late King Birendra's property would go to a trust while that of King Gyanendra would be nationalised, Koirala added, "Based on this, other things can happen."
The prime minister said that any issue of national concern would be taken very seriously by the government, adding, "The government is prepared to go to any lengths for the welfare of the nation."
Koirala mentioned that the government will definitely take actions against the culprit and added, the government will first make sure whether the offences were committed and that the punishment fits the crime.
According to sources, the PM also said that the Maoists would not be joining the interim government until the process of the cantoning the Maoist militia and arms lockup are incorporated into a definite monitoring mechanism.
"The interim government including them (Maoists) will be set up only after all their arms are locked up otherwise, there will be no interim government," the PM said.
Koirala added the peace accord will be signed on November 21 and the interim constitution will be enforced as per the time schedule after one or two days and only then the government will be formed.
Posted on: 2006-11-18 01:41:34 (Server Time)
Thursday, November 16, 2006
Religion taken to extreme
Religion has been spewing poison. That is not its original intention. Religion was a creation of humanity in its ignorant phase before the era or enlightenment. Religion is more often than not a tool of control these days, no matter what part of world we observe. Below, I post a news I read from Hindstan Times, an Indian daily. It is about the Muslim cleric getting offended because an actress was not covered like a Muslim woman. I say to them, it is not God who is offended by nudity, it is them. If God were offended, we would all be born wearing clothes.
Notice to Katrina Kaif, Rishi Kapoor
Indo-Asian News Service
Ajmer, November 16, 2006
Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti's dargah committee has decided to issue notice to actress Katrina Kaif for wearing a knee-length skirt inside the dargah premises.
Filming a sequence for Namaste London, which featured Kaif wearing a knee-length skirt inside Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti's dargah in Ajmer, over 140 km from here, had created uproar among 'khadims' (servers) and the shrine administration.
A similar notice has been issued to actor Rishi Kapoor, director Vipul Shah and Babu Bhair Goshi, the shooting arranger for rolling the cameras without taking prior permission of the dargah authority.
The notice reads that all the accused should feel sorry for their act or they would be sued in the court of law.
"We have located the addresses of all the people except that of Katrina, which is being searched by the committee," Dargah Nazim Abdul Alim informed.
As per Islamic traditions, women wearing skimpy outfits are not allowed into the shrine and dargah officials and the Muslim community had taken exception to Kaif's attire.
It may be mentioned here that on Oct 2, while filming a sequence of Namaste London, Kaif had walked into the dargah wearing a knee-length skirt, which had created a ruckus.
Dargah committee vice-president Sayed B. Chisti, while objecting to it, had said it was the duty of office-bearers accompanying the Bollywood team to ensure the sanctity of the shrine.
At the time of controversy, the film's director Vipul Shah had said: "There was no intention of hurting anyone's sentiments or religious feelings. Katrina's attire was in keeping with her role as a London-based NRI. We are even ready to drop the scene from the film."
Notice to Katrina Kaif, Rishi Kapoor
Indo-Asian News Service
Ajmer, November 16, 2006
Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti's dargah committee has decided to issue notice to actress Katrina Kaif for wearing a knee-length skirt inside the dargah premises.
Filming a sequence for Namaste London, which featured Kaif wearing a knee-length skirt inside Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti's dargah in Ajmer, over 140 km from here, had created uproar among 'khadims' (servers) and the shrine administration.
A similar notice has been issued to actor Rishi Kapoor, director Vipul Shah and Babu Bhair Goshi, the shooting arranger for rolling the cameras without taking prior permission of the dargah authority.
The notice reads that all the accused should feel sorry for their act or they would be sued in the court of law.
"We have located the addresses of all the people except that of Katrina, which is being searched by the committee," Dargah Nazim Abdul Alim informed.
As per Islamic traditions, women wearing skimpy outfits are not allowed into the shrine and dargah officials and the Muslim community had taken exception to Kaif's attire.
It may be mentioned here that on Oct 2, while filming a sequence of Namaste London, Kaif had walked into the dargah wearing a knee-length skirt, which had created a ruckus.
Dargah committee vice-president Sayed B. Chisti, while objecting to it, had said it was the duty of office-bearers accompanying the Bollywood team to ensure the sanctity of the shrine.
At the time of controversy, the film's director Vipul Shah had said: "There was no intention of hurting anyone's sentiments or religious feelings. Katrina's attire was in keeping with her role as a London-based NRI. We are even ready to drop the scene from the film."
Friday, August 26, 2005
Making of a documentary II
Once the format was settled, I got flying. I decided that it could not be a grim portrayal of the situation. It had to be upbeat. It had to highlight the potential without undermining the seriousness of the ground reality. When I asked Celia her take on the focus of the video, she confirmed my own angle. That was good news. I felt I could not just go and distort what she had shot in almost 10 hours of tape. If it served some higher purpose, praise be to God! Alhamdulilah! (That's something I have learned from my Arab and Muslim friends).
How do I even start? Where do I start? It was a difficult decision. In the beginning, I was only concerned to make a fund-raising video. So I started chopping up pieces that were good, and had some meaningful insights from all the individuals that were interviewed, interspersed with sights and sounds of Kathmandu and Hetauda. It was good that there were some artistic sections--no I am exaggerating! Well, I am referring to a little snippet of music that went along with this sign that said: Let there be peace! And there was a section with a Nepali folk song. I grabbed those real fast. I would definitely use them. I grabbed all the snippets with children doing their things. Then I separated out the more serious interviews with the adults.
I tried to put some humor--crosscut the serious interviews with children's upbeat natur--before the message got too depressing, or turn away viewers. I felt it was important to show the reality of the school--how it looked, how student studied. As they say a picture speaks louder than the words--ok okay, those are not the exact words, but why use a cliche when you can be creative?
I had Purna, Rob Buckley, Juliana and Elizabeth Wickwire. When I reached my first review phase, it was about 20 minutes long. I knew I had to put Kirk later, but at that point, the video was meant to be only for fund raising. So I got a little creative. I wanted to get a feedback before I went and made it unbearable to watch. I asked Bruno Pareyra, who runs Ram TV programs twice a week to view it and tell me honestly what he thought. I am glad I asked. He told me that it was hard for him to understanding English coming out of Nepali tongues. At that instance I had placed all the Ms. Wickwire's interview intact toward the latter half. That was too lengthy and had to be chopped up to prevent it from being dull--despite all the interesting facial expressions, her ability to express concisely, and create new words in the process if she had to.
I agreed with Bruno's take. That set me into a new phase....
How do I even start? Where do I start? It was a difficult decision. In the beginning, I was only concerned to make a fund-raising video. So I started chopping up pieces that were good, and had some meaningful insights from all the individuals that were interviewed, interspersed with sights and sounds of Kathmandu and Hetauda. It was good that there were some artistic sections--no I am exaggerating! Well, I am referring to a little snippet of music that went along with this sign that said: Let there be peace! And there was a section with a Nepali folk song. I grabbed those real fast. I would definitely use them. I grabbed all the snippets with children doing their things. Then I separated out the more serious interviews with the adults.
I tried to put some humor--crosscut the serious interviews with children's upbeat natur--before the message got too depressing, or turn away viewers. I felt it was important to show the reality of the school--how it looked, how student studied. As they say a picture speaks louder than the words--ok okay, those are not the exact words, but why use a cliche when you can be creative?
I had Purna, Rob Buckley, Juliana and Elizabeth Wickwire. When I reached my first review phase, it was about 20 minutes long. I knew I had to put Kirk later, but at that point, the video was meant to be only for fund raising. So I got a little creative. I wanted to get a feedback before I went and made it unbearable to watch. I asked Bruno Pareyra, who runs Ram TV programs twice a week to view it and tell me honestly what he thought. I am glad I asked. He told me that it was hard for him to understanding English coming out of Nepali tongues. At that instance I had placed all the Ms. Wickwire's interview intact toward the latter half. That was too lengthy and had to be chopped up to prevent it from being dull--despite all the interesting facial expressions, her ability to express concisely, and create new words in the process if she had to.
I agreed with Bruno's take. That set me into a new phase....
Wednesday, August 24, 2005
Making of a documentary
I had barely started to learn digital editing three months ago when I took on the challenge of producing a documentary. I am passionate about serving my home town in any way I can even though I am eight thousand miles away. But passion, as it turned out, was not enough. I also had to dig in and utilize the other two p’s—patience and perseverance.
First, I got a two-hour VHS tape from Celia (She’s a soul, I believe, who has come down to help humanity). She had reduced her 10 hours of DV tapes into 2 hours and expressed her desire to trim it to 20-30 minutes show. God bless her heart! That was a big help for me. Initially I was wavering on whether to make one cut or two—one for fund raising (maybe 20 minutes long for Celia) and the other—30 minute long—to enter into documentary festivals. Yea, I am ambitious!
I got off on a wrong foot. After a few tries, I managed to upload the 2-hour footage into a computer. The editing program we use here at the Communication, Drama and Journalism Department is Adobe Premiers 6.5. I used a swappable drive, 40 gigs. The misstep was regarding the format. Since Celia had shot it in Nepal, I assumed, she might have used PAL. Well, no! It was in NTSC—a system used in North America and Japan, she convinced me. So I uploaded the whole thing in NTSC program after a few weeks break, maybe it was a month. At this juncture I was working for the publicity of dramas we stage at our two theatres. I was not even working for the TV production yet. The first glimpse of the digital editing I had was during the production of a 30-second public service announcement for my first play publicity—Once Upon a Mattress, a mucical.
But anyhow, the first step had been taken. I was off from the starting line, to say the least. I was hoping to be Seabiscuit—a perennial underdog that pulls it off. I had started working for TV production officially, so I was getting more exposure into intricacies of editing and god forbid, the cabling of the equipments. I was so green that I cannot believe I thought I could do this. But well, it seems it is always the people who know “nada” or “muy poco” that believe they can do things the rest of the world knows better—just like George Bush believing he can graft a flourishing democracy in Iraq under the supervision of mighty US military. Sorry, I cannot help but take a shot at this folly.
But my folly was less troubling; It cost no lives, only umpteen hours of frustration. Or what other people would call frustration and I call it a learning experience—or a test of the will—or the struggle of man against the machine—or maybe the test of my will against the devious, temperamental and thwarting nature of computer software and glitches. Or it was me vs. Adobe Premiere. Most likely it was me vs. me.
To be continued…
First, I got a two-hour VHS tape from Celia (She’s a soul, I believe, who has come down to help humanity). She had reduced her 10 hours of DV tapes into 2 hours and expressed her desire to trim it to 20-30 minutes show. God bless her heart! That was a big help for me. Initially I was wavering on whether to make one cut or two—one for fund raising (maybe 20 minutes long for Celia) and the other—30 minute long—to enter into documentary festivals. Yea, I am ambitious!
I got off on a wrong foot. After a few tries, I managed to upload the 2-hour footage into a computer. The editing program we use here at the Communication, Drama and Journalism Department is Adobe Premiers 6.5. I used a swappable drive, 40 gigs. The misstep was regarding the format. Since Celia had shot it in Nepal, I assumed, she might have used PAL. Well, no! It was in NTSC—a system used in North America and Japan, she convinced me. So I uploaded the whole thing in NTSC program after a few weeks break, maybe it was a month. At this juncture I was working for the publicity of dramas we stage at our two theatres. I was not even working for the TV production yet. The first glimpse of the digital editing I had was during the production of a 30-second public service announcement for my first play publicity—Once Upon a Mattress, a mucical.
But anyhow, the first step had been taken. I was off from the starting line, to say the least. I was hoping to be Seabiscuit—a perennial underdog that pulls it off. I had started working for TV production officially, so I was getting more exposure into intricacies of editing and god forbid, the cabling of the equipments. I was so green that I cannot believe I thought I could do this. But well, it seems it is always the people who know “nada” or “muy poco” that believe they can do things the rest of the world knows better—just like George Bush believing he can graft a flourishing democracy in Iraq under the supervision of mighty US military. Sorry, I cannot help but take a shot at this folly.
But my folly was less troubling; It cost no lives, only umpteen hours of frustration. Or what other people would call frustration and I call it a learning experience—or a test of the will—or the struggle of man against the machine—or maybe the test of my will against the devious, temperamental and thwarting nature of computer software and glitches. Or it was me vs. Adobe Premiere. Most likely it was me vs. me.
To be continued…
Friday, August 19, 2005
Educational goals!
I had an interesting interview for a TA position this morning. It brought out a point that ails America. As mentioned earlier in fear and love blog, it seems the primary reason for failure of American public education system might be the "fear." There is fear that the ones with the most potential and promise might actually fulfill that potential, so the schools only meet the minimum neceassary, just in case the rest who are not the best and the brightest will not feel too bad about themselves. Similarly, there is fear to promote social good, just in case the "evil" also make use of the same facilities that can promote social harmony. No wonder, the students become apathetic and dwell in a morass of ignorance while the world continue to pay for the follies of the mighty ones. It is easier to rule a flock of sheep than pack of wolf. But the price paid for producing sheep will be beyond our imagination. The mighty shall fall when the they choose the convenience of ruling over the sheep rather than producing those who question their every move and are not afraid to let them know of their follies.
Monday, August 15, 2005
Bush's moral corruption
The deadline for the constitution for Iraq is MOnday midnight. The report is that Sunni demand will be sidelined to meet that goal--under the pressure from Bush administration. It is pretty amusing to see how the administration is downplaying its goals in Iraq of a full-fledged, prospering democracy so that they can claim "victory" and wimp out like a dog with its tail between its legs. There were many people who could have told this administration and neocons that democracy does not come from a graft but have to be rooted from cultural trnasformation. Apparently noone in the hawkish administration have learned anything about the cultural component of democracy. The price is misery to the world. But that is not all, Krugman in his opinion piece today aptly summarized Bush's agenda and approach to his governance:
"But the campaign for privatization provided an object lesson in how the administration sells its policies: by misrepresenting its goals, lying about the facts and abusing its control of government agencies. These were the same tactics used to sell both tax cuts and the Iraq war."
Was he successful in anything he attempted in his life? NO! Why would he be successful in being a president? But there is a deeper forces at work. American people are as much to blame for reelecting Bush. Being ignorant and arrogant, not using their good judgement about the lies being fed to them, taking for granted that the world had to tow to the American policy... Leadership is only a reflection of the people. Leadership is one of the most important components in a country's standings and course. Bad leadership--defined by ignorance, out of touch with reality, full of deception, unconcern for the people--world over had led those countries to their misery. Thanks to Bush and his hawkish cohorts, USA now joins that corrupt deceitful world of morally deprived leadership.
"But the campaign for privatization provided an object lesson in how the administration sells its policies: by misrepresenting its goals, lying about the facts and abusing its control of government agencies. These were the same tactics used to sell both tax cuts and the Iraq war."
Was he successful in anything he attempted in his life? NO! Why would he be successful in being a president? But there is a deeper forces at work. American people are as much to blame for reelecting Bush. Being ignorant and arrogant, not using their good judgement about the lies being fed to them, taking for granted that the world had to tow to the American policy... Leadership is only a reflection of the people. Leadership is one of the most important components in a country's standings and course. Bad leadership--defined by ignorance, out of touch with reality, full of deception, unconcern for the people--world over had led those countries to their misery. Thanks to Bush and his hawkish cohorts, USA now joins that corrupt deceitful world of morally deprived leadership.
Friday, August 12, 2005
Bush hiding behind bush (helicopter)
The news below shows the moral bankruptcy of a man who believes he has a mandate from God to impose his "foolhardy" will on the innocents and the world.
Bush ducks mother of dead soldier
President using helicopter to enter, leave Texas ranch to avoid confrontation
By ALAN FREEMAN
Friday, August 12, 2005 Updated at 3:45 AM EDT
From Friday's Globe and Mail
Washington — As the Iraq war continues to produce growing U.S. casualties and shrinking public support, President George W. Bush was forced yesterday to confront the protest of a grieving mother of a soldier killed in the war. But he still won't meet her.
As Cindy Sheehan camped out on a road leading to Mr. Bush's ranch near Crawford, Tex., for the sixth consecutive day, insisting she wants to speak to the President personally, Mr. Bush said he sympathizes with her plight, but rejected her call to pull the troops out of Iraq.
Ms. Sheehan's 24-year-old son, Casey, was killed in an ambush in Sadr City, Baghdad's sprawling Shia neighbourhood, last year, just five days after he arrived in Iraq.
"I begged him not to go," says Ms. Sheehan, 48, who travelled from her home in California to try to speak with Mr. Bush as he spends his summer vacation at his Prairie Chapel Ranch. "I said, 'I'll take you to Canada,' but he said, 'Mom, I have to go. It's my duty. My buddies are going.'
Advertisements
"I don't believe his phony excuses for the war," Ms. Sheehan has said of the President. She said she believes the war is really about oil and making Mr. Bush's friends richer. "I want him to tell me why my son died."
Anti-war activists are converging on Crawford, eager to seize on Ms. Sheehan's newfound notoriety and telegenic appeal to get their message across.
On Saturday, Mr. Bush dispatched deputy national security adviser Stephen Hadley and deputy chief of staff Joe Hagin to meet with her to try to defuse the situation, but it just gave Ms. Sheehan more attention.
Mr. Hadley said that Mr. Bush is very sensitive to the losses being sustained by military families, pointing out that he has already met privately with the families of more than 200 of the fallen.
"He believes that they are engaged in a noble cause and it's terribly important for the safety and security of our country. And he respects her views, but respectfully disagrees."
Yesterday, Mr. Bush felt obliged to respond himself. "She feels strongly about her position and she has every right in the world to say what she believes," Mr. Bush told a news conference. "And I thought long and hard about her position. I've heard her position from others, which is: Get out of Iraq now. And it would be a mistake for the security of this country and the ability to lay the foundations for peace in the long run if we were to do so."
Mr. Bush said he grieves for every death in Iraq. "It breaks my heart to think about a family weeping over the loss of a loved one. I understand the anguish that some feel about the death that takes place."
Yet there was no sign Mr. Bush intends to meet Ms. Sheehan. In fact, there were reports he is travelling solely by helicopter when he leaves the ranch in an effort to avoid racing past the protester in a limousine.
"The President says he feels compassion for me," Ms. Sheehan said, "but the best way to show that compassion is by meeting with me and the other mothers and families who are here.
"All we're asking is that he sacrifice an hour out of his five-week vacation to talk to us before the next mother loses her son in Iraq."
Cal Jillson, a political scientist at Southern Methodist University in Dallas who has studied Mr. Bush's rise, said: "For him, meeting this woman face to face would be blinking. His whole game is to be confident and to appear never to doubt and never to waiver. It's this idea of determination."
And unlike government leaders in a parliamentary system who are challenged directly by their political opponents, Mr. Bush can easily shelter himself from such confrontations.
"He would not trust himself in a face-to-face meeting and neither would his staff. These guys like control," said Prof. Jillson, who added that Ms. Sheehan's protest in itself may not be that significant but it comes at a time when many Americans are reconsidering their views of the Iraq war.
Approval of Mr. Bush's handling of the conflict has dropped to as little as 34 per cent of people surveyed, according to a recent poll conducted for Newsweek magazine.
But only 33 per cent of Americans say the solution is withdrawing all troops, according to a recent Gallup Poll. Another 23 per cent say some of the troops should be withdrawn while 41 per cent say troop levels should remain the same or be increased.
Ms. Sheehan's protest comes at a particularly bloody time for U.S. troops in the war as roadside bombs aimed at patrolling soldiers have become increasingly sophisticated and lethal. According to Associated Press, at least 1,841 American troops have died in the war since March, 2003, including 37 since the beginning of August.
At his news conference, Mr. Bush said he strongly disagrees with those calling for troop withdrawal. "Pulling the troops out would send a terrible signal to the enemy ..... [that] the United States is weak and all we've got to do is intimidate and they'll leave."
Bush ducks mother of dead soldier
President using helicopter to enter, leave Texas ranch to avoid confrontation
By ALAN FREEMAN
Friday, August 12, 2005 Updated at 3:45 AM EDT
From Friday's Globe and Mail
Washington — As the Iraq war continues to produce growing U.S. casualties and shrinking public support, President George W. Bush was forced yesterday to confront the protest of a grieving mother of a soldier killed in the war. But he still won't meet her.
As Cindy Sheehan camped out on a road leading to Mr. Bush's ranch near Crawford, Tex., for the sixth consecutive day, insisting she wants to speak to the President personally, Mr. Bush said he sympathizes with her plight, but rejected her call to pull the troops out of Iraq.
Ms. Sheehan's 24-year-old son, Casey, was killed in an ambush in Sadr City, Baghdad's sprawling Shia neighbourhood, last year, just five days after he arrived in Iraq.
"I begged him not to go," says Ms. Sheehan, 48, who travelled from her home in California to try to speak with Mr. Bush as he spends his summer vacation at his Prairie Chapel Ranch. "I said, 'I'll take you to Canada,' but he said, 'Mom, I have to go. It's my duty. My buddies are going.'
Advertisements
"I don't believe his phony excuses for the war," Ms. Sheehan has said of the President. She said she believes the war is really about oil and making Mr. Bush's friends richer. "I want him to tell me why my son died."
Anti-war activists are converging on Crawford, eager to seize on Ms. Sheehan's newfound notoriety and telegenic appeal to get their message across.
On Saturday, Mr. Bush dispatched deputy national security adviser Stephen Hadley and deputy chief of staff Joe Hagin to meet with her to try to defuse the situation, but it just gave Ms. Sheehan more attention.
Mr. Hadley said that Mr. Bush is very sensitive to the losses being sustained by military families, pointing out that he has already met privately with the families of more than 200 of the fallen.
"He believes that they are engaged in a noble cause and it's terribly important for the safety and security of our country. And he respects her views, but respectfully disagrees."
Yesterday, Mr. Bush felt obliged to respond himself. "She feels strongly about her position and she has every right in the world to say what she believes," Mr. Bush told a news conference. "And I thought long and hard about her position. I've heard her position from others, which is: Get out of Iraq now. And it would be a mistake for the security of this country and the ability to lay the foundations for peace in the long run if we were to do so."
Mr. Bush said he grieves for every death in Iraq. "It breaks my heart to think about a family weeping over the loss of a loved one. I understand the anguish that some feel about the death that takes place."
Yet there was no sign Mr. Bush intends to meet Ms. Sheehan. In fact, there were reports he is travelling solely by helicopter when he leaves the ranch in an effort to avoid racing past the protester in a limousine.
"The President says he feels compassion for me," Ms. Sheehan said, "but the best way to show that compassion is by meeting with me and the other mothers and families who are here.
"All we're asking is that he sacrifice an hour out of his five-week vacation to talk to us before the next mother loses her son in Iraq."
Cal Jillson, a political scientist at Southern Methodist University in Dallas who has studied Mr. Bush's rise, said: "For him, meeting this woman face to face would be blinking. His whole game is to be confident and to appear never to doubt and never to waiver. It's this idea of determination."
And unlike government leaders in a parliamentary system who are challenged directly by their political opponents, Mr. Bush can easily shelter himself from such confrontations.
"He would not trust himself in a face-to-face meeting and neither would his staff. These guys like control," said Prof. Jillson, who added that Ms. Sheehan's protest in itself may not be that significant but it comes at a time when many Americans are reconsidering their views of the Iraq war.
Approval of Mr. Bush's handling of the conflict has dropped to as little as 34 per cent of people surveyed, according to a recent poll conducted for Newsweek magazine.
But only 33 per cent of Americans say the solution is withdrawing all troops, according to a recent Gallup Poll. Another 23 per cent say some of the troops should be withdrawn while 41 per cent say troop levels should remain the same or be increased.
Ms. Sheehan's protest comes at a particularly bloody time for U.S. troops in the war as roadside bombs aimed at patrolling soldiers have become increasingly sophisticated and lethal. According to Associated Press, at least 1,841 American troops have died in the war since March, 2003, including 37 since the beginning of August.
At his news conference, Mr. Bush said he strongly disagrees with those calling for troop withdrawal. "Pulling the troops out would send a terrible signal to the enemy ..... [that] the United States is weak and all we've got to do is intimidate and they'll leave."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
