Immigration Reform Interviews – An Immigrant Rights Lawyer, Health Care Provider and Media Educator share their views
These interviews are part of a series that we will be posting with people from West Michigan who are working to push for a new immigration policy from the federal government. The West Michigan Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform is working with the national group Reform Immigration For America (RIFA) to hold the new administration to its promise to reform immigration policy. You can join the local group by becoming a member on Facebook or contact Diane at dianelawkessler@gmail.com.
The first interview is with Liz Balck, who is a local immigrant rights lawyer. Next is Juan Daniel Castro, a local health care provider. Last is Jeff Smith director of Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy.
Senator Levin responds to Military Coup in Honduras
It has been some two months since a military coup in Honduras ousted the democratically elected government of Manuel Zelaya. The global diplomatic community unanimously denounced the coup and called for the restoration of democracy in that Central American country.
Initially the Obama administration spoke out against the coup but since mid-July they have stopped calling for the reinstatement of Zelaya. In fact, as Eva Gollinger reports, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is now referring to the coup leaders as the “interim government.” In addition, Gollinger writes, “The State Department has refused to certify legally the events in Honduras as a “coup”, it has not suspended nor frozen financial support or trade with the country, nor has it taken steps to pressure effectively the de facto regime.”
The lack of any serious action to defend democracy in the hemisphere and the tacit acceptance of the coup leaders suggests that the US is not interested in the rule of law in international affairs.
When asked recently about what his position on this matter is, Michigan Senator Carl Levin said,
“In July, Secretary Clinton announced that President Manuel Zelaya and Honduran National Congress President, Roberto Micheletti, agreed to engage in negotiations mediated by Costa Rican President Oscar Arias. These negotiations are ongoing and have done little to resolve this matter so far. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton continues to lead the Obama administration’s effort to urge both sides to find a negotiated diplomatic resolution to the crisis.”
Seems that Levin is in agreement with the administration’s inaction and acceptance of the coup government.
The positions of the Democratic administration and Democratic Senator Levin raise questions about the US motives on the Honduran Coup. Some writers have suggested that since Zelaya is a member of the regional alliance known as the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA), the US administration wants to marginalize him. Some US media reports on the Honduran coup have suggested that Zelaya was ousted because he wanted to change the constitution to be President for life, which isn’t what Zelaya was advocating. In fact, as independent journalist Ben Dangl has reported,
“Nations across Latin America, including Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador, have recently re-written their constitutions. In many aspects the changes to these documents enshrined new rights for marginalized people and protected the nations’ economies from the destabilizing effects of free trade and corporate looting.”
The proposal to rewrite the constitution in Honduras had significant support, especially from popular sectors.
What the US media has not reported on is that many of the coup instigators in Honduras are graduates of the infamous US Army School of the Americas. There has also not been much reporting of the popular resistance to the coup, nor the increasing repression that targets those who oppose the military coup.
US Coverage of the popular opposition to the coup in Honduras pales in comparison to that of the popular electoral opposition in Iran a few months ago. This comparison, which reflects a double standard, should be cause enough for people in the US to question the US government position on Honduras.
This interview is part of a series that we will be posting with people from West Michigan who are working to push for a new immigration policy from the federal government. The West Michigan Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform is working with the national group Reform Immigration For America (RIFA) to hold the new administration to its promise to reform immigration policy. You can join the local group by becoming a member on Facebook or contact Diane at dianelawkessler@gmail.com.
This interview is part of a series that we will be posting with people from West Michigan who are working to push for a new immigration policy from the federal government. The West Michigan Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform is working with the national group Reform Immigration For America (RIFA) to hold the new administration to its promise to reform immigration policy. You can join the local group by becoming a member on Facebook or contact Diane at dianelawkessler@gmail.com.
Immigration Reform Interviews – A Grand Rapids Public School teacher shares his views
This interview is part of a series that we will be posting with people from West Michigan who are working to push for a new immigration policy from the federal government. The West Michigan Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform is working with the national group Reform Immigration For America (RIFA) to hold the new administration to its promise to reform immigration policy. You can join the local group by becoming a member on Facebook or contact Diane at dianelawkessler@gmail.com.
Not enough troops, the death of a soldier and the ongoing GR Press coverage of Afghanistan
On Monday (8/24), the Grand Rapids Press published a short version of a New York Times article that states US military commanders are now saying that there are insufficient US troops operating in Afghanistan.
The article quotes Admiral Mullen who was on CNN this past weekend and referred to the situation in Afghanistan. “I think it is serious and it is deteriorating. The Taliban insurgency has gotten better, more sophisticated, in their tactics.”
Nowhere in the story are there other perspectives or any attempt by the Times reporter to verify the claims made by US military leaders. The Press version of the story does mention that recently polling shows more Americans are becoming dissatisfied with the US military occupation of Afghanistan, but the story omits any credible critique of the US campaign either from US sources or Afghani sources.
You will recall that the Obama administration has sent an additional 17,000 US soldiers to Afghanistan since he took office in January, but his administration has not responded to the recent comments from the military on the inadequate levels of US troops. These additional troops do not include the private military contractors that are operating in Afghanistan. According to a recent Wall Street Journal article, there are more private military contractors in Afghanistan than there are US troops, roughly 74,000 to 57,000.
Private Military Contractors
The Press did publish a Los Angeles Times article on Sunday (8/23) that dealt with private military contractors in Afghanistan. The article does provide some critique as it relates to accountability and inadequate training of those private military forces, but does not question their role in Afghanistan. The LA Times piece also does not take into account the private security forces that are being contracted by the Department of State, a fact that independent reporter Jeremy Scahill points out in an article he posted today.
A Michigan Soldier is Killed in Afghanistan
Lastly, it is worth pointing out that a Middleville man who was serving in the US military in Afghanistan was killed recently. The Grand Rapids Press ran three stories in the past week, on August 18, 20th and 21st. The August 21nd article is the longest and included a full page of just pictures of the funeral service in West Michigan. The death of this local soldier is the only reporting that the GR Press has done on the US military occupation of Afghanistan since GRIID began this most recent monitoring project in late May, which suggests that only when local soldiers die is the issue newsworthy.
It should also be pointed out that the Press ran an editorial on August 21st in which they focused on the fact that the Pentagon has now changed its policy on the Press taking pictures of flag draped coffins of US soldiers killed in action. However, the Press editor also used the piece as an opportunity to promote a pro-US military position by saying, “While photos of flag-draped coffins don’t show us what war is, or why our soldiers are fighting, they honor the ultimate sacrifice military men and women make for this country.”
It seems quite appropriate for the Press to report on this funeral, but we question whether or not they should be making statements that do not question whether or not US wars and the soldiers that fight in them are making sacrifices for this country.
Media Alert – Where Is the Afghanistan Debate?
This Media Alert is from the national media watchdog group FAIR (Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting)
With new polls showing the American public becoming increasingly critical of the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan, the Sunday morning network talkshows turned primarily to Pentagon officials and war boosters to discuss the issue, continuing the media marginalization of critics of the escalation of the war (Extra!, 4/09).
The most recent ABC/Washington Post poll (8/13-17/09) found that 51 percent of respondents believe the war is not worth fighting–the first time that position has received majority support. Just 24 percent supported sending more troops to Afghanistan, while 45 percent think the level of troops should be decreased.
As the New York Times reported (8/24/09): “The White House has been concerned about declining support for the war among the American public. After recent polls illustrating the decline, [Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman] Admiral [Mike] Mullen and Karl W. Eikenberry, a retired general who is the ambassador to Afghanistan, went on Sunday talkshows to discuss the direction of the mission.” Indeed, this pair of officials appeared the same morning (8/23/09) on both NBC‘s Meet the Press and CNN‘s State of the Union.
State of the Union host John King also presented “three U.S. senators from across the ideological spectrum [to] debate whether to send more troops to Afghanistan.” The views expressed by Republican Sen. Richard Lugar, independent Joe Lieberman and Democrat Benjamin Cardin, though, could hardly be considered a debate: Lugar said that “everyone waits for General McChrystal to give, really, the outline of where we’re headed, how many troops or whatever else is going to be required” while Cardin declared that “we need to make sure that Afghanistan and, quite frankly, the border with Pakistan is not a safe haven for terrorists,” and “we now need to know what do we need to do as far as resources to accomplish that mission.”
Lieberman, declaring that “we can’t let the Taliban come back,” suggested that the U.S. “give our troops and our civilians there…the support that they need as quickly as we can get it to them.” (“Don’t dribble it out, don’t go for incrementalism,” Lieberman warned.) Lugar concluded the segment by predicting that the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan would last “many, many years beyond” President Barack Obama’s current term.
On ABC‘s This Week, Sen. John McCain gave his appraisal of Obama’s conduct of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. (As the ABC web headline put it, “McCain: Obama Doing What I Would Do on Battlefields.”) Host George Stephanopoulos asked McCain about the public’s attitude towards the war: “The majority now say that it’s not worth fighting. Two to one, they don’t want more troops. The clock is ticking both with the public and Congress. You say 12 to 18 months. What do we need to see in 12 to 18 months to make sure the public and the Congress stay behind this war?” Note that the issue for the host is shaping public opinion to conform to the policy, rather than asking whether the policy should change in response to public opinion.
On the show’s roundtable, conservative columnist George Will was the most forceful critic of the war (saying, “I think the American people are right about this”), while liberals Paul Krugman and Robert Reich downplayed both the political significance of the war and the importance of recent polls; Krugman said that he would like to ask Americans who are surveyed to find Afghanistan on a map.
CBS‘s Face the Nation did not feature a discussion of Afghanistan this week. Last week (8/16/09), the program featured former Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel and former Democratic Rep. Lee Hamilton, neither of whom seemed to have a strong opinion about the war.
It makes sense that government officials would try to reverse the trend of declining public support for the war by going on TV. But why are the networks allowing themselves to be used this way? Why is the corporate media response to rising dissatisfaction with the Afghanistan War not an effort to include that point of view in the discussion, but to bring on more officials to explain to the public why their opinions are wrong?
ACTION:
Encourage the Sunday morning shows to acknowledge the public’s views on Afghanistan by including peace advocates and other critics of the escalation of the war as guests on their programs.
CONTACT:
NBC‘s Meet the Press
Email: meetthepressquestions@nbcuni.com
Webform: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6872152/ns/meet_the_press/
ABC‘s This Week with George Stephanopolous
Email: thisweek@abc.com
CNN‘s State of the Union
Email: StateoftheUnion@CNN.com
CBS‘s Face the Nation
Email: ftn@cbsnews.com
More Thoughts on Art Prize
It has been almost two months since I originally wrote a critique of the DeVos initiated Grand Rapids Art Prize. I have received lots of feedback on my critique, both verbal and written responses. All the feedback has been interesting and has contributed to a larger dialogue that people are having as the art contest event grows near.
The most recent response I received via this web page was such that I felt the need to provide additional comments on why I still feel that Art Prize is problematic. The writer made two basic arguments; any art that comes to this community is “good” and the further development of downtown Grand Rapids (what I called gentrification) is beneficial to this community.
I also felt it was important to post my response to these recent comments since the local media continues to provide only glowing coverage of the evolving Art Prize event. What follows is my response.
“Cynthia, thanks for your thoughts on this matter. I completely agree that there can be a great deal of “good” that can be gained from people being exposed to more art, particularly when it inspires and gives us a sense of awe. I have no doubt that there will be some positive benefits to Grand Rapids with more art being created and displayed.
My initial article and critique was not designed to dwell on the negative, instead it was meant to challenge us all to think about the art contest within a larger social context. Doing so is not a negative, rather an opportunity to push us to think about these issues and the long-term implications they have on this community.
Art and other forms of creative expression can always have the power to give us a sense of peace and wonderment. My mother was in a movie about women in Nazi concentration camps, which had the opportunity to prolong their lives if they possessed the ability to play a musical instrument. The music that was played for the Nazi camp officials and their guests no doubt gave men who were in charge of mass extermination a sense of joy or an appreciation of the beauty that comes from classical music. However, looking at the larger context reminds us that this beautiful music was for genocidal murderers. Now, in no way am I comparing the DeVos family to the Nazis. The example was merely to illustrate a point about the importance of looking at the social, political and economic context in which art and creativity is often expressed.
Anyone can look at the churches and other buildings that are part of Rome or the Vatican and many other European cities and be amazed at the beauty, the detail and the craft of the artists who were commissioned to create those works of art. Again, the larger context forces me to come to terms with the fact that much of the gold and silver used in churches throughout Europe was imported from Latin America and mined by indigenous populations for several hundred years after the European conquest of the Americas.
Gandhi once said there was no beauty in the finest linens made in Europe if they caused poverty in India. One of the points I was making in the original article was the economic impact that the art contest could have on the downtown of Grand Rapids. Gentrification may “improve the quality of life for those involved and those around them,” as you say, which was exactly my point. Those who will benefit from this gentrification are those who already are economically privileged and whatever gentrification will come out of it will mostly fatten the wallets of those who live better than most of us. Ask people in Heartside if their being displaced or brutalize by the police, so that gentrification may occur without any resistance, feeling that this art contest is of benefit to them.
The last point I want to make on this matter is that the more we ignore the larger context in which wealthy and privileged sectors of society operate, especially when they engage in philanthropic acts, the more difficult it will be to challenge them when they blatantly exploit and abuse working class sectors of society. A great resource that explores this issue is a book published by the group INCITE! entitled, “The Revolution Will Not Be Funded.”
The consequence of not shining the light on Art Prize, which is the brainchild of one of the DeVos family members, is that it may make it more difficult for people to question the policies and influence that such families and other power structures have on our community in the future. They may withhold funding because they disagree with something that people without power are proposing in the city or they might use their political and economic influence to subvert the democratic process. We would all be naïve if we did not acknowledge that candidates are bought by people like the DeVos family and political and economic policy which impacts as all is all too often dictated by their influence.
Media Bites – Beer & Gender
This week’s Media Bites takes a look a some recent Budweiser commercials that normalize gender roles through a male dominated lens. These commercials are part of Budweiser’s Lager Lesson’s series that uses music from the band Jet. We address in our critique of these spots how in beers ads the consumption of beer is often equated with the consumption of women.
Immigration Reform Interviews – A social worker and religious leader share their views
These interviews are part of a series that we will be posting with people from West Michigan who are working to push for a new immigration policy from the federal government. The West Michigan Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform is working with the national group Reform Immigration For America (RIFA) to hold the new administration to its promise to reform immigration policy. You can join the local group by becoming a member on Facebook or contact Diane at dianelawkessler@gmail.com.
The first interview is with Jerry Dykstra, who is the Executive Director of the Christian Reformed Church in North America. The other interview is with Kathy Siegenthaler who is an Infant Health Therapist with a local social service agency.
